Now that the CDR creep ship has basically sailed, perhaps we should just address CDR's biggest issue

TotalJerk·Jun 18, 2018·3 votes·1,100 views

The additive stacking. To give an extreme example in a world with no CDR cap: going from 0% CDR to 10% results in a 10% increase in spell uptime. To go from a theoretical 80% to 90% results in a 100% spell uptime increase. CDR is significantly more valuable the more of it you have, creating a landscape of champions that either want to rush the cap or not get any at all.

Has thought ever been given to making CDR stack multiplicatively? Buying 4 10% CDR items would result in about 34.4% CDR under this change, but if any champions are to horribly hurt by the lost of 5.6 CDR they can always get some compensation buffs. I doubt most supports will hate it because hyper lategame they often struggle to avoid hitting the cap anyway.

7 Comments

Madsin25Jun 18, 20181 votes

CDR could honestly save this game.

If they are dead set on keeping fast paced games they should lower the damage and lower the cooldowns as "compensation".

They managed to make Lissandra viable without even touching her damage, all they did was lower her CD's and mana costs.

OleandervineJun 18, 20181 votes

By it's very nature, percentages do not equal 100% unless they are 100%. If you have a 100s spell, and you have 10% CDR, your CD is now at 90s, which is a 10% increase in uptime. However, if you have 80% or 90% CDR, your CD is now 20s or 10s respectively, which is an 80% or 90% increase in uptime. In no circumstance will a 80% or 90% ever equal 100%. That's just simple math. It may seem that way on shorter CD spells, but there is still a CD, no matter how brief.

That said, 40% max CDR is hardly ruinous to the game. I don't think it's a problem, and while it does contribute to quicker games, it's not problematic like the snowballing and the sheer increase in pure damage across in the board.

FefnilJun 18, 20181 votes

That's not what OP's saying. When your skill has 100s cd and you go from 0% to 10% CDR the spell goes from 100s to 90s, so it's a 10% reduction. When getting another 10% you spent the same gold to get the same amount of CDR, but the cd of the spell went from 90s to 80s, which is, effectively, a 11.1111% reduction. Additive reduction % bonuses always have increasing effects when taken multiple times, and that's what he's talking about. Now, how impactful the difference between stacking multiplicatively and additively may be, that's another whole matter, for which I can't really say much. An important thing to notice though is that this makes different values of CDR hard to calculate. When multiplicative, buying 20% becomes better than buying two 10%. Taking OP's example of four 10%, anyway, while the absolute difference is 5.6%, the relative difference ends up being 9.14%, almost 10%. It means that skills will effectively have almost 10% more cd than what they have now, which could have some impact. With that said, while this change may remove the "problem" of increasing effects on CDR, to be honest, they're not really that impactful to begin with. So this change would just end up complicating numbers, so I disagree with it.

OleandervineJun 18, 20181 votes

I understood what the OP was saying, I was speaking against this:

{quoted}

The additive stacking. To give an extreme example in a world with no CDR cap: going from 0% CDR to 10% results in a 10% increase in spell uptime. To go from a theoretical 80% to 90% results in a 100% spell uptime increase.

This is wrong because math can't ever operate in this way. An 80-90% will never result in a 100%.

FefnilJun 18, 20181 votes

But he's right, though, and I was talking about that in my reply. With 80% CDR you have (with the same spell as before) 20s cd, so you have an uptime of 1/20s. With 90% CDR the cd becomes 10s, and the uptime becomes 1/10s, which is exactly double the previous one, so it's an effective 100% increase on uptime. You see?

TotalJerkJun 18, 20181 votes

Uptime has been doubled, which means it was increased by 100%.

OleandervineJun 18, 20181 votes

Yes, but that's confusing then. Why are you comparing the cooldown reduction increasing from 10% to 20% as being a 100% increase to uptime, when you're discussing the impact that that cooldown reduction has on champions and their skills. The changes in the CDR being 100% or 200% or whatever is irrelevant to how the CDR interacts with cooldowns. You're building a very confusing topic and muddling it with percentages that are discussing different things but not distinctly separating what they're talking about.