Which is worse? All ap or all ad?

in most cases all AP since they tend toward burst; at least AD teams have the sustained DPS and items like cleaver to get through armor stacking

In general, you'll never have "all AP" because you've got an ADC usually on the team.

it depends on their team. However I feel that its easier to build armor efficiently than it is to build mr in an efficient way unless it synergizes with your kit. An exception is the adc who has many mr options such as maw, merc. scim., and ga. Whereas the adc only has GA for armor or iceborn gauntlet if it works on their kit. Just my opionion.

all ad is better for the reason that have already been listed.. the sustain and the objective control.. and the fact that all ad can generally heal back up with life steal where as most ap cant regain life without going back to base

..... are all hard anti ad. and are some of the few hard anti ap

TL;DR at the bottom

Theory time : All AP could overall be better due to some AP champs like Kayle having Decent physical damage. Also, Corki is an ADC with a majority of magical but a little physical damage. These two might ruin what you think of full AP however, so ill count them out, as well as champs like Vel Koz who now have so much true damage they would make full AP fine.

Okay so full AP has something that AD no longer has : . This is important. All champions on the team can go through over a third of the MR built by the other teams. AD, however, has things AP does not have and all of the crit items Black cleaver on its own, once stacked, does almost the entire job of with only one ally buying it. The key thing is the Ally must actually hit all of the enemies to full stacks for effectiveness. This wouldn't be a problem for someone like or , but much harder to hit all 5 with a or a .

Next : : This is a weaker staff in terms of penetration until the enemy has a lot of Armour. Luckily, if you are full AD, odds are their tanks have a lot of armour. It also has the added bonus of added damage if the enemy has more health than you. This is pretty good, seeing as the issue a full AD or AP team would run into is the tanks, the squishies would still be able to be blown up, most of the time ( )

This is something else that is important . Why? because grievous wounds against current strong tanks like and is pretty valuable to cut down their healing, and the healing of Grasp of the Undying. And yes has grievous wounds, but it is locked behind getting their target low, which is fine against someone like , but the current meta tanks always have good regen. ADs definitely have the advantage here.

Now the last thing about offence is the job you need to do. This Is important, because your style of champion influences how good your Full AD or full AP comp is. If you have a , you can bet she can long range late game one shot a squishy mage on the enemy team. However if you have , well his % damage and his low range means he will go for tanks first.

Flipping that to the AD side, a may be able to kill one or two priority targets, vs a who can melt entire teams. A team full of Assassins will be much less useful versus the tanks than marksmen, while the marksmen only lose a bit to assassins versus squishies.

Overall for tanks, its well known that overall Marksmen can typically kill them faster then mages (few exceptions again, but overall) but this is with mixed items against a comp with AD and AP, however i believe this would still stay for full AD or AP comps, as mages are overall more bursty than Marksmen

I know i missed a few items, which are impactful, but i didn't want this to only be about offensive capabilities, overall however, i believe ADs have the advantage here

Defensively, tanks can actually build into Armour with much less difficulty than MR. A who has to deal with minimal magic damage but a lot of physical damage build would contain and the choice per game of or . All items in this build are efficient defensively versus AD, even which gives healing or that reduces CC. These effects help defensively against anyone, and thus this would take a long time to kill

Versus a majority of AP, a typical 's build would resemble and then the last two slots would be picked between and for boots. This build is much less effective against AP than the Armour one is for AD because of the amount of stats wasted. GA's armour portion would be much less effective, Gunfire has the same issue as well as ZZrot.

Therefore i believe Tanks can itemize better versus AD Champs

TL;DR : So which wins?

Even with the way tanks build more effectively against AD, i believe the power of marksmen's consistent damage is much stronger than the overall burst of mages. There are of course champions or comps that break this, such as and to name a few. Would love to hear thoughts on this or points i have missed

All AD is worse: No CC. Armor is cheaper than water. $$ <$$ Limited Range. Comparatively, not as much mobility.

Morellonomicon + Thornmail + Zhonyas ($8150) = R. Hydra + Bloodthirster + V. Scepter + Pot ($8150)

^FUCK SUSTAIN^ More Resource-less AP than AD.

And more I'm sure.

Depends on the champions involved.

With certain AD compositions, you have enough innate armor penetration and utility to make up for not having a magic damage threat.

All ap is worse. The penetration options vs Mr are worse agaisnt Mr stacking than against armor stacking

They just nerfed a lot of MR items so it's hard to know for sure. I would say ap because they have better ad defensive items like maw and scimitar plus if your support has locket. So your adc would have better protection then if it was all ad. I would say that ad has better armor shredding items as well.

All AP is worse. You there are more AD pen options that can be used in both flat and % format

All AP is clearly much worse. The comparison of burst damage vs. consistent damage aside, there are clearer problems. First is pen: a basic Last Whisper is only 1300 gold and the complete item grants larger %pen than Void Staff. Yes it's bonus armor vs. total MR, but this means stacking armor is less effective than stacking MR. Then on top of this, AD also has Cleaver too which is shred and not just pen. In this scenario where you're all AD, this means a single Cleaver on one player benefits your whole team.

Next is anti-HP items: AD has 2 options, the first being Giant Slayer amping all of your damage by a very large multiplier at all times. The next being BoRK which has both a Max-HP damage active in addition to a Current-HP passive which has a Min-damage. With the removal of DFG, AP doesn't have an effective way of dealing with HP. Liandry's is very mediocre at best, but unfortunately does not have a Min-damage, meaning you can literally be burning for ZEROs.

Then there's defensive options: armor probably has more options, but all of them are very niche. Three of them give HP, but short of Zhonya's there is none that gives a real offensive option. On the reverse side, MR has several hybrid options even if there's only a couple tank choices. One of those being Maw which's effectiveness scales additively with each additional MR item you buy which essentially makes it a pseudo-tank item regardless. Not to mention the shield it grants can't be taken advantage of by enemy % damages. Not just Maw, there's also Mercurial, Wit's End and several AP items too.

Blatantly all AP would be weaker. Historically they always have been, and frankly are so much weaker at this point that the only real reason to always have an AP on your team is to get mixed damage types... but then again there's

It's generally harder to take objectives as All AP. No matter who survives a team fight as an All AD team, they can take towers afterwards.

Theres a lot of AD/AP+MR options, but not as much in the way of AD/AP+Armour, so all AP is probably worse off.

That said, all AD has to deal with thornmails, while theres no anti-AP equivalent of that.

All AP worse IMO since you won't have a champion that deals good sustained damage. With AD you have champs like that are still very bursty despite being AD.

Sees full AD team... Enemies die by faboulousness.

All AP because your teammates don't like it when you rush bork and hurricane on support soraka "to give your team some AD".

All magic damage since mages have lower DPS than AD champions, therefore tanks can just build HP to counter burst.

well when you go all ad. you either have ad carries or melee carries or assassins. if you have assassins. you might lose because you can't kill a malphite on the other team but say you have 3 ad carries and some ad tank with black cleaver shredding armor then its not bad.

it could go either way i mean if we had an all ap vs all ad the ap team can blow up the adc easily and win the game or the ad team has good peel and let the adc shred the other team. i feel like stacking mr isn't as good as it used to be because you have several penetration items. abyssal scepter giving a lot late game.

there is way more armor items than mr. and after a while you start building inefficient items. actually you start building inneficient mr items after 2 items if your going full mr tank. however you can get 6 armor items.

generally all ap is better.

All AP is far worse since any AD champ can buy hexdrinker and instantly nullify every AP champ in the game. Hourglass is a poor substitute that has a ridiculous cooldown. Not to mention when Zed or whoever blows his combo he can still auto attack and deal 500 damage each hit while AP champs become sitting ducks for all the broken etc to destroy them.

all ap worse unless you have azir, he doesnt care about tanks.

i guess brand or zyra would be pretty decent too.

ALL AD is worse. If the enemy is stacking armor that also means that they are taking less damage from minions, monsters, and turrets.

All AP because there are so many MR + damage items and very few AP + armor items.

nuff said

depends on both comps, though generally full ap is worse as ap usually lacks dps, so you have issues with tanks and objectives. With champs like cassio or Azir, that is much less off an issue though, or vs teams without proper frontline. Ad also has much easier acces to powerfull armorpen and %hp damage, aswell as sustain.

of cause, if you face with full ad, your boned, though same goes for full ap vs

I would say all AD, as there are less AP+Health options in the game and is arguably better for shredding through resists than items.

Usually all AP, since they can't burst a team with 5 banshee's, and most AP have poor sustained damage, while AD champs all can supplement their spells with autos. However, some AP champs like Azir have very good DPS, and could be better than an all AD team if it has mostly burst champs as armor items have more armor than MR items have MR.

Honestly going all one damage type doesn't make that much difference if the enemy team doesn't have a tank. If they have 2 or more tanks though you pretty much lose the late game.

Solo wise probably full AD; AP champs tend to have some kind of utility to help with survivability, as well as burst so even if they instadie their damage is done. AD champs need to stay alive longer.

Realistically in a proper teamfight with a balanced teamcomp? Full AP is probably worse because the ADs should have tanks peeling for them and the AP needs to stay in the frontlines.

All AP is definitely worse since they wouldn't be able to clear minions. Did you ever wonder why this item was disabled on urf?

It kind of depends on who you're fighting against. Typically more AD is better especially as the opposing team becomes tankier. Champions like Kayle though can make an all AP team work though.

General rule of thumb is you'd want both (I realize I'm stating the obvious)