Analysis of Cleaver versus Sunfire

The Ecdysiast··1 votes·1,300 views

Edit: One good point the comments have made is that in the matchup, Cleaver is in its best scenario while Sunfire is in its worst. But that's exactly the problem. In game, Cleaver is always in its best scenario when fighting a tank, and the tank has no option for an item to improve the situation. And it's in a large part because their starting options are drastically worse in gold efficiency. That's what makes it unfair, not the counter.

I'd be a different situation if I were comparing Cleaver to Stormrazer or Luden's, since those aren't usually pitted against each other. But Cleaver and Sunfire, despite being in direct opposition, are for two different classes that mainly lane against each other. And the unfair cost exacerbates an advantage Cleaver and its champions already have against tanks.


(Additions to an old thread) The total cost of Sunfire is 100g less than Black Cleaver, but that ignores their gold efficiency. If you factor in the gold efficiency of the items' base stats, then Sunfire actually costs 500g more. In a matchup Cleaver's shred passive reduces the armor of Sunfire by up to 15, so it loses an additional 10% gold efficiency, widening the difference to 800g.

  • Sunfire's passive at level 9 grants 425g worth of damage.
  • Cleaver's Rage passive grants either 340g worth of MS, or 1020g.

So at minimum, the overall difference between Sunfire (LV9) and Cleaver is 415g in Cleaver's favor. At maximum, the difference is 1,395g in Cleaver's favor.

Coincidentally, the gold cost of that 20% CDR is 533g. That's only 33 shy of exactly evening out the difference from base stats. So that's an easy way to make it a more balanced matchup. One problem solved.


Alternatively since Cleaver was never intended to have the same amount of health as pure tank items while also countering armor directly it could have its health reduced down to 300, (which still higher than the 200 it was before it was changed). Several ADCs and all AD Assassins still abuse it for the HP and armor shred, so reducing the health would hopefully work towards preventing this as well as balancing it out against tanks without having to buff Sunfire or Deadman's.

There should be some cost or risk in there, but there's none at all with its current stats. It gives you every stat you could want with an unreasonably high base gold efficiency for its relatively low cost, while the champions who buy it have low enough (or no) resource costs and high enough base stats to not pay any price for it not having armor, mr, or mana.

13 Comments

ModThe Djinn2 votes

So at minimum, the overall difference between Sunfire (LV9) and Cleaver is 415g in Cleaver's favor. At maximum, the difference is 1,395g in Cleaver's favor.

I'm not arguing these numbers from your analysis, but I do notice you're giving Cleaver its optimal match-up (a 1v1 fight against a single opponent where you get all your stacks off) and Sunfire its worst (a 1v1 fight against someone with armor shredding). Sunfire's value increases by a lot if you're travelling in teamfights and not taking reliable all-target-reduction from an opponent or if you need to hard push waves, and should pretty much only be bought in situations where you'd expect to have those opportunities. By putting it in it's worst matchups, then yes -- it's a significantly weaker purchase.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=mu22OBAE,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2018-11-11T18:26:03.636+0000)

I'm not arguing these numbers from your analysis, but I do notice you're giving Cleaver its optimal match-up (a 1v1 fight against a single opponent where you get all your stacks off) and Sunfire its worst (a 1v1 fight against someone with armor shredding). Sunfire's value increases by a lot if you're travelling in teamfights and not taking reliable all-target-reduction from an opponent or if you need to hard push waves, and should pretty much only be bought in situations where you'd expect to have those opportunities. By putting it in it's worst matchups, then yet -- it's a significantly weaker purchase.

Because that's what top lane is. At the point when your first item matters, Cleaver is almost always in its preferred matchup. And I did include the base difference not counting the armor shred in the second sentence:

If you factor in the gold efficiency of the items' base stats, then Sunfire actually costs 500g more.

Then go on to note that if you do include the armor shred, the difference increases to 800.

ModThe Djinn2 votes

{quoted}Because that's what top lane is. At the point when your first item matters, Cleaver is almost always in its preferred matchup.

Yep! Because it's specifically an aggressive, lane-bully item. It's meant to spike hard.

I'm not arguing that it's perfectly balanced, by the way, but more that this favorable 1v1 comparison vs. an item that isn't designed to be a 1v1 dueling item is expected.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

[{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=mu22OBAE,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2018-11-11T18:32:49.311+0000)

Yep! Because it's specifically an aggressive, lane-bully item. It's meant to spike hard.

I'm not arguing that it's perfectly balanced, by the way, but more that this favorable 1v1 comparison vs. an item that isn't designed to be a 1v1 dueling item is expected.

It's not though. The item itself provides all the tools necessary to make lane bully champions way safer than they're supposed to be. And no, it's really not expected that an item with 20% more gold efficiency and a lower cost directly counter the only option for a class that's already at a disadvantage against the kits of those who buy it early.

There should be some cost or risk in there, but there's none at all. It gives you every advantage possible even against opponents who aren't building Sunfire first, while the champions who buy it have low enough costs and high enough base stats to not pay any price for it not having armor, mr, or mana.

ZephyrDrake2 votes

{quoted}

It's not though. The item itself provides all the tools necessary to make lane bully champions way safer than they're supposed to be. And no, it's really not expected that an item with 20% more gold efficiency and a lower cost directly counter the only option for a class that's already at a disadvantage against the kits of those who buy it early.

There should be some cost or risk in there, but there's none at all. It gives you every advantage possible even against opponents who aren't building Sunfire first, while the champions who buy it have low enough costs and high enough base stats to not pay any price for it not having armor, mr, or mana.

you are comparing items whose entire purpose and role are entirely different. It's supposed to be a massive 1 item spike for whoever builds it. Sunfire is not a 1 item spike at all. It's built for it's pushing power and it's teamfight strength not to duel anyone. Triforce is also an item with a massive 1 item spike so why aren't you comparing cleaver with it where there would be more of a point to make on whether cleaver is too strong or not? Maybe tanks shouldn't be building sunfire first? or they should just accept that they cannot duel people if they build it first and focus on wave clearing until teamfights happen?

The Ecdysiast1 votes

{quoted}

you are comparing items whose entire purpose and role are entirely different. It's supposed to be a massive 1 item spike for whoever builds it. Sunfire is not a 1 item spike at all. It's built for it's pushing power and it's teamfight strength not to duel anyone. Triforce is also an item with a massive 1 item spike so why aren't you comparing cleaver with it where there would be more of a point to make on whether cleaver is too strong or not? Maybe tanks shouldn't be building sunfire first? or they should just accept that they cannot duel people if they build it first and focus on wave clearing until teamfights happen?

Because the point I'm arguing is that it's unfair that one class has an item that's so drastically better than a class they already encounter. You'd have a point if I were trying to compare Cleaver to Stormrazer, since those champions don't normally fight each other in lane. But this is about the classes that do fight each other.

Trinity means nothing in this regard because it's not an option for the opponents of the cleaver builders, it's another option for those same champions.

And tank KITS already make it so they can't duel people. They have a disadvantage just in regards to stats and abilities when it comes to duels. But Cleaver only adds to that, making any attempt to farm safely moot since there's no difference between dying several times and losing 60 farm because the enemy will kill you if you try to stay up.

Whether or not you think tanks should be able to duel has no bearing on this. Cleaver is by all accounts a better item than any a tank can buy first, and it shouldn't be that way since the champs who buy it already counter the tanks.

(And I'd like to remind you that upvotes/downvotes aren't for showing your agreement. They're for showing whether or not you want to discuss... which is what you're doing. And it does no one any good to downvote threads where the analysis is factual because you disagree with the conclusion. Disobeying the boards guidelines like that is why Riot can't take the boards seriously)

ZephyrDrake1 votes

{quoted}

Because the point I'm arguing is that it's unfair that one class has an item that's so drastically better than a class they already encounter. You'd have a point if I were trying to compare Cleaver to Stormrazer, since those champions don't normally fight each other in lane. But this is about the classes that do fight each other.

Trinity means nothing in this regard because it's not an option for the opponents of the cleaver builders, it's another option for those same champions.

And tank KITS already make it so they can't duel people. They have a disadvantage just in regards to stats and abilities when it comes to duels. But Cleaver only adds to that, making any attempt to farm safely moot since there's no difference between dying several times and losing 60 farm because the enemy will kill you if you try to stay up.

Whether or not you think tanks should be able to duel has no bearing on this. Cleaver is by all accounts a better item than any a tank can buy first, and it shouldn't be that way since the champs who buy it already counter the tanks.

(And I'd like to remind you that upvotes/downvotes aren't for showing your agreement. They're for showing whether or not you want to discuss... which is what you're doing. And it does no one any good to downvote threads where the analysis is factual because you disagree with the conclusion. Disobeying the boards guidelines like that is why Riot can't take the boards seriously)

You are doing nothing but putting an item on it's best case scenario and the other on it's worst case scenario and then saying "hey look at hoe unfair this is!" No shit that BC is going to look miles ahead of sunfire. You can do that to every single completed item in the game and it'll look pretty much near identical. The job of a bruiser and of a tank are entirely different, the role of their items are also entirely different. You are doing nothing more than comparing one sides best case scenario vs the other side worst case and be all "look at how unfair this is". While completely disregarding the opposite situation.

The Ecdysiast1 votes

{quoted}

You are doing nothing but putting an item on it's best case scenario and the other on it's worst case scenario and then saying "hey look at hoe unfair this is!" No shit that BC is going to look miles ahead of sunfire. You can do that to every single completed item in the game and it'll look pretty much near identical. The job of a bruiser and of a tank are entirely different, the role of their items are also entirely different. You are doing nothing more than comparing one sides best case scenario vs the other side worst case and be all "look at how unfair this is". While completely disregarding the opposite situation.

I am not the one doing it. The very fact you can complain that that's what I'm doing is the problem here. Because this is what happens in game. Tanks have no option but to choose an item that is in its worst case scenario if they're fighting any opponent who can build Cleaver first.

There is no opposite situation. There's no item a tank can buy that will put them in a best-case scenario in lane, because such a scenario does not exist for them.

FOR JUSTICE1 votes

Poppy OWO

i can go ibg into cleaver??

The Ecdysiast1 votes

{quoted}

Poppy OWO

i can go ibg into cleaver??

Heck I love Poppy, and I'd say go Cleaver then Gauntlet or Trinity then Titanic anyway. (you'd put yourself at a huge disadvantage going Gauntlet first into a cleaver builder) Especially with her recent changes, which increased her Q's AD scaling in exchange for lowering her W's movement speed AND defense, I think you're better off building her as if she were a tanky juggernaut instead of just a pure tank. It's only a difference of one or two items, really.

Jbels1 votes

I would actually prefer the 20% CDR on Sunfire Cape.

MrFawknSunshine1 votes

ok well what if sunfire built out of item 3751 + item 3082 +item 3067

giving sunfire passive, the passive of wardens reducing as and 15% cdr

and instead of 2900g cost it cost 3200g?

Moody P1 votes

nerfing an already shit item yikes

More from Gameplay

More by The Ecdysiast