Talk:Lux/@comment-31827536-20170627221559/@comment-28977071-20170711155637

I actually like to play  despite her being condemned in higher ELOs. However, I focus on team utility, CC and zoning in such case (unfortunately, one has to explicitly enumerate all this stuff now that the old 'team utility' term's been divided by Rito. I still find it quite inconvenient and confusing cuz the "utility" meaning from a normal language now corresponds to the new utility, CC and zoning all together, but whatever..).

The  has to not only be built, but also played, differently than an APC  imo. should put much more stress on using her and  in such way that the CC should not overlap too much if possible. An APC wants to burst an enemy carry, while a   wants to chain her CC.

Sometimes building the damage on a support is good, even though it sounds as an outright oxymoron. If one faces a sustain lane, building damage is good for laning cuz a kill lane is its natural counter. But even then, one wants to enhance/build utility, CC and a zoning on a support because of their immense synergy with carries and teamfights. The laning against a sustain lane won't last forever.

When I personally'd like to go for later damage as a, I usually build ( or ) and/or CDR early. Those stats naturally enhance the already present utility, CC and zoning potential, while still allowing the transition into damage later.

Outside of those two cases, I just don't like the idea of aiming for damage on a support. A fully "team-utility"-dedicated support is worth more than just one man later in teamfights. Plus, in case that the laning partner falls behind for whatever reason, the support role allows to fully shift their power to other potentially fed/carrying teammate; something that a fake support cannot achieve.