User blog comment:HeresyHorus/Critical Strike Chance/@comment-1330314-20140415041810/@comment-1330314-20140415214929

It's becoming difficult to discuss this because you're not actually taking in the points people are giving you here:
 * 1) You're saying squishies need to be tankier against marksmen. While this in itself is fine, you're suggesting bizarre changes to crit mechanics that would make them needlessly confusing. This is just a needlessly roundabout way of nerfing marksman damage which can be achieved in a much simpler manner, such as by changing armor pen.
 * 2) Crits based on chance and a 1:1 translation to enhanced damage leads to exactly the same DPS. Chance-based gameplay is also not actual gameplay: if you want tanks to be somehow more vulnerable to marksmen or the like, a chance to deal additional damage requires no input on your part other than playing normally and hoping for a lucky stroke.
 * 3) This is something that could be fixed by a constant damage amp: instead of dealing a multiple of the damage you should have dealt, you deal exactly the damage you itemized for. This is one of the main points of having an AA amplifier, and a point I mentioned in my first comment here: a non-random increase to autoattacks would make gauging a crit user's power far easier, and would make fights fair by removing the randomness inherent in crit.

To reiterate, changing from a x% chance to deal double damage to a x% damage increase to autoattacks would not change crit-based damage output. Again, if everyone gets slaughtered by AD champs because of this change, that would be indicative of an imbalance on their side and not because of crit, and so would just warrant further balancing. You propose that every system tied in to crit would need a retuning, but if the new damage amplifier were to be too strong it would just need a number nerf to be properly balanced. You suggest that champions with long autoattack ranges would dominate, but that statement makes no sense: raw AD does far more than crit early game, particularly as every marksman has AD scalings on their abilities. You'd need 125 AD for to increase damage by the same amount as a, so no matter which champion you are you're not going to experience any kind of spike in damage just by building crit early on. In fact, crit-based damage would progress a lot more smoothly, since right now every marksman can abuse the animation on their autoattack to land a guaranteed crit on their next AA poke, something a flat amp would prevent, not encourage.

You also mention AD casters as somehow having the potential to be OP with non-random AA enhancers. Putting aside the fact that AD casters deal far more damage by building raw AD than by building crit by dint of having great AD ratios, autoattack-based damage is itself a good thing for any champion, particularly casters, as it forces them to stretch out their burst. Building crit on an AD caster would quite likely reduce their damage output, not increase it, but even if it were somehow more potent than raw AD it would not be a problem as it would present more options for counterplay.

Point being, you somehow seem to be under the impression that making crit non-random would suddenly make it overpowered, which is not only a baseless claim, but also one that runs against math that shows no difference in damage output or power: if you have a 10% chance to deal 200% damage or simply deal 10% extra damage on each autoattack, your DPS will be the same. You also seem to think crits are too powerful now, which is itself a pretty opinionated statement. If you were right, that would only be one more reason to make crits non-random, since that would make evaluating the mechanic's power a lot easier to analyze and balance.