Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-4881935-20130327060139/@comment-3112744-20130408012630

The5lacker wrote: Ozuar wrote:

Agreed. If someone can tell me a valid reason for why we should  ONLY  use radius, then I will likely concede on this matter. 1. Radius allows someone to calculate the maximum effective range of an ability.

2. Radius allows someone to calculate how many people can be hit from an ability based on where its center is placed.

3. Radius is also translated into Range.

4. Diameter is merely 2 * Radius, and therefore can be easily found by simply doubling the radius, rather than listing only Diameter with requires one to divide a number by 2, which is harder to do off of the top of someone's head.

5. No matter if an ability is ground targeted or comes from a source (usually a ground targeted source, as well, such as Jarvan's E), an ability is still a circle, still has a center, and still has a radius.

6. Radius is used in significantly more calculations, such as total area covered (Pi * Radius ^ 2).

There are all points I have made TIME AND TIME AGAIN. 6 points. That's 6 more points than diameter, which at the moment is only "well that's what I want and that's what we have right now." Radius is more practical and no one has proven me otherwise. What can diameter be used for? Please, I want to know what diameter can be used for other than "it helps me visualize because that's what I'm used to." 1. That is something we easily concede to, but that's also not the source of the issue.

2. Diameter does the same exact thing, and the location of the center isn't necessary for that.

3. That doesn't really say anything.

4. Again, this isn't a discussion based on math. It's based on usage and which makes more sense. Yes, it is easy to get one if you have the other.

5. That doesn't directly explain why radius is better for ground-targeted areas.

6. See 4.

And my post about is definitely more than "that's what I want". I gave a practical application that you have done nothing to refute.