Talk:Kled/@comment-27004415-20160828011105/@comment-28977071-20160901094334

No, I didn't mean that there ar no other items that provide slow. There are also, , , , , (again many unsuitable for ).

I meant that only those 3 items provide sustained access to slow. That's what I want if the team lacks CC and I need to fix it by itemization. The items with slow active work as engage tool but don't work that well if team horribly lacks CC to follow up, so I mostly consider items with CC actives to be tools of improving team CC, rather than fixing it (in a similar fashion as e.g. rather improves health restoration rather than fixes it).

However in case of he already has decent CC incorporated in his kit, along with a bunch of dashes and haste. That shifts odds more to CC improvement than CC fix.

I don't intend to diminish value of, I use it extensively myself, including passive and it's imo the heaviest armor equipment around, especially gold efficient against teams of AS-based champs or multiple marksmen. I just find it to be a solution when I want to fix team CC, although 4 seconds is a really long time span. If you forced a or traded well, good, but enemy team is expected to respond with own CC and mobility tools to disengage and in such case entire team'd have to wait entire 1 min for next opportunity. I don't think that item actives provide enough of consistent access to CC to fix it for the team. CC improvement is however very different story.

You made very good arguments even if our gameplay tactics differ. I maybe might try your point of view someday to compare (e.g. I never opted between and  based on enemy's kiting potential, I am usually willing to sacrifice some of own  as bulk if it gives me engage opportunity and peel for the team).

Similarly I usually consider on Mallet to be fine. I don't pick that item on based champs so the stat will be used, although delaying item completion a bit. In terms of early item efficiency can be a tad overpriced, but from the point of late item effectivity no stat is wasted.

You seemed to correctly compare both items as rush options during laning phase. However, in this thread we specifically compared'em as 3rd item buy on. Pet mechanics of this particular champ regarding sustain during laning synergize very well with direct instead of resists combined with health restoration. So albeit correct in general, your comparation might not apply specifically to him. It might be a reason why a heavy build →→ wins ladders with 80% winrate while →→ has only 64% winrate on. His innately good stickiness to targets might be the other reason. Again I'm not suggesting to blindly accept results of statistics, but they still might be indicative.