Talk:Kassadin/@comment-31543294-20180716065407/@comment-4091261-20181027054118

It's because you are thinking of the damage reduction percentages, which is largely skewed to rounding error, instead of EHP.

Have you ever thought to yourselves, what truly is the essence of penetration? If we found that gains was as simple as 1% of  gains through the concept of EHP rather than diminishing returns, then what is making the mere subtraction of this susceptible to a nonlinear rate? The answer: it isn't.

Consider the difference between someone with their / before and after penetration. I've already stated it, before, you are always removing which practically only removes 0.18 from the multiplier that would be used to calculated EHP. It is wholistically removing 18% of the HP. It's not that complicated to envision.

Just because you have a billion, it doesn't change the fact that are penetrating. The effect it causes is exactly the same from the point where the enemy has equivalent as the penetration towards infinity, just because the constant becomes negligible doesn't mean it never existed.

I can't believe something so simple is giving everyone such grief. I'll break it down yet again, but with many examples:
 * 1) You have 18 magic penetration against someone with and.
 * Your penetration is removing 0% of their HP, which is 0 EHP out of the previous 1000 EHP.
 * 1) You have 18 magic penetration against someone with and.
 * Your penetration is removing 18% of their HP, which is 180 EHP out of the previous 1180 EHP.
 * 1) You have 18 magic penetration against someone with and.
 * Your penetration is removing 18% of their HP, which is 180 EHP out of the previous 1200 EHP.
 * 1) You have 18 magic penetration against someone with and.
 * Your penetration is removing 18% of their HP, which is 180 EHP out of the previous 2000 EHP.
 * 1) You have 18 magic penetration against someone with and.
 * Your penetration is removing 18% of their HP, which is 180 EHP out of the previous 3000 EHP.
 * 1) You have 18 magic penetration against someone with and.
 * Your penetration is removing 18% of their HP, which is 180 EHP out of the previous 6000 EHP.
 * 1) You have 18 magic penetration against someone with and.
 * Your penetration is removing 18% of their HP, which is 180 EHP out of the previous 10,000 EHP.
 * 1) You have 18 magic penetration against someone with and.
 * Your penetration is removing 18% of their HP, which is 180 EHP out of the previous infinite EHP.

Flat magic penetration is almost completely independent of. The only dependence is that the minimum threshold of enemy necessary to make complete use out of flat magic penetration is raised linearly alongside flat penetration.

I implore everyone to stop using the percentage graphs that are bounded from 0 to 100%. It's simply an issue with trying to set inflexible graph boundaries to represent reality. What the heck does the 99.99999...% damage resistance tell you when you have have over a billion ? All it tells you that you take almost no. It makes adding another seem negligible when it obviously adds value, it just looks excessively small in comparison.

The magic penetration does not get smaller, it is just the enemy's that gets a lot bigger.