Perhaps change "Humor" to include "Unconventional" as well, or create a seperate section for it.
Unconventional Guides/Builds
Just because they are unconventional, doesn't mean that they don't work, they may not be viable in ranked per se, but in normals they are ok, fine, or even amazing, and on top of that, FUN.
Zeprido wrote:
Unconventional Guides/Builds
Just because they are unconventional, doesn't mean that they don't work, they may not be viable in ranked per se, but in normals they are ok, fine, or even amazing, and on top of that, FUN.
Zeprido is currently:Online
If I've helped you at all in any way, or you really like my post click that +Rep button =)
You can always call me Zep for short =D
Feel free to private message me with questions/concerns or if you just want to chat =)
I would agree with Zeprido.
In my eyes:
A funny build is a build with no attempt to be used in play
An unconventional build is a build that is a serious attempt to be used in play, but is known to be less viable than other builds
Now here comes the real hard part. Some people that make unconventional builds truly believe their build is better than the conventional build, and so would not want it to be separated from other more conventional builds. However I can still see it working because it will give users who want to be more experimental some protection from people downvoting because it's not viable for competitive play.
Basically, it would have to be optional because it should be up to the writer's discretion of how seriously / in what way he wants his build to be perceived.
In my eyes:
A funny build is a build with no attempt to be used in play
An unconventional build is a build that is a serious attempt to be used in play, but is known to be less viable than other builds
- - -
Now here comes the real hard part. Some people that make unconventional builds truly believe their build is better than the conventional build, and so would not want it to be separated from other more conventional builds. However I can still see it working because it will give users who want to be more experimental some protection from people downvoting because it's not viable for competitive play.
Basically, it would have to be optional because it should be up to the writer's discretion of how seriously / in what way he wants his build to be perceived.
AP Twisted Fate | AD Carry Kog | Support Sona
Well, I could add that as an additional guide type option. It would cause those guides to get filtered out of all the places that currently only show guides of "Champion" type, but it would still show in all the other places where general/humor/team guides show.
Yeah the only problem I see is they will obviously get less advertisement that way, but it would make it easier for new players to get more standard builds, and for more experienced players to look up some fun new builds. It would be the guide writer's choice which section they want to put it in either way so I guess they can't complain.
Can we make it so you can't switch back and forth though? Like what if they had a build as unconventional so it got upvoted for being unconventional, and then they switched it to a standard build to get the top spot for a champ?
Can we make it so you can't switch back and forth though? Like what if they had a build as unconventional so it got upvoted for being unconventional, and then they switched it to a standard build to get the top spot for a champ?
Thanks to GrandMasterD for my sig!
Mowen wrote:
I would agree with Zeprido.
In my eyes:
A funny build is a build with no attempt to be used in play
An unconventional build is a build that is a serious attempt to be used in play, but is known to be less viable than other builds
- - -
Now here comes the real hard part. Some people that make unconventional builds truly believe their build is better than the conventional build, and so would not want it to be separated from other more conventional builds. However I can still see it working because it will give users who want to be more experimental some protection from people downvoting because it's not viable for competitive play.
Basically, it would have to be optional because it should be up to the writer's discretion of how seriously / in what way he wants his build to be perceived.
I support this. For example, we had a fiasco a while ago where the AP Yi build achieved a higher rating than DEWO's AD Yi build, leading to the erroneous conclusion that AD is worse than AP.
But while "Unconventional" is an option, I would instead be much more supportive of "guide types", as mentioned before. Classify a guide as AD/AP/Tank/Hybrid/etc and all the "unconventional" riffraff is gone and instead categorized in a location not typical of that champion.
Seems good to me. Will imo work like a filter for builds that there's no point in even looking at since I play to win :3
I'd also like Vets/Mods to be able to switch the category of said guides to "unconventional" if they truly are, but that may just be me :3
I'd also like Vets/Mods to be able to switch the category of said guides to "unconventional" if they truly are, but that may just be me :3
"Well, basically you should treat me like a prostitute." - TotalBiscuit
Searz wrote:
Seems good to me. Will imo work like a filter for builds that there's no point in even looking at since I play to win :3
I'd also like Vets/Mods to be able to switch the category of said guides to "unconventional" if they truly are, but that may just be me :3
Moderators are currently able to switch guide types and if anyone has a problem with a guide, you can just report it - although I don't know what Matt's stance is on allowing Veterans this power.
You need to log in before commenting.
The two veteran lists also seem broken lol...
I will fix this :)