You raise some things that have given me a few thoughts, Jhoi. Things that have made me develop my views. I expressed my distaste for guides receiving excessive help because the author will likely be unable to maintain the guide without further relying on crowdsourcing it. And that's because the author does not know the optimal set-up, as you say.
That said, the more I think on it, the more I think that alternative playstyles certainly have a place, however niche. AP Varus might be an entirely unviable way of playing, but if someone can create a well-structured, superbly coded and reasoned guide that manages to teach readers how to play AP Varus to the best of its potential (however low that may be), then their efforts certainly deserve recognition.
I still ultimately feel that only optimal play styles should be at the top ratings. I see the purpose of a guide site to be to help players become the best they can be and that is not achieved by spreading weak builds. Scouting can obviously help to make optimal guides more visible, but a sub-optimal build at #1 or even #2 is not what I think new players should find. Although if the only good guide happens to be sub-optimal, that raises a problem. That said, giving well-crafted alternative guides the recognition they deserve rewards the authors for their effort and, to return to the overarching theme of the thread, fosters a warmer community.
The salient points of my post are:
Anyhow, those are just my thoughts for now. It was pretty interesting to go through that, thanks for provoking said developments.
That said, the more I think on it, the more I think that alternative playstyles certainly have a place, however niche. AP Varus might be an entirely unviable way of playing, but if someone can create a well-structured, superbly coded and reasoned guide that manages to teach readers how to play AP Varus to the best of its potential (however low that may be), then their efforts certainly deserve recognition.
I still ultimately feel that only optimal play styles should be at the top ratings. I see the purpose of a guide site to be to help players become the best they can be and that is not achieved by spreading weak builds. Scouting can obviously help to make optimal guides more visible, but a sub-optimal build at #1 or even #2 is not what I think new players should find. Although if the only good guide happens to be sub-optimal, that raises a problem. That said, giving well-crafted alternative guides the recognition they deserve rewards the authors for their effort and, to return to the overarching theme of the thread, fosters a warmer community.
The salient points of my post are:
- Excessive help, to the extent that the guide is written by the commentors, is counter-productive for both the author and the site as a resource for guides.
- As a resource that is going to be used by many relatively new players, top guides should be optimal.
- Alternative guides fully deserve recognition when well-crafted, however they should not supplant optimal builds. This is beneficial to both the community and the site as a learning resource.
Anyhow, those are just my thoughts for now. It was pretty interesting to go through that, thanks for provoking said developments.
Just some relevant comments, not necessarily all disagreeing with what you said:
Guides teach other people how to play a champion. If they teach something inefficient then they're wrong. This is like saying teachers should be allowed to preach creationism because THEY believe in biblical fiction.
So you're saying revenge downvotes can't be wrong? Should someone who posts "-1" 3 seconds after viewing a 200,000 character guide be given "the benefit of the doubt"?
If you change the cheatsheet but your guide contents are still garbage no one should be upvoting the guide. If you know nothing about the champion, just unpublish/archive and let somebody else more knowledgeable write guides.
I feel that scout points are given way too scarcely. Even some of the best guides I've seen on this site appear to have 0 scout points.
jhoijhoi wrote:
1) Guides are just guides of the way the author plays that particular champion. If the author enjoys gold farming with Ashe, then that's why they've levelled E first. If the author likes playing AP Caitlyn, that's why they've maxed net first. An author can't be wrong about how THEY play a champion.
Guides teach other people how to play a champion. If they teach something inefficient then they're wrong. This is like saying teachers should be allowed to preach creationism because THEY believe in biblical fiction.
jhoijhoi wrote:
2) Upvotes and Downvotes are just expressions of opinion. Just like how the author can't be wrong about how THEY play a champion, a commenter can't be wrong about how THEY play the same champion. Upvotes and Downvotes only matter to the people who are trying to get high scores.
So you're saying revenge downvotes can't be wrong? Should someone who posts "-1" 3 seconds after viewing a 200,000 character guide be given "the benefit of the doubt"?
jhoijhoi wrote:
3) A guide does not need to be "optimal" to be good. A guide that has been changed to reflect public opinion without any input from the owner beyond "yes, will change guide to get upvotes", is a bad guide. It may be optimal, but is it good? Does the author really know anything about the champion? The original guide was better because it was unique. Unfortunately, a lot of reviewers/commenters see a hesitation to change the guide as a sign of weakness or being bad. You can't win; either you change the guide to "improve", or you keep the guide as it is and are called "bad".
If you change the cheatsheet but your guide contents are still garbage no one should be upvoting the guide. If you know nothing about the champion, just unpublish/archive and let somebody else more knowledgeable write guides.
jhoijhoi wrote:
4) On the other hand, "optimal guides" can be Scouted. If the top guide for Alistar is six Deathcaps and non-optimal, but the second guide is absolutely the best thing ever created since sliced bread, Scouts can feature it. Good guides are noticed.
I feel that scout points are given way too scarcely. Even some of the best guides I've seen on this site appear to have 0 scout points.
I think the argument now is "what is optimal". Because builds are not mathematical equations and there isn't a clear-cut right or wrong answer.
Instead of criticising a guide for being different, or "non-optimal", people should be a little more open-minded.
Edit: Sorry Satella, didn't see your post. Guides are not teachers. Guides are suggestions. As a teacher I could teach you about photosynthesis, and I'd have to teach you what is currently known about it, in order to teach it correctly. Video game guides =/= real life learning.
Downvotes are downvotes, no matter what form they come in. All votes, whether negative or positive, are purely opinion.
People naturally change their guides to reflect feedback. I remember when I had Stark's as an item in my core Ashe build. I stuck to it, kept it in the guide for a long time, before changing it as I grew more experienced with the game. Changing things about in the guide doesn't mean you lose knowledge of the champion you initially wrote the guide for.
Scout points mean nothing currently, because no one knows what scout points do, or even what they are ^^
Instead of criticising a guide for being different, or "non-optimal", people should be a little more open-minded.
Edit: Sorry Satella, didn't see your post. Guides are not teachers. Guides are suggestions. As a teacher I could teach you about photosynthesis, and I'd have to teach you what is currently known about it, in order to teach it correctly. Video game guides =/= real life learning.
Downvotes are downvotes, no matter what form they come in. All votes, whether negative or positive, are purely opinion.
People naturally change their guides to reflect feedback. I remember when I had Stark's as an item in my core Ashe build. I stuck to it, kept it in the guide for a long time, before changing it as I grew more experienced with the game. Changing things about in the guide doesn't mean you lose knowledge of the champion you initially wrote the guide for.
Scout points mean nothing currently, because no one knows what scout points do, or even what they are ^^
Basically what I get from these walls of text:
1) We should be wary not to change guide authors into "upvote *****s" who just make every little change to get an upvote. Ex: first comment says to get
Butcher
instead of
Fury
. It's changed. Upvote given. Then the next comes along and tells the author to do it the other way around. It's changed back. Another upvote.
2) People who comment on it are in general just players and by my standard: players are humans too and therefore are known to make mistakes.
1) We should be wary not to change guide authors into "upvote *****s" who just make every little change to get an upvote. Ex: first comment says to get
Butcher
instead of
Fury
. It's changed. Upvote given. Then the next comes along and tells the author to do it the other way around. It's changed back. Another upvote.2) People who comment on it are in general just players and by my standard: players are humans too and therefore are known to make mistakes.
I'm not ignoring it, I'm accepting it. There is no such thing as a "troll vote". This concept of votes as opinions has been well established on MobaFire. The only voting that is against MobaFire's policy of fairness is that of one person trying to cheat the system/leading a tirade of revenge voting.
In the end, guides are simply meant to be about sharing how you play a champion. First Blood AD DunkMaster Yi is not going to work every single game, but there's nothing stopping you from watching War's video and trying it. Support Nidalee isn't going to work well every single game, but there's nothing stopping me from writing that guide and sharing it with everyone else.
Edit: Could you imagine if every guide was the same, detailing the "most optimal" way to play the champion? LoL would grow stale very quickly, and MobaFire would virtually have no use. And remember, what might not be "optimal" now, can quickly become so if a "pro" tries it out and succeeds. Not to mention if something changes in the game - Jungle Nasus, anyone?
In the end, guides are simply meant to be about sharing how you play a champion. First Blood AD DunkMaster Yi is not going to work every single game, but there's nothing stopping you from watching War's video and trying it. Support Nidalee isn't going to work well every single game, but there's nothing stopping me from writing that guide and sharing it with everyone else.
Edit: Could you imagine if every guide was the same, detailing the "most optimal" way to play the champion? LoL would grow stale very quickly, and MobaFire would virtually have no use. And remember, what might not be "optimal" now, can quickly become so if a "pro" tries it out and succeeds. Not to mention if something changes in the game - Jungle Nasus, anyone?
jhoijhoi wrote:
I think the argument now is "what is optimal". Because builds are not mathematical equations and there isn't a clear-cut right or wrong answer.
Instead of criticising a guide for being different, or "non-optimal", people should be a little more open-minded.
I was inconstant in my use of "optimal". On one hand I used it to refer to the differences between what I would call "competitive" and "alternative/just-for-fun" builds, such as AD vs AP Varus. Also, niche, inflexible build paths that work only situationally and offer no adaptability while remaining functional fall into the latter. I feel both have their place, but the former needs to be most visible.
However there's also "optimal" in the sense of the best created guide. There's a lot to say about that, but as it is late for me, I'll shorten it. An optimal AD Varus guide offers a common build order which functions most broadly, best allowing him to fulfill his roll as an ADC. It then offers situational items to build to each game, ranging from the common to the niche. An item is only suggested to be built where it is the best choice. That is on top of all the other desirable traits any guide should have, not just competitive ones.
jhoijhoi wrote:
I'm not ignoring it, I'm accepting it. There is no such thing as a "troll vote". This concept of votes as opinions has been well established on MobaFire. The only voting that is against MobaFire's policy of fairness is that of one person trying to cheat the system/leading a tirade of revenge voting.
In the end, guides are simply meant to be about sharing how you play a champion. First Blood AD DunkMaster Yi is not going to work every single game, but there's nothing stopping you from watching War's video and trying it. Support Nidalee isn't going to work well every single game, but there's nothing stopping me from writing that guide and sharing it with everyone else.
Edit: Could you imagine if every guide was the same, detailing the "most optimal" way to play the champion? LoL would grow stale very quickly, and MobaFire would virtually have no use. And remember, what might not be "optimal" now, can quickly become so if a "pro" tries it out and succeeds. Not to mention if something changes in the game - Jungle Nasus, anyone?
The Meta is not some stagnet thing like jhoi points out, its a changing thing. It will ALWAYS change, because pros will always try something new to get an edge in proffesional play. When you play the game, doing the same thing over and over is good, but its great to change things to discover them. Like Jungle nasus.
People change, therefore the game changes, just like Season 1 -> Season 2 -> Season 3. Take a look at LoL's Meta history. In season 1 we had ADC mid, Support and Tank Bottom, and then APC Top, and then your jungler. Season 2 it was APC mid, ADC and support bot, Tank/Brusier/Assassin Top (This changes alot actually dont quote me on this), and then Jungler. Season 3? Well its been changing alot, APC/AD Assassin mid, Bot is the same, Jungler the same, Top can be almost everything, from AP, to Supports (Nunu Anyone?).
Riot also plays a role into, the "optimal" build/champion, they change things to make the meta change too, just like how Kha'Zix sucked and now is one of the most played champion now.
So how does this relate to Mobafire Guides? Optimal guides will show up, DURING THAT PERIOD, but will always change. Jhoi's jungle nasus was considered troll, but when riot changed him, it became vialbe. So "optimal" is a very loose word in the meta. Its what ever you consdier good, but people forget this. So optimal, is not a word we should use nesscarry, it should be more like what you feel is best. After all, optimal is only, what you think is best.
NewMeta
<Member>
<Member>
@Arcana3 : You're correct, this really does prove that downvoting a guide really shouldn't be about whether a build is built towards the current meta. How good the guide will be in-game is different than how the guide is made which is really what I think should lead people to judge a guide. When voting on a guide, I think that one should not think about whether the build shown fits the meta but instead think about how the author presented the build. If the author showed that the build COULD fit the meta or COULD become a new meta for that particular champion, then I would give them a thumbs up. I suppose that's another thing that has to be taken into account to fix our community.
So thanks for all your comments so far, hopefully we can keep this discussion going.
So thanks for all your comments so far, hopefully we can keep this discussion going.
You need to log in before commenting.
1) Guides are just guides of the way the author plays that particular champion. If the author enjoys gold farming with Ashe, then that's why they've levelled E first. If the author likes playing AP Caitlyn, that's why they've maxed net first. An author can't be wrong about how THEY play a champion.
2) Upvotes and Downvotes are just expressions of opinion. Just like how the author can't be wrong about how THEY play a champion, a commenter can't be wrong about how THEY play the same champion. Upvotes and Downvotes only matter to the people who are trying to get high scores.
3) A guide does not need to be "optimal" to be good. A guide that has been changed to reflect public opinion without any input from the owner beyond "yes, will change guide to get upvotes", is a bad guide. It may be optimal, but is it good? Does the author really know anything about the champion? The original guide was better because it was unique. Unfortunately, a lot of reviewers/commenters see a hesitation to change the guide as a sign of weakness or being bad. You can't win; either you change the guide to "improve", or you keep the guide as it is and are called "bad".
4) On the other hand, "optimal guides" can be Scouted. If the top guide for Alistar is six Deathcaps and non-optimal, but the second guide is absolutely the best thing ever created since sliced bread, Scouts can feature it. Good guides are noticed.
And that's about it, I think.