astrolia wrote:
The elo tier function works. You're forgetting to put in the "minimum ELO tier" and is left as any.
Could you copy the exact link? Because when I try to use the elo tier function (even if assigned to any in the above fields), it just orders by join date every single time.
^So the sort by elo tier function doesn't work, but narrowing it down to plat/diamond/gold etc works fine. I didn't think of doing it that way, thanks!
♡ guide writing tips 'n tricks ♡ ashes to ashes ♡ fancy a sig? ♡
♡ sig unintentional collab with Jovy and me ♡
♡ sig unintentional collab with Jovy and me ♡
So I took the liberty of counting MobaFire's tiers (45 names per page, for anyone interested):
Bronze: 58
Silver: 99
Gold: 45
Platinum: 31
Diamond: 17
That's pretty interesting, as there are more silver and bronze players on MobaFire than Gold. So it's unlikely that the gold guides are a problem, when you consider guide writing - or at least, that's what one would hope.
Bronze: 58
Silver: 99
Gold: 45
Platinum: 31
Diamond: 17
That's pretty interesting, as there are more silver and bronze players on MobaFire than Gold. So it's unlikely that the gold guides are a problem, when you consider guide writing - or at least, that's what one would hope.
Also only Plat+ guides are "featured" and put above other guides on the champ guide page. Otherwise I think gold is fine for the "high elo" filter. Not many people use it and the ones that do are educated generally and can decide for themselves what they consider high elo.
Thanks to Minho for my sig!
Totallynotn00b wrote:
Zzz...
Your logic falls flat on its face when you realise that being good at the game doesn't neccessarily = an ability to write a good guide.
Sure, you may know what *you* are talking about, but from my experience from reading guides, other people sure as hell don't.
People who get to higher elo simply expect the lower-elos to aspire to being a higher elo. I.e, they know the mechanics, things like map awareness and warding... and quite frankly, they don't.
They view it as above them to have to explain what many regarded as trivial things.
And that is why their guides tend to fall flat.
Second, just as one can get to high elo without knowing how to write a guide, one can know how to write a guide without getting to high elo.
I would take myself as a prime example.
I played LB in season 2 to the point that i could crush 2k elo players without a sweat in midlane.
The problem? Try first picking LB and see where it gets you. Let's leave aside whether or not I would know how to play the game. I don;t think anyone is going to argue I know how to play Leblanc. And yet by your criteria, i would have pretty much been automatically branded "bad".
I'm not going to go about defending low-elo guide writers. Believe me. Having had to review them, I know where you're coming from.
But such broad and brash statements are both false, and unhelpful.
So ok. Let's assume we're going to catagorise a guide purely by elo, as opposed to how good it is.
... Why?
It makes no sense to judge a product by the person who made it as opposed to judging the product itself.
TLDR:
High elo players tend to have experience, but not know how to write guides.
Low elo players tend to know how to write guides, but lack experience.
I completely agree. I read a few guides on SOLOMID by DYRUS and they were straight awful. His guide for TF just stated "Spam rainbow cards down the lane and you win". Kind of a lack of description on farming, when to use pick a card. Which card to use and etc. So I agree writing is a skill not an ELO thing. A person could know everything about LOL yet they are in 900 ELO due to bad teams.
A person who is in 900 elo and "knows everything about lol" is a theorycrafter who lacks the mechanical ability and/or game sense to really play the game in real time versus real opponents on a higher level. You can find people like this even at "high elo". E.g.: SYDTKO, formerly of Curse, was known as "King Theorycrafter" in season 2, but he had "poor" top lane mechanics compared to other pro top laners.
Now, you mention Solomid guides. Let's be honest here: Dyrus thinks his guides are trash too. When he released his Singed guide, he told everyone, "Quit looking at mine, go read InvertedComposer's instead". But Dyrus is famous for playing Singed, so Dyrus making a Singed guide draws in visits/admoney/etc for Solomid. InvertedComposer and also Ranka Lee's Singed guides are basically 500 page essays that have more theorycrafting (theorycrafting supported by hundreds of ranked games as Singed playing against pros), detail, match up descriptions, and gameplay stuff than any guide on this site. And when they get comments telling them "[blah blah blah] I don't like this item", they don't reply "Well, this is how it works for me, so you should just try it out", they actually respond to the person.
So, there are 4 kinds of people:
- High elo + can't write guide
- High elo + can write guide
- Low elo + can't write guide
- Low elo + can write guide
IMO, based on many of the guides on this site versus many other guides on Solomid (by someone other than Dyrus), the number of people who fall into the category of "low elo + can't write guide" far outnumber the number of "high elo + can't write guide". So, instead of bringing up Solomid, why don't you focus on the guides actually on this site? Are there "high elo" guides you found that are actually like Dyrus's guide which is why you brought that up?
Now, you mention Solomid guides. Let's be honest here: Dyrus thinks his guides are trash too. When he released his Singed guide, he told everyone, "Quit looking at mine, go read InvertedComposer's instead". But Dyrus is famous for playing Singed, so Dyrus making a Singed guide draws in visits/admoney/etc for Solomid. InvertedComposer and also Ranka Lee's Singed guides are basically 500 page essays that have more theorycrafting (theorycrafting supported by hundreds of ranked games as Singed playing against pros), detail, match up descriptions, and gameplay stuff than any guide on this site. And when they get comments telling them "[blah blah blah] I don't like this item", they don't reply "Well, this is how it works for me, so you should just try it out", they actually respond to the person.
So, there are 4 kinds of people:
- High elo + can't write guide
- High elo + can write guide
- Low elo + can't write guide
- Low elo + can write guide
IMO, based on many of the guides on this site versus many other guides on Solomid (by someone other than Dyrus), the number of people who fall into the category of "low elo + can't write guide" far outnumber the number of "high elo + can't write guide". So, instead of bringing up Solomid, why don't you focus on the guides actually on this site? Are there "high elo" guides you found that are actually like Dyrus's guide which is why you brought that up?
hi embracing. yes i play ff14 now.
Problem with making the border, say, gold 3 or 1, is there really won't be as much difference between a gold 1 and a gold 5 as there was before between a 1500 and a 1700 or 1800. You can go even win loss and gain league points...each division means a lot less than it used to, and the "elo" barrier is fuzzier.
Thanks to TRUeLM, Plastictree, Scrax, Xiaowiriamu, foggy12, JahGFX, jhoijhoi, msrobinson, JEFFY40HANDS, Nyoike, MissMaw, and me :) for the sigs!
wRAthoFVuLK wrote:
Problem with making the border, say, gold 3 or 1, is there really won't be as much difference between a gold 1 and a gold 5 as there was before between a 1500 and a 1700 or 1800. You can go even win loss and gain league points...each division means a lot less than it used to, and the "elo" barrier is fuzzier.
Theres a HUGE difference between a 1500 and a 1700-1800.
I was born nude but now i am dude
You need to log in before commenting.
Your logic falls flat on its face when you realise that being good at the game doesn't neccessarily = an ability to write a good guide.
Sure, you may know what *you* are talking about, but from my experience from reading guides, other people sure as hell don't.
People who get to higher elo simply expect the lower-elos to aspire to being a higher elo. I.e, they know the mechanics, things like map awareness and warding... and quite frankly, they don't.
They view it as above them to have to explain what many regarded as trivial things.
And that is why their guides tend to fall flat.
Second, just as one can get to high elo without knowing how to write a guide, one can know how to write a guide without getting to high elo.
I would take myself as a prime example.
I played LB in season 2 to the point that i could crush 2k elo players without a sweat in midlane.
The problem? Try first picking LB and see where it gets you. Let's leave aside whether or not I would know how to play the game. I don;t think anyone is going to argue I know how to play Leblanc. And yet by your criteria, i would have pretty much been automatically branded "bad".
I'm not going to go about defending low-elo guide writers. Believe me. Having had to review them, I know where you're coming from.
But such broad and brash statements are both false, and unhelpful.
So ok. Let's assume we're going to catagorise a guide purely by elo, as opposed to how good it is.
... Why?
It makes no sense to judge a product by the person who made it as opposed to judging the product itself.
TLDR:
High elo players tend to have experience, but not know how to write guides.
Low elo players tend to know how to write guides, but lack experience.