Guide Information Should Be Optimal!

[quote=GrandmasterD]Alright, a recent development in the Scout forums has lead to an interesting debate. I won't reveal any names as they have spoken within the safe zone of the Scout forums and who am I to violate that? Also, that information isn't actually relevant. The question is simple: Is it worth to sacrifice optimal setups to remain original? There are complaints that guides end up being all the same if we'd all do what the meta states and what the pros do. Personally I think all guides should be optimal, if you want a personal diary then call it that but don't call it a guide. I think a guide, since it's supposed to teach others, should contain fully optimal information. Hence one could ask the question about what is optimal and sure there are a ton of grey areas. Like is running 9/21/0 masteries worth running on [[Diana]]? Some people would say that it isn't and others will say that it is. However, most people will agree that [[Clarity]] is never worth using. So yeah, post your thoughts. Should a guide contain optimal information only or not? Keep in mind that I do not discourage unorthodox builds or guides. There's a lot of unorthodox stuff out there that probably works really well. Those are the grey areas and as a result I would expect them to explained in full detail. [spoiler=From The Scout Forum] [quote]My guides are a reflection of how I play that champion. And I no longer care if xx is better on xx, or xx mastery is better than xx if the change is so insignificant. It's my guide. I'm happy to test things out and improve myself as a player and then improve my guide. But I'm not happy to just whimp out and change my guide based on feedback from people who "know better".[/quote] [quote]Difference =/= wrong. It's my guide. That's what I dislike about MobaFire. Authors feel pressured to change their guides to what is "standard" or "meta" or what the "pros" do. Yes. Maybe getting xx item on xx works well for you. That's not the point of MY guide. I'm not at all advocating a Katarina guide with Clarity and Revive. I'm not saying that a Sejuani with HP per level quints, marks, seals and glyphs is good. I am definitely not saying that Darius with 100% CDR is amazing. I'm saying that if the author wants to write that, they can. Now, if the author is saying, "This cheat sheet will work at all elos, you should win 100% of games", I'd expect only the most "optimal" cheat sheet. And that's fair, as the author should be writing the guide based upon what truly works at all elos that can win 100% of games. But if an author says, "This is the way I play XXX, it works for me" and the guide gets to 95%, then why are you annoyed? It's THEIR guide, their way of playing said champion. It may not be the way YOU play that champion; that's fine, downvote if you want.[/quote] [quote=GrandmasterD]Guides are supposed to teach people things and I figured that, out of all people, a teacher would actually understand that the reader, or student, doesn't know if the author, or teacher, actually presents the optimal choice. They simply assume that because the guide is extensive and has nice visuals the author knows what they are talking about. Then, if the guide isn't optimal, it simply creates a whole bunch of players who aren't using an optimal setup or playstyle and worse: they aren't even aware of it. Also, undoing that damage is a lot harder than actually inflicting it. If you, as a player or even as a person, do not care about optimal choices then don't read guides, don't listen to other players and just play your game but you should definitely not be writing guides![/quote] [quote]I write guides because I want to share MY way of playing xx champion. I'm teaching readers how *I* play xx champion. And if that's wrong, then what are guides for?[/quote] [/spoiler][/quote]

[quote=-NA- Veng Lmfao]There's a massive difference between switching in a few runes, adjusting mastery pages or running different game strategies (Teamfighting vs splitpushing) etc than troll builds. I'm more than happy to see a guide which critises the meta and makes an attempt to VIABLY try something new. Sick and tired of seeing the same old shit, and as soon as a guy tries [b]3[/b] mana regen glyphs, you get potatoes like Lagger "Wrong runes -1" The voting sort of confuses me. First option agrees with my opinion, but aren't I supposed to be selecting the second one? I'll vote after I work it out *tired and I've always been slow on things*[/quote]

[quote=GrandmasterD][quote=-NA- Veng Lmfao] There's a massive difference between switching in a few runes, adjusting mastery pages or running different game strategies (Teamfighting vs splitpushing) etc than troll builds. I'm more than happy to see a guide which critises the meta and makes an attempt to VIABLY try something new. Sick and tired of seeing the same old shit, and as soon as a guy tries [b]3[/b] mana regen glyphs, you get potatoes like Lagger "Wrong runes -1" [/quote] Obviously but that's not what I'm speaking of. I'm talking about stuff like 9/0/21 [[Nasus]] with [[Exhaust]] or 18/1/11 [[Warwick]] with [[Spirit of the Spectral Wraith]].[/quote]

[quote=-NA- Veng Lmfao]Okay, I'll use your option. There's a difference between 9/0/21 nasus with exhaust (that has potential to work, and can be agreed that it does have potential) and a 0/0/30 nasus with clairvoyance. Does this make more sense or am I still not getting it? [b]EDIT:[/b] You literally responded within 3 seconds of me posting... wow![/quote]

[quote=Ninja Trigger]Sometimes the build in a guide can be complete and utter trash! However other parts of the guide can contain game changing information and still be super useful. Asides from having bad masteries or runes, I will sometimes find something in a guides match up section that is really helpful even though the build is garbage. Also the meta is always changing so I don't hate on a guide for having 20/4/6 masteries although I am much more likely to down vote it.[/quote]

[quote=GrandmasterD][quote=-NA- Veng Lmfao] Okay, I'll use your option. There's a difference between 9/0/21 nasus with exhaust and a 0/0/30 nasus with clairvoyance. Does this make more sense or am I still not getting it? [/quote] There's a difference as the latter is just plain troll and the former is an attempt but both will be called not viable and far from optimal. (I'm calling top lane) There's also a huge difference between 9/21/0 Nasus top with [[Teleport]] and 9/0/21 Nasus top with [[Exhaust]]. [quote=-NA- Veng Lmfao] You literally responded within 3 seconds of me posting... wow![/quote] It's a debate I think is important.[/quote]

[quote=tehAsian]It depends on the guide author's aim. Some want to write a guide that shows the most optimal way to play a champion. Others write unorthodox ways of playing a champion *cough OTG cough*. This is fine too. But if someone writes down bullshit and says it's the most optimal way to play a champion, that is not fine.[/quote]

[quote=GrandmasterD][quote=tehAsian] It depends on the guide author's aim. Some want to write a guide that shows the most optimal way to play a champion. Others write unorthodox ways of playing a champion *cough OTG cough*. This is fine too. But if someone writes down bullshit and says it's the most optimal way to play a champion, that is not fine. [/quote] OTG's guide can be judged on if it is the most optimal way to play AP Varus.[/quote]

[quote=OTGBionicArm]When it comes to stop that isn't pro or high elo recommended, a lot of builds people make... they just don't seem to put the effort into testing it. I've seen SO MANY guides where the build sucks the D and the author will respond with something along the lines of "This has worked for me many times." But do they really stop and think about why it works? Maybe they are bronze. Maybe the enemy team collectively suffered bowel issues at once and afk'd. Who knows? My point being is that "it works" isn't a good argument. I realize my guide isn't optimal, or competitively viable, however I have gone to great lengths to test the build against as many mid laners as I could to find out what works and doesn't work, as well as when it's just a plain shitty time to use it. Edit: This means that optimal has nothing to do with meta or not. Optimal is simply being the best at the intended role. My guide is intended to be played as a Mage, rather than an ADC. EDIT 2: I specifically state the guide isn't for ranked and have only tested it in normals. Another thing that irks me is when people just kind of leave information like that out of their guide or lie about it.[/quote]

[quote=GrandmasterD][quote=tehAsian]It depends on the guide author's aim.[/quote] My problem is that authors rarely state those so a reader will assume it's the most optimal way. If I'd be a noob and see a [[Nasus]] guide that has over 85% rating, I will assume it's an optimal one.[/quote]