Board Thread:Wiki discussions and announcements/@comment-1990160-20140521040036/@comment-1330314-20140522201314

ClariS wrote: ^ My above post is an actual arguement, but below is me more venting and somewhat explaining my actions of removing content.

Thing is, you should not have removed that content in the first place, not at least without consulting others. You have a nasty habit of going out and doing things with complete disregard for the other contributors on this wiki. It's destructive to the wiki itself, and harmful to its editing atmosphere. If the sections you removed were so self-evidently flawed, a forum thread like this would've quickly resolved the issue. I think we both know that discussing your plans before you acted on them would've raised serious objections, which is why you decided to skip that particular step.

ClariS wrote: AP would have the same gold value, even if certain AP had no interaction with champions or items.

This is another clear example of you completely ignoring the input of other users. Let me pull up post #2 on this thread:

Willbachbakal wrote: Before we discuss this seriously, I think there are a few things that need to be cleared up:
 * Gold value and gold efficiency do not dictate the effectiveness of an item on a champion: the simplest example would be on : the item's stats are certainly worth gold, but none of this translates into additional power because Vayne has no AP scalings. Similarly, different champions will scale differently with different items. None of this impacts on the validity of gold value, nor on the gold value of items, but the misinterpretation of such measurements can lead to blatantly wrong conclusions.

QED.

ClariS wrote: Gold value is to compare item on as a whole, but you constantly push for adding information that only apply to one or few situations, moments, or effectiveness.

No. Gold value is a measure of an item's stats, which means that its gold value changes if it carries more stats than it normally would. Your definition of gold value is both vague and inconsistent. It's not even a definition at all.

ClariS wrote: Hmm, even if a Riot member were to declare attack damage to be worth 1000g per AD, we can’t use that.

Yes we would. Riot has the final say on everything pertaining to League of Legends. If AD is worth 1k gold per point, AD is worth 1k gold per point. The gold efficiency system in place is more than capable of accounting for that.

ClariS wrote: And the thing about comparisons, to truly and accurately make comparisons, all possible ‘unassigned’ variables must remain the same at all times. If not, we have an unknown value that we have no idea how to adjust for. This makes any answer with these unassigned variables nothing more than a guess (which we aren’t suppose to be doing on this wiki).

Every single sentence here is blatantly false. None of the cost analysis sections you removed were guesswork. They were precise evaluations of the stats given by an item in a very specific situation. If you truly want to compare an item with conditional stats with another, you need to account for situations in which one item becomes massively more gold efficient than the other. How frequently these situations arise is up to you, but these situations nonetheless form a part of the item's power. I see no reason why you need to make a special distinction between permanent stats and temporary stats. They're stats, therefore they have a gold value. If a stat is conditional or temporary, then the situation in which that stat applies can be isolated and given its own mini-section. All of this would be accurate, and far more informative than your current method of removing said content and forcing the readers to calculate these conditionals on their own. The only thing here dictating that items must have a fixed gold value is you, and your opinion is eminently questionable.