Board Thread:Wiki discussions and announcements/@comment-3308937-20140828121932/@comment-658634-20140903143957

Vsagent wrote: Mmm, you two, Empty & Neon, realize I didn't say 'hextech is good on Nami'? No need to come with arguments why it wouldn't be. It's true I asked 'why is that crap' and 'who are you to judge' but first, I asked him, not you and second I didn't want straight up answers like 'I'm division and hextech isn't stats efficient' as they are wrong. Let me expand the original questions to prove it: 'why is that meant to be crap' and 'who are you to judge it as crap for everybody else'. I don't think there are right answers for these. Actually, they gave you exactly the right answer, save the 'I am tier it-does-not-matter' part. The key word was synergize and how. Its not my judgement call, its the readers role to judge and its the wikis responsibility to offer the reader the facts that the reader can make the call. If wiki offers something that has been 'judged' then it also needs to provide source So, what about those 'Talk' pages which are unused? Shouldn't the wiki community express itself there about strategies? Talk pages have been traditionally used for discussion among editors about the article and if it used form something else, then a alternative forum for discussion is needed. The comment section works great for strategy, tactic, should-i-build-rabadon-to-draven talks.

The value section is missing something I have been looking for a long time and its the stats at level 1 and the stats at level 18. There present format is quite geeky and more clear layout would only need some math syntax. e.g. HEALTH	437 (+82) 1831