I don't like this.... I've been way more liberal with my "Likes" on Event Builds, both now and in the past, because they haven't been ranked. I think Mason's reasoning for not ranking them was sound, and changing it now is not really fair ... it gives Event builds a distinct advantage in the tiers as they got more exposure.

Was this opened to members for discussion/input/votes, and I missed it? Or are you guys just making the decision? Either way, I'm not a fan.

I don't think it'd be the least bit unfair if you went back and removed the likes you felt were on the liberal side. That might entail a fair amount of digging, though.

That's all well and good, and I probably will do that despite the fact that it'll make me feel like a dick. But my other points still stand. Not to mention I'm sure I'm not the only one who gave the Event Builds different consideration when deciding whether to "Like" them.

Honestly this fucks up the entire ranking system IMO. It'd be one thing if they'd been ranked from the start, but doing this after, what, five events now have gone down, is really going to devalue the higher rankings and push a lot of currently overlooked/underrated builds even further under the radar.

Most current Legendary builds probably took more than 4-6 weeks to plan, test, write, and publish. The window for events is about that at most, and for some of the early events it was even less. These builds are made with different criteria and different expectations, and for that reason it makes sense not to mix them in with the "normal" non-event builds.

Event Builds have always been featured in other ways specifically to compensate for the decision not to rank them, so as to keep them from being inherently disadvantaged. Yes, some Event Builds may still fall through the cracks, but you can say the same thing about many non-event builds too. The Hidden Gem Spotlight is a good way to remedy that, and last I checked, Event Builds qualified for the HGS too....

Short of a complete overhaul of the Event Build system (i.e., totally removing the Event tags, the event build hub page, event build special allowances for hall of fame, etc.) this fundamentally alters the nature of the ranking system for the future, without accounting for the way it's stood for the past three years. This will harm a lot of non-event builds in the middle tiers, and potentially a lot more to come.

Plus, this feature is Mason's baby. I don't like changing the format and going against his wishes in doing so. Did you guys discuss this with him?

The reason is that Event Builds get overlooked a lot. They get attention mostly only during the events. Nalcaraya's Aedric Spear is the best example. That build got into the Hall of Fame. Before that, it had a very low number of likes and many people did not know of it.

We put this up for debate with all the hosts and the feedback was positive.

There are a lot of builds that get overlooked. The Event Builds at least get their own page and special allowances for the Hall of Fame. Unless you guys are willing to revoke those special treatments that benefit the event builds, I highly discourage you from removing the ranking "handicap" which was implemented as a counter-balance.

The current system effectively separates "normal" builds from Event Builds in a way that harms neither. By ranking Event builds now, you give them an unfair advantage and simultaneously devalue a lot of builds in the middle tiers that will now have even more competition, and less exposure.

If feedback was positive, are you saying there wasn't anyone opposed? If so, then I think you should have opened it up for discussion with the users as well ... If none of you were opposed, then no one even had cause to provide a counterargument to begin with.

And let's face it. There are so many event builds better than Legendary ranked builds. If you want an example, look up my Tonal Magister. I have no idea why it got so popular other than the fact that it's been here for a long time. Event builds don't have that luxury. They're new to the community and because the blog doesn't have the same high activity as in the old days, they will get overlooked. I think this evens the odds for a change. I say out with the old, in with the new!

because the blog doesn't have the same high activity as in the old days, they will get overlooked. I think this evens the odds for a change.

Lower activity harms ALL builds equally. If anything, I think the Event Builds get a LOT more views and likes within the event window itself, and non-event builds are largely ignored. And with their own page for convenient viewing, and their own tag for convenient sorting, they get other advantages too.

Pointing out specific builds that are overlooked or overrated isn't a valid argument for this change ... As I've already pointed out, there are plenty of overrated and underrated builds -- allowing that these are obviously subjective measures and vary from one person to another -- in both the Event build list as well as the non-Event build list. Ranking the Event Build will benefit them but at the expense of harming non-event builds. Not a fair trade.

I'd be okay with ranking future Event builds if a middle ground like this is met ... But I'm still staunchly against retroactively applying rankings to the current and prior events, for the reasons I've already stated.

At least by making the rule only apply to future events, we can clearly establish that middle ground such that no non-event builds are negatively impacted and the event builds don't get too much special treatment.

I'll say again though: If you guys haven't already done so, please discuss this with Mason before you make any changes. He had very good reasoning for setting it up the way he did, and I think you owe it to him to hear his thoughts in this matter.

I agree about the advantages Event Builds get in the Hall of Fame. I understand that they're newer, but considering that their was no other qualification or necessary review of their quality, they had a huge advantage in the Hall of Fame nominations. Then again, I don't think the rank system really works that well in general, in part for the reason Noodles mentioned (builds that have simply been around a long time are and will remain higher ranked than new builds, regardless of quality) and because the site dynamic and activity is so different that it is much more difficult for new builds/builders (regardless of quality) to reach higher ranks.

Well, there will always be loses. Back when the blog had high activity, Mason had to increase the standards: higher number of likes required for ranks and so on. Now, because of the lower blog activity, we're lowering the standards and the new ways of managing event builds are our way of doing it. We're simply re-scaling.