I would go for option 1 and 3 as the main thing. 

So I commented on the poll, but I should probably out it here instead:

I vote for Option 3. Ranks, while not as important anymore, were a big part of Skyrim CB and have a lot of the sites history behind them, so I'd like to see them kept. But given how things are right now making a new set to apply for different times makes sense.

As posted in the poll discussion:

If we do nothing and leave it as it is, then we seriously need to do something to make the ranks meaningful. As it stands no one is really concerned with ranks. This is a problem. As Rogue once said, we lack a sense of competition. Despite modern social constructs and philosophies, well-regulated competition is a very good thing. It inspire drive, ambition, and quality, among other things.  

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Patriarch]Patriarch[/url] said:[/b]

As posted in the poll discussion:

If we do nothing and leave it as it is, then we seriously need to do something to make the ranks meaningful. As it stands no one is really concerned with ranks. This is a problem. As Rogue once said, we lack a sense of competition. Despite modern social constructs and philosophies, well-regulated competition is a very good thing. It inspire drive, ambition, and quality, among other things.  

[/blockquote]

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Henson]Henson[/url] said:[/b] I guess that's a good point Pat, but a lot of that drive and competition will only come back with a new ES game. We have been trying to get that feeling back for 4 years now and we have spurts with "events" but that's about it and less and less so. I still think that ranks could just wait until a new game comes out and focus on the tags and allowing people to see older works that aren't liked as well. For example, someone could be coming in and asking for a savage warrior or a chaos mage and the tags could direct them there easily. I think new builds could adhere to this and still be "ranked" either way.[/blockquote]

I think these are both good calls, and really don't see why it needs to be a case of one or the other. If lowering rank requirements and fostering a sense of friendly competition helps people build by providing incentive, then all we can do is try and see.

Likewise, nothing wrong with giving tags some love by showcasing builds or specific archetypes, perhaps discussions and polls about what the best build is within that tag or why that tag/archetype is so compelling and what can still be done with it.

@Patriarch:  I think your wrong on your first point about noone being concerned about ranks.  The marjority of the poll says otherwise, members do care about ranks they just want them to be more accessible (read as lower the requirements).  You are right about ranks not having meaning, but they never had any true meaning to begin with a likes based system is only a good measure of popularity not of quality a glance at the Hall of Fame or Legendary rank will show that to be true since some of those builds were low quality even by 2013 standards yet still garnered 100 likes.  As for your second point, i completely agree with you and Rogue and agree that it's something that has been missing from the group.  That will change next month...

@Henson:  I agree that more foucus on playstyle is the way to go that would basically be option 2 (make ranks optional) as that would deprioritize ranks to a degree.  We could go further and remove the rank links from the archives as well forcing people to search via playstyle.  However as i previously stated the community cares about ranks the traffic of HOF shows that the majority want a quick way to find the best build of a specific playstyle.

The both of you have reminded me of something I once said back on the old site concerning the arbitrary nature of a likes based ranking system.  Legendary builds just get more legendary while everything else stagnates.  The point is that most people just go to the Legendary tag in the archives find a legendary build and then like that build they don't bother looking anywhere else so if a build isn't already legendary it never gets any attention.  Meanwhile legendary builds will get a steady stream of new likes simply for being legendary.

So removing ranks from the archives would force people to look at more builds in the playstyle they are interested in, notably newer builds since those will come up first in the search.  Or it would force them to use the Build Recommendation thread to get suggestions.  This would make a largely arbitrary system even more arbitrary the RankTag would really just be cosmetic since there would be no conveniant way to search by it.

However, all of that is a moot point since the poll has shown that the community wants ranks.

I will be closing the poll tomorrow, that will be one week from when i posted it last tuesday.  I think the results are pretty clear so expect a topic soon that will discuss how we go about implementing the new ranking system.  In the meantime if you havn't already ...GO VOTE IN THE POLL!

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Paws]Paws[/url] said:[/b]

Likewise, nothing wrong with giving tags some love by showcasing builds or specific archetypes, perhaps discussions and polls about what the best build is within that tag or why that tag/archetype is so compelling and what can still be done with it.

[/blockquote]

I like this idea Paws, in fact it's similar to something i've been mulling over and ironing out on my own for little while now.   

[blockquote][b][url=/profile/Vargr]Vargr White-Tree[/url] said:[/b]

@Patriarch:  I think your wrong on your first point about noone being concerned about ranks.  The marjority of the poll says otherwise, members do care about ranks they just want them to be more accessible (read as lower the requirements).  You are right about ranks not having meaning, but they never had any true meaning to begin with a likes based system is only a good measure of popularity not of quality a glance at the Hall of Fame or Legendary rank will show that to be true since some of those builds were low quality even by 2013 standards yet still garnered 100 likes.  As for your second point, i completely agree with you and Rogue and agree that it's something that has been missing from the group.  That will change next month...

@Henson:  I agree that more foucus on playstyle is the way to go that would basically be option 2 (make ranks optional) as that would deprioritize ranks to a degree.  We could go further and remove the rank links from the archives as well forcing people to search via playstyle.  However as i previously stated the community cares about ranks the traffic of HOF shows that the majority want a quick way to find the best build of a specific playstyle.

The both of you have reminded me of something I once said back on the old site concerning the arbitrary nature of a likes based ranking system.  Legendary builds just get more legendary while everything else stagnates.  The point is that most people just go to the Legendary tag in the archives find a legendary build and then like that build they don't bother looking anywhere else so if a build isn't already legendary it never gets any attention.  Meanwhile legendary builds will get a steady stream of new likes simply for being legendary.

So removing ranks from the archives would force people to look at more builds in the playstyle they are interested in, notably newer builds since those will come up first in the search.  Or it would force them to use the Build Recommendation thread to get suggestions.  This would make a largely arbitrary system even more arbitrary the RankTag would really just be cosmetic since there would be no conveniant way to search by it.

However, all of that is a moot point since the poll has shown that the community wants ranks.

[/blockquote]

I disagree with your disagreement. The poll idicates that they're interested in ranks, especially if those ranks change, but not concerned about them. There's a difference. The question is what those ranks mean. They literally have no meaning, especially to a new person on the site. Honestly, my two points were related. Competition will make people concerned about them and will give them meaning, if we find ways to integrate rankings with competitve events.

Pat - I agree competition is good, but we haven't had that for a few years now. A new game will certainly bring it back! I think Vargr has the right idea bringing out a poll but my concern is it only has 150 some views and only 30 actual votes... Kinda tells me only 30 people care at least so far.

Vargr - I would love to help in any way with bouncing around ideas if you are thinking about any new tags or how to maybe energize them a bit. Ranks as they stand and which has bee pointed out give people an easy way to check and see the most popular builds of the site while at the same time not having to care too much about the lesser liked builds - even the second highest rank.

New people can come and learn about the ranks and all the history of what we do and how we do it but honestly - most people are looking for a quick fix or new idea, not a history lesson of a website. Ranks were a great arbitrary title that seemed to have served their purpose in my view. People wanna come here (and I have a feeling a TON of lurkers and not willing to actually sign up, not putting us down, just what people do...) and find an idea to spark their 6 year old game into something new.

Focusing on tags somehow will help new members or viewers find what they are looking for and allow for build that haven't had views since 2011 get some attention in case they got buried in the midst of mid ranked stuff.