Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.
For some reason, nothing is highlighted in red for me, but it's not important.
These posts are separated in time. The second quote is from post 620, where I agree to modify the formula (now the coefficient will be 0.7 in the described case). And the first quote is from post 612, where such an agreement did not yet exist. You calculated using one formula, and I used another, which are physically equivalent but NOT mathematically. Obviously, we were getting different NUMERICAL results.
Now there is an agreement; for the accepted formula, the coefficient is 0.7. I hope this resolves the issue.
Regarding the map minimum:
AmberSoler is right about the evidence base. And here, there can only be one – a completed walkthrough with the best result. That is, some tournament participant must spend additional time on a new walkthrough to reduce their own rating (instead of participating in a new tournament to increase it)? Or even worse, allow a non-participant to use the winners' month-long efforts to then reduce their rating? This could seriously damage the relationships between forum members. Do we need that?