Аделаида
Auto-translated
I'd like to add my two cents.
I don't understand why there should be so many different rankings; more numbers and tables just create more confusion for players and other forum visitors. It would be better to have just one ranking, so people can come, look, and easily understand everything.
Separating ranked games into a separate ranking is a necessity because, no matter how you look at it, you can't equate them to full-fledged, multi-hour games. As for random elements or fixes, in my opinion, there isn't much difference; all the shortcomings and bugs of randomness are balanced by well-refined rules. So, it's better to consider fixes and random elements as one ranking.
One inconvenience is that you have to copy part of the report, and can't ss-d view it in a special thread for "Seasons of the Year" reports and count from there? Or is it necessary to copy it?
I don't understand why there should be so many different rankings; more numbers and tables just create more confusion for players and other forum visitors. It would be better to have just one ranking, so people can come, look, and easily understand everything.
Separating ranked games into a separate ranking is a necessity because, no matter how you look at it, you can't equate them to full-fledged, multi-hour games. As for random elements or fixes, in my opinion, there isn't much difference; all the shortcomings and bugs of randomness are balanced by well-refined rules. So, it's better to consider fixes and random elements as one ranking.
One inconvenience is that you have to copy part of the report, and can't ss-d view it in a special thread for "Seasons of the Year" reports and count from there? Or is it necessary to copy it?