Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.

When the second component artificially elevates an outsider in the ranking, it's not quite a fair comparison. The placement in the tournament is secondary. What matters most is the time it took for a participant to complete the game and how close they are to the leader. Therefore, comparing the strength of players in this way is not entirely accurate.
I used a STUPID example to illustrate this and compared two stages. In one case, a player who is a thousand times behind the leader takes second place and, consequently, receives the same rating as a player from another tournament who is eight times behind the leader but also takes second place! IS THAT RIGHT?

Your "stupid" example is quite relevant, but it needs a third participant to complete the picture.

Therefore, the question is: if the third participant completes the map in 500 days, will the outsider with their 1000-day completion time be third out of three, rather than second out of two?

And if the newly introduced third participant completes the map in 1200 days, then the one who completed it in 1000 days will be second out of three, not third... Moreover, their result remains unchanged, but the rating will depend on the performance of ALL participants, not just the leader... This is not the same thing.

And the oscillator is designed to take into account all participants in the tournament (not only their number but also their relative positions). The second parameter, which you have concerns about, is responsible for this. The second (linear) parameter is not applicable on its own, but in combination with the first, it makes sense... Don't rush; just experiment with the numbers...

The concept of an oscillator, as a parametric index that reacts equally to changes in several unrelated parameters, was not invented by me. This mechanism has been tested and adopted by all methods that study the behavior of randomly changing digital sequences (tournament results are exactly that). So, in the first approximation, everything is correct here; don't doubt it. And to justify this to you, I would have to go beyond the scope of the topic. Maybe it's not worth making it more complicated?

And this mechanism is certainly applicable for calculating Grail scores.