Player rating for tournaments across all installments of Heroes.

N
Therefore, losing or missing one Tournament should not significantly affect the result... it's not a lottery, and the rating should be flexible...

Missing one shouldn't immediately have a big impact – a grace period is given, and the deadline can still be negotiated, but losing one is a different story; the rating severely penalizes losers, especially those who were recently among the champions, isn't that right? But I'm saying that I'm not against it, but look at the examples given and think for yourselves.

Added 9 minutes ago

Well, we have different approaches to the rating... :)

A person who is at the top of the rating, which changes drastically after just one Tournament, doesn't inspire respect... The rating should be such that it takes a long and persistent effort to reach it, and randomness shouldn't knock a player down...
And if you're suggesting organizing a "King of the Hill" or "Caliph for an Hour" game, then I'm out... :) I'm not interested, I'm being honest. I advocate for creating motivation for Tournament competition in the long term... You, on the other hand, are suggesting playing here and now... :) I'm willing to work towards the top spots for a year, proving my strength and significance as a player... But a rating that would allow Vasya Pupkin to jump to the top spot because someone's tire burst (i.e., a random mishap) – what's the point of putting in effort all year?..
And no one will be able to stay at the top for long, again, according to Murphy's Law and the theory of probability... And the player's skill doesn't matter – it's all decided by blind chance...

Don't you notice how persistently Vasya Pupkin is moving up in the third row, but he has few chances :) He's just hoping that the leaders' tires will burst. And we're talking about the Current rating, and you're talking about the Annual rating again. We were talking about how the current ratings, in a way, have a minor impact on the Annual ratings of each player. So why not take care of the tires :) You know that in sports, the rating is unlikely to fall smoothly if a player loses repeatedly; I'm just showing an example – the player has lost five times, and five times a tire has burst. But Vasya Pupkin's tire doesn't burst; he just drives poorly. But the ratings can't equalize them. Why doesn't anyone want to stand up for Vasya Pupkin? :)

Added 8 minutes ago

And no one will be able to stay at the top for long, again, according to Murphy's Law and the theory of probability... And the player's skill doesn't matter – it's all decided by blind chance... I think you're trying to model a rating system that has captivated you in space races :) But is it worth it? Here, everything is different, I think...

If we treat the game of Heroes as a sports game like chess, then the rating is the rating. Today it exists, and tomorrow it falls, and you need to pull yourself together and continue the fight if you want to stay in the TOP. But I'm saying, even if you do it this way, I'm not against it. We've already complicated things enough; VDV will come and be surprised. Aging was accepted by both the Prophet and VDV at 1/3. But I think they would agree to reduce it; then we'll remove all sorts of bonuses. But that cosmic system has probably been working since 1992 – it's been tested by time :) Yes, strong players have fallen, but in the next Tournament, they would rise again. But again, in the Tournaments, the strength of the Tournaments was taken into account. That is, they went where there were strong players and tried to win – if they succeeded, the status quo was restored :) If they didn't succeed, they slowly climbed up in the next Tournaments :)