but they are sorted in only two ways: total number of wins, followed by alphabetical. This can confuse people; there's other columns there, but they're not being used for secondary sorts.
This has the greatest impact on the player page due to the large number of ties. If i had two victories and my username was Aaaaaaaosdict, i would be the 29th-best player in the tournament, just after wintergalaxy. But if my username was zzzzzzzzosdict, I'd be the 44th-best player in the tourney, just barely above Albertb.
Perhaps: use the visible columns for secondary and tertiary sort.
Perhaps: remove the Player-page columns that don't actually correlate to any leaderboards (games / ratio). They cloud the issue of what exactly the tournament is measuring, and obfuscate what one can do to improve one's standing.
Perhaps: when there is a multi-way tie, shuffle up the tied players/clans, so that a clan/player named "a a a" doesn't have a hidden advantage over team "abc".
but they are sorted in only two ways: total number of wins, followed by alphabetical. This can confuse people; there's other columns there, but they're not being used for secondary sorts.
This has the greatest impact on the player page due to the large number of ties. If i had two victories and my username was Aaaaaaaosdict, i would be the 29th-best player in the tournament, just after wintergalaxy. But if my username was zzzzzzzzosdict, I'd be the 44th-best player in the tourney, just barely above Albertb.
Perhaps: use the visible columns for secondary and tertiary sort.
Perhaps: remove the Player-page columns that don't actually correlate to any leaderboards (games / ratio). They cloud the issue of what exactly the tournament is measuring, and obfuscate what one can do to improve one's standing.
Perhaps: when there is a multi-way tie, shuffle up the tied players/clans, so that a clan/player named "a a a" doesn't have a hidden advantage over team "abc".