(I'm the site admin if you don't know my username, I haven't been active much in the past 12 months)
Thank you for posing the question, goosebrown! Without putting my thumb on the scale I'd like to add some additional info you (plural, not just GB) may or may not know:
- PG-HQ only stores one rating per user per scenario. If you play it 2x the most recent rating overwrites the prior rating. The rational behind this method (instead of allowing a rating each play) is that the scenario rating is exactly that - a rating of the scenario - not a rating of this particular play. Of course there's no guarantee members are actually keeping that in mind when rating a scenario more than once.
- The member rankings - private, sergeant, etc. - only give credit for unique scenarios played because they exist to motivate players to play the series widely, not deeply. This is admittedly a selfish stance by PG-HQ itself, as the higher our scenario play and AAR coverage the higher our value to the members. It is both frustrating and amusing that even after all these years and TEN THOUSAND PLAYS recorded we still have 25% of the PG universe with zero plays in our library.
- There are other awards and stats for people who play lots of scenarios. Most of that is recognized in the Annual Awards which have a multi-year backlog that I will start clearing soon.
- I find this entire discussion intensely amusing because in essence you are asking for a way to climb the ranks faster. Perhaps you don't know that when the site launched and the ranks were created they were calibrated against the total scenarios in existence at that time? If you like I can change the counting formula and also recalibrate them to the present Library scope...
PS - making the change discussed would be trivially easy and would also incorporate all past plays (Wayne)
