Quote:
Originally Posted by hooters
Glad to see MA decided to put out a "complete" list of the event. That's bound to make a couple of people "happy".
Thanks MA. And congratz to the winners again. |
I wouldn't call it complete, exactly. More like 33% complete.
They put up a good number of names. With the list in hand it's obvious the top 50 would have sufficed, 100 being overkill. 2k is, imho, a way of
MA to try and overshadow the two remaining thirds of the "complete" list.
Points - Come on. It's one thing not discussing the average return in loot or mining patterns, but to disallow people their score in a massive hunting competition
all about scores is, well, wrong.
"(Note: The time limit is only checked against the first 3 positions, as they passed all
checks on other users became unnecessary)"
As it would clearly have sufficed to check only the top 50, or 100 if you want to compensate a bit, then why not do it? It's not like this would require a 72 hour downtime of the servers.
I opt for re-released (double negative = leased?
) scores and online time (passed or DQ, not actual hours) for the top 100, or very least top 50, of that list.
