It probably only bothers me because I'm a math guy but the percentiles are backwards. So if in Obscurity, Halekotsi has a 6.5 percentile, it should actually be 93.5%ile, not 6.5. Is anyone else bothered about this? If not, then I'll shut up.

Percentiles can always be expressed both ways (it depends on just how you label them - in the game, you could either compare one on one wins or losses and get the opposite result), but I agree that "high percent is better performance" is the common usage.

It doesn't bother me much however - as long as it's clear which direction is used (and you do get that by simply looking at the divisions), either way works. It's just a number to justify "why is player X in division Y"?

I agree that the percentile rankings should be flipped to the higher percentile rankings corresponding to higher performance. Since most of the games have gone to win points I'd like to see a win percentage column also. Yes I know you can do your win points per play divided by your average division of wins to calculate win percentage but it'd be nice to see separately.

I'm still confused about division sorting. It's definitely not based solely on win percentage, total points or average percentile. At the time of writing this in the Easy game for example the highest rated player in Division 5 by average percentile is at 14.4 while the lowest rated player by average percentile is Division 6 is at 21.1. Division sorting is very important for meeting certain challenges but the sorting mechanism seems mysterious.

I concur as well with Triviaballer and TriviaFan22. It's the more conventional presentation. This is also a good idea.

Now for those who don't know, Wesley is an actual scientist, and it is interesting and something I didn't know that it could be presented either way. But it is satisfying to know I'm not the only one who was bothered by that. Of course I read bass clef and am bothered by treble but it is just a form of thinking we may have to get around.