Such a filter is necessary unless people want to see hundreds of names, at which point the data is not consumable.

There are 28 completed seasons. The list of champions is already short.

The point is the "5 seasons in the top 50" criteria is non-sequitur for making a list of champions, top 3 finishers or top 10 finishes.

Say playerA has completed 4 total seasons with 4 top 3 finishes. playerB completed 28 seasons (all in the top 50) and but has only 1 top 3 finish. playerA is a stronger top 3 finisher and should be mentioned ahead of playerB.

I agree it's important to make data consumable given our limited space here. This can be accomplished by taking the top N from inherently long lists like top 10 finishes.

Edited 7/27/2017 16:14:48

Fun question: are there any seasonal winners with less than 20 games?

Yes, Heyheuhei I believe.
The penalty was increased from 20 or 30 points per game to 40 after that season.

EDIT: confirmed, Season VIII:
https://www.warlight.net/LadderGames?ID=4007&LadderTeamID=2078

Edited 7/27/2017 16:28:55

^Math Wolf to the rescue again:) Very interesting, thanks. Whenever the forum is in need of honest, rigorous statistical analysis, whenever important bits of history are about to be lost forever, Math Wolf is sure to be found!

I believe the penalty used to be 40 points per game and after Season VIII it was increased to 65.

timon is correct.

For future seasons, this penalty is being increased from 40 to 65.

source: https://www.warlight.net/blog/index.php/2013/05/season-ix/

Would it be possible to use an either/or statement as a means to include significant results (such as two winning seasons) that are otherwise filtered out by the 5 Top 50 finishes?

Additionally, Average Rank either needs to list the total number of ranked seasons (which could then be used as a tie breaker to reward longevity), or the average ranks of everyone needs to be divided by the total number of seasons and not merely the total number of ranked seasons.

Edited 7/28/2017 17:39:55

Thanks for the link Timinator. Also interesting from that blog post about the penalty:

Instead, it’s implemented by simply giving 40 [now apparently 65] points to each player every time they receive a game, up to a max of 20 games. This is also why ratings tend to always go up as the season goes on.**

** It’s worth noting that this extra rating bonus does not impact matchmaking. Determining who you get matched against gets done before this rating bonus gets applied, so this mechanism does not penalize players who join late, as long as you get 20 games before the season ends.

Does anyone have access to modify the wiki? The page for seasonal still mentions the old 40 point penalty and doesn't mention the above implementation.

https://www.warlight.net/wiki/Seasonal_Ladder

Updated wiki

I guess MotD was too modest to update the list of Seasonal winners, so I did that as well :)

Motd, Beren, u guys are fuckin MVP of WL!

WL doesn't preserve the information of a player's clan membership during that season. If I were to compile clan statistics, it would consider the player's current clan(I'm not sure if this is what people are looking for).

Yes it would be interesting. We couldn't use this as a proper clan ranking, but at least it would give further ideas. The same idea is used for MDL for that matter if i'm not mistaking.
Clan at the time of the season on the other hand wouldn't tell anything imo.

Edited 8/2/2017 13:17:04

Maybe we could add you for being the first person in WarLight to win 2 seasonals back to back.