While looking through the various tables, I noticed that where the same player holds the #1 and #2 position, that player gets a raw score of 100 for both games regardless of the finishing date of the 2nd game. Examples, 1) monarch, standard, culture, normal 2) deity, tiny, diplo, quick. Just wondering if that is the way it is supposed to be.

I also found that in my own Machiavelli Score game #2 is worth about 38 points, but the game it points to is only worth about 13 points.

Regarding your second question, which entry ID is that?

The entry is 4815. I think now that maybe score is computed based on EVERY submitted game, not just based on the games of a particular table?

But what about my first question? :crazyeye:

But what about my first question? :crazyeye:
I would call it a feature, but QA would call it a bug ;).

I can understand why it's happening. The Average/Best dates are calculated based on the best games for each player in a particular table. Because only one player has played in that table the Average/Best dates are the same, so it's not possible to scale the QScore as that would involve dividing by 0. Once another player has submitted to that table the 2nd submission for that player will get less than 100. I *could* put a change to the scoring as a special case, but I'm not sure what score that second game should get. Maybe it would be more fun to leave it and let competing players fix it by target their next games at tables such as these :mischief:.