Better to rank top 5 in a low scaling subject or rank top 20 in a higher scaling sub? (1 Viewer)

[YOLO_SWAYG]

Hi,

As the title says is it better to rank top 5 in low scaling subjects or rank top 20 in higher scaling subjects? The low scaling subjects I'm referring to are Ancient History and Japanese Beginners and higher scaling subjects (in comparison to the two I mentioned) I'm referring to are Biology and Economics.

 

[rumbleroar]

Re: Better to rank top 5 in a low scaling subject or rank top 20 in a higher scaling

Rank top 5 in "low" scaling subjects, because in the end what counts is your rank.

 

[braintic]

Re: Better to rank top 5 in a low scaling subject or rank top 20 in a higher scaling

Rank top 5 in "low" scaling subjects, because in the end what counts is your rank.

Um, hmm. Ignoring the fact that most people are misinformed about the use of ranks (except for 1st and last, they are irrelevant), you certainly can't use ranks in this way to compare across subjects.

 

[YOLO_SWAYG]

Re: Better to rank top 5 in a low scaling subject or rank top 20 in a higher scaling

Um, hmm. Ignoring the fact that most people are misinformed about the use of ranks (except for 1st and last, they are irrelevant), you certainly can't use like this to compare across subjects like this.

What do you mean by this?

 

[someth1ng]

Re: Better to rank top 5 in a low scaling subject or rank top 20 in a higher scaling

It's better to rank 20/5000 than 5/5.