Steam leaderboards and ranks explained

Baba you realize the Steam leaderboards look the way they do because Relic had a subcontractor start the project, then they never actually finished it and the half-assed data dump on Steam is the final result?

Maybe, tho I think they are deliberately like that. The whole story about third party (valve) being a stumbling rock, well meeh.

As far as I remember, In game ranks worked just fine. You got experience, you leveled up, got achievements and Steam ranks were/are reflecting that.

So I say that is just bullshit. Ranks weren't broken, they are working just fine. Like they were designed to do so.

There is logical conclusion or conspiracy theory where Relic can't release any info, even say who is the third party, because of contractual agreements.

Anyone who went to business school for 2 days can tell you that contract and all obligations one party has towards the other are nullified the moment that contract is breached (like not delivering steam leaderbords after contractual date)

Or Relic has the dumbest Legal department on Earth, and they didn't put delivery date nor contract breach specifications when contracting the 'third party'

In my opinion, The only reason they helped with COH2.org ladder is because of huge backlash from player base like many other things that community had to forcefully demand (Chat for example)
You decide which explanation sounds more likely.

In this noobed down game I have no idea if being top 200 means anything. I think it might, but then again it seems to me that anyone I ever play not in the top 200 is totally awful, below level 10 in the old COH1 system...

There are some very good players around, but also awfully number of average players (from COH days, parading in that top 200) Not many top players from COH days in there.
Is it because the game is different or because old pro's quit playing this game?
I think a bit of both