*Headdesk* I didn't mean it like that...and as it is I'm trying to avoid setting off a virtual aneurysm in my mind.
You're right, in terms of basic information that the average player may need, the table more or less has it covered. I'm just lightly bugged that beyond 3 hours wait time is a virtual no man's land in terms of data. I'll brute force that for results when I get the time but while that part of the chart has so much blank, it leaves a sort of...itch...like a painless itch in your eardrum that you just can't reach without popping a vein in your ear...
Admittedly it doesn't help that although I like to think I might be onto something that may reflect the actual programming of the game (on an amateur level I've written source code for basic games so I've seen a few program-based patterns in my experience), I'm being told that because I do not and never will have 100% undeniable evidence to show to the world, I can't put it on my findings that I really want to be out there as a suggestion (and yeah, I know, just put it in a discussion instead of the actual wiki page, problem is I'm still trying to find exactly where that "discussion" option is on the wiki site) Like I said, I'm not blaming anyone...it's just...irritating.
Once again, chart's got quite a few holes, holes like between 2600 points and 2,830 points, 3:30 wait time only having a single number instead of a range (I know, probably only one data plot that ever got recorded, we're missing alot), or Limited N not showing in the 2:00 prizes despite it showing in the tier above and below (and that's usually a hole I'd fill on instinct because programs generally don't leave holes open like that unless blatantly ordered to do so and most of the time they don't but we're not allowed to consider absolute truth a "most of the time" statement)
And from time to time I see people put up the own personal blog guides that, sure, have imperfections and misconceptions, generally an 80-95% accuracy but all that happens is someone points out a mistake and it gets corrected and it just gets closer to accurate and people generally appreciate that over a 100% correct but less than 40% helpful.
...I'm drifting so I'll shorten the note:
Nothing's wrong about the poster, there's just a few things missing from there I'd like to be able to fill in with programmer instinct instead of actual data and devote myself to proving later down the road. That's not going to be allowed though so forget it.
I am not ditching the table on wikia that's based on the OP here though. Alot of the edited data there was based on my last few days of experiments with Kurito that I never got the time to record here.