2019 C3V Playtest Tournament - Complete (Congrats dok)

[infectedsloth]

PTI

There are three reasons why I believe this tournament’s structure is inherently flawed and leads to weak or unreliable data.

1: Take Two seems like a flawed format for testing figures. With take two many times one batch of armies will be stronger then the other. This leads to one persons armies being played at a higher rate then other possible army combinations. The armies were also designed to be balanced against each other. The results is a format that encourages the same balanced matchup over and over again. That meta simply doesn’t produce a lot of good date. Not to mention you’re not gonna see matchup archetypes that are all but required for testing a unit properly. There’s too much outside influence before the game even starts creating a balanced matchup. This comes at the cost of the figures being playtested. A focus on creating balanced matchups is not the philosophy that we should be encouraging. We want to see how units do in verity of settings.

2: Both armies contain units that are being play tested. This a cardinal sin of play testing. It’s really science 101. We want to control variables, not introduce more. If a match is a blow out is it becomes one unit was too strong, the other unit too weak, or a combination of both? There’s no way to tell. If you play against established armies you don’t have this problem. We’re trying to answer question here, not cause more.

3: Take a moment to look at the armies in this tournament. It doesn’t look a thing like any tournament that’s been played in scapes 15 year history. Y’all created an artificial meta that is not representative of reality. I’m at a loss who thought it was a good idea to test units it this bizarro meta.

This tournament tells you so little. It’s a real shame that we’re getting so little date out of so many games. It’s also troubling that skewed date is being used to informs design decisions.