I've realized there are some problems I need to work on with my testing team. I'm going to be clear and cut with this. I have discussed a few tests, with a friend of mine, and it seems some of them have flaws. There will always be flaws in a testing system, but I want people to openly discuss this, so we can fix it. Here are some flaws i've seen.

• Originality & Concistency of the deck contradict each other- Meaning that usually if a deck is concise, a deck losses points for not being "unoriginal" and when we see an originality deck, it is usually docked points for not being "concise" enough.
  
• Optimal and "This way" vs what works - I've seen the testers do this (even myself) so focused on a certain way a deck should look instead of actually what the deck can work. Its starting to be more as if a deck doesn't look a certain way its wrong. Don't misunderstand what i'm saying here. I'm not saying that there isn't a "wrong" and "right" in deck building, because it is, but I think that as testers we aren't leaning more openly towards being "opinionated" in something that is right. Someone can also have a different tech that works just as well as yours.
  
• Decks of Testers- I've come to watch some of my testers test, and some of the decks used are just....wrong. Some shouldn't be used for testing because it is way too strong, and some are just not strong enough for testing. As that said, I will be working on that with the testers.
  
• Any complaints or anything you want to discuss can be posted here. Anything you think should be changed to the testing system feel free now.
  
• Take note that a system will always have flaws, so if you have a better open idea please post.
  
• I know some of you are probably thinking. Why is he so serious about this? Its just a testing system. It doesn't matter. Well I think it does as a tester is putting "judgment" upon a person entering an academy, and there are times when testers make bad calls and bad interpretations of said decks. Even kyo said this himself.
  
• Lastly, I thank you for reading this, and I hope that you will post your remarks and help bring a stronger testing community.
  

You seemed to mention all the flaws of the testing system, would be a more optimal way to rank users if you fixed those issues. I have nothing else to say.

well you said almost all of what needs to be said about it really. i mean you already covered two of the bigest problems and some times they result in the same end really the deks that testers use and the decks that testes use.

i mean if the testers useing E-dragons ' or any one deck like evilswarms spell books just fill in the blank with what ever randome teir 1 or 2 deck ya want' and your useing plants or spirts ' just nameing randome shiz here' becuse your trying to be orginal like it says then of course the testes deck will look slow and weak and inconsistunt i mean your useing some of the fastest/cheapest decks ever. i mean they are teir 1 and 2 for a good reason expecting a teste to beat the most popular deck is just unreasonable whill asking them to use an creative yet consistunt deck



side note i now the spellings bad i was in a rush and wasm trying not to type a lot as you can see i failed.

Well Pride is right we do need more testers. Ill also sugest we do 2 matches rather then 1 or a single, I mean 1 match is faster but 2 matches or a single gives people a chance to show they don't stink :/ and trust me, during testing u will suck. Also it gives them the chance to use a different deck.

TheCoolest wrote:

Well Pride is right we do need more testers. Ill also sugest we do 2 matches rather then 1 or a single, I mean 1 match is faster but 2 matches or a single gives people a chance to show they don't stink :/ and trust me, during testing u will suck. Also it gives them the chance to use a different deck.

The very few people that are really good are lazy.
It takes skill to be a good teacher/tester and even the best duelist only "inherently" have knowledge vs those who can explain in a matter for Anyone they explain it to.
Most people don't have enough skill to begin with to even test.
We've been through why we don't have 2 matches anymore. It's already time consuming to begin with, and this isn't ygopro or devpro where we can just duel for 20 minutes and I can just save replays and evaluate days to even a week later.
If you didn't make obelisk or the dorm " you should've been in" then you are doin something wrong and it's clearly not your luck.
Obelisk should take relatively 2 tries If you are that good. That being said Id rather have a set of even only 2 people who are very suggestive and not always just graded a deck based of what it "should" look like in a norm, vs key cards always in said deck. When ur results are done and your testee actually takes in the input, if your testee didn't give a heads up that the suggestions were good chances are : the testee didn't care, or it didn't help at all. So what do you say to that? I'm just saying my opinion.

Taisa, sometimes ur luck can suck or ur draws are just gosh darn awful except in some decks
EX: Elemental Dragons, Chaos
Those are the only 2 :/

TheCoolest wrote:

Taisa, sometimes ur luck can suck or ur draws are just gosh darn awful except in some decks
EX: Elemental Dragons, Chaos
Those are the only 2 :/

I don't think you understand that luck isn't the reason you draw so bad with decks. Luck is a part of the game, but only so much. Just because e dragons are tier 1 doesn't mean you will draw good with it, especially if the build is bad. The better you build, the more probability of you handling more situations and more plays laid on the field. As I will state again, it's not a cooncidence you just get bad hands during your test tc. It's a coincidence that you realize during a test, that your hand isn't good enough for the game.