The testing rubric, as it is right now, I really think needs some changes. The main issue being it's not fairly testing our new members ability.
Right now 43% of the score is based on what deck they use. Which is not a very good thing, since it doesn't necessarily have to be the player itself which has made the deck. However even if they are using their own deck, 43% I personally think is just to much.
Trying to grade to what attitude the members has during a game does not only give free points, but it's also potentially a rude thing to do. Because you are really putting a staple on how well the new players behave.
In this system we have right now, you could theoretically, as a complete beginner, end up in the raviel dorm with a good attitude and a borrowed deck.
One important thing which seems to be missing in the testing rubric right now is how well the new members actually knows the game itself. Basically knowledge about different cards and rulings.
I'm really hoping something is done about this, so we can get a more fair judgment of how well our new members in the academy play and knows about the game.
My suggested improvement:
1. Match Wins: 1:2=5p, 2:1=8p, 2:0=10p (10%):
This one I think is good and I have no complaints about it. I also agree that it shouldn't be given to much points since it can easily be unfair if it happens to be a bad deck match-up for example.
2. Deck construction 20p (20%):
The way the players deck is built is still important and should still be a part of the evaluation, but not weight as heavily.
3. Power 40p (40%):
This is what I think is the most important to judge, basically how well they play and what decisions they make!
4. Knowledge 20p (20%):
Here you will judge how well the player knows the game and about it's different rulings and cards.
5. Questions 10p (10%):
This category I also think is great and I'm not sure why it was taken away from the testing rubric. It's a good way test the players knowledge of things you didn't get to see during the game. For example if they have a firm understanding of how solemn warning and solemn judgement works and if they know what cards can be activated during the damage step.
I suggest asking 5 questions, 2p for each, under a fairly short time limit (to prevent cheating).
Try to ask if they know the cards involved in the question before you ask it, so the player have time to check the cards before trying to answer the question (also to avoid potential cheating). You could also decide to give reduced points if they don't happen to know the cards involved in your upcoming question.
Also the amount of questions, and how much they are worth, doesn't necessarily have to be so strict and you could make some question that are worth more and so on.
Total score: 100p
Uria Dorm: 0-29p
Raviel Dorm: 30-59p
Hamon Dorm: 60-89p
Armityle Dorm: 90-100p
Ways to get reduced points/canceled test:
I think this is a better way to make people refrain from behaving badly and generally breaking rules.
If the opponents behaves badly during the duel I propose a system where you give out warnigs:
1 warning: Nothing happens
2 warnings: Reduce 10 points from the overall score (do not post the reason to the reducing in the test result, rather take it personally with the player if needed)
3 warnings: Canceled test, and unable to take a new one for a month.
Illegal Deck type/Borrowed deck:
If it's immediately obvious that it's an illegal deck type used, the test should preferably just be restarted with a new deck. If it's less obvious, in case of something like lavals or hieratics which can be made very OTK:ish you can reduce anything from 1 to 20 points depending on how bad it is. If the player is obviously using a deck they haven't created themselves you can also reduce points from a scale from 1 to 20.
Getting outside assistance by other players to get help with what moves to make and searching for information to answer the questions asked.
- Canceled test, unable to take a new one for a month
Please give feedback on what you think about this!