You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We are at a week from the deadline for the first draft of the rule book. I want to remind the TC and rule book authors that the intent of Stage I is to have simple tests that require a small amount of setup.
If I remember correctly (I may be wrong, please correct me if so), we are aiming to have 2 scenarios with at least 4 tests each to provide teams that can do a LOT of tests more points that those that repeat tests. Each scenario will be carried out at least twice, with at least 3 repetitions each. Considering that past years we've had 12 teams per league, that means that we will be carrying out around 36 tests for each scenario slot.
THE POINT: We need to have Stage I tests that are easy to set up and straight to the point.
I've read through some of the tests, and I believe that there are several that require simplification. Some examples: #520 , #528 , #529 . This is not an exhaustive list by any means.
I would ask the rule book authors to have a look #526 as an example. It has a simple description, specific objectives, straight to the point and very easy to setup.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We are at a week from the deadline for the first draft of the rule book. I want to remind the TC and rule book authors that the intent of Stage I is to have simple tests that require a small amount of setup.
If I remember correctly (I may be wrong, please correct me if so), we are aiming to have 2 scenarios with at least 4 tests each to provide teams that can do a LOT of tests more points that those that repeat tests. Each scenario will be carried out at least twice, with at least 3 repetitions each. Considering that past years we've had 12 teams per league, that means that we will be carrying out around 36 tests for each scenario slot.
THE POINT: We need to have Stage I tests that are easy to set up and straight to the point.
I've read through some of the tests, and I believe that there are several that require simplification. Some examples: #520 , #528 , #529 . This is not an exhaustive list by any means.
I would ask the rule book authors to have a look #526 as an example. It has a simple description, specific objectives, straight to the point and very easy to setup.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: