Actually, the very point of my test was to avoid needless distractions like human playing skills or pure luck. The point is that it is statistics : the less parameters you have, the more precise and meaningful your test becomes. While your test, endoperez, would be more "complete", it takes into account much more variables, that means you will need to use a lot more tests in order to find a few correlations.
The point of my test was to isolate the order parameter and the turmoil/luck ones, disregarding outside influences like playing skills, expansion, luck (that's the reason for 3 years and "large" number of provinces). And also disregarding the 120 pretender extra points, since there is no clear choice of where it would be the most useful, and too many possibilities to include them all. However, in most strategy games (dominions included), those have more influence than whatever edge scales may give you.
I could run a dozen of those tests, to check whether the results change or not, but it's rather boring. Besides, anyone can run them. I'd rather play, and test new strategies that, anyway, will have much more influence over the game than scales have. And, the point I wanted to contradict is proven wrong. There are no "best choice" scales for Pangaea, only different setting for different strategies.
Re: EA Pangaea strategy
Hybrid Mode
