METHODOLOGY

PROTOCOL

How the Archive shows its work.

Most win-rate tables are verdicts. Protocol is the part that comes before the verdict — the question of whether the verdict can be trusted in the first place. Sample size, confidence intervals, the difference between a real shift and a coin flip in a small dataset. The Archive’s stance is that methodology should not be hidden behind the answer; it should be the answer’s foreground.

WHAT’S HERE NOW
TOOLS + ARTICLES
Methodology Library
The full directory — find the right tool or article for the question you’re asking.
BROWSE ›
Glossary
Terminology and definitions for both the 40k scene and the statistical concepts the methodology pieces use.
OPEN ›
CI Explorer
Visualize the Wilson confidence interval around a reported win rate. Single-rate primary mode plus an optional second-rate overlay for visual comparison.
OPEN ›
Two-Proportion Test
Compare two reported rates — faction vs faction, pre-update vs post-update, event vs event — and read a three-tier plain-language verdict on whether the gap is signal or noise.
OPEN ›
Power Analysis
How many games before we can tell? Converts statistical-power math into tournament-cadence reality — one major weekend, one MFM cycle, one full season — so you can judge whether a question is even answerable on the timeline you care about.
OPEN ›
Damage Distribution Calculator
Type a weapon and target profile; see the full exact damage distribution — mean, median, mode, P(kills the unit) — on the same picture. The interactive companion to the On Average article.
OPEN ›
FEATURES
FEATURE · LONG-READ · EDITOR
Where Cover Lives
A speculative column on a hypothetical 11th-edition cover-rules change — what one drafting decision could do to the opening months of the new edition. Editor voice; in dialogue with the methodology pieces above without being one.
READ ›

All Phase 2 methodology tools are live, plus the four methodology articles — see the Methodology Library. The first feature long-read, Where Cover Lives, sits one register over: speculative analysis in the Editor’s voice, distinct from the methodology explainers.