Skip to content

Designing Around a Weakness

How this page is sourced

Sourced from research and clinical guidance, named coaches and communities, and vendor documentation. Checked against its sources. Not yet reviewed by a person.

A scenario is a question you ask your aim. A vague question gets a vague answer, so the design work happens before the editor opens.

  • Name the weakness first. "Tracking" is not a weakness. A subcategory is.1
  • Practice needs a defined goal. Without one, a session is repetition.
  • One scenario, one demand. A drill that tests three things diagnoses none.
  • Check for the shortcut. If the drill can be beaten another way, it will be.

Start from evidence, not from feel

A benchmark names the gap. Your weakest subcategory is the one scoring lowest relative to the others, which is not always the one that feels worst.1

Six subcategory scores drawn as bars of similar height. The shortest bar is highlighted and labelled as the one to build a scenario for, even though several others are close to it.Bassel Bakrhttps://github.com/Bassel-Bakr/aimYour last benchmarklowest relative, not worst feelingstaticdynamicprecisereactivespeedevasivebuild for this one
Several bars sit close together. The lowest is the one to build for, not the one that felt worst.

Your own matches are the other source. Review lost fights and ask whether a decision or your mechanics lost each one. The mechanical losses tell you what to build.2

Purposeful practice has a shape. It is built around a specific, well-defined performance goal, gives feedback on each attempt, and gets harder as you improve. Ericsson reserves "deliberate practice" for the version a qualified teacher directs.3

Three steps in a row, lighting one after another: a defined goal, feedback on each attempt, and getting harder as you improve. A return arrow runs from the third back to the first, labelled as a new goal rather than more of the same.Bassel Bakrhttps://github.com/Bassel-Bakr/aimWhat makes practice purposefuldrop a step and it is repsa defined goalone demand, namedfeedback each attempta stat or a replayharder as you improveor it stops teachingthen a new goal, not more of the same
Drop any one of the three and what is left is repetition.

A scenario is how you give that goal a form. If you cannot say in one sentence what the scenario should be hard at, it is not ready to build.

Isolate one demand

Pick the smallest unit that still resembles aiming. A scenario that mixes target acquisition, sustained tracking and a movement demand produces one number covering all three.

When that number moves, you cannot say which part moved. Splitting the drill in two costs a few minutes and makes both halves readable.

On the left, three demands feed into a single score, so when the score moves the cause is unknown. On the right, the drill is split so two demands feed two separate scores, and a change in either is readable.Bassel Bakrhttps://github.com/Bassel-Bakr/aimThree demandsone number, three reasonsacquisitiontrackingmovementone scoremoved: unknownSplit in twoone reason eachacquisitiontrackingscore Ascore Bmoved: readable
One score moved by three demands says nothing. Two scores, one demand each, say where you are.

Keep everything else simple. Anything not under test should be as easy as it can be without becoming unrealistic. A weapon with spread, a reacting bot or a cramped map all add noise.

Balance still matters across a week. Isolating one subcategory for a session is not a reason to let the others decline, which is why a playlist draws from more than one.4

Find the shortcut before your reps do

Ask how you would cheat the drill. A tracking scenario beatable by standing still trains waiting. A switching scenario where targets queue up in a line trains a memorized sweep.

The test is whether the intended skill is the bottleneck. If some other skill, or patience, sets your score, the scenario is measuring that instead.

Two panels with a still crosshair. On the left the target sweeps straight through the crosshair twice a cycle, so a player who never moves still scores. On the right the target orbits above the crosshair and never crosses it, so every hit needs a correction.Bassel Bakrhttps://github.com/Bassel-Bakr/aimBeatable by waitingthe path returns to your crosshairfree hits, no aimingHas to be aimedthe path never comes backevery hit is a correction
Left: the path walks through a resting crosshair, so waiting scores. Right: nothing is free.

Predictable motion is the usual cause. A path you can learn stops being read and starts being recited, which is a different skill from reacting to a target.5

That is not always wrong. A repeatable path is exactly what some tracking work wants. It only becomes a problem when you meant to train reading and trained recall instead.

Common mistakes

  • Building a scenario around what feels hard rather than what scores low.1
  • Copying a hard scenario and making it harder, without asking what it isolates.
  • Testing three changes in one version, so the result explains nothing.
  • Training the isolated weakness so exclusively that another one opens up.4

In practice

Write the sentence before you open the editor. One line naming what the scenario should be hard at. If you cannot write it, the design is not finished.

Do this next. Run a benchmark, take your lowest subcategory, and write one sentence describing the drill that would isolate it.

Resources

References

  1. Revosect, Benchmarks guide · REF-44 ↩↩↩

  2. Aimlabs, How to start aim training for Fortnite · REF-10 ↩

  3. Ericsson & Harwell, a 2019 review examining Ericsson's original definition of deliberate practice · REF-36 ↩

  4. Aimlabs, How to build a well balanced aim training playlist · REF-8 ↩↩

  5. Aimlabs, Stop predicting and start reacting: get better at reactive tracking · REF-15 ↩