[infectedsloth]

Pretty much everything in your response that you asserted was my view point actually isn’t.

First off, you base your entire response on a perceived fundamental disagreement that’s simply not there. You made the statement that “playtesting is ultimately about a qualitative analysis of results.” I agree with you, heck I think pretty much everyone agrees. That’s how we’ve been doing it for years. I didn’t think this was up for debate. As an illustration, if a unit through the course of its play testing kills an average of 83.5 points. I’m not gonna push for the unit to be priced at 83.5 points. I’m not a slave to the data. I know how to make subjective conclusion based of the date and other factors. Everyone on this site does too.

Multiple times you act has if I take win/lose records as gospel, when I never even mentioned win/lose records. Look at part two again. I use terms like too weak or two strong. Those are subjective terms. I want the testers impressions just like you.

I’m pointing out that the system has been set up in such a way that it’s not producing good date. This makes qualitative analysis more difficult and less reliable.