A lucid review if I have ever seen one. Living alone in a small college dorm room is an impediment to playtesting. For the most part, I share your point of view. Nonetheless, There are one or two points worth defending: <br> 1) Math is a good thing! Playtesting is admittedly far better, but the human mind is often nearsighted, and misses some things that pop up immediately if you do some math. I'm all about playtesting, but you can't just discard the only tool that this poor college student has at his disposal. <br> 2) If you READ the strategy and tactics section, you will realize that I have provided only extremely broad strokes. This is what I WANT my game to be, and I admit it. I didn't dare go into specifics, and at that, merely gave a quick overview of what appears to be obvious. (And about the rules making the strategy . . . How the heck would you design the rules then?) <br> 3) What exactly is it that you have against fixing problems with a game? If there is something wrong with it, you should fix it. Granted, it might make the rules more inelegant, but its better than having a game that has a gaping hole in it. Ex: You complain about my rule that keeps pieces in hyperspace, but if one were to move their galaxy onto the black whole before his opponent does, and leave it there, forcing a draw. U telling me you would rather have THIS problem, as opposed to an inelegant rule?. <br> <br> Other than this, I can say that your comment is about as lucid as they come. Since the post, it has undergone some playtesting, and other problems have shown their faces. Most notably, a disequilibrium between the sides that is difficult to attribute to any particular rule or group thereof, and therefore, really hard to get rid of(read previous comments). Surprisingly, however, I got rid of most of the nooks and crannies before playtesting began, and I was right about almost all of what I wrote in my strategy and tactics section. <br> Thank you, nonetheless, for a sincere, straightforward, and lucid response.