bach01 - thank you thank you thank you!

I've tried in the past to make the same point as you, but without much success. I even tried to make a "QA is a bigger job than you think" post yesterday in this thread but somehow managed to lose over half the text doing a "preview" and gave up on the effort. You did a much better job than my attempt would have. Those are some pretty amazing numbers in your guestimates and I'm with you 100% in the point you make.

You touched on some high level variables that need to be tested, but there is so much more to consider: unit vs unit, formations vs formations, flanking, routing/rally, unit special abilites, weather, rivers/bridges, grouping/group formations, user interface, effects of the general's rating, unit weapons/armour/experience, missile fire, unit pathing, terrain effects (movement & combat), and so on. And that is just the battle side of the picture. The thought of trying to organise testing with this many variables causes my brain to shutdown.

lt1956, about the open beta, I'm sure there are issues with that approach too, otherwise why wouldn't all game developers do so? On the surface, with games as complex as the TW games though, it seems like an open beta would be a good way to cast a much larger testing net to catch bugs. However, I guess there are reasons CA didn't want to go that route (showing their gaming advancements to the competition?) It has been suggested before in these forums and many patrons have volunteered to help with testing too.