Good job balancing based on statistics, you are obviously unqualified to interpolate and interpret. In the physics community if you want to publish results you have to prove that the results you get cannot be explained any other way, and that your conclusion is not only supported statistically but has no logical inconsistencies. A reductio ad absurdum example: Testing birth control without checking whether or not your subjects were already pregnant. It's not like a pregnant woman will show a false positive regardless of the birth control she was on after the fact. Just as much as it is medically near impossible that she became pregnant after she was already pregnant. Please hire a decent scientist to interpret your data. God knows I don't want that job, but that's what physicist do, interpret data to statistically and logical validated conclusions that must not have logical inconsistencies. [b]THE SAD THING IS YOUR STATISTICS ARE SO FAR OFF THAT THE AVERAGE PLAYER COULD TELL YOU YOUR BALANCING IS INCONSISTENT AT BEST.[/b]