by Agent 57
It starts of with a number of assumptions which are false or pure speculation... as all of these attempts to modify distribution do... by neccisty of course. The problem is that no one making the argument seems to want to acknowledge this and seems unable or unwilling to believe that FFG has in fact found the best solution to the problem as they see it.Rather than trying to convince them that your solution to their problem is better (which you are unlikely to ever be able to do) instead try convincing them that the problem is different than they see it. You let FFG define the problem and their answer to it is almost certainly going to be better than any one that anyone not in the industry is going to come up with.
You need to find a way to convince them that the problem is not one of creating a core set which best appeals to casual players and that multiple sets or exapansions provide the best means for deck building for competitive players.
If you can come up with an alternate problem that rings as true to them as the above where your solution is the best fit to it you are much more likelyto achieve better results.