That's unfortunate to hear after going through all that hard work. Those clear washers are probably your best bet after the problems have started to appear.

I suppose I can add to the discussion. I purchased a Mirco QS playfield for a high-end scratch build in 2020, but knowing the issues with their PFs, I had it directly shipped to Kruzman to work his magic. You get what you pay for. Still looking like glass after many hundreds of plays. That said, it is a significant additional cost, so I wouldn't get the Kruzman magic for just any playfield swap. It would have to be for a keeper game.

But there are other things you can do during your swap to reduce the risk of post pooling & chipping. Specifically techniques I picked up from HEP in his build threads. Like adding a small #6 washer between the post & playfield, so that the post edge does not dig into the clear & increase the risk of pooling. And also cutting your own 6-32 screws to length & screwing up from the underside of the PF for posts that are anchored through T-nuts. This will make these posts (that usually get bashed often) rock solid & firmly anchored, and less prone to pooling.

Between both of those install techniques, and Kruzman's superb work, my build still looks brand new. If I ever have to buy another Mirco PF (like the Alien Star PF I've been waiting 3+ years for), I'm pretty sure those install techniques would help prevent the pooling/chipping issues with the stock, soft & never-seems-to-harden Mirco clear.

https://pinside.com/pinball/forum/topic/my-2nd-restoration-quicksilver-scratch-build/page/7#post-6269528

This has been floating around in my head for several years. I couldn't recall who sent their Dragonfist PF to him. Sorry to hear it was you.

It rubs additional salt in the wound because so many DF owners & potential scratch builders really need that reproduction. I gave up hoping for this awhile ago & moved onto other projects. He's been promising to produce AS playfields for at least 5 years, if only someone would send him a PF for artwork reference. Glad no one ever did.

I suppose I will chime in on my thoughts on this. Pinside is a great resource for information, but on topics like this, it can be really difficult to filter out the opinions & decide the best path to take when restoring a game.

cottonm4 swears by those washers he uses & they have worked very well for him. I used a similar method when I did my Quicksilver scratch build, but I just used a couple standard #6 washers. Where did I get the idea? From the HEP restore thread, where he was using this washer method on an Indiana Jones Mirco PF, because he was having post pooling issues. If the "washer method" is a good method for HEP, then it's certainly good enough for me.

I knew the horror stories before I purchased my QS PF from Micro in 2020. It had the missing keylines around some of the star rollovers. It was missing a hole under the apron used to run wiring. Unfortunately this is what you get when you order from Mirco, as well as the lousy clear that was soft upon arrival. Plus one of the plastics had artwork errors along the edge, to which Mirco told me the error was in his original artwork files, so when I asked for a replacement I was told to pound sand. Anyway I decided to send the PF to off to Kruzman to fix those issues & reclear it. Those services cost almost as much as the PF itself, and it's pretty ridiculous that you have to send a brand new PF off for reclearing. While I wouldn't use Kruzman for every restoration, IMO it was worth every penny for QS since it's a rare fantastic sought after title.

I used two washers under every post, so that the post was raised from the playfield about the width of a fingernail. The outer edge of the post never makes contact with the playfield. If pooling does occur around the #6 washer, it would occur under the post, within the outer radius of the post. It wouldn't visible to the player, nor are you able to tell the post is raised slightly, unless you try to slip a fingernail under the edge. The other thing to remember is that not all posts are the same. Some posts are simply screwed into the PF from the surface, others that take significant direct pounding from the ball are firmly anchored to T-Nuts underneath the PF. Those posts are screwed in from underneath & the threads are cut to length, then firmly secured with the topside nuts, so you can make them really firm & have no worries about pooling thanks to the washers under the posts. You can see what I did in my QS scratch build thread.

I can say that after 1000+ plays, on a properly built QS with the correct 16B-6 transformer & rebuilt strong flippers, there has been no wear to my PF or around any posts at all. No issues whatsoever. Is this due to Kruzman's superior clearcoat job? Yes without a doubt. Is this due to the "washer method" as well? Yes it certainly has played a part IMO.

All I know for sure is that NONE of this would be necessary if Mirco simply produced durable error-free quality PF reproductions.

Unrelated to this thread but I will chime in on this as well. I purchased a "mirrored" Jackbot BG from CPR last year, and the mirroring effect is practically non-existent. It looks like silver paint & doesn't reflect at all. I didn't complain, I just won't purchase another mirrored BG from them again.

I’ve never had to remove a post, so I’ve never been able to check for impressions. I doubt I will ever visibly see any pooling on this playfield.

Which brings me to my next point. There are no dimples in the clear either. It still looks like glass & the ball flies on it.

Get what you pay for I guess. Kruzman is the best.