@coreystup I've been meaning to respond to your earlier post, because I agree with you in many ways and I appreciate your desire to help.
You may not have looked carefully at the simplified examples of what I call "reliability-based" RM rules I showed, but their purpose is to verify device state after commanding switch changes. I use a Repeat/Until loop with the switch command inside the loop to do what you are calling a retry. I use a "FaultCount" variable to count how many loops have occurred without a valid change of state. I can turn on a warning light or a buzzer etc. in my house, or send a notification to a device, if the FaultCount variable reaches a certain number. I also set a variable "ValidState" which is set to what you are referring to the logical state of the device, and it only gets set (to 0 for OFF and 1 for ON) if the rule can confirm that the device is in the desired/commanded state (from an event being fired in RM for the state change). When ValidState is set to 0 or 1, the Repeat loop terminates.
Of course as I have been saying, the RM event doesn't fire if the command is to change to a state the hub thinks the device is already in, and the only way to get out of that fortunately rare scenario (without the changes I'm seeking) is to cycle the device switch. Not only is that a gimmicky workaround, but it isn't always a good idea, with lights that need to stay OFF at night or an AC condenser motor.
Yes, a hard-wired automation system would be more reliable, and I've considered it many times, but I've always been able to find ways to circumvent the weaknesses I encounter in an RF setup. I currently run two C-7 hubs in a hub-mesh, and normally one hub does the rule/app work while the other does the radio work. I've set up a mechanism that each hub regularly tests the other for complete functionality (every 5 minutes), and for critical temperature control in my EggRoom, either hub can fail the other and take over complete control, with its own devices. I also have duplicate temp/humidity sensors in each room, one on each hub. I've been setting up my heaters and cooling units to be operable by two Zwave devices, and I've been working on adding physical high-temperature shutoff switches as well. So even though I'm choosing to stick with an RF setup, I'm improving its reliability all the time. I've been controlling my animal/egg rooms for more than 4 years this way, and although I've encountered some problems that could have become serious, I keep my animals at home where I spend most of my time, and I have always caught the problems early, knock-on-wood. I've never lost any animals/eggs and when I see a failure point, I've always found ways to minimize the possibility of a bigger problem.
What I think I am hearing is that the device drivers on the hub are filtering out the events where there is no state change, not the hub's platform software. If that's the case, then the author of the device driver would possibly be able to make modifications I suggest, and someone like @bravenel who works on Rule Machine less able. I write Visual Basic code, and C++ looks like a foreign language to me. If its a single line of code or a simple change, maybe I could envision trying to attack it myself, but I'd have to have the source code and I'm not sure its available for these devices. I'm still figuring this stuff out as you can see.
To answer some of your other questions, all of my devices that are capable of S2 are on S2, otherwise S0. And yes, some of my relays get cycled in the hundreds per day during certain times of the year. I am very aware that I may see a relay failure at some point, but I still haven't. I've been moving to the newer 700 series devices, and all my switches except one are now 700.
Even with a hard-wired setup, relays can still fail. Even with an RF setup, redundancy can be accomplished, hardware fail switches can be implemented, and failure warnings can be created.