If a manufacturer has consistent production tolerances, or specifies that from their contracted producers, then there is nothing wrong with batch testing. It's obviously different than testing every individual scope, but depending on the test it could actually be far more rigourous than individual testing can realistically be, becasue an involved test, let alone a destructive test, isnt practical to conduct on a zillion scopes, but might be very realistic on a sample-set from each production lot. ideally you'd have both--batch testing that is involved and possibly even destructive to see where the limit of durability is, as well as individual testing to catch any obvious issues, but which must necessarily be simpler and faster and certainly not destructive. It's not unlikely that diferent levels of scopes have DIFFERENT internal testing procedures and standards, even if they are all "individually tested".
That said, my understanding is that very few scope manufacturers test zero RETENTION, even if they are doing impact testing to verify post-impact function--those are two totally different things so I'd be very careful reading too much into manufacturers marketing of impact testing.
Also, OEM manufacturers routinely hold different tolerances and build to different designs for different customers--this is totally normal--so just becasue two scopes are built in the same factory really doesnt mean they are of the same or even similar quality.
