|
Post by bountyhunter9 on May 1, 2010 22:41:48 GMT -5
We're not talking about overcosting. We're talking about pricing aggressively vs conservatively. Based on discussion, the group collectively seems to think that price somewhere in the range of 39 to 45 would be reasonable. I say err on the side of caution here. That does not explicitly make him overpriced, although some might view it that way. It's The line between costing 'conservatively' and overpricing a character is very thin, if it exists at all. It can be very easy to price a mini a few points higher than one normally would, simply because if is a member of the more playable factions. That situation leads to a piece that is both overcosted and priced 'conservatively'. How about we go for a compromise? You want him to stay at 45, and I want him to be bumped down to 39. How does going right in the middle at 42 sound?
|
|
|
Post by gwek on May 2, 2010 5:23:04 GMT -5
I would prefer to stay at 45 (which I think is a more than fair price for him), but would come down to 42 if that's what it takes to get him finalized.
Okay, folks, what do you say?
39 42 45 ?
|
|
|
Post by Dendrite on May 2, 2010 15:12:10 GMT -5
45
|
|
|
Post by Roque Saber on May 2, 2010 23:55:49 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind 42. It's the same cost as Obi, JM who has long been outdated.
|
|
|
Post by surfrider56 on May 2, 2010 23:59:05 GMT -5
I wouldn't mind 42. It's the same cost as Obi, JM who has long been outdated. ... an even better reason for 42 is that I already made a card with it and I wouldn't have to go back and change it ;D
|
|
|
Post by bountyhunter9 on May 3, 2010 16:36:31 GMT -5
I think that's three for 42 and two for 45. Anyone else care to weigh in?
|
|
|
Post by surfrider56 on May 6, 2010 22:15:52 GMT -5
Maybe a compromise of 43?
|
|
|
Post by Roque Saber on May 7, 2010 11:20:52 GMT -5
Works...
|
|
|
Post by bountyhunter9 on May 7, 2010 16:23:10 GMT -5
The compromise was 42, then we're going to compromise to 43...lol, I don't think one point will make any difference. But I'd sign off on 43.
|
|
|
Post by surfrider56 on May 7, 2010 18:14:35 GMT -5
The compromise was 42, then we're going to compromise to 43...lol, I don't think one point will make any difference. But I'd sign off on 43. Well, I was looking at 3 for 42, 2 for 45, and the "Middle" of that was 43 .........
|
|
|
Post by bountyhunter9 on May 7, 2010 22:34:34 GMT -5
The compromise was 42, then we're going to compromise to 43...lol, I don't think one point will make any difference. But I'd sign off on 43. Well, I was looking at 3 for 42, 2 for 45, and the "Middle" of that was 43 ......... Eh, it works. Do we like 43?
|
|
|
Post by Dendrite on May 10, 2010 23:12:39 GMT -5
43 looks like a winner
|
|
|
Post by Roque Saber on May 12, 2010 0:37:13 GMT -5
K, can we get the stats reposted with 43 as the cost?
|
|
|
Post by surfrider56 on May 27, 2010 23:02:05 GMT -5
Is Tholme really in need of revamping?? He's at 23 lines, which is reasonable.
|
|
|
Post by gwek on May 28, 2010 0:06:17 GMT -5
Can we see a version with all special abilities written out? While he might not NEED to be revised, I think we should look at every mini to see if we can streamline.
|
|