Register Register

Author Topic: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions  (Read 90102 times)

GRUD

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2054
  • Quinn's Quads - 'Mechs on the March!
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #120 on: 11 February 2015, 13:05:02 »
Solutions:
 
1. Put some kind of official poll on IWM's website for people who have accounts and, say, credit card purchases on file as the only ones capable of voting. Something to verify people are actually going to buy and not just vote on "fanboy-ism". Or mass-mail people and give options.
 
2. Mass-mail a poll to former clients who've made purchases and count the votes manually.
 
3. Have voting only for new minis and let re-sculpts be fan financed in a "resculpt" thread. This way there's always a mix of the two being accomplished. Not that I feel most of these things NEED resculpts, but if there's a demand, there's money to be made.
I can see SO MANY problems with #1 and #2 it's not even funny.   :o  Mainly, the Fact that not everyone buys directly from IWM.  Telling those people "Your money isn't good enough" is an EXCELLENT way to make them "Angry ".  With so many people buying from either other online retailers or from their local FLGS, your idea wouldn't necessarilly be all that more accurate.  Angry people are known to "Vote" with their wallets, as in by NOT BUYING.   :-\


While I tend to agree with you on #3, I'm also one of those that doesn't view the Primitives as a "True" Resculpt.   ;D  As I've said before, the art for the Primitives is sufficient enough to warrant a new mini, while the "True" Resculpts are existing minis with something minor about them that some people don't like and want "corrected".   :-X
To me, Repros are 100% Wrong, and there's NO  room for me to give ground on this subject. I'm not just an Immovable Object on this, I'm THE Immovable Object. 3D Prints are just 3D Repros.

Something to bear in Mind. Defending the BT IP is Frowned upon here.

Remember: Humor is NOT Tolerated here. Have a Nice Day!

Hey! Can't a guy get any Privacy around here!

TigerShark

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4884
    • MekWars: Dominion
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #121 on: 11 February 2015, 13:21:45 »
Both of those designs (FLS- and HGN-) have dopey-looking artwork to begin with. So there's nothing wrong with the sculpt so much as it looking like an ugly design. That, and people probably thinking it all needs to resemble MWO artwork now.
  W W W . M E K W A R S - D O M I N I O N . C O M

  "You will fight to the last soldier, and when you die, I will call upon your damned soul to speak horrible curses at the enemy."
     - Orders of Emperor Stefan Amaris to his troops

mike19k

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1461
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #122 on: 11 February 2015, 13:24:33 »
While I tend to agree with you on #3, I'm also one of those that doesn't view the Primitives as a "True" Resculpt.   ;D  As I've said before, the art for the Primitives is sufficient enough to warrant a new mini, while the "True" Resculpts are existing minis with something minor about them that some people don't like and want "corrected".   :-X
I also do not see primitives as a "True Resculpt", I just want to do things that have not been made first, I do want to see the primitives as the ones that are out right now I think are great some much better than the originals.

speck

  • IWM Web Support
  • Moderator
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2337
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #123 on: 11 February 2015, 13:30:46 »
There will still be one suggestion thread and poll each quarter with 6 winners to be sculpted. But will shorten the number of suggestions on the poll. I aggree there was to many options to vote on. We will make some adjustments before the next poll and see how it goes.


cavingjan

  • Sang-Wei MUL
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4415
  • grumpy ESOB
    • warrenborn
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #124 on: 11 February 2015, 13:31:58 »
If our limit is capacity, adding a seperate resculpt poll isn't going to do anything other than reduce the number of slots from this poll. Doesn't seem like it will do what you want.

So doing 2 every month is not quarterly, it's monthly.

2 every month for 3 months nets us the 6 for the quarter. Thus the cycle starts all over again each quarter.

cavalier1645

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 803
  • "Train the Force...OPFOR"
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #125 on: 11 February 2015, 17:44:28 »
I also do not see primitives as a "True Resculpt", I just want to do things that have not been made first, I do want to see the primitives as the ones that are out right now I think are great some much better than the originals.

I do see them as a resculpt. The only reason a thing is primitive is it got older weapons and internals (like a engine etc.) Aesthetically it should not look much different at all from it more modern variants. To me, no offense, the results and primitives seem to take away from mechs, vehicles and power armor that doesn't get a chance to be made.

DarkISI

  • Praedonum Dominus
  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6010
    • My Author Website
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #126 on: 11 February 2015, 17:49:31 »
Will we get additional options in for the next poll? I mean, for example, BAs ;)
German novelist and part time Battletech writer.



"if they didn't want to be stomped to death by a psychotic gang of battlemechs, they shouldn't have fallen down" - Liam's Ghost

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5348
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #127 on: 16 February 2015, 16:51:43 »
Will we get additional options in for the next poll? I mean, for example, BAs ;)
I hope so, I really need Marauder BA and Cuchulainn Support Armor for my Mercs.

Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Fan XTRO: The Society

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3705
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #128 on: 16 February 2015, 18:11:07 »
I do see them as a resculpt. The only reason a thing is primitive is it got older weapons and internals (like a engine etc.) Aesthetically it should not look much different at all from it more modern variants. To me, no offense, the results and primitives seem to take away from mechs, vehicles and power armor that doesn't get a chance to be made.

I think, and correct me if I'm wrong; but I think that Primitives are sort of a second shot at the reseen for those of us who didn't care for what we got out of PP. As far as I remember, all the primitives have been of formerly unseen types, except for the Xanthos, which, while I am not 100 thrilled with it's sculpt (LEGS! WHY ALWAYS THE LEGS?!), we hardly need a new sculpt for that version.

Yes, some minis just look *wrong* to some or all of us. Sometimes it's even an accurate portrayal by the art, but the art sucks, sometimes it's just a poor sculpt.

Interestingly, I find the 3025 revised "De-enriched" SLDF mechs are usually very attractively depicted, especially in the case of designs which kick butt on the table and look bad on the shelf.

There may be some moderate call for variant sculpts, but this would be a very case-by case sort of thing, mostly based on demand. In this mien I am *HUGE* fan of variant parts and *Fixing* sculpts bit by bit.

So, do we need sculpts for all the primitives? Eh, maybe when popularity calls for it. A case can be made for re-working some fugly mechs as well. Variants should be the least common re-sculpt in my mind. While the quest for a Zeus as badass to look at as it is on the table, continues; I think moderation is called for overall.
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3705
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #129 on: 16 February 2015, 18:21:13 »
Okay, so if it comes up; what is the accepted waiting period for a financier who goes dark on us?

How much time should we give someone without even a how do you do? I want to be fair and understanding.
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

Maingunnery

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5348
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #130 on: 16 February 2015, 18:27:00 »
Okay, so if it comes up; what is the accepted waiting period for a financier who goes dark on us?

How much time should we give someone without even a how do you do? I want to be fair and understanding.
My idea:

Two weeks from the start of the funding thread. Then use the backups, if the backups fail ask an earlier financier to increase their share.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

Fan XTRO: The Society

Feenix74

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3026
  • Lam's Phoenix Hawks
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #131 on: 16 February 2015, 19:16:25 »
May I suggest, two weeks from when the lead financier pm's with the paypal payment details. The rest I agree with Maingunnery.
Incoming fire has the right of way.

The only thing more accurate than incoming enemy fire is incoming friendly fire.

Always remember that your weapon was built by the lowest bidder.


                                   - excepts from Murphy's Laws of Combat

B-3

  • Iron Wind Metals
  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 282
    • B-3 Designs
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #132 on: 16 February 2015, 20:20:08 »
Sounds good to me!  Speck?
"Don't start nothin' won't be nothin' " - J

speck

  • IWM Web Support
  • Moderator
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2337
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #133 on: 16 February 2015, 23:03:09 »
Sounds good to me!  Speck?

Sounds good to me.

Also, I have updated the Guidelines thread with the addition of the lead contact information from Cache.

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 14186
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #134 on: 17 February 2015, 16:56:29 »
Definitely something to think about, the other side is even if you have say 100 people vote for something will they all buy it or do they just think it is cool but have no plans of buying? Also if using your example TigerShark is willing to fully fund something would others vote for it if they are not going to put money towards it, but still may want to buy it?

Speculation on my part:

I suspect the problem isn't finding funding for a sculpt, but to ensure sculpts are made of stuff that will sell beyond just the extremely tiny group of people who fund the sculpt. So a straight up popularity poll is the only viable method.
What good is it if you can instantly fund three different 'Mechs, if the grand total number of customers you'll ever have for them is 1? Especially when that "1", starts out with a huge pile of credit he can then apply against those new sculpts? Even if we presume IWM suffers no costs beyond getting the sculpt made, it seems like a great way for IWM to be wasting its limited production resources on stuff that is not economically interesting.

So, bottom line: I assume that finding funding for a sculpt is FAR less interesting than finding sculpts that are popular.


Cache

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2342
    • Lords of the Battlefield
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #135 on: 18 February 2015, 19:20:39 »
A note to everyone trying to redeem your vouchers: The first time through I clicked the link in the email I received, logged in, and then was redirected to the front page of the store.  There was nothing about the code being redeemed.  I had to log into the IWM online store first, then click the link in the email.  I was then directed to a page saying redemption was successful and the Shopping Cart widget in the upper right of the screen showed the voucher balance.  (The FAQ in the online store appears to be directed at those who do not already have an account.)  You can redeem through the checkout process by entering the code, as the FAQ states, but I'm not ready to order and wanted to make sure it works.  If you redeem prior to placing your order, there is a third payment option when ordering that states, "to be used from Gift Vouchers."

mike19k

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1461
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #136 on: 19 February 2015, 10:23:46 »
Speculation on my part:

I suspect the problem isn't finding funding for a sculpt, but to ensure sculpts are made of stuff that will sell beyond just the extremely tiny group of people who fund the sculpt. So a straight up popularity poll is the only viable method.
What good is it if you can instantly fund three different 'Mechs, if the grand total number of customers you'll ever have for them is 1? Especially when that "1", starts out with a huge pile of credit he can then apply against those new sculpts? Even if we presume IWM suffers no costs beyond getting the sculpt made, it seems like a great way for IWM to be wasting its limited production resources on stuff that is not economically interesting.

So, bottom line: I assume that finding funding for a sculpt is FAR less interesting than finding sculpts that are popular.

I am sure there is something to this, but at the same time, in my local group (of about 10-12) most of them have a hand full of mechs (between 1-12) but three of them have hundreds most have been playing for about the same time, but are not buying at the same level. If you asked all of them what they would like to see whose voice should carry the most weight? Those who buy a mech every year to year and a half or the ones who buy several every month? There is no perfect way, just trying to show the other side of the coin.

Hythos

  • The Embiggened Man
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 503
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #137 on: 20 February 2015, 12:28:22 »
Grr!
I've only just now found out about these! :(
Has there been an announcement I may have missed?
Agent 722
Salt Lake City / Utah
Have 'Mech, will travel.

GRUD

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2054
  • Quinn's Quads - 'Mechs on the March!
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #138 on: 20 February 2015, 19:58:56 »
Grr!
I've only just now found out about these! :(
Has there been an announcement I may have missed?
Apparently so!   :D


Don't worry bud!  There are still 4 more that will need Funding for this Quarter alone, and it looks like there will be more to come this year!  You'll have a chance to jump in the pool.   O0

Even if you don't help Fund something, you can still Support it later by buying one or two or four once they're released of course.   ;)
To me, Repros are 100% Wrong, and there's NO  room for me to give ground on this subject. I'm not just an Immovable Object on this, I'm THE Immovable Object. 3D Prints are just 3D Repros.

Something to bear in Mind. Defending the BT IP is Frowned upon here.

Remember: Humor is NOT Tolerated here. Have a Nice Day!

Hey! Can't a guy get any Privacy around here!

klarg1

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1416
    • Blind Metal Minis
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #139 on: 10 April 2015, 13:13:13 »
Are the polls still running on a per-quarter basis?

I am pumped about the successes we saw with the first round of funding (and am warming up my wallet for all three financed choices), but I can't help but notice that we are already 10-days into Q2, with a significant backlog still ahead.
Read about my travails with miniatures:
http://blindmetalminis.blogspot.com/

speck

  • IWM Web Support
  • Moderator
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2337
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #140 on: 10 April 2015, 13:26:32 »
Are the polls still running on a per-quarter basis?

I am pumped about the successes we saw with the first round of funding (and am warming up my wallet for all three financed choices), but I can't help but notice that we are already 10-days into Q2, with a significant backlog still ahead.

A new round of suggestion and poll will not happen until the first is completely funded and sculpted. We are seeing how it plays out to make adjustments for the next round.

TigerShark

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4884
    • MekWars: Dominion
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #141 on: 10 April 2015, 13:41:48 »
Speculation on my part:

I suspect the problem isn't finding funding for a sculpt, but to ensure sculpts are made of stuff that will sell beyond just the extremely tiny group of people who fund the sculpt. So a straight up popularity poll is the only viable method.
What good is it if you can instantly fund three different 'Mechs, if the grand total number of customers you'll ever have for them is 1? Especially when that "1", starts out with a huge pile of credit he can then apply against those new sculpts? Even if we presume IWM suffers no costs beyond getting the sculpt made, it seems like a great way for IWM to be wasting its limited production resources on stuff that is not economically interesting.

So, bottom line: I assume that finding funding for a sculpt is FAR less interesting than finding sculpts that are popular.


Popular =/= profitable. We still have a boat load of folks playing 3025. So they could vote with nostalgia goggles, then turn around and just use the plastics from their accumulated boxed sets. Saying, "I'm a fan of the Thunderbolt" doesn't mean "I'm going to buy 12 Thunderbolt minis." A straight poll which doesn't ensure actual, financial participation isn't really going to show what is/is not profitable.

I know we covered this before, but a "pay-to-vote" could also be helpful. Pony up $15 for a vote, which translates into store credit for IWM. Funds get applied to the top [3] winners of the poll. Anyone who doesn't pay probably wasn't going to anyhow, as that's a tiny amount of money and basically covers a single mini at the store anyhow.
  W W W . M E K W A R S - D O M I N I O N . C O M

  "You will fight to the last soldier, and when you die, I will call upon your damned soul to speak horrible curses at the enemy."
     - Orders of Emperor Stefan Amaris to his troops

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 14186
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #142 on: 10 April 2015, 14:12:12 »
The objective isn't to ensure funding for a sculpt, it's to ensure it sells well.
The ability to find ~10 guys to fund a sculpt is not good data, so the pay option provides even less data on potential sales than the popular vote. Meanwhile, it adds yet another layer of work, and things to go wrong.

GRUD

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2054
  • Quinn's Quads - 'Mechs on the March!
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #143 on: 10 April 2015, 17:57:31 »
At last count, I own 52 T-Bolts of various sculpts.  Of those, 19 are Unseen, then I've got 4 each of the Primitive, IIC, and 3 different "Fan Sculpts", then 2-3 of all the other Reseen sculpts.  I might not buy "12" of any particular 'Mech, but if it's one I like well enough, I'll most likely buy 4 of them.  I plan to buy 4 of the Primitive Rifleman, plus 2-4 of the Primitive Griffin.

Having to "Pay" to vote is pure BS, plain and simple.  If something someone likes doesn't win enough votes in any given Poll, "Them's the Breaks".  I don't buy any "Collectible" garbage because I want to buy what I want, NOT trust to the Luck of the draw.  I'm not about to pay someone $10.00-$15.00 so I can stick my hand in a hole cut into the top of a box, and blindly grope around for a blister, with the Hopes that it's something I actually want.  Of the 3 'Mechs I voted for, 2 of them were in the top 6, and I donated money to each of them.  I WON'T be "Forced" to pay MY money to have another Variant of an existing mini made, OR a Resculpt of an existing mini.  (OR a Re-re-resculpt!)  Unless I like the looks of it, I also won't pay to have any Clan mini sculpted.  There are minis that I won't fund that I'll still Probably end up buying.  I know I'll get at least 2 blisters of the APCs, or whatever it takes to get me 2 of each mini.  I buy minis I like the looks of, Period.  There is NO WAY I'll "Pay" to vote if there's the Slightest chance my money will go to some garbage I'll never buy.


As far as I remember, all the primitives have been of formerly unseen types, except for the Xanthos, which, while I am not 100 thrilled with it's sculpt (LEGS! WHY ALWAYS THE LEGS?!), we hardly need a new sculpt for that version.

I just remembered, another "Non Unseen" Primitive is the Banshee BNC-1E.   O0
To me, Repros are 100% Wrong, and there's NO  room for me to give ground on this subject. I'm not just an Immovable Object on this, I'm THE Immovable Object. 3D Prints are just 3D Repros.

Something to bear in Mind. Defending the BT IP is Frowned upon here.

Remember: Humor is NOT Tolerated here. Have a Nice Day!

Hey! Can't a guy get any Privacy around here!

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3705
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #144 on: 10 April 2015, 18:20:51 »
At last count, I own 52 T-Bolts of various sculpts.  Of those, 19 are Unseen, then I've got 4 each of the Primitive, IIC, and 3 different "Fan Sculpts", then 2-3 of all the other Reseen sculpts.  I might not buy "12" of any particular 'Mech, but if it's one I like well enough, I'll most likely buy 4 of them.  I plan to buy 4 of the Primitive Rifleman, plus 2-4 of the Primitive Griffin.

Having to "Pay" to vote is pure BS, plain and simple.  If something someone likes doesn't win enough votes in any given Poll, "Them's the Breaks".  I don't buy any "Collectible" garbage because I want to buy what I want, NOT trust to the Luck of the draw.  I'm not about to pay someone $10.00-$15.00 so I can stick my hand in a hole cut into the top of a box, and blindly grope around for a blister, with the Hopes that it's something I actually want.  Of the 3 'Mechs I voted for, 2 of them were in the top 6, and I donated money to each of them.  I WON'T be "Forced" to pay MY money to have another Variant of an existing mini made, OR a Resculpt of an existing mini.  (OR a Re-re-resculpt!)  Unless I like the looks of it, I also won't pay to have any Clan mini sculpted.  There are minis that I won't fund that I'll still Probably end up buying.  I know I'll get at least 2 blisters of the APCs, or whatever it takes to get me 2 of each mini.  I buy minis I like the looks of, Period.  There is NO WAY I'll "Pay" to vote if there's the Slightest chance my money will go to some garbage I'll never buy.


I just remembered, another "Non Unseen" Primitive is the Banshee BNC-1E.   O0

first of all; Man I feel A LOT better about my collection now, thank you and also; Awesome! (your collection, not the mech, though I am sure you have many of those as well)

I agree with all your other statements as well.

Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

mike19k

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1461
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #145 on: 11 April 2015, 02:28:37 »
I do not think that is any way to solve this so that everyone is happy. I for one do not want to see re-sculpts tell everything has a first sculpts, and unlike GRUD I place the Primitive in the class of re-sculpts. Now I am not knocking the re-sculpts as some of them are very nice and I have bought some of them, but I would just rather have new over different version of the same.

klarg1

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1416
    • Blind Metal Minis
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #146 on: 11 April 2015, 08:39:04 »
I would agree that nobody should be forced to fund something they don't actually want. This whole process is a volunteer effort. Hopefully, the backers, the other BT fans and IWM will all win in the end.

Resculpts are not my thing, but they clearly have a following. On the other hand, unlike Mike19k, I like a lot of the primitives in their own right. Right now, we are funding a bunch of stuff I want, but I won't complain when the poll shifts the other way and something else gets picked. I will simply assume that another segment of the fan base will be happy, and that's still good.
Read about my travails with miniatures:
http://blindmetalminis.blogspot.com/

Jal Phoenix

  • CamoSpecs
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3332
  • Once, we had gods.
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #147 on: 11 April 2015, 12:09:43 »
You guys talk about being "forced" to fund as if you're not getting anything else out of the deal.  You are getting a full credit to the IWM store for your donation.  Your entire investment is compensated, no matter what ends up getting funded.  Behrle gets paid the full amount, so he's compensated.  If anyone gets the short end it's IWM, because even though they get a discount on the cost of producing a mini by essentially paying in material and labor instead of cash, they are still investing resources to make something that may not ever sell enough units to cover that cost.  I don't see why they would agree to fund something that they have as yet determined unworthy of being made through the usual channels.  If a resculpt results in a superior mini than the existing one, and hance more sales, I'll gladly back that over a sculpt of a unit only a few people want.

beachhead1985

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3705
  • 1st SOG; SLDF. "McKenna's Marauders"
    • Kilroy's Wall
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #148 on: 11 April 2015, 13:29:02 »
The fanbase needs to learn to discriminate between small foul-ups and serious flaws. Part of our strength as a fandom is how we tell TPTB exactly what we want; sure a lot of us would like an ideal version of our favourite mechs and there may well be an appetite out there for endless revisions of some designs until we get it "right enough", but I don't feel it's constructive and a moderate approach is needed.

Some things do "need" to be fixed, cause they're awful. Just which those are is open to debate.

"Scale" is a huge issue for some people and there seem to be a number of people who don't care for a single new mini until we have a  current line which is in scale from one end to the other and they sure as all-getout do not one one single new mini released which is out of what they consider the proper scale.

The scale issue needs to be addressed in a final and non-fuzzy sense by TPTB in a way with is concrete, if not universally satisfying and it needs to address rules, fluff and minis in one statement.

Ultimately we need to draw the line.

In my opinion what is needed is a triage for the most egregious scale and other sculpting issues and to stop the bleeding with a better vetting process for new minis. We don't always want something which is a perfect match for the art either. The Primitives can be a compromise between new minis and re-sculpts, ditto some "variant" sculpts; look how happy people are with the new Zeus for instance. Once we have this general understanding in place we can reach a satisfying compromise between resculpts and new minis, but need need both and, frankly I feel it needs to lean heavily towards the new stuff, but that is my opinion and I do not count primitives as resculpts.
Epitaph on an Army of Mercenaries

These, in the day when heaven was falling,      Their shoulders held the sky suspended;
The hour when earth's foundations fled,         They stood, and earth's foundations stay;
Followed their mercenary calling,               What God abandoned, these defended,
And took their wages, and are dead.             And saved the sum of things for pay.
     
A.E. Housman

mike19k

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1461
Re: Fan Finance 2.0 Questions
« Reply #149 on: 12 April 2015, 13:41:38 »
You guys talk about being "forced" to fund as if you're not getting anything else out of the deal.  You are getting a full credit to the IWM store for your donation.  Your entire investment is compensated, no matter what ends up getting funded.  Behrle gets paid the full amount, so he's compensated.  If anyone gets the short end it's IWM, because even though they get a discount on the cost of producing a mini by essentially paying in material and labor instead of cash, they are still investing resources to make something that may not ever sell enough units to cover that cost.  I don't see why they would agree to fund something that they have as yet determined unworthy of being made through the usual channels.  If a resculpt results in a superior mini than the existing one, and hance more sales, I'll gladly back that over a sculpt of a unit only a few people want.

I can see your point, and think that there is some validity to it, my hope is that they will sell. At least with the APC what I am hearing is that they will sell, how much and for how long I could not say but I know that I am planing on buying a bunch.