Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Fifth Element" data-source="post: 4544737" data-attributes="member: 48135">Indeed. But the topic of discussion is not minis that are stupidly out of scale. The topic are minis that are slightly out of scale. And the bases don't enter into it, since there isn't any mini-by-mini variation in base size (assuming they're the same size category).So in a discussion about whether small scale differences matter, the opinion that they don't matter is not relevant?If I am marketing a series of minis, of course the &quot;don't care&quot; matters. Making scale more precise increases the cost of the minis, which increases the price.And your poll would have to specify what &quot;to scale&quot; means to be useful. If you mean that all minis will be to 28mm scale, give or take 10%, that's something very different than meaning scale will be ignored entirely.The point is, most people here seem to think you're significantly overstating what number this would be. If the results are more like 10% - 10% - 80%, then that 10% loss is probably worth it given the cost increase required to retain them.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Fifth Element, post: 4544737, member: 48135"] Indeed. But the topic of discussion is not minis that are [B]stupidly [/B]out of scale. The topic are minis that are [B]slightly [/B]out of scale. And the bases don't enter into it, since there isn't any mini-by-mini variation in base size (assuming they're the same size category). So in a discussion about whether small scale differences matter, the opinion that they don't matter is not relevant? If I am marketing a series of minis, of course the "don't care" matters. Making scale more precise increases the cost of the minis, which increases the price. And your poll would have to specify what "to scale" means to be useful. If you mean that all minis will be to 28mm scale, give or take 10%, that's something very different than meaning scale will be ignored entirely. The point is, most people here seem to think you're significantly overstating what number this would be. If the results are more like 10% - 10% - 80%, then that 10% loss is probably worth it given the cost increase required to retain them. [/QUOTE]

Verification