Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Showing 3d printed masters aren't necessarily representative of the final product however. Mantics restic models for example, while I'm happy with them (given the price) if you expect what you see from a 3d printed master you'll be disappointed.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I hate stretch goals.

thank goodness, I was worried I'd be the only one on that line of thinking.

What's your reasoning for it? I've heard a lot of people hate stretch goals because if it was meant to be funded, it should be available for funding day one. Yet instead they end up held behind a pay wall that's completely pointless since a few guys could pledge really high then drop them down later after the goal was unlocked.

I'm a fan of stretch goals even if you exclude the impact of the "hype"/marketing they bring. Stretch goals legitimately can do things like bump a model from PVC to hard plastic due to the increased cost of hard plastic tooling being justified due to the increased funding. More funds and backers means higher economies of scale which means more ability for extra stuff. Given we're the "investors" of the KS, we're the ones that should reap the rewards from it - we don't get interest, we get loot.

They need to be managed well of course, good budgeting of costs and time is required or else problems. Quality concerns like with some of Mantics older stuff or time concerns such as... almost every KS, with Dreamforge being one of the worst offenders due to the difficulty in tooling so many high quality hard plastic kits.

Stretch goals are one of two things. On one hand, they can represent additional things that can be produced at different funding levels.

If you are raising money for molds, you can't very well promise to make 20 different kits if you only raise enough money for one set of molds. Setting up the KS for the first set and then putting the other sets out as "stretch goals" make sense and lets people know what will happen should the project exceed its funding goal.

It also works as a sort of hype game. It generates interest, enthusiasm, and helps drive people to pledge more than a token amount.

As someone who is designing a kickstarter project this is a very interesting read. If it doesn't Shanghai the thread too much what are your thoughts on a limited run of product? I am doing terrain, 15mm resin buildings specifically, and I am thinking of limiting the number available to something small for the initial foray into kickstarter. Something around 100 of each of the designs. My thoughts are that it keeps it manageable both in production and shipping times. If successful then I can look at expanding it in a second kickstarter.

Stretch goals are ok in moderation, some Kickstarters have overdone it.

Like said before communication is key, small tidbits of progress on design, sculpting, prototypes keeps the peasant revolt down, it doesn't have to be elaborate, and even telling about honest delays would be OK, Love the dreamforge stuff but the sudden brake on communication gives me that nagging feeling ("he is not going to pull a defiance?") Not really but people have a tendency to expect the worst.

Tressel wrote:
As someone who is designing a kickstarter project this is a very interesting read. If it doesn't Shanghai the thread too much what are your thoughts on a limited run of product? I am doing terrain, 15mm resin buildings specifically, and I am thinking of limiting the number available to something small for the initial foray into kickstarter. Something around 100 of each of the designs. My thoughts are that it keeps it manageable both in production and shipping times. If successful then I can look at expanding it in a second kickstarter.

I hate companies that arbitrarily restrict my ability to buy their product unless I jump through the right hoops. I don't fault you for doing limited runs if that's all you're capable of, but I also have no interest in supporting your Kickstarter - for me "the cause" is bootstrapping mass production, not producing a hundred casts and then being back where we started.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
I now assume everything I look at will be up to a year late minimum, and then decide if the discount I'm looking at makes the wait worth it.

For example, I pledged on the Winter War kickstarter only because I got a huge break in price for it. I knew full well it was probably going to run late once the stretch goals started opening up. I probably would have dropped my pledge if it wasn't for so many of the add ons being free.

On a related note, the more stretch goals I see for a kickstarter now, the less likely I am to back it. Stretch goals are synonymous with delays. If I see more than 2 or 3, I immediately expect delays. Anything more than 5 is a red flag, and anything in the twenties to thirties range causes me to laugh as I move on to the next one.

It may be different for non miniatures kickstarters, but for the ones I typically back, I've found they're bad news. If I saw a kickstarter coming up where the main guy specifically mentioned there would be no stretch goals, I would be far more likely to back it than one that had several stretch goals available.

For stretch goal freebies to be a positive rather than a negative, they pretty much need to be either Zombicide or Mantic, since it means that many of them are already budgeted for. In smaller campaigns, stretch goals that allow other items to be funded can be good or a bad case of over-extension - pretty much on a case-by-case basis.

The Winter War KS was expected to be horribly late, despite the BS spouted by that cheerleader CBR who only comes to Dakka to pimp things, but it's become even more of an abortion since the "casting machine" saga was finished.

Tressel wrote:As someone who is designing a kickstarter project this is a very interesting read. If it doesn't Shanghai the thread too much what are your thoughts on a limited run of product? I am doing terrain, 15mm resin buildings specifically, and I am thinking of limiting the number available to something small for the initial foray into kickstarter. Something around 100 of each of the designs. My thoughts are that it keeps it manageable both in production and shipping times. If successful then I can look at expanding it in a second kickstarter.

You should take a look at the Kickstarters run by Ramshackle Games. They were for very specific products and while the product was added to the webstore at the end of the campaign, there's only so much casting time in the day and their stuff is hand cast, so the Kickstarter was, in a lot of ways, a limited run with the potential to sell more after.

Ramshackle has an extensive catalogue that could have been leveraged to make an even bigger kickstarter end result, but that was intentionally avoided in order to not stress production capabilities to the breaking point.The end result was a adequately funded and quickly fulfilled project, with another heading for the same result.

If you're outsourcing the casting, just round up the number you need and have some left over to sell afterwards. So then it is both a limited run and bringing a product to the market that otherwise wouldn't make it. There's a very active 15mm sci-fi Facebook group you need to be part of as well (in case you didn't think to look there).

AlexHolker wouldn't a limited run with fast delivery times on product be better than an unlimited run that you may not get for 6 months? I know personally as an investor I would not want to have to wait.

Tressel wrote:
AlexHolker wouldn't a limited run with fast delivery times on product be better than an unlimited run that you may not get for 6 months? I know personally as an investor I would not want to have to wait.

No. If you wanted to offer only a limited number of pre-orders so you could guarantee quick fulfillment that could be a good idea, but I want the product to still be in production once that is done.

Don't get me wrong. I plan to continue to produce it after the initial run but I will not be using kickstarter to do the future runs. All of the profits from this run will go into building an inventory up for future sales.

 edlowe wrote:
Thought I'd start this thread due to the ammount of kickstarters recently that have come under more intense scrutiny from the comunity as a whole.

Whether it be scale, material or just full transparency alot of potential backers are asking more questions before they part with their cash, which imho is only a good thing.

The question is what do you need to hear from a ks before you pledge, do such things as mentioned above really affect your pledging or like me do you sometimes get 'shiny eye syndrome' and pledge with a lot of faith?

Basically what gets you to pledge and what stops you? Do you think that were holding companies to a higher standard than a year ago?

I've been burned more then satisfied with the new sham way of doing business that is KS.

I've backed my fair share, and am holding until at least some of them deliver. I received a good bit, but the ones that I have actually got my stuff from have really been a pain in the ass.

BEST figures that I've ever received bar none, and can always be counted on for their projects- Stonehaven miniatures.

http://stonehavenminiatures.webstorepowered.com/

Absolutely professional in every project they have done.


Some of the projects I've backed, I wish after the fact that I would have put the cash to some of the projects, such as the one from Cyp, that I had to honestly had to back out of and could not get back into. Most of the projects that I am now in wait of are major hitters, such as Kingdom Death, AVP, etc. Hard core board games that I honestly love now as much as when I backed them.

Others, I've honestly lost hope on and if something comes, ... great.

Anymore it really needs to knock my socks off and be something cool that I really want in on. KS is the wrong thing for some of these clownasses to use, and still others use it as a PRE ORDER PLATFORM to their own peril. They can't handle the volume, they have excuse after excuse about transportation. they use china over their local manufacturing, thereby increasing the leigth of time the project honestly really needs. Still others are outright liars and cheats.

I still get E mail entertainment from this particular ass.

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2063410154/axes-and-anvils?ref=nav_search

Still waiting on stuff from Mongoose.... surprise.

Still waiting on Wyrd for a project that they used the funds to foot other bills with and write even more checks their mouths can't cash.

We won't even get into the hot mess garbage that these one hit wonders use for figures that is PVC soft plastic.

So yeah. basically, KS is crap to me. I won't look at it in the same light I did a year or so ago.

Delays and the crappy communication, as well as just being treated like a shill were the thing that put me off.

Full two years going on three is unsatisfactory for a project. At that point, refunds are in order.

We won't even talk about Kickstarters complete lack of accountability and so called "Projects" that do not have to do anything but use Kickstarter as their own private cash cow, and the professional Kickstarter funding shills that use it as a fundraiser for their own private fund source.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
I hate stretch goals.

thank goodness, I was worried I'd be the only one on that line of thinking.

What's your reasoning for it? I've heard a lot of people hate stretch goals because if it was meant to be funded, it should be available for funding day one. Yet instead they end up held behind a pay wall that's completely pointless since a few guys could pledge really high then drop them down later after the goal was unlocked.

I'm not a big fan of them when they have done as much damage as they have done to projects.

It complicates the project, and adds additional stress to an already ambitious production plan from people who have no idea on what they are initiating. They get caught up in their own hype, and then reality sets in. Then production, then the real world.

If anything to my issue has been the biggest turn off of KS it is because of the producers getting caught up in the "what are we going to pull out of our hat next, Bullwinkle?" that gets a project into so much trouble with the "sorry backers for the delay, its because we have to add all the shinies to your orders that we're 2 years behind schedules."

Dumb stretch goals.

Tressel wrote:
Don't get me wrong. I plan to continue to produce it after the initial run but I will not be using kickstarter to do the future runs. All of the profits from this run will go into building an inventory up for future sales.

Best not to call it a limited run then. All it does is make people think "what if I get this, really like it and decide I want more, but I can't get more?"

Grot 6, you express my thoughts, but perhaps a bit more bluntly.

The idea that there is "accountability" on kickstarter is adorable. There is none. The dance to get you to contribute just has to be a bit more elaborate, perhaps, but not really. And that is a problem, too: more people have been burned, so more are fighting the last war, but missing the fundamental issues.

Once your funds are pulled, all accountability ceases fully and completely. That is the problem.

Project creators have all money from backers from the start, with ZERO actual qualified review of the ability to fulfill the promises. People still do think that projects are vetted in some way. Not us of course. We're all too smart for that. But really. All our "questions" are nothing. We can't pull books, quotes, contracts. We can't require a business plan. There is a reason these things are in place for conventional lending. Do I think that institutional/conventional lending has become too conservative? Yes. But the basic fundamental premises are sound. You want my money? Show me why you deserve it.

But really, my major problem is that all the power lies with the creator once funds transfer, with no viable recourse for backers for failure to fulfill, whether at all or by missing quality or other intangible promises. Ref: The Doom that came to Atlantic City, Sedition Wars

There is zero, ZERO practical or actual repercussions for walking away with pledge dollars. In fact, per kickstarter rules, all you have to do is check in every once in while and say, "working on it!" Ref: Wyrd Through the Breach

Finally, most frustrating of all? Unfulfilled kickstarters seem to not have a whole lot of impact on the same actors going back for more money. Ref: SPM/ND

So, to me, the problem is that Kickstarter is the "open market" but without the negative consequences on bad actors necessary to prevent breaking the system. It operates on rainbows and unicorns.

That all said, I still do back kickstarters. Occasionally. And no more than I'm willing to throw away on a gamble... because kickstarter actually has fewer rules than the lottery, or casinos. It's more like the dude on the corner with the shells next to the legit struggling artist, and no, you can't just tell who is who by watching their spiel.

The only kickstarters I back are those for single products or small product lines. None of this combined rules and miniatures or the launching of a whole new game and company stuff.

Mechafront because I already do both 15mm and 6mm sci-fi.

Ramshackle Games is another great example with two Kickstarters for small product lines:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/179741323/brothers-of-iron
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/179741323/battle-dog-and-pug

Anvil Industries and their Afterlife Kickstarter:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1637892615/afterlife-the-narrative-wargame-project

Small runs of a limited number of products by people with passion and no grandeur about being some million dollar plus business overnight. The by-gamers-for-gamers type projects by people who already have the demonstrated skills in getting things out.

If you want to pledge kickstarters where you will reliably get your stuff in a timely fashion, stick to these kinds of projects.

So it sounds like there are really two main camps on what people are looking for. One that wants the extras (discounts, stretch goals, etc) and one that is opposed to those things and are looking for stability and a reliable service. Is there any one thing that will bridge the gap and bring both camps on board and donate for a project?

Why bridge? The big hyped projects get all the sucker's money already. It's drying up as suckers learn not be suckers , but there's still enough for those type of projects. The smaller and more reliable producers don't need the volume and in many ways are not prepared for it.

If I'm one guy with a workshop in my garage and I'm making moulds and casting in resin as each order comes in, what am I supposed to do with a hundred thousand in orders? Now I need to get into out sourcing and managing an unplanned expansion. I may end up in the awkward position of a part time endeavor requiring full time hours to fulfill.

I don't think we need every Kickstarter get hundreds of thousands or even multiple millions of dollars. I think a company getting ten, thirty or fifty grand and getting a new product line out to a few hundred people is just fine.

I agree and that is my greatest fear that if I did an open ended kickstarter is what happens if thousands of people like what I am offering? I know I can't handle that kind of volume. That is why I was wanting to limit the total number of pieces that are available to investors.

I am the exactly the one man operation you mentioned and I have no expectations of becoming the next Games Workshop. I have been doing pieces through eBay for a while now and already have rural roads, cobblestone roads, trenches, minefields, a fountain and bocage sets in 15mm completed. All of which have been self funded. This is the first project that I have not been able to do out of pocket. Hopefully if all goes well it should be launching by the fall.

I think imposing an artificial limit will likely only have a negative effect. What you can do if you really are concerned about fulfillment you can limit the number of pledges at a given delivery date and then figure out how long it would take you to make more and make another pledge at another later date. And if you really want to, a third pledge at an even later date.

Look how Reaper did it on their 2nd kickstarter:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1513061270/reaper-miniatures-bones-ii-the-return-of-mr-bones

Having some stretch goals is a good idea, but make sure their delivery date is scaled appropriately and you don't leave yourself on the hook for making multiple shipments per backer as that will kill your revenue.

Tressel wrote:
I agree and that is my greatest fear that if I did an open ended kickstarter is what happens if thousands of people like what I am offering? I know I can't handle that kind of volume. That is why I was wanting to limit the total number of pieces that are available to investors.

I am the exactly the one man operation you mentioned and I have no expectations of becoming the next Games Workshop. I have been doing pieces through eBay for a while now and already have rural roads, cobblestone roads, trenches, minefields, a fountain and bocage sets in 15mm completed. All of which have been self funded. This is the first project that I have not been able to do out of pocket. Hopefully if all goes well it should be launching by the fall.

Just be realistic and open about how much you can produce, and as said Reaper added new pledges for different release waves to make it even more obvious.
People will be happy to wait if you're up front. Even something like "I'm one-man operation so I can only deal with approx ___ pledges per week, on a first-come-first-served basis" like Ramshackle Games did (I think his were much more successful than he expected so there was a bit of a wait, but everyone knew about it).

I don't think anything has really changed for me - though I do see two different camps developing between backers.

The first is certain that KS should be a preorder system and that it should follow regular retail rules (scheduled deliveries being met, product expectations and all the rest).

The second are those who look at KS as a chance to get something that wouldn't have much possibility of ever happening getting out (start-ups, niche niche products...). They tend to expect delays and disappointments (and the occaisional failure), but are willing to risk it.

Established companies have helped the first group along a good bit by using KS as a preorder system for things which would otherwise not need any sort of crowd funding. That first group also tends to make the most noise in projects which are better suited for the second grouping (especially in the event of a project implosion...).

For new campaigns, they have plenty to look at to determine what a good campaign looks like and how to run it (Bones II has some excellent ideas within it both prior to launch, during launch and afterwards to keep communication going). There are also plenty of examples of what not to do.

About the only thing that will put me off from a KS campaign is "Limited". Preorder or pipe dream, I think it should be about getting products to market, not funding a production run. If there isn't anything that will be becoming a retail product, I don't have any interest in backing the KS project (and have passed on projects that had significant "limited" portions that I would have otherwise been interested in).

Last year was pretty expensive on the KS front for me and my crew. Between personally backing Through the Breach, Robotech and Shadows of Brimstone, it tapped a lot of funds for projects that were going to take a while. Though I didn't expect Wyrd to take over 18 months to deliver (it has become a running gag).

Palladium I expected delays from (their books are always, without fail, delayed), but had hoped that HG breathing down their necks and ND doing actual work might keep them in check. Not so much; they estimated 8 months for full completion, that has been back peddled to roughly 16 months for 1/2 delivery, and the second wave will probably add another year onto that.

FFP I have faith in, as they have actually delivered on the project they campaigned for in the past. While I wouldn't be surprised for my box to arrive in Sept rather than August, I sincerely hope they don't become a gak show like the others I mentioned.

My friends also backed Xia and C'thulhu Wars, which are both delayed, but seem to have had a greater emphasis on communicating with their backers and keeping them apprised not just that there will be delays, but why the delays are happening, and what is being done to rectify those issues.

This year, I've reigned things way in, and can't see myself dropping significant sums on any projects for the foreseeable future. $20-50 here and there, sure, but not hundreds upon hundreds as we have in the past. Hell, at a glance I've backed 6 projects this year, and only one went over $40, but that was the Dwarven Forge guys, whom delivered early on their last campaign (from my perspective at least; when a project says they'll deliver in October, I expect them to start shipping near midnight on the 31st. Actually starting in the middle of the month curries a lot more favor with me).

As for accountability itself, it's coming to a point where rather than wow'ing me with stretch goals to 'sweeten the deal', I'd rather campaigns note where at least some of those finances will be used to shore up their delivery timeframe. To improve shipping, to acquire better/extra assets that should reduce the likelihood of delays putting them back weeks and months or even years.

I'll keep backing Mantic Kickstarters, but that's about all, they're fantastic from a value for money perspective and they do deliver when they say they're going to deliver.

Sometimes theres a month delay, but thats as far as it goes.

 Sean_OBrien wrote:
I don't think anything has really changed for me - though I do see two different camps developing between backers.

The first is certain that KS should be a preorder system and that it should follow regular retail rules (scheduled deliveries being met, product expectations and all the rest).

The second are those who look at KS as a chance to get something that wouldn't have much possibility of ever happening getting out (start-ups, niche niche products...). They tend to expect delays and disappointments (and the occaisional failure), but are willing to risk it.

Established companies have helped the first group along a good bit by using KS as a preorder system for things which would otherwise not need any sort of crowd funding. That first group also tends to make the most noise in projects which are better suited for the second grouping (especially in the event of a project implosion...).

For new campaigns, they have plenty to look at to determine what a good campaign looks like and how to run it (Bones II has some excellent ideas within it both prior to launch, during launch and afterwards to keep communication going). There are also plenty of examples of what not to do.

About the only thing that will put me off from a KS campaign is "Limited". Preorder or pipe dream, I think it should be about getting products to market, not funding a production run. If there isn't anything that will be becoming a retail product, I don't have any interest in backing the KS project (and have passed on projects that had significant "limited" portions that I would have otherwise been interested in).

This... was the post I wanted to make.

I am firmly in the second group - Bones, Kings of War, and little projects like Dwarf Adventurers - where the line would either have been much, much smaller, or never exist at all.

I have not yet backed a complete failure - except for ones that never reached funding. I have never had a Kickstarter take my money, laugh wildly, and disappear.

I... think that Kickstarter is moving into the vacancy that banks and the distribution network have left as they pulled away.

Back in the eighties and nineties, there were a lot of small companies with small products - and the distributors would carry them.

The new product would use older product as collateral, and the receipts from the new product would pay off that loan - rinse and repeat.

Then the rules changed, in the US at the least.

The number of distributors dropped down to one major distributor - and they didn't bother with small releases from small companies.

The result was smaller companies not selling their stock - which meant that the banks no longer loaned them money.

Take a look at the collapse of West End Games as an example. (Also a cautionary tale as to why selling stock is a bad idea for a game company - WEG was owned by a shoe company until the bank told the shoe company to divest itself of non shoe related holdings.)

Then came the Internet - and selling from the companies' websites became an option - but the financing stream was not in place. Small companies tended to stay... small. One product at a time.

Some companies entered slowly - the Kings of War Kickstarter had a small goal, and a single stretch goal - which Mantic did not expect to reach. Instead that single stretch goal was left in the dust in a matter of days, leaving Mantic in a happy panic to get more stretch goals up.

So, I am happy that Kickstarter, Stretch Goals, and hype exist.

I think that something like this could have saved West End Games, FASA, and other one time 'big boys' in the hobby.

The Auld Grump

Being that I am working with 3 different terrain pieces do you guys think it would be best to base the project on just one building or set the donation levels around building packs? Stage 1 for building A, stage 2 you get A and B and stage 3 you get A, B and C. I'm leaning toward a single building for the initial offering.

To me, the biggest thing that determines if I pledge or not is how well the company/creator presents their vision and whether or not that vision is somewhat grounded in reality. Show me a coherent vision with at least the semblance of a workable plan and I'll consider it. Fail to convince me that you know what you're doing (e.g. - thinking any work will be done in China in February) and you start being moved down the list. Not answering basic questions, or having remarkably bad answers for those questions (e.g. - offering international shipping but having no idea how you're going to be doing it), shows me that you don't actually have your plan together and thus I'll likely skip your project. Other red flags for me would be hyperbole like "98% complete!" without being backed up by showing me 98% of your ready-to-go production masters.

As to Tressel: the biggest thing is have a solid communication plan. If you run a campaign, make time every day during it to answer questions directly either in the comments or an actual update. Work on clarity, because English can be a horribly imprecise language and you can leave statements open to interpretation without really meaning to do so . For example, in this thread we saw how "limited run" went from "fixed numbers for production" (your intention) to "no more will ever be made" (how it was read)? Things like that cause unneeded drama and drama = lost backers and customers. Be especially cautious about that with quick comments as even people who normally have their act together have been bitten by that one. It might not be "fun" to have to re-read everything thinking about how it could be mis-read, but that's similar to how "having a plan" is just part of the price of admission.

As far as scope goes, I'd stick with a single building. To my knowledge, you're not quite "established" in the broader market, though you do have a history to point to for people to examine your prior work. In those circumstances, running a small KS well will likely provide better returns for you than running a large KS badly, and will likely be better on your mental and physical health. You'll also learn a lot of the hidden lessons about a campaign on a small scale where mistakes are hopefully not quite as painful. Also, and this is likely painfully obvious but I'll say it anyway, try to choose the terrain piece that's most widely usable for your first one. Don't put out an Old West saloon, for example, over a more generically useful building.

I'd also recommend as others have said doing the wave shipping options that Reaper showed with Bones II, as that is a good way of managing expectations and production workload.

I'm not sure you need stretch goals per se, but think about having a list of optional services people can pledge for that you can reasonably provide. Not entirely sure what this list might look like, but some things that come to mind are a basic paint job offering or some sort of "premium enhancement" that you could make to the piece for those interested (stained glass windows for a church or a collection of themed stickers depicting movie bills or propaganda posters backers could attach to make the building more "lived in"). Not a lot of people may take you up on such things, which is certainly a risk, but it does allow you to have room for people to give you more than a fixed amount of money for the terrain piece.

I've only backed video game Kickstarters prior to this year. Seeing those get delayed often makes me sad, but hey, I've gotten some fun stuff out of it and all mine are still being worked on or done. So that's neat.

I missed out on Kingdom Death, but been grabbing models as I can. Lovely!

This year I backed my first two model related ones. One was Creature Caster, but since the gent has already performed as UltraForge, I can say I'm feeling confident he will deliver. It's risky and I went in for one of the big models, but I'm hoping for solid payout.

The other is Freeblades:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/dgsgames/kuzaarik-forgers-freeblades-fantasy-miniatures

I've met some of the DGS guys personally and they are the type you'd love to play D&D with all night. Fun loving, hearty laugh guys that just love games. I said I'd back their next (and now third successful) Kickstarter if it was their take on Dwarves. Their early models leave me lacking, but each release seems to be getting better and better. And the price is amazing. AND it's pewter! Win-Win! So I'll have my second faction this Fall and can start setting up demo games. I know they've already done well and work in a medium I like, so I feel like I'm safe. And if anyone wants a pure Fantasy skirmish game on the cheap, go check them out! It's pretty cool from the demos I've played!

I only do them if I can get the Early Birds, if there are no early birds left, I only invest if there are significant discounts.
Too many times I have been left waiting far longer than was planned, I would rather buy stuff which I can have shortly after paying.