That's not what you said.

No, they don't. But you changed the subject. And I don't have an issue with you not liking new versions of pieces.



That dosen't mean that the new pieces are "aggressively costed."




I actually agree here. The Klat is one of the 3 Vset pieces that I feel was too powerful (neither of the others had to do with cost). But that dosen't constitute a pattern of overly aggressive costing.

Really? I have yet to see an example of this pattern of increasingly aggressive costing in the Vsets.



Meaning...?



Nor did I ever say you did. Dosen't mean you can't be attacking the Vsets.




Again, let's see them. I've only seen 1 example, which means nothing.

Again I don't want to seem like I'm hating on the vset, so I will not put a list, however if you check here: http://www.bloomilk.com/Character/Ratings

You will see most (not all) of the characters with higher ratings are from the vsets - overall one could infer that vset pieces are stronger than alternatives for the cost - granted this isn't exactly 100% accurate, but it does well to illustrate the point (power creep).

I don't see you as "hating on" the Vsets. You are, however, attacking them. Dsoen't necessarily carry a connotation of irrationality, like hating does...though when you refuse to provide examples of this wave of underpriced pieces...





Irrelevant. You don't seem to understand the difference between power creep and having more competitively priced characters.

Toe-mae-toe, toe-mah-toe.

I really don't see a difference between adding more "competitively priced" pieces and a greater consistency of "aggressive costing" or "power creep" as it were. After all what are they competing with? The best of the best figures - the ones WOTC undercosted such as Rieekan plain and simple (or their own unintentionally over-powered figures, like Bastilla). It's something that is both good and bad for the game - at this point the good still outweighs the bad, but if you must, consider it a warning for the future (not an attack) that extra care really needs to be taken.

Closer to p-o-t-a-t-o, p-o-t-a-t-o-e.



You really don't see a difference between competitive level pieces and casual level pieces?



Nope. Rieekan wasn't undercosted, his effect was just too strong. They are competing with pieces like MJJ.



To quote you



Attack, warning of the perilous slope the game stands atop. I really don't care how you describe it to yourself, but it amounts to the same thing.

I was referred to as the Jedi Librarian on last week's SHNN!

I think the main thing that the graph shows is that there there were a lot of crappy filler pieces in Bounty Hunters - 31/60 pieces were rated less than 7 - while only around 10% of the CotG pieces are rated less than 7.

I jumped back in, sorry.

You are saying that there is no power creep, it is competitive growth.
My point was form the start, they are the same thing.
‘Zebra. STRIPEY HORSE!! No, Zebra.’

Now hold on before you kick off again!

Somewhere down the line ‘power creep’ has become a derogatory term; because when used you become aggressive and defensive. So I shall amalgamate it.
Power creep?!!

Competitive growth?!!

TWIN POWERS ACTIVATE,

Form of

COMPETITIVE CREEP!!!!


WOTC did show signs of getting on board with the ‘competitive creep’, when they brought out Malak, Dash, MJsky, Mouse droids, New Thrawn etc, but they were already on a slippery decline and about to go under, it was a dark day, that day.
Vsets took over and designed specifically to make better use of pieces, rather than wasted filler pieces that Wizards gave us. The game instantly changed from being a plastic crack habit, to having a more competitive slant.
This was just the game evolving.
Wizards didn’t really use any finesse when making pieces, they paid people to look at what was ‘trending’ (god, I hate that term) then go…name-abilities-cost; throw it at the wall, if it sticks, it fits.
Vsets have a voluntary team of gamers, who look at what a faction wants/needs, what the fans and themselves, want to see. Then design around that premise.
Still, there always has to be new and better pieces.
This is, from Wizards to today, the core of the game. If new pieces don’t come in, the game will plateau. The new pieces in each set, have to be ‘new’, different, either overly specialized, aggressively costed, or have something totally new to bring to the faction.
Ultimately, causing other pieces to fall by the way side is a natural evil and some pieces will become redundant because of the costing and ability spread.
I believe LB’s concern seems to be ‘over specialization’, evolutions dead end. Bastilla is the extreme example, and an easy go to, so I apologize for that, but she is a perfect example.
Aggressively costed, nice powerful abilities, all of which were absolutely necessary for the OR to be made useful, at the time without her the OR was dead in the water. Now she has to be designed around, and potentially replaced by another better piece.
To my point though, there is a spread, there is a change, and there is a creep. The graph clarifies that.

EDIT:



Just saw this corran, sorry, and thank you for understanding.

Not wasting the only time I can use "TWIN POWERS ACTIVATE" though.

ENOUGH OF THIS BALLYHOO!

When do we get to see the finished cards?