The Book of Poison Ivy (II)

[Arkham]

@Ronin , as the other tester, how do you feel?

[Lazy Orang]

Like I said, I could see 165 much better than 175 - hell, I could even see an argument for 155 so that she's more draftable outside ideal conditions, basically going on the same logic that resulted in Iceman's cost. 175 feels a bit high, though.
Notably, 165 makes her cost identical to Ivy vI's, I believe - not sure how we feel about that.

[Ronin]

She was technically 1-2 in my tests, but she had a huge performance in one of those losses. Killed Professor X with autowounds, turned a blowout into a narrow loss. I'd be reluctant to go down to 165 here.

[Tornado]

Did not consider Ivy(I) as 165, probably best to go different here at 175.

[Lazy Orang]

Originally Posted by Tornado

Did not consider Ivy(I) as 165, probably best to go different here at 175.

I wouldn't agree with that, honestly. If she's overcosted at 175, she's overcosted 175.

[Yodaking]

I'd slow down a bit on the drop 20 points in cost idea. I would need more testing to convince me of that big a swing after looking at Tornados last tests.

I do agree that Ivy I's price should have no bearing on Ivy II's price. While it would be nice if they were priced differently for more army building options, if she is testing at 165 she should be 165.

[Arkham]

I definitely don't think 155 is reasonable here. It's between 165-175 IMO, I wouldn't go any lower than that, and I'd be resistant to going any higher. I think 175 is reasonable, and even if you analyze your results Lazy, 2 losses aside, her actual performance was reasonable. Game 1 she caused 4 wounds, healed 4 wounds, added additional movement and defense to a couple figures. Game 2 she caused 5 wounds, healed 1 wound, and gave movement and defense to several figures.

For a breakdown of W-L points wise:

Game 1: 185
Game 2: 185
Game 3: 185
Game 4: 180
Game 5: 190
Game 6: 190
Game 7: 185
Game 8: 160
Game 9: 170
Game 10: 175
Game 11: 185
Game 12: 185
Game 13: 185
Game 14: 175
Game 15: 190

160: 1-0
170: 0-1
175: 1-1
180: 0-1
185: 3-4
190: 1-2

With all that said...if you analyze what she actually offered in those games, she was reasonable at 175, and picking her with an all sand map with no trees/jungle wouldn't even be wise form the get go. So 175 works for me, and when we do the Vines they'll offer her a little bit more options and usefulness in her ideal situations, as well as less than ideal situations.

I'm going to settle at 175, because I'm confident 165-175 is where she falls in, and 10 points isn't a big difference, especially if we're trying to play it safe. I propose a vote to move to Final Editing at 175.
@Yodaking - Yea
@Viegon - Yea
@Tornado - Yea
@johnny139
@TrollBrute - Yea
@japes
@Zettian Juggernaut - Abstain

[TrollBrute]

Yea Even though the win/loss isn't outstanding, I think she showed at least 175 in testing.

[Yodaking]

yea

[Tornado]

Yea

[Viegon]

Yea

[japes]

I think 175 is right here. You can't go off overall record LO since the losses were at above 175.

Yea