A lot to consider, and even more to learn.
Of course, some of the unknowns in choosing a model to purchase (as opposed to scratch-building), occur when the manufacturer uses a modified foil (especially if they've blended that foil several times along the wing span); how they set decalage; tail moment and sizing of the tail group; etc. All of these things have a significant impact on flight characteristics, efficiency, and performance beyond simple choice of airfoil(s).
Although it may sound like I've settled on the Odyssey, this is merely because the limited data available to me (essentially, foil type and wing loading), and the price, seem suitable. Your comment that the Odyssey is not suited to a full winch launch is significant; I would prefer a model with a stronger wing, if only to eliminate any worry about overloading the wings during winch launches in gusty conditions. For this reason alone, the Odyssey may not in fact suit my needs.
It seems that a lot of highly efficient designs have evolved out of the development of a few families of thin, high-lift foils that permit extremely light-weight airframes that still have very good penetration, and thus it seems the dramatic change from polyhedral RES ships being primarily for beginners, to RES today being extremely competitive TD designs. This is a bit different from what I was used to 15 years ago. I knew that Selig (for example) was working with new foils (I even helped build wing models for his UIUC low speed airfoil wind tunnel tests), but it was all still fairly new, and mostly theoretical at the time. When I was flying, the SD 7037 was the foil of choice. It was a relatively slow foil that thermalled extremely well, but benefited from reflex and a higher wing loading than I generally see in today's designs, in order to cover ground efficiently between lift. Modern RES (and full house) designs today should easily out-climb the most efficient full house SD 7037 competition designs of 15 years ago.
So it's obvious to me that I have a lot of catching up to do in this hobby. It's for this reason that I ask for feedback from folks who have flown the models; pilots can usually provide an empirical assessment of a plane's performance far beyond simple assessments of airfoil polars and wing loading values.
So I would still be most appreciative to hear any feedback on what folks think about the thermal ships they are flying in the 2.5 to 3m range.