Well, because I'm looking out for my own local players as well, I asked about the plans to make everything available to the Warfare only crowd as well. And I got an answer I really wasn't expecting…

HERO said:

HERO said:

first let me say I agree it is frustrating to be forced to buy the Tactics Expansions in order to get the specific Hero miniature I want, trust me it frustrates me as well. The thing is though when I look at it that box is $40-45 for the one model and I get a second hero as well. I can then proceed to keep the second hero or trade/ sell it to people that are looking for it and subsidize my initial value.

Compare this to other miniatures games and in this one the heroes/ HQ choice models are the most expensive thing to get and I look at it as saying okay sure I have one poorly priced miniature or maybe 2, but the rest of them are cheap.

You use the up coming 6th ed of 40K to represent another temptation that will steal your money and as one 40K player to another I think you picked a bad example as the rule book for 40K alone is going to be in the ballpark of $80, but that's just the rule book now you need a codex so lets say the new Chaos Dex you say is coming okay there is another $35 okay now we are sitting at ~$115 just for the rules to the game and our single army. Okay so instead since your super eager to play Dust Warfare you could buy their rule book $40 and that one poorly priced box set to get your special HQ mini another $40 (or go to a Bitz site/ ebay and find on for cheaper) now you just payed $80 (equal to just the 40K rule book alone) for your army book, the core rules, the other factions rules and you bought one overly priced mini and were given another you can trade away or sell online to another Warfare player…… Like I agree with your statement it is sill to not have some of these minis available on their own or in a second Hero pack for cheaper, but its still VASTLY cheaper then other TT games out there if you want to compare it. If that's still too much for you well then their you have it. Sorry to say FFG makes TONS of different games and this means they cant always put their entire work force around fixing one issue especially when they probably have to do a lot of changes to their marketing and production lines in order to accomplish it.

That all being said yes I agree it would be awesome if they could get on top of that issue as soon as possible. I would love it as I need to get a markus myself, but I already did bu the Cerburus box for Angela and I sold the Chef mini for $15 bucks to a friend who plays Allies I kept the terrain so overall in that situation I payed $30 for a mini and an awesome pack of terrain.

blkdymnd said:

Wankers.

I am not surprised. Thankfully I've got all of them because I play Tactics.

Enough said, this game is not aimed at miniature gamers only, they want you to pay for both games anyway, doesn't matter which you want to play.

Why do you keep comparing prices to other companies and defending FFG? are you nuts? you will pay 40$ for 2 pieces of plastic? and throw away the rest because that's the only way to get it?

By the way, prices in Europe are not so cheap anymore, and rising. Now a box of 3 plastic figures cost 15 quid ( price of good metal figures), and you will pay £30 for an expansion… Thinking that I've paid £40 RRP for Claustrophobia where there is 17 hand painted minis, cards, dice, tokens, and loads of thick cardboard tiles makes me angry that I've started with Dust in first place… I am a completionist and this game is a money sink, they are making a lot of bad bussines mistakes, like operation Seelowe had cardboard buildings only to be obsolete by 3d buildings in next operation cerberus. I like Tactics though, think its a clean design.

The truth is… whatever they will do, you will buy it anyway, it is only because of that Games workshop treats their customers like that, I see that FFG is going the same direction.

I've been buying online from Amazon and saving a pretty penny

blkdymnd said:

This is just ridiculous!

I thought their partnership with GW was business only but I guess FFG is learning their attitudes as well.

Galadhir said:

That's what I was saying on the topic I've opened.

People here suffer a lot of fanboy'ness. If people want to compare prices, just compare the price of 30 miniatures bought as in FFG sales model right now and buy them in other companies sales model, even the overpriced GW.

And I don't play Tactics, never wanted to play Tactics, and I'm already regreting the fact that Andy Chambers wrote such a cool ruleset for Dust and FFG. I guess I'll have to play Dust Warfare with other models then FFG because this attitude is just lame.

HERO said:

What this guy wrote is real, folks.

Right now we have one of the best times in miniatures market. We have lots of good companies producing solid miniatures, some of them even hard plastic in the likes of GW. We have several freelancers writing rules for those companies, and good rules. We even have new companies appearing by surprise as Hawk Miniatures did with their DropZone Commander in Salute'12.
So, people here tells Dust Warfare is not about miniatures gaming but a next step in their Tactics platform… if it's that so why would they contact a guy like Andy Chambers, one of the well known names of 40K glorious days?! Yeah, right!

What this guy wrote makes perfect sense. People now have such great choices in the market. With the budget I have to spent on D:W I could simply invest it on an Infinity Warband and have some spare change to bet on a Spartan Games starter. There, I have two new games, different themes and mechanics.
He also talks about 40K 6th Edition. Well, as I want to get out of moneygrabbing policies from GW this is a fact that has a lot of impact, simply because it's a game that moves thousands. It's like Magic, we all know it sucks, we all know it's faults, but there will always be players playing it. And a game without players isn't a game anymore, it's just a cool product worthing *dust* on stores shelves!

This day is even beggining and I've read so much bad things about D:W that I'm sad about it… and I had so much hope after hearing the D6Gen podcast!

oDESGOSTO said:

Its advertising, thanks to him they had the buzz needed, and after all they took his work cut half of it out and patched whenever possible so it is inconsistient… like Frankenstein, in some areas it tries to be a wargame (like true line of sight) and in some a boardgame (no area effect artillery weapon? smoke grenades obscuring whole battlefield?). Some people like it but some doesn't, don't listen to what people say because half of them probably is being paid for what they are saying, after initial wave of reviews I start seeing not so favorable reviews start appearing, so I am putting dust on backburner, I do have quite large armies, just missing heavy walkers and light walkers, heroes and heavy commands, somehow cannot explain it to myself paying 15 quid for 3 bendy figures. But that is only my opinion and I will be probably eaten here for saying that.

They set the bait and catched possibly big enough audience, rulebook sales says it all, they even didn't predict it to be so successfull and were sold out preety quickly. I have a lot of FFG's boardgames and most of them are very good (lately I havent found any, except remakes of old boardgames), but its how they are answering to their customers hurts me most, people asked to add categories to Dust's forum, how complicated is it to get it done? Thats why I don't believe they will listen to any lamenting, and every cry out for balancing the game, or changing the rules is pointless. It is what you get and there will be no more work on this title, just look at the FAQ they released, it's all we've been talking here for a long time nothing more, and where they were not sure, they let people to decide for themselves, In a game that suposedly is developed towards turnament play ! Outrageous.

I am just waiting for a company that listens to their fan base, and Hawk wargames I believe could be that company, ONE guy sat for 16 hours a day for 2 years to sculpt those figures for Dropship commander, I've been at salute those figures looks amazing, everything is ready to produce, all factions finished, even terrain. I bet he came with better rules in his 2 years development than Andy Chambers and FFG.

Ahh…..the righteous indignation of the internet over a game that's barely a month old.

The Customer Service email says " … currently have no plans… " I seen no issues with this. I wouldn't expect FFG to be able to repackage the D:T expansion hero's into a D:W friendly box set for at least a year, and they sure aren't going to mention it if they are doing it. I would expect they will, eventually, make these figures available.

As for the constant complaining about FFG's response time, they put out a FAQ within the first month of the game's release. That FAQ covered all the issues and cleared up the reading comprehension problems some people had. Was the Close Combat answer the most ideal, no, but it set down the basic functions and says here is the best way to deal with it. Combined with the way close combat works I see no real issues other than some people overreacting.

One guy spending sixteen hours a day for two years working on a game can make a tight rule set. Is it any good? Don't know. Will it be perfect and flawless? No, nothing is. Will it make everyone happy? No, nothing does. Has the game made a profit in two years? Not if he hasn't sold anything for the game, his gamble is all in post release. Can a large company work that way? No.

I am not saying don't complain or criticize. Do it constructively, with just a little bit of thought into how a business actually runs and the time it takes to get things done.

Yeah, just like they released Battlelore after they bought it from Day's of wonder… oh and they still say they have no plans for it.

But they released Battles of westeros with battlelore name on it, how nice of them

Galadhir said:

Galadhir I am going to say this once and only once as I personally don't wish to seek another "Warfare Issues" thread situations which is how this one is looking like it is shaping up at the moment. I live in the Minnesota area, myself and my friends play very frequently in the local scene for competitive miniatures games. Several of these people do regularly well (top tables in tournaments if not overall winners) not just at the local tournament scene, but also on the national level. These people were some of the playtesters used for Dust Warfare in its development process, they played with the original rules developed by Andy Chambers and delivered to FFG. I trust these people as they know wargaming and they have told me how broken the original ruleset was. Sadly a lot had to be reworked to make it a clean system they called Alessio Cavatore (maybe you have noticed his name their under the editing section of the book). He worked with their in house developers and play testers to develop a cleaner game better working game overall.

Now that being said I have nothing bad to say about Mr. Chambers he is an excellent game designer, but no game designer on their own can develop a perfect product. It requires an editing team and other developers working together to make something truly worthy of taking on the big dogs in the wargaming market. The people I know who playtested the game have informed me that the new rules are indeed MUCH better overall than when they first started playtesting Andy Chambers original work. You have not seen the game he designed it was broken mechanically. 9 times out of 10 the person who won initiative in the original game won overall. So please take this into consideration I recognize you are clearly an Andy Chambers fan its okay to enjoy his work he did a significant part of this game, but his work alone is not all holy and unbroken, this is why TEAMS not individuals develop games.

Be aware that you are having a "Grass is always greener" to this game. You don't know the product that was you only seethe product that is and you should not assume they destroyed it just because it changed.

Well said, Andy Chambers is one of my fav game designers, but Starship Troopers was horrible and unbalanced. As said, it does take a group effort and as dismayed as I was by the bluntness of the response by FFG on the heroes, Warfare is a top notch design after the many games I've played of it so far compared to the many games I've tried and played the last 10-15 years

I think you are mistaken Denied, actualy I am not a fan of Andy Chambers, I couldn't care less about him I am a fan of Dust. I said they used him as a bait to draw people who liked him and it worked, and it seems their target was 40k crowd in that matter. Honestly I can't believe he broke this game like this and I would be perfectly fine if Mr. Cavatore had more time to perfect the rules. I still hope they will, but I think they will stick to what they've got at the moment. I am thankfull to everybody involved in the designing proces to make it "playable", but I am not impressed.

FFG claim to be a leader in boardgames, time to act like one, rulebook where editing and proofreading and probably playtesting is a issue doesn't impress me anymore, If you defend this stance, you are responsible for how they act. Dust Warfare could be so much better.

Galadhir said:

Don't see this as a personal attack when I say it, but EVERYONE thinks they could make a game better. The more complex a system is the harder it is to keep balanced. In a War simulation game there are many MANY variables that need to be weighed an measured against one another and its tough to get anything truly "Perfect". This is why game companies keep coming out with new editions of their games attempting to adjust and try out new rules sets.

Additionally no matter how good your play testers are or how good your developers are at foreseeing issues they will never catch all of them. I like to think of the public as a giant super computer because in a way we are. Using the internet gamers are able to work through complex systems like this with remarkable success at finding loop holes and weaknesses that were easily missed on the development level. This is why things like FAQ's and Erratas are commonly used by miniatures games. I personally think that when compared to the competitions this game ranks in the top tier of well designed wargames with mechanics that are both unique and complex while at the same time being simple to learn and intuitive on various levels.

That being said is this game perfect? No, but no game is and that's my point. When compared to the competition this game system shines in a way that others have not. I think there is room for growth and development, but I am VERY pleased with the product as it stands. I also think for a company that does not specialize in miniatures games this is a top notch first attempt and I look forward to seeing what they do in the future and if they continue to develop their miniatures department.

In my opinion the Wargaming community has grow stale on games like Warhammer Fantasy and 40K and the companies that produce these games have grown fat and insolent of their consumer base. Recently new manufactures have appeared and are producing games that will challenge the reigning king that is Games Workshop and healthy competition will hopefully help develop a better future for all wargamers because developers will start listening to their fan bases and doing things to make their games stand apart from the competition.

Galadhir said:

****, guess liking this game makes me 'responsible'… hopefully I don't have to face a tribunal or anything since it sounds like you want FFG up for war crimes. Take a breath, it's a game, choose to spend money on it or don't. Warfare is a fantastic game even with its very minor issues of some editing

Wow this thread went off topic quick! Some heroes being in the tactics box sets is a pain - but I don't think missing an odd hero should reduce the enjoyment of the game. The heroes add a nice bit of flavour, but I don't think they make or break this game. I have the heroes from the two main starter sets, and since then I've concentrated on building up core forces of walkers and infantry for both sides.

Denied said:

Denied, sounds like you have lots of experience in tabletop gaming and you've pointed out Warhammer Fantasy and 40K (as I've mentioned 40K before too) as examples of far-from-perfect tabletop games.

But what to say about Warmachine/Hordes? And Flames of War?

I'm not a FOW player neither a FOW fan and I look at them (BattleFront) as a GW bastard son who's meaner than his parents, and some rules are, well, not so accurate as possible, but in a whole people tell me that it's a good set of rules;
and Warmachine/Hordes has a pretty set of rules that by itself don't offer much imperfection, and the team behind that system makes balanced tournament play scenarios (AKA SteamRoller) and gives FAQs and Erratas as soon as questions are raised.

So, is this game (Dust Warfare) better than Warmachine/Hordes for Tournament play? Is it worth its bucks?!

I've compared it with 40K and GW price range and such before because it's the mainstream example, but now I'll compare it with my top game and 1st choice when it's all about tabletop miniatures game.
If you prove me that this game can be better than Warmachine/Hordes, I'm sold; because any new game in the market can be better than GW ones, even the Mantic chess-variants-with-miniatures-and-dice.

Vis-a-vis WM/H, in my opinion, and only in my opinion, you're looking at a MUCH tighter rules set in WM/H than pretty much any other game out there. That being said, it's not worth much to have well-written rules and an excellent mechanical engine if you don't like the skin its wearing. I have nothing but the utmost respect for PP, their rules, and the people who work there (I've interviewed many of them, including Matt Wilson who'se always been GREAT). And there's no denying that they're top notch when it comes to organized play of a HUGE variety of types. That being said, however, I really don't enjoy games of WM/H, because of the theory used to create new units (break existing rules rather than work within them), the sheer number of synergies available now (really must know EVERYONE's pieces to be a competitive player, because they all break the rules in different ways, multiplied exponentially when units interact to break rules further), the fully you-go-I-go organization of the turn, which basically has you pummel the crap out of your opponent, and then stand back with no interaction (other than trash talking) at all while he does the same to you. Bit like Rochambeau that way . . . And finally, I REALLY never liked the caster kill element, that really relegates almost ANY mission as a secondary consideration, and makes alpha-striking the order of the day. I've never played a full-sized mini game before or since where you could very well spend more time setting up and taking down than you actually spent playing, because you lost your 'general' in turn one or two, and thus the game was over.

NONE of those things make WM/H bad games by any stretch of the imagination, just showing that even what I consider the 'best' rules set out there now for clarity and well-written rules isn't for everyone.

I VASTLY prefer Dust: Warfare, with all of its warts, because it addresses all of the above issues, AND I think it's MUCH more interesting visually. However, if the above aspects of WM/H are not problems for you, or are in fact even strengths, it's QUITE possible that Dust: Warfare isn't for you, even BEFORE you start looking for the warts to decry.

Hope that helped.

~Craig

Craig in NH said:

As a six-year WM/Hordes veteran, and a PG to boot, I think this is the most well-written succinct advice you'll get. Well done Craig!

WM/Hordes is a fantastic game, but of the several events I've won over the years, and there have been many, (my bags are running out of decorative space for medals, coins, and ribbons), I can count on one hand where the entire event required me to actually play better than all my opponents. Most of the time, I've had favorable matchups (I brought rocks, opponents brought scissors) carry me through the first few rounds, then in the closing rounds I've won initiative and set up a tabling alpha-strike which carried the day. DW scenario and terrain rules for tourneys, along with Initiative based on # of units left and command phase unit phase interaction, make it far more balanced IMO.

I would have to agree with everything Craig just said actually. I have limited experience with WM/H it is a fun game don't get me wrong at all, but it has its downsides. For me the major downsides are the models themselves. I think that when they are put together right and painted well they are true works of beauty, but the plastic they use and the casting problems they have with their production line drives me crazy. The rules overall are very well written from a game mechanics aspect, but I do prefer to have a more dynamic game experience where I feel involved in every aspect of a full game turn. With WM/H, 40K, and Fantasy I find myself getting bored during my opponents turn as they think through their moves and I am an impatient person I will admit that fully. I have found with Warfare that due to the back and forth nature of a game turn I feel far more involved even during my opponents half then I do in other games. Probably just because the game turn phases are split up into smaller junks of I do my command phase you do yours I do my activation you do yours, next turn! Instead of I do all my movement, then all my shooting, then all my attacks then you do all yours. Like if it wasn't for the fact that I worry my opponent may cheat if I am not watching over them I would leave during their turn to go get a coffee or something and ask who they killed when I got back lol.

I am not saying WM/H is by any means bad, but cost wise it is up their with GW for the models you get ( Dust is cheaper). The models you have to build are annoying as mold lines and sockets don't often line up leading to copious use of Green stuff to fix them so I can use them on the table top (Dust everything come pre assembled and ready to go little clean up and paint and you have gorgeous models on top of it). Then the mechanics of WM/H I am just not a fan of, its not broken I just prefer the way Dust works.

Dust is far from my ONLY miniatures wargame. I play 40K, I have WM/H models, but I am REALLY liking Dust overall as a nice cheap fun game to play and a **** good game for tournaments too. I don't advocate forsaking all other minis games for one, I advocate trying a fun game and seeing if you like it.

Hello and thank you for your opinions.

As you I also see some flaws in the HordesMachine system. I have to live with them, though.
As pointed out is really difficult to be "updated" in HordesMachine metagame and also difficult to predict the opponents plan w/o the full knowledge of all the rules of his/hers gaming pieces. But that's a technicality (a strong one indeed).
What I don't like in the system is the total absence of reactions out-of-turn, and the lack of response in combat. That causes situations where you have your models and in the opponents' turn you have NOT, and you didn't make a single attack with them. But this is also a technicality, and with time I've learned to live with it and play with it.
As for I-Go-You-Go, well, HordesMachine was designed 10 years ago, way before alternate activation rules were developed, tested and accepted in the gaming society. Flames of War and Warhammers (both of them) use this kind of approach.
The Caster Kill sittuation is mitigated in the Steam Roller ruleset. I know, I know, SR is Caster Killing in a disguise but I've managed some good results with my Rhulics in SR missions with Control Points that in standart Assassination game I couldn't expect to win at all.

Dust Warfare has also some broken rules like any game in the market. A good example is the one that's pertinent on the boards, using Heavy Walkers in one list against a list without them. Every Report you'll read will have "balanced" armies for the sake of the Report. But try building a list without at least 1 Heavy Walker and face a list with only 1 Heavy Walker and try to destroy it! Yep!
There are also powerhouses in this game, Grim Reapers being one of them. Give time to powergamers read and interpret this game and these kind of aspects will keep coming.

About the models in HordesMachine, I really don't know what you're talking about.
Yes, they are badly engineered, the glue-spots of the metals won't work in most miniatures, some glue-spots are really ridiculous (I have Gators!) but one thing I have to point out is their cast. Their cast is one of the most clean casts I've seen in metal miniatures (only Infinity beats them). Some infantry will have some flash, but most are simply clean. Mold lines are near invisible, and that's a pain for those guys like me that can't stand mold lines in miniatures, because it's really hard to spot and remove them. For lazy hobbyist this is just wonder because they'll ignore those thin mold lines.
As for the plastics, they're not GWish plastics but they are fine. Strong enough, won't bend/warp that easy and have great glue-spots that really work!

Now, the 'million dollar question', cheapness.
Once again you say that Dust is cheaper.
Now, let's see if it really is!

I'll use USD price tags from this retail shop: http://www.maelstromgames.co.uk
They ship free postage worldwide, and they are #1 sellers in UK (although I buy my Hordesmachine elsewhere).
I'm also not considering buying any kind of bundles or starters, and I'm just compairing models in numbers. I guess there's no need to compare full scale of both games because both games will play in the same number of miniatures (30 to 40)

Let's see…

Heroes / Warcasters

DW
Allied Hero Pack $21.58 - 3 figs

WM
pHaley $7.12 - 1 fig
Squire $8.56 - 1 fig
Journeyman Warcaster $8.56 - 1 fig
$24,24 - 3 figs, bought separately (this is for a legal gaming perspective)

an equivalent pack to the one in D:W Hero Pack would be the Cygnar Black 13th $14.32 - 3 metal figs with superior detail (than normal PP infantry miniatures)

Infantry - Light

DW
The Gunners $21.58 - 5 figs
The Gunners $21.58 - 5 figs

WM
Long Gunners $43.12 - 10 figs

Infantry - Heavy

DW
Grim Reapers $17.26 - 3 figs
Tank Busters $17.26 - 3 figs

WM
Khador Man-o-War Shocktroops $43.12 - 5 figs

Light Walkers / Warjacks

DW
Allies Light Assault Walker $28.78 - 1 fig - 2 variants

WM
Cygnar Heavy Warjack $28.72 - 1 fig - 3 variants

So, Dust Warfare is super cheap, right?!
What I see is a game in the same price point of those in the market, nothing too fancy as some folks say it is. And with the quality issue of their miniatures to take in mind, of course!

Folks, don't get me wrong here. I really want to play and like this game. What I don't like is people being total fanboys and saying marvels of this game and that it's super cheap and so and in fact IT ISN'T.
If you open your eyes and compare it with what is on the market you'll see you're buying a lesser quality product (and don't give me that crap about how miniatures resist impact and so, I want to play a tabletop game with them not bouncing them against the walls, and softer plastic = cheaper plastic, period) saving a few pounds here and spending more there.

That's my main "hate" for this game, this feels to me as much as GW games, feels like I'm buying an overpriced product. But at least, this game seems fun!

PS. Sorry for the wall of text

…You know, oDESGOSTO, I really don't understand you. Instead of wasting hours of your life talking about how much you "want to enjoy the game, but dislike the miniatures/prices", you could just try PLAYING the game. Heck, use printed out proxies for the models if you wish, but as far as I can tell, you seem to want to only argue with people and ramble about how you can't make up your mind as to whether or not you want to play the game. Just get out there and try it, man, instead of arguing with anonymous strangers in the internet!

Peace,

~Bravester

Edit: While we are at it, the prices you quoted are off. The Hero pack costs only $19.99, and if you are a smart shopper, you can find it online for $12-$15. And the Light walkers only cost $24.99, though it is easy to find 'em for $17 online. Just thought I would mention that.

My problem is not just with FFG, but with those companies which try to follow the GW modal (since it's successful). And then they actually fail, since they don't take advantage of the mistakes and lessons GW has learned over the years: Package deals, starter sets, bundling. Knocking $10 off a package deal (they could call it a platoon!) for Allies and Germans would generate a lot more sales, and encourage people to collect the game (say, a command squad, two normal 17-point squads, a walker of some sort, and a hero. Huh, I just described the base load for the original Dust Tactics set. Charge $65-70; we could sell a lot where I play - and help sell - games). And yes, I'm copying GW's battalion set-up.

Yes, the Revised Basic DT set is a wonderful deal (conservatively, at least $120 worth of product), but there are people who only want one army, and think they're being ripped off because they get stuff for a second army as well (they think the idea of having a second army is being foisted on them).

oDESGOSTO, that is some pretty flawed calculations. How about real world scenarios. I had one of our Warmachine players build a 35 point balanced list and I built a 300 point balanced Warfare list, plus what you'd need to start.

Sorscha, Destroyer, Juggernaught, 2 battle mekanik units, 2 winter guard field guns, widow makers, widow maker marksman, Joseph Gregorivich, full winterguard with command + rulebook + khador book = $301.88 full retail

The boss, Gunners w bazooka, BBQ squad, Recon Boys, Grim Reapers, Steel Rain, Hell Boys, Death Dealers, Hammers w Rhino, Blackhawk, snipers, observer squad + rulebook = $239.59 full retail

You'll probably get $30 back for the Dust stuff, because there is a revised core set bought in there and you sold off your Axis stuff to a buddy/Bartertown/eBay/etc. you also have the option of using the Pounder, Hot Dog, or Mickey instead of the Steel Rain. And you just bought this off the wall at the LGS, someone wants to play right now, so you break it out and play because it's already built and ready to go.

I just don't understand the anger here. I like the mini war gaming hobby because I get to play a fun game, build models, and paint said models. If Markus is so necessary for your army convert/proxy a 28mm monkey. FFG just started DW a month ago. Play the game, make some friends, and try to enjoy yourself. If you want, I will buy SeeLowe, send you Markus, and keep the other stuff just to see this kind of anger diffused. We get to play a neat new game! Seriously, I will buy and send you the monkey!

yakmandoo said:

You can get Mentor Freezer from AT43 online for about $10 still, actually makes a fantastic Marcus proxy!