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.

I’d just like to see availability of their product again.
Nothing new has been available at any of my usual places of purchase, so even if there was a MK4, it would be nigh impossible to find up here.
The shipping to anywhere but in the US being reasonable has stifled PPs ability to capture very much interest outside the US market these days, what with almost their entire product line only being available direct.
I have yet to see anything besides the two initial starters for MonPoc, and have yet to see anything at all up here with regard to Riot Quest.

So before there is even a MK4, PP needs to do something about their availability, or at the least provide better and cheaper shipping options. Because right now I have no desire to seek out anything from them due to the scarcity of the product.
And I’m only looking to play stuff with my kid, and it’s not like I need a local meta or anything - just product availability without astronomical shipping costs. NeoMechanica was the same (super costly for both the pledges and shipping), which put me off even buying a single model to paint.

Nurglitch wrote:Not to thread-jack, but it occurred to me that campaign rewards would be better in wargames in general if they were generated by actions that were at a tangent to actions that help win individual games.

Not sure how easy it would be to get competitive players to actually play campaigns. Seems like PUGs and tournaments against strangers are their preferred mode of play (they seem to always swipe right), and the perceived imbalances that come from campaign upgrades tickle them harshly in the "unfair" spot. Not to mention that they are deeply distrustful of each other and believe that their opponents could just lie about their upgrades... which might be justified, because competitive players are more likely to cheat at the game than someone just having fun with his friends.

LunarSol wrote:I'm actually really interested in seeing how the Monsterpocalypse campaign set turns out. Tying the campaign to base building seems like it works surprisingly well in a system that doesn't seem like it would be an obvious fit for a campaign.

I've got it on order, but Miniature Market is taking its damn sweet time getting it. PP did recently do a blog on it. It does seem like each player in the campaign will need their own Smashville box (at the very least) to play.

LunarSol wrote:I had to defend a point for 4 turns, getting D6 points -1 for each enemy model on the point, winning if I got at least 12. I tabled my opponent by the end of turn 3 without him getting a single model to the objective, and rolled 3, 3, 4, 1 at the end of my turns. Again, I'm not really complaining; my opponent actually conceded when he was out of models, but I wanted to roll it out when I realized I could still lose and had a good laugh at that single pip. I had a lot of fun with the game and its quick and easy to just play again, but it was also jarring to realize that my decision making had zero affect on the outcome.

Well, no, your decisions made a huge difference to the outcome. If your opponent had defeated more of your units or was better about getting his units near the target, you would've had a much larger chance of losing. For instance, you could've won on the second turn with a roll of two sixes, but if your opponent had gotten at least one model in range, you had to play at least three turns, minimum. If you had rolled a 1 early on, your opponent might've decided that he could be more careful in his attack and stayed back, attacking from a distance or hoping for a better initiative roll next turn.

Yeah, you still lost, even though you feel like you played the best you could've, but it was unlikely (just like it is unlikely that you win on round two with two sixes). It's like a dice roll where you have to roll a 2+ on a twenty sided die. How you play changes that modifier (play poorly, and you might need to roll a 14+), but it doesn't change that it is a dice roll and you might roll a 1. Saying you had zero effect on the outcome is incorrect.

 Sqorgar wrote:

LunarSol wrote:I had to defend a point for 4 turns, getting D6 points -1 for each enemy model on the point, winning if I got at least 12. I tabled my opponent by the end of turn 3 without him getting a single model to the objective, and rolled 3, 3, 4, 1 at the end of my turns. Again, I'm not really complaining; my opponent actually conceded when he was out of models, but I wanted to roll it out when I realized I could still lose and had a good laugh at that single pip. I had a lot of fun with the game and its quick and easy to just play again, but it was also jarring to realize that my decision making had zero affect on the outcome.

Well, no, your decisions made a huge difference to the outcome. If your opponent had defeated more of your units or was better about getting his units near the target, you would've had a much larger chance of losing. For instance, you could've won on the second turn with a roll of two sixes, but if your opponent had gotten at least one model in range, you had to play at least three turns, minimum. If you had rolled a 1 early on, your opponent might've decided that he could be more careful in his attack and stayed back, attacking from a distance or hoping for a better initiative roll next turn.

Yeah, you still lost, even though you feel like you played the best you could've, but it was unlikely (just like it is unlikely that you win on round two with two sixes). It's like a dice roll where you have to roll a 2+ on a twenty sided die. How you play changes that modifier (play poorly, and you might need to roll a 14+), but it doesn't change that it is a dice roll and you might roll a 1. Saying you had zero effect on the outcome is incorrect.

~24% chance of rolling 11 or less on 4d6. Nearly a quarter of games are literally unwinnable for the defender. The point stands that no decision I made could have resulted in victory nor should knowing how well you're doing affect how aggressively you defend the objective.

 LunarSol wrote:
~24% chance of rolling 11 or less on 4d6. Nearly a quarter of games are literally unwinnable for the defender. The point stands that no decision I made could have resulted in victory nor should knowing how well you're doing affect how aggressively you defend the objective.

I found the victory card, and you have to exceed 12, so you actually have a 34% chance of losing. So you have a 66% of winning in the 4th round, and a 26% chance of winning in the 3rd round, and you cannot win in the first or second round, period - assuming the attacking player fails to lower it further.

But you also have to understand that this number changes after you roll the first die. If you roll a 6 the first round, there's a 91% chance you'll win (through the ritual rolls), while if you roll a 1, there's only a 37% chance you'll win. (6=91%, 5=84%, 4=74%, 3=63%, 2=50%, 1=37% - so you have a 66% chance that your chance to win will go up or stay roughly the same in the second round). Rolling two 6s means you can't lose, two 3s means you are at 58%, and two 1s puts you at an 8% chance of winning. But if you roll a 1 and a 6, you are back up to 72% chance of victory. This will inform what you need to do in round 3.

Long story short, what is rolled will change the direction of the game. If it immediately becomes unlikely that the defender will get the glory points for the win, it is more prudent to go on the offense and attempt to take down the enemy leader or a third/half of the enemy's forces. He might be too focused on the target to realize what you are doing (he's gonna focus on getting 3 people really close to you), and not only can you get some glory points from this, you can force injury rolls for your opponent, possibly causing them to lose rerolls and artifacts. Meanwhile, defender rolls a 5-6 on that first roll and the attacker needs to go offensive because he's now incredibly likely to lose if he doesn't.

Basically, the game doesn't truly start until the second round, and while you may have to be content with secondary objectives over winning, you don't have to walk away empty handed. Also worth pointing out that this scenario is not a matched play one, so it was already deemed an "unfair" scenario.

We're pretty massively off topic here, particularly since the original point was that being unable to win is less of a problem for a game as short and simple as Warcry compared to a similar situation in a game as long and involved as Warmachine.

That said, 34% is pretty extreme, particularly since there's no way to improve it. Fine I guess in the context of a campaign, but I think even that would be pretty harsh if the game was a 2 hour plus affair. Personally, I'm of the mindset that reacts to failure with a need to try again. Being able to do so immediately is very different from waiting a week for a shot at redemption.

I just want to say that I bought a couple Warmachine starter sets (Skorne, Cryx) from PP's webstore sale (they even came with nifty faction pins). I'm not looking forward to putting together those crappy plastic models, but I know that if I take care and then prime them matte, they'll lose that cheap "I found this in a box of cereal" look. I haven't decided to full go back to the game (and thus paint everything in these boxes), so I'm thinking of spraying them in similar colors to the plastic, keeping that faction color thing it has going on.

Since I've never done Mk3, I really want to get the full new player experience, so I've taken the time to look through the stuff I just ignored last time. The basic training book is interesting in that it doesn't actually use any models - you cut out cards and tokens from the book and go through a dozen missions intended to walk you through the most basic elements using fake model profiles and the like. On one hand, this means you can do those missions without building any models first, but the other, it is much harder to get excited. Even with the aim of getting the full new player experience, I'm having trouble mustering up the energy to go through the basic training.

I've never been a fan of tutorials that act like you've never heard of a miniature game before. Fallout Wasteland Warfare had a similar tutorial approach of "this is how you measure walking, here's a mission to walk from point A to point B". Including the full rulebook helps, but there's such a huge gulf between a 100 page rulebook and a "here's two pages describing what an inch is". As far as starter sets go, Infinity is still the gold standard. You are playing a real game after 3 pages of rules, albeit a very abbreviated one. Each scenario afterwards adds a new model and new rules, so it always feels like the game is growing with you, rather than patronizing you. It'd be better if Infinity included a full rulebook, but that might be even more terrifying than Warmachine's.

On the bright side, I was surprised to find that the paper maps that came with the boxes had different maps on them. Since neither of them look like the map I previously got, there are at least three different maps in the boxes. One has a hill and the other has a stone head in the dirt. I think the map I had previously only had some trees and crater. It's a nice touch. So is including stacking focus tokens. There's also some sort of spell token that I guess you are supposed to write on, but seem too dark to be able to see anything. The spell tokens I used in Mk2 were not nearly as dark.

My main worry right now is how outdated this is. I know they released an updated rulebook with Oblivion. I'm not sure how much I'll have to relearn to get up to date on the game. Similarly, I'm sure the cards included in the boxes are out of date, and I'll need to print new ones from PP's page. I can't decide whether I should go with the built in rulebooks and cards or update now...

Yeah, all those barriers to entry (needing to print cards or pay for the app, not having an updated physical rulebook, etc) are big problems.

Not to mention the power creep... in updating my list recently I realized it'd almost always be way better to take the various types of new Archons, instead of whatever other support I was considering. This is obviously true in many games, but really strikingly apparent with the latest wave of warmahordes releases...

 Sqorgar wrote:

My main worry right now is how outdated this is. I know they released an updated rulebook with Oblivion. I'm not sure how much I'll have to relearn to get up to date on the game. Similarly, I'm sure the cards included in the boxes are out of date, and I'll need to print new ones from PP's page. I can't decide whether I should go with the built in rulebooks and cards or update now...

I don't think anything too significant has changed in the rulebook. The Oblivion update had more to do with theme forces and didn't change much in the actual rules. The big one off the top of my head is that you can't target friendly models with power attacks anymore.

The battlebox models haven't changed very intentionally as far as I'm aware. A few of them had their points redone, but it was always in tandem with other models in the box to ensure things added up to 0 total. I don't think any of them have had actual rules changes.

I've got Oblivion coming sometime this week (depending on the mail fairies). I'm going to just wait and use that rulebook. It might not be too different, but it feels like a waste to learn a bunch of minutiae only to immediately have to unlearn it.

In general, I just think that maybe it is time for new battlegroup boxes. The plastic models are pretty bad and could use an update, the rulebook is out of date, the cards are out of date - I think they were decent starter sets for Mk3, but Mk3 kind of left them behind. Doesn't seem like PP is reprinting them either, as the Circle battlegroup is extremely difficult to find and even PP's own webstore only had a few of the possible boxes.

Speaking of Circle, I'm probably most interested in doing Circle. Never played them before, but both the constructs and the Tharn are appealing to me - unfortunately, they don't overlap in themes (not that it would stop me). Even worse, the Circle battlegroup has neither barbarians nor golems. I heard someone suggest an alternate battlegroup with Baldur1, Wold Guardian, and Woldwarden - any opinions on this?

 Sqorgar wrote:
I've got Oblivion coming sometime this week (depending on the mail fairies). I'm going to just wait and use that rulebook. It might not be too different, but it feels like a waste to learn a bunch of minutiae only to immediately have to unlearn it.

In general, I just think that maybe it is time for new battlegroup boxes. The plastic models are pretty bad and could use an update, the rulebook is out of date, the cards are out of date - I think they were decent starter sets for Mk3, but Mk3 kind of left them behind. Doesn't seem like PP is reprinting them either, as the Circle battlegroup is extremely difficult to find and even PP's own webstore only had a few of the possible boxes.

Speaking of Circle, I'm probably most interested in doing Circle. Never played them before, but both the constructs and the Tharn are appealing to me - unfortunately, they don't overlap in themes (not that it would stop me). Even worse, the Circle battlegroup has neither barbarians nor golems. I heard someone suggest an alternate battlegroup with Baldur1, Wold Guardian, and Woldwarden - any opinions on this?

They are not re-printing any cards because they are all digital now

https://cards.privateerpress.com/

 aphyon wrote:

They are not re-printing any cards because they are all digital now

https://cards.privateerpress.com/

Oh, that might have been too ambiguous. I know the cards are digital now. I meant that they aren't reprinting (restocking?) the battlegroup boxes as a whole.

I think they ended their partnership with the plastic manufacturers and are likely looking into what to do next. My gut says that Warmachine is a bit on the backburner while they set up logistics for a relaunch or something similar.

They are pushing toward their new sci-fi game.

I think Warmachine needs to perhaps be reborn as less of a skirmish and more ofa war game coupled to a reduction of model boxes perhaps with cheaper combined sets of models like thecurrent theme forces they do; but with high grade plastic to lower the cost to the customer.

Their biggest issue is likely either finding a reliable plastic caster or trying to afford the machines themselves (which might be near impossible for them at present).


Personally I hope that PP rises from the ashes once again - they've got so much potential I'd hat for them to vanish

LunarSol wrote:I think they ended their partnership with the plastic manufacturers and are likely looking into what to do next. My gut says that Warmachine is a bit on the backburner while they set up logistics for a relaunch or something similar.

I was watching an interview with Hungerford about Warcaster, and he was talking how the design team works on all the different games, but individual members take lead on individual ones. Anyway, he said that he had become lead on Warmachine fairly recently and that the Warmachine stuff planned for the end of 2020 was the first batch of stuff with him as lead. Warmachine is definitely on the back burner because they are launching Warcaster (which is also why we won't see a Mk4 anytime soon), but it could also have something to do with a change in leadership.

Overread wrote:I think Warmachine needs to perhaps be reborn as less of a skirmish and more ofa war game coupled to a reduction of model boxes perhaps with cheaper combined sets of models like thecurrent theme forces they do; but with high grade plastic to lower the cost to the customer.

Honestly, they don't really need to make Warmachine into that - the models are the expensive part, so they only really need to provide an alternate ruleset (similar to Kill Team and 40k). They did make a half assed effort with Company of Iron, but they made the mistake of thinking that people would want to play a version of Warmachine without warcasters or warjacks. I think they even charged for cards in WarRoom, because third tier games with minimal support definitely do better when you nickel and dime.

What they need is a Kill Team which is just warcasters and warjacks. But at the skirmish level, you need more granular terrain rules and generally need to avoid the combo-heavy gameplay that Warmachine thrives on. But this should be a separate thing from Warmachine, mainly because I love the colossal models and they would have no place in a skirmish game.

Personally I hope that PP rises from the ashes once again - they've got so much potential I'd hat for them to vanish

I think PP spread themselves too thin with their board game initiative (the bodgers games, level 7, undercity). They seem to do better with fully supported lifestyle games. I'm not sure if Riot Quest is a good game or not yet (PP's store hasn't shipped my starter yet, likely because I also ordered the neoprene mat) - but the support it is getting has convinced me to give it a try. And Monsterpocalypse might be my favorite miniature game. Warmachine might not be as popular as it used to be, but I think I'm happier with PP now than I was a few years ago.

I really hope Warcaster does well - budget reasons meant I had to pull out of the KS (that and I couldn't decide on a faction); I really hope it keeps doing well and hopefully goes from strength to strength. It's an intresting way to market the game.

I do wonder if PP will eventually do the KS fundraisers in-house so that they don't lose a portion to KS; but then again sometimes having a website with all the back-end stuff setup in advance for you is actually a big saving rather than trying to setup that whole system yourself. Plus being on KS is a big marketing boon and makes it mcuh easier to get people on board.

They did make a half assed effort with Company of Iron, but they made the mistake of thinking that people would want to play a version of Warmachine without warcasters or warjacks

I love playing a full version of warmachine at 50 points without warcasters and only jacks run by jack marshals in the vain of company of iron. it makes it a full table army game not centered around one figure. it is how most battles in the universe would happen since warcasters are incredibly rare.

 Sqorgar wrote:
I think PP spread themselves too thin with their board game initiative (the bodgers games, level 7, undercity). They seem to do better with fully supported lifestyle games. I'm not sure if Riot Quest is a good game or not yet (PP's store hasn't shipped my starter yet, likely because I also ordered the neoprene mat) - but the support it is getting has convinced me to give it a try. And Monsterpocalypse might be my favorite miniature game. Warmachine might not be as popular as it used to be, but I think I'm happier with PP now than I was a few years ago.

A lot of their side projects are just ways to deal with creative burnout. Minicrate essentially exists for the same reason. Creative types are hard to keep if you don't let them try out their own ideas from time to time, which is why you often see people leave to design for other games.

EDIT: On the subject of Riot Quest, I think its a solid, fun chaotic game. It definitely requires a more reactive mindset as there are a lot of elements out of your control, but the decisions you make during your turn are interesting enough to feel like they matter. My one big gripe is that the base game mat is a little too spread out and combined with randomized spawning, creates situations where a character comes into play away from anything worthwhile and gets kind of stuck there as moving costs resources. I'd really like to play it on some of the new maps or even the base one with things brought a little closer to the center.

 LunarSol wrote:
A lot of their side projects are just ways to deal with creative burnout. Minicrate essentially exists for the same reason. Creative types are hard to keep if you don't let them try out their own ideas from time to time, which is why you often see people leave to design for other games.

Not sure that makes sense as a company imperative though. I mean, it takes resources to make these games, ship them, and sell them. And of the ones I've played, they don't really stack up to the competition on the market (I've heard good things about Level 7 though). I mean, High Command was just kind of there, battling in the deck building genre which is saturated as hell and filled with some big name, high rated games. It's possible that they didn't want to fill their miniature pipeline with side projects and focus on Warmachine, but PP seems to do a lot better in the miniature field than the board game one (even when they consider Riot Quest and MonPoc to be board games).

EDIT: On the subject of Riot Quest, I think its a solid, fun chaotic game. It definitely requires a more reactive mindset as there are a lot of elements out of your control, but the decisions you make during your turn are interesting enough to feel like they matter. My one big gripe is that the base game mat is a little too spread out and combined with randomized spawning, creates situations where a character comes into play away from anything worthwhile and gets kind of stuck there as moving costs resources. I'd really like to play it on some of the new maps or even the base one with things brought a little closer to the center.

The maps are what initially drew me to Riot Quest. Actually, I saw the starter map and thought it was kind of boring - made me think of Aristeia's open, generic arenas. Seeing the Hullgrinder map, I was kind of blown away how cool it looked. The Temple of Concord map is almost as cool, and with new gimmicks as well. I'm kind of reminded of Super Bomberman.

I really hope the Monsterpocalypse maps start approaching the level of Riot Quest's, though I guess MonPoc really makes the player-brought buildings into the stars of the map.

Paper mats - a sign in this day and age that you’re too cheap to invest in a ‘real’ board for your game(s).
That’s what really bothers me the most about their side games - the paper mats. It’s essential for play, and ends up being unfolded, transported, and refolded a lot. And paper does not hold up to repeated use.

Sure they have the neoprene mats, but why a real game board isn’t included in Riot Quest or MonPoc, especially at the price point they’re at, to me is just cheapening your product.

 Ghool wrote:
Paper mats - a sign in this day and age that you’re too cheap to invest in a ‘real’ board for your game(s).
That’s what really bothers me the most about their side games - the paper mats. It’s essential for play, and ends up being unfolded, transported, and refolded a lot. And paper does not hold up to repeated use.

Sure they have the neoprene mats, but why a real game board isn’t included in Riot Quest or MonPoc, especially at the price point they’re at, to me is just cheapening your product.

I'm sure there are many logistical issues at play here. For one, I don't think you can create a $40 starter set with $70 worth of content (they really are good deals at the price point they're at) and still put in an expensive $15-$20 board. The maps for these games are quite large, and the boxes quite small. They'd have to significantly increase the size and weight of the box (which means more costs in storage and shipping) - it's not like Warhammer Underworlds where it is two tiny boards. And a starter set isn't intended to be the fully pimped out game experience - MonPoc includes a bunch of cardboard apartment buildings too. MonPoc and Riot Quest both have new maps coming out only in neoprene, with paper mats being limited to just the starter.

Ultimately, I think players have shown that they don't mind paper mats, especially when options exist to replace them with something better. Aeronautica Imperialis came with a paper mat and nobody complained. Let's see, Walking Dead: All Out War used paper mats with separate neoprene versions. Fallout Wasteland Warfare too. Necromunda: Dark Uprising was $290 with paper mats. Deadzone 2.0 has paper mats in the big boxes. The 40k/AoS starter sets came with paper mats. Warmachine too. Infinity's excellent operation boxes with nice cardboard terrain, paper mats.

In fact, it is harder to name miniature games that don't have paper mats. Warcry/Kill Team, Warhammer Underworlds, Blood Bowl, and Aristeia have hard boards. Dust 1947 starters have neoprene mats in them (and are expensive as hell). The original Deadzone too. Most other games don't have mats at all, paper or otherwise.

I'm not sure why minis companies seem to have a gap when it comes to solid boards. It's paper or all the way up to neoprene. I suspect its because they don't have the expertise to deal with tile warping, but I do find it curious.

 LunarSol wrote:
I'm not sure why minis companies seem to have a gap when it comes to solid boards. It's paper or all the way up to neoprene. I suspect its because they don't have the expertise to deal with tile warping, but I do find it curious.

Probably to avoid the "board game" feel. Some things are not done due to cultural concerns rather than any cost or practicality.

 LunarSol wrote:
I'm not sure why minis companies seem to have a gap when it comes to solid boards. It's paper or all the way up to neoprene. I suspect its because they don't have the expertise to deal with tile warping, but I do find it curious.

It's probably because boards would get scuffed up and dented. One of my Warcry boards has a bunch of dents in it from when the sprues rubbed up against it in the box. Boards cost about 2/3rds of a neoprene mat, but I don't think they'd survive nearly as long with heavy use. I almost feel like I need to put neoprene on the bottoms of my miniatures to protect the board from them. Plus, I feel like the cushioning from neoprene might protect my models (and their paint jobs) better should they get knocked over.

We need some sort of PoD for neoprene boards.

As for mats i have 2 lovely 4X4 mouse pad quality mats, a city and a desert. where they really need some quality mats is monster apocalypse most of the big mat suppliers have the 4X4 covered. including some that include all the zone markers overlayed on the mat surface.

 aphyon wrote:
As for mats i have 2 lovely 4X4 mouse pad quality mats, a city and a desert. where they really need some quality mats is monster apocalypse most of the big mat suppliers have the 4X4 covered. including some that include all the zone markers overlayed on the mat surface.

I don't think there's a question when it comes to free form terrain and model placement. Neoprene is definitely the way to go. It's a little more of an issue with games like Riot Quest and MonPoc where multiple maps are a big part of the gameplay variety.

From the various games that I've purchased that had minis plus cardboard/cardstock boards, I think the big issue is that you have to design the packaging to keep the minis from contacting the cardboard. So you end up with these huge air filled boxes with inserts and dividers. (* The Ogre collector's box did the really neat thing where they put a plastic tray inside the box to hold the assembled contents. But the end result was that they had to ship about half of the cardboard -outside- of the game box. And that's with a game box approaching the size of an automotive tire.)

-Then- you have to deal with warping.

I'm going to be really honest and say that im not completely convinced that PP will make it to see WM/H MKIV. I hope so, but I've a relatively bad feeling about it.

They made nearly half a million from a KS for a brand new game where they basically charged near retail value for the sets rather than a steep discount (which is often more common with KS). That's still a very significant chunk of money and since they weren't offering vast discounts it means they've also been able to take more income from it rather than purely cover manufacture costs alone (plus they've already got the machines for working metal and resin).

If their new sci-fi game does well this summer and winter then I can well see them getting an even greater sum of money with the second KS. They should get most of those who backed first time around; plus their friends; plus with a greater number of models on show faction identity and styles become more apparent which often helps get more people to jump in and support.

 Overread wrote:
They made nearly half a million from a KS for a brand new game where they basically charged near retail value for the sets rather than a steep discount (which is often more common with KS). That's still a very significant chunk of money and since they weren't offering vast discounts it means they've also been able to take more income from it rather than purely cover manufacture costs alone (plus they've already got the machines for working metal and resin).

If their new sci-fi game does well this summer and winter then I can well see them getting an even greater sum of money with the second KS. They should get most of those who backed first time around; plus their friends; plus with a greater number of models on show faction identity and styles become more apparent which often helps get more people to jump in and support.

500,000 dollars isn't a lot of money. had it hit 7 figures, I would feel a bit better about it, tbh. I don't want to be the doomsayer, (though I know I am) but I'm quite concerned.