Star Citizen - media blowout, Chris Robert's new game

Talking to Star Citizen players...

0vpofebvznwy.gif
 
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the $0 CCU drama. This friday is the end of free CCUs. It won't change existing CCUs, so get them while you still can.

I liked to go back and forth between my Cutlass and the M50, but that will end. New system will put a $5 minimum, so a Cutlass to an M50 would increase the ship melt value by $5 even though they are both $100 ships.
 
As with other things CIG has done out of goodwill towards the community those who exploit things ruin it for everyone else.

They are closing a loophole people exploited (and I'll admit I have probably more than a thousand of them stockpiled), it generates thousands of support tickets from those encountering issues, database bandwidth spent and it also prevents designers from having a real picture of the actual distribution of ships in the game's population to start balancing things gameplay wise and at the end of all that CIG gets literally nothing in return.

Not to mention people who exploited it in the grey market.

Oh and they just clarified what they are going to do. There will no longer be a fee but they are eliminating CCU for all future concept ship sales and existing $0 CCUs will have an expiration date.

The CCU and ‘melt’ systems were created to give backers the kind of choices they wouldn’t get from a normal publisher.


We knew that concept ships were going to change as the game’s systems were built out and balanced after their initial sale. So early on we ensured that backers could melt a pledge for the full amount of credit put towards that pledge, and then use that full amount of credit towards a different pledge. However a problem occurred when people wanted to keep elements of their original game package – say the physical goods, or the LTI on the ship, as melting destroyed the whole package. This created a major Customer Service overhead, where we had to add and change packages manually. So the CCU system was developed to allow backers to keep the current features of their game package, but swap out the digital ship. Between these two systems, in many cases it has become a game itself to navigate the system to end up with the ship of your dreams, but has also enabled some exploits that do not benefit all backers.

We have identified an issue related to the stockpiling of $0 CCU's. As we previously stated, there are more than 1.1 million unused CCUs in the system today. 1.05 million of these are $0 ‘cross trades’ and the vast majority of these are held, unused, by significantly less than one percent of Star Citizen backers. Some people have thousands of $0 CCU's on their account at this time, which is clearly an abuse of the system. A very small number of users are creating a scenario where they can get a limited ship in the future, without having put any value towards the right to do so. With a stock of $0 CCUs on their account, they can generate ships to sell to other users for their own profit.

There is also a potential design issue related to the number of ships in the universe at launch. We are getting to the point where we need to drill down deeper on things like ship rarity, overall dispersion and the like. When we don’t know how many ships may be present at launch, this makes it much more difficult. The implications there are far-reaching: if Carracks are the most popular ship then we need to put more resources on exploration… if Buccaneers are everywhere then we need to build missions that will be challenging and fun for Bucc pilots. It’s something that touches every part of Star Citizen.

All of that said: we’ve spent some time thinking about options to address this, which don’t include an extra charge. While we need to end the abuse of the $0 CCUs, we understand that these systems help all backers and reassure people who are just starting the game. We’ve settled on a plan that will eliminate $0 CCUs without impacting the benefits of the CCU and melting systems in general.

The first part is very simple, we will eliminate the $0 CCU from concept sales starting with this week’s sale. If you have a ship of equivalent value and you want to use store credit, you can of course melt it and purchase the store credit version. This should greatly reduce stockpiling of CCU's.

The second part is longer term, but very important: we will plan for a process to expire the unused $0 CCUs from the system. We want existing CCUs to be used as intended: to pick a ship that works for you, and not as a permanent ‘anything goes’ option. This will not happen immediately, but as we approach 3.0 it will be an important part of this process. And we want you to know in advance that this is coming.

This simple solution should address the issues we've discussed here. Our goal is to make Star Citizen the best game it can be for all players. As always, we thank you for your support.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
As I had said else where, as long as there is no in universe (PU, not AC) ship vendor to test out long range durability or playability in the PU this is a blatant money grab. The whole point of melting your ship originally was so you could adjust your pledge how you liked until the game went live, then CCU because there was no way for early backers to transfer the benefit of LTI to newer ships, or upgrade there packages. The CCU stockpiling issue is pointless, make CCU ships untradeable, then they can't be sold, this is about as bad as the Taurus downgrade fee that everyone just justified for CIG, no, it is no work on their part, once its set up its hassle free. Why there is no hard limit on the number of CCU you can hold is beyond me, I can see this becoming a real issue once the game goes live and people have $1000 worth of CCU that they haven't spend.

EDIT: CIG already stepped back on the CCU changes it seems.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/spectrum/community/SC/forum/1/thread/spaceship-prices/175177

Zyloh | CIG@Zyloh-CIG
Today at 10:00 am
Hey everybody,


On Friday we mentioned that we’d be making some changes to the CCU system with the Eclipse sale. Rather than raising the price of CCU's, we’ve decided to take a different approach.


The CCU and ‘melt’ systems were created to give backers the kind of choices they wouldn’t get from a normal publisher.


We knew that concept ships were going to change as the game’s systems were built out and balanced after their initial sale. So early on we ensured that backers could melt a pledge for the full amount of credit put towards that pledge, and then use that full amount of credit towards a different pledge. However a problem occurred when people wanted to keep elements of their original game package – say the physical goods, or the LTI on the ship, as melting destroyed the whole package. This created a major Customer Service overhead, where we had to add and change packages manually. So the CCU system was developed to allow backers to keep the current features of their game package, but swap out the digital ship. Between these two systems, in many cases it has become a game itself to navigate the system to end up with the ship of your dreams, but has also enabled some exploits that do not benefit all backers.


We have identified an issue related to the stockpiling of $0 CCU's. As we previously stated, there are more than 1.1 million unused CCUs in the system today. 1.05 million of these are $0 ‘cross trades’ and the vast majority of these are held, unused, by significantly less than one percent of Star Citizen backers. Some people have thousands of $0 CCU's on their account at this time, which is clearly an abuse of the system. A very small number of users are creating a scenario where they can get a limited ship in the future, without having put any value towards the right to do so. With a stock of $0 CCUs on their account, they can generate ships to sell to other users for their own profit.


There is also a potential design issue related to the number of ships in the universe at launch. We are getting to the point where we need to drill down deeper on things like ship rarity, overall dispersion and the like. When we don’t know how many ships may be present at launch, this makes it much more difficult. The implications there are far-reaching: if Carracks are the most popular ship then we need to put more resources on exploration… if Buccaneers are everywhere then we need to build missions that will be challenging and fun for Bucc pilots. It’s something that touches every part of Star Citizen.


All of that said: we’ve spent some time thinking about options to address this, which don’t include an extra charge. While we need to end the abuse of the $0 CCUs, we understand that these systems help all backers and reassure people who are just starting the game. We’ve settled on a plan that will eliminate $0 CCUs without impacting the benefits of the CCU and melting systems in general.


The first part is very simple, we will eliminate the $0 CCU from concept sales starting with this week’s sale. If you have a ship of equivalent value and you want to use store credit, you can of course melt it and purchase the store credit version. This should greatly reduce stockpiling of CCU's.


The second part is longer term, but very important: we will plan for a process to expire the unused $0 CCUs from the system. We want existing CCUs to be used as intended: to pick a ship that works for you, and not as a permanent ‘anything goes’ option. This will not happen immediately, but as we approach 3.0 it will be an important part of this process. And we want you to know in advance that this is coming.


This simple solution should address the issues we've discussed here. Our goal is to make Star Citizen the best game it can be for all players. As always, we thank you for your support.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
That's a decent compromise. We knew the CCU system would eventually go away, though I would still argue that 3.X is too early.

I've certainly benefited from the CCU system. My Cutlass started as a super cheap AMD coupon Omega package. It's probably been back and forth to the M50 a dozen times or more, but I'm going to leave it as a Cutlass for the rework and the ability to add a dragonfly.
 
I've been really torn in ditching my Aurora LX to compliment my other stuff but I figure it will still have a use vs my bigger stuff.

I think the current CCU system is fine until they have more of a game in place. Once the jobs are actually playable such as mining, cargo hauling and so forth its time to lock things in as the game is more in production vs development meaning they have their tools and are building it vs still designing the way to make it work.

I think their revised plan works out for everyone and shows they are listening to the feedback of players.
 
Pretty pissed off to be honest now with them deciding to make the $0 CCU's expire. It seems to me like they are coming back with well since you guys don't want to pay more we are going to screw you with another stick. BTW notice that before the existing $0 CCU wouldn't expire, but now they have to expire? seriously WTF.... Unless I am misreading, or something changed... If they are actually worried about the grey market stuff, then they can go after the people doing it, they have the data to do so. Also no more $0 CCU at all so if you have a $350 ship you can't side grade anymore.... This is an even worse solution than the $5 charge lol

I'm currently sitting on 3 $350 ships with $0 CCU's to each so I can decide which ones I want once they get around to actually building the damn things and we can see what they are going to do. The only other $0 CCU I care about is the Caterpillar Pirate one, which I can't really do anything with since my extra Starfarer is $5 more than the Cat and I can't downgrade.
 
Last edited:
I figured the $0 CCU would need to go at some point. Not a fan of them expiring the old $0 CCUs but I really didn't have too many of them I was planning on using at this point. Pretty much trying to decide between a Reclaimer and Carrack.

At least the CCUs with a cost associated with them are staying the same instead of the +$5 thing they were thinking of doing, that would have been annoying, especially with combo packs. Too bad this wasn't closer to the traditional november sale, then you could have melted one $350 ship and gotten some $75 Aquila->??? upgrades to make sure you could get any of them still, just wouldn't be able to keep swapping.
 
I have to admit I'm nonplussed about the $0 CCU decisions. If it was meant to curtail those who have a ton of coupons and they're selling them on the greymarket, then I'd rather have said coupons become no-trade and/or no-trade on apply . I really think its a bit early to start to lock things down for players especially considering the size, price etc.. of varying ships is still in flux and we don't yet have a complete game loop/experience where especially non-combat tasks/jobs/duty stations/professions etc..aren't available to try out. The updated plan is a bit better of course, but I still am a bit concerned about decisions that appear to make it more difficult for long-time supporters who have already invested a lot to have as much flexbility or value as they used to. Likewise, decisions like the whole push for subscribers this year, continual WarBond focused sales, etc.. along with the aforementioned decisions, seem to say "What have you done for us lately? Spend more now if you want the cool stuff!"

WIth that in mind, for the Concierge (maybe subscribers) here... check your Inbox! They have revealed the Eclipse (at least a little bit), and are offering it for an early sale TODAY ONLY.
Aegis-Eclipse-L4-Piece-2-Hangar-Presentation-007.jpg


"
PLEASE NOTE: The ‘First Wave’ War Bond SKU will be available exclusively during this 24-hour preview for Concierge members. The ship includes a unique serial stamp, an additional in-game poster featuring the Project Eclipse logo, an alternate ship skin and a Clearance Level Ultra forum badge. Ships sold after the preview, starting Friday May 19, will not include the forum badge. Additional data and technically specifications will be made available as part of the event. You are receiving this advanced notice because of your status as a loyal UEE Citizen. Until the official announcement, this information is classified ULTRA and should not be shared with non-Citizens."

A limited time event is fine, but I really don't like them tying special tokens and widgets to an exclusively Warbond, no-store-credit purchase. This is the kind of thing I was talking about that feels like someone new is making poor decisions - If they had a normal edition for $275 AND the Warbond $250 on the first day that both get the forum badge and other widgets I'd feel better about it. Yes, I get the point is to raise money, but their success thus far is because of their customer-friendliness and flexibility. A player who uses some (or even all) their store credit / melts ships to buy an Eclipse etc... has still put a lot of money into the game. If they want one of those ships back they melted, they will need to pay real money in order to have access to them again (aside from a token store credit unmelt or courtesy unmelts), so it isn't like there is no future money to be made either. However, if CIG makes poor decisions that cause players to become less confident in the consumer-friendly business practices, that will result in fewer sales. I see more than a few Concierge members expressing their displeasure with some recent decisions on the forums. Perhaps I'll write a letter to support - last time I was worried about some questionable decisions it seemed to help and others must have done so as well, because they adapted to the user base's concerns. Maybe they can do so again....
 
Please, I know its a bomber, but give it 4x Size 3 gimbal weapons that are pilot controlled :D Here is the ship description:

ECLIPSE – NEWLY DECLASSIFIED: the Aegis Eclipse is a bomber designed to get in and strike before it’s ever even spotted. After extensive service with the UEE, this high-tech military equipment is making its debut on the civilian market for 2947.
Click to expand...

I got something between 401-500 :-/

rolGTme.jpg
 
I was immediately put off by "Can other players hijack my ship? Yes." Since you pay real world currency for these ships. The incentive to cheat will be enormous.
 
Arts Citizen: Get your high quality spaceship art from a company that really knows how to produce and price it appropriately:

ships.jpg


Oh, and there is no spoon!
 
Just went over my planned upgrades and current ships and realized I won't care at all about the $0 upgrade removal, lol.

ATV had some pics of the new Aurora, looks a lot better now. Still a space Volvo though :p Only $0 Aurora CCU available now is the LX->Mustang Alpha one so it will be the only one going away.
 
Vader1975 said:
I was immediately put off by "Can other players hijack my ship? Yes." Since you pay real world currency for these ships. The incentive to cheat will be enormous.
Click to expand...

This is an important gameplay element but while in most games you concerns would be warranted, Star Citizen is designed differently. For instance, the pervasive "insurance" systems. Before you take ANY ship out that you own (or are driving for someone else etc..) its a good idea to spend in-game currency and get it fully insured. Thus, if you crash and total the ship, the game will return you a brand new ship of that model with all the default equipment onboard. Note there are diffferent kinds of policies and they stack, so "Hull insurance" which covers the entire hull and all standard equipment is the "basic" insurance that is the least you should fly with, but you can also buy (with in-game earned money) policies to say, cover the cargo you're transporting for its value and/or cover all the upgrades and customizations you made to the ship compared to stock. Insurance is meant to be a common "gold sink" of sorts and be affordable, so its rare that a player should ahve a legit ship and not have it covered by at least hull insurance. Its also notable that many of the concept ships come with LTI / Lifetime Insurance which is exactly the same as standard hull insurance, but as a small perk does not require any in-game premium payments.

Thanks to the Insurance system, its unlikely you'll have to worry about actually losing a ship if it gets hijacked. Furthermore, someone does hijack your ship unless they can get to a pirate / fake-ID location of one kind or another, they'll be a wanted man with a hot ship until they can "clear the plates". No matter what they, you file a "claim" and get a ship returned to you no matter if it was stolen, blown up etc... but if the thief gets blown up, caught etc.. then that ship is gone from them!
 
Xaeos said:
This is an important gameplay element but while in most games you concerns would be warranted, Star Citizen is designed differently. For instance, the pervasive "insurance" systems. Before you take ANY ship out that you own (or are driving for someone else etc..) its a good idea to spend in-game currency and get it fully insured. Thus, if you crash and total the ship, the game will return you a brand new ship of that model with all the default equipment onboard. Note there are diffferent kinds of policies and they stack, so "Hull insurance" which covers the entire hull and all standard equipment is the "basic" insurance that is the least you should fly with, but you can also buy (with in-game earned money) policies to say, cover the cargo you're transporting for its value and/or cover all the upgrades and customizations you made to the ship compared to stock. Insurance is meant to be a common "gold sink" of sorts and be affordable, so its rare that a player should ahve a legit ship and not have it covered by at least hull insurance. Its also notable that many of the concept ships come with LTI / Lifetime Insurance which is exactly the same as standard hull insurance, but as a small perk does not require any in-game premium payments.

Thanks to the Insurance system, its unlikely you'll have to worry about actually losing a ship if it gets hijacked. Furthermore, someone does hijack your ship unless they can get to a pirate / fake-ID location of one kind or another, they'll be a wanted man with a hot ship until they can "clear the plates". No matter what they, you file a "claim" and get a ship returned to you no matter if it was stolen, blown up etc... but if the thief gets blown up, caught etc.. then that ship is gone from them!
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm sure this will all work. Just as soon as they can get the AI to do something as simple as hunt down spawn campers.

https://testsquadron.com/threads/reddit-repost-we-cant-all-be-pirates.8533/

Does the PE currently do any of the things you've stated in your post involving pirates? It sure doesn't sound like it, if the extent of "protection" is just hacking-in no-fire zones around stations.

And with the vast majority having lifetime insurance, what's stopping the entire universe for becoming one big never-ending war? That will get old quick.
 
whateverer said:
Yeah, I'm sure this will all work. Just as soon as they can get the AI to do something as simple as hunt down spawn campers.

https://testsquadron.com/threads/reddit-repost-we-cant-all-be-pirates.8533/

Does the PE currently do any of the things you've stated in your post involving pirates? It sure doesn't sound like it, if the extent of "protection" is just hacking-in no-fire zones around stations.

And with the vast majority having lifetime insurance, what's stopping the entire universe for becoming one big never-ending war? That will get old quick.
Click to expand...

First of all its important to note that the linked content has much to do with disruptive play/griefers etc.. . as opposed to pirates/outlaws, which both require completely different systems to properly govern the ability of each group to affect the game world (ie asshole behavior needs to be minimized in just about all cases, where outlaw/pirate behavior needs to be balanced). Its also noteworthy that the piece written there was posted nearly a year ago and there have been some improvements made in the Alpha, since the days when you had people crashing every launch platform every second of the day. That said, the system is expanding little by little through various iterations and just as we can see now looking back to things like the Hangar Module and earliest Arena Commander days that entirely new functionality is only added when there are at least some of the systems necessary to support them. Trying to rush along to implement them haphazardly draws criticism (rightly and wrongly) as well, so its important to keep perspective. For instance, there has been a lot of justified criticism regarding the $0 CCU changes, saying it is too early in the player's understanding of ship viability and game loop to "lock them in" without that feature. If they were to say, implement a "live-style" Insurance system now people would say the same thing and rightly so - the game lacks some of the implemented features necessary to make it viable and fun, at the moment; same goes for tweaks to piracy. That doesn't mean they won't come in future builds when ready. Oh and regarding LTI, from the very start there has been a plan to ensure that it doesn't become a "no consequence" system. Even LTI ships take time to be replaced if they are destroyed (or similar) under certain circumstances (ie repeated suicides) and just in general regarding the more "claims" there are, to discourage bad actors and whatnot. This is to say nothing for other game systems, such as the cost of cargo, weapons etc... faction/reputation/criminality systems and more.

Every MMO must make changes to deal with griefers/exploiters, not to mention to ensure the game is generally played within certain parameters. I'm sure as additional game systems are rolled out, including the ones I described above, the developers will balance accordingly.
 
Xaeos said:
Oh and regarding LTI, from the very start there has been a plan to ensure that it doesn't become a "no consequence" system. Even LTI ships take time to be replaced if they are destroyed (or similar) under certain circumstances (ie repeated suicides) and just in general regarding the more "claims" there are, to discourage bad actors and whatnot.
Click to expand...

Of course you're ignoring your average high-roller, who has enough LTI ships in their hangar for every day of the week. After all, it's people like them that are responsible for getting the funding well beyond the 100 million mark.

Are you going to pretend that these people won't be overpowering beasts in the game? Even though they can afford to lose a ship every night going weakling hunting, or can at any time bring-to-bear a vast continuous onslaught, and repeat it again next Tuesday?

It sounds to me like it's ripe for exploitation, so the war must go on! Especially when the rest of the universe is empty. Boredom breeds trolldom, as you can already tell from the story i linked :D
 
OK- your fears are partly legitimate, but you are very certain that you know how the final game is going to turn out it seems. In many of the various Q&A programs that have been in place (which should be mentioned is unheard of), balance changes and prevention of griefing have been brought up. At the end of the day, it's on their radar and they want to err on the side of the game being fun for everyone. It's entirely possible they will screw that up as badly as world of tanks/warships, but it's a moot point right now.

Oh- the talked about increasing insurance timer would be a simple way to handle that also...
 
Lorien said:
Yes but it depends on which Aurora model you have. Go here: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/pledge/extras?product_id=51

Then just find your particular Aurora model and see which $0 CCU you can use to upgrade it.

P.S: If you weren't aware the Aurora is getting revamped to bring it up in line with the higher quality/materials/texturing of newer ships.
Click to expand...

I have an Aurora Digital Scout with the LN upgrade. Looks like the only thing that would work for is the Mustang Alpha? Or would I need the LX to qualify? No way to hop to a 300 series without dropping some more cash to I take it? For dog fighting, is there any reason to consider the Mustang Alpha over the Aurora LN? Always hard to keep up with the many changes they keep getting.
 
Honestly, between the two I'd just keep the Aurora LN- it has both more weapons and more versatility with the add-on cargo box. (unless something changes)
 
I don't like these recent changes or that my $35 ship package may not actually have the whole game. I haven't cared to actually look.

I haven't played it in months... and while dog fighting entertained me for a while I never found it fun. That's my main issue right now is I fear if they ever do finish it it won't be cohesive nor fun...

I think I actually will try for a refund like Droc. I've lost faith to be honest.
 
Dayaks said:
I don't like these recent changes or that my $35 ship package may not actually have the whole game.
Click to expand...

Wait... what's this about? I haven't logged on in nearly a year. Do I not have the full game when it comes out?
 
Krixon said:
Wait... what's this about? I haven't logged on in nearly a year. Do I not have the full game when it comes out?
Click to expand...

Single player and multiplayer might be purchased separately. Even if you have it you might not have all the missions is what I think I read.

Here's a thread on it. https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/289936/do-i-have-access-to-squadron-42

Quoting Raptor Alpha "As long as your package has "Squadron 42 Digital Download" and "Star Citizen Digital Download" you have purchased both the single-player and multi-player versions of the game."

Another guy said if you don't have "Squadron 42 Mission Disk" you may have to buy additional missions.

Wow, what a cluster fuck.
 
Last edited:
Dayaks said:
Single player and multiplayer might be purchased separately. Even if you have it you might not have all the missions is what I think I read.

Here's a thread on it. https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/289936/do-i-have-access-to-squadron-42
Click to expand...

Uh this has been known for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time, anyone who kickstarted or pledged prior to 14 February 2016 received SQ42 as part of the package (assuming you didn't buy a ship only package).

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15189-Package-Split-Information
 
Blade-Runner said:
Uh this has been known for a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooong time, anyone who kickstarted or pledged prior to 14 February 2016 received SQ42 as part of the package (assuming you didn't buy a ship only package).

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15189-Package-Split-Information
Click to expand...

Maybe to you, but to the normal person it's not very obvious. Maybe if they broke it down in a more coherent manner people would realize what they are actually buying. Like (single player) and (multiplayer) after the package name.

The majority of people don't read the game news on a game that is years past the due date.
 
Dayaks said:
Another guy said if you don't have "Squadron 42 Mission Disk" you may have to buy additional missions.

Wow, what a cluster fuck.
Click to expand...

The mission disk is an expansion pack.....you know, pretty much standard practice for the entire gaming industry. Its also meant to be free for any backers who pledged before the $6 million funding goal was reached.
 
Blade-Runner said:
You mean people who occasionally read their email updates from RSI or know how to use google search? Or even looks at mainstream gaming websites?

https://www.kotaku.com.au/2016/01/r...split-for-star-citizen-and-free-week-of-play/
Click to expand...

Your argument is that people should follow a game that is in (practically) permanent limbo? And expansion packs are normal years before the game ever even launches?

Well you might be right on the second part these days, which is sad, but expecting people to follow a game like this is strange to me.
 
Dayaks said:
Your argument is that people should follow a game that is in (practically) permanent limbo? And expansion packs are normal years before the game ever even launches?

Well you might be right on the second part these days, which is sad, but expecting people to follow a game like this is strange to me.
Click to expand...

No that's not my argument, only that all the information is freely and easily accessible, so making indignant posts about your misconceptions rather than doing a 5 second google search only makes you look foolish.

And yes expansion packs are planned years in advance, what do you think publishers are doing when they sell season passes before the main game is even released? Again this isn't a surprise with Squadron 42, it is clearly stated upfront as part of the $6 million stretch goal.
 
Blade-Runner said:
No that's not my argument, only that all the information is freely and easily accessible, so making indignant posts about your misconceptions rather than doing a 5 second google search only makes you look foolish.

And yes expansion packs are planned years in advance, what do you think publishers are doing when they sell season passes before the main game is even released? Again this isn't a surprise with Squadron 42, it is clearly stated upfront as part of the $6 million stretch goal.
Click to expand...

And I did google search it and put a link. Still asinine they split the game when they were already years behind.

I bought in in 2014 and decided a long time ago this was not worth my time to follow, so it was a surprise they tried to up their money grab even more, but I have both single and multi.

I'll let it ride since I didn't invest much, not worth the time to try to get a refund. Anyone who invests now is absolutely nuts. Shady business practices, game is terrible (not fun), years behind...
 
You put in a link to an equivocal forum post, it isn't that hard to find something official and certain.

And you can do whatever you want, I am just pointing out the facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top