CIG's pricing practices

[Chimaera]

So, given the amount of debate around CIG's pricing practices, especially when it comes to new ships, policies about CCUs, etc... we've decided it would be best to keep commentary about said practices OUT of the threads for the specific ships, and in a single thread that members of the SCB community can contribute to. While we want to foster good debate and discussion, this thread WILL be moderated heavily for violations of our forum rules. 

We know this is a highly charged topic, and that a lot of people have strong feelings both for and against CIG and the pricing practices they have been adopting, but we ask that members display common courtesy and respect when discussing this sensitive topic.

[Switch]

Updated video on updated CCU change.

 

[Tom Villder]

Rejoice! CIG have revised their CCU changes:

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

They will remove the extra $5 CCUs, but you will still have the ability to melt your ship and purchase an equivalent ship using store credit.  The other thing is that the 0$ CCUs will expire in time as well.

[GalYurr]

Sigh, I would have been happier with the previous solution...They didn't specify all future sales, but future concept sales.  I don't know if this only includes the 1st sales of new ships (traditionally referred to as concept sales), or any sale where unfinished ships are available (BMM, Crucible etc).

If it's the latter then that sucks for people with higher CCU value ships compared to melt value (BMM -> X).  Few will take the hit and slap down $100 (+VAT) more compared to what was previously (and for a long time) $0; they'll just not CCU at all.

It also sucks for anyone with a ship in a package they cannot melt.

Doesn't affect me too much though.

Edit:  Just giving them an expiry time of, like, 1 hour would have been enough to stop 1% of people hoarding 1mil+ of them; no need to prohibit them entirely.

 

[Devil Khan]

Well they still haven't started it yet, so if it not being changed.

Hmmm I now feeling pissed as I have more $0 for the ability, such as warden>redeemer.  

That might  be fine IF the packages didn't exist. If a concept sale eliminate $0 then any package can't be used and you don't want to melt it as it is a package of $0. 

 

[Switch]

2 hours ago, Tom Villder said:

Rejoice! CIG have revised their CCU changes:

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

They will remove the extra $5 CCUs, but you will still have the ability to melt your ship and purchase an equivalent ship using store credit.  The other thing is that the 0$ CCUs will expire in time as well.

I was for the $5 thing as you could melt it getting all your $5's back and just buy one ship or one CCU at the end, now I need to make sure I don't have any $0 CCU's I'm trying to hold onto that I actually want.  I didn't realize it was an abuse of the system to stock these though which is why they realized they made a mistake and trying to fix it, so I support them on trying to fix it since they didn't intend for us to use these as we are, better now than later.

[Tom Villder]

Just now, Switch said:

I was for the $5 thing as you could melt it getting all your $5's back and just buy one ship or one CCU at the end, now I need to make sure I don't have any $0 CCU's I'm trying to hold onto that I actually want.  I didn't realize it was an abuse of the system to stock these though which is why they realized they made a mistake and trying to fix it, so I support them on trying to fix it since they didn't intend for us to use these as we are, better now than later.

Look on the bright side though, if you bought a few dozen 0$ CCUs to give yourself some choice and then decide to not use them, then at least they'll expire and your hangar will be free of all the extra clutter xD

[VoA]

CIG modifies $0 CCU's again

EDIT - Sorry didn't see the link was already posted in a previous post on this thread

 

Spoiler

 

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.

 

 

 

========

I personally prefer this solution over the $5 up-charge solution

[BryGen]

Wish they offered a down grade CCU or a CCD.....

[Fizzlefuse]

Looks like I'm safe either way, I only got the one CCU from saber to reclaimer and that was never a $0 ccu.

Honestly these changes seem like a better solution then just adding the $5. Putting a expire date on the $0 CCUs should eliminate quite a stockpile of those.
It blows my mind that there are some people with thousands. That's insane.
 

[Trophias]

I prefer this over the $5, but I liked the $5 as well. I wish they kept both of it.

Too many people abused the $0 CCU upgrade. 

I'll go back to what I said earlier:
It's. 5. Dollars.

People spend $2,000 for a ship. Grey Market abused this into submission. I'm glad they will get rid of it over-time.

[AstroJak]

I would have rather them just place a $5 surcharge on those 0$ ccus and leave every other ccu price alone. Trying to out manuver people is a pointless venture...
As for the new scheme, i agree with others, it causes problems for people who have packages and may wish to ccu a ship within that package, during the concept sale are now prevented from doing so. The simple solution is place the same expiry date on all 0$ ccus weather concept or those currently in the system.
I believe the expiry time should be 30 days from date aquired. So for those currently in your hangers, this date will be when they pull the trigger and make this official... eg3.0 drop?


Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

[KKillroyV2]

I still don't get how adding $5 would stop the Grey market >.>

 

[Trophias]

24 minutes ago, KKillroyV2 said:

I still don't get how adding $5 would stop the Grey market >.>

 

It wouldn't.

Just means they don't get to poach that $5 profit from an already profit from CIG.

[Juntau]

It won't, but it will stop people from holding thousands of them

 

[Black-Dahlia]

24 minutes ago, KKillroyV2 said:

I still don't get how adding $5 would stop the Grey market >.>

 

It doesn't just decreases the market value right?

[KKillroyV2]

25 minutes ago, Juntau said:

It won't, but it will stop people from holding thousands of them

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So you're telling me that people who got $0 CCUs to the Banu merchantman which would be worth $100 dollars will stop because they now have to put down $5? Considering the kind of people who have hoarded these CCUs (I imagine the megastore operators on Starcitizen_Trades) I don't see $5 being what breaks the camel's back

Quote

It doesn't just decreases the market value right?

1

It could in a way limit the amount player's would buy, but considering the profit players could possibly make off some of these CCUs I doubt it will have that effect

[Juntau]

If it cost them 5k it would

 

[KKillroyV2]

Not as much as making CCU'd ships Bound to your account, that would mean the only way to trade said ships for profit would be on the Black market, which is bannable and not a large market like the Grey market

[AstroJak]

That wont work either...once a ccu is applied to a ship, its no longer recorded and therefore giftable based on the ship it was applied too. Make sense?

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

[KKillroyV2]

1 minute ago, AstroJak said:

That wont work either...once a ccu is applied to a ship, its no longer recorded and therefore giftable based on the ship it was applied too. Make sense?

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk
 

 

Or, they could limit the amount of CCUs an account could have in general. Most of these things have been suggested on spectrum and dismissed though so I guess the best option we have is something that eliminates the usefulness of CCUs for many people

[ChiefWarrant]

Well... Looks like they heard the complaining and dropped the inevitable hammer. 

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

[Donut]

1 minute ago, Nova-Prime said:

Well... Looks like they heard the complaining and dropped the inevitable hammer. 

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

I don't want to see another CCU thread after this. Spectrum has literally been nothing but "ccu's are cash grabs" "stop giving CIG money" "wahhh"

[GeraldEvans]

I'm really not thrilled about the wording there. He compared a single seat fighter to a six to seven seat long range exploration ship stating they'll build depth into the game based on backer sales per ship. I mean by numbers I'd wager the Aurora still holds the crown by far. So that means the focus is what?

[KKillroyV2]

28 minutes ago, GeraldEvans said:

I'm really not thrilled about the wording there. He compared a single seat fighter to a six to seven seat long range exploration ship stating they'll build depth into the game based on backer sales per ship. I mean by numbers I'd wager the Aurora still holds the crown by far. So that means the focus is what?

 

Good point, Considering the aurora is one of the most left behind ships ever