Star Citizen: Chris Robert`s new space sim (the Wing Commander guy)

Page 285 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
Cause Turbulent is the one running the web back-end and not the actual Star Citizen server infrastructure?

$0 CCUs - their creation, processing, and tracking were definitely under the domain of Turbulent. But in the old days, these CCUs would actually screw up people's accounts (if done too many times) and that required CIG support staff to resolve.

I actually wonder how much backer money has been wasted on this whole CCU program.......money that could have (and should have) went towards the game. But hindsight is 20/20 and there is no way that every CIG decision will be perfect.
 

Worthington

Golden Member
Apr 29, 2005
1,433
17
81
Oh agreed. My comment was just in regards to Seba's question on how will the actual game be manageable if they can't even keep track of 1mil CCU database items. I don't have a horse in this race, I don't really care what they do with the CCUs. That said, seeing people buy 3 dozen CCUs just they could swap ships left and right seems a little abusive of the system to me. I'm all for people getting to try whatever ships they want. Make the entire alpha free to fly whatever the fark you want. But the CCU system itself wasn't meant to be used the way some people were using it.
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,497
144
106
$0 CCUs - their creation, processing, and tracking were definitely under the domain of Turbulent. But in the old days, these CCUs would actually screw up people's accounts (if done too many times) and that required CIG support staff to resolve.
Funny that you say that.

They complain about un-apllied CCUs sitting in people's accounts.

The CCUs that are screwing the people's accounts are the applied ones (if you apply more than 7 successive CCU to the same ship, incrementally upgrading it).
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
Funny that you say that.

They complain about un-apllied CCUs sitting in people's accounts.

The CCUs that are screwing the people's accounts are the applied ones (if you apply more than 7 successive CCU to the same ship, incrementally upgrading it).

Yup. But CIG didn't "complain" about un-applied CCUs. They said they were making the job of balancing the economy more difficult. Seems plausible to me that a variable such as the number of ships in the 'verse could create complications for the economic sim.

And since CIG is in control.....no more $0 CCUs and this variable becomes less of an issue.
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,497
144
106
Yeah, right. "It's for the economy". At least they did not said it's for the children.
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
Yeah, right. "It's for the economy". At least they did not said it's for the children.
You can either believe what they tell you.....or not. But if you don't believe what they tell you, it make following the project kind of pointless, doesn't it?
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,497
144
106
Still no clarification from CIG if the $5 tax only applies to $0 CCUs or to all CCUs.
 

Father Torque

Member
Aug 7, 2011
103
3
81
Derek Smart is claiming that C. Roberts was informed that he can't have seamless space to planet transitions because the engine can't do it. Is there any truth to that ?
 

SLU Aequitas

Golden Member
Jul 13, 2007
1,252
26
91
Derek Smart is claiming that C. Roberts was informed that he can't have seamless space to planet transitions because the engine can't do it. Is there any truth to that ?

That requires the good dr dr to understand what seamless is lol. Don't you have a thread?
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,497
144
106
Derek Smart is claiming that C. Roberts was informed that he can't have seamless space to planet transitions because the engine can't do it. Is there any truth to that ?
This one should get an answer soon enough (with 3.0).
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,701
60
91
Follow their twitter. They've shown all kinds of stuff.

Derek Smart's trolling only works on those who aren't invested enough to spend the time to 'keep up' with CIG.

He counts on people being ignorant. Those who aren't are called shills.
 

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,701
60
91
CIG is not moving forward with $5 CCU's after all.

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

Zyloh | CIG@Zyloh-CIG
Today at 12:00 pm
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.
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,497
144
106
But they will remove the $0 CCUs. Even the existing ones will expire soon, if not used.
 

Worthington

Golden Member
Apr 29, 2005
1,433
17
81
agreed.. no more people buying dozens of every $0 CCU and then waiting to see what ships increase in cost so they can buy the initial ship, upgrade for free and then turn around and either CCU again or sell on the grey market.
I'm not opposed to grey market, but that's a total end-around the system.
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,497
144
106
Grey market is not the only use of $0 CCU.

CIG made some ships "limited". Some of those limited ships have $0 CCU to them from non-limited ships. This allows you to get the CCU to the limited ship during a sale (those sales are only a few per year; for some ships maybe only once per year) and decide later.
 

Worthington

Golden Member
Apr 29, 2005
1,433
17
81
I get that, and in an ideal world they wouldn't have to do this. But when individual people have literally 100s of these things it becomes an issue for CIG, which in turn becomes an issue for us.
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,497
144
106
Ah! You believe their bullshit explanation with "balancing the economy" and making custom missions for most owned ships?

They just want more money. Restricting the CCU system is their method to make the players buy whole new ships instead of upgrading. It will fail. They will get less money in the long term.
 

GoodRevrnd

Diamond Member
Dec 27, 2001
6,803
581
126
I don't know why all my friends who aren't even that in to these kinds of games suddenly got on the hype train, but they did. I think they're just bored and looking for the next thing. There isn't even enough content and stability to really draw my interest yet. What are the best cheap and reasonably priced ships for someone to start with? The Avenger has always seemed like the best option for a "be able to do almost everything by yourself competently" ship. Does that still hold, and what about a ship in a lower price bracket? I think the guys looking for a cheap ship will mostly be the ones who aren't that interested in doing a lot of stuff by themselves and just want to multicrew with the more skilled guys and/or be FPS ground pounders. I would guess they need an inexpensive dogfighter or cargo hauler.
 

Worthington

Golden Member
Apr 29, 2005
1,433
17
81
Ah! You believe their bullshit explanation with "balancing the economy" and making custom missions for most owned ships?

They just want more money. Restricting the CCU system is their method to make the players buy whole new ships instead of upgrading. It will fail. They will get less money in the long term.

Huh, where did i say that? I'm guessing it has more to do with people using 0$ CCUs to prospect ships. If I remember correctly you don't even have to have the base ship to buy the CCU, which was a mistake on their part. Players buy a crap ton of 0$ CCUs then just wait for certain ships to appreciate. Then, they buy (cough, excuse me "pledge") for whatever base ship they have an upgrade for.. then apply the CCU they've had sitting in their account for over a year to the now more expensive ship and BAM, instant free money.

That's a problem, and they needed to fix it.

EDIT. what they also could have done that probably would have solved the vast majority of the abuse is apply any cost increase of a ship that you want to CCU to at the time you apply it instead of just one-and-done when you purchase.

As it is now people for example do this:

1. see redeemer (which is on sale all the time) is the same price as the Banu.
2. Buy a crap ton of Redeemer to Banu CCUs
3. Wait for Banu to increase in cost (or vice versa)
4. Banu goes up a $100. They buy a Redeemer then apply the CCU.
5. Instant free $100 to either sell on the grey market or CCU again to a more expensive ship.

If, at step 4 when you went to apply the CCU the system came back and said you'd need to cough up $100 to apply the upgrade it would curb the rampant abuse. If you don't want to spend the money, just delete the CCU since it cost you $0 to begin with.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: SLU Aequitas

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,497
144
106
The ships cost an insane amount of money. A lot of them are not even in the game yet.

But a player is supposed to decide if his expensive ship is the one that he likes/wants or not, based on a few pictures and a marketing blurb from CIG.

In the case of flight ready ships, they are constantly changing them. For instance, Constellation is now an useless ship. When first sold, it was described as capable to take on a few Hornets at once. A Millennium Falcon of Star Citizen.

Melting is not really an option, because you lose LTI. Not all, but most of those that go beyond purchasing a starter package and put a lot of real money into this game want to have the re-assuring of LTI. Otherwise they could wait to get the ships in-game, for no real money.

Also, CIG is the one that raised the prices of some ships. Not the players. But sure, blame the players.
 

Worthington

Golden Member
Apr 29, 2005
1,433
17
81
So you're cool with a tiny population of players having 1000s of free CCUs just to play the grey market. Those are the people you should bitching at, not people here in the SC thread. Again, i really don't care. I don't have any $0 CCUs. and if i really want to buy a new ship (which I'm not going to do) i'll pay for the upgrade. You can still CCU to your hearts content. And if the new ship is more money, there isn't a $5 "extra fee".

I have a Constellation. It's my only physical package. So I'm just as affected as any one else (that hasn't been stockpiling these). But, if at some point I decide to trade if for something I'm not going to expect that i can get any ship for free that at one point in time, possibly even years ago just happened to be the same price.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |