Hope you bought your Redeemer

MikeNificent

Space Marshal
Sep 24, 2016
474
1,681
2,350
RSI Handle
MikeNificent
As soon as I saw the price go up with the defender sale, I did the Defender warbond CCU > redeemer > $0 CCU to BMM. A $235 LTI BMM was just too good to pass on, since the same thing would cost 3 warbond Nox's and a $10 gift card more if I waited. Seems like 'get while the getting is good' is going to be the new normal.

I get it. It was a loophole. It's now closed. I hate that valued community members get burned by these transitions, but ultimately this will happen more and more as legacy marketing systems are replaced. Does anyone think that all these new CIG employees are game devs? Nope. At some point they had to have hired an accountant or two. There were meetings. Some new guy raised his hand and, VOILA! Loophole closed. Until CIG figures out how to pay rent and employee paychecks with RSI store credit, backers are going to be the ones keeping the lights on. From a business perspective, I shudder to think how much money they lost by not closing that particular hole before the defender sale...

Dear CIG:

I used the loophole, but you still got a fresh $235 (plus another warbond Defender because ships) so I think we both did ok on the deal. You made me feel that by giving you $400ish for those two ships, I was 'getting over.' Bravo.

My $0.02
 

supitza

Vault Dweller
Aug 5, 2015
2,000
8,576
3,010
RSI Handle
AstroSupitza
As soon as I saw the price go up with the defender sale, I did the Defender warbond CCU > redeemer > $0 CCU to BMM. A $235 LTI BMM was just too good to pass on, since the same thing would cost 3 warbond Nox's and a $10 gift card more if I waited. Seems like 'get while the getting is good' is going to be the new normal.

I get it. It was a loophole. It's now closed. I hate that valued community members get burned by these transitions, but ultimately this will happen more and more as legacy marketing systems are replaced. Does anyone think that all these new CIG employees are game devs? Nope. At some point they had to have hired an accountant or two. There were meetings. Some new guy raised his hand and, VOILA! Loophole closed. Until CIG figures out how to pay rent and employee paychecks with RSI store credit, backers are going to be the ones keeping the lights on. From a business perspective, I shudder to think how much money they lost by not closing that particular hole before the defender sale...

Dear CIG:

I used the loophole, but you still got a fresh $235 (plus another warbond Defender because ships) so I think we both did ok on the deal. You made me feel that by giving you $400ish for those two ships, I was 'getting over.' Bravo.

My $0.02
You are right. Allow me to add to this:
I'll gladly support development, I'll cheer like a schoolgirl while I buy space pixels.
But when there's a loophole, it's not the customer's fault and it's the business who takes the loss. In this case, though, they didn't lose $100 per BMM. Would I ever pay $350 for a BMM? No. Would I have upgraded something to it if it were $250? Maybe. Not all people who are comfortable spending $250 are okay with spending $100 more.

<rant>
Loopholes considered, I still think their primary way of losing money is by trying to make some ships scarce through limited availability. We have the gray market, we can get any ship at any time. And we're paying each other instead of CIG. What amazes me most is that they don't adapt.
Also, they do not let us test ships freely. If I only pledged for a Mustang Alpha, don't make me lose 50 races or play through countless matches of Star Marine just to be able to fly a certain ship so I can submit bugs for you.
And don't even get me started on reporting progress for S42...
</rant>
 

MikeNificent

Space Marshal
Sep 24, 2016
474
1,681
2,350
RSI Handle
MikeNificent
You are right. Allow me to add to this:
I'll gladly support development, I'll cheer like a schoolgirl while I buy space pixels.
But when there's a loophole, it's not the customer's fault and it's the business who takes the loss. In this case, though, they didn't lose $100 per BMM. Would I ever pay $350 for a BMM? No. Would I have upgraded something to it if it were $250? Maybe. Not all people who are comfortable spending $250 are okay with spending $100 more.

<rant>
Loopholes considered, I still think their primary way of losing money is by trying to make some ships scarce through limited availability. We have the gray market, we can get any ship at any time. And we're paying each other instead of CIG. What amazes me most is that they don't adapt.
Also, they do not let us test ships freely. If I only pledged for a Mustang Alpha, don't make me lose 50 races or play through countless matches of Star Marine just to be able to fly a certain ship so I can submit bugs for you.
And don't even get me started on reporting progress for S42...
</rant>
Valid points. I asked myself if I would pay $350 for a BMM and the answer for me was also NO. Subconsciously, It's probably because I've been staring at the $250 price tag since I joined the community. That said, I had the CCU in my hangar. That means that I had been entertaining buying one since the last anniversary sale (i.e. I wanted one deep down in my black little heart, but couldn't justify spending the $$). Once it gets closer to done, new and old backers alike may see how huge it is, and decide that it is indeed worth $350 when measured against the same standards that make the Carrack, Orion, Phoenix, Reclaimer, Hull D "worth" $350 now. I absolutely agree that breaking past that $250 / ship mark is not something that every backer wants to do, but for those that do, the BMM is probably going to be "worth" the cost and it was only a matter of time before the price tag caught up with the ship IMO.

I also agree to an extent with your rant. If the "scarcity" didn't exist, I never would have bought the CCU in the first place, meaning I never would have "saved" $100 by spending the $235. I only bought the CCU because I didn't feel like spending the $$ at the time and I wanted to have the option to buy it whenever I felt like doing so. If I didn't have a way to "save" $$, I might have paid the full $350 if/when I decided I wanted one. Or maybe I wouldn't have purchased the BMM at all. Hard to say.

I agree whole-heartedly with the ship testing comment. I think CIG would make money and find more bugs by opening up 5 or so ships a month to everyone. Rotate them and keep them in free fly status at least until all of the bugs are smashed.
 

supitza

Vault Dweller
Aug 5, 2015
2,000
8,576
3,010
RSI Handle
AstroSupitza
Valid points. I asked myself if I would pay $350 for a BMM and the answer for me was also NO. Subconsciously, It's probably because I've been staring at the $250 price tag since I joined the community. That said, I had the CCU in my hangar. That means that I had been entertaining buying one since the last anniversary sale (i.e. I wanted one deep down in my black little heart, but couldn't justify spending the $$). Once it gets closer to done, new and old backers alike may see how huge it is, and decide that it is indeed worth $350 when measured against the same standards that make the Carrack, Orion, Phoenix, Reclaimer, Hull D "worth" $350 now. I absolutely agree that breaking past that $250 / ship mark is not something that every backer wants to do, but for those that do, the BMM is probably going to be "worth" the cost and it was only a matter of time before the price tag caught up with the ship IMO.

I also agree to an extent with your rant. If the "scarcity" didn't exist, I never would have bought the CCU in the first place, meaning I never would have "saved" $100 by spending the $235. I only bought the CCU because I didn't feel like spending the $$ at the time and I wanted to have the option to buy it whenever I felt like doing so. If I didn't have a way to "save" $$, I might have paid the full $350 if/when I decided I wanted one. Or maybe I wouldn't have purchased the BMM at all. Hard to say.

I agree whole-heartedly with the ship testing comment. I think CIG would make money and find more bugs by opening up 5 or so ships a month to everyone. Rotate them and keep them in free fly status at least until all of the bugs are smashed.
I realize now I might have sounded a lot angrier than I actually am.
I'm not angry, I just disagree with CIG's marketing strategy. I think I, personally, would have spent more money if their marketing strategy were different.
 

Blind Owl

Hallucinogenic Owl
Donor
Nov 27, 2015
20,938
74,084
3,160
RSI Handle
BlindOwl
Good conversation. I dare say that I agree. I want the game developed, so I want CIG making smart business choices. I really do.

That being said, if there's a way to save money on a ship, I'll jump on it, because, well, money.

At the end of the day, they need my money to make the game, and I really want/need them to succeed, or all those pretty pretty dollar bills I've given them mean nothing. A hanger full of pixel ships is worthless without a game.

I concur with you @supitza, they do need to market better. How? I dunno. Though maybe they're laughing all the way to the bank, playing us like fiddles. I mean, they put the redeemer back in the store today. So how many dollars are they making right now with people scrambling to buy it before it gets removed again July 10th? Maybe they're really good at playing our psyche. Maybe.
 

hardroc77

Space Marshal
Donor
Aug 27, 2015
2,581
9,011
2,410
RSI Handle
hardroc77
Good conversation. I dare say that I agree. I want the game developed, so I want CIG making smart business choices. I really do.

That being said, if there's a way to save money on a ship, I'll jump on it, because, well, money.

At the end of the day, they need my money to make the game, and I really want/need them to succeed, or all those pretty pretty dollar bills I've given them mean nothing. A hanger full of pixel ships is worthless without a game.

I concur with you @supitza, they do need to market better. How? I dunno. Though maybe they're laughing all the way to the bank, playing us like fiddles. I mean, they put the redeemer back in the store today. So how many dollars are they making right now with people scrambling to buy it before it gets removed again July 10th? Maybe they're really good at playing our psyche. Maybe.
Ya know, I thought about this earlier this morning. I'm willing to wager that is exactly what CIG did. They can generate sales of a slow moving ship and get folks to cash in any CCU's they have from and to it at the same time. After July 10th, they can pull it and put it on the shelf. That will also temper any Redeemer owners from screaming about it's development since it's no longer available.
 

Blind Owl

Hallucinogenic Owl
Donor
Nov 27, 2015
20,938
74,084
3,160
RSI Handle
BlindOwl
Ya know, I thought about this earlier this morning. I'm willing to wager that is exactly what CIG did. They can generate sales of a slow moving ship and get folks to cash in any CCU's they have from and to it at the same time. After July 10th, they can pull it and put it on the shelf. That will also temper any Redeemer owners from screaming about it's development since it's no longer available.
:wink:
Conniving eh?
 

supitza

Vault Dweller
Aug 5, 2015
2,000
8,576
3,010
RSI Handle
AstroSupitza
Ya know, I thought about this earlier this morning. I'm willing to wager that is exactly what CIG did. They can generate sales of a slow moving ship and get folks to cash in any CCU's they have from and to it at the same time. After July 10th, they can pull it and put it on the shelf. That will also temper any Redeemer owners from screaming about it's development since it's no longer available.
:wink:
Conniving eh?
"Mwahahah, now let's see if our marketing trick worked!"

"Nope."
 

chendal220

Grand Admiral
Mar 5, 2017
31
86
1,200
RSI Handle
Chendal220
it´s no secret that the redeemer need to be completely redesigned. I think it´ll come back: stronger and better but NOT bigger !!!! This ship willl rule the verse...small enough to fit into every small jumppoint and strong enough to fight 2-3 classes above him....thats what the brochure wanted us to think about this ship ;) small jumppoints were only fighters can get...and with the redeemer you should be able to kill 2-3 hornets simultanously *g* haha
 

Sirus7264

Space Marshal
Donor
Apr 5, 2017
3,364
11,195
2,800
RSI Handle
Sirus7264
it´s no secret that the redeemer need to be completely redesigned. I think it´ll come back: stronger and better but NOT bigger !!!! This ship willl rule the verse...small enough to fit into every small jumppoint and strong enough to fight 2-3 classes above him....thats what the brochure wanted us to think about this ship ;) small jumppoints were only fighters can get...and with the redeemer you should be able to kill 2-3 hornets simultanously *g* haha
here here i agree i want it to be badass so i can finally choose my fighter ship so tired of all these missle ships lets get back to the machine guns and lazers i want to feel the action while im fighting
 

Shadow Reaper

Space Marshal
Jun 3, 2016
5,448
15,107
2,975
RSI Handle
Shadow Reaper
It would need 4 S4 guns and torpedoes plus a lot of missiles to live up to its name. . .
If the two manned turrets each carried 2 S4 weapons, and the unmanned turret carried 2 S3 weapons, and there were a handful of fixed mount weapons for the pilot, say like the stack of 4 S2's the Vanguards carry, then adding better missiles or no you would have a reason to put 5 people in one gunship. IMHO, it is a waste of players to put them in turrets that have no serious firepower. You'd be better off with them in a Hornet or some such flying escort. I think CIG has always known this, and intends to beast mode the Redeemer. We'll see. It was designed back before the new weapons system and pipes, and they know they have to do something.

It is a very beautiful ship, with a fun layout and really the kind of thing a handful of players could live out of, but they gotta improve the guns for it to be a gunship. It would not be surprised if they brought it back at $300.
 

Stevetank

Lead Aurora Theorycrafter
Donor
Jun 3, 2016
3,252
14,934
2,900
RSI Handle
Stevetank
Huh... I actually bought 5 Andromeda to Redeemer CCUs a few months ago for giggles. I guess they came in handy because I bought one of them back yesterday.

I still have 4 of these CCUs left plus the CCUs to turn them into BMMs. I have not applied my CCU yet because I'm waiting for a buyback token to apply my CCU to, so I don't know if we can still use them but I'm going to guess that they still work.

If anyone is interested in aquiring either ship, you can message me. I also have Hoplite to Redeemer CCUs.

Stevetank keeping people on track!
 

hardroc77

Space Marshal
Donor
Aug 27, 2015
2,581
9,011
2,410
RSI Handle
hardroc77
Redeemer is back in store till july 10th!
I saw that. Did a little melting and CCU'd from an 85X. Now to consider the CCU from Rdeemer to BMM I have. I suppose I will pull that trigger, but I'm going to tryout the Hoplite that I got as a loaner first.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blind Owl

DrizztD0Urden

Admiral
Sep 3, 2016
3
7
675
RSI Handle
DrizztD0Urden
The big question is... What CCU options will be available from the $350 BMM (which many got due to the redeemer)? No $0 ones right now, and maybe none in the future, so the only option is if other ships in the $350 tier go up in price, and if so, by how much?
 

Blind Owl

Hallucinogenic Owl
Donor
Nov 27, 2015
20,938
74,084
3,160
RSI Handle
BlindOwl
"Mwahahah, now let's see if our marketing trick worked!"

"Nope."
Who's wallet is that? CIGs or yours? :wink:
The big question is... What CCU options will be available from the $350 BMM (which many got due to the redeemer)? No $0 ones right now, and maybe none in the future, so the only option is if other ships in the $350 tier go up in price, and if so, by how much?
Well, if we're lucky we'll still be able to get 350 level 0 dollar CCUs. If not . . .welp, then I guess I own a BMM
 
Forgot your password?