Greetings, This has been on my mind for a while now - CIG keeps asking for our feedback on changes to missions and mission payouts, changes to ship weapon balances, changes to gameplay loops, changes to you name it. But we rarely get any response by CIG to the feedback we have given. Don’t get me wrong, there a ample examples where CIG did listen to feedback and sometimes did react to it very fast. Like the 400i landing gear changes on PTU to allow for a ROC to be loaded. Backers almost unanimously told CIG to revert the change, pointing out not every ship needs to be able to carry a ROC. Ultimately CIG agreed, reverted the change rather swiftly with the next PTU patch. More recently the ballistic shield penetration changes – Yogi wanted to experiment and trial and error a bit, to see what effect this change would have on ship combat. He did this knowing the key component to mitigate ballistic hull damage “physical ship armor” was still missing. Almost everyone agreed this change did not work. Eventually CIG (Yogi) implemented “virtual hull armor” as a stand in until the real thing gets there as a way to mitigate the ballilstic changes. But for every time CIG did listen to our feedback, theres seems to be this wagon load of feedback that gets ignored, or to the very least is never openly addressed by CIG higher ups or any of the developers. Some examples in no particular order: *Dynamic Events. XT is running for the n-th time and since its very first showing people ask for a a way to refuel / repair / restock at Jericho station instead of having to fly over to MIC L1. Jericho is the main UEE base of operations in the Stanton system, as such normal supplies for fighters and sub capital ships should be available. So when the UEE asks the Civilian Defense Force (CDF) to help out during the XenoThreat they should also provide basic maintenance at the station to be defended! Nope. Years after XTs first ever run, players still need to fly over to MIC L1 to restock and repair. *Night Vision. Ever since planetary landings have been added with Alpha 3.0 backers are literally begging CIG to add night vision as anything on the dark side of the moon is near pitch black darkness! Most ship lights cannot even compete with a candle and if they are effective the many storms renders them useless as all you see is a bright milky mess of nothing. The need for night vision has been pointed out even more ever since atmospheric bounties have been added to the game, which seem to happen near exclusively on the dark side of celestial bodies. But despite giving CIG this crystal clear feedback on "we -need- night vision!" – it’s passed over. *Taking the fun out. Whenever a new ship or gameplay loop is added or tweaked on, CIGs reaction is a constant: nerf it! CIG added salvaging with 3.18 and component stripping with 3.19 and backer feedback has generally been very positive about this. Salvaging turned out to be a very chill and profitable gameplay loop that got even more exciting and interesting with component stripping. What does CIG do? They promptly reduce the number of wrecks spawned near Legrange stations and lower payout of stripped components by 80%. On the ship side of this "nerf it" reaction honorable mentions go out to - the AEGIS Redeemer and the Crusader Ares Starfighter. *Entry level mission torture. I think it was near the end of the 3.17.X branch when CIG started to add “derelict outposts” as legitimate locations for entry evaluation missions. A wagon load of feedback has been given to CIG to remove “derelict outposts” from the valid mission location system for these entry missions, as many feel facing of multiple 9-Tails and backup for a entry box delivery is over kill for beginners. Some suggested “derelict outposts” should only show once you reach a higher reputation level. What does CIG do? Nothing. *Constant PEW PEW focus. So many threads at spectrum, at reddit and talks by SC content creators – CIGs current inability to talk about new missions and locations without the addition of combat! Whenever a new location is build and CIG shows it of on ISC and SCL, as soon as the guest developer starts to address possible missions at those new locations – its combat related! New Under Ground Facilities (UGF) are shown off and instead of talking about say, some new maintenance missions, hauling jobs to get produced commodities to a specific location etc. – the dev immediately starts to talk about assassination and horde mode missions. Recently new “derelict settlements” are shown off on ISC and again, instead of talking about how there maybe a new minor mission NPC that has a never ending supply of missions to deliver goods to them – he starts to talk about king of the hill combat scenarios! While some new combat content is always cool – CIG currently seems to be combat only focused. And the community shouts at CIG: STOP IT with the constant addition of combat to everything you do! *The New player Experience. A TON of feedback was given. But Todd Papy only addresses the tutorial needs to make a stronger point to actually buy that helmet in ISC. I mean. Come on man! Talk to us! Are you actively changing the tutorial right now for the impending 3.19 live release that heeds our feedback? Or will it be what it is now with only minor tweaks? Is all our feedback currently just noted and maybe gets added in a year or so, once "priority" allows you to come back to the new player experience? While we give constant feedback about all aspects of the game – there isn't any real dialogue about it between us and CIG developers! Even when CIG directly asks us for feedback on a specific topic - outisde of testing chat we rarely hear anything back from them. Did our feedback make you change your mind on things? Was there a moment you thought - whey didn't I think of this? If after asking for our feedback nothing changes - why even give feedback if all stays the same year after year? To counter point this; Jared often likes to point out how hard it is for him to find topics to talk about on ISC and SCL. When he says this I am always like “What?”. CIG you have a trillion things you need to add to the game before it comes close to the vision CR outlined to us. We give so much feedback. Address it! Bottom line what I am saying is: If CIG wants to build this game - with us - they need to react more often - to us - about feedback given and then keep talking - to us - about it! Anyhow. I felt the need to talk about this as very often when feedback is given to CIG it seems to be falling on deaf ears. As always, keep it civil in the comment. TldR – CIG keeps asking us for feedback on any number of topics regarding SC development, but it rarely to never leads to some form of dialogue where CIG takes our feedback given and talks about what they think about it, what they may pick what is not possible etc. Instead they keep doing what they do and feedback given on any topic – like the constant combat focus - feels like talking to a wall. At the same time CIG has troubles to find topics they can talk about in their ISC / SCL weekly shows … Regards HkS73