First, congratulations to the marketing and sales team for unlocking the ability to sell $5,000 ship concepts. It is a masterclass in funding generation, especially as the project sails comfortably toward the $1 Billion mark while the live alpha remains in a truly deplorable and unplayable state is a true financial masterpiece engineering. However, looking past the pledge store, the operational priorities seem heavily skewed. It is fascinating that a project with a billion dollars in funding can seamlessly pitch a $5,000 digital promise, yet lacks the communication infrastructure to address why a $600 live asset like the Ironclad is currently unplayable with 80+ confirmed Issue Council bugs. When does the priority shift from accumulating historical funding to delivering basic stability and transparency? Leaving macro-level wishful thinking aside, could we get definitive, concrete timelines for: Squadron 42: The actual launch date. The Ironclad: A real schedule to fix the 80+ confirmed bugs. Dynamic Server Meshing: The target deployment window. Flight Model: When will it be fully locked and finalized? Commercial Release: The real roadmap for both titles. Planetary Tech: The rollout of Genesis on all worlds. And all the pending promises The funding goals are consistently met with perfection; it is time for the core development milestones and basic communications to be held to the same standard. //Note to the devs. If you are pushing/crunching hard to release SQ42 imminently (really imminently) you have all my admiration and support for the final rush, but it's very difficult to be in this doubt which oscillates between "is it ultimately a scam or a masterpiece?" In which reality are we playing ? because lot of things are broken on SC. Meanwhile interviews for a release... Any transmission from the deep black ?