Can't say I'm surprised. You guys knew a lot of Valk owners would have wanted to upgrade to the Asgard. Which, despite the fact that it is larger and can carry tanks... is just a bit less expensive than its older brother. I would ask what motivated that price decision, but I think every backer that has been around long enough can easily figure it out. Edit: Before you say: "just melt it". Yeah, that's not really an option If your Valk is LTI or part of a pack... (without losing a LOT in the process). Not the end of the world (and ok calling it "vile" the title is a bit of a strech, I'll admit), but please don't try to convince me that the reason the Valk is more expensive is a bunch of seats. :rolling_on_the_floor_laughing: . Use some common sense. You know why it's cheaper. Edit 2: Alright cleary, I presented this very poorly (and that's on me). It came of as me wanting the ship to be more expensive. When that's not the case, I just think the Valk should be cheaper than the Asgard and a viable CCU chain. If my post came off as "Make the ship more expensive, please", I apologies. That's not how I wanted to say it, but that's how it came off with how I titled this post. I'm glad that folks got the Asgard for cheaper, but my take that the Valk shouldn't be more expensive than the Asgard remains. C.I.G in their behind the ship video called it "A Valk on steroids". So why is the Valk more expensive? Doesn't make sense. So clearly, to me, that pricing is to cut off the Valk to Asgard CCU chain. Hence my post. That said, I could and should have worded it without sounding like I was complaining that a ship wasn't expensive enough. Poor choice of words. I deserve the :picardpalm: . I'll take the L.