First of all: I’m not a fan of the balancing changes either, and the whole situation leaves a rather bitter aftertaste. In my opinion, however, the biggest problem is the general lack of respect for player pledges and how they are being handled. ~$300 is a huge amount of money for an ingame asset, something many tend to forget. With such a price, there should come a certain level of responsibility and respect. Of course, ships must be balanced somehow, but if I spend $300 on a ship designed to fulfill a specific role, it’s not okay to simply change that role. The Redeemer was sold as a heavy gunboat: large weapons, slow but tanky. That’s what people wanted, that’s what they paid for, and in many cases, they spent a long time setting up their CCU chains for it. Nerfing the Redeemer—making it significantly less tanky and more agile—is already a tough sell, and it’s no wonder that many are unhappy with this change. This is no longer the ship they pledged for. It’s not just about raw performance but also about the gameplay experience. And, of course, there are some people who might prefer a nimbler Redeemer. The real problem arises when another ship takes over its previous role—and that’s exactly what has happened. The Paladin now fills the Redeemer's former role, which is a terrible decision. A much smarter approach would have been to swap the roles of the two ships: keep the Redeemer heavy and slow, while the Paladin is faster and more maneuverable. To illustrate the issue differently: imagine buying the F8C, only for it to be changed into a medium/light fighter. Then, a few months later, the Sabre Mk II arrives and takes over its role as a heavy fighter. Sure, some people might welcome that, but from a design perspective, it’s a disaster. TL;DR: The Redeemer was sold as a heavy gunship, then changed into a "medium gunship," while the Paladin has now taken over as the new heavy gunship.