1- I recall seeing that thread locked and thought it was a bit odd, but given there were a few other very similar threads also at the same time, I can only guess that someone simply mistook it for a double-post.

2- I can't speak as to any specific mail that IC support may have recieved, but given the likely volume of minidump mails I'd expect they're getting, I imagine they're only going to be replying to things that they need more details on, or that they think can be solved on the user end. Crashes due to actual code faults are more likely to just show up fixed in an update if the devs are able to pin them down--at least that's the way we handle it with GalCiv2 reports.

I appreciate the responses thus far, but I have to respectfully disagree regarding the lack of communication. An auto-reply along the lines of "Thank you for your submission. Rest assured we are investigating your problem." requires little effort on the part of IC. As it stands now my email (which would be hard to miss given the 10 MB compressed attachment) may be out in the 'ether'. Point being there is no confirmation that my email even reached IC let alone is actually being investigated. It's poor customer service no matter how you look at it.

I also respectfully disagree with the 'waste of money' comment. I believe this problem will be resolved given time. I would have thought the beta period would have served this function, but I do understand the flip side of this that not all hardware/software combinations can be tested. Any time software is released to "the masses" there is bound to be something come up that was not accounted for in testing.

All that said, perhaps it's time to post something on the news section about this issue in lieu of "we made these ships faster and made the economy x,y,z". A simple acknowledgment that there is a legitimate issue would go a long way towards satiating your customer's patience.

Respect to all.

Thank you Blair for the communication. I AM trying to keep the tone in this thread civil (which is also the reason why I opened a separate mini-dump thread, but it was locked).

I did read the post you linked to and that thread is a perfect example of why I think a formal acknowledgment is warranted. The success of Sins will ultimately be derived from the success of the community and currently there is quite a bit of negative back and forth going on.

For the community at large, I admit I am "envious" of those who don't have any issues, but the fact that I, and others, DO have legitimate issues doesn't warrant the flippant responses I've read in other threads. On the flip side, those that DO have issues should take a deep breath before posting and post the issue in a responsible manner.

As my original post states, I was more frustrated by the lack of communication than the crash itself. By responding to this post you've assuaged my frustration at least temporarily. For the record, my locked post states that I was part of the beta as well, but I never had cause to contact support (the betas worked fine in the context that they were betas (a bit sluggish overall, a few hiccups now and then, but nothing to the extent that I am now experiencing)).

In closing, I am certain IC will fix the problems, but please IC, take into consideration that this needs to be communicated on a larger scale than what was being done during the beta.