The Wonderful Six - Connection Between Mirrors and Internet Spaceships

Bold Pilot Log, Entry #10

The rage is about to cease as I write this entry. Thousands of players have made clear to CCP what they don't want. In essence, there was no clear word on whether CCP decides to sell non-vanity items in its newly introduced cash shop.

But let us stop for a moment here. Vanity and non-vanity? What are we talking about?

To cite a classic EVE response: 'It depends.' So, everybody thinks it's clear but the nature of EVE is in fact very resistant to micortransactions. I say that because the complex mechanics that make up the game are depending on simple principles. Those are in short risk, trade-off and effort.

Risk means that whatever you have, your actions can and most of the time will result in losing it, whether you value it or not. Ships can pop, prices can shift, competition can drive you out of business any time.

Trade-off is the principle that your decisions have to have an impact. The best example is ship fitting. Do I armor tank my hurricane and sacrifice its speed and damage, or do I shield tank it and sacrifice slots that could have been used for tackle and EWAR? Or in industry - do I buy it and save the time required for production, or do I build it and take the risk of selling whatever I need it for later?

Effort is required to make the game meaningful and a value as entertainment. Essentially, everything you do takes time, ISK, skill training, faction standings, etc. This means that not just you, every other person who engages in the same activity, has to put at least the same energy and time into it as you to compete with you.

And that, ladies, gentlemen and capsuleers, is where we connect to the world of microtransactions. This is something all game developers will consider when they are thinking of ways to add the ability to buy ingame things with real money. The predicament we face is a simple question that is hard to answer well. How do we not break the game with it so people will still enjoy it? The answer seems as simple as keeping the cash shop vanity-only. But the how does it translate to EVE, is what I am trying to explain here.

When I say EVE is very resistant to breaking, I refer to the above introduced three principles that make up the bones and flesh of it. If you introduce something that bypasses any of them, you break the game. You still have to be carefulwith it. Let's look at a few examples.

Example 1: 'Aura' projectile ammunition

• Does all kinds of damage, evenly split but no more than Faction Ammo.
• Short-range Ammo, with all other stats the same as e.g. EMP S/M/L.
• Unique graphical effect when firing it.
• No material cost, just drop AUR and you get the shells.
• Can be put on contracts, sold on market

Example 2: 'Decimator' Gallente battleship

• A T2 Hyperion with increased power grid and same CPU and same slot layout as the T1 hull.
• Requires Marauders 3 and Gallente BS 5 to board
• Role bonus of increased Web range, velocity factor
• 125 m^3 drone bay and 125 bandwith
• Only the blueprint copy is handed out, requires the same materials as a marauder would.

Example 3: 'Divinitiy' Amarr Control Tower

• No standings required to anchor.
• Invulnerable in an online state.
• 50% reduction in fuel cost for all modules.
• Only the blueprint copy is handed out, requires materials to build.
• Cannot be sold, relocated to player hangar upon destruction of carrying ship.

So, here they are. Now, which one of the items listed above is vanity? It is example 2, the Decimator! It is a fairly overpowered ship, why the hell then, you may ask is it okay to put this in the cash shop? Let's see!

• Risk - check! You may have it "pimped out" as you want, but I land a black ops gang on it, and it's gone before you know it. It'll pop just like any other ship does.
• Effort - check! You need to train up to board it, you need to build it from materials that have been created by normal game mechanics.
• Trade-off - check! Since it does not bypass the fitting requirements, so you'll still have to think carefully what you put in its slots.

Now let's take a look at why the other two examples are non-vanity, in other words, gamebreaker stuff. Example 1, the ammunition is created out of thin air. It bypasses the effort rule. It also does all kinds of damage, which, if set too high, will bypass the trade-off rule. Example 3, the POS tower is bad because it most importantly bypasses risk - cannot be destroyed in normal circumstances and cannot be taken by killing the ship that carries it. Also, to a lesser extent, it bypasses effort, because anchoring in high security space would normally take months of standing grind. It also is unavailable for any other players who might be interested in it.

So, to sum things up, when a cash shop item enters EVE, there are quite a few requirements that should all be met in order to make it blend into the game. I'll call these the 'Wonderful Six':

1. Risk - All the risks that are associated to the same item group must also apply to the cash-shop item.
2. Effort - There must be an ingame effort associated with the item, preferably higher or the same as its group.
3. Trade-off - It must not eliminate trade-offs typical to its group.
4. Availability - It must be available to everyone, at least via purchase with ISK. (Most of the times the AUR cycle will provide this, but it's still a valid concern.)
5. Balance - It must be balanced against its own class of items, and must not give an arbitrary advantage.
6. Challenge - It must not eliminate or overly diminish the challenges a player might face during the game.

When purchasing cash shop items, please consider the following. Buying anything that does not meet the above criteria enters what I call the no-fun zone. It will sooner or later break the game experience for all parties involved.

Sessym out.