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.

Dude, your face...

Bold Pilot Log, Entry #9

Actually your whole body. Yes, in EVE. You can see people in EVE now... Ah well, not really. It's just some bloke in a makeshift apartment staring at his billion-ISK fleet. The more interesting part, however, is the story of all this.

It's been talked about a lot, it's been worked on a lot, and now finally, after much rage and red, the first piece is finally out. On Tranquility and of the way. Because what the characters walking inside their capitain's quarters' really are can be called as a tech demo. Now they know how to do a few things.

First, they sort of know how to control character avatars in an interior environment. The movement is smooth, though it definitely can use some work. The way the character reacts is a bit awkward in that it sometimes follows the camera angle, sometimes not. On top of that, I'm not entirely sure the WASD controls were the best choice. I find that a lot of times you start typing 'wwwwwwwwww' in some text window instead of walking forward. I personally would welcome a point n click approach included, so that the damn space barbie can walk up to that couch and sit without having to play a platformer game towards it. Oh wait...

Second, they now know how to do the station interiors themselves, lot of work ahead, huh?

Third, we can see a glimpse of the new interface in there. Yes, I'm talking about the active ship menu. This being CCP we're talking about, it is quite likely, that they aren't going to design something entirely new when they have a few bit lying about. So yeah, get ready for floating transparent buttons and windows overlay.

I can't stop myself but continue my verdict with the statement that the biggest plus I cna see is they have a lot of potential there. God knows, I might even get out of the CQ and mess around with other people in station. I also want to meet Scotty, the docking manager. The graphics are damn good too, but I'm not sure about the optimization. Got some flickers here and there on high settings, but I only have a dx10 card so that I cna contend with.
After carefully evaluating the situation with this expansion (read: raise eyebrow, nod head, sip beer, relax eyebrow) the current standpoint is: 'So what...' Yeah, I'm left a bit indifferent. After much excitement, it wasn't that big of an impression. Maybe it's just me, but the content presented here seems to be irrelevant to my interests. So, is Incarna a fail or a win? In some sense, both. It failed to leave the amount of immersion I was expecting. It's like two worlds in the same game. I suspect this has to do with the difference in graphic detail and lighting. In space, you have fairly low-res textures on most ships. In the station, everything is smooth, shiny, clear. It breaks the game into two. This, I feared from the start. What we can see here is technically amazing and I must applaud the people that put the effort and imagination behind it.
Because it is apparent on every surface and every little movement, that it was a whole lot of work, trial and failure to make Slideshow Online available parallel with Spreadsheets online.
But when I look at the screen something gets lost. It really is apprent when you look at people's new and old portraits. Something that was very EVE, got lost in the process. I am not a very good writer and thus I can only convey this in one way: MOAR RUST.

There is another huge feature though that made me smile. As you may know, I'm a gunnery pilot. And, ladies, gentlemen and capsuleers, let me present you the new turrets! The purity of awesome just got a new definition. I really like the new turrets. The only minor Issue I could find is that while the old ones were generally light-colored, their icons could be seen in space next to the targets. However, the new turret graphics came with new icons, meaning that now there are dark, green, brown, even black dominant colors, making it difficult to see which targets have one on them at one glance.

So. One room. One guy. 67 new turret models. Good work, CCP. Now please finish it.

Sessym out.

The pests

Bold Pilot Log, Entry #8

This is my high-sec home. We're missioning, and salvaging and blowing up NPC's. The only problems are the pests. While other places have rats or roids, we have...

NINJAS.

That's right. They come into a mission and grab its loot. Floating junk all over the place, might as well use it, right? Well, you'd have thought that it was all they do. But when you look at their employment history and see a two year old pilot you realize they're usually up to something more. There's a reason why I don't really bother with them. First, let's see what they do and want you to do.

1. Scan down missioning ship. It's easy most of the time, because most missioning ships are battleships or no unscannable objects anyways.
2. Warp to mission area. Usually by the time you get a warpin, the owner had completed or tanked the first room.
3. Start salvaging wrecks. Since salvage won't flag you, the danger of CONCORD being spawned protects the salvager from the mission owner. Not that he could catch a frigate anyways.
4. Steal loot from mission runner. Criminal flag obtained, the ninja practically invites the mission owner to shoot him / her. And, ladies, gentlemen, and capsuleers, that's where the magic happens.
5. Kill mission runner.
6. Drink tears.

Now you may wonder how the fuck can part 5 happen. Easy. When you shoot at someone in low and high security space, they got 15 minutes to take revenge. That's more than enough for a witty capsuleer to jump your slow, undertanked battleship and beat the shit out of it. Not jsut that, but the whole corporation the ninja is in can attack you too, and they probably will if they're nearby. Also, by shooting at the precious loot you tried to protect, they can extend the timer further, so if you get the idea to dock up and wait for things to clear up, don't forget the timer.

So, what can be done to throw the sand of the sandbox back into the face of the 'bully'. Let's go through the list again:
1. Unscannable ship. Like a Tengu. Tradeoff is, it's expensive and gimped. You might just get ganked the other way by suiciders.
2 and 3. Use marauders. Skill-intensive, expensive, but fast in completing missions and also is able to get the loot from 40k away. Until then, you can shave off the frustation by letting go of wrecks. Some missions can be blitzed easily. Some might have bounties worth gunning for. But in overall, you can optimize your cheap insurable T1 battleship to do the job until you train up.
4. Dun shoot at no ninjaz. It's almost certain that they have something up their sleeve. If they realize you don't give a damn, they probably will go away. Or, take the loot. Watch for the mission objective though. Some objective items cannot be stolen, some can (those that can be bought over the market). Always obtain that first or leave the ship it is in alive if possible. Transporters are especially nice in this way because they even save you the trouble of approaching their wrecks.
5. You can build hybrid setups that can live with neuting and tank the other PVP ship (for example,a  hurricane). Fit war distruptor or warp scrambler. Omni-tank and carry various ammunition. Run if there are more than 1 BC's.  Usually can't tank them AND the mission. They will probably bring passive tanks and cheap stuff because of CONCORD. Be aware though that they are living off this, and generally have a better understanding of aggro mechanics. They can, for example bring logistics ships into the fight. High sec consensual, non-war PVP is more like, for example Lineage II than EVE. You have flags you have to watch. We've covered that few lines up.
6. If you got your ass kicked, don't get angry. They'll often convo you and try to piss you off. Disregard, answer with cool head, analyse. If you don't behave like a child whose toy was taken, there's a good chance they'll begin to respect you. It's a rare thing.

I keep telling myself I'm not some carebear. Truth is, I am. I just like to shoot at both red crosses and internet spaceships of pixel people. And yeah, I'm also trigger-happy. Sometimes I find myself cursing like
"Why the hell has highsec to be like this.. I want to shoot people out of the blue if I don't like them."
Then I realize that's jsut not EVE. In EVE, you either take the full risk, or let everything go as it goes.

Sessym out.