Docs / Outreach / Monetization

Monetization

Monetization is explicitly not yet decided. This page surveys the candidate models, what each implies for design, and the constraints we already know we want to honor. The actual decision lands at M18 / M19 on the roadmap.

Constraints We Already Know

No pay-to-win. Competitive integrity is the spine of the game's value proposition. Anything that affects match outcome must be earnable through play, not bought.
Cosmetics-friendly architecture from day one. Even if we launch as premium-paid, we're building structural support for skins, banners, VFX variants — so we can add a store post-launch without a refactor.
No mid-match microtransactions. No "press X to spend $1 to instant-respawn your hero." Match state is sacred.
Respect the audience. Strategy players are notably sensitive to dishonest monetization. Whatever we ship, it has to feel optional, not coercive.

Candidate Models

Model A — Premium Paid + Cosmetic DLC

Buy the box once. All gameplay content is included. Cosmetic store opens post-launch with skins, banners, VFX recolors, voice packs.

Pros	Cons
Highest-trust model — players pay once, get the game. Aligns with the strategy-game audience expectation (Civ, Crusader Kings, AoE all charge upfront). Simpler service requirements; we don't have to run a store on day 1. Fewer ethical pitfalls.	Lower ceiling on revenue per player. Requires marketing reach to drive day-1 sales. Harder to grow a long tail without a service model.

Best for: indie launches that want to build trust first and add monetization layers later.

Model B — Free-to-Play + Cosmetic-Only Store

Game is free to download. All gameplay content is unlocked through play. Revenue from cosmetics only — leader skins, unit kits, banners, animated emotes, lobby flair.

Pros	Cons
Maximum reach — F2P drives the largest top-of-funnel. Player-base size matters for FFA matchmaking; a large pool fills 12-player matches. No pay-to-win complaints by construction. Long tail — cosmetics keep selling for years.	Requires a credible cosmetic art pipeline from day 1 (real cost). Live-ops headcount required. Risk that "all gameplay free" feels off-brand to the strategy-game audience. Cheating becomes a bigger problem (no per-account purchase friction).

Best for: games that need a large player base for matchmaking to work, and have the studio capacity to run a live service.

Model C — Hybrid: Premium with Free Trial Window

Premium paid box, but with a free trial mode — a few featured leader/army combos rotate weekly and are playable for free. Players who like the game buy the box; players who don't, churn out without spending.

Pros	Cons
Discoverability of F2P with revenue clarity of paid. Trial mode doubles as marketing — friends can play with paying friends. Cosmetic store can layer on top. Matchmaking pool stays large from trial-mode players.	More complex licensing logic in code (entitlement gates). Still requires the trial-rotation infrastructure to run live. Risk of trial-mode players feeling "second class" if not designed well.

Best for: a strategy game with multiplayer matchmaking where pool size and word-of-mouth both matter.

Cosmetic Surface Areas

If we open a cosmetic store under any model, these are the surfaces we'd sell on:

Surface	What it sells	Production cost
Leader skins	Alt outfits, weapons, ability VFX recolors	High — full character art
Army unit kits	Visual variants of every unit in an army	High — many small assets
Tile / banner sets	The visual identity of your owned tiles on the board	Medium
Path FX	How your paths animate and pulse	Low–medium
Lobby flair	Profile borders, animated portraits, win celebration screens	Low
Sound packs	Leader voice, claim/upgrade SFX themes	Medium

Battle Pass Considerations

A seasonal battle pass is a common F2P revenue tool. If we ship one, the hard rule is the same: cosmetics only. No leader unlocks gated behind the pass. No XP boosts that affect matchmaking eligibility.

Considerations against shipping a battle pass:

It signals "live service game" loudly. The strategy-game audience can read this as a red flag.
Requires a content cadence we may not be staffed to sustain.
Adds a season-end FOMO loop that doesn't match the slow-burn strategy genre.

Lean: probably not at launch.

Founder / Early Access Pack

A Founders Pack at launch — a one-time purchase that grants:

The base game.
A unique founder cosmetic set (banner, lobby flair, exclusive leader skin variant).
Early access to playtests and the post-MVP closed beta.
Listing in a Founders ledger (lobby flair only — no in-match advantage).

This works under any of the three models above. It's a clean way to pull early-adopter revenue forward without committing to a full DLC pipeline.

Esports & Prize Pools

Out of scope for launch. If a competitive scene grows organically, a percentage of cosmetic sales could feed prize pools (Crowdfunded International style). This is a speculative future, not a plan.

Decision Process

Now → M18: build the game. Architect for cosmetics. Don't decide the model.
M18 (leaderboards / match history): we have real telemetry on retention, session length, and player count. Decide here whether the model is premium, F2P, or hybrid.
M19: if F2P or hybrid, define the cosmetic store's launch inventory and the per-player progression that doesn't affect matches.
M24: final pricing pass before ship.

Reminder: nothing on this page is committed. If you have an opinion on which direction we should go — especially if you've shipped one of these models before — that's exactly the kind of input we want before M18.