To re-emphasize, the focus of this proposal is not to prevent players from selling Alchemica. That is the default, expected behavior.
The focus is to dramatically reduce new supply while also stimulating demand, which should help balance the source-sink ratio of Alchemica, which is currently skewed to the supply side.
I do not believe that incrementally reducing channeling will help reach that goal quickly and effectively, as we can clearly see the imbalance. If something is apparent, I believe it is better to just address it directly while trying to anticipate any second order effects and designing measures to handle them (such as GHST rewards for builders, mobility boosts for high kin gotchis, etc.).
Throughout this three-month period we can design dashboards to help visualize better the economy in preparation for the review period proposal.
1. What currently planned sinks are in design and/ or development and tentative timelines and if any of them will be available before game play release
Besides Aesthetica (decorations / tiles) there are currently no additional sinks planned before PVP gameplay. NFT Displays and Bounce Gates are live and I expect demand for those to continue as more players enter the Gotchiverse for social activities.
2. What is the tentative release time of the game play
No specific timeline on that but as I have said before I will be very surprised if some form of PVP is not shipped in 2022.
3. What alchemica price targets are you shooting for by this type of adjustments? what will be our success criteria and guidelines for reverting (at least partially) of this adjustment?
The success criteria of this proposal is the daily/weekly emissions of Alchemica vs. spending. The price of Alchemica is variable and depends on many factors, and is beyond the scope of this discussion.
4. Can we shorten the evaluation period to like 1 month
What advantages do you believe a 1-month eval period has over a 3-month eval period? Changes like this take time to percolate, I wouldn’t want to be too hasty in evaluating it.
5. Strongly against tie kinship to HP. Lesser opposing to movement speed but still feel that’s not right.
Definitely open to more suggestions on where to tie in kinship
Disable Alchemical Channeling completely, except for one full day during the week (likely Saturday, to coincide with hangouts). This has lore potential. We now have a “holy day of channeling” in which the alchemica gods are kind to gotchi-kin. Also good because we’re not completely turning off channeling which would have been a shame (understatement).
Enable spillover for Reservoirs 24/7. Scholars in particular will love this. Way more dynamic, community oriented and entertaining than monotonous channeling.
Allow 100% refund for demolishing Altars. Why is this needed? If the new meta is farming only than you’re going to need altars…
Boost movement speed and hit points for high kinship Gotchis. No please don’t do this. This will negate a future sink which is hp and speed potions. This kind of buff would likely get turned off by the DAO anyway because it follows the same logic as “high kinship gotchis taking all the alchemica so turn off channeling”. Save trait buffs for wearable investment and potion sinks pretty please.
The point of the refund, is so that you can take down your L7 humble and put the altar on a harvestable parcel. Yeas, you could also use that as a rage quit refund, , but it will also enable people who have a bunch of low/mid level altars to consolidate them into one good one. It takes two of the level below to make the next level, if you are shopping with refunds, so the people who have a pile of L4s will be able to turn 8 l4 humbles into one l7 spacious. Provided that alch prices are aided by this change, they are now in a place where they may feel different about building, as they have the altar, and the altar is the roadblock to the whole operation.
As far as bots and dumping by scholars goes… nah… not with reservoirs. Maybe with the low level ones that have terrible yields, but noone with a substantial yield is using high spill gear. Most of it will go right to owners.
I really do not understand why #2 of this proposal is included if the main goal was to address equilibrium to the emissions vs sink. IMO it looks like it was just included for the rental market only being that this issue has been brought up for months but with the consensus that this would hurt not help token prices as the reason that it should stay off. If its solely about emissions this should not be included being that the goal is to get to the ideal 1:1 ratio as soon as possible. Also what is the actual plan for the landowners that have installations and altars? I saw where GHST was mentioned, so will it be an option or will they just get the alchemica airdropped to them in the place of burning them?
I have over 50+ parcels with at least a lvl 3 altar and the temptation to “dump” is very high if something like this passes because it seems like every few months something changes that makes my initial investment seem rather dumb. For the price originally of a spacious i can now get 3 or 4 and for a reasonable you are looking at maybe 5 or 6
thanks for addressing the issue quickly and putting up a proposal for it. Also really glad to hear about the progress made towards the bot protection.
Overall I agree with your proposal, I’d like to see more solid data to tune the number for destruction but I’m against 100% regardless, there shouldn’t be a reverse button without some consequences.
On the other hand, I’m strongly against to tie kinship to any gotchi attribute for compensation. Just like interest rates, channeling rates could be adjustable but I understand the potential grievances.
To make up for it, I’d suggest an alternative benefit. High kinship gotchis could have a higher chance of alchemica spilling in bigger amounts. This should be a small but still convenient advantage, while it doesn’t fully leverage the channeling gotchi but with a good probability will do so. I also think this is lore friendly, higher the kinship more favored the gotchis for raining alchemica and their findings are bigger and worthy.
Wait so you want high kin gotchis to spill more alchemica than less alchemica? Should not that be reversed? Would not a higher kinship gotchi be more skilled in his craft than novice (low kin) gotchi?
Maybe it wasn’t clear, what I meant wasn’t related to spill radius or percentages, it was about the individual scattered alchemica pieces.
If there’s a parameter(kinship) to adjust size of alchemica spilling pieces(for high kin) it will scatter in less locations in the given radius which makes it less tedious to ensure everything is collected.
That is assumed of course when there’s not whole a lot of competition around, but that’s the nice thing about it, it’s not granted and there will be sometimes surprises.
One potential issue is if the channeling is constrained to happen in one day of the week, users need more flexibility to channel to balance it out timewise.
I think instead of hourly cooldowns, the aaltars should have charges i.e a Lv. 9 altar should get 24 charges to channel back to back. This would give people some flexibility during the limited time that it is possible channel and would serve also as a way to incentivize updating.
Coderdan, thank you for the well written and well thought-out proposal. You have clearly outlined your goals and provided supporting evidence with a broad enough scope for us to see the whole picture.
The biggest thing I like about this proposal that I feel is getting overlooked in conversation is that it is temporary. With some form of PVP/PVE coming within the timeframe of this proposal I am sure there will be enough information to figure out a better way forward once combat is in place.
I do not think this will make high kin gotchis useless since this is just temporary. And 3 months really isn’t that long. I would also propose that - if no path forward is agreed upon after 3 months of implementation then we automatically revert back to the current system. This will give confidence to the players who have invested in high kinship gotchis/ channeling that they will not be forgotten about or swept under the rug.
the same here. more than 150 parcels , if something like this is approved I will sell everything and leave this game. no respect or consideration for anyone who has invested in this game on altars or Gotchis.
GOOD proposal in general. It is clear that the current supply/demand imbalance is trashing the ecosystem. It MUST be addressed asap or this thing will death spiral. A few suggestions to consider:
User choice on when their 24 hour channelling period happens during any given week. Making it only on Saturdays is tough for people with Saturday commitments.
Scarcity, and proximity to resources and community always has been a driver for property values. Further land issuance should absolutely be abolished and immutable, not able to be changed in the future. Like BTC 21MM, scarcity is key to value.
The value of a gotchi needs to be more closely tied to development. New installation prices should vary inversely to kinship and brs. The better your gotchis, the less it costs you to develop the land.
Installation buyback value decrease to 25%. When you develop a property that is a sunk cost. Game should mimic the real.
Introduce rentable makers that cost alchem by the hour/day that speed up upgrade times while rented.
Thanks for your proposal. It is timely and necessary.
If sustainable demand cannot be created, closing Alchemical Channeling can only temporarily reduce the selling pressure, and a new round of selling pressure will also be formed after the buying pressure enters the cultivated land.
Sounds like a reasonable solution. In the future could it be possible To tie channeling and farming together? Farming spillover goes to the channeling pool. This would make channeling reasonable endeveor peridiocally, when ever there Is enough Juice In the godly qauge. Maybe even pvp could replenish farming?
There is a lot of ideas going around, community is very split on this topic.
I agree that proposal of Mark/Fantasma is smaller scale, and will not be enough long term, but DAO should vote between multiple solutions.
I would like to adress important topic, that might actually help alchemica price as well.
As Coderdan noted in proposal number 3, REALM Diamond contract has enough alchemica to withstand massive aaltar demolition, but we need to address potential alchemica bank run. If everybody disenchant all structures, there will not be enough alchemica to refund.
“Crafting revenue Distribution” in Gothiverse chapter 2 say alchemica from crafting is distributed this way:
Great portal: 35%
Pixelcraft: 30%
DAO: 30%
Burn: 5%
When you destroy altar / reservoir / harvester you get 50% of alchemica back, but I am not sure where this alchemica is coming from… Am I missing something? We need to know exactly where is refund coming from.
What I suggest:
The structures will be Labeled as “Refundable” / “ Non refundable”…. , so for example Altar / Reservoir / Harvester is refundable, and Tiles, Decorations are non refundable….
When crafting “Refundable” structure, ”Crafting revenue distribution” would look like this:
Refund contract: 50% (it should contain as much alchemica, as if all refundable installations would be destroyed, there is enough alchemica to satisfy everybody)
Great portal: 17%
Pixelcraft: 14%
DAO: 14%
Burn: 5%
When crafting “Non Refundable” structure, ”Crafting revenue distribution” would look like original in gotchiverse:
Great portal: 35%
Pixelcraft: 30%
DAO: 30%
Burn: 5%
We should return alchemica to refund contract. DAO / Pixelcraft / Great portal…. We have also a lot of alchemica in spillover contract, so it could be returned from there. Majority of alchemica was not spend yet….there was DAO prop to provide alchemica liquidity, so DAO might have to buy their part of alchemica on open market if needed. This is TBD.
The impact on the alchemica economy would be:
It will bootstrap a lot of alchemica within Refund Contract, potentially help alchemica price a little.
It will block possibility of bank run on alchemica.
