Another spillage solution...... :)

[JonnyC321]

Just an idea….

The spillage mechanic is a good one but its terrible for the economy, I don’t think the economy would last long with that kind of permanent extraction even in a bull market.
The rental market works fine at the moment without spillage, so if it isn’t broken don’t fix it….

Why don’t we keep the rental market and the spillage pick up completely separate.
So rented gotchis from the open market are used only for channelling and land servicing purposes. emptying reservoirs UBI channelling, land management etc… they cannot pick up spillage ever.

For spillage pick up you have a separate contracts market. With the contracts market, %100 of the spillage picked up goes to the gotchi owner if the contract is fulfilled. Contracts are issued by gotchi owners but under set parameters.

The contracts parameters are set by the DAO or automated, you could have 3 options 1hr, 2 hr, 4hr… they have a set ghst pay out on completion. So you pick up X amount of alchemica in 4HRS and you receive X amount of GHST.

The contracts should be set up so gotchi owners are effectively buying alchemica at a discount if the contract is fulfilled. . So, it incentivises gotchi owners to open contracts to accumulate cheaper alch. If alchemica prices decline then the so does the discount rate and contracting becomes unprofitable, = less or no contracts available = less sell pressure on alch/ghst.

If the contractor fails to fulfil the contract requirements, then the alch they picked up goes to the district dao and the contract issuer gets their ghst back.
If they complete the contract, then the owner receives the alchemica and the contractor gets his ghst as a reward.

The contracts would have to be approved by both parties to stop people spamming contract acquisition and reducing the competition… And each wallet would have a reputation/statistic on their past performance, so the contract issuer knows if they are a good bet or not in terms of fulfilling the contract requirements.

The idea would be to make it so that the contractor’s job is not easy, and they don’t win %100 of the time. Never really understood why we would want to just give alchemica away to people that put nothing into the eco system…

I think a 20%-win ratio would be about right for marketing purposes and the other 80% don’t lose anything except their own time. It adds a layer of gamification to spillage pickup. Puts allot of alch into the hands of the district doa’s who’s job it is to burn it on aesthetic items… add traits to the equation and some gotchis would be better for fulfilling contract requirements than others because of their potential to pick up more spillage faster. So adds value to gotchi’s with better traits for spillage pick up. Especially if traits affect your speed and the amounts of spillage you can carry before heading to a vortex…

Probably going to get allot of push back on this because of the DAO setting prices for the discount rate, this is obviously the biggest draw back with this idea…. Maybe it could be automated so the price of the contract’s updates to a constant %25 percent discount with a cut off when alch goes below a certain price…. but thought I’d post it anyway because it might enable us to get spillage turned on without affecting the rental market which is chugging along nicely on its own.

Also, players are obviously going to ask why they should be paying for their spillage even if it is at a discount. Well it’s all relative right, there are currently talks about giving all spillage to the district doa’s… at least the contract system would allow them to get some benefit from their own spillage…

They could issue themselves or a scholar a contract before they empty a load of reservoirs to accumulate alch at cheaper prices.

Not sure how easy this is to accomplish from a smart contract pov….

I think this system would allow us to throttle extraction from the economy by adjusting the contract requirements and changing the W/L ratio.

I expect there are many holes in this idea… interested in constructive opinions though.

[Garuga]

The spillage mechanic is a good one but its terrible for the economy, I don’t think the economy would last long with that kind of permanent extraction even in a bull market.

How? You’re assuming everyone that plays spillover gets Alchemica sells it immediately, some people, like myself, stake spillover earnings immediately. You’re assumption is this is a bad model but there’s more incentive to stake if you’re a player, or at least enough so you can rent for next week’s spillover and restake more, creating a positive feedback loop. I’m not sure it actually drives down Alchemica prices, except for bots, which the developers are dealing with. If you really want to blame prices on someone, why not the whales? You ever see the GHST-GLTR pool go from 31M staked tokens to 28M overnight just to see it shoot up again at the end of the week? Price volatility is more about the whales rather than you’re average player. Sorry, but people making money from things they usually wouldn’t and using that money is basically Web3. Also keep in mind that FUD, and FOMO are beginning to ramp up in value (according to coingecko).

ALPHA and KEK is trading sideways, meaning people are neither buying nor selling, generally a strong staking force. People hold KEK over the others mainly because it’s rarer.

I think what’s happening is people held ALPHA and KEK, sold their FUD and FOMO, and now have to rebuy that FUD and FOMO at a premium as people stake it more and more, there’s buying pressure every time a new building drops. There’s more incentive to stake if you want to play the long term. Economy looks okay to me.

Why don’t we keep the rental market and the spillage pick up completely separate.
So rented gotchis from the open market are used only for channelling and land servicing purposes. emptying reservoirs UBI channelling, land management etc… they cannot pick up spillage ever.

Generally the idea is that you can rent a gotchi and do anything with it. People may have gotchis for just spillover, like one shot gotchis (in the future) that can die. There’s no way you’re complaining that people renting for spillover are interfering with channeling, that’s simply never the case, you have to time the market just right to get a gotchi for channeling. For Spillover, 1 HR before the event you can get a 3HR gotchi for 0.05 GHST. The player earns money due to their labor, and they paid the rental fee set by the gotchi lender, where’s the unfairness here?

For spillage pick up you have a separate contracts market. With the contracts market, %100 of the spillage picked up goes to the gotchi owner if the contract is fulfilled. Contracts are issued by gotchi owners but under set parameters.

The contracts parameters are set by the DAO or automated, you could have 3 options 1hr, 2 hr, 4hr… they have a set ghst pay out on completion. So you pick up X amount of alchemica in 4HRS and you receive X amount of GHST.

So instead of a transaction between the gotchi owner and the player, you want to add another party? So you’re essentially adding a middleman? You are thinking that the DAO will give more fair options, but also, DAOs are run by humans, most notably humans with a lot of money have the most influence.

So in your example you explain the player takes a contract, puts up their spoils of toil as collateral, and if they don’t reach a certain amount not only do they lose the possibility of earning GHST, the gotchi owner loses out on the Alchemica as well as it would go to the DAO. If the player succeeds they get GHST as a reward, no doubt it would be worth less than the amount accrued through Alchemica in the current model though. Honestly this is such a raw deal I would quit the game completely if something like this was implemented. However, in the right context, smart missions will be the future once more activities are in the metaverse, this ain’t it though.

There is already a vault for asset management to optimize as much as possible, in fact the vault is probably driving the market. So what I’m saying is, if people want to have their earnings on assets optimized by a third party, they can already do this with the vault. What you’re suggesting applies to all players, forcing them to accept third party management of their assets. I’m against this. The two party P2P model in place is what Aave is all about, so I don’t think it will change.

The idea would be to make it so that the contractor’s job is not easy, and they don’t win %100 of the time. Never really understood why we would want to just give alchemica away to people that put nothing into the eco system…

This is a game, games are meant to played by players right? I’m only earning as much as I collect.

I think a 20%-win ratio would be about right for marketing purposes and the other 80% don’t lose anything except their own time.

This would also make me quit the game. This is literal wage and revenue theft. Wage theft is when you work for a couple of hours and get paid nothing, not only that you lose collateral. You’re literally setting up a model that farms player’s labor. This is revenue theft on the side of those that own gotchis, they could be renting them, instead they got used and they earned nothing if a contract is not fulfilled. So you take from the players and the asset owners and give to the district DAOs so they can buy aesthetics? Let’s be clear that a district’s DAO can raise funds by lending gotchis themselves, I’m guessing they have more money than an average gotchi owner or an average player. You want to take from the poor and give to the rich.

TL;DR

[JonnyC321]

I think allot of scholars sell their alchemica. Personally I think players should be entitled to their own spillage. Or at least be entitled to the possibility of retrieving it. But following recent doa discussions it sounds like spillage has been put on the back burner and might end up in the hands of district dao’s.

I have no issue at all with asset owners extracting from game… this is a P2E game after all. But i’m not sure how sustainable spillage pick up would be if we just open the game up to the masses via the rental market with no restrictions. The cartridge system seeks to deal with extraction by scholars in a different way, as in they get rewarded with extra play time for crafting in game assets.

I was just trying to think of a way how we could implement spillage but control extraction depending on market conditions, with a view to making the gotchiverse look a bit more lively and giving asset owners the option to accumulate alchemica at a discount.

Was also thinking that if players had to accumulate specific amounts of alchemica that this would be a barrier to bots.

I’d rather have this as an option than just have all spillage go to the district dao’s.

[HARDKOR]

@JonnyC321

I was just trying to think of a way how we could implement spillage but control extraction depending on market conditions, with a view to making the gotchiverse look a bit more lively and giving asset owners the option to accumulate alchemica at a discount.

Don’t stop trying to flip concepts on their heads.

Keep turning over the rocks and sometimes you find the unexpected.

[JonnyC321]

Yea I’m not phased, I still think it a valid solution, although it’s far away from what I envisioned spillage would be like. I understand the arguments against it. I would much rather have spillage implemented in its original format but I don’t see it happening without guard rails as Dan puts it. Maybe it just ends up being a bull market benefit.

[Garuga]

What determines spillage output besides the installation? Like where does the actual value come from? Really only 10% of what is generated is distributed as spillover when alchemica is channeled, the other 90% goes to the channeler’s wallet. There might be a problem here if there is no stabilization for spillover.

It’s a common problem in DeFi games, play our game and make money, the money comes from the original seed money for a period of statistics to make a sustainable model. There’s plenty of outcomes, but the one to worry the most about is the one where it never gets done and the investor’s money runs out.

In aavegotchi, each gotchi has an underlying asset and petting your gotchi daily increases value, as well as upgrading an installation, so there is some sort of growth mechanism here and it probably generates the alchemica. I just don’t have the math behind everything but there is something there.

[JonnyC321]

I’m just going to go over a response a bit closer here, finally had the time to sit down and look at it. Thanks for your input.

Yea I’m not assuming that everyone immediately extracts, asset owners have always had a reason to keep their alch for structure upgrades. Even more so now farming is live. However if your going to have a game mechanic open to the public where they can rent a gotchi and make money %100 of the time then its probably going to get milked for all its worth. This is why the cartridge system also tries to incentivise scholars to invest in in game assets to prologue their playing time. So extraction was obviously a problem that was noticed by the devs, not just bots.

Thanks for your analysis on alchemica prices… Obviously the recent release of farming can be attributed the the rise in alch prices, the reason why FUD and FOMO are leading is because they are essential for all installation upgrades where as KEK and ALPHA are more necessary for late stage upgrades. And now with GLTR rewards the LP’s are looking much more robust, I agree with you the economy is looking good.

Your right, im not complaining that people renting for spillover are interfering with channeling… My reasoning here is that using the rental market for spillage pick up leads to extraction by bots and scholars alike without any control over that extraction at all. Again this is something that cartridges seeks to solve by incentivising scholars to craft in game assets to prolong their play time. The contract system just limits extraction as or if, alchemica prices decline. I guess the difference between the cartridge system and contracts is, cartriges seek to address the bots problem whilst also incentivising scholars to invest in game assets but has a level of extraction at all times. The contract system is an indiscriminate across the board control on spillage extraction that uses price as an incentive.

Yea this is the main issue with a contacts based system, the parameters of the contract are the reward in GHST, the amount of alch required and the time required to collect it. And also possibly a cap on the number of contracts available, all designed to control extraction from the game…. Yea I agree these seem like punitive measures. Always knew this is where I would get a lot of push back. Also they are not exactly set and forget figures either as the economy is ever expanding. You would need to adjust the spillage pick up requirements with the growing economy to keep the W/L ratio constant. Not an easy task, it would have to be automated and I don’t have a clue how easy that would be to implement. Maybe the contract requirements could be rebalanced on a daily basis depending on that days W/L ration. The W/L ratio doesn’t have to be set in stone either, you could improve it as alchemica increases in price.

Its not ideal I know, but like I’ve said above if it was a choice between this and just having all spillage go to district dao’s then I would choose this method. It might be worth listening to the last Dao meeting where it was stated that, Parcel owners are not entitled to their own spillage. I don’t 100% agree with this statement, having played around with res spillage on mumbai test net, I’m fairly sure that I could definitely capitalise on the farming process if I was given the opportunity to pick up my own spillage.

The contract system is a tough compromise, its main goal would be to make the gotchiverse look lived in again whilst giving asset owners the chance to accumulate alch at a 25% discount or more, and scholars could earn a few bucks here and there trying to complete contracts. The real pro of the contract system is that extraction rate is linked to alch prices. Where as cartridges even if you incentivise crafting in game assets will always have a certain amount of extraction going on.

I’m not advocating this as the main solution to getting spillage turned on, I much prefer cartriges. But I thought it was an interesting alternative and worth a discussion. And like you say smart missions might be a thing in the future so worth exploring the subject a little further. Right now the gotchiverse is practically empty and after dans request in the last dao meeting that we think about marketing idea’s my first thought was, we need to make the gotchiverse look lived in again…

[Garuga]

I think the problem needs to be explained more in depth in how the tokenomics works behind the scenes to see where the imbalance is occurring. If extraction is a problem, by how much?

[JonnyC321]

Yea I agree, but let’s assume for a moment that extraction can be a problem without guard rails. As has been stated many times in dao meetings.

If this is the case then would it not be best to have automated processes that control extraction based upon the health of the in game economy.

Rather than an on/off switch that’s decided upon by the dao.

Ultimately if you want spillage on with automated guard rails then this is how you do it.