Fixed drop schedule allotments for wearables

I think we first want to determine some sort of target gotchi to wearable ratios. ie Do we want our gotchis to be fully slotted, 2x fully slotted, more shirts than pants, more hats than hands etc. Then when we have some constants to work with we can vote in future to change these constants if the economics don’t feel right after the season.

On the frequency of the drop, maybe 1 maall drop + 1 raffle drop per season/haunt could work but whatever it is I feel it should be spread over the course of the season so there is constantly something to keep players engaged throughout. Not sure how other games do this but replicating successful strategies would be ideal for now. Can experiment later once we get the ball rolling.

I think a flash raffle such as what @cryptomooniac suggested could be fun too, reward active players of the game. Although this could easily be automated with bots placing non-botters at a disadvantage. An alternative solution could be that every time you pet your gotchi, there’s some % chance that you can see 1 or 2 items for sale in the Maall. This would also get rid of the mad rush when Maall doors open and make item drop access fairer.

3 Likes

Maybe we are doing things in reverse ?
Step 1 : Determine how many times a year will be Farming/Kinship/XP contest and distribution of prizes. Every 2 or 3 months ? Twice a year ?
Step 2 : AFTER contest and PRIZE DISTRIBUTION, make new haunt with wearables, to fund prizes for the next contest. Try to sync number of new portals with number of new wearables.
Step 3 : Between contests organize raffles with small wearable collections. Some raffles could be with consumables only.
Step 4 : Celebrate events like minigames etc… with ultra small, unique wearable collections

4 Likes

I would cross ‘fixed’ schedule as an option immediately. Even though this would be the easiest choice…
Imagine, you strike a deal with Samsung or Nike buys a stake or whatever - something huge happens, clearly we will need some commemorative raffle :slight_smile:

New gear with every new Haunt (hopefully, not more than 3-4 times a year) + raffles tied to some significant events in the ecosystem (3-4 times a year) will bring variety of gear but not overload the MP with it, so the economy can build up and develop itself without too much spikes.

2 Likes

Awesome to see all the ideas flowing… I’ve given this significant thought haha.

I’ll start simple, but you may regret saying the more detail the better… :crazy_face:

I believe 1 maall sale at the same time as a haunt (like last time) actually gave those that missed out on Gotchis (like myself) a chance to still be in the game. So apart from the issues with the transactions for Gotchis not working for many, the concept I think worked well. Most people will need to decide what to go for first. I like that. Those that say this is a bad system clearly want to have their cake and eat it too. (Btw, I have a decent idea for how to make portal sales more distributed, and remove completely the issues of what happened in the last haunt, but I won’t digress with that now).

I don’t think a raffle soon after a maall sale makes much sense (I understand it this time, as it was already planned), which I have mentioned why before. I think a raffle mid way through a season makes perfect sense. Keeps people staking GHST. People can get lucky and get some awesome wearables mid way through, which increases their rarity farming. The story of the comeback kid winning against odds is born.

So that is 1 maall sale and 1 raffle per season effectively.

I think there needs to be a way to value earlier wearables more. (This is actually relevant, and I will explain why now). Like NFT cards that slowly increase in XP every day (like Nova Blitz cards for example), wearables could gain XP value, and therefore over time a wearable bought for the same amount 2 years previously is actually FAR more valuable than the same type of item for the same price, because it has a huge XP locked in. One could then sacrifice the wearable (like we can sacrifice Gotchis) and do a huge XP pump on their Gotchi, and win the title right near the end. People may say this benefits the whales as they can buy up all the wearables with high XP and dominate. But… the small fish can then play the long game with wearables, and build up XP and sell it to those said whales for a very good price. Win win. Therefore, those common wizard hats from launch day become VERY valuable 2 years from now. Hodl frens!

This also means that we have a nice counter balance to the total supply of wearables. This creates an actual need for new wearables to be released, as eventually most (but not all) wearables get sacrificed at some stage. Also, each level of wearables will receive more XP the higher the rarity it is. Potentially, 10 years from now, someone could sacrifice a godlike and make their Gotchi into a Super Saiyan. People may say this is unfair, but if someone is willing to sacrifice a $50-$100k NFT… they best get their money worth. If I’m not explaining the HUGE benefit this will create on the whole ecosystem, please ask me to go into even more detail (yes… I can go to that next level of detail if required :joy:).

This also solves the issue of potions. No longer are potions required. Maybe people can win potions in a raffle if there are too many wearables for that raffle. Will explain more below. Kinship potions seem a step too far in actually being a necessity for the ecosystem, but if they really have to stay then I suggest something simple - drop how much each potion gives, and sell them for more in the next maall sale.

End of Part 1 of 371

3 Likes

Justttttt joking. Only 2 parts in totality.

Then it just becomes a more simple governance of wearables released by some ratio that makes sense once all factors are taken into account. This can be tweaked and adjusted by the DAO over time, if the ratios are not panning out as expected. Why not start with the ratio of the universe? The golden ratio. But before I go there, let me state what two variables need to be compared. Because many will keep some portals unopened, and others will sacrifice their Gotchis, the ratio should not be wearables to portals, or summoned Gotchis, but rather - wearables to alive Gotchis.

So there are 7 wearable slots, and 1 background slot to fill. The 7 slots are the most important as they create the stat impact on each Gotchi. So we use the universe’s code to select the number of wearables required for those 7 slots. The aim should be to have significantly less total wearables than total slots. There were 10k portals on opening day. ~ 67% of portals have been opened. Lets say all are still alive. That is ~ 6700 Gotchis. 6700 * 7 = 46900 possible slots to fill right now. However, many of those Gotchis have been bought for flipping, and many owners have no desire to fully allocate all slots with wearables. If you don’t believe this is true, go look at the marketplace and see how many Gotchis are fully clothed and kitted out. In fact most have none or just 1 or 2 wearables. Let’s arbitrarily slice the average wearable per slot by half, so with an average of 3.5 wearables per alive Gotchi, that means that equals 23450 wearables which is a rough guide to a more even distribution. Not over supplied, and not under supplied. So now we plug the golden ratio in to work out how to distribute each level. Starting with Common, we use 1.618 ratio. So total common wearables should be 10841 (6700 alive Gotchis * 1.618) based on total alive Gotchis right now. Once we have a starting point for the Common wearables, we can retrace backwards using the Fibonacci ratios. So for Uncommon wearables: 10841 * 0.618 = 6700. This means that every Gotchi technically could own 1 Uncommon wearable (and if you think that many players won’t let their Gotchi be seen dead (get it?) with any wearable lower than a legendary item, means even more Gotchis can have 2 or more Uncommon). Then next retracement for the Rare wearables: 6700 * 0.5 = 3350. Then Legendary wearables: 3350 * 0.382 = 1280. Then Mythical wearables: 1280 * 0.236 = 303, and since the Fibonacci sequence begins with 0,1,1… we then end the last retracement using 0.236 again. So Godlike wearables: 303 * 0.236 = 72. All rounded up.

So to make it easier on the eye, wearable numbers based on 6700 alive Gotchis:

Common - 10841
Uncommon - 6700
Rare - 3350
Legendary - 1280
Mythical - 303
Godlike - 72

When we add all these numbers together, we get a total wearable number available on the market of - 22546. Which is therefore 904 short of the estimate of 3.5 wearables per alive Gotchi. This number (904), can then allow you to use it for special events, surprise small raffles, like a New Year quick raffle. Then this number can be sorted based on same principles above OR, the only time those ratios are allowed to be broken with. As long as total wearables on the market does not cross the line of 3.5 wearables per alive Gotchi.

I said before that potions may come in play if there are too many wearables in the market. Instead of selling or raffling wearables, you could fill the spots with potions, only when necessary. In the future you could also identify the need for new potions that no one has even thought of. Like a get out of jail potion that gives you an extra life in certain mini-games, limited to 1 per Gotchi (as a stupid example).

With all these ideas combined, I believe it will solve the wearable distribution problem.

So main points: follow a 1 maall and 1 raffle per season based on the ratios above. Give wearables XP over time, and many will sacrifice them to level up Gotchis. This reduces supply, and means there will always be a need for wearables. This all works because a. not breaking the above ratio, b. allow the required stream of revenue the project needs. c. whales benefit from buying expensive XP wearables to level up. d. small fish benefit from hodling older wearables and e. everyone is happy.

In summary of the conclusion - re read all this 7 times, and tell me what you think.

Muchos gracias amigos aka frens.

Forgot to mention that the distribution between the maall and raffle numbers will be up to the team initially, but then afterwards, with the sacrificing of the wearables, the numbers will work themselves out based on required number of wearables needed to get back to equilibrium required.

2 Likes

If revenue reasons push up the total number of item issuance required vs. what it would be from an organic demand, raising prices is necessary because of the following example:
If 50k in revenue are needed, the community is better served selling one godlike item at 50k than 5 items at 10k. It is nice to try supporting the community by selling these items at a more accessible price, but in reality, re-sellers beat the average user to the supply and secure the economic benefit to themselves. They raise the resale value of the 5 godlike items to 50k immediately, and then this has negative consequences for long term users through supply and demand. In this scenario, item prices spike and crash with only resellers securing the most benefit while the overall system is hurt.

**My previous suggestion for a rarity curve with increasing maall prices somewhat addresses this. A bidding/auction system in the maall for releasing wearable is another way to ensure the ecosystem keeps more of these funds vs. resellers who make a quick flip and then take the funds to re-sell in a different platform/project.

1 Like

There seems to be some loss of balance in the bonus offered by wearables. This might not be the best place to discuss but i’m not sure it is worth its own topic. The current distribution (including the next raffle wearables) is favorable to gotchis with high AGG & NRG, low BRN. Pretty well balanced about SPK. Here is the distribution when we multiply each wearable bonus by its supply. Over time, it would be nice to hover around 50% for each category

image

1 Like

I tend to lean towards the ratio system. To me it makes sense to have a certain amount of wearables in existence per Aavegotchi. Refraining from any further comments and sticking to the topic.

5 Likes

I would like to see wearables drop once per haunt. Maybe make these wearables drops 2 weeks after a haunt to increase user engagement post haunt.

I agree with this sentiment. The items should be pegged in ratio to number of gotchis in the realm. We should offer some level of variability so as to allow creative new ideas to come out with items and also to allow for even numbers. So more like:

Common: 72 - 77%
Uncommon: 48 - 52%
etc etc.

There’s some talk about making the items become worse over time with lesser stats. This, to me, is not a good idea. In any video game, the items gradually get better over the span of the game. More users will drive up the value of items, not giving more and more benefit to early adopters.

I’d not like to deviate from the question at hand, but would like to share my thoughts I feel relevant.

In observing the community the past two months I have noticed the biggest challenge with aavegotchi is defining it primarily as a collectible or as a video game. Collectibles naturally want fewer of everything and the genesis to be as special as possible. Video games strive for mass adoption and give equal playing ground to everyone.

If we stay short sighted and only look at collectibility and nobody adopts the game, then we can all kiss the returns goodbye. First gen pokemon is only valuable because there are dozens of generations beyond it. How many “season 1” games exist out there that never took off and have no value today??

New blood is necessary to drive new demand.

3 Likes

release schedule should coincide with gameplay improvements for sure. gotta use that increased traffic to produce more ghst revenue.

rarity farming items with stat boost should be capped relative to ecosystem size.
definitely a hard cap wearable/gotchi ratio = magic number 3x full outfit.
but that being said should allow for purely cosmetic user made outfits… with no limits. this will allow this game to explode…

literally think of the virality of user made matic gotchi wearables. perhaps their could be a part of website to make sure that community controls flow of new wearables like a page where you can submit your item proposal. official rarity and and to incentivize creation initial mint of user wearables portion of either original minting or original listing funds go to makers?
this will get the attention of many pixel artists to allow pixelcraft to focus on exciting games for users.

This and more discussion above regarding user generated wearables does need to be fleshed out. Without going too far off track, this all loosely ties into the release schedule for “powered” wearables we’re discussing today.

Basically, once The Realm exists, there’s far more reason to desire wearables for… wearing! Creating unique appearances that can be shown and seen by others in real time. By developing a dedicated wearable creator dapp, we’ll be able to make creating wearables for the metaverse relatively easy for anyone.

By default these would be aesthetic-only and therefore NOT directly contribute to the release schedule we’re exploring today. What do we call these two different types of wearables… powered and un-powered wearables?

The schedule for these “un-powered” comes back into play if the most popular can be voted to be “powered up”. Potentially an elected and rotating DAO committee could be tasked with “powering” a very specific amount of the most popular user designs on some schedule as well. Maybe monthly… maybe quarterly… or tied to Haunts again.

Could get weird, so we can flesh all this out in a future thread, but it’s important to know this potential for mass user created wearables exists and how they are different from the powered up wearables we are discussing today.

6 Likes

I like this idea. I have some of my own wearable ideas I would like to create and add at some stage.

1 Like

dude and the wearables should have custom user collateral too for sure so that they can wear their portfolio…
think of the collateral possibilities.
lps
tokens.
nfts…
anything tokenized.
multicollateral…
guys unlock exodia for these guys…
aagents to the moon.
layer two scaling turing complete.

Yes, lots of cool ideas there… but lets save this for a future thread. With this knowledge of powered vs un-powered wearables we can turn the thread back to the focus: release schedule for “powered” wearables.

Make sure you guys give out hearts to ideas you like so we know which ideas have support.

I like @Choyna 's post in that its simple in signaling support for a ratio system and also find value in @cryptomooniac 's more detailed but straight forward bullet points (new haunt, during raffles, special events).

These are very concise ways to go about building a plan while leaving room for smaller details.

4 Likes

I like the idea of two types. The term cosmetic comes to mind for items without stat boosts.

With regards to user-generated content, I believe there should also be some form of control within what’s allowed, color palette being one of them. Even though there could be dozens of contributors, I believe the game should retain an overall aesthetic. All of this, however, is for a different discussion…

Yes balancing is an ongoing endeavor, when we create new wearables we monitor the overall distribution of positive/negative stats for each trait and try to keep it to equilibrium, while also making the bonuses “logical” and fitting for the wearable it’s assigned to. The recent Lil Pump set was high on AGG and NRG so that’s why those are skewed to the right.

Having a fixing budget for wearables will probably help this process, as we can plan ahead and try to balance the meta through various releases.

2 Likes

I should add to the initial post that by a “Fixed drop schedule allotment” I don’t quite mean that all drops would happen at the same time every month. We’re thinking about it more as a “working budget” or allotment that can be used (but may also be saved up).

For example, if we’re allotted a budget of 5000 wearables per month, if there are no events that month then that budget would be rolled into the next month.

I like the idea of narrowing focus and moving forward discussing what is a sensible schedule for release of powered wearables. Lacking hard/raw data, I would argue the following point:

*Whatever existing supply amount is already out there, plus expected upcoming raffle supply, is already more than enough for current amount of active gotchis.

I make this leap in logic given the current nature of supply and demand of powered wearables, where you see a steady decline in prices and general sense of unease regarding supply/demand/price correlations.
The current “bear market” in powered wearables, if we can call it that, really kicked off after the announcement of raffle 4.

This all points to an assumption we can start building towards finding our “magic number”:

  • Existing supply+ Raffle 4 supply of powered wearables > Supply requirements of 6k active gotchis

Next point might have to be analyzing the market again after Haunt 2 to determine if market was shifted into undersupply from the current surplus.