Introduction of an Aging Mechanic for BRS

Hey frens, there has been a lot of discussion on Discord about the apparent advantage Haunt 2 Gotchis have at the top of the BRS leaderboards. Currently 8-9 out of the top 10 Gotchis (depending on ties) were summoned out of an H2 portal.

After a lot of heated debate someone came up with the idea of introducing a BRS boost based on the age of the Aavegotchi. Even without the H2 “bug”, I and many others believe this to be a great way to preserve the rarity (and value) of Gotchis over a longer timeframe - not just for Haunt 1. Of course the devil’s in the detail, but @diddlypoo came up with a potential formula using Fibonacci numbers. I’ll quote what he had to say:

“So I think we’re at the point where we need to be discussing specific formulas for possible implementation. I think a maximum of 10 BRS should be possible via the aging mechanism to avoid it being too OP, although we should probably debate this number. Still thinking of ways this could be distributed, but in the spirit of using numbers occurring in nature, one idea was using # of blocks elapsed since birth following the first 10 Fibonacci numbers x 1 million, but replacing the first 0 with a 1 (to better fit the use case).
For example, the first 10 Fibonacci numbers (replacing the first 0) are 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, the sum of which is 89. Following this formula would mean +1 BRS after 1 million blocks, then another +1 BRS after 2 million blocks, another +1 BRS after 3 million blocks, another +1 BRS after 5 million blocks, …, up to a final sum of +10 BRS after 89 million blocks (approx 6.5 years using average block time of 2.3 seconds - the average since May 1st). Full chart below:”

Cume BRS  | # blocks elapsed
   +1     | 1 million 
   +2     | 2 million
   +3     | 3 million
   +4     | 5 million
   +5     | 8 million
   +6     | 13 million
   +7     | 21 million
   +8     | 34 million
   +9     | 55 million
   +10    | 89 million

“This implementation would provide a bigger boost earlier on, helping to account for the current BRS creep, but would also greatly flatten over time, allowing later haunts to catch up. Thoughts? Or has anyone thought of another approach?”

If this were to be implemented before Rarity Farming Season 2, we’d have to push this to a Signal Proposal fairly soon. That’s it, I don’t think much more has to be said, what are your thoughts frens?

  • Introduce Aging BRS (diddly’s model)
  • Introduce Aging BRS (different model)
  • Don’t introduce Aging BRS

0 voters


Would be useful to see a visualization of the effect these changes would have on the current leaderboard if applied. Maybe someone can whip up a spreadsheet / page with these values, to help the community better understand the implications?


You had me at Fibonacci.

The numbers make sense, too. Looking at the H1 gotchis, if you summoned near the beginning of the haunt, you’re roughly around block 7.6m, which would put you between +4 and +5 BRS, which was the intended target for the BG BRS proposal.

Another advantage with this proposed model is it would incentivise more portal openings. More openings = more demand for wearables & more scarcity for unopened portals.


Yup, I posted the idea right after I realized how perfectly the numbers lined up with what we are shooting for. Agree incentivizing portal openings is a great side effect.

@coderdan working on that now.


I agree wholeheartedly with this measure as a general dynamic to reward long term engagement regardless of haunt- something to counteract the effects of sudden and aggressive dilution like we just witnessed.

Being that an aging mechanic would benefit all haunts- in the long term I don’t see it as a proper solution to the H1 nerf- but I support it as a stand-alone initiative in its own right.


Here is a spreadsheet of the current top 50 by naked BRS (discounting XP gains), and what the top 50 would look like right now if my proposed algorithm is implemented.

So even with aging, we can see that H2’s are still squarely in control of the top 10. However H1’s would get a nice bump for season 2 (only - as by season 3 H2’s will have mostly caught up).


Initially I was a bit skeptical of this because we already have things like XP and Kinship as long term incentives for holding gotchis.

But rethinking on this as Kinship will become spendable in the REALM, it is a good additional incentive to hold a gotchi for the long term and it is good this will be applied to all gotchis now and into the future.

Also it gives a good incentive to claim portals to benefit from aging rather than keeping gotchis in closed/open portals. I’m in support of this.

EDIT: We need to be cautious of the timing for implementing this. Do we do it before season 2 rarity farming or after? I would lean towards delaying until after season 2 rarity farming or alternatively implementing it half way through the rarity farming season as it will mess with the leaderboard rankings. I know about the H2 gotchis dominating the top 10 BRS but it is not conclusive.


“Messing” with the leaderboard is exactly the point tho. The entire reason this was proposed is to try to get haunt 1’s on a level playing field for rarity farming. Can you elaborate on what you think is not conclusive? The spreadsheet I provided very conclusively shows how strong the discrepancy is.


This may mitigate H2 dilution temporarily, but it’s actually a separate idea. Aging helps smooth variance, but it is yet to be determined what, if any, the H1 handicap is.


The reason it is inconclusive is because of the sample size and when you take all of the portal options and compare them between haunts, the standard deviation and variance is slightly larger for H1 portal options compared to H2 portal options.


I agree the idea stands on it’s own is a good idea outside of the discussion on whether H1 is nerfed compared to H2. But if you implement it before season 2 rarity farming it will change the leaderboard results.

1 Like

You are zooming way out and analyzing the issue from the center of the curve as a viewpoint.

If RF rewarded being near center of the curve, images like yours would actually help the discussion.

Continuing to dismiss the issue based on averages is not very constructive unless dismissal of the issue is the primary goal, but plenty of people in the community will not be happy or satisfied with dismissal, as happy as that would make other members of the community.

I would say let’s not distract the aging forum/proposal with H1 balances issues that once confirmed, would have their own solutions such as BRS for BG. As @actaeon pointed out, aging helps with smoothing the variance/leaderboard impact/ etc with the introductions of new haunts. It actually gives us an actionable model with which to issue new haunts every time new users need them, without endless discussions of dilution/value etc hindering the effort every single time.

Aging simply makes sense for the long term viability of the project. 3 years from now- “H1 vs H2” would hopefully not be a serious topic. Let’s roll up our sleeves and pass the measures now to address these different issues with the long term roadmap in mind.

So again, for this particular thread, the focus should be on discussing aging overall, not shortsighted impact in a single season etc.

To your point of timing, I think debating the actual timing of implementation would be moot, as dev capacity would be the ultimate deciding factor if the measure passes. That could very likely be after szn2 has begun. I wouldn’t see a reason for postponing implementation until after szn2 however, as that would be actively picking winners and losers after a successful vote.


Awesome work diddly.
Strongly support this implementation as a start to smoothe out the unexpected variance and as an interesting mechanic for every haunt going forward. Any hook toward further making gotchis a beloved pet and heirloom to care for is a solid win.


I support this model. It incentivise holding Aavegotchi and also appreciates the value of Aavegotchi too.
But why the Fibonacci model and also why capped at first 10 numbers?


Generally, I don’t really support the idea of adding yet another BRS mechanic especially in response to a short term issue. I think preserving the immutability of gotchi stats and accepting where the dice fall is immensely important for the long term health of any NFT project, and to me these principles are far more important than rewarding early adopters.

However, this idea seems like a reasonable compromise. At +6 BRS which is about a year after summoning, it would take about ~200 days to increase BRS to +7.

I agree with @jarrod that this shouldn’t come into effect until after season 2 though, as on average this would simply disadvantage haunt 2 owners far too much considering that the reward distributions of the season have already been announced. The oldest Haunt 1 gotchis are almost at the +5 threshold for bonus BRS, which is an immense advantage in rarity farming rewards. Haunt 2 owners will likely only have +2-3 BRS during the periods in which rarity farming rewards are distributed.

It has been amply demonstrated that a difference between haunts in average base BRS of gotchis is pretty much nonexistent. If there are any discrepancies, they exist only on the extreme tails of the distributions. To implement this solution now would in effect give ALL haunt 1 owners an advantage, when it is only the extreme tails of the distributions that are potentially affected.

I will be voting no on this proposal for now. I’m willing to support this idea after this season’s rewards are distributed, but before a future haunt and rarity reward distribution is decided on.


The extreme tails are for all practical intents the only places where it matters in season 2. Nobody is going to jump for joy that their BRS 502 H1 gotchi got an extra .28 GHST on the leaderboard payouts.

Looking at the middle of the bell curve when it’s always been a game of outliers and extremes by the BRS system’s very design is simply skewing the data to fit your own biases and bags. If 8/10 or 9/10 of the top 10 being H2 gotchis is not a demonstration of difference, I don’t know what else to tell you.


Again, to be clear, this is not in response to the “short-term” issue of H1 getting smashed off the top of the BRS board. There doesn’t need to be any difference in BRS for this to matter and to be a good idea.

If we don’t address the permanent issue of dilution, we will have to rehash the same arguments over and over before every haunt, basically deciding whether to throw in with the new haunt or protect the old ones we already own.


“Arguments” like this are exactly what has driven some people away from this project. Spoken as if they know what they’re talking about, yet meant only to benefit themselves at the cost of most others.

How can you look at the data I provided yet somehow come to a conclusion that H1’s would have an “immense advantage in rarity farming rewards”, when the data shows literally the exact opposite? What?? Did you even look at the numbers?


Point of clarity. Looking at the spreadsheet, it looks to me that 8 out of the current top 10 are H2, and 4 out of top 5 are H2. That’s not what the original post says.

1 Like

Top 10 is tricky, technically 4 gotchis are tied for 9th place, so depending how you sort those its either 8/10 or 9/10. 3 out of those 4 tied are H2s tho. Good point about the 5/5 tho, didn’t notice. @Moon plz edit