Next season of rarity farming

Proposals by Gotchi Gov'nuhs
1

Hi all,

It feels like the last rarity farming season just ended, but it’s already that magical time to start discussing a new season! It looks like the last season started on 2/1/23 and ended on 3/28/23. We’ve been aiming for ~3 rarity farming seasons a year, which would put us at a June 1 start date. I propose that we stick with the June 1 date; thoughts? We should also discuss whether there are any changes people want to see implemented into this season. The idea of a Forge smithing leaderboard has been brought up, which would be very cool to see! Thoughts on how much that leaderboard should earn and whether those rewards should be taken from another category or added to the total?

Cheers,
Bearded

9 Likes
2

I would like to see a new category: smithing I propose we allot 5% of RF rewards to smithing. To accommodate, we reduce BRS and XP rewards by 1.25% and reduce KIN by 2.5% We reward the top 300 smithors with the same algoirthm previously used for the other categories.

Reasoning: Smithing directly supports burning alloy and thus the wearable floor. BRS supports the wearables market. XP supports the gotchi market by burning gotchis. Kinship does not provide a deflationary force. it’s spirit was to incentivize engagement. I argue that individuals smithing are demonstrating deep levels of engagement that we should reward.

We reward the top 300 gotchi smiths instead of the top 7500 gotchis. Smithing is a unique skill that rewards the individual user behind their army of gotchis. We currently have 200 unique holders of alloy, so almost every smith would be rewarded. We can attempt a release of new schematics during RFS6 to give new things to Forge.

Attached is a link to a potential RFS6 with a new Smithing Leaderboard RFS6 with Smithing Leaderboard - Google Sheets (edited)

6 Likes
3

Full support. Please get this on a regular schedule ASAP so we have at least one thing we can count on.

1 Like
4

Conversation of the new round of RF happening on time, but not sure about such an early launch of it.
Because in this matter, if this round will be happen in June, then next round will happen in November? Moving too fast, when RF pool is not refilling itself, since there is no new Haunts sales that would help it.

Idea of supporting Forge competitions sounds valid, but does it have much to do with RF?

Also:
Proposed % of rewards cut from originally rewarded categories sounds unfair.
If want to talk about fairness, then:
BRS category rewards is the most fat piece of the pie, let’s make the biggest cuts of rewards from there for Forge.

In case of Forge becoming a part of RF and it’s reward cuts let’s review it’s proposed changes in this matter:

To make it more fair, there is 4 different options of cuts, and the option to make Forge competition to be standalone.

Options:

Smithing competition and RF rewards deduction
    1. 3% BRS, 1 % XP and 1% Kin
    1. 2.5% BRS, 1.25% XP and 1.25% Kin
    1. 2.5% BRS, 1.5% XP and 1% Kin
    1. 2% BRS, 1.5% XP and 1.5% Kin
    1. Make Forge competition standalone (same as Alchemica Spending Competition)
0 voters

In my opinion, if Forge competition is coming become a part of RF(when it reminds me more of Alchemica spending competition, which is not a part of RF) then, the numbers of changes with deductions above will be more fair, than:

Argument on reasonings, if Forge coming to RF:

Wearables burn for making another wearables = BRS curve stays the same or going up.
Wearable burn and wearable market have no bond with the BRS curve, it’s only making more deficit of wearables, not BRS itself. Simply, it’s just an overflow of one Rarity category of wearables to another.

P.S. I prefer if Forge will come up with the different proposal of making a competition of Blacksmith alone, as a season of smithing, without any negative effects on original rewards distribution of RF.
Because it sounds like forcing and raider seizure of rewards from RF, when:

Which is sounds like an transfusion of the original rewards of the RF pool to the special few:

To summarize - I’m Not against Forge competition, but it would be better to make it’s own pool of rewards, without RF integrations.
If there is any options for Forge to make such a pool on it’s own Smithing procesess and sales.

Also, 75000 GHST to reward people with Smithing, sounds like a giant cut of initial investment of Forge funding and it’s redemption of debt to the DAO will be almost = 0. Isn’t it too early to bring it on the table now? When DAO funding of Forge is still not yet fully covered with it’s paybacks + new funding round is coming up.

2 Likes
5

Great let’s do it!

On the smithing competition:

I think this is a brilliant idea. It might be fun to run as a separate competition as @ArtCore has said. From a marketing perspective, it shows we have more going on, too. Overall, it needs some refinement and more discussion. Some spitballing ideas I have:

  • Keep the rewards tail tight. 250 - 500 gotchis only.

  • Introduce a scoring system that encourages forging during the competition in addition to the flat blacksmithing level. This will bring people back to the anvil and promote more alloy burn. :fire::fire::fire: We could even play with multipliers as with the alch competition.

  • Consider prize alternatives to GHST exclusive. ie: award a rare schematic for the top 250. GHST rewards for top 50.

  • Can we make this competition net positive for the rewards pot? ie: we drop 50k of GHST but accumulate 75k worth of alloy

  • Badges. Sweet badges.

  • If this is its own competition, it would be really effective if it is run just before RF. Players smith a bunch for this comp > cycle rewards into new wearables for RF.

  • Would love to see some new schematics dropped just before RF/smith comp

xx

3 Likes
6

Looking forward to a new RF season!

What about this idea?

I don’t know if it would be feasible to get it done by June, but it could spice things up.

2 Likes
7

What if we make it automatic, but its triggered by the end of the DAO alloy gbm(sell all, triggered itself
by a preset amount of alloy being in treasury) , and the rewards are 50% of what the dao take in ghst was from the gbm. Use other 50% as forge funding, and, if thays not enough to fund the teams next request/offer, it just chills until it either hits the number or someone else proposes dorge updstes that DO fit in thst budget.

Theres no way to lose here, and its gamified on muliple fronts, even the dev/proposal side.

This is good model for lots of dao projects, btw.

1st time, you get funds to stsrt up, and then the continuation occurs at whatever rate and intensity your rewards structure and build costs determine, as a result of people using it or not using it.
.

8

Infinity Keys can feature a Rarity Farming onboarding puzzle for marketing and educational purposes in the lead up to the next season.

A three step puzzle hammering home the points and concepts required to understand and participate in rarity farming.

2 Likes
9

I think this is a really great candidate for introducing a new category to rarity farming. However, we should make sure to take equal proportions from the other categories to fund this in order to make it fair and avoid any “my bags vs your bags” discussions.
BRS: 5% of 70% = 3.5%
KIN: 5% of 20% = 1%
XP: 5% of 10% = 0.5%

So the new reward distribution would be:
BRS: 66.5%
KIN: 19%
XP: 9.5%
Smithing: 5%

5 Likes
10

I love this idea! The only issue I see is that it would come with a lot of ties. How about letting the VRF decide on tie-breaker traits as well? So one round could for example be:
+SPK (main)
-BRN (first tie breaker)
-NRG (second tie breaker)
+AGG (third tie breaker)

1 Like
11

I would propose that we add Fakes as an RF category. Fakes have a total volume of 555,298 in GHST to date. It’s an excellent onboarding mechanic, bringing in many artists from the NFT space and overall promoting meme culture. Additionally, NFT displays positively impact Alch emissions and prettify the joint. I propose that we allocate 2% of RF to the top 100 for three possible stats: Fake leaderboard, top publisher/artist (fake cards burnt), and the most NFT displays in Gotchiverse.

References:

Top publishers: https://dune.com/froid1911/fake-gotchis
Total volume: FAKE Gotchis
Landowners with NFT displays: Aadventure.io (filter by NFT installations)
Matched 403 parcels (1.34% of 30,058 currently available)

4 Likes
12

So I don’t think I can weigh in without bias, obviously I’d like it.

The net keeps getting wider and wider on RF and although I like it because it gives an entry point to people that aren’t OG’s, I think we need to keep OG’s in mind and not upset the balance too much but nothing wrong with slipping fakes, smithing, and arguably crafting into a prop and see what the people say

13

In my opinion, it doesn’t make sense to include fake gotchis which aren’t really a core protocol feature. I agree that incentivizing alchemica spending is great, but we already have the alchemica spending competition

4 Likes
14

There has only been 1 core/schematic sales which added fund to RF pool.

However, this cut you propose would fund smithing RF for multiple seasons. (1.5M * 0.05 = 75K per season) or 225K a year

The amount being removed from brs/xp/kin in 2 years(?) of RF will be disproportional to what is being contributed by the forge’s gbm sales (there is no sales being proposed in forge 2 prop and I was told everything else is a tabled/maybe)

For the reasoning that this helps raise the wearable floor to justify a smith RF:

  1. In some case, the forge actually devalue certain rarity/slot via dilution by reducing RF reward of said holders

  2. There is an on-going cost to fund the forge: 660K a year
    (we will need at least forge 3 to finish what is being proposed)
    at that price point the wearable floor raise should be a implied/expected outcome

  3. It cause deflation via alloy, but at same time it has a inflation of schematic as the only way for the mechanic to work is by having endless release of new schematics
    (eventually trait combination will run out as yanik has pointed out)

The forge mechanic is basically non-functional if there is no schematic release to give it a reason to smelt/smith cycle
(i.e. geodes prize pool schematic, new schematic) which means at a minimum you need to pay someone to make/release new schematic in order to keep it working

tldr; the wearable floor is actually being raised by:

a. release of new schematics which will “balance” the trait thus hurting existing holders

b. release of new schematics which will cost the treasury to hire someone to create at an on-going basis

c. Alternatively or done in combination with a smithing RF at the cost to other RF leaderboard for the amount that isn’t covered by core/schem sales

(This is basically asking 7500 gotchi x 3 leaderboard (some overlap) to chip in to reward 300 gotchi)

On the other hand, if sales of core/schem is being used to justify funding Smithing RF there should be no cut to brs/xp/kin RF and discontinued once said fund is depleted

(Not that I think converting treasury fund indirectly to smithing RF is a nice concept)

Total cost is: 660K (forge) +225K (Smith RF) = 885K/yr
Revenue so far is in the 100s K (after part of it goes to PC)

Any benefit from wearable floor raising:

  1. does not benefit kinship/exp gotchi (they don’t need wearables)
  2. counteracted by loss in RF reward for certain slot/rarity holders or by offering a cheaper alternative to existing slot/rarity (nimbus cost way less than existing common pet but has “negative” trait) to gain same amount in brs points but in opposite trait direction (balancing)

The biggest issue is the forge mechanic is highly dependent on release of new schematic. In another words, once schematic release stops, the forge stops and every brs schematic is an inflation of its own

It would be nice if there is interest in non brs schematics as an alternative way forward

i.e. Could schematic (wearable) that is specific to games be feasible:

  • Gotchiminer: jet jack etc.
  • Botanica: Gardening gloves etc.

Also, schematics/wearable that expires on monthly basis instead of being permanent might help (?)

I wrote this not as “off topic” but to suggest alternative solution to use RF as a way to induce smelt/smith cycle

1 Like
15

It will be a bit hard to do since unlikely gotchis their position in rf (kinship/xp) doesn’t change if transferred. (wearable you can “rent” to each other)

Fakegotchi / Display are transferable this mean it will be a competition of who manage to make the best team and not necessary reward individual for their collections/displays

I don’t think a RF reward to top publisher/artist is a good incentive.
Quantity != Quality

Moreover, certain Fake gotchi sales are being incentivize with “WL Channeling” or prize for solving puzzle etc.

1 Like
16

Very true, after all - this structure of fakes means it can be gamed by someone that just decides they want to climb leaderboard and try to mint tons of fakes.

Granted there is the queue for QC which makes you think - oh what if we based off ‘likes’ but we can see that even that aspect has been gamed by people that promise giveaways on twitter and whatnot.

17

@stedari would we interested to hear your thought process why KIN should be reduced more than BRS and XP?

18

A few reasons, but I am not married to my proposed numbers. I don’t believe KIN prospectively adds much anymore as it’s unfortunately a stale mechanic. We currently reward KIN with double the rewards of XP. I am not sure what prospective behavior we seek to incentivize with this allocation. My personal belief is that XP does a better job of incentivizing specific behaviors through voting and sacrificing while BRS incentivizes rare gotchis and the the broad wearables market. The Smithing leaderboard most directly benefits the floor wearables market.

My proposed numbers still reward KIN with double the rewards of XP as a nod to all of the individuals who have been obsessively caring for their gotchis since inception. I hoped that maintaining this 2x ratio would be enough to sate the community kinshippors.

19

First, I would like to clear the misconception of exp.

Exp in a normal game would be something non-transferable and non-purchasable.

Our exp fail in both aspect in the sense that it can be transferred (pooled) or purchased via sacrifice

Kinship is more “exp” in traditional sense in that it is not transferable and purchasable (except a few points via expensive kin potions)

Kinship is “stale mechanic” in the sense that it is closer to what “exp” would traditional behave: longer time you invest in the game the higher it is. You cannot gain this via other means such as sacrifice

BRS/Wearable is just as “stale mechanic” by your definition in the sense that you just buy and hold much like a kinship gotchi

Only difference is that you feel/prioritize “wearable market” is more important than “kinship gotchi market” (which I think there is nothing wrong with that as we all have our own take on what is more important)

I can make the same argument I need something to raise floor/help of kinship gotchi (or gotchi in general) much like you want to raise floor/help of wearable market

2 Likes
20

Your proposed number reduce RF reward for BRS/KIN/EXP while maintain a ratio

Ok, instead of funding the forge, 50K/month to smithing leaderboard should solve the problem?
Benefit: no BRS issue from schematic

We can still hire someone to make non-brs schematics

1 Like