Proposal: Making the distribution of rarity farming more equal

The idea is great and will give value to the community. A high grade gotchi with godlike itens will be easily earning good ammounts every season, and the value of it itens and gotchi will increase over time. Also a standard gotchi with good itens can also have a chance to earn decent ammounts. I think it will provide liquidity for the gotchis and also for itens. Keep the idea forward!

3 Likes

I think in answering this we want to figure out what we’re incentivising and the principles we want for the Aavegotchi ecosystem going forward.

Seems to me the above will incentivise the hoarding of gotchis, vs the hoarding of Godlike wearables which is what we want. Everyone should have a gotchi, but not everyone should have a Godlike wearable. Create value through scarcity with real calculable utility vs being just a cryptopunks-like collectible. If we now change the incentives for whales to build armies of gotchis (linear rewards curve - why focus on high BRS?) vs focusing on a few, this will create less value for Godlikes and imo will drop the floor price on all wearables and gotchis within the ecosystem. Not to mention that whales buying up the supply of all 500+ BRS gotchis may even push out the regular joe entirely from the competition.

We need to incentivise fierce competition at the top as this creates value for entire ecosystem by giving Godlike items real calculable value and creating scarcity through the hoarding of these items.

3 Likes

I understand your point but no whale will ever have all the 500+ gotchis. We will always have a chance of getting a nice grade gotchi from the portals. A godlike item could turn a gotchi into a profitable one, and make literally 3k GHST for a year. Of course will have a lot of value.

We could add a bonus to the top spots, what do you think?
Like that:

top 1: +10k GHST
top 2 +9k
top 3 +8k
top 4: +7k
top 5: +6k GHST
top 6 +5k
top 7 +4k
top 8: +3k
top 9 +2k
top 10 + 1k

Whats the incentive for a new player start playing the game if he will never reach the top leaderboard spots and make profit from it? People don’t like to loose money. More haunts will come and new people will be able to buy portals and get a nice gotchi. At some point the whales will have to focus 100% into one or two gotchis. Trust me, even top 500 its not a easy task.

1 Like

I 100% agree with your goals. Need some upward mobility it seems …

1 Like

Cheapest Godlike is currently 50k GHST, payback period is over 10 years by your calculations. I don’t think top spots are intended to be for new comers or average enthusiasts of the platform. The top spots are for whales to compete and for the rest of the community to watch, while bringing in some nice PR for the ecosystem.

We need competition and we need whales, we need smart money coming in to play for a shot at the title. In F2P (Free to play) games most of the revenue generally comes from large spenders which funds development of the free part of these games. I don’t expect Aavegotchi to be too different. If we don’t have big spenders we’ll have less capital going towards Pixelcraft which leads to slower release times for new updates, less features and overall a worse experience for everyone.

I understand where you’re coming from but I think that if we flattened the rewards curve it’ll do much more harm than good in the long term.

2 Likes

I 100% share this opinion but there’s a way bigger issue with the idea. Noone with 10k GHST or more will ever vote for it. This proposal is basically doomed to fail because it punishes all the big holders who are required for a successful governance vote. There’s no point in philosophizing about things when they’re not even close to realistic.

3 Likes

As much as I love your intentions I think this proposal will have the opposite effect it wants to achieve.

You are proposing to reward only the top500 players instead of the top2000. If you don’t have any godlike or mythical wearable, it will be hard to get in the top500. The current proposition offers about 20% of the rewards to the 500-2000 tranche, while your proposition don’t offer anything. Your legendary, rare, uncommon & common wearables will lose all their rarity farming value, prices will drop. The godlike wearables won’t give such an edge over the mythical ones in terms of rewards, so their price will also drop. The rarest Aavegotchis will also lose value as it is not as interesting to pay a few extra k$ to get a few extra BRS points.

I don’t think it is fair that player #100 will get 3200 GHST while #1 will get 4000 GHST, as #1 will be much more unique than #100 it should be much better rewarded. I understand there are risks to having whales in an ecosystem, but they are also a chance to value our NFTs. Who’s gona spend 50 ETH on Stani’s boat if not a whale?

FWIW, the current reward distribution model is inspired by poker tournaments reward schemes, which have proven to be successful for decades. It follows a kind of (k/x)^y distribution model, where x is the players rank, y=1 (could be adapted by the DAO to flatten/accentuate the curve) and k is calculated so that the sum equals the total amount of rewards.

4 Likes
  1. I’m not planning to not reward players from 500 to 2000. Sorry for not being clear but i wrote: “From 500 lower we can keep the same as propposed in the docs.” So, from 500 to 2000 we keep the poker distribution.

  2. You can’t compare aavegotchi with poker. Every poker tournament the game starts from ZERO. Every newbie player has chance to win the tournament! Complete different from aavegotchi. Here a newbie player will start in the last place and you never win the game. You know that’s the true. If a newbie player could at least get a nice prize, top 100 or 200 for example, we would invest money and play the game. In poker tournaments the winner is never the same, it’s almost impossible to win two straight tours. In aavegotchi the top 10 winner are going to be the same over and over again. Just the top leaderboard will play and the rest will watch. Different games, different dynamics.

2 Likes

I agree that can’t compare to poker, but his point is good though. It won’t be nice that the 1st ends with the same as 100th. We should estimulate competition for the first places.

I think we have to find a middle term of both ideas. I don’t think it’s necessary to “pay out” the priced invested in just one season like said. If you think like that you are assuming that aavegotchi won’t last long, and after your aave boat won’t have any value. If you invested on godlike itens and high grade gotchi and just earnd “4k”, in the first season (btw this is doubled now, cause DAO is way richier now), so maybe 8k to be the first 10th, next season you will probaboly get more. Your aave boat probably will be way rare and valuable. You think is a bad deal? Also you have less risk that some smart players come with surprise and leave you with much less than you think.

It would be great estimulate that some “normal” gotchis, with not millionaire itens can get an fair amount. Normal people will get more interested on buying portals next seasons, and a good way to spread the game and not put away new players. We probably gonna be 2kk of prize, so I will give an exemple of what I’m thinking:

2kk prize
top 1 - 99k ghst
top 2 - 25k ghst
top 3 - 10k ghst
top 4 - 8k ghst
top 5 - 8k ghst

top 10 - 8k ghst
top 11 - 4k ghst

top 50 - 4k ghst
top 51 - 3k ghst

top 100 3k ghst
top 101 2k ghst

top 500 2k ghst
top 501 800 ghst

top 1000 800 ghst
top 1001 300 ghst
top 2000 300 ghst

This is way better for a not a whale player have a chance to grow in the game on long therm. Cause he can earn prizes more easily and reinvest on new itens wearbles and portals, and maybe season 6 he will have a chance to have a fucking boat non being a very rich guy. It is not nice just the bigger first player have more ghsts and more itens, we have to think in all comunnity and give hope to people that they can enjoy and have a chance in the future if they give a try.

That values I proposed is just an exemple.
If you don’t agree with me, but also don’t agree on what was proposed before, please give your idea of distribution!

Keep gotchis strong!

2 Likes

That statement is false fren. Only the top 32 Gotchis would get less. Every GHST holder that has no Gotchi among the top 32 would get more GHST (or the same amount for top 500 to top 2000). And that is why the vote is very likely to succeed by your own logic of people = greedy.

1 Like

I liked this one, we need good prizes for most leaderboard positions would be great if the top 2000 gets at least 300 GHSTs like you proposed. That’s how to create market value for the gotchis

1 Like

I support the idea of changing rewards distribution. But I do not support any options presented in this thread.

  1. Sorry, misread your message.
  2. Don’t forget about new haunts and ARS for next rarity farming seasons, no one can be sure to sit on the top forever.

As for the (k/x)^y model, the curve could be lowered with a low y value. Check here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Wo54SOBvK6G2yv-4eDZirXF8-CMJgHYc_9VIi_O0XxQ/edit?usp=sharing. I actually really like the y=1 model as implemented, but here another simulation with y=0.75

3 Likes

I prefer the curve like that, better distributed than the y=1. I would vote for something like that.

1 Like

Hi @orenan, sharp eyes on the updated exel source doc! To be clear, those numbers you’re citing are not in any way the final numbers we’re using for the Rarity Farming Season 1.

In fact, what you see there was the result of our team working through some various scenarios and failing to return it to the true originally confirmed numbers as cited in the original Rarity Farming Medium article.


Til now, those numbers remain. The numbers you’re seeing these few days in the excel doc are due to the now 1.4M rewards pool without any adjustment to the curve shape. Obviously the rewards pool size is now far above original projections. With the increased revenue of the Ape Tax and successful primary sales we now have a larger reward pool than ever!

The conversation you’ve kicked off here is perfect, but I want everyone to know we didn’t just change the numbers without any announcement. If/when we update the rewards distribution curve, there will definitely be a big announcement with full explanation and the conversation.

We’ve returned the excel doc in question back to the still standing numbers and look forward to having news to share regarding the growing rewards pool very soon.

We also need to wait and see how the conclusion of a Haunt 2 vote plays out this week as that will directly affect the rewards pool and number of aavegotchis in play.

6 Likes

your simulation with y=0,75 is waay better :slight_smile:

1 Like

As we won’t have a new haunt before the RF, this topic is relevant to debate now. I have some doubts about how it will gonna work.

This distribution formula presented below (with y = 1 and 0,75) rewards the best 20% performers. This 20% should be for active gotchis or portals? Should we discuss and vote how the distribution is going to be? I think is a topic of interest for everyone here.

2 Likes

If the Prizes would be as uniform as you suggest, then it would just make sense to have an army of ok Gotchis place with in the money.

Also the top10 places would not be very good and hardly worth fighting for which would lower the prices of the rarest wearables. Not saying that is bad or good, it just would be like that.

The Payout structure looks to be a copy basically of a poker tourney. (as it stands now)

Personally I’d like to see a little more uniform prize structure between top1000 and maybe scratch the 1001-2000 altogether or just give to those places the same small reward.(This is likely desired to keep more players in)

1 Like

good job I like this

1 Like

I love many of the suggestions here. My vote would be on flattening rewards from the top10 while also reducing rewards for spots 1500-2000. This way the numbers tilt toward rewarding engagement more over mass and over “whaling”