IZ P2E Delay Compensation

[final ridge]

IZ P2E may or may not be launched with Open Beta. I would like to see some compensation for landowners if IZ P2E is launched after Open Beta. As we know, landowners have been waiting for 2 years.

I do appreciate the Fuel Crates Airdrop 1. The Fuel Crates Airdrop 1 may not be deemed significant by single T1 plot owners, but overall, the Airdrop is taking away $950K revdis from token stakers.

For transparency, I am a token staker and I do not hold any IZ plot, but I do feel the pain of landowners.
I acknowledge that no amount of monetary compensation can completely alleviate landowners' grieve. I understand that landowners just want to play IZ P2E and build their bases.
That being said, I hope we, as a community, can come to a compromise.

Here are my suggestions:

1. More revdis for landowners. 10% of revdis instead of 5%, while IZ P2E is being delayed post-OB.

2. Speed-ups airdrop. The amount should be 8-16 hours per day delayed post-OB.

3. Elements Airdrop or Production boost. For use with the speed-ups. The idea is so landowners can recover the opportunity lost because of the delay. Point 1, should provide the fuel needed to build the base.

I do not know much about IZ, but my general idea is to fairly compensate landowners in unfortunate event of a delay post-OB.

[shrewd spade]

Hold on. To clarify

If they receive 5% of ingame purchases IF delayed.
And they all start at the same time WHEN launched.

Then what exactly are they losing out on?

[final ridge]

I suggest they receive 10% if delayed

The premise is we should not wait for IZ P2E to be ready for the greater good of the project, so i feel that giving an additional revdis for landowners is appropriate

[shrewd spade]

So it's an 'i'm sorry' bribe?

[onyx palm]

Well 4-6 weeks turned to more than 2 years...

[plain nest]

I wouldn't use a term like that... people are just looking for ways to make amends after the.. huge dissapointment to least say so land/ILZ has become.

[final ridge]

i cant see the team is going to delay OB just for IZ P2E, unless OB testnet is delayed too.
so yea, the bribe is a compromise

[visual jolt]

as ive said before, this is not an option for land owners.

1. finish p2e in whatever way, safety pool, pray to jesus, idc
2. delay OB until p2e is ready in its entirety, megacity and all.

why its bad to release without p2e and give rewards?

1. dao loses money
2. holders are still screwed and cannot play, because the fuel provided will not get them anywhere or we will burn through the 2 year runway in 2 months.

• any sort of compensation option enables illuvium to continue deliever half baked stuff and lets them get away with it , on top of dao losing money.
• 72 million spent and cannot use land to make fuel and play OW.
• blueprints etc
• progress on your land. in 2 months time a t4 should be fully developed or close to it. by not allowing us to play during launch theyre robbing you of every opportunity for long time ahead. the impact will be felt for months. a t1 will finish upgrading his land during bear.

not only we need zero on time, but as promised, 2-3 weeks before OW.

[final ridge]

what if they can't/won't give you what you asked?

[visual jolt]

delay

[final ridge]

what if they don't want to delay?

[visual jolt]

they have no choice.

[chrome sage]

I cant support this. It doesnt make sense to change the tenets of the IIP that created land which sets the revenue at 5%. Without any data to justify except for sentiment, this has no legs to stand on.

As a landholder myself, I sympathize but creating a permanent change like this seems like a knee jerk reaction. I would support a temporary reprieve/solution. Going a bit extreme, maybe an IIP that gives 20% of the fuel purchases to land owners in the first three (3) months from open beta as an example. (not that im advocating for this atm lol)

[final ridge]

The increase in revdis only applied during the delay

[chrome sage]

im curious to know why you think they have no choice? Id like to understand how IZ P2E is considered integral to the overall Illuvium ecosystem especially considering alternative solutions that might not be perfect but achieve a version of it.

[final ridge]

Once IZ P2E is launched, the revdis will go back to 5%

[chrome sage]

Ah, it wasnt as clear from what you wrote. That makes more sense

[visual jolt]

because it was sold for 72m and it has to work? beyond and zero holders are the only thing pushing ilv forward and providing money since tokens were sold, but token has utility.

saying such things is exactly what i meant when i said abuse. dao cooks fuel, zero useless.

do u remember the advertising for zero? all the promises? iips ? now u come and say that iz is not considered important for the ecosystem

it is the core of the ecosystem.

i believe an iip must be passed that states dao can make fuel only if zero makes it, then ill never hear this sentence again.

[chrome sage]

I agree that IZ p2e should work but I may not be completely sold that it needs to be there by Open Beta provided the core promises are being maintained i.e. getting the 5% of all in-game revenue.

beyond and zero holders are the only thing pushing ilv forward and providing money since tokens were sold, but token has utility.

True but only as of this moment. Beyond is a finished product while Zero was a speculative investment. However, wouldnt it be fair to say that once overworld is finally on chain (Open beta) then it would be another game that would 'push' ILV forward as you say? People will need to purchase fuel to do actions in overworld while Arena will create demand for illuvials.

saying such things is exactly what i meant when i said abuse. dao cooks fuel, zero useless.

I cant comment on this until we can hear from Labs what the stop gap plan is if P2E version of IZ is not available by OB. This is what Im trying to find out.

[visual jolt]

how do u decide whats core promise? tomorrow yall might say well we dont feel like giving 5%, thats not a core promise

i cant stress this enough, do not even discuss compensations , do not give them such option at all. if they go for it, ill blame yall.

[chrome sage]

Its in the IIP that made land sale

[visual jolt]

so words only have meaning if theyre on iip, the rest of the promises on the medium page or whatever are empty words?

announcements, any form of other communication except iip is a lie?

dont cherry pick and dont bend over. if yall need me here so i can get u to step up, so be it. yall have control over stuff and u have to have the balls to do it.

[chrome sage]

Its a DAO. the passed IIPs are whats being followed ideally. Not sure about the medium you mention but it should follow what the IIP passed. If you can share it I can go over it

[chrome sage]

To be frank, Im trying to understand where youre coming from and I would like you share your points of argument. Cause up until now, Im not quite sure what you want to ensure is there by open beta. Its hard to decipher if you just say P2E version of land owners. Is it the fuel exchange, setting the prices of fuel on the open market, earning straight eth from selling fuel, etc.

Have you also considered how a delay would affect the whole illuvium ecosystem as whole? Cause thats something both Labs and IMC is balancing.

[visual jolt]

if these questions are coming , just so we can receive small airdrop for that, i dont like that.
obviously we need iz fully functional , generating fuel, selling it, using it, whatever.

also a delay can only affect it positively, theyll have more time to work on the games and prepare for the big bang.
what is the benefit of launching a game without its economy and launching entire ecosystem without its core utility?
why arent resources being sent to zero if its so far behind.
why do i have the impression that back in the days we spoke about iz making fuel and dao multiplying it and now yall say iz is not needed and dao can make the fuel?

having functional iz would bring insane value to the land itself and restore or improve the price.
having land boost for airdrop would add to that.
using resources from your land to play for the airdrop would add to that.
developing your land during bull and maximizing profits or progress will add to that.

theres very, very short time window in which land owners need to make up for the 2 years in whatever way they can before bear hits. yall want to eliminate that window.

im sorry that i cant be more detailed, you know how complicated everything is and i got things on my mind and cannot focus to give all the info i want to give, hopefully someone will jump in to help , there is more to lose .

i feel like as soon as they saw all of this coming, they could have set aside some $ to hire more ppl or something and we wouldnt have this issue at all? why is it not happening right now and we have to discuss this?

[hollow shadow]

I also just had a look at IIP-39 and it states clearly:

Launch Timing

Illuvium Zero will be launched in open beta as early as technically feasible prior to Illuvium Overworld. This allows land plot development by players to occur, allowing a steady fuel supply from landowners within weeks after Overworld launches.

[visual jolt]

ok, so from these 2 sentences they HAVE to launch it minimum on the same day

[hollow shadow]

Actually way longer before OW, to give us time to build up our plots or they have to give us unlimited speed ups, so we can build up on day 1.

[visual jolt]

the "as early as technically feasible prior to ow" allows them to say , we couldnt earlier, but we launch them together. nothing less than that.

so if this is an iip it should be non negotiable and enforced and this conversation is pointless

[hollow shadow]

But then we should still get speed ups.

[visual jolt]

sure, whatever, as long as the game is on time i dont care what we get and if we get something for the weeks prior promised

[hollow shadow]

Fine, we can basically stop discussing this here until we here from @viral stag how he wants to proceed now.

[thin plaza]

I guess it rather get changed than OB delayed...It needs a simple iccp and 5 mins of work to change that iip 😄
Not sure how you guys see it like you found the solution to the Problem with IZ.

[hollow shadow]

Sure, and then we know how much this DAO is actually worth its name.

[visual jolt]

that would have to be voted by council, i doubt they will. thats suicidal

[final ridge]

not sure if implementing an IIP is a must
we got IIP-47-R the tournament fund

[thin plaza]

Ofc they will... Who do you think agreed to delay IZ in order to have an earlier mainnet Launch date?

You think imc wasn't involved at all?

[hollow shadow]

Then they should have read their own fucking IIPs before making such a decision. Where are you @viral stag ? Do you even know what is in your IIPs?

[visual jolt]

i hope not, cuz im trusting them here and theyre only talking about compensations and it doesnt look good.

[neon cliff]

add canceling all future land sales to the list

[chrome sage]

The IIP was made in the assumption that all three games would be available by OB. Please keep in mind while what Kieran have said in the townhall is not considered as the official statement. Were still waiting for that.

Now if theres going to be huge shift in the direction, this would probably need a proposal depending on what Labs proposes.

So what Im trying to make it clear here is that lets find out the details from labs then get sentiment before we craft a proposal or raise our pitchforks.

[final ridge]

IIP-39 says more land sale

[thin plaza]

In decisions like that, Team proposed to imc to Launch Arena and OW prior to IZ and IMC has to agree or disagree... Obviously they agreed as a group so all this happened

[chrome sage]

There hasnt been any proposal of this.

[neon cliff]

and? we can change things

[thin plaza]

Then why did imc didn't intervent when they saw IZ being delayed?

[final ridge]

im gonna pick my battle, ser im just an ICC

[hollow shadow]

Okay, I am all for a good rational solution. But to say that the assumptions have changed doesn't allow for ignoring the IIP.

[chrome sage]

Because theres no such announcement of it. They will tell IMC if IZ will be ultimately delayed or not. For transparency, I have this raised as a topic in our meeting to be held in less than 24 hrs

[neon cliff]

then pick the best battle - this is all inconsequential tbh

[chrome sage]

I agree. So if any huge change to the plan/iip then either an ICCP might be needed to pass and more details should be shared.

[visual jolt]

i think we can work with scruba, he seems reasonable, we only need to get him to understand that it needs to happen as it was planned and he might reason with the rest of the council

[chrome sage]

Im personally trying to get more info for you guys. Hopefully by tomorrow I can share more details. But I think the best course of action is to have a town hall with Kieran on this so that all your concerns, questions, and violent reactions can be addressed all in one go 🙂

[final ridge]

scruba is your best bet

[chrome sage]

https://tenor.com/view/chuckles-im-in-danger-ralph-simpson-meme-gif-16042439

[final ridge]

u got it scrub, landowners are in your hands now

no pressure tho

[plain nest]

Well the most debated things (see top 4 ideas) on the feedback channel in the last week it's clearly land/ILZ. I think there's enough info here if you take a bit of time to go through them
This would be very appreciated

[chrome sage]

Rest assured ive been reading them and will be raising them in the call 🙂

[final ridge]

just remember to vote for scrub next epoch guys, he's with the community

[neon cliff]

are you in the landholders chat?

[sour mantle]

THIS!!! 💯💯💯

[chrome sage]

I should be but I cant find it anymore. can you link it again?

[sour mantle]

Loving your approach finally, somebody from the council who truly takes this seriously -
Good to have you, buddy!

[sour mantle]

Scrubadubdad for president!

[hollow shadow]

We should work to get the delay compensation integrated in that yet to propose ICCP.

[chrome sage]

@visual jolt, @plain nest , @hollow shadow and all the others here. If you guys can provide me a bullet point of all the concerns across all the channels including zero, landowner and the feedback idea that would be much appreciated. I can push to have this brought to Kieran and Labs attention. This will also help shape the discussion for the town hall and be addressed there in one go.

[visual jolt]

as simple as iz on OB launch, how they do it is up to them

put more money in iz, push OB back, doesnt matter

[neon cliff]

https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1059599339351199845

[chrome sage]

oh wow. Why did I lose access to this. I used to have access before.

[neon cliff]

idk. I shared so thoughts on why I think canceling all future landsales makes sense, if you have time

[thin plaza]

Didn't Kieran talk about the team had a meeting where they locked down launch critical stuff, like what has to go into open beta and what can be updated afterwards?
IMC didn't got a list of all of that?

[thin plaza]

tell me you sold all your land without telling me 😄

I had the same a few months ago, and got magically access again few days afterwards again

[chrome sage]

I didnt lol. I still have a t3 and 3 t1s hahaha

[final ridge]

NDA

[thin plaza]

you for sure lost your land holder role... maybe jeremy can get it for you again.
or you have to do the collab land stuff again in #🎫〕verify-asset

[thin plaza]

IMC is under NDA, isn't it?

[final ridge]

IMC and ICC are under NDA, yes
as for ICC we did few progress update meeting with Nick, and we get IMC update from JP

[thin plaza]

then i don't know what the comment was all about 😄

[final ridge]

every time we do a meeting with nick it was documented in the minutes

[thin plaza]

I was just asking if IMC got a list with launch critical features or not, and IZ paid land was on that list or not 🤷🏻

[chrome sage]

Not to my knowledge

[thin plaza]

so what is launch critical didn't got decided by IMC? o.O

[chrome sage]

I'd say it hasn't gone through the process yet.

[thin plaza]

that's even worse 😅

[blissful walrus]

I had to reverify recently

[blissful walrus]

Here are the main concerns as I see them (others may have more to add):

1. Skipping testnet for fuel production and order book testing
2. Landholders can't generate fuel/ETH to help fund their overworld runs
3. 5% of fuel sales will be distributed evenly across land holders based on land tier, removing the competitive aspect and ability for grinders to outearn during the initial player surge. Inactive land holders still earn an equal share.
4. No time is provided for initial build-up of land plots ahead of Open Beta, requiring land owners to put more time into ILZ when they could otherwise be grinding Overworld (2-4 weeks advanced release has always been discussed)

[plain nest]

I would also add:

5. With the delay of fuel production and development of plot there’s also a loss in financial gain from potential blueprints/skins sells. So if ILZ is delayed for 2 months that is basically 2 months less time for a land owner to** research biodata and get blueprints** which, and I can’t stress this enough, was the 2nd most advertised thing when it comes to land. How can we compensate for that?

6. Some owners (if not majority) bought land to fund their own OW runs. We know 5% will be distributed but when? If we have to wait fuel sales to reach $500k or $10mil then it means we would have to wait for quite some time and some people bought land based on this -> not paying for their OW runs, thus leaving them with 1 option if they also want to play OW.

7. For so long lands** did not have any kind of use case** thus maybe something like a ‘staking’ or a more simple snapshot functionality could be implemented to earn some ILV rewards from the same pool as Beyond and Arena, at least until ILZ will be out.

8. Increase revenue share (at least for a period of time) to make ILZ an instrumental part of the ecosystem. 5% is negligible/insignificant and shows a reason why the focus wasn’t on it.
   Another take on this would be -> don’t allow DAO to produce fuel out of thin air.

[chrome sage]

Thanks, Mozeen and Torrex

[visual jolt]

definitely dao shouldnt be printing fuel without it being produced in IZ first

[final ridge]

need to check with lore how the dao can produce 95% of fuel

[onyx palm]

They have spacestations with converters above the landplots

[visual jolt]

i find it kind of weird that founders wouldnt realize whats the impact

[hollow shadow]

I still think about why Grant left. I suspect some disagreement with Kieran over strategy. Kieran seems more of a degen by heart, Aaron and Grant just want to create the best games. I am not sure if Kieran thinks about long term impact, he seems more impulsive, a bit too much for my taste.

[tiny horizon]

Sent you a DM. I made a complete list but can't share it here because word counts restriction and formatting.

I will actually post it as a Feedback on its own. I just failed the first post but now I have to wait 6 hours.

I didn't know posting a long text would automatically turn it into a .txt file, completely ruining the formatting. Is there really no way to share feedback of more than 2000 characters count without losing formatting?

[late pulsar]

I asked for a staking version of land plots months ago. https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1196526125761953884

[final ridge]

yea, thats how i see it too. grant is an artist who prob wants perfection, while kieran is a business person who wants to ship products faster.
im choose the later

[chrome sage]

Thanks received it

[final ridge]

i understand that the recent pivot might hurt us long term, but cmon guys the halving is next week

[thin plaza]

point 3 in your suggestion is more beneficial the lower tier the landplot is.
The team stated that time for building up the city is extremely high weighted. Thats why they set the multiplier of a theoretical max fuel output ratio of 1:3:9:27 instead of 1:4:12:36.
The more IZ gets delayed, the more impact it has up to a worst case scenario of time advantage of high tier plots being 0

[tiny horizon]

And? BTC already reached a new ATH last month. Should we have a rushed launch then even though we weren't ready?

[wooden linden]

You don’t have the land owner role. Maybe need to #🎫〕verify-asset again to see #🗻〕land-owner

[final ridge]

i see, so it need to scale with the Tiers?

[final ridge]

that's how i see it yea.
Q2 is the psychological target

that we need to launch in Q2 in whatever progress we have

[quaint pollen]

What a scuffed narrative. Trying to time the markets is a huge L. The only reason we should release in Q2 is to not let down everyone one more time on missed deadlines.

[tiny horizon]

Who's psychological target precisely?

[tiny horizon]

Everyone except land players.

[quaint pollen]

yeah feels bad if this actually happens...

Big game/server launches are always something memorable and an event in and of itself.

[tiny horizon]

The launch needs to be reconsidered completely.

It will be to the benefit of everyone.

[wooden linden]

The Drones that are out there on the planet surface were deployed as forward bases in order to produce resources that the crashing ship (DAO) will need. The drones are not running around full on autonomous. They have programmed parameters and percentage production quotas that must be met. (Much of this is extrapolated but some is not. It all fits nicely with the lore that is known)

[final ridge]

team, they have announced Q2 too in the illuvial hunting trailer

and investors too i reckon

[tiny horizon]

"team" needs some more accountability lol

[final ridge]

im gonna rewatch the ama so i dnt break any nda lol
but im pretty sure kieran said something similar in an ama

[wooden linden]

Really? He said he was not working for months in the same ways that he was at the beginning but was getting paid the same anyways.

[final ridge]

if drones can extract 95% of infinite fuel supply, why do we need extractors

[wooden linden]

The drones I’m referring to are the ones that are building the bases in IZ.

It’s Buckley. The drone in the top of the headquarters. I’m referring to IZ. The drones build the extractors. They build everything the player tells them to build. The fuel production just gets “lore-taxed”

[tiny horizon]

When the "team" decided that. Did they consult the DAO/community? Knowing it would go against what the DAO/community passed (IIP-39)? That's what I find ridiculous about getting told to participate in the governance. What governance? The "team" decides anyway.

No governance decided on Q2. Just a small group of people named "the team".

The real thing that no one dares to say is that it's not just IZ that's not ready for Q2 launch. It doesn't matter though, let's put our blindfolds on and hand out money, it can't go wrong.

[hollow shadow]

Then he could have just lowered his salary and stayed on as an advisor or anything like it. There must have been a fight with one of his brothers.

[hollow yarrow]

let's not speculate too much here 🙂 you can find his message explaining the situation quite easily.
#💬〕general message

Now let's stay on topic!

[thin plaza]

Scale it up/down or based on tiers just impacts the time of reaching the worst case Scenario.
Have to be deleted i guess.
But thats just my opinion... I bet you Find enough t1 landholders who would vote for let it in 😄

[sour mantle]

Wow, hahaha - for real, who’s responsible for that?

[hollow shadow]

Last quote then we can go back to topic:

As we got closer to release, there was a very clear strain between Kieran and I, I don't think he believed it was fair what I was doing and you know, maybe he was right.

[blissful walrus]

I think what you're saying is that because high tier lands can max their fuel production more quickly, delays that allow T1 land to receive a set fraction of 5% revenue benefit T1 land the most and hurt T4 land.

On the opposite side, not launching ILZ ahead of OB hurts T1 the most because they need that time to build up the most.

So any change in timeline does shift earning potential between land tiers. I guess this is unfortunate but not a lot can be done and they will eventually all reach end-state.

[thin plaza]

No, if you airdrop fuel/Element + speedups IZ could be delayed that mich that in worst case Scenario you can build up all Tiers in 1 Day.
This would eliminate the advantage of faster Building out the city, and this advantage being the reason for the changed theoretical Max fuel output ratios between the Tiers, high Tier plots would again get punished.

[final ridge]

its on our roadmap

[thin ridge]

My first thought was that we are not losing out of money directly since we are still getting our 5%.

However, we are missing out on time. When it was first planned I thought I had 2 weeks to play my land like crazy and get it set up so that it wouldn't take much time when OW started. Now I will be hunting Illuvials and then when I finally get my land I would have to switch my focus to that.

I agree with 2 and 3 but not 1.

[wooden linden]

Consider that you are talking to an actual person. And that actual person did not produce the roadmap you are referring to. And try responding again.

[tiny horizon]

He said "our roadmap". I said "your roadmap". I think the pronouns are correct. Was the word "joke" offensive? I genuinely don't understand.

You may dm me if you want to keep the thread on the subject.

[blissful walrus]

Very true, speedups are far more helpful for T1. So yeah, timeline shifts change earning potential between tiers and really can't be made right again just with the speedups even.

[tiny horizon]

"The road map of your group" (I hope I don't get moderated for that) can't be taken seriously.

It uses terms like "Illuvium Private Beta 4" and "Illuvium Overworld" without hinting that "Illuvium" doesn't include Zero. And then there is no mention of Zero up until 2025.

[frozen solar]

If I may also suggest to really dig deep on whether hiring more developers temporarily to speed up development is a viable option. The best solution to all this would be if IZ gets ready for OB and everything launches at the same time.

I know that people have dismissed this, saying that hiring a new person takes 2-3 months to integrate. I do freelance work in a different niche and this is 100% BS. The team just got 10mil funding so expense should not be an issue in this case. There are qualified freelancers available on an hourly basis on several online platforms. So we should not be looking to hire new team members as integrating them would indeed take longer. But an experienced freelancer who is a specialist should not need more than a few days to bring up to speed and they could be working on the project in a week. There is still almost 3 months left until the end of Q2 so a few experienced developers should be able to contribute a lot during that time.

[final ridge]

yes, i agree that the team should have been more transparent with this issue

[sour mantle]

That is absolutely an understatement!

[thin ridge]

Good point

[pine bear]

Not sure if this has been mentioned above, but mega cities will be the most disadvantaged by a flat 5% fuel drop per plot.

[thin plaza]

Megacities>skilled Players>active Players>landplots focused on fuel production

Plot traders, Casuals, unexperienced Players and landplots focused on blueprint production actually benefit

Plots on lost wallets... Well... Lost revenue aswell

[pine bear]

Exactly

[visual jolt]

does that mean that we should sacrifice the project, so we can do airdrop ?

[visual jolt]

pretty sure we can do something about it, council can : D

[shrewd spade]

It has for ILV holders too. Do they get an apology airdrop?

[pine bear]

Ilv holders if they staked got rewards all the way along. So it’s a little different I think.

[shrewd spade]

Thats fair hahaha

[pine bear]

Not that I’m looking for an apology. 😂

[chrome sage]

Theres too many threads I dont know where to share it hahaha but for all concerned parties, there will be a town hall scheduled next week. I will be sharing the list of concerns that was posted and dm'd to me to Labs in an effort for them to be addressed.

Once the town hall is posted as an event in the discord, I encourage everyone here to attend. Thank you!

[viral stag]

I'll address the concerns on the Townhall next week. There are too many ideas swirling around in here. We will come up with a plan of attack once all of the issues have been laid out.

Just remember, the entire DAO has been effected by the delays.

• Illuvium Beyond - has no game connected to it, and without the other three games, sales / market activity is lessened.
• Illuvium Zero - No ability to generate fuel.
• ILV token holders - No revenue distributions.

Everyone who has participated in the ecosystem has made concessions, just think about the token holders wanting the $5m safety pool distribution.

The positive news is everyone in the ecosystem is going to benefit from the Airdrop. And you might say - well we should be compensated the most, but I would implore you to look at the other participants in the ecosystem and understand that it is not just Landholders who deserve "compensation".

[blissful walrus]

Please don't turn this into a land holders vs everyone else debate. Most land holders just want to see the game delivered so we can participate in the ecosystem as it has always been intended since the land sale.

Any "compensation" would not need to be at the expense of others in the ecosystem (#2-3 in Jag's original post have strong merit and take nothing from anyone else).

[visual jolt]

no compensations. finished game.

we delay everything if its not done, its that simple.

[viral stag]

So you would rather delay the game, even though that will mean you missing out on your 5% of revenue?

or rather, delaying your 5% revenue even further?

[violet anchor]

Assuming you were replying to the comment above you, he does not speak for the whole group. I would just look at the list once it's submitted and take it from there. Mozeen said it well.

[foggy rapids]

Yes, most landholders are probably also token holders and I bet many are participants in Beyond. So we're indeed not talking about separate silos.

And on the effect of delays:

• Beyond has been receiving ongoing leaderboard rewards which at least stabilises Illuvitar prices even if market activity is quiet
• Token holders have been receiving staking rewards (ILV or SILV2) till now and the $5mn safety pool is not consequential on a per token basis
• Illuvium Zero on the other hand did not benefit from any substantial mitigant for the last 2 years (the BPs and airdrops are nice gestures but on a time and value-adjusted basis are not consequential)

I am a participant in all ILV products and want what's best for the whole ecosystem just stating why many feel IZ has been lagging behind.

[hollow shadow]

Here is a good list Kieran can use as a starting point. https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1227003710840766484

[blissful walrus]

Absolutely, I'm well into all three too. Reward comparisons aside, land was sold two years ago with a specific purpose. Now is when that purpose should finally come alive, but it turns out not to be the case. This is the main issue.

[viral stag]

Totally, and we can play around with the Airdrop numbers to make up for those lost rewards. We absolutely would have had rewards for IZ players but unfortunately had to wait until the backend was properly built so we can stop cheating

[foggy rapids]

I agree. A lot of us waited very patiently for 2 years. I just want to play my megacity haha 🙂

[viral stag]

And once again, the intention is to have land playable by Open Beta, we are still working towards that. As a backup, in case it is not, landholders will still get distributions

[blissful walrus]

Thanks Kieran, I do appreciate all the effort and know there are only good intentions. Looking forward to next week's town hall.

[hollow shadow]

You notice how he is avoiding to answer all the other questions ? He is a sales guy. A politican.

[violet anchor]

He did say he would address them in the Townhall next week

[hollow shadow]

Yes, another way to avoid actually answering. He will talk around the hot issues. Why not write it down? Again, what would a politician do? They are good at talking you into sleep.

[foggy rapids]

Appreciated. Keen to hear the details during the townhall. As you probably understood, beyond distributions / rewards, a lot of ppl would want comfort on timelines for IZ P2E playability 🙂

[blissful walrus]

I think there are important council and team discussions that need to happen between now and then. Hopefully he will be discussing these things for a week before trying to answer.

[hollow shadow]

Yes

[viral stag]

I think it is much better use of my time to not read through hours of text and have it be summarised and then you allow me to answer on the Town Hall...

If someone would care to give me a TLDR of this entire conversation in text, then I will answer here and in the Town Hall

[blissful walrus]

@chrome sage was compiling this.

[hollow shadow]

There is also a list here, but we can wait until @chrome sage has integrated it all into just one list. https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1227003710840766484

[wooden linden]

From battlecries:

" yes, i am ready to sacrifice everything to get the game done and get what we were promised, its an IIP, you cannot just decide to throw 72m worth of land nfts under the bus, we should be your priority. there is much more to lose than 5%. the future of ilv depends on council stepping up and fixing stuff, we have received nothing but false promises and bad news for 2 years straight and you want to keep us out of the honey pot during bull, as a founder you should know whats the impact and on how many fronts we are losing"

[chrome sage]

Will be sharing to him all the summarized points. @tiny horizon @blissful walrus and another provide it already will just compile neatly.

[viral stag]

Thanks, and can you also make it a google doc not a PDF, for security I don't download them

[chrome sage]

Will do!

[onyx palm]

Sure

[sour mantle]

This 👆💯

[final ridge]

Thanks for stopping by, is it possible to airdrop speed-ups and elements to landowners if IZ has a delay?

[tiny horizon]

There's no way for us, without roles to share 2000+ characters, without joining a pdf or doc. We also can't share google doc links. 🤷🏽‍♂️

[viral stag]

You can DM me

[neon cliff]

I want to point out that it's not about compensation for delays.

I get some people are saying but that is not what many of us are asking for.

It's about equity share in the Illuvium ecosystem and the best path forward give the present situation.

---

Given the present situation, Landowners is saying that it is not the best strategic move to dilute landowners to support funding the DAO with short-term capital raises, and so all future land sales should be canceled.

The DAO is fully funded, we don't need to have the bear market PTSD of the past.

The game is going to work, we are going to make enough money to fund the DAO.

Possibly too much, that we might need to consider selling ILV so the DAO doesn't have too many tokens.

---

if this is the case, why would we have the plan to dilute the most die-hard supporters of the game?

is it not the time to be bullish and create more advocates for the game who are highly motivated to bring new players into the ecosystem.

---

Reward those of us that are psycho enough to have believed in your vision.

---

ppl that held this bag -98%, bought land during an industry disaster (land came first btw), bought illuviatars, bought merch, funded the DAO, supported delays, and supported caplital raises that we all thought or hoped we could be a part of.

---

The team didn't get diluted. Hell ya. I support the fuck out of that.

We don't want to get diluted either and we didn't get to buy tokens at a discount (okay fine).

Bear market is OVER.

It's time to start fucking winning. Let's do it.

https://tenor.com/view/what-say-you-aragorn-lord-of-the-rings-what-you-say-gif-15043681

@viral stag

[neon cliff]

Lastly, those that bought land bought everything else, at a way more significant percentage that the other way around. When you talk about the other areas of the ecosystem. I'm like who? also us?

Beyond has been getting rewards, and the value prop there at the first sale was this is a PFP collection that will inflate over time, maybe other stuff, but no promise. I don't feel we can do much there other than launch the game and drive demand. For ILV, we are all ILV holders and yeah the delays suck. We are all in that boat. What can we do about that? I don't see any options, and no one has suggested anything.

The case for land was ALWAYS, I'm an ILV holder who is planning on getting their share of revdis. But Aaron/team designed a very cool mechanism to build the foundational pieces of an in-game economy.

damn, that will make this whole thing insanely valuable. I support it and want to maintain my share of revenue so I'm going to buy land and help fund the dao.

in short, fund dao and get share or equity in the ecosystem.

So we are just talking game balance here, what makes sense.

OP giga chad landholders who feel motivated as fuck to get players so they buy fuel? or ppl who feel like they got raked a bit and their shit land is going to get nerfed over and over again.

Seems pretty clear to me, considering we are funded, and we could build a second game if what we have doesn't work.

---

If we do come down to the wire again, land will be worth very little and a land sale will only raise a small amount.

If we crush, then we what? Add even more to the already funded DAO? it will be very difficult to understand why we are selling more land for additional short-term gains and dilute the best advocates we have.

If we make this move now, we will benefit most from the community. People will be happy af, they will be excited to play and to onboard. You do marketing. Who drives the easiest conversions. Current happy customers. We can form/reinforce this distributed marketing army for basically free, as landowners should be the most motivated to onboard new players as they should benefit directly. It was designed in this way.

What am I missing here? genuine question.

We should cancel all future land sales, preserve landholder equity, reward the community and create and an incentive aligned dao.

@chrome sage @shrewd spade @knotty falcon

[neon cliff]

@thick coral

[final ridge]

not really sure what ur asking, no more land sale?

[thin plaza]

Looks like

[neon cliff]

sorry this convo is happening in like 5 places. I made it clear and bolded the point.

[white remnant]

#1226688381132476536 message

[lament notch]

Funny to hear a founder comment on this . Definitely didn't give me any confidence

[shrewd spade]

Personally I've always believed land needs a 10% share and I don't think we need more than 20k lands.

It would be bother me if all the land masses stayed so separated forever tbh and I would love all their coordinates to be shuffled so it's one connected land mass but that's just me

[thin plaza]

Oh yea... Mess up all the megacities, sounds Fun 😂

[pine bear]

https://tenor.com/view/american-horror-story-jessica-lange-pain-gif-22582354

Don’t mess with coordinates

[shrewd spade]

U could easily do it without affecting megacities at all

U bring them closer to together but change nothing about their relationships to neighbours

[neon cliff]

let's goo!

Yeah - make them bigger and move them around to fill in the space

[neon cliff]

oh lol think there is away to do it but yeah. I see your point

[thin plaza]

What's with those who almost habe a megacity but need 1 lr 2 more plots for a 2x2 or 3x3?

[boreal mural]

I’ll take a reroll… my neighbor is Mia for a year n a half /:

[thin plaza]

Mia?

[boreal mural]

Missing in action

[thin plaza]

Aah... Mine to 😩

[thin plaza]

Maybe it's the Same... We could share cost of a headhunter

[twilit patrol]

I dont have a land and if that is what land owners deem as a fair and good compromise I wouldnt mind it .

[boreal mural]

So are we all pausing and submitting questions for the town hall? Or anyone making a proposal before?

[viral stag]

No more land sales, ever, would have to be an IIP.
In terms of IZ holders receiving fuel for gameplay, I am working on a solution. I will get back to you once I speak to the team

[shrewd spade]

For the plots with an empty plot next to it. Then it would be a disadvantage. But it already is if u cap at 20k

[white remnant]

Ration 1/19 => 5/15 fuel

[thin plaza]

Yea totally, but they bought it knowing there could be an eternity until it is filled, not even surely filled

Ripping appart the others and maybe Make them to such Spots is a worse decision imo

[thin plaza]

Also about Holding revenue back and distribute it when IZ is live based on weekly fuelsales?
Would be neat if both is possible, so i don't have to push the idea forward ibrecently shares 😛

[shrewd spade]

I am not saying rip apart anything. Literally keep everything as is, just delete the empty space

[thin plaza]

You literally said shuffle the plots 😂
How you delete empty Space?

[shrewd spade]

But having the islands is kinda cool in its own way too. So either is probably cool

[shrewd spade]

Ahhh I see the confusion. Itd be like a reverse pangea to me. Everything stays connected where they are connected. They just all move together

https://tenor.com/view/deriva-continental-gif-22169596

reverse of this 👆

[noble shadow]

That map is dogshyt

[thin plaza]

"Shuffle all coordinates so it's one connected landmass"... That confusion is on you mate 😄

[shrewd spade]

Yep I worded it very poorly. Should have been more specific

[viral stag]

That's the solution. Aaron agrees we can do it. Waiting to hear back from Johnny

But it will require an IIP

[shrewd spade]

So kind of like how we did Beyond rewards then gave triple rewards for a few weeks?

[thin plaza]

Sounds great

[viral stag]

Okay johnny agrees, and just to make it clear, all we want as a team is for the landholders to be happy, we are never going to make everyone happy, but if the majority agrees, and the DAO votes accordingly, then we can do it

I will write the IIP today

I also think it is fair that we build into the airdrop the additional ILV rewards that Beyond has received as a bonus to Landholders. Again, it wasn't that we didn't want to incentivise Zero players, we couldn't do it fairly. This makes them whole

Side note: I feel like I have been negotiating with a union here, perhaps something in the future to add to the governance model so the voices of Landholders can be heard through an official channel

I feel like you guys are going to strike soon 🤣

[thin plaza]

I guess it's the last hickup we see from Landholders... When there are 150k Arena Players and 200k OW Players screaming for this Feature and that balance Change, voices of 20 landholders will get drowned😂

[viral stag]

There are 8500 of you. And you hold a lot of power

[thin plaza]

True true, but super majority is silently watching.
I guess we will See soon 🙂

[viral stag]

I'm actually glad we have a top rail now, the last week has made me realise that this union if properly banded together could actually cause some damage if your demands weren't met. But then again, I doubt it would ever happen, some would break away, start selling fuel cheap, and so would begin a fascinating dynamic

[thin plaza]

Yea, greed always wins...
But would have been super Fun watching, and taking part

[boreal mural]

Landowners of Illuvium unite 😁

[thin plaza]

Your army small mate... Need to pump those numbers up

[boreal mural]

one sec

there we go... the gathering

[chrome sage]

Nooo... I'm going through ptsd lol. I'm actually negotiating with our union hahaha

As much as I hate to admit it there are similarities lol

Should we recognize a collective bargaining unit and it's representative and go through mandatory reconciliation? Rofl rofl

[chrome sage]

Tbh this is why it's important for your ICC members to be representative of your interests 😜 I can see a complex governance process where collective units such as land owners and maybe beyond elect their own reps into ICC ensuring proper representation but it's convoluted and requires multiple snapshot voting. Not something for us to implement right away but definitely something to think about.

Sorry I digress lol

[viral stag]

This is what I dream about

[pine bear]

I thought that’s what I voted for already. 🤣

[chrome sage]

I'd say partly. I'd say almost all of the members I'm both council were voted based on their expertise and value add. I don't think anyone was solely voted on based on a platform of representation for a singular collective unit. I.e. running for council as a landowner rep etc 😜

So it's partly true I guess hahaha

[noble shadow]

yea i tried running for council with that in mind and got destroyed both times 🤣 🤣

[pine bear]

Considering most of us are invested in almost all facets of illuvium I doubt we need this.

[chrome sage]

I don't think it's needed in imc but in ICC I can see it working. Some people feel like they don't have a representative in either council. This ensures they can go through their official rep in ICC.

[final ridge]

https://tenor.com/view/dune-2021-desert-power-timothee-chalamet-paul-atreides-zendaya-chani-gif-14085656076762374579

[wooden linden]

I certainly would not mind being called a land scab. I’m just playing the game.

[hollow shadow]

Elon Musk just posted this tweet about Steve Jobs and I find it pretty fitting to our situation. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1777905553303371780?s=61&t=CMbpXHUf3Gb6-W4O3JiB6g

Elon Musk (@elonmusk) on X

Precisely

Twitter · Apr 10, 2024, 3:44 AM

[plain nest]

No rails... give power to the people

https://tenor.com/view/mandalorian-the-mandalorian-this-is-the-way-gif-15962126

[sour mantle]

THIS 💯 👆

[daring crane]

This is a really good solution in my mind Kieran. I would suggest we look at some sort of broader time period. For instance, don't do triple rewards in week 1 as that probably skews a little too highly to the higher tier only land plots who would be getting to fuel production early but spread it out as 1.1x rewards over the first X weeks instead. Team can review what the right balance is there.

[pure nexus]

It's interesting that Kieran says landholders hold a lot of power, because I feel a major reason for these kinds of objections is due to feeling sidelined and insignificant. 5% production has always seemed fairly inconsequential to me, now even more so as the DAO can just mint 100% of fuel in perpetuity at the top rail if landowners give up. Landowners could essentially all stop playing and the rest of the games would carry on no problems.

Compared to the damage ILV stakers could do to the entire DAO if they weren't kept happy, I don't see how landowner 'power' holds even the faintest candle that of ILV stakers.

So what I'm trying to say is that I think all of this manifests from insecurity.

[quaint pollen]

I agree, I can see the 95/5% split for the revdis no problem as the majority of it will come from other games in the future. Beyond already helped fill the safety pool, for example. I can't see why there's a problem for the fuel to be only produced by the landonwers since there is the top rail. This listing 1 crypton and it being 20 makes no sense to me.

[thin plaza]

The 95/5 Split for sure is not balanced, but cutting of stakers totally from it might not be a proper solution

[pure nexus]

It kind of feels at the moment that the incentive is to either not play at all, or focus on blueprints and just assume the passive distribution of fuel sold at the top rail. Perhaps that's an intended dynamic though 🤷‍♂️

Needs testing, in open beta... and thus we come full circle

[quaint pollen]

The thing that differentiates stakers from landowners is that the latter bought a piece of land instead of staking ILV. So, why would stakers also benefit from the sales made by the landowners?

There will be tons of sources from where revdis will come in the future...

[thin plaza]

Yea in the future, but now it could end up not being enough to sustain

[quaint pollen]

This logic is a bit short sighted. Fuel sales could even have a trading fee.

[pure nexus]

I'm sure a lot of thought and consideration has gone in to setting the distribution split, so I'm not necessarily advocating for it to change (significantly anyway), just highlighting the feeling of insignificance it creates. Credit where credit due though, this team is at least trying to integrate land in a meaningful way, and are engaging with the community. Much more than can be said for land in many many other projects.

[thin plaza]

Could yea... But don't you wana See how it all plays out with playerretention, revenue of fuel and revenue of everything else, before cutting of stakers and with that labs from probably by far the biggest inflow of money in the first years?

[quaint pollen]

My opinion is that revdis will be very low until we reach mass adoption with more than 1 game. And I don't see how this affects player retention in anyway. But yeah I agree with the point that I do wanna see everything unfold.

[final ridge]

maybe because they dnt want the possibility of the games be held ransomed by landowners

[thin plaza]

One could say If revdis is very low you shouldn't Cut them of.
If revdis low, not many people in the ip actively playing and paying which means all other revenue Löw aswell and there's too less money for developement

[final ridge]

even if revdis is low they can sell more treasury token

[thin plaza]

You are right
We should just let all revenue flowing in paying out to landowners, and whenever they need money they can sell treasury tokens

[pure nexus]

I think the majority of landowners, being invested across the ecosystem as has been mentioned, and wanting project success on all fronts, appreciate and accept that this has been a major consideration in arriving at the current arrangements. It may just require fine-tuning to reach a point that is satisfactory and equitable for all parties. This almost certainly needs to be based on proper and thorough testing, which is why this potential delay has kicked up such a stink, because it prolongs and antagonises the issue in people's minds.

[quaint pollen]

how is that even a thing when the DAO is always available to sell fuel at the rail price??

[pure nexus]

In addition to all the other ways that people feel a delay might cause them to be missing out, on both fun and finance, which have already been collated. Stating that plots would receive production-based distribution in the case of delay is only an obvious absolute minimum arrangement IMO.

[pure nexus]

I think that's the point - it's not a thing because the DAO can sell fuel at top rail. Or rather, the DAO can sell fuel at top rail, primarily to prevent it.

[quaint pollen]

Exactly I'm not talking about needing money for the labs I'm talking about revdis for stakers. Landowners should get the entire fuel sales value. And besides initially there will be very little fuel in the market since everyone will be needing it to build and upgrade their plots.

Which means the majority of the fuel will be sold by the DAO at the rail price

This whole idea of listing 1 crypton and it being 20 crypton stems from the fact the DAO wants to give revdis from fuel sales. Which doesn't seem fair to whoever bought land.

[final ridge]

we were promised 5%

[quaint pollen]

of revdis, correct.

do you own land Jag?

[thin plaza]

I see where you coming from and i generally Support an increase in share or even get the Fun of economy play when only Land sells fuel, but before making adjustements i like to See how it unfolds, how much revenue is flowing in, possible flaws in the System nobody thought about etc.

And just by the Way, if you are selling fuel and the price is always at the top rail, you are making the most money you can with your plot.

[thin plaza]

Not really correct 😄
Revdis was never promised to land

[quaint pollen]

Then I misunderstood.

[thin plaza]

Which doesn't mean that can't be changed...

[thin plaza]

Many understood it wrong, and you won't be the last one

[quaint pollen]

The more I understand about land the more worrisome it gets.

[thin plaza]

Happens to everybody

I myself was on that stage 1 year ago 😄

[quaint pollen]

Yeah I had this pictured a whole lot different than it actually is. Only with all the recent controversy did I start digging a bit more into land tokenomics.

[thin plaza]

Always good if you understand the whole System, and not just parts of it

[quaint pollen]

I thought landowners received 5% revdis and all the fuel sales. But apparently they receive no revdis and only 5% of all the fuel sales.

[thin plaza]

That is correct

[quaint pollen]

Insane 🤣

[final ridge]

its been 3 years filow

[quaint pollen]

The cherry on top will be a top rail-guard of less than 100% swings.

[thin plaza]

It is, and super Hard to Change it in favor of Land.
The decision maker is choosen by token stakers and everything can move on without Land, which means Land has no say nor Leverage to put pressure on

[quaint pollen]

yes this is so bad that my mind must have blocked this I guess. And got wishful thinking.

[thin plaza]

Why you think i was ranting when i saw skins in beyond rewards 😂
skins out of BP was the only silver Line shining for Land, which got taken away aswell

[quaint pollen]

I totally understand your side better now Spoon. Respect.

[thin plaza]

Well we will See how Hard it Swings when we See the Parameters of automated fuel balancing System in place.
Or how many people dca, i certainly do... Don't wana waste Space of production to play Roulette on a slightly better or worse selling price

[quaint pollen]

Yeah, also, players will always be limited by the number of storage facilities they have built. So no infinite stacking waiting for the ideal price to sell.

[thin plaza]

Absolutely not 😄
If you build 1 of each storages and have a balanced plot, storage is fuel in 2 - 2.5days.
Every storage Building you add lowers production significantly

AT least in Alpha season1 ... Might change in beta

[plain nest]

(Cough) (Cough) don't forget mine please 🤣 ..i think we had our first arguments on that topic

[quaint pollen]

yes both of you 🫡

[plain nest]

All good mate 🙂 .. you had your fair share of good ideas

[quaint pollen]

just trying to help the DAO

[spice juniper]

I'm a landowner, but the 10% instead of 5% are not necessary in my opinion.

However, the speed points and element airdrops would be amazing.

Why?

Because building a base can take a lot of time.

T1 plots might need up to 6 months to get to max level.

So dropping Elements packages 📦 and speed points could cut the development time of bases by 50% or even more. That would be amazing.

Being sooner able to max up fuel production by potential months is definitely a big plus.

[final ridge]

dont u need fuel to build some structures?

[boreal mural]

I think he a lil confuzzled

[thin plaza]

After a certain lvl all Buildings need fuel

[final ridge]

Do u feel u gonna need extra fuel to compensate a delay?

[thin plaza]

I wouldn't drop speedups, fuel, Elements at all into IZ.
It debalances the build up time of the different Tiers and it's lost revenue for stakers.

[thin plaza]

Like the 2 last man standing... Even landowners turned their back and played the impact down 😄

[blissful walrus]

If there is a delay, I think they will certainly need to make up the lost time for us somehow. Speed-ups for the entire plot, including worker(s), would be more equitable across land tiers than simply boosting/dropping elements and fuel.

Nothing will restore the original balance/timing between land tiers vs the original timeline, but this would be far better for everyone than all starting from scratch weeks/months into OB with nothing to boost speed.

[paper rain]

This is the reason I didn't run for council again. Try having a little respect for the people who are working their butts off for us. There are so many different things that go into making a decision and you are VERY tunnel visioned. Please stay open minded and respectful..

[plain nest]

https://tenor.com/view/this-is-where-we-fight-300-spartan-warriors-gif-16327366

[boreal mural]

Kieran has a proposal in the works. The way it sounds is the proposal will make things right with landowners. Have to wait and see what the actual proposal turns out to be.

[thin plaza]

Just because the Timing vs the original timelines is fucked up, doesn't mean you have to fuck up the whole early game.
But yea i agree, a builder for free could be a nice Option, but we have no clue what it cost. What if it's just 1$... Worthy compensation? 😄

[thin plaza]

If it's not good, i push mine forward 😂
Maybe rework it

[boreal mural]

Yah I think weal just waiting to see the proposal and go from there...

[blissful walrus]

yep

[pine bear]

Where is the list of questions being compiled? @thin plaza have you asked the question of perimeters around labs ability to mint skins?
I would like to know what skins Zero will be able to exclusively produce and what skin we will not be able to produce.
When we are looking at the value proposition of land we need to factor in the opportunity of producing bp for skins imo.

[neon cliff]

https://tenor.com/view/gg-boys-jaredfps-good-game-well-played-ggwp-gif-26211145

[thin plaza]

There's a from you can send your questions linked in the #📣〕announcements .
I don't think there's anymore Info on that subject since the last time Johnny answered and I don't think they developped anything new (content still the Same and most are working on open Beta). So no exclusivkty if it comes to skins out of bp's. I guess the answer will be skins made out of illuvials is the exclusive part of IZ BP's.
So far it's IZ-BP's:

• Ranger skins
• Drone skins

Illuvium skins:

• Ranger
• Drone
• Beyond Album
• Arena battleboards

[pine bear]

Thank you.
That is what I believed the deal to be.

[tiny horizon]

I also flipped, when I realized it.

[thin plaza]

Oh sorry, been a Long time... Probably forgot you 😔

[tiny horizon]

No worries, I didn't mean it like that. I'm just remembering Johnny was explaining that skins like the ones from Zero can be given in other ways and it's not exclusive to Zero. And I got confused because I always thought that was one of the main value proposition of IZ.

[thin plaza]

I remember Team stating arround landsale they will create "some" aswell... Turns out that was a little bit of an understatement

[tiny horizon]

Yep, and like you said that was at land sale. Talk about prioritization. 😭

[pine bear]

At land sale beyond wasn’t even really a thing. Most of the skin and all battleboard rewards have been given to beyond players.

[thin plaza]

Yea, i asked obviously. And the answer was more or less Like special skins for christmas or when they do special collabs... But definetly didn't Sound Like yea... Arround every 3 months there's a new Set of skins we sell, oh and we have more variety to sell...

[pine bear]

This is a sore point for me too

[thin plaza]

Yea, for everyone since we all most likely will have mixed plots after beta launch

[pine bear]

I have a lot of plots and am constantly trying to get my head around how they will all work and what to prioritise.

The mega city is my biggest concern and there has been precious little info on them

[thin plaza]

I was speechless when i read many landowners saying "thats nothing to sorry about.... The ones from beyond are so expensive... They barely sell skins..."

I guess we will have More Support for that when the first people Start creating t5 skins and experience how much they will cost to craft, and you might not even sell all of the ones you crafted

[thin plaza]

Don't think there will be more Info on megacities...

[pine bear]

When you look at all of the consumables that will go into a t5 skin it boggles the mind

I can see a situation where the beyond skins and battle boards are priced extremely high

[thin plaza]

Consumeables are not the struggles... But go skin your rhamphires for skins 😄 that could End up pretty expensive

[pine bear]

When I say consumables I also mean all illuvials that will be burned to create the skin

[thin plaza]

Oh sorry, misunderdtood

[pine bear]

Is it 27 atlas for one axadon skin? I think that is it.

We still don’t have a definite answer for skin mechanics from what I’ve seen.
Last I heard it was still 3 per skin

[thin plaza]

It's 3 per Stage.
3 Atlas = 1 axon
3 axon = 1 Axodon

And you need to fuse an axodon in Order to skin it

[pine bear]

And in order to fuse each stage they need to be levelled up to a certain lvl correct?

[thin plaza]

Yea, for now there is a total amount of exp all 3 illuvials summed up need to have

[pine bear]

The time required will be entreme

[final ridge]

ill say, the team need to deliver megacity before even thinking of building a new game

[pine bear]

A lot of money was spent by investors and a lot of time to acquire a megacity. I hope for the best

[viral stag]

I've sent the IIP to the other admins for feedback. Should be up today though

It's not a matter of weeks. It is a bonus % on top of what you would normally get for fuel drawn from a pool

Once the pool runs out, we revert back to normal. And again, this is only if IZ isnt out at Open Beta

[hollow shadow]

Thanks a lot for helping the land community! But here I would like to disagree a bit. As a mega city owner myself, I would still like to see F2P features for mainstream built into Zero first. Like Illuvial Pets. I still think mainstream casual gamers and the Illuvial IP should be our next focus.

[viral stag]

Let's say the top rail is considered to be way too expensive, and as such market forces lower it which effectively gives players a ton of bonus fuel, meaning they need to spend less. Then one day, the landholders band together and say "screw the players" we aren't selling any Fuel, and players have to buy it from the DAO, whatever the delta is it's passed onto the players. Let's say it's 50%, that's a shit ton of power.

I'm only being half serious though, I don't ever see that happening, but crazier things have happened in the real world.

[viral stag]

Mega Cities are already on the roadmap and being worked on. All four of the existing games will still have people working on new features even if we start designing a new game.

[hollow shadow]

Cool, I think my point was more about priorities. Thanks by the way!

[final ridge]

id like to see silly mounts, pets and illuvials skins. people love those.
i think the team is still sticking to lore, so we prob only have drones for now.
when rev underwhelm we prob gonna revisit

[final ridge]

looking forward to it, thx again kieran.

so curious, maybe use the safety pool?

[hollow shadow]

When you said „silly“: Our games are way to serious right now. The drones could be become crazy and silly, but other than that it is just Illuvitars and Emotes. When people say OW feels empty, maybe it is because of the clean and cool asthetics? We should think about getting the fun of Illuvitars into OW somehow.

[final ridge]

i mean WoW was serious until they did pandaria and sold pets and mounts.

FFXIV has maid costume, and people do maid cafe ingame

[hollow shadow]

With Illuvial Pets I mean something like this by the way: https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1222607986883559556

Mounts in OW sounds fun.

[thorn valley]

This is pretty messed up... of course land owners are gonna complain for compensation if something can be gained... this is messed up! What's next, vote for the 1 million ilv to be distributed to land owners and such? This is just nuts and conflict of interest all over the place

[hollow shadow]

I agree, but this happens when real money is at play and different classes of assets and interest exist.

But the real goal is always to make the DAO succeed long term. Like in the real world there are democracies, dictatorships etc. to accomplish this.

We should find more innovative ways to balance out the different interests. But this whole experiment could also fail the whole project.

The only other experience I have is with Yuga. And they chose the "good" dictatorship mode that still listens to the community, but is not afraid to piss of asset holders in favor of the long term success. At least I hope so. 😂

[boreal mural]

Is it messed up? Or is it rectifying what should have been set from the beginning?

Beyond pays out LB rewards weekly, arena was paying out rewards weekly as well, and will resume, stakers obvs get their apy. Landholders invested money, time, effort over the past years and have had a pittance so far. Zero was supposed to be ready well before OB so ppl could farm fuel and provide for the economy but then f2P became the focus... and again landowners sidelined with the potential of Zero maybe not even being ready by OB. Not to mention skins were supposed to be a zero thing but alas... Landowners are advocating for themselves.

What if they said... Buy a bunch of ILV you'll be able to stake it in a few weeks!!! But then you hold and hold and hold... but no staking... yet other parts of the ecosystem get implemented and rewarded. You bet your ass those holders would be pissed. Sooooooo... something needs to be rectified. If you have a better solution na... go for it.

[thorn valley]

Yeah so what? They took the risk of investing. It could have been well the opposite they got huge rewards and land becomes unaffordable and they got lucky. Would you compensate other games to have similar yields and rewards? No...

They got the fuel crates they should be super happy

As it will f* up the rest of investors due to less revdivs. You cant make everyone happy all the time

[viral stag]

To be fair they are mainly saying they want their gameplay to fairly reward them like it was intended. I'm willing to also accept adding additional airdrop points up to the amount of beyond because they would have received those too if it was possible

[final ridge]

T1 cost $500

• Fuel Crates for T1 valued at $30 (2 x $15) if they get 2 airdrops
• 15 bp valued at $45 (15 x $3)
  earning over 2 years of holding = $75 or 15%

[viral stag]

Yes but like ILV investors who have been waiting two years for rev dis, Landholders haven't lost that revenue, it's just delayed. Shit situation but it doesnt mean the DAO owes them a full return on investment immediately

And yes I get ILV has staking rewards, and IB has leaderboard rewards, that is why we will make them whole with the airdrop.

[final ridge]

looking forward to it.
i hope it can recover landowners confidence

[hollow shadow]

It has been said before, but more so than any financial reward, I would love to see land and Zero become a real OW companion/full experience app, that acts as a kind of jump board into all of our other games.

You start with a free land and a free Illuvial, you take care of them, level them up, maybe in a team together with OG land/Illuvial holders and then earn yourself into your own land and Illuvial.

Kind of like living with you parents, renting you first place, renovating a friends old house and finally buying your own place and then flipping until you own your dream home.

[onyx palm]

Well this calculation gets worse the higher tier you get because the blueprints are the same for each tier land

[spice juniper]

Landholders will form their own OPEC version around fuel 😂

[hollow shadow]

And then fossil fuels get banned ...

[thin plaza]

And blueprints don't really get Sold, right? They just listed for that price... AT least last time i watched

[final ridge]

IIP to use safety pool to buy bp?

[thick coral]

An upside of the blueprints is also you can’t get them again if you already got them, aka you will be able to get other blueprints on average faster than people who didn’t play in the alpha and got those 15.
It seems difficult give that a $ estimation though atm.

[quaint pollen]

dollar < time < entertainment

[neon cliff]

wait so his iip is just a reconfiguration of the airdrop? or?

I mean balance the airdrop based on the amount invested to each part of the project by the community and give us the burned land and increase in rev share.

idk if i missed something but that would be preferred than a small one time increase

[tiny horizon]

You do know that, unlike the other games, land players have directly paid for their game? That was 2 years ago. These players didn’t get “bad luck on their investment” like you’re claiming. They simply didn’t get what they paid for and they still don’t know when they’ll get it. If you’re so ready to screw over Illuvium’s earliest customer, it shows how much you care about the long-term success of the project. I wonder, where do you think the money for your revdis should come from?

I’m not even in favor of compensation as a solution, but reading your comments makes me cringe. Greed and delusion 🤑 ✨

[thorn valley]

Project delays are normal. The project could have failed collapsed etc... that was always a known risk when buying land.

[boreal mural]

Gosh... great added value

[visual jolt]

i have to say i am super disappointed by pretty much everyone here. i told u guys not to discuss compensations and now here we are, theyre already making an iip to throw us another 15$ and move on.

Did any of you even think what kind of compensation they have to give us in order to actually compensate 2-3 months time?

We are talking about 50 million $ worth of fuel or something? Do you think they will give such things? thats just for fuel, 2-3 months worth of speedups ? resources? its nonsense.

Kieran showed up and said 2 words and all of you fell in the trap instantly.

I am pretty certain that we need to change the people in the council and i would like to offer to the more active users here that arent on the council, but want to use their head, like @late pulsar to give it another go.

Now council will vote on 15$ airdrop and they will forget about zero for the next 6 months.

Lets do a simple math here, how much fuel do u think theres in that 15$ bag? 10? 30? 60?

thats still 1 day worth of production, unless we r talking about the very first days. to drop you the amount of fuel/speedups and resources you actually need to compensate, you will need ATLEAST one airdrop of 15$ (t1) per 3 days or even per day.

You know ilv, they gave you 15$ for 2 years and theyre beating themselves in the chest here, like they made us all rich. the worst thing that has ever happened to land owners is about to happen and nobody seems to get it. we paid for this project, more than anyone else or anything else.

im here to ask council and other users to stop discussing compensations and start asking for ways to speed up process, you are literally digging your own grave when you allow them the option.

and council, you should be ashamed of yourselves, this is why DAO cannot work when theres 2 points of interest. token will always be their priority, because ILV founders have no clue how to balance the ecosystem.

<@&1107754780744487002> <@&814435151307866142>

[boreal mural]

We are just waiting to see the proposal. Spoon already said he would push another proposal if it be no bueno.

[visual jolt]

it is no bueno, spoon's is also no bueno

none of their compensation proposals is bueno , ilv doesnt have that much money .

[visual jolt]

we need this today, so we can show ilv community that land owners will not vote for such things and that token holders are the voters that force things on us. because it benefits them. always has been the case. there must be land council too! im tired of ilv bag holders commanding the project, that can no longer be the case.

[shrewd spade]

Nothing is stopping you from making a motion to vote out the current council. Every bit of compensation Kieran has mentioned was planned long before this and does not impact the severity of this discussion.

If an IIP comes through and I am tasked to vote, I will vote with great consideration of the sentiment of the community.

If a proposal like that passes the ICC you can assume it is THE COMMUNITY that is accepting it. The 38 Upvotes on this proposal is not 38 council members. The 40 downvotes on your proposal is not 40 council members.

To act like this is OUR DECISION is completely missing the point.

The community rejected your proposal, not us

[wooden linden]

Well… I’m pretty sure that he’s not an ILV DAO member.

[visual jolt]

there was no proposal in my topic, there was rant. i was trying to see where the wind blows, the wind blows just fine. if a proper topic is made with proper description and probably by someone else, cuz im the black sheep around here... itll do alright. there isnt a single land owner that wants to skip the first 2-3 and possibly more months of 2 year old investment.

[shrewd spade]

Then write the IIP. No one is stopping you at all.

I will help you craft it.

[visual jolt]

i didnt see a single person from council not bending over when they heard airdrop. none of you even asked how can we speed up the process and build zero on time. not a single one of you.

i dont hate anyone, i just know who is against me and who takes the easy way out.

not many from council hold land and even if they do, its nothing compared to their ilv bag, thats why theyll always vote for token. that will always be confilct of interest. thats why we need land council, people focused on doing better for land.

You guys are saying, omg we gotta do whats best for the project, oh really? do you? whats the best for the project in your opinion? launching unfinished stuff ? that doesnt sound reasonable. launching at any cost is the situation atm. the cost is and always will be = land owners.

If any of the voters thought about land actually, there will be no compensation votes, zero.

Best for the project is in no case sacrificing the investors. Best for the project is protecting and taking care of the investors.

or you mean it might be better for the bag yall r holding? it still might not be. there is insanely huge shitstorm coming around whats about to happen and it will not help. you think land owners will just shut up ? i dont think so. i only have 1 t1, but others have spent 50-100k $ and more.

i see what yall r doing, counting every cent going towards zero, but i never saw you doing the math how much $ yall sucked out of ilv with staking. some even had the balls to say we got 15$+ 15x3$ from blueprints, how dare you hahaha 😄 15% return they said : D what was the return to stake ilv for those 2 years? how much money yall washed through our land sale?

this is no dao, this is just greedy ppl vs people that want what was promised, thats all. launching at any cost is no DAO. lets see, kill land and lets see how ilv does.

[shrewd spade]

I care about land, I always have and always will. But delaying Illuvium is a giant risk on the other end of the scale, ultimately its a lose-lose. And Illuvium cannot afford any more delays.

If it were up to me unless they were 100% certain Illuvium would be finished I wouldn't have had them announce any dates, but they have now and the entire project has backed itself into a corner.

I personally don't care about land compensation at all, 'getting free stuff' is not NFT utility, its a bandaid, it will always be a bandaid and I don't want Illuvium to ever make that a habit.

However, the team is still confident that Illuvium Zero will launch on time with everything else, there is a more than 50% chance this entire discussion literally doesn't matter, but I agree that if something goes wrong and Land gets delayed 2+ extra months then the DAO will have so step in and start asking the really hard questions, in my mind it would be inexcusable. But this discussion is the equivalent of locking someone in jail because they have thought about what it would be like to rob a bank, its pre emptive and is difficult to reach a conclusive outcome.

[shrewd spade]

Again, you have not written a proposal, and no one has rejected your proposal besides the community, they are the ones that rejected your proposal. Throwing stones at the DAO and the council makes literally no sense.

[visual jolt]

i believe its much better to tie our pants, send funds towards zero or something to make sure its on time instead of risking it all. the IIP should not be about compensation, it should be about funds distribution. we still have months left. any day that we are wasting not pushing zero harder is a wasted day and increases the chance of failure.

[visual jolt]

i throw stones, because they agree to airdrop and even stimulate it. do u not think that 2-3 months compensation requires 50m $ fuel ? do u think that if they say 2 months they are not certain itll not be on time and just making sure we take the blow easier? or we dont go offensive?

[shrewd spade]

Are you a game developer? Because I am not, but I have done enough random things in my life to know that throwing money at something doesn't always make it go faster. Fuck I wish it were that easy. I'd write that proposal right now

[visual jolt]

i refuse to believe tha tnothing can be done to speed up the process if thats what ure trying to convince me.

[shrewd spade]

I will ask the person in charge. @granite goblet Is there any possible way to speed up the development of Illuvium Zero? Any way at all?

[visual jolt]

ye johnny, consider safety pool and every possible option.

[shrewd spade]

If we assume money is no barrier, would it be possible 👆

[granite goblet]

I'm travelling so I don't have access to systems right now (to view exact tasks and the like), but finding new people and getting them to a productive state isn't likely to help: by the time they are productive we will be in the final testing phases.

There's also only so far you can split a task: a task that takes 5 days for one person may well take 6 days for two due to the need to sync up work, agree on approaches, and the like.

The only notable way to cut in to the release timeline would be to cut features, and even there there is not much left to cut.

I mentioned last week (or maybe Monday this week) I'd provide details of what's remaining in f2p and p2e when I got back. I'll need to chat to Jay but should be able to share this Tuesday.

[visual jolt]

finding a way is crucial, so we dont divide the community once it comes down to delaying the whole project or killing land.

obviously cutting features is not an option and since ilv didnt think about this as soon as they realized that there will be no ilv zero and didnt act, our only option might be a total delay. so please get to hiring if theres no other option, an attempt is better than not doing anything.

its been probably a week since i first mentioned using safety pool, thats a week of work wasted. now until someone thinks to make IIP, until it gets voted.. nothing happens. having dao is only hurting ilv from where im sittin.

land owners should refuse any other option, sponsoring the project and boosting token holders is our only purpose for existing, lets change that. please? u will see the IIP, it will be horrible, it will allow no progress, it will not compensate, because itll require millions if it compensates properly. it will still get voted and then we are screwed. this is literally our last moments of fight right here. we are about to lose everything.

[hollow shadow]

Maybe we won't loose if we make Zero and land actually useful to more than just the few current owners?

I like this idea https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1228121146902184037 and if we can get agreement from the council that this (or something like it) is the future for Zero, then we might have a good future.

[visual jolt]

still losing and doesnt help our current situation where we paid 72m to play a game that will not exist when its most important. thats a separate thing that would be cool, i love the idea, but as u see they cant even finish what was promised, not to mention making new stuff.

whoever made the decision with those dates knowing that it will not catch zero, must be removed from team. whoever it is.

we directly paid for the game, there must be some sort of conditions if they do not deliever, refund or something. who understands the legal side better?

[hollow shadow]

I kinda agree with you, we need to keep the pressure on them.

But what better pressure than developing Zero into a real game and not just a mini game ?

Maybe we can add this kind of commitment into the IIP Kieran is writing up?

[visual jolt]

i will not give up on finished zero until the very release date, i will fight for it even if people dont comprehend the consequences of whats about to happen. very few people realize the impact , apparently. this cannot be allowed. further progress is always welcome, but i cannot just give up, i cannot allow 8500 holders to be used for a mere advertising system and 72m investment to be used for boosting others on our expense. idgaf about the 600$ i spent, i care about the game, the project in its entirety. i believed in ilv and i still do, but the constant dragging down by the project itself and the dao not helping is just confirming what ive always thought, the token will be the first priority , always. land matters, it was created to be crucial part of ilv and they have purposely made it less and less relevant, so this can happen.

[late pulsar]

Good morning. Got pinged somewhere. Man so many long texts. 👀

[tiny horizon]

This issue can’t be resolved with an IIP, since it was caused by a decision made without the need of an IIP (Q2 launch date and development pivot towards F2P).

You admitted it yourself:
“If it were up to me unless they were 100% certain Illuvium would be finished I wouldn't have had them announce any dates, but they have now and the entire project has backed itself into a corner.”

I wish that “they” would come forward, apologize, and acknowledge that their absolute decisions were at the root cause of this issue. This way we can all agree and move forward, possibly by working on governance guidelines regarding these types of decisions. What I’m seeing is that most are simply accepting that governance is flawed, probably because in the end it benefits their agenda in some way.

[visual jolt]

dont forget that founders also hold ilv bags... its normal to step on us.

and to be clear, i never said that scoriox isnt trying to do good, but ilv puts council in a position where they must choose between their bags and whats right, everyone will go for the bags. thats how the system is built. if council was made up of people that have no side, we wouldnt have this conversation. it would be the logical answer to delay everything. nobody is suffering except land holders, the benefits of that timeline are only hypothetical. the marketing guy himself couldnt name a single benefit for launching early. in order to set ilv straight council needs to do whats right. action must be taken against such destructive decisions as well, prevent it from happening again in future.

[hollow shadow]

So we need to align our bags to avoid these conflicts in the future.

Once Zero has grown from a game that only 7.000+ play to a foundational F2P game millions play and the DAO makes lots of money from it, they will never look down on Zero again.

[visual jolt]

they wont allow that to happen, theres a reason why the split is 5% to 95%.

btw total raised from ilv token is 32m vs 72m for land, they still get 95%.

[hollow shadow]

No, I mean Zero could bring in lots of money from micro transactions.

Leveling up your Illuvial will cost resources and fuel and you can speed up with micro transactions.

This is the perfect end game for Zero, because there is no end to it and other thanraids it is casual.

[thick coral]

I believe the Labs wallet got something like 1.7mil rev dis out of those 72m, as 72m includes silv2 mostly and then stakers got the revenue, which isn’t 100% going to labs runway, so if I remember correctly something like 1.7mil revenue for labs was made.
Idk why this 72m number is still used as if it was revenue in eth or fiat.

From my governance understanding if eg an iip would go to ICC while someone continuously uses something misleading the community, it would possible be voted down because of that.
So if anyone wants to push an iip pls stay to facts.

[visual jolt]

oke lets go through this again, where did the rest of the money go ? did it not benefit ilv token by burning silv2? we dont care where the money were put, ilv gave it value, council afaik has voted for silv2 to be used, so if anything , council has screwed us and is now constantly reminding us that our 72m are 1.7m

[tiny horizon]

Are you trying to admit that Illuvium is in the unsustainable business of making money out of thin air, as opposed to making games? These arguments, I swear.

[thick coral]

I don’t think this is the place to explain illuviums tokenomics, you can read the whitepaper for that.
If you are unhappy about those as well, making a new thread might be the best course of action.

[thick coral]

This isn’t an argument, simply stating facts, and reminding that ICC might downvote on things were the community was given false or misleading information.

[tiny horizon]

Saying that Illuvium received 72m in value from land sale is not false or misleading information.

[thick coral]

When you say Illuvium, do you refer to the DAO or Labs?

[tiny horizon]

Both

I believe they are both the cause of this issue.

[visual jolt]

itll be good to stop devaluing land tho, saying its worth only 1.7m to labs, cuz they decided to burn the rest is not helping. 72m were actually invested, yall flexed with those numbers everywhere.

[thick coral]

Pls read the whitepaper and tokenomics and understand what silv2 is.

[visual jolt]

it does not concern me, ilv has given it value that equals certain amount.

[thick coral]

That’s your opinion though, not anything else.

eg I think it is fair to question should the 72mil number been used the way it did, that is a different topic though.

[tiny horizon]

What he's saying, is that it's quite irrelevant to the issue.

[tiny horizon]

Is it fair to question if customers should receive what they paid for? I wonder.

[frozen solar]

Come on guys, you've got to wrap your heads around this cause 72 mil is misleading. That is not 72 mil the team can use towards game development, which is what matters in this case.

The value spent in sILV2 goes to every token holder. Yes, the DAO holds tokens but that value will mostly materialise over time, by having less tokens in circulation.

That value is fugazi, it's floating in the air. It's not money you can give to a game developer to work on your game. It's not value you can go to the store with and pay for things. @tiny horizon @visual jolt

[visual jolt]

sure, but still money spent. he cant come and say that 20k lands are worth 1.7m to the dao. it should be worth more than 72m to them.

[thick coral]

I didn’t say that, I tried once again to make you look up tokenomics and understand what that 72mil number is and means like doom explained above.

I don’t think it is any helpful to engage more until we at least see the proposal, we can debate about that then.

[visual jolt]

as ive said it doesnt matter what the proposal is, its waste of time. it cant make up.

you were one of the leading people when we were developing land on the first release, u know the process, u should understand how much itll affect land holders if they dont have access for 2-3 months.

ilv cant possibly give us that, the entire project doesnt have such amounts of money for fuel only. i guess?

[tiny horizon]

And I don't think it is any helpful to engage more until governance change or community understands how to run a business in a sustainable way. Yet, here we are still giving it some effort to nudge it in the right direction.

[thick coral]

You can always make a proposal for any of these topics.

[visual jolt]

the question is why doesnt council make those proposals if they see whats wrong.

[tiny horizon]

Yeah but it's futile if both IMC and community can't acknowledge that the current way of doing things is unsustainable. People want to fill their bag asap no matter how and that's their priority.

Instead of focusing on delivering products and acquiring real customers.

[visual jolt]

everyone knows that ilv cannot match our daily fuel output and give it to us to compensate, but we r still waiting for a proposal ? the only reason why yall r waiting for a proposal that cant possibly deliever is because u just want to move on from the issue instead of doing whats right.

[thick coral]

If your point is true and you have good arguments I expect you can convince people of it.

[tiny horizon]

I got moderated for pointing out (with an explanation why) that the DAO’s collective roadmap can’t be taken seriously, so no. Sadly I think there is way too much resistance. There are other factors at play such as the foundation of the project. If IMC can’t acknowledge what I’ve mentioned in the feedback document I posted, I don’t see a point.

[tiny horizon]

But I have to admit, it’s tempting to write an IIP and see it not get accepted at the IMC level. Just to prove a point.

[visual jolt]

just read in your feedback that this airdrop is 2m , so imagine, 30$ fuel compensation for 2-3 months. so 30$ fuel must be worth like 5000 of each type of fuel?

[pure nexus]

From what I gather, yes everyone is aggrieved by a potential additional delay that seems to stem from a last minute f2p pivot. However, and this doesn't deny any specific individuals position, It seems that the majority of people don't think delaying the entire launch would be wise, when considering all things.

It is right that the various ways that a delay would impact landholders are properly considered and plans for how this might be remedied (compensated) are thought about ahead of time, which is the purpose of this thread.

I don't think pushing the idea from a thread which has received negative community sentiment in one that has received positive community sentiment is helpful.

[final ridge]

i believe in constructive discussion or if i borrow kieran's words, "negotiation".
all of us have voiced our concerns and demands.
the team has responded and promised us an IIP.
the process is moving forward.
now we just have to wait.

[final ridge]

the council is elected by token stakers. that's why im looking for compromises, not gouging each others eyes.
as i said in the original post, stakers are foregoing $750k revdis, and prob another $750k if we do another fuel crate airdrop.
i havent seen a token staker complain about that.

[final ridge]

i agree with this johnny, throwing money into the issue is not how dev works. sometimes more people means more issues

[blissful walrus]

Lot of opportunity for negotiation outside of anything revdis related....in-game boosts, extra builders, airdrop points

[pure nexus]

Well technically there, it could be argued that if IZ was treated fairly regarding rewards etc, that 750k should never have been 'theirs' to be forgone on in the first place.

[final ridge]

we wont see immediate benefit of reducing the max supply by 5%, ill go further saying that we wont see a benefit at all from sILV2 reducing max supply other than an exit liquidity for stakers.

[final ridge]

yes my personal believe, we should focus on what we can work on or achieve

[blissful walrus]

Your closed-mindedness is getting old and this will get you nowhere. I'm not sure you've even established within your mind where value is being lost in order to accurately be able to quantify what should be made up. Instead it's easier for you to just say no release without ILZ. Lazy.

[final ridge]

yes, i agree, it's not enough. i do appreciate it, it is a nice gesture to start with. that's why i started the post, and i hope we can focus on a resolution.
i dont expect landowners to be overly satisfied, i just expect we can feel better

i want landowners to feel proud of holding the nfts

[visual jolt]

where value is being lost? lol. from fuel alone we are about to lose millions.

do you know what it means for 20k lands not being able to make fuel? 7500 or 8500 holders not being able to play the game? how much fuel do u think the airdrop will give you ? it will not cover first 3 days. you will not be able to play illuvium, do you understand?

every bit of fuel used in game has to be purchased with actual money? except the airdrop that theyre going to try to shill and ofc council will accept, theyll throw us 2m worth of fuel which will not do anything for the 2-3 months timeframe and thats it.

im pretty sure yall must be trolling at this point ,because i cannot believe there are so few here that understand the impact, thats ONLY for fuel.

[neon cliff]

at the time it was about 6 or 7 mil in eth

[thick coral]

yeah, but not all of that did go to labs, it was payed as rev dis so most did go to stakers

[neon cliff]

ah ya

---

idk why we can't agree on delay IZ (we get paid regardless) get airdrop according to totals spent on land (vs illuviatars) then the real ask is only 20K land plots, and ask for 20% revdis and probably compromise to 10%.

ez pz

[visual jolt]

50% might not be enough

[neon cliff]

if that's true then we probably failed anyway brother

[blissful walrus]

Aren't these the direct impacts?
#1226758651285340245 message
(emotional aspects aside, which I do also very much understand)

Blueprint delay is another direct impact, but very hard to quantify. These others can certainly be resolved with the right compromise and creative solutions

[tiny horizon]

I'm still unclear as to why you're bringing this up, again. Are you making it a point that the DAO failed to allocate enough funds of the land sale into developing the game?

[thick coral]

I bring this up, as I think you don´t understand Illuviums tokenomics or events that happened, including but not limited to silv2 and rev dis

[tiny horizon]

In the eventuality of a legal dispute between customers and the DAO, is that going to be relevant?

[nocturne pilot]

It would take me forever to read through all of this, but what exactly are you looking for? You don't want compensation and you just want IZ to be ready for open beta?

You'd rather see open beta delayed than see IZ launch slightly afterwards? How would this be good for anyone, including land owners?

[thick coral]

What legal dispute?

[tiny horizon]

When an organization (web3 or not) sells something to a customer. Normally, the customer is entitled to receive what was agreed upon during the transaction. If the customer doesn't, and the company is not agreeable to deliver, the customer may decide to take legal action. This is not rocket science.

[thick coral]

I am no lawyer, so I can´t help you here.

[tiny horizon]

I made a document that I posted in the Feedback channel outlining why I think the proposed time and sequence of launch are not appropriate.

[tiny horizon]

I don't think you need to be a lawyer to have a general understanding of how a transaction can be fair.

It doesn't matter what the store owner decides to do with the money he receives from the sale of goods. He should still hand out the goods to the customer.

[thick coral]

I think this points again to me asking you to understand that e.g. we are a DAO, so everything could be subject to change with an iip.

Also on this topic I am unaware of legal side regarding DAOs e.g. and if there could be any legal dispute here on not, I am no lawyer who is informed on this topic.
If something like this happens I will be sure to inform myself.

[nocturne pilot]

Is there a pdf or a version I can open without downloading anything?

[tiny horizon]

I sent you the link.

[tiny horizon]

This is the real world, with real money. No amount of loopholes and unusual governance structures can prevent liability and legal disputes. A DAO is still liable for selling things. I hope you know this as a member of the IMC. 👀

But again, this SHOULD be irrelevant. You should be able to understand what is a fair transaction before it leads to any more disputes.

[visual jolt]

yes, of course. not only that would cost millions to the dao, which will not be enough to do anything, literally anything, but also kill land value , because ilv simply cannot provide enough resources. even 2 weeks of proper compensation will ruin ilv's economy

we would need another land sale amount of money to sponsor these 2 months

[nocturne pilot]

Having a hard time understanding what you're saying here to be honest.

You think land cannot produce enough resources to supply the OW?

[visual jolt]

no im saying that ilv cannot compensate holders if theres no zero

the upcoming drop is 30$ for t1 right? u think 30$ worth of fuel is enough for 2 months grind?

[blissful walrus]

Where is info on that airdrop?

[nocturne pilot]

The DAO will produce any FUEL that is needed. 5% of that revenue will go back to landowners

[nocturne pilot]

I dont know anything about this

[visual jolt]

#1227003710840766484 message

[visual jolt]

oke and with what fuel would the land owners play the games ? how would they get fuel to play ow?

last airdrop was 1m, which was 15$ for t1, now 2m.

[nocturne pilot]

In the OW you'll select x FUEL you want to buy and buy it. The DAO will provide that FUEL. IF you buy $100 of that FUEL $5 of that will go back to the landowners

[visual jolt]

why would i buy fuel

[nocturne pilot]

Thats completely up to you. If you want to play the OW you need FUEL if you dont then dont buy it

[visual jolt]

i want to make fuel with the land that i paid for 2 years ago , maybe?

[nocturne pilot]

Yeah I get that, but if its not ready then its not ready

[visual jolt]

not really. if its not ready we do stuff.

[vestal umbra]

have you run any math on how much revenue OW would have to do to generate $30.00 for a t1??

[visual jolt]

ye thats whats missing, we dont know how much fuel they give for the 30$, but unless its in thousands, cant rly compensate for 2 months

[thick coral]

the number of fuel isn´t relevant in the equation, it is relevant how much revenue you´d need for a T1 to generate 30$ of fuel, now this is gamified and some can play better than others etc. but you could e.g. assume everyone playing equally and get an estimate

[thin plaza]

arround 60m

[nocturne pilot]

What people are missing is that these FUEL airdrops are actually at the expense of ILV stakers already. If you're given $30 of FUEL outside of IZ that would have required $600 of FUEL purchases if you were creating that FUEL yourself.
That $570 of revenue would have gone to revdis and that's being bypassed

[visual jolt]

yep, its hurting the dao and its not helping holders.

[nocturne pilot]

It means for that first 2m of revenue 100% is going to landowners instead of 5%

[visual jolt]

then 66m sounds like acceptable airdrop, lets go for that number

[vestal umbra]

exactly. @visual jolt I dont know if you have run the math on this. getting $30.00 for a t1 land is very generous in my opinion. I think you are going to be very shocked when you see how much a t1 can produce in fuel.

[visual jolt]

i dont need airdrop, land owners dont need airdrop

[vestal umbra]

please dont speak on my behalf. I am a landholder and I want a airdrop.

[nocturne pilot]

You talk about an acceptable airdorp then say you dont need an airdrop. What do you want?

[visual jolt]

i was clearly joking, ilv cant possibly do that. we need finished game

[nocturne pilot]

It wasnt very clear. I still dont know what you want. The game is going to be finsihed at some point.

[visual jolt]

😭

[thin plaza]

that thought process seems flawed.
If you airdrop someone (is it landholders or not) outside of iz 30$, thats 30$ worth of fuel being spent somewhere in the ecosystem.
Stating that thats 570$ lost revenue and link it to the missed ratio seems wrong.
That person wouldn't have bought 600$ worth of fuel if he didn't received that 30$ worth of fuel

[vestal umbra]

personally I was excited when they said we were just going to get 5% of the revenue without having to play IZ. My largest worry was not having enough time to play OW and IZ. Now I can just focus on OW until IZ is released. Maybe I'm alone in that thinking.

[nocturne pilot]

Depends on how you look at it. Maybe I didn't phrase it correctly.
As a lnad owner if you get $30 worth of FUEL outside on IZ that means it required $600 of revenue to make that happen because you're only getting 5%

[visual jolt]

the whole point of zero is to have resources to play ow with few clicks per day

72m worth of point with bunch of promises

[thin plaza]

still flawed.
Landowner would sell 30$ of fuel and buy 30$ of fuel. That 570$ worth of fuel would have never been bought.

[nocturne pilot]

I dont think its flawed at all.

If youre a land owner and you sell FUEL to the market and end up with $30 worth on FUEL outside of IZ how much revenue would it take for that to happen. $600.

[neon cliff]

yeah fair to point out that people did spend real ILV on it

[neon cliff]

but the ask remains simple

[thin plaza]

Yes, thats true
Still, you can't link that to an airdrop.
Don't know right now how to explain it on another way i did above and am in a rush 😅
But think about it, its like you are saying Airdrop1 costs the DAO 19m$
is it tho? Would all those who received the airdrop spent 19m$ if they didn't receive the airdrop?

[thick coral]

Most of this airdrop revenue math seems flawed in the sense, that you assume people would have bought x$ of fuel even without the airdrop.
Maybe they would have bought 0, maybe after the airdrop they play and like the game and buy more, we don´t know that.

The fuel airdrop could be positive revenue, like a marketing expense, which in my eyes it is exactly that.

[nocturne pilot]

With no FUEL airdrop: If total FUEL revenue is 20m then the land owners get 1m and the 19m goes to revdis.
If you airdrop 1m worth of FUEL you end up with the same amount of in-game purchasing power.

From an ILV staker perspective, by the time there is 1m in-game purchasing power you should have seen 19m going to revdis.

@thick coral @thin plaza
I get what you are saying and I think we're looking at it differently.

My point is that without these FUEL airdrops if there was going to be X amount of purchases made, 95% would go to revdis. Now thats FUEL airdrop needs to get eaten up before anything goes to revdis

[nocturne pilot]

I see what you're saying. Some of the FUEL airdrop may just sit in a wallet forever. But it can be sold to the market and even if it used by someone who would have never paid for anything they are still adding resources to the overall supply

[thick coral]

I don´t think the fuel from these airdrops impacts the 5-95 creation of fuel.

I think @daring crane can explain this better, as I remember we had this topic in the past.

[thin plaza]

i just see landowner racism in your pov 😄

if you ardrop 1$ worth of fuel to a landowner its 19$ rev missing
if you airdrop 1$ worth of fuel to a non-landowner i guess its 1$ rev missing?

[nocturne pilot]

It has to. No matter how much FUEL is purchased 5% goes to landowners.

[thick coral]

I think these fuel crates are closer to gift cards, see it as you can use them to do X in the overworld, they don´t impact the fuel trading pool. (again maybe I misunderstood something)

[nocturne pilot]

Definetly not racist towards landowners haha. Yeah I guess im looking for at oppertunity cost then

[nocturne pilot]

Let's say you went to see a movie with a $20 gift card. And assume you were going to see the movie regarless.
If you use the gift card you get in.
If you use $20 in cash you still get in, but now $19 get distributed out as revdis

[thick coral]

The assumption of it being used/seeing the movie anyways is a big one.

[nocturne pilot]

Okay so lets say you have this $20 gift card and you didn't want to see the movie. Would you sell it to someone for $19 or would you throw it in the trash?

[thick coral]

You do realize we can play this example towards, someone saw a movie now likes going there and then sees 10 more movies?

The logic of this is straight minus revenue is simply incorrect, as we don´t know and prob will never know how people would have acted if not for the fuel airdrop.

[final ridge]

The $1m fuel crate airdrop is taking away $950k from stakers.

[nocturne pilot]

I'm not saying its straight minus revenue. I used that for math purposes, but yeah I know there will be some of this airdrop that goes unused

[pure nexus]

Apart from it's not...? If it was given in $s, eth, fuel or whatever other currency - the value that was intended to go to landholders is what was given. Just because it was fuel doesn't mean 95% of it was meant for stakers, that's bizzare thinking.

That's why it's a $ amount and not a fuel amount

[nocturne pilot]

Bizzare thinking?
If I planned to travel 10x in Illuvium and that cost $30 worth of FUEL stakers would see 95% of that. If I had the FUEL airdropped to me the stakers see none of that.

[final ridge]

the way our fuel exchange works
Everytime landowners put 1 fuel om the fuel exchange, the dao will add 19 fuel.
The value written on the fuel crate is 1+19

[pure nexus]

That's not how it makes sense to me at all, it's an IOU for a $ amount of fuel

[final ridge]

its not an IOU

[pure nexus]

if the same $ amount had been given to us in ETH, 95% of that eth wasn't meant for stakers lol?

[thin plaza]

what's an IOU?

[final ridge]

the fuel crate is redeemable at the max fuel price

[nocturne pilot]

Yes, if you were given $30 of ETH and had to purchase the FUEL yourself then yes 95% would go to revdis

[pure nexus]

Hang on so you're saying we should have been given 5% of what we were given lol?

[final ridge]

yes

[pure nexus]

This convo is crazy and pointless

[final ridge]

the other $950k is taken from stakers revdis

[pure nexus]

absolute nonsense, you're framing the airdrop in completely false light just because it was fuel

[final ridge]

well ive discussed this with team and imc, just explaining it to u

not my choice of airdrop, but it happened

if what i just said is untrue, assuming every fuel crate will be sold on the fuel exchange, the dao need to sell $19m worth of fuel.
thats why the value of the fuel crate is already taking account the dao's 19x

[boreal mural]

The thing is... seems the fuel drops are necessary to get fuel into the ecosystem because Zero isn't on schedule. Was supposed to drop earlier than OB so landowners could farm and provide. Otherwise fuel only will be available at top rail price by DAO and landowners play catch up. What would be another solution than fuel airdrop??? So while the point that airdrops takes away from revdis, it is only part of the equation... if there's no fuel available before OB then we're all screwing ourselves.

[blissful walrus]

Seems like a calculated decision. They could easily have airdropped $50k ETH on L2 to buy fuel, which would have then gone back to land holders and stakers IF used to buy fuel. They chose fuel crates instead. Why? Marketing to ensure it stays within the Illuvium ecosystem and because it's free NFTs to the DAO. Don't hold this against land owners, we would have been better off with straight ETH.

[pure nexus]

Well colour me clueless then, I didn't realise the DAO decided to try and placate landholders by robbing peter to pay paul. Seems like a terrible choice. No more of that please.

[blissful walrus]

That's old news btw, newer from Kieran is here. Is this not what you're asking for? #1226758651285340245 message

[neon cliff]

judging the pa kieran is rewritting the iip as we speak

[visual jolt]

https://tenor.com/view/star-wars-meme-gif-22672438

the land war

[final ridge]

i prefer they airdrop $1m in eth/ilv/stables, can be from the treasury or ingame rewards token.

anyway 5mins slow mode guys
we are making waves

[neon cliff]

https://tenor.com/view/rabble-randy-marsh-sheila-broflovski-gerald-broflovski-richard-tweak-gif-22002734

[final ridge]

the fuel crates were airdropped to landowners, they already know the game.
it's a marketing expense to an existing market, some of them have known the game for 2 years.
it is a marketing expense that is funded by future earnings

[final ridge]

it is not like gift card. people buy gift cards and it earns the company revenue.
the fuel crates are like frequent flyer miles, it's an expense

[visual jolt]

which is why it shouldnt happen, we should focus on finishing the game instead of arguing how much the dao has to lose

[boreal mural]

Idk man... That won't benefit the game imo. At least fuel keeps it in the ecosystem. People can sell it or use it... either way, the fuel will get used for playing. Airdropping tokens will mostly evaporate and a fraction will stay in the game imo. I see that shit happening with other projects that airdrop tokens... people just dump them straight away.

So any solutions need to encourage gameplay, retention, etc.

[boreal mural]

Could airdrop silv2... but prob wanna give some notice for the LP 😅 maybe silv2 airdrop would more likely stay in the game...
Dao could buy a bunch off the market or OTC from LP at an obvs discount from ILV price using the reward pool or treasury as u mentioned. Would help burn it out of existence.

[tiny horizon]

If I receive sILV2 as a solution, I just might burn it and claim I never received its value 😆

[boreal mural]

😱

[thin plaza]

Naa, definetly not a Fan of silv2 drops.

[boreal mural]

I hear that. Just tossing out ideas 🤪

The other thing I was thinking... and Idk if this has been talked about yet...
IFFF paid Lands are deemed not going to be ready... could it be possible to make our paid plots available to earn airdrop points and keep the buildings that we develop until a version goes live on chain? I sure don't wanna be playing a f2p land just to get airdrop points... would rather play my own lands

[thin plaza]

pb4 starting very soon, not sure this is possible.
Also probably needs extra time for devs if possible, meaning it would delay further.
But i totally get the point, playing a f2p land just for the sake of testing and farming airdrop because you can't play your own land would suck.

Maybe @granite goblet can answer this when he's back from his days off.

[boreal mural]

Yahh would love to hear his thoughts

[granite goblet]

There are heaps of cool ideas being thrown around, right now that's the problem, we can't do 10 different things, each new thing we add or change will have a cumulative effect. Even doing one is going to have some impact on timelines.

That said, this seems like a good idea, and it seems fairly straightforward to implement (all the code should exist). The risks I see is that the QA and security bar is higher for p2e compared to f2p. An error on f2p sucks, but doesn't do major damage, an issue in p2e can be very significant.

But it definitely has a lot of merit, and I'll talk to devs about a more detailed risk assessment.

(also there are too many threads going on in feedback, can you please ask questions in zero channel, its easier to track, feel free to link back to a feedback thread 🙏 )

[visual jolt]

😭

with every idea that ure giving them, we are digging our own grave deeper, cuz it enables them to avoid finishing the game

[boreal mural]

You gotta work with the system bro... not against it... otherwise everyting crash pew pew

You can't hold a gun to ppls heads and say do it... if it simply can't get done. Finding solutions within the scope of reason is the way.

[neon cliff]

EYES ON THE REAL PRIZE.

Min ask:
-only 20k land (this is the highest long term value driver for land)
-airdrop proportional to investment

Reach ask:
-10 or more % of revdis
-anything else.

[granite goblet]

We were hesitant to restrict originally to 100k lands as it limits the audience significantly. 20k allows only a very small number of people to be playing the blockchain connected game, particularly when you consider that many wallets hold multiple land plots: with this model the actual player base is probably more like 5k. This seems very restrictive.

What about instead of restricting lands, land holders get a notable percentage of future land sale revenue before normal revdis?

I think a proposal like this could deliver notable benefits without the player base limitations.

(I just said I wasn't going to talk about these kind of mechanism in zero chat, and keep myself to tech, but couldn't help but share this ideas 😮 )

[visual jolt]

can we really afford to dilute something that has 2 years to pay back

[blissful walrus]

I'd be very happy diluting it in 2 years if you're saying I will have made all my initial investment back by then

[shrewd spade]

The governance is flawed, I don't think thats a secret. But I will say that it has improved with every iteration, this is my third council and its the most streamlined its ever been, but it will always need improvements.

What would be nice, is a clear guideline of what does and doesn't require an IIP. Anything token related should require an official IIP imo. Outside of that timelines and dates are a nice to have but hard to say since they rely on so many NDA partners and other externalities.

[knotty falcon]

Most NFTs go to 0 in two years

That’s being generous

[blissful walrus]

I assume council was consulted before these dates were announced, right? No one asked what wasn't complete yet or what was still at risk of not being ready in time?

Seems like this had to have been a conscious decision by both team and council to release without P2E ILZ, otherwise it's crazy to set dates while development for the release is still going on.

[knotty falcon]

Development will be ongoing even after everything is launched. Setting dates is still necessary.

[blissful walrus]

Hopefully Illuvium development never ends! Obviously I'm talking about the development for the launch itself, edited above to be more clear.

[late pulsar]

What about giving the rest of the land plots to the holder, so no more landsale is coming. They can sell them, they can keep them and build them out. They can share with others to get mega cities. Only sale would be tier 5 later.

[visual jolt]

ours has been 0 for 2 years, it needs some catching up to do before another silv2 wash trade

btw if theres no silv2 involved the lands wouldnt sell or the prices will be horrible, who would buy land in this condition : D

[dim crystal]

✋ Present!

[frozen solar]

I also thought about this recently, airdropping the next 20k plots to current holders 1 to 1. This way, everyone can decide if they keep them or sell the new plots and keep the original ones, etc. It would allow for the expansion of the playerbase without hurting the buyers of the original 20k plots who have been waiting for a long time.

This would give land holders a compensation that is comparable to the staking rewards for ILV holders during the wait, while still keeping 60k plots for the project to sell down the line (probably in years time, as the game gains a significant playerbase).

[visual jolt]

go sweep the floor lol, ppl r gifting them

[quaint pollen]

This would be too good to be true. And a lot of missed revenue for the DAO.

[knotty falcon]

So not 0?

[neon cliff]

That's my point. Might as well make land valuable; it's not scalable in its current form.

What's the difference between 20k and 100k? The only relevant things today are revenue for the dao, and revenue for players.

Currently, IZ is not fun enough on its own, period. It is very compelling within the context of the ecosystem and as an economic hub so strength that part.

Where can we scale at launch?

***OW, Arena, and Beyond. ***

What would you prefer, a bunch of landowners that aren't motivated to play because dilution of revenue and supply are coming the moment you actually start making money.

OR

An insane group that has been here through it all now onboarding players to the OW bc it increases their earning potential for life.

Down the line, we can build fun and interesting game mechanics that scale IZ, while maintaining that only 20k lands earn revenue.

There are solutions.

[quaint pollen]

P2E landplots might not be scalable but there's a huge difference between 20k plots and 100k. Not sure why this worries you so much though.

The map is done and it encompasses the 100k plots, why change that now?

[neon cliff]

Because of new information and our understanding of the ecosystem.

[boreal mural]

Nothing has to happen with future lands until there is a need. Currently, there is no need. Restricting now is wayyy too premature. Better to focus time on solution that help with current issues.

[quaint pollen]

Please, do enlighten me.

[neon cliff]

Try reading mate.

[quaint pollen]

I did read, still not sure what the "new information" is. Must be bad at reading.

[frozen solar]

You are the only one who keeps shouting about wanting to lock land supply at 20k - even before the game is out... This would be nonsense, shooting ourselves in the foot for no reason. As long as we only have 20k plots, we earn all the revenue land produce anyway, without giving up options in the future prematurely.

[neon cliff]

lads I'd love to dig into it with you but I really don't see that you are interested in a different pov than the one you already have.

I had your pov, more land, more players, more rev for the dao.

I get the argument, I really do; I supported it until recently.

[boreal mural]

It's moot... you could be right... but now is not the right time. Save it and bring it out when it's more relevant. For now, solutions that address Zero delays, lack of return for 2 years, f2p vs p2e... those would be more helpful imo

[final ridge]

somehow i prefer less supply than airdropping more land to landowners if u want to do a drastic change. Or at least max supply at 40k.
lets just see the demand in bull peak then decide. most players might leave in the following bear

[neon cliff]

I swear, I could try to hand out gold in this discord and someone would be like nah bro, I don't think now is good time for that.

[quaint pollen]

Yep, though you'll never know unless you try.

[final ridge]

imagine splitting 5% over 20k supply, and then splitting 5% over 20k, 40k in the bear.
the assumption is linear growth without crypto cycles

[late pulsar]

but right now illuvium can go and say. hi we need money let us sell some more land.
and do you know how much 5% Rev is. its not much. and if you send out the land plot to the other holders its the same. because the holders still are the same. plots got more but holders stays the same.

[neon cliff]

exactly, there are so few future scenarios where more land makes the most sense.

While keeping the option open is this hanging, like well maybe we will screw the economics of this over and maybe we won't.

the dao really be like hehe i like chaos.

[final ridge]

if we do that, then fp will likely be halved

[late pulsar]

why the doa will still produce 95% of the fuel. and you need a lot of time to build up all the land plots to get fuel production going.
this would be at least give us some of the hype weeks back that we are going to miss.

[visual jolt]

isnt the dao making the fuel anyway? there wont be need for more lands, cuz land owners do not make the fuel afaik? we can chill at 20k forever, that would also improve the value if they decide to do something for zero for next cycle

need a youtuber with land that is aware of whats happening, lets make "the dark side of illuvium" video and explain whats happening around here, that should get things going .

just to put it in a perspective, 72m $ is equal to 1-2 MILLION copies of AAA game. we cant get the game working in 2 years.

[frozen solar]

Or, we can also try not to rage destroy the game we are all waiting for for 3 years. Like an idiot elephant in the porcelain shop... 🤔

[visual jolt]

https://tenor.com/view/nudie-nudies-nudie-community-nudie-nft-send-nudies-gif-25321340

[neon cliff]

how does lowering the supply of land ruin the game?

have not heard that argument. Only that it's less scalable, and we want options.

[neon cliff]

I DID IT AGAIN #💰〕token message

[quaint pollen]

I already did it 1h ago.

[neon cliff]

I did live in the chat.

[quaint pollen]

Props 👊

[quaint pollen]

Check the time.
#💰〕token message

[neon cliff]

leggo - we on the same team.

[frozen solar]

I tagged the wrong text, I meant to comment that to his youtube video suggestion

[minor ore]

I don't want to spend much time on this topic
As an idea, how about dividing the current LAND into 4 parts?
Then the total of all LANDs will be 400,000 LANDs.
Everyone who already has one LAND will have a 2x2 MEGACITY.
If we sell additional LANDs in the future, it will be difficult to create MEGACITY, so those who currently have LANDs will have at least one MEGACITY.
I don't know if it's technically possible.

[hollow shadow]

Please have a look here and tell me what you think #1228121146902184037 message

[sour mantle]

The ideas are getting worse and worse; you have to be kidding. Right, basically, your idea says deleting all the Megacities holders who overpaid for having a Megacity and giving everyone one for free, LOL.

[boreal mural]

Anyone have that google feedback link for the town hall?

[tiny horizon]

It's in the announcements, but here: https://link.illuvium.io/TownHallQuestions

[shrewd spade]

I dont know the ICC wouldn't be involved either way. Whether the IMC discussed it is their knowledge

[shrewd spade]

This is not compensation. This is the equivalent to a token split, which is not comparable to staking rewards at all. What the equivalent here is, is you farm all these crops, and all of a sudden they give you a second lot of crops to farm but every crop is worth half. Thats horrible, absolutely horrible.

This would be a bail out and is the same thing Yuga did before they trended to 0. This would literally make land trend to 0.

[viral stag]

It is getting ridiculous. Someone the other day said, don't sell any more land, and just give us the extra 80,000 plots

IIP is with Council, looks like its all good, then will post in Ideas

[boreal mural]

There are those that work within the framework of reason... and those that verge towards the realm of insanity.

[frozen solar]

Don't be so quick on trending towards 0.

First of all (and I should have made this clear), I did not mean to suggest doing this now. There is no reason at all for more than 20k plots now. If it would be done when the demand is there, land value would only drop to 60-75% and get back to where it was relatively quick.

The reason why this would be a decent compensation at some point, imo, is the massive difference between what token buyers and land buyers got as a return during the last 2 years. You may say land buyers took a speculative risk, and I agree with that. EXCEPT, land was sold with the specific message of "We don't sell game NFTs without utility, the game will be out in a few months."

Let's look at the information available for someone with capital to invest into Illuvium at the time of the land sale. Option 1 was to buy tokens with a clearly defined return if you staked them. This went according to the plan. Option 2 was to buy land instead, and start earning with it in the form of fuel/blueprints in a few months time. This did not go according to the plan.

Please note that I'm not trying to blame anyone here. Game development is what it is, delays happen. I'm merely pointing out the difference between the return for 2 groups of investors in the same project. 2 years worth of staking rewards on one side, close to nothing on the other side.

And if we are taking ideas from Mavia for the airdrop, guess what else Mavia did during the same game development period? They had land staking. So did other projects.

So airdropping the second 20k plots to the original buyers (again, at a later point) for the 2 years extra waiting time would reward them with a return in the same ballpark of what the token stakers got during the same period, and still leave the project 60k plots to sell later.

[shrewd spade]

That's what I sam saying, its not a return. Diluting your nft by half is not actually giving you anything. It would be the exact same premise as saying 20k land is the only land there will ever be. There is 0 difference in the outcome.

Now sure as a 'we will do this later' its quite good and I dont hate it. If the game is successful then this 'promise' will uplift land prices significantly more and reward those who stayed. But isn't future promises what got us into this mess in the first place?

The difference between distributing 20k lands and saying 'no more land sales' is that it gives every landholder the opportunity to dump 50% of their nfts value on the market if they want. Not necessarily a bad thing but if landholders are interested in maintaining NFT value, this will have the opposite effect.

@frozen solar did u notice Mavia land halve in value after the airdrop? Or BAYC and Otherside trend to 0 after the APE airdrop. This would be no different unless the land has excellent utility in the future. So if lands all going well then yeah this airdrop would be a fun thank you present. But its a dangerous game

[noble shadow]

I could see a right to first refusal as an option at lowest land sale prices but not outright giving away all 20k plots for free.

[shrewd spade]

Honestly if I had to pick a compensation option for landholders. I'd just give them epic benefits in the future play to airdrop. That's problem solved imo 🤣 . Not to mention simple, and encourages people to join our economy.

Not sure why everyone gotta overcomplicate it. Like even 10% of the total airdrop just going to landholders would be significant.

[final ridge]

dilution is a real issue

[noble shadow]

Yeah for sure. I wasn't saying it was a good idea btw lol. Was just giving an example of something reasonable but its hard with some of the ideas coming from looneyville.

[shrewd spade]

People are underestimating time spent. Say u have 4 lands and now to get the same roi u need to play 8 daily. What u do is u sell all 8 cause cbf. Then land dips considerably. Even if thats 20% of the playerbase that cbf.

[final ridge]

yea some people will sell the airdropped plots.
the problem with IZ is we still have so much unminted supply, which put a cap on revenue.
double supply of land, need double fuel demand, can it be sustained in the bear?

[visual jolt]

i dont wanna hear about other lands for atleast 5-6 years. ilv has much to make up for before it starts another washing machine

[late pulsar]

I am out. I am gonna leave now after that comment from Kieran. I am done with that.

[late pulsar]

He means me not you.

[final ridge]

dnt leave. i cant lose more friends.
lets grind the airdrop

[late pulsar]

If I get in. Still got no response from Tarren. Guess he has a lot to do right now.

[neon cliff]

Especially if we are in a good place with the treasury and revenue.

At a certain point, it really looks a bit bad to just sell us more shit that makes what we already have less valuable.

Like what?

It's not like we are creating value by making more land. It's pure dilution.

[final ridge]

yea introducing more supply can only be justified by persistent revenue growth.

imagine if OPEC declares that they have 5x oil reserve and 5x daily supply
remember when people the oil producers are paying people to take their supply during covid

[neon cliff]

dude, WORST than that because ppl could find more oil fields (land) to produce even more oil.

More land does not mean more fuel. Again pure dilution and selling the community a diminishing asset.

---

Kieran is just trying to give us a quick thing to make us happy.

We should reject it wholesale.

***We want a long term solution to the value proposition on land. ***

---

The old plan made sense when we didn't know how long our run way and when the game would launch.

Now that we have funding to get us well through game launch and it's a bull market, the situation has changed.

[final ridge]

i havent seen something similar in other project where u have 80% unminted supply
it really put a cap on land fuel revenue, and potentially reduce fuel revenue during the bear market (higher supply, lower demand)

[blissful walrus]

100k plots has always been known. The thing that has changed is release timing, and this is the issue at hand right now that needs to be addressed. Trying to address the 100k future land supply at the same time is confusing things.

[neon cliff]

Nothing is set in stone brother. We can change everything. We are having a conversation about what is the best path moving forward considering the current situation, and what is the best role for land to play in the ILV ecosystem.

[blissful walrus]

It should definitely change, I just think the timing is bad. This discussion could have happened a year ago. It could probably happen a year from now too before it becomes relevant (I highly doubt they release more plots by then). Mixing it up with trying to make us whole for potential delay is not a good path forward.

[neon cliff]

Imagie trying to get this done with 200k more ppl in here.

the time is now.

i will not even bother later.

Let's focus on a short term quick buck, instead the the long term value generation route.

But I mean, lets take the airdrop too.

[blissful walrus]

At least keep the two topics separate please

[neon cliff]

They are not unfortunately. If we take the quick option, later ppl will be like but landowners are fine they got xyz.

Do you feel you fully understand what I'm suggesting? I'm happy to clarify anything.

We can have both, if we work together.

[blissful walrus]

I understand the problem certainly. Not sure which was your original proposed fix or which you support anymore.

If people really can't understand that there are two separate problems to solve, I wouldn't put much weight behind their opinions.

[thin plaza]

This discussion happened already a year ago... Happened again and again... And i guess it will happen repeatedly in future 😄

[blissful walrus]

Fun. I think it's because there's too much speculation on what the future looks like. When/How the next 80k plots are used is vague by necessity, but people understandably don't like that uncertainty either.

[neon cliff]

So why are they so different and why can't we pass them at the same time?

Because I'm saying let's solve the land issue in general, and I don't see why they need to be different.

it's not hard to speculate what will happen to the value of a land plot and and the revune earnings if 80k more land is release, it's pretty simple math from my POV. I mean right?

[thin plaza]

I guess it's because Stuff got changed, and Hype Videos were often far from reality.
Like free Market, IZ producing all fuel etc. Then people buy Land, come in Chat to ask basic Info about gameplay and Find out there is no free Market with simple supply +demand and IZ just producing 5% of all fuel.(Latest "fuel explained" vid in illuvium+ going exactly this direction again).
Than people are disappointed, and try to figure out ways to Make the Land they bought as valuable as it always gets marketed.
Cut out the future dilution of Land is just the most straight forward Way to go for most people i guess.

[neon cliff]

Why can't we work together?

iip for land problem
-good airdrop
-no more land sales

at the highest level it's that right?

https://tenor.com/view/we-have-to-do-this-together-team-work-work-together-we-got-this-dr-smolder-bravestone-gif-15659606

[blissful walrus]

If I were to define the two problem statements, they would be this:

1 - As the remaining 80k land plots are released, the original 20k plots will have their value diluted. This benefits the token holders through RevDis and expanding gameplay to more owners at the expense of existing land holders.

2 - The release of Illuvium Zero for land holders to generate fuel and create blueprints has always been planned for 2-6 weeks ahead of overworld launch. Releasing it after overworld or even at the same time means land holders can't generate funds in time for overworld runs, can't directly participate in the economy by being the fuel providers (resulting in 5% of revenue being later dropped across owners evenly instead of based on merit through gameplay), and forcing land owners to spend significant time on the initial build-up of plots when they may have otherwise planned to farm overworld with that time.

We need to start with the specific problem statements and not lose focus on these through all the various proposed solutions.

[neon cliff]

ok

2. clear sounds great, I'm with you and agree.

3. How does more land generate more revdis? In its current form.

In general, what is the benefit of more land, considering IZ in it's current form.

---

My view is that more land is just a fund raising mechanism for the dao, at the moment.

[blissful walrus]

Landsale revenue goes into revdis (non-sILV2 anyway)

[neon cliff]

Right, a non sustainable fundraising mechanic.

This would only occur in the future scenario where we are successful because if we don't have players and are not making money. Then, the value of the land will plummet and would NOT raise much money from selling it.

Do we agree there?

[blissful walrus]

Yeah, definitely. I really can't see anyone from the team or community pushing for another land sale unless existing land has been very successful already. I also don't see these sales intended as a fundraising mechanic (maybe the first to raise a bit of funds and burn a ton of sILV2, which was great). Later sales are completely unnecessary for that purpose though because there will be live games for revenue.

Big potential as marketing events though, to draw players in more.

[neon cliff]

Well, I agree the first one was definitely a fundraiser that we needed and used. I supported it and even tried to get us to divert all the money to the dao (unsuccessfully).

But we agree that land sale will happen in a successful outcome. Dope.

So today, the community backed the dao and got it funded through the bear, bought land, illuviatars, mech, and supported VC fundraises. Hell ya, it's a bull market now it's time to win.

We have more than enough money to prove out the vision of the game (due to team execution and meaningfull community support) and Kieran has even said that we might have too much revenue and have to figure out what to do with an overflowing dao.

You yourself say it's not about the money.

Okay, so land sale is not about the money. It's about marketing and more players.

Anything missing?

[white remnant]

I have an idea so that the value of the first 20,000 land sales remains high, we could say that the next generation 2 sales do not allow the creation of Blueprints?

[blissful walrus]

Agreed on everything. I would also add that (if all goes well) it would be nice to have those 80k plots at some point to fill in the map, allow more trading and more megacity creation. Ideally there won't just be big gaps in the map forever. This is a softer benefit though.

[neon cliff]

Okay, agree softer benefits that could be solved with other ideas down the line.

The Marketing pitch for the next land sale:

For new players:
-Buy land that will be diluted by more than 50% in value and potential earnings. We must make this incredibly clear, or it will be scammy.
-the join the discord, and every land owner is, rightfully like, cancel the land sale! Why are we getting diluted, this is bs!
-navigate a contentious situation and a VERY complex financial decision. Current value and rev of land, vs. after the sale, and after the other sales, and where we are in the market cycle, and the volatility bc people are upset.

The case for more players bc a land sale:
It's possible for 80k more players, but realistically, it's 25k BC whales.

All for money we don't really need if we are going to win.

Will you confidently tell anyone to buy land at the next land sale?

[quaint pollen]

I think you guys are getting way ahead of yourselves. If things go right the demand for land will increase and having 100k landplots will make total sense.

[blissful walrus]

Think you're getting into why an agreeable solution is needed.

[boreal mural]

Agreed... good to keep options open. But don't need to do anything til there is a need.

[neon cliff]

Wouldn't creating an army of motivated landowners who will benefit for life from onboarding new players be a better marketing strategy?

Wouldn't focus on scaling the 3 other games that are launching ready to scale make more sense? IZ is not fun with out monetary incentive and future potential.

the other games are fun and will be more fun faster.

[viral stag]

#1229420814986772510 message

[quaint pollen]

it's alive!

[blissful walrus]

I'm not convinced limiting to 20k plots is in our best interest necessarily either though. There are benefits to bringing in more people very long-term.

What if future land sale revenue just went to existing land holders? Does that solve #1 #1226758651285340245 message and would there be significant objections to this from non-land holders?

[noble shadow]

Doesn't this model greatly favor t4 and t3 owners tho? They will reach peak fuel output faster, thus giving them the majority of the bonus ETH?

[chrome sage]

Ah okay was about to reply lol. I'll wait on the other post

[neon cliff]

the community burned the sILV which increased the percentage stake everyone (team included) has in the system.

another thing the community did

[white remnant]

I adapt to all the proposals so I would not do Blueprints for the first 3 months I would be focused 100% on fuel 👀

[white remnant]

This is the best solution for the long term

[final ridge]

so we still need another IIP for compensation

[thin plaza]

what about...
https://discord.com/channels/760344898200666112/1226898258245455962

[thin ridge]

From a purely selfish point of view I don't want to see land limited. It is however important to not sell until we have a high volume of players.

I would also like land to be able to change wallets without resetting.

This will mean I can sell a fully functioning mega city, buy a new mega city and build it up. I think there could be money to be made in land development.

[daring crane]

Yes. This would be true under any model we use though. Keep in mind if land were launching 4 weeks before OB it would be the same situation with T3 and T4 land plots capturing an outsized share of revenue vs. T1 and T2. Splitting it up at 10% of sales each month actually spreads the initial buying wave of fuel across a longer window and likely distributes it more than the originally envisioned launch window looked like.

[noble shadow]

I played all the tiers in alpha. The only reason t1 could keep up was the passive converter generation that was said to be going away. The t4s and t3s will exponentially be ahead of t1s and t2s by the end of 2 months while t1s will still be using fuel to progress their land so t4s and t3s will be mostly be the only ones selling. If this IIP was based on fuel generated by plots entirely then it would work, but it's only based on fuel sold.

[final ridge]

dont u think spreading 2 months of revenue over 10 months is excessive?

[daring crane]

But keep in mind that in the current process, ALL fuel sold (including all fuel from the guardrail) in month 1 goes directly to landowners in proportion of their fuel sold in that time window. That means those T3 and T4 that you mention would be caputuring an even higher percentage. In this proposal, those amounts are spread out over months in the future.

[noble shadow]

This is why IZ was supposed to be released 4 to 6 weeks prior to OB Ani.

[daring crane]

I don't mind decreasing it a bit if we want. I argued for a longer window to actually allow 1) those who play more actively over a longer time period to benefit for and 2) more diffusion to T1 and T2 (as outlined above).

[thin plaza]

delay the distribution window to IZ:launch +4 weeks and keep the 10%
That way it is pretty close to what should have been.

[noble shadow]

There needs to be a progress buffer, like @thin plaza is asking above

[tiny horizon]

I still prefer your solution which doesn't simply delay. It incentivizes to release Zero the soonest.

[thin plaza]

it is one of the intentions, somehow it doesn't get received will in the community with just 18 upvotes over all this time.

[tiny horizon]

I think it might be because of the 2x multiplier and timeline. I say you submit in the governance-ideas with a slightly lower multiplier shorter time and it could pass. For example, *1.25 every week. 🙃

[thin plaza]

i mean i specifically said, multiplier can be adjusted like everything in the proposal 😄

[tiny horizon]

Your ratio of upvotes to downvotes deserves a post in the governance-ideas, especially now, given the approval rating of "IIP-49".

[thin plaza]

IIP-49 not approved yet
yea maybe i talk with scrubs since he's already involved in IIP49 to push it to governance stage.

[tiny horizon]

I know, I just was being a bit snarky 😅