zero suggestions

[barren dune]

The first suggestion has to be implemented by ilv team without voting by ICC, as it is non negotiable and crucial for the future of zero.

1. zero subcouncil that can deny vote concerning zero even if voted by ICC

The reason for that is ICC does not and never has cared for zero, otherwise they wouldnt say there was 1.4m profits from land after voting it themselves to have silv2 included and turn our investment into their silv2 washing machine. they continue to vote things outside of the interests that land owners have, so they can boost their bags.

2. my gamemode suggestion would be tower defense for zero

i believe some sort of pvp tower defense would be great for zero, it could be with a system that players attack each other or it could be with a system that they just compete to survive more without affecting each other. (plenty of good examples in warcraft 3 maps if any of u has played)

3. (this is very important punishment for the dao)

scenario 1: no more land sales, because of washing silv2 and using it as an excuse that landowners didnt bring revenue, its both ilv team and council fault for allowing this and making it happen, effectively devaluing land in the eyes of the entire project.

scenario 2: to compensate for first land sale and everything in between , maybe more land sales, but without silv2 and land owners take 50% of the revenue, u can do with the rest whatever tf u want, develop games, throw it to token holders or whatever.

Conditions if that option is chosen :

If the land sale makes less than 70m $, the 50% are increased for every 10m below first land sale with 10%.

60m = 60% for land holders
50m = 70% for land holders
40m = 80% for land holders
30m = 90% for land holders

we stop here, but i could be as greedy as the dao and push em to 5% for 20m and below.

4. delay of the project until zero is fully ready.

acceptable solution to release without zero is giving 95% of revenue to land holders until release and 5% dao

• ** 1.** To further clarify how no more land sales could contribute for the growth of the ecosystem :

Current 20k land's output has to be boosted, so when play to earn is implemented in zero.. theres room to give something to free to play players , because with the current output, t1 cant possibly make much more than a free to play, otherwise that f2p will not play.

the more we dilute the lands by selling more of them, the harder it will be to keep price and support play to earn and of course every land sale will make less and less money. i dont expect more than 5-10m $ in the next 20k pieces and thats generous, based on how land owners feel currently. if we even manage to sell it out.

So 20k cap with decent adjustment on production will allow even 1m players to play without affecting THAT much ppl that paid.

t1 is barely surviving as it is, so the acceptable difference between t1 and f2p plot has to be 20-30 times the output , so the land value does not drop.

this must be implemented even if theres more land sales, if we want to have play to earn in zero.

• 2. To further clarify why** delay of the project** is a must or there must be** big payday for landowners**

Land was sold on the condition that it will be live before anything else and will produce its own fuel to sponsor their OW runs on top of many more things.

None of the conditions were met, so unless yall r proposing full refund and total drop of zero, there is no middle ground that can be acceptable with your funny suggestions, you did not deliever what 72m were paid for. that is 2x the amount that token raised and we are being used to further boost the token, again. you're also making sure that the future or value of land is always in question, that can no longer be the case.

[burnt adder]

1. Some sort of representative out of IZ community onncouncil Stage i'm totally for it, not sure what would be the best System, but i would actually Like to See them in the Same Stage as IMC or in imc included and not as a sub council in the Same lvl as icc just with the power to Veto.

2. Love TD's and indid play them in WC and SC. Saw it more as a standalone than a battlesystem inside a game, since it often takes a considerable amount of time until the game is finished.

3. A "punishment" for the DAO is totally the wrong Intention to start a System Change in Order to create a healthy IP.

4. Delay is a viable option because it looks Like it is totally a rushed Operation anyways, not being able to wait a few weeks to bring Zero (the "backbone" of the economy) in on Launch besides Arena and OW

It seems you wana implement f2p being able to produce fuel, totally against that. Nothing would devalue Land more than f2p being able to produce fuel. Also you would send fuel sales share to botters instead of the owners. I can See f2p being able to Make a small Buck with some additional features in IZ, but getting them sell fuel is the wrongest Way to go imo.

[barren dune]

3. yeah, im just angry 😄 but doesnt mean that im wrong.
4. delay seems to be the only option atm, as theres no p2e implemented in zero and its pointless to send ppl there.

and about f2p producing fuel, im just trying to tie our pants here by throwing an acceptable number to stop land from being devalued further. 30 times more production would mean f2p land equals 20-25-30$ vs 600$ t1, thought thats fair enough for holders.

[burnt adder]

3. I feel you, i'm not the normal Investor in here, i actually have a Big chunk of invested money in Land and not Like 95% token and own 1 T2. The fact paid Land wouldn't release at open beta launch hit Hard and seems everything else than justified. And i'm with you that most decisions of imc/team if it comes to IZ weren't in favor of landholders. One of the best examples are deleting the free market or automated System of minilandsales kicking of when imc feels the "demand" is there.

F2p producing erc-20 fuel would be biggest devaluation from Land ever mate 😄 i rather prefer an increase in Land up to 200k plots.
You can't calculate it like that, since f2p plots number is infinite. Except you wana introduce Like a t0.1 selling for a certain amount with no plot Limit and delete f2p plots.

[barren dune]

yeah i agree, f2p producing fuel can shake the economy a lot, but to the extent you are talking about, we would have insane playerbase and thats a price that i personally think we should be willing to pay. ofc the numbers can be touched to make better and more secure structure.