#IIP-X: Add extra Illuvial utility to gauntlet

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

trail shoal
#

Sponsor: @rain fjord
Co-producers: Scoriox, Paz, Jaganite, Nijafe

Abstract:

This proposal aims to enhance the utility of Illuvials in the Gauntlet game mode by allowing players to earn ILV tokens based on their performance and ownership of Illuvials. The goal is to integrate Illuvials more deeply into the Illuvium economy, thereby increasing their utility and relevance.

Overview/Implementation:

The proposal suggests the following features and considerations:

-Earning Based on Performance:
Players can earn ILV tokens based on their individual leaderboard standing and placement in Gauntlet battles.
Earnings are conditional upon the use of owned Illuvials. For every Illuvial owned that has been used for a specific minimum time during the Gauntlet battle, they get extra rewards.
Players are limited to earning for only a certain number of wins per day, (their top X highest earned wins per day, Parallel has proven this concept with 5).

  • ILV Distribution:
    The ILV distributed for in-game rewards will be entirely funded by a percentage of the revenue generated by the DAO over an equal time period. This closed-loop system ensures that the rewards are sustainable and directly linked to revenue.
    This rewards mechanism is sustainable because it does not introduce any additional ILV tokens into the supply, creating a non-dilutive method for driving new-player adoption, however the in-game yield pool could be used to subsidize this for a period of time if it makes sense to do so.

Read the rest of the proposal here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1grWlWlX9Imi5JnH3TbQtt5XqUmRtPVeEfjidK_DZVkU/edit?usp=sharing

Google Docs
IIP-X Add extra Illuvial utility to gauntlet - Public

IIP-X: Add extra Illuvial utility to gauntlet Sponsor: Scoriox Co-producers: JP, Paz, Jaganite, Nijafe Abstract: This proposal aims to enhance the utility of Illuvials in the Gauntlet game mode by allowing players to earn ILV tokens based on their performance and ownership of Illuvials. The goa...

proven moth
#

i really like how parallel's spend-to-earn is optional

#

as for the rewards,
we are going to spend 3%-17% on influencers
i believe spending at least 5% of revdis on rewards is a good option, and it doesnt introduce new token supply compared to the P2A

finite prawn
#

I have mixed feeling around this proposal. I appreciate the thought and feeling behind it.

I feel that there 100% needs to have some form of link or benefit for owned illuvials when it comes to Gauntlet.

A free 2 play game mode in the illuvium ecosystem encourages players to come in and try, which removes the barrier of entry. However, before being able to vote clearly on this proposal, we would need to know what is the Illuvium Teams plan for player conversion from free2play to pay2play players? (Encourage them to play overworld or buy/sell assets on illuvidex or hold illuvials)

I feel the ecosystem is complicated enough and this might make it a little bit too complicated to understand. There is RnG that will play a huge factor alongside skill and strategy... but this will heavily focus around the same "main carries" in most matches which will pump values for ownership of those illuvials.

Would it be possible to see a rough digram showing the idea? Or course values would be generic and left to the Team to decide... but just to help visualize the premise further

#

Got character maxed due to my free discord 😆

Additional comments to be discussed or thought about:

A) Arena's pain point is having to build a deck for hours or longer... unique stats would need to be ignore for gauntlet. So would there be a gauntlet deck builder or would it check your wallet?

  1. GAUNTLET randomizes the entire set of illuvials based on your "level" and then merging the illuvials. So this does encourage OWNERSHIP of multiple assets based around this comment:
    "Earnings are conditional upon the use of owned Illuvials. For every Illuvial owned that has been used for a specific minimum time during the Gauntlet battle, they get extra rewards."
    Ex: if you own 9 Rhamphies, 3 Rhamphites, 1 Rhamphyre, you will earn "eligibility points" as they are on the bench or in play until you get to your Rhamphyre...

  2. Would it not make more sense to have gated options instead? Yes this complicates things as well but would emphasize for players to own assets. The problem would arise thst the Tier 0s being 75 total illuvials will be a problem...

6 tiers for continuity:

Gauntlet Tier 0 = Free2Play
Gauntlet Tier 1 = ownership of 5% of illuvials
Gauntlet Tier 2 = ownership of 15% of illuvials
Gauntlet Tier 3 = ownership of 30% of illuvials
Gauntlet Tier 4 = ownership of 50% of illuvials
Gauntlet Tier 5 = ownership of 75% of illuvials

Or reduce it to 4 stages:
Stage 0 = Feee
Stage 1 = 15%
Stage 2 = 30%
Stage 3 = 60% +

There are other games that use specific tier assets to gain access... why couldn't this be for % ownership?

  1. Additional gamemodes and games are good to bring in broader audiences, however, the more options you have the more you are splitting the players.
    We regularly see many people coming in tto ask how all the games are interconnected and if that cannot be easily explained it will cause many pain points.

Alright - morning thoughts thrown out 🫠

finite prawn
# proven moth as for the rewards, we are going to spend 3%-17% on influencers i believe spendi...

We have a current reserve for rewards presently in the Teasury, but that is a finite amount and will eventually run our

We may be WAY ahead of the curve on this one but there should be a seperate proposal entirely discussing how to replenish the "rewards pool" from RevDis

The more $$$ taken from that, the less happy many will be over time

3 - 17% influencers (which rewards bringing new players and spenders in)

5% rewards (keeping players happy and encouraging spending & ownership)

Slippery slope, which now add more:

X % marketing

X % for tournaments (which could tie in rewards, but I am thinking along the line of Team Liquid increasing tournament pot)

X % giveaways

Etc. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Every step reducing the % rev dis the holders of ILV will receive. However, if long term the % goes down, but value $$$ goes up, many would not care 😉

sudden robin
#

I agree with Ricky, it's important we start talking on how are we going to keep the in-game rewards going when the "rewards pool" dries out.

Regarding this proposal, I don't really get the need for this proposal. In my mind I always thought we would have leaderboards for all arena game modes, with higher amounts for the leviathan ones.

The gauntlet mode would even give a fair chance to the F2P players to earn ILV by placing high on the leaderboard.

finite prawn
# sudden robin I agree with Ricky, it's important we start talking on how are we going to keep ...

Agreed... but the other game modes are based around ownership (and skill). You would require assets to go further. The free team rotation implement is good to practice/test with illuvials before you buy them. But these teams would rarely get you to the top of leaderboards ($$$$)

Better players will rank higher in general. The ownership for "better" assets will play a huge factor as well. Free2Play players can play with their Tier 0 decks in these game modes, but they won't get very far ....

Gauntlet is a free for all entry point and has no connection to ownership and does not incentivise FREE2PLAY players to become PAY2PLAY players which why a proposal like this is unfortunately required

sudden robin
#

there's no greater incentive to convert F2P players into P2P players than by putting a money carrot as reward in front of them.

#

this proposal pushes for the traditional play to earn model and I don't think that's a model worth pursuing. I'm much more in favour of simply rewarding the best of the best through leaderboards.

proven moth
sudden robin
proven moth
proven moth
#

we already using 25% of it just for the launch

rain pelican
#

A very interesting concept and I do think it would add Value to the illuvials.

However, I think the question we have to assess is, "Where are these rewards best used?" This is a reward allocation question.

I think we need to get a player base to test and confirm that gauntlet is on par or better than TFT. If we get that reception then it is worth adding rewards here.

If it does not meet that I don't think it will be successful. There is loyalty factor and a lot of learning for current players of TFT. I would want to bet on our unique Aesndant mode or even Survival mode in this case.

In my opinion its too early to be assigning reward tokens to a game mode that has not been tested at all. I would suggest Tabling this till next month and Maybe have a comprehsive proposal of how all the reward pool would be allocated among the game modes.

#

I think once we figure out what is the most active and FUN game thats the one we dump rewards on.

proven moth
trail shoal
sudden robin
sudden robin
proven moth
#

we had 200 players in ascendant

rain pelican
sudden robin
trail shoal
trail shoal
#

this is a very different style

sudden robin
proven moth
sudden robin
proven moth
#

"Now, all that changes with Gauntlet."

#

read between the lines

sudden robin
#

Jag, ascendant has no RNG in it. It's very straightforward and mostly played in the teambuilder screen.

#

we needed a game mode like this. Even more when there is no entry barrier to play it.

proven moth
#

gauntlet is the future.
ascendant was a nice attempt.
im sorry

sudden robin
#

I disagree

#

I see leviathan ascendant as the ultimate ILV game.

#

1v1 with owned assets

#

where stats matter

proven moth
#

leviathan ascendant is fine, but we dnt really need to incentivize normal ascendant or survival

sudden robin
#

I don't want to sidetrack the conversation I'll just say that what we should be discussing is how much ILV is each game mode rewarding through leaderboards. And how much of the revdis are we willing to partake to sustain this in the future.

proven moth
#

i believe thats up to the team, because its under marketing

#

altho we had an IIP for the referal program

#

i believe the gauntlet should have the most incentive

rain fjord
#

didn't expect this to be posted this morning so i'm ooo but will circle back in a few hours and comment/respond to comments haha

rich linden
#

It seems we have become a game where the governing body has stepped in with rewards and it is escalating to the point of rewarding everyone for everything. It concerns me as I think there is the potential of us running out of money as people get used to the concept of being paid for playing rather than paying for the experience of playing. They will demand more and more and where will it end?

My question is, what are my options? Is the choice between stopping paying people to play our games or this proposal? Or is my choice pay people to play Gauntlet without owning Illuvials or pay people for playing Gauntlet who own Illuvials? If we are going to pay people to play Gauntlet I would prefer that they have to own Illuvials to get the money from Illuviuum.

short yarrow
#

what does the team have planned?
My last info i saw was that f2p gauntlet will get rewarded, would be nice to see their solution first than force them to do it a specific way and maybe let some considerable work getting spilled down the sink.

wanton pagoda
#

Not a fan of receiving 0.012 ILV for a Ranked Match win. I think there are better ways to go about this.

@proven moth what kind of $ amount is the top player receiving for a Ranked Match win in Parallel?

#

If it does come to this, much prefer to see the top players per match rewarded a randomized amount of Fuels in the form of a Loot Box.

ripe heart
#

This is wrong. If we can't keep players without paying them then we failed.

short yarrow
#

i feel like the additional incentive of Leaderboard rewards/tournament rewards etc. is an awesome marketing tool to make people have a look at the IP and let them try out the game

wanton pagoda
rain fjord
#

I think other ideas for how to add ownership utility to Illuvials in Gauntlet would help flesh out the original idea here a lot actually

proven moth
rain fjord
#

very few hit those numbers

#

that's like top 20 lol

wanton pagoda
# rain fjord I'm going to respond to everyone above in a minute, but just out of curiosity, w...
  • Your wallet address receives an Illuvial score based on number and rarity of owned Illuvials.
  • You receive a Gauntlet Score determined by your placement at the end of a match.

Illuvial Score x Gauntlet Score = Total Points for the game.

Five Tiers of Loot Box are available.
Top 4 players per match have a chance at receiving a Loot Box.
Loot Boxes contain Fuel (nothing significant, but enough that you can occasionally buy a run in Overworld).

Maybe the Loot Boxes also have an extremely low % chance at a "Gauntlet Battle Board", "Gauntlet Ranger Skin" also.

#

Rather than rewarding players with $ILV directly you get the following...

Gamified Loot Box Opening
Randomized chance at small - high pay off reward.
Fuel ensures player keeps playing and IF they so choose they can sell higher stage Illuvials from the "bonus" runs on secondary meaning DAO takes a fee.
Removes market sell pressure on ILV token.

proven moth
#

unless fuel can be sold, it's prob not attractive enough

proven moth
wanton pagoda
#

But the bigger piece is that ultimately the other game modes, and Overworld and future games are so fun that a player introduced by Gauntlet wants to take the next step.

#

You could also have a Casual Gauntlet Mode, that doesn't include a Ranked Ladder, and to unlock Ranked Gauntlet / Leviathan Gauntlet they have to own Illuvials in some capacity

#

Aaron has mentioned they will rework Ascendant, + Arena as a whole allows for any number of new game modes to be ideated and developed.

#

If we go with $ILV surely the player would need to play something like 50 - 100 or more games to extract $100 USD of ILV

#

and as mentioned by others above , again I'd probably prefer some sort of Gauntlet Mode that features wagering or Tournament style rewards.

proven moth
#

our economy is centered around the arena.
generally, theres little reason to play OW or own illuvials than using them in arena.
of course there will be "collectors" but without demand from arena unlikely they will make profit from their investment.
unless we gonna keep spending 36k token/month on mainnet, where will demand come from

#

who is going to spend $6m/month for us to pay the expenses

wanton pagoda
#

I don't mind introducing some sort of pay-off or reward for winnners in Gauntlet, but not sure I love the $ILV token here

#

Or what about... a player owns a Squizz and wins 100 Gauntlet Games using Squizz, that Squizz has it's own progression system and winning games opens up re-skins, color variations, cosmetic changes.

#

Will keep reading the thread, good IIP to start the conversation for sure I see your point.

wanton pagoda
proven moth
#

lol

ripe heart
#

Degens are no loyal customer

trail shoal
wanton pagoda
#

One of my biggest fears in seeing this IIP pop up overnight was the effort req

rain fjord
# wanton pagoda One of my biggest fears in seeing this IIP pop up overnight was the effort req

It should have been made more clear that this IIP was dropped here for community feedback on the concept in general, not to push for implementation in it's current state. In any scenario it isn't something that would move to vote now, and wouldn't be drafted to vote until after mainnet launch and we can make a more informed decision on how gauntlet behaves F2P in the first place.

Can't make decisions about econ or incentive structures when you don't have a baseline to work with imo.

#

with that said several other good ideas dropped in this discussion so this has opened up discussion in the way i was hoping it would, the OG idea certainly not set in stone

wanton pagoda
#

Yeah for sure, it's a conversation that needed to be had

#

Keen to hear from @vast furnace I think, looking into the future is super important here as there will only be increasing reasons to hold Illuvials post launch and we may not have a complete picture of the vision. Implementing ILV rewards for Gauntlet at Beta may be a drastic move once we have a clearer idea of what's planned for the Illuvial collection.

short yarrow
#

this channel is for push for implementation in it's current state.
#1020759212172775464 is for gathering sentiment.

rain fjord
#

but thank you

short yarrow
spark slate
#

I like the general idea of this proposal. Its true that we cant really incentivize a free mode, at least not to the extent that we do for the other modes that require ownership

That being said, i agree with a lot of the feedback thats been provided here. We need to know the current Team's plan and it would be best to test the mode first

To me the current idea of the 3 modes makes a lot of sense. We have a free casual mode for onboarding (gauntlet), we have the competitive ascendant for people who want to compete for rewards but have to own their teams (ascendant) and then we have both of those modes in the leviathan versions for whales

After testing out the reworked ascendant and gauntlet we may conclude that we could benefit from a gauntlet mode where ownership matters but not the stats. The proposed way could be an option but i really like Nick's idea about giving fuel as this is the onboarding mode

rain fjord
trail shoal
short yarrow
rain fjord
#

NFT rewards as a primary focus are fine too, we (Paz, Viper and I) discussed that on their podcast yesterday and how it can be implemented into battle pass or battle pass adjacent systems too.

rain fjord
short yarrow
balmy saddle
# proven moth afaik team's plan to monetize the gauntlet is only cosmetic while in gauntlet le...

So we would have to do a deck of 250 illuvial to put the good ones with good stats for every one ?.
I really dont get that "leviathan" version of gauntlet.

I love what parallel made between f2p and p2p. We could imagine the same thing from a full collection perspective. As in gauntlet, its played with every units.
Having a 100% reward if you hold in your wallet 1 of each illuvial and reducing for every illuvial you miss depending on the rarity would makes totally sense to me.

proven moth
normal wedge
# wanton pagoda Not a fan of receiving 0.012 ILV for a Ranked Match win. I think there are bette...

The base prime you get isn´t much it also depends on the amount of people playing and your rank, around 1/day for only owning cards if you are top 1%. Further nfts outside of cards boost it and most of those are bound to conditions, that often require time/luck certain amount of skill.
Getting like 6-8 becomes the avg if you own all the extra NFTs and spend far more time than only winning 5 games/day. Those NFTs could be comparable to needing to own holo/dark holo for max earnings.
The biggest difference is that they have released about 40% of tokens and release more of their supply this way.

After following Parallel for a while now, I don´t think their system has been successful, it is fun and great to profit of it, but it has failed to attract a relevant amount of players, and the players they have are almost only play 2 earn, not play to have fun/spend money on products in the game, but it can be argued that various other issues on ui/ux/bugs are what is hindering acquiring new players.

I think the idea of this win X games and depending on your rank you get something is good, I don´t like offering them ILV though.
They could e.g. farm a different ingame currency and redeem (non?) NFT cosmetics, if there are strong arguments suggesting this doesn´t reduce revenue by lowering value/sales on cosmetics overall.

hollow abyss
#

So this is another way to reduce revdis?

hot prawn
# wanton pagoda - Your wallet address receives an *Illuvial score* based on number and rarity of...

What about the idea of quitting illuvitars?
That may have been a good thing to get users to spend money, but I think selling worthless NFTs is breaking the game!
And it puts a huge cost on the user financially.

illvitars should be game rewards, where players play a game, accumulate points, and then exchange those points for Disks.
We will build the album over time as we play the game, shouldn't this be the way the game should be played?
And you can sell the NFTs.

You don't have to develop games using "iluvitars" either, because even if you do, it will be meaningless if there are no users.
I don't mean to sound harsh, but the NFT has declined significantly in the last two years.

Can you sell any more illuvitars and sincerely say that this is something that will have value in the future?

hot prawn
#

As the season of illuvitars is 3 months long.
For example, suppose that only one Holo Ramphyre was produced during that time
We could sell that on the marketplace for a higher price.

Remember, we have commission income from the Marketplace.

Players may play many times to complete an album of illuvitars!
This may also help keep users from leaving the game!

If we can sell iluvitars at a higher price, we may be able to bring in new users.
I think that's what creates value.

Time moves incredibly fast in Crypto!
Even Blur, which defeated Opensea, doesn't know what might happen now.
I think you know better than anyone how difficult it is to make the right decisions in this crazy world.

proven moth
#

and we gonna have to replenish it somehow

balmy saddle
half gull
#

This IIP feels about 3 months too early tbh. If the data on player behaviour shows a need to enhance the utility of illuvials in gauntlet by then then sure I'm all for discussing this. Rn though it's all just speculation 🤷‍♂️