#Make Fuel Tradable ERC-20 Token As Originally Planned

1 messages · Page 1 of 1 (latest)

pastel hinge
#

Fuel production from Zero and the DAO are increasing by the day causing the fuel price to continually drop. At the current rate fuel will reach near worthlessness as supply far outweighs demand. Landowners are being forced into an cycle of undercutting just to sell fuel... this by turn causes the price to fall lower even faster. Some landowners may not want to sell in these market conditions. However, storage space for fuel is limited on land plots. Therefore the question arises... why is fuel not an ERC-20 token that can be transferred to an external wallet? This would allow for accumulation and holding during unfavorable market conditions until a time when things improve and can be sold at a later date.

If fuel were a tradable ERC-20 token it could:

~ Be transferred out of zero to an external wallet
~ Be transferred back into land plot for selling on illuvidex

  • Be traded on a DEX if someone created an LP

Pros: Landowners won't be forced into undercutting or using fuel for OW but could store indefinitely

Cons: Uncertain price action

Would love to hear thought/opinions

green pasture
#

I believe it has been stated that they are working on a way to allow land owners to send their fuel into the OW. We do not know how much work it would take to implement what you suggested. I think there should be a 20% rail on the bottom end like there is for the top end. We can’t sell for over 20% of current fuel price, there should be a rail that doesn’t allow to sell for less than 20% of current price.

#

The bottom end rail doesn’t need to be set at 20%, it can be more. But there needs to be a rail to prevent people from infinite undercutting. They will just need to wait their turn to sell if it is listed at the lowest end price. Not ideal for now, but the undercutting will continue if nothing is done.

pastel hinge
# green pasture I believe it has been stated that they are working on a way to allow land owners...

Yes, it does seem like transfer to your own OW account is coming. The problem with sending to our OW account is it's a one way street. Landowners will have to either continue undercutting and sell or transfer to OW - just feels like having hands tied. And creating a bottom rail will cripple the market... nothing will sell.

Fuel producers need more options. Hence allowing fuel to be transferable to an external wallet and able to be stored or moved back in.

green pasture
pastel hinge
#

We also still don't have confirmation whether transfers to our OW account will trigger the DAO to sell 19x on market.

pastel hinge
cursive cradle
#

Personally I'd love to have a AMM solution in place.
The challenge wouldn't be the implementations necessarily but how to maintain the raito of 95-5% landowers : DAO.
However, I agree that price undercutting is a problem and fuel to sell takes forever even if adjusting to the lowest possible price every few hours. Doesn't help the price and ecosystem this way and it's annoying/busy to make any sales.

magic agate
# pastel hinge Yes, it does seem like transfer to your own OW account is coming. The problem wi...

Transfer to OW also does not fix anything of the dao still sell its 19x of whatever you transfer to your overworld account, which may be how they implement that. Since this would only remove 5% of the fuel production… so its important that nothing is sold on the fuel exchange if the fuel is transferred to overworld account so supply is 100% reduced when the fuel is sent to overworld.

making fuels into a token would allow for too much price manipulation from whales though.

I think a bottom rail should be set where we just have all be patient and sell our fuel at the same low price while the game grows and demand increases.

The bottom rail would also be a buy signal where users could load up on fuel knowing it is as cheap as it is going to get. I don’t like buying fuel when its going to be cheaper tomorrow.

pastel hinge
magic agate
#

Also you don’t have to worry about fuel prices falling infinitely as the IMC can make changes to fuel production at will from IIP-39. But I would prefer the transparency of a lower rail so the community knows at what point the IMC would make these supply changes

magic agate
# pastel hinge I think the founders likes the idea of a free market... Hence no bottom rail and...

Fuel production is not a free market. There is a top rail ffs. They IMC could just cut fuel production in half for all pieces of land starting tomorrow. I think fuel prices are in a good spot nowish.

At keast they would make it so we can’t keep undercutting each other on the fuel exchange. At least make it so the lower number cannot go lower except every 48 hours or something. Hate relisting unsold fuel multiple times a day as it steps down regularly

late lodge
pastel hinge
pastel hinge
magic agate
#

Yeah, I feel you. I feel like 20% of top rail would be ideal for a lower rail so a 5x price fluctuation can occur

pastel hinge
magic agate
#

Last time I checked yesterday we were at 30% of top rail

pastel hinge
#

It is a good indicator of the game's interest... at what point will people buy fuel and meet supply with demand?
At the current rate and over supply by the DAO I don't think it will ever happen because of over supply. Seems like a broken system.

#

But maybe they will change fuel production idk... something has to change tho

magic agate
#

Land owners union! Haha 🤣

pastel hinge
pastel hinge
pastel hinge
late lodge
pastel hinge
#

We should have more options than being forced to undercut to zero

late lodge
late lodge
magic agate
# late lodge markets will oscillate between times of high and low demand. You'll be wanting t...

I mean we actually don't have to sell at all if the prices get too low. With a large enough group of land owners, we could agree to only sell at or above a certain price point and make our own lower rail we don't see worth even selling our fuel at all for. I'd rather burn off extra fuel all together than let it fuel prices go to zero.

I'm currently in the process of constant expantion of fuel storage containers. I have made 3 max level crypton storages, and have stopped selling fuel at these prices. I will continue expanding storage of fuel and remove power stations as needed to expand to hundreds of thousands of crypton in storage if need be. I am currently sitting on over 12k crypton.

pastel hinge
late lodge
#

There will come an inflection point where it pays off to travel to the OW even if you're not a pro gamer, assuming the illuvials hold their value, which I believe they will, since they’re finite.

Fuel is just a market like any other. Bitcoin miners aren't always profitable, but they keep mining because they believe it will pay off in the future. If you think we're at a low point and don’t want to sell, that might be a smart play. Even though I have quite a few land plots, I’ll be buying fuel if I see ridiculously low prices (like we’re seeing now).

There's very low demand right now so this was pretty much inevitable, and hence why it was important to have a killer launch with the 3 inter-connected games going full force, something that sadly did not happen...

hexed ember
#

Wouldn’t the bigger problem of making them a separate token be that them being held on separate wallets would require a transaction fee and transaction time. Like when you buy things in the marketplace with eth a separate window pops up and it takes time for that transaction to go through.

#

Fuel not being a separate token allows for faster transactions and no fee

#

Just like land people wouldn’t want to hold their tokens on passport but on secondary wallets

pastel hinge
spare arrow
#

I think what where seeing is the proper action ( As a low tier land owner) the idea is that with less demanad ffuel prices will drop to encourage more players to come into the game and more money to be spent and as more players come in demand will increase.

teal quest
#

its healthy

magic agate
pastel hinge
# teal quest its healthy

Do we know for certain whether fuel transferred to our own plots will or won't trigger DAO to print 19x and sell on market?

teal quest
#

we can buy time by lowering fuel production until we have arena leaderboard/tournamnent and collection milestones

teal quest
magic agate
magic agate
teal quest
teal quest
ivory pike
pastel hinge
# teal quest it has to if we want to keep the 1:19 ratio

So that's a confirmation? Been waiting for Kieran to confirm but he wasn't sure... sounds like it's still up in the air depending on fuel price and how the imc wants to handle balancing. Seems like straight transfer without dao print would ease on inflation but... someone's gotta do the math

teal quest
ivory pike
#

And yes as @magic agate mentioned IIP 39 gives labs the ability to make the adjustments but it was discussed previously with council before the increase and is being discussed now as well

magic agate
chrome pond
violet musk
#

We are in the process of reducing output as stated in IIP-39

whole matrix
#

A T1 will need a year to top production thanks god i sell most of my T1 early this year. I see this coming 🫠

teal quest
#

👀

whole matrix
#

It is not easier let land owners supply all the fuel and them you put a fee on it? If the fuel prices get too high them the DAO supply the market. Just a thought...

violet musk
pastel hinge
swift osprey
#

I'm 100% behind Fuel as ERC-20, was very sad to see that go. But it has to be done in a way where it still flows through the DAO to enure the 5% ratio.

#

The ratio problem due to current Zero supply vs OW demand is not solved by doing this... but I still think its a good idea.

To solve the other problem you have reducing output (short term solution) and increasing demand (long term solution).

hexed ember
swift osprey
#

Because thats what was agreed. Its totally reasonably to propose the Land Holders get a larger share, but that means ILV holders get a smaller share. It immutable until an IIP says otherwise.

hexed ember
#

If player fuel doesn't sell out per day, than prices drop. The DAO can set a top rail for prices, but if you need 1350 fuel to do a stage 3 run, but only need to buy 450 due to bonus. It really means you are not selling as much fuel as you want, which is hurting the DAO.

This cycle of undercutting will continue which hurts both DAO and land owners

teal quest
hexed ember
#

Wouldn't it make sense to reduce production a bit, but also change the ratio, so that player fuel is selling out each day, which in turn, stops the decrease in fuel prices. Which will in turn reduce the bonus given out, which in turn makes it so that we are selling more fuel. Which means the DAO is making more money.

swift osprey
teal quest
teal quest
#

but thats all it can do, buy time

hexed ember
swift osprey
# hexed ember Wouldn't it make sense to reduce production a bit, but also change the ratio, so...

The system is far more complex than that, both in its operation and in the 'political' ramifications for want of a better term. I doubt the token holders want to open up the slippery slope of giving up more of their share.

Remember also that the treasury which is used to pay for the team, services, and other business expenses, gets its share from revdis. If you reduce this share then the game also needs to make more money just to survive.

There are many levers to pull, but the best and biggest is to increase demand. Everything else is a tradeoff.

To be clear I'm not saying your proposed option is a bad tradeoff, just that:

  1. its hard to imagine council voting for it without some very very compelling arguments.
  2. there are other options that may be better 😉
hexed ember
teal quest
#

or increase storage capacity

swift osprey
#

If you want to make a strong point for increasing landholder share I think you need to make a case that looks at all the ramifications and possibilities. Simplifying to just a few measures can make ANYTHING look good.

hexed ember
#

If you could make it so that whatever you set fuel production and whatever the % is. As long as that number combined, makes it so that player fuel is selling out, then the undercutting will stop. Price will stabilize, and the team can adjust those numbers so the DAO is maximizing profits to help fund the game and keep token holder happy

#

Without knowing how much fuel is selling each day, and what the projections are, it's hard to know what those number are

teal quest
#

theres no cure to low demand but to create demand, def not by tinkering supply

hexed ember
teal quest
swift osprey
#

As a temporary measure which has minimal ramifications.

hexed ember
#

I'm not against lowering production, I get why it has to be done

swift osprey
#

Anyway I got to go! Back on topic as a parting note ... I'm all for Fuel = ERC-20.

hexed ember
#

I'm a math guy, there are 800 or so tier 4 lands, which right now can make 4-5k fuel per day. 2000 tier 3 lands, which can make 1-2k per day. I'm not going to say they all sell that (some will use, other lands won't ever get to full production, etc), so let us take half of those lands, and take the bottom of those levels. 400 tier 4 at 4k per day, and 1000 tier 3 at 1k per day. That's 2.6 million in fuel. At 5%, that means you'd have to sell 52 million fuel per day for the player fuel to sell out. This is not including any tier 1 or 2 lands, so I think it's a good estimation with not having access to any data.

Again if you can't sellout of player fuel, you have undercutting, which hurts overall fuel prices, which hurts the DAO and token holders.

To sell out of player fuel you'd have to cut the land production pretty huge but that would destroy land prices, which in turn would hurt the DAO and token holders.

Without knowing how much fuel is being sold per day, or what the projections are it's hard to say what the actual numbers should be. But at 5%, it'll be really hard to see how they can sell out of land produced fuel per day.

Changing the ratio, even a few percentages makes a huge difference. At 6%, you'd only need 43.3 million sold, 7% 37.1 million, 8% 32.5 million. If you make it so that player fuel is selling out each day, then the undercutting stops. Fuel prices go up, less bonus, the DAO is selling more fuel, which helps DAO and token holders.

Again you wouldn't want it so there is way more demand than supply, then prices go too high and people can't afford.

There should be an optimal fuel reduction and change to ratio that is most beneficial to both sides.

It'll be hard to balance selling out of player fuel when you can only change fuel production. The ratio (at small percentages) plays such a big role, it would be nice if they could adjust that as well.

#

It would be nice, if you could just like fuel production, be able to adjust the ratio, somewhere between 5-10%. This way the team can try and have it so that player fuel, demand equals supply, and thus we stop the undercutting.

With only fuel productions being able to adjust it gives the team less ability to adapt and will actually hurt the DAO and token holders.

#

And of course this is way more complex, as once burning mechanisms, leader boards, competitive arena and the countless other things the team is working on. This will change the demand.

This just gives the team more flexibility and they can adjust accordingly.

I was just asking why so stuck on 5%, and people asked me why it would help. This is just how I see it would help. But there is probably a lot more going on.

teal quest
#

yea like johnny said, it's just the agreed distribution rate of revenue to landowners

hexed ember
#

Fair enough

late lodge
swift osprey
#

One of the most unique things about Zero was the possibility for real market interactions (for example arbitrage via Converters). You can't find that anywhere else which felt pretty special.

late lodge
swift osprey
#

You can't buy Fuel for use in Zero.

late lodge
swift osprey
#

I mean you could add that and do it off chain, it's not like it's impossible or even hard, but if you don't believe in crypto it's all kind of moot. We can just centralise everything.

late lodge
#

is that bad though? I like that a T1 or a T2 can't be boosted and they take their time to level up

#

initially I was also against the idea of not being able to get fuel into the land plots but I think it's fine now. It gives the true sense of having to play the game to earn it.

swift osprey
#

I mean you can just buy a perfectly optimised Max plot then hire someone to look after it.

Personally I feel that direct interplay between real world and game economies is unique and really cool.

But I didn't win that fight.

late lodge
#

it would be unique, but it would also open doors we might not want to open. Like having fuel hoarders, which could eventually lead to big price manipulations.

#

we don't even need a top rail-guard like it currently is set up.

swift osprey
#

I'm well aware of the implications, I spent a lot of time thinking about this game coming up with its core mechanics and the chain interactions.

#

But its moot now.

late lodge
crisp rose
swift osprey
#

Sorry I've had a few drinks, it's Friday evening here... I might be being rude.

late lodge
swift osprey
#

Okay 😉

orchid parrot
coral seal
# crisp rose Please correct me if I get this wrong, but the market suggest that prices are to...

You can make thesis like people are scared of prices going lower and lower, so they wanna wait until this stops before spending and playing more.
There are also variables like playercount and time.
If a player plays a slow and optimal stage 3 run, might take them 1h, 1350 crypton +some hyperion.
Each T4 plot makes about 6k fuel/day, t3 2k/day at current values with last converter patch etc.
so 120k fuel per T4, that need to be spend and 40k per T3 in endgame.
So other thesis could be if playernumbers/time they play simply aren´t enough then it isn´t free market demand lacking, but just too much ingame currency going around for how much the current players can spend.

crisp rose
# coral seal You can make thesis like people are scared of prices going lower and lower, so t...

Good argument. I failed to include available time per player into my thoughts regarding this matter. Do we have implications that show that players can't invest more time and therefore don't manage to use up the fuel supply? Maybe, some sort of correlation with beta play time per user per day? The data would still be off but to some degree would give some information about what is true. Either players don't have enough time to use up the fuel or they are waiting because of high prices. Would be important to figure out what is true. If most people are waiting for prices to get lower until we reach a reasonable playtime per dollar this change would go in the wrong direction, wouldn't it?

coral seal
#

Labs has access to that data, I could only make assumptions currently.

devout cove
teal quest
#

rn im just chilling, doing daily missions and buy decent stats, not gonna try to catch a falling knife

opal haven
opal haven