Illuvial Packs or Automated Drone Runs for Zero Players (Land Holders)

[near quarry]

Its very obvious that Land Holding players aren't reaping the expected rewards, and although the current plan of growing demand through Arena before uplifting Overworld, should, if successful, eventually result in returns to Zero players (through their 5% share, and eventually via Fuel sales) it will likely be a long wait.

To address this I suggest a simple reward mechanic that regularly grants Land Holders the new Illuvial Packs or free Automated Drone Runs.

We don't know exactly what will happen here, but if one of these ideas goes ahead I think such a reward would go at least a little way towards addressing Land Holder concerns.

The actual mechanic could be implemented in many ways. For simplicity I will assume we have "Illuvial Packs" but it would be similar if instead we had automated drone runs.

Some ideas:

• Simple loyalty reward - Log in each day and get 1 pack, log in 7 days in a row and get an extra pack or a megapack.
• Tied to Fuel - Get a pack for every X Fuel you generate.
• Tied to Scanning - Get a pack whenever you discover a new Illuvial.
• Deeper integration - Create new building which has activities that generate packs. This could be a permanent feature.
• Auto generated (airdrop) - Simple drop packs in each holders wallet each week.
• Competitive - Create a Fuel production leaderboard and give packs to best players in each tier.

Rewards would be multiplied by Tier, or maybe 3 * (Tier-1) (unless Fuel based, as Tier is already accounted for in that case).

Obviously deeper integration would take more time, so it also may make sense to start with airdrops and move to something cooler.

In any case I'm not pitching here the exact reward, or the exact mechanism. I'd suggest that it should be meaningful enough to be more than a token gesture, but also would need to be balanced so as to ensure there is still demand for Illuvials: possibly the amount of rewards could be tied to size of Arena player base.

In any case, lets open it up for discussion...

[tired glen]

I like the general idea, possibly we could do Beyond D1sks until we have illuvial packs(if that idea happens).

[viscid finch]

Yessssss... hudred percent YES

[balmy bloom]

Interesting idea @near quarry - could the total fuel generation (your % contribution) give you a portion of that week'sor month's fuel sales? This would be your "competitive leaderboard" which was outlined in someone's fuel proposal back in the say (Vetemor I believe)

I would push back against these points:

• scanning new biodata = pack. This eliminates players who have all biodatas = so ❌

• log in per day = you don't encourage players, i would prefer actions over just signing in (daily missions completion or weekly missions completion)

• really like the BUILDING TO GENERATE PACKS = this could be Illuvitar D1sks or Illuvial Crates (if they go that route and whatever they call them) - this way you NEED to use fuel & time to mint them. This will allow higher tier lands (more fuel generation) to essentially get more of them easier

Let's fuel the conversation everyone - 💪
Ideas on ideas 💡 🤔

[viscid finch]

Or make scanning possible to find packs also which brings back utility to that building even if all biodata is found

it's a scanner... it can...scan... for...packs

[rose sable]

I love this idea.
It would be great if we could choose between Illuvial packs or Illuvitar disks.
Exchanging fuel for packs may impact the economy negatively.
I like the idea of challenges for a little extra and packs to be tier based. Or progress based.
Thanks Johnny

[near quarry]

Yeah and if you have found all biodata it would become a positive as you would become more likely to find packs... ( + @balmy bloom )

[zinc sphinx]

I like the scanning for packs idea.

I also think that if there's automated overworld runs using fuel, that also may help with this problem as time poor whales can burn through more fuel.

[balmy bloom]

People will exchange TIME to POWER PACK opening = this could burn off a ton of fuel (won't know until we try it)

I have a ton of fuel, but no time to play this week - if I could pop packs on mobile I would be opening them right now

[keen rapids]

finally johnny back!!!!!100% agree give motivation to play illuvium zero🙏

[sudden flicker]

Me three

[cursive cloud]

What if you had to gather resources from overworld and bring them to your plot to forge them into packs or something. Perhaps loot can also come from playing arena

Just a thought

[tacit kayak]

Although I do like the general idea, it appears as though the rewards are being handed out without requiring any value add from the landholder side, or at least that is how it appears.

For example, being rewarded a disk for simply logging in. The action of logging in doesn't offer any value to the ecosystem, yet they will be rewarded with real value, which also has the potential to inflate/devalue other peoples assets.
I don't think any rewards should be offered lightly, without at least receiving a larger value add from the player upfront, so the return for the ecosystem as a whole remains positive.

Simply, players must perform an action that creates more value than what they would receive as a reward, otherwise I will have a hard time supporting it.

[keen rapids]

action of holding the lands and not selling them

It's not a game, the lands are still an investment, so don't be afraid to reward the people who own the lands.

[tacit kayak]

Landholders will receive 5% of all revenue.
I would be much more in favour of incentivising additional revenue generation and helping landholders that way, rather than inflating the current supply of products without any additional value being added.

[viscid finch]

If the pack discovery were done through scanning then there would be an exchange... using fuel and removing it from the supply pool.

I'd say make Illuvitar and Illuvial annnnd emote d1sks discoverable... would make the prospect of scanning MUCH more fun and interesting. Just set the rates accordingly and let people have fun finding things through spending fuel.

[civic ledge]

Now @tacit kayak your talking shop. $72M worth of capital to keep this whole project on the road should participate much more equitable in future cashflows. LHs did not participate in Wave 1 & 2 of revenues that violates the premise of the landsale and now Wave 3 will not trade in fuel. We are ~30 months behind on basic deliverables such as megacities and blueprints.

@near quarry thanks again for supplying a leading advocacy voice for landholders. Great creative ideas.

[tacit kayak]

I do believe Wave 1 and 2 revenue was diverted to the safety pool, and if those funds are not required, they will still be distributed.
Delaying the distribution of funds to ensure extra runway and safety for the DAO is something that I agree with, although I know some don't, but if the DAO doesn't survive, everything goes to 0, so I know where my priorities lie.

Although Wave 3 will not trade in fuel, 5% of the ETH revenue will go direct to landholders.

I also agree that landholders have contributed immensely to the project, (hell, I was one for a very long period), and their loyalty and patience should be rewarded in kind, although it appears we may disagree on some of the approaches.

[civic ledge]

Michael Saylor uses a specific phrase all the time, which is why I love my MSTR bag and wish I had never diverted capital from it to Land NFTs. "Accreate shareholder value" means to increase the financial worth or value that shareholders receive from owning a company's stock; essentially, it means taking actions that lead to a higher stock price and potentially larger dividend payouts for investors. Given that Landsale is the only substantial capital base outside of VCs ($12-18M) and retail ILV stakers, I believe it is "equitable" to form mechanisms that create more value (yield) for landholders. Call me crazy...and Michael Saylor while we are at it.

[keen rapids]

personally I have 15 lands I have not received it is 5% what does 5% represent?

[tacit kayak]

5% of total revenue (ETH). Example, if Beyond generates $1 million in revenue (excluding SILV2), landowners would be due $50k of that. I believe it is as simple as that. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.
Wave 3 goes live on the 21st November, so it is perfectly normal that you have not received any distributions as of yet.

[tacit kayak]

Not crazy at all, seems like common sense to be honest 😅 .

[keen rapids]

How much does 1 t3 earn with your calculation ?

[velvet frost]

in our case, the "share" is

• token
  while i do agree that other assets in the ecosystem need to go up, but the number one priority will always be token.
  now to answer michael saylor, does implementing this idea benefits token, land, illuvials and beyond?
  i agree with @tacit kayak landholders need to add value to get these rewards

handing out d1sk or p4cks freely can devalue illuvitars and illuvials

and foregoing revenue

as a note, the dao still owe landowners:

• 2nd fuel crate airdrop
• 5% of fuel sold at top rail
• 5% of cosmetic sold
• MC bonus

i prefer we settle this debt first before promising more things

[velvet frost]

[vagrant frigate]

The first month should have been paid out already, but isn't yet afaik.
Probably not too much $ but still some top rail sales + emotes/battleboard skins.

[vagrant frigate]

what value add you are thinking about?

[velvet frost]

burn/sell fuel maybe

[vagrant frigate]

the only thing there is, right? (besides the shop, where you can buy the speed up tokens. )
So you would add a chance to every fuel burn (scanner/matlab/fuel-converter) and/or every fuel sale to drop such a run/pack?

[velvet frost]

hmm maybe not a chance based, but instead make it as milestones rewards

[vagrant frigate]

so kinda like a one time thing? or seasonal reset?

[civic ledge]

I TOTALLY agree the DAO needs to settle the debt first. So glad for your perspective/conviction on the IMC. By the way, if 90% of the initial land was bought with sILV2 then that tells me that the stakers and landowners were essentially one in the same constituency (set of investors). If we going to unify fuel, then I think we should work towards unifying stakers and landholders interests so the two are not conflicting. Our camp is too small for such trite division.

[civic ledge]

The DAO should pay its debt to its senior stakers/investors first and then pay everything else including its contractors. This is how any other entity on the planet would function. ILV is flipped upside down and is the anomaly. This needs common sense reform. Pay ourselves first!

@velvet frost could we make a motion for this transfer to payoff existing debts that have been carried by landholders (and stakers if any)?

[vagrant frigate]

lets try to stay on topic 🙂

[mystic vessel]

it's amazing how @civic ledge keeps talking about the same topic over and over again regardless of what the discussion is about. Just make your own thread man...

[velvet frost]

ive raised it to danny and hes on top of it

[civic ledge]

responding to a sensible reply in this thread from @velvet frost. agree on any creative means for Zero players to add value to ecosystem with management of the lands. anybody with common sense should.

[lean egret]

It's a bit different, with the new IIP if you sell fuel, only then will you get 5% of all income, if you didn't sell it, you won't get anything from the beyond

[tacit kayak]

Can you provide a link please, I cannot seem to find this. Thanks! 👍

[lean egret]

@vagrant frigate could yo help pls with IIP

[vagrant frigate]

ICCP-17
#1267902026533306480 message

[lean egret]

thx

[tacit kayak]

Thanks for that.

[vagrant frigate]

By the way @balmy bloom
Since this ICCP anyways needs a rework because of that part which is mistakenly in from an other IIP.
The example needs a rework too.
It's written as amount of eth generated is the metric in the bullet points and in example fuel units sold acts as metric.

[lean egret]

yeap and pls add a little bit more % for landlords too)