3-month vesting period

[exotic cobalt]

I am writing to provide feedback on the recent changes to the rewards system. While the new mechanics are technically excellent and the expansion of ways to earn rewards is appreciated, I must express my deep concern about the new 3-month vesting period for claiming rewards.

A vesting period of this length not only diminishes the sense of immediate reward for active players but, more importantly, poses a significant threat to community growth. New players, in particular, are likely to be deterred by the lack of immediate access to earned rewards, which could harm adoption and retention.

We believe this decision will discourage new users from joining and may cause existing members to lose motivation, undermining the work that is otherwise being done.

I strongly recommend that you reconsider this vesting period or implement a more flexible tier system. A shorter or tiered vesting schedule would better balance the need for token stability with the need to maintain a vibrant and growing community.

[muted sonnet]

It's completely and absolutely unacceptable that the team has treated the community like this. Giving us no vote when we are the ones who have kept this project alive. The community needs to completely vote against the 3 month lock up.

Cannot believe once again how badly the team have treated the investors who allow them to exist.

[umbral quiver]

Please try to stay rational and well reasoned with your Feedback 🙂

[foggy bluff]

Good point, was this run by the community of players via the council that was voted in? Or just decided by council/team?

[muted sonnet]

Rational would have been for team to given the community a vote but we all know why they did not .... because we all would have said no. Unbelievable

[keen smelt]

The only people who should be upset by this change are pure extractors. If you play the games regularly then you will get rewards instantly with a 20% boost.

[muted sonnet]

So angry at how they think they can tell us what do do with our tokens because the token price is low not because of us.... because of them. Because they delivered a sub par game then we need to pay the price for Thier actions

[umbral quiver]

This thread could help bring your concerns forward to council/team.
Reasonable arguments could have an effect and might change decisions made by council/team.
Everything else likely doesn't.

Also remember, the community has always the possibility to write up a proposal trying to force a change.
I'm sure every member of the <@&1107754780744487002> will help anyone out with the proposal process.

[hearty girder]

The rewards already reduced significantly according to 2024, where we got 10-12 or more ILV and not just the pro gamers and whales with a lot of money.

[muted sonnet]

We should have the choice what to do with our funds especially for beyond

[muted sonnet]

Yes can we do this please to force them not to do this

[woeful sluice]

who are the members of the Community Subcouncil?

[signal drum]

That was an airdrop campaign, based aroudn a set figure. The rewards now are completely differnet, and is a bonus incentive to play. The 2 shoudl be seperated if you're usign them to compare amounts.

Also, the rewards we are currently getting, will increase the more people who play the game modes. Incentivising growth aroudn the ecosystem as a whole - you will get more, if you are active + there's a larger player base

[muted sonnet]

You know why they did not give us a vote right ? Cause we all would have said no

[woeful sluice]

For example, I don’t know exactly how the process works whether this decision is discussed by the team without being presented to the Subcouncil members
feels like all the effort we put into expressing ourselves here might be in vain

[umbral quiver]

Can read this and the last post in this thread
#📰〕governance-news message

All ICC members are mentioned (Just me who got exchanged with JP can read up on last post on that)

[muted sonnet]

They should have waited to do this after the bull run...it's a slap in the face to community to do this just before a bulk run.....what on earth are they thinking ? Like literally

[woeful sluice]

ı'm quite tense, I don’t know, my friend… the new decision is really bad.

[hearty girder]

If the player base will increase. But I don't think that will with this new decision. 🙁

[umbral quiver]

Not at all.
i can assure you, council and team are reading a lot in discord.
Especially in the gaming chanels and the #1020759212172775464 channel.

[muted sonnet]

Are the community actually supposed to be able to vote on this ?

[dusky gorge]

doesn't look like beyond is included

[muted sonnet]

This is going to end up with less investing not more ....it's going to really annoy the faithful community and put of new comers

[signal drum]

I think it will more dpend on 'why' you are coming into this ecosystem or gaming project ot begin with

[muted sonnet]

Oh really ....was that in the announcement?

[signal drum]

not everyone is here for monetary gain, believe it or not

[hearty girder]

I got ~1.2ILV/week, and from Oct 16, I will get this amount just 3 months later. Maybe the Team should aware of the higher rewards that are much more... this is a "lunch money", that won't cause the system and price crash. 🙈

[signal drum]

Ratty is linking a picture that is in the Blog, attached to the Anoouncement post. You should read it

https://illuvium.io/news/rewards-v2

[dusky gorge]

I see a chart in the announcement and it doesnt include Beyond... so I assume Beyond rewards will contunue as they are

[foggy bluff]

Mate, let’s not do that. This is about governance and communication. Not who is a “gamer” or “pure extractor” as someone above you already tried to frame this as.

[hearty girder]

So everybody will "play" beyond from now.

[signal drum]

I'm replying to a comment about people investing more or less because of this change, it's a fitting response, since it's true.

Growth of the game is what adjusts these reward levels. And the truth is, a lot of people in this ecosystem are here for a great game, not profit - that should be remembered

[hearty girder]

It's okay, but if somebody would like to play good games, will choose another game for fun.

[signal drum]

Possibly, but we're hoping that changes. That's why they are still building out the games - for enjoyment

[hearty girder]

A web3 game shouldn't be about only having fun.

[foggy bluff]

No one forgot that lol. You can also be here for enjoyment AND rewards. No need to divide the crowd.

A lot of ppl will be upset, and that’s ok. Let them speak their minds.

[signal drum]

You are right, not trying to divide, apologies

[runic sedge]

I am interested in knowing what percentage of land owners are actively playing Zero?

[dusky gorge]

One month seems like a nice balance...

[umbral quiver]

I'm the wrong guy to hit up with increasing bounty rewards my friend 😄
I'm sitting on the other side of the medal in this topic. (even tho i'm also profiting from BH rewards)

Can see my reasoning in the other thread you created.
#1421564901201019141 message
Can also elaborate further why other Incentives would be better serving for the purpose of why bountyhunt got introduced.
If it was on me bounty hunt would get replaced by demand incentives.

Nonetheless, your feedback is seen and got shared on council stage.

[fiery coral]

Im also of the opinion that no vesting is better

The positive would be that some more people choose fuel over $ but those 2 types of rewards are of very different nature and most everyone that wouldnt already pick fuel still wont no matter what

The other positive could be delaying some sell pressure for 3 months for maybe a raise but thats very trivial as its only a very small portion of tokens distributed and overall trading volume (personal speculation)

To me the big downside is that a lot of people rely on those rewards and with a 3 month pause they will have to choose another opportunity to earn

Rewards that are "instant" are much more attractive then the delayed ones. New players that see the opportunity to earn x$ in another project right away or the same x$ in illuvium but can only start to earn in 3 months wont have a hard time deciding

I know its about having a fun game and stuff but rewards are our #1 tool to attract players. Introducing a vesting period definitely seems like a net negative imo

[hearty girder]

The question is that from Oct 16, the base rewards are the same as was in Sept or less?

[covert sand]

This is the worst time for you to do that — do it after the World Cup.

[hearty girder]

Maybe this is the reason for this. Not to sell immedately

[covert sand]

I myself won’t be playing as often as I used to — I’ll only play the IPL after this new rewards update.

[umbral quiver]

https://illuvium.io/news/rewards-v2

[hearty girder]

But this doesn't include past rewards. I don't know how much was for OW before in $

[covert sand]

Don’t do that.

[woeful sluice]

No no, let’s just talk about the current leaderboard right now… I know your opinion, and I actually read your thoughts in detail the first time you wrote them on that discussion thread and responded in my own way

Let’s talk about tangible facts, okay 🙏
I’ve been in the top 3 of the OW leaderboard for 27 weeks

One of the players I competed against many times was a player named Jubjub, I think he’s a whale. and he always pushed me to spend more… because he was constantly doing 1300-fuel ADR runs.
If we’re going to have vesting for 3 months, how can we possibly spend $500+ every week? It doesn’t make sense, especially when we can’t predict what will happen with a bull run… If I’m not going to spend that amount, and since no one else has been spending as much as me for 27 weeks, how on earth can this system remain sustainable?

If the team had fully decided to end the OW leaderboard, like you said, that would’ve made much more sense…
What they’ve done now is basically kill the big spenders while giving the small spenders a chance to grab first place just by using the Stg1 map

[hearty girder]

yes, so the rewards are less... great. This was 200ILV/week that means 200* for example 12$ in ILV, that is 2400$.

[umbral quiver]

200ILV except Zero was lower.

$ amount obviously varies with token price

[hearty girder]

That won't be higher after this I think 🙁

[woeful sluice]

Alright, if we’re bringing in a lot more players, should we rely on MMO advertisements for that? Like I said, let’s put forward tangible things so no one gets their nerves wrecked.

All of a sudden an announcement is made and the whole place turns into a bloodbath

[runic sedge]

I think the idea is that you take your rewards as fuel - which gives you a 20% bonus and use that for your runs instead of taking it out of the ecosystem.

[umbral quiver]

depends on playerbase.
With 1 player obviously not.
There will be x-amount of players needed to surpass the old rewards.

[woeful sluice]

ı can’t say I find it illogical; in earlier conversations with Filo, I had mentioned keeping the reward amount inside

If it’s going to be like this, then it should be supported with Leviathan; we constantly need to build things on top of each other, we need this.

[runic sedge]

Yup, I don't think OW should have the option of ILV as a pay out. Fuel only. We can make our money off the Illvuials and yes, we should have Leviathan as the highest paid tournaments.

[foggy bluff]

Well said. People for this decision just deciding everyone that doesn’t want fuel and are just dumping $ILV rewards and extracting only….very short sighted.

[hearty girder]

Illuvidex is almost dead. You can sell only Maxstat, and they are also really cheap by now.

[covert sand]

You won’t see me in the ranked queues anymore, only in the IPL unfortunately.

And keep in mind, I’m the person who plays the most ranked matches—I have more games than anyone else.

[hearty girder]

But IPL will be under vesting too, won’t it?

[fiery coral]

No its USDC

[quasi wind]

buy fuel for OW for $ and get reward in fuel instead of ilv? sounds strange. stage-3 run cost more that 1 month subscription in WOW.

[meager escarp]

Overall I think the new Reward system looks ok, and I do think it's sensible to tie it to active players, in this way.

The only thing that I think should be considered to be changed is the vesting period of the ILV tokens from rewards.

Would it be an idea to give a small bonus if you leave the ILV vested, and if you claim the ILV right away you forfeit the extra bonus?
I believe we had a similar system before.

Personally I don't have any issue with the vesting... I have claimed some ILV rewards before, that I have just staked for 12 months, but I mainly claim in fuel to spend in OW.... but I can see how the forced vesting can be a problem for attracting new players, and can be seen as a negative.

[summer jetty]

I play IZ in the same way Sisyphus pushes his boulder

https://tenor.com/view/death-stranding-2-sisyphus-on-the-beach-hideo-kojima-mountain-climb-gif-9060768058445058879

[hearty girder]

So, if I understand correctly, the OW's base rewards pool is 1000$. So if ILV will be 20$ then the rewards will be 1000/20$ = 50ILV?

[vapid badge]

Correct.

[worn plover]

my idea would be keep rewards as it is and make battlepass monthly so its kind of a subscription

[runic sedge]

S3 runs are far too expensive for what we get out of them now that fusing costs are so high. That's a whole other issue altogether.
I think it is odd to get rewards in ILV since it isn't an in-game token and is a governance token.

[runic sedge]

Same.🤣
Seems odd to have a "more rewards if there are more players" on it though with all lands sold. Do we care if people are playing them?

[runic sedge]

Which is why we need Leviathan and something in the MMO to make Illuvials valuable again. I would not necessarily call the max stats super cheap though considering those buying them don't know what the use case will be and most people won't take low offers.

[foggy bluff]

Wise words Patate. You are on the gaming council for Arena correct?

Can you (or any council members) share why the 3 month vesting was introduced? As you mentioned the price impact of ppl selling will be very low, and not all players that receive $ILV are dumping as some ppl here have suggested.

3 months is a long time for a small weekly reward pool. Ive typically claimed fuel rewards myself for context, but would like to understand how they came to this decision.

[fiery coral]

Community council but yes i represent arena

This was approved by IMC side. This idea seems to have gotten a lot of traction, when 25 👍 are reached we can help @exotic cobalt write an IIP and push for the change if thats still what he wants

I cant speak for the other council members but i would personally support such a proposal. Even if IMC originally approved things can change following this discussion

[woeful sluice]

In the AMA, there was a part where Kieran said he was pleased with the activity generated by the Leviathan tournament… if you watched the interview, you probably know.

In this part, even though there are a considerable number of 60lvl Illuvials on the market, Scoriox and Kieran mention that this number is insufficient… and they continue, saying that if you want something to be sold, you should get in touch with players setting up for Leviathan or move more Illuvials to level 60

So I want to ask, how can the recent reward system decision be properly aligned with the things mentioned in the AMA?

If a player preparing a deck for Leviathan tells me they want to level 8 Illuvials to 60, we almost always make the deal 50% fuel on their side / 50% fuel on my side… The Arena player doesn’t want to spend too much, and the OW player sees it as a reasonable deal since they’ll get fuel support and also rewards from the leaderboard… With today’s update, we have now removed this part; the 12-day leveling time and cost to reach level 60 have become much heavier

**- 20 lvl Illuvial to 60 lvl → minimum 200+ Stg2 runs

• 40 lvl Illuvial to 60 lvl → minimum 160+ Stg2 runs
  I won’t even mention the possibility of running Stg3… the cost for an 8-setup is $400+**

With the new system, we are taking farmers who would prepare Illuvials for the long-hyped Leviathan in the past to an almost impossible return process...

So, what’s the worst that could happen? Yeah, we might not even see level 60 anymore… I guess this has been one of the biggest problems from the start. In Arena Leviathan, many investors sold their entire decks because of balance adjustments that didn’t satisfy them, and it still feels like we’re basically saying to those who remain, “please, you go too.”

In discussion threads, it’s constantly written that OW doesn’t provide enough return, that it’s never at the desired level, or that it’s not like Beyond, and so on. These days, when we’re talking about the possibility of the MMO becoming F2P, the problem isn’t money, right? Not a single person should be writing that OW doesn’t provide enough return anymore, I’m really starting to get tired of it

Guyss, what exactly do you want?? An OW player plays hours of OW at the lowest possible cost or high cost does fuse, and levelling their good stats to 50–60. They either convert the income they earn from the leaderboard into fuel or take it back as tokens, sell a portion of it to create small opportunities for themselves, and prepare some deck

[sly abyss]

You voted for the IMC, they make these decisions. That isn't a lack of a vote. You are welcome to VONC any or all of the sitting IMC if you feel you were unjustly misled.

Alternatively you can do what Ricardo is doing and allowing the community to provide feedback in a structured governance process.

Both are avenues designed for the community and quite effective.

[sly abyss]

If you gave people a vote on charging $1 for eggs or $10 for eggs. What would people vote for?

Point is not everything should have community input. Vestings a little different but 80% of community members of any community would choose immediate personal benefit over long-term DAO sustainability.

A vote via staking tokenholders is a bit different tho tbf.

[sly abyss]

I was thinking a 1 month vest, but really don't mind the idea of a tiered system. Eg 3 month base, 1 month reduction if u have battle pass. 1 month max reduction based on staked tokens. Maybe 1 month max reduction based on active games played and stuff.

I think this could be great.

[dusky gorge]

Classic example of... push an initial extreme and negotiate a lesser change. But going for that lesser change initially would get pushback too... well played 😄

[sly abyss]

I think you are overcomplicating the scenario. They want all of what you are saying, but the MMO has to be built first, then they can do all that. I prefer the Overworld to the Arena as well, but the MMO isn't done.

[sly abyss]

I personally think there's definitely an element of this tbh. The 3 Month vest was attempted previously and got absolutely obliterated.

[woeful sluice]

There’s no overcomplicating, there was already a system that worked, whether good or bad.

We had been sitting quietly, watching the videos in the leaks channel for days… Actually, all the overcomplicating started with today’s announcement.

Would it be a bad idea to not mess with anything until the MMO era..

[torpid lagoon]

I was going to suggest the same thing. Reduced or no vesting for battlepass holders Seems fair.

[signal drum]

Would also incentive ongoing revenue from the battlepass (especially if they continued a similiar system/additional benefit to the future battlepasses and have them benefit another part of the ecosystem for the player)

Obviously have to be careful how impactful it is though

[runic sedge]

I put a thumbs up, not because I am necessarily against a vesting period but because I think that a 3 day warning is inadequate. I also find it to be bad timing. I don't want to see Illuvium making a bunch of X posts marketing the MMO and a bunch of people piling in with, "Yeah, you ripped me off my ILV rewards, now I can't touch them for 3 months!"
Be nice to hear from the council on this thread about their reasoning of why they felt now is the best time to do this.

[torpid lagoon]

To be fair I think the changed reward system is fair.

Giving away weekly rewards with more value than the entire ecosystem makes in income is not sustainable

[signal drum]

Yeah, I think the health of the ecosystem has to be first and foremost. Sure, a lot won't like that initially, cos it stumps their take-home.
But it's most certainly an important focal point! - Also agree that the timing / 3day warning is not ideal lol

[torpid lagoon]

I can agree on the 3 day warning not really being very nice!

Maybe start it next month

[sly abyss]

Sorry I am lost now. What did they mess with regarding overworld/leviathan?

[worn plover]

selling battlepass for making ppl eligbl for rewards then removing 2/3 of it

[sly abyss]

U need to return back to the mission statement of this update. Encouraging new players to join and scaling with newblood. The 3 month vest kills this I agree, but a battlepass doesnt change that fact on its own.

[signal drum]

Beign eligible for rewards is a bonus to the battle pass.
It works exactly as any other battlepass does in the world - provides rewards on a tiered track.

The selling point is not in game token rewards

It's unique prizes that are limited to a specific time

[sly abyss]

Omg I forgot about that, yeah lol whoops, it shouldnt be factored hahaha, but maybe it can be for overworld leaderboard idk

[runic sedge]

Yeah, actually that is really bad. It shouldn't come into effect until after this season is over.

[normal prism]

👀

[signal drum]

Ah wait I see what you guys mean...

[woeful sluice]

I didn’t write anything about Overworld/Leviathan there. I’m just pointing out that today’s announcement caused confusion

[woeful sluice]

an undeniable fact...

[sly abyss]

Okay so I don't understand this then:

"I will buy fuel and level up Illuvials to 60 for those who will compete in Leviathan for 12 days (all day minimum 7-8 game hour)
Afterward, I will either wait days to sell these Illuvials at the healthiest price or sell them for free to opportunistic users at a very low price (becaus Leviathan tournaments could never be organized regularly)

20 lvl Illuvial to 60 lvl → minimum 200+ Stg2 runs
40 lvl Illuvial to 60 lvl → minimum 160+ Stg2 runs
I won’t even mention the possibility of running Stg3… the cost for an 8-setup is $400+"

[jovial creek]

i guess the main problem with the game right now is leviathan, there is no point on asking people to use fuel and go to OW when the illuvials are useless

i have been building a team for over a year already and i still can't use them

the game wont survive without proper ways to spend fuel on something the people actually want

[sly abyss]

I think the point is that this doesnt have the intent of driving up demand, they'll still wait for the MMO lite. But dexter has a fair criticism that they should consider waiting for then, or risk killing their current playerbase

[jovial creek]

this is how many illuvials i have, this is crazzy
if the only thing i can do with them its burn for outfits, not worth it

[signal drum]

Right there with you, friend.
I'd love a burning mechanism that felt like it had some value, or just a reason to go and min-max fuse my spares, to try and get some dupes to sell to people who like Leviathan competition

Hopefully soon!

[torpid inlet]

• Leviathan rank -> more play OW/Autodrone -> Illuvium price increase (meaning worth buying) -> money buy fuse increased
• Gauntlet rank -> not need to play OW/Autodrone -> Illuvium price Low -> money buy fuse not to need.
  => OW will be worthless without laviathan, need to rank laviathan
  p/s: personal opinion

[woeful sluice]

yes, I’ve read it, I changed that part. ı wrote something a bit messy, my nerves were all over the place

[sly abyss]

That's all good. Just wasn't exactly sure what you meant, I think I understand that u r more saying that u could make user acquisition harder until the MMO comes, defeating the intent

[fervent plover]

I tend to agree here. I'm not sure 3 months vesting even helps the DAO much anyways. The community seems to agree with you as well. Maybe we should be writing up a proposal to remove the vesting period.

[normal prism]

yea we can always review and revise things

good point here, 200ILV is only about $2500/week, it is relatively very small compared to daily volume and selling pressure from salary

we'll discuss it. thank you for your attention to this matter

[proper walrus]

The whole v2 thing is useless. Just another mechanism for when your game is already popping, not gonna generate any new interest in the game, on the contrary it will do the opposite. Then once again everything depends on the MMO, which right now looks like a 90s game with UE5 graphics.

We should have tied the rewards to our illuvial collection + leaderboard placement and introduced different in-game rewards and nfts into brackets like suggested many times instead of the useless battlepass that caps your spending at 40$ per 3 months and does nothing to improve someone's collection or get them interested in Leviathan.

That was shut off by the previous <@&814435151307866142> because it would "scare" the web2 players lol.

Well f2p players get next to no fuel now, battle pass players get less fuel than before.

If we did my suggestion with the collection, we wouldn't have to worry about 3 month vesting periods or the rewards tanking the token price, as the rewards would be tied to player spending (improving their collection) in a fun way + their placement on the leaderboard, also a fun way. And it doesn't have a 40$ 3 month cap like the battle pass does, which was a much better idea before when we had the old OW and crafting.

Good thing we have our experts at IMC looking after the well being of the project 🤦‍♂️

[sly abyss]

On this note, maybe vesting should scale with active players as well?

Its a small amount, but the vesting seems to be positioned for more like $10k drops. Maybe even 1000 paying players adds 1 month of vesting or somethin.

[normal prism]

that sounds so complicated.
i think we either want to give people money or not

if we cant afford the airdrop stop, if we want to give people money to get better player number for the raise then keep doing it and stop btching about it

https://tenor.com/view/starwarsday-gif-5413758

[proper walrus]

We could have better player numbers and a growing eco system without bribing the players like a bunch of losers, if you guys stopped making dumb decisions as IMC + Labs

[hearty girder]

So OW isn't worth it anymore.... now it is 200ILV, from 16, itt will be just quater

[umbral quiver]

since many seem to think that vesting got introduced because of sell presure of the token, here's a SS out of the blog

There are good reasons out of a studios perspective why a vesting period of x duration could make sense, especially to incentivize people to rather claim in fuel since that is instantly available or people rather claim X% of their reward instead of all because they don't want to wait the full vesting period.
One could argue that creating a vesting period everyone is happy with doesn't fullfill the purpose of having a vesting period at all anymore.

This might seem very minor in current state, but keep in mind that the rewards are now scalable with paying players.
It also doesn't need huge amount of paying players to surpass the current reward system.
At least for Arena/OW... Zero is a bit of a special case there

[sly abyss]

as the IMC u literally chose neither? Who are you arguing with? I think you are right, either stop it or dont, why bother with half measures?

[normal prism]

i honestly dont remember what i said when we discussed this. this was 2 months ago. anyway the council is currently discussing about this

[summer jetty]

I understand the reasoning behind the 3-month vesting, but psychologically it’s a real blow to onboarding imo.

New players don’t think in terms of long-term gain — they think in reward loops. They need that quick dopamine feedback: play, earn, claim, feel progress. A 90-day delay breaks that connection before trust in the system even forms, which risks killing momentum and retention.

A partial or tiered unlock system would strike a better balance — let players claim a reasonable percentage of ILV instantly, while vesting the rest to promote long-term retention.

It’s frustrating how Illuvium’s design decisions always seem to swing between extremes — either giving away thousands to F2P players with no clear path to revenue, or locking rewards behind a battle pass with a 3-month vesting period. There’s a middle ground that would serve both growth and sustainability.

I'm also going to add my usual jab that rewards should be for leviathan not ranked. 😅

[foggy bluff]

Thank you Nijafe, great to see other council members sharing an opinion on this. What about the other IMC members? They seem to be silent beyond Jag.

What was the reasoning for the 3 month vesting? Why not 1 or 2 months.

Please begin a proposal to revise this, community sentiment is clear 🙏🏼

[umbral quiver]

Upvotes in here ( #1020759212172775464 ) are just for gauging sentiment, they have nothing to do with the proposal process.

Everybody can at any point in time write a proposal and post it in #1126838877429182506 (need to be token staker to post in there) where it needs 25 upvotes to proceed to the next stage which would be ICC voting and if approved after that to IMC voting.

[foggy bluff]

Thx Doctor! Sounds like Patate and Nijafe are going to write one, your input would be appreciated too. Community sentiment is clear on this one

[fair slate]

😉

[umbral quiver]

I stand behind a 3 month vesting period.
I understand the reasoning on why this can be beneficial for the studio. (my points are mentioned above)
I also don't think it really negatively effects the marketing impact since it's basically just a 3 month delay of getting the rewards on the same regular basis as of now. (and you still get the fual instantly)
(Obviously this opinion can change if there are very good reasons brought forward 🙂 )

Additionally:

• In my opinion, rewards should be seen as a bonus on top and not as for example passive income, or to farm for free, or to get other paid services for free on a regular basis.
• I also share GHamsters opinion above and would make holding collections/ leviathan-gameplay rewarded with ILV, replace the F2P leaderboard with strictly fuel and maybe cosmetical seasonal rewards. (I think the IPL should be enough incentive to keep going, with additional fuel to buy battlepass or other stuff in the ecosystem, there's plenty of rewarding)
• I would remove the bountyhunt since i think it is bad for a game economy if you incentivize supply instead of demand, except if the economy is massively lacking supply over a long period of time for whatever reason.

[umbral quiver]

🙂

[summer jetty]

I agree completely on shifting ILV rewards toward collections and Leviathan play as that’s where genuine risk and ecosystem contribution takes place. Ranked F2P can stay fun and competitive, but ILV should feel earned through real participation in the ecosystem, not airdropped to passive extractors.

[clear storm]

@spiral cypress didnt I write up a proposal for this some months ago?

[sly abyss]

I think the current issue is that paying into the system isn't enough. There's no avenue for financially wealthy and time-poor individuals to even participate. So really your playerbase is quite limited.

[spiral cypress]

yeah we did have something along these lines. The problem as it has already been mentioned in the past has been the low player base numbers and us not wanting to split the player base so we would increase the queue times again.

Rewarding Leviathan has always been the goal, we just haven't reached the point where we feel it's the right time to do so.

The same goes to having MMR where new players are not competing against the top 100 and getting completely destroyed.

[clear storm]

I mean scaling rewards based on collection

[spiral cypress]

yes we did. But it didn't wen't forth with the rewards V2 and because most of the F2P players don't own illuvials and there's still no way to level up illuvials without having to go play OW.

[proper walrus]

Collection based rewards are superior to this 'rewards v2' in every possible way out there.

Isn't this the idea? For more and more f2p players to own stuff? Maybe if we gave them any reason to do so, some of them would?

It is literally the perfect system for us, it hurts my brain why we still don't have it

[summer jetty]

I get the logic around queue times, but I don’t think the right mindset is “achieve A then add B.”

Player growth and Leviathan rewards aren’t sequential steps, they’re interdependent. The incentives that make Leviathan worthwhile are part of what drives the growth needed to sustain those queues.

In other words, it’s not “wait until we have enough players, then reward Leviathan.” It’s “use Leviathan rewards as one of the levers to encourage growth.”

Building both sides simultaneously is how ecosystems scale sustainably. The current approach is too risk averse and defensive imo.

[spiral cypress]

and we already started doing that with the Leviathan Tournaments. It's not small amount of prize money being given out there.

I can share with you guys that we're finishing the details on the second Leviathan Tournament and an announcement will most likely come out this week, so it's not like we forgot Leviathan at all. We'll keep incentivizing it, just not through leaderboards atm.

[summer jetty]

That’s great to hear tournaments definitely help. However, they tend to spike engagement in short bursts. What I’m hoping for is something more consistent and sustained over the long term.

[foggy bluff]

I guess I’ll have to state again, I personally usually take fuel as reward already. And this is not about passive income or debate about free rewards. I get all that.

I’m yet to see any convincing reasoning for the 3 month vest, and we have at least 2 council members agreeing with the majority of community engaging with this thread.

Would be great if the IMC can share some factual info about why they opted for 3 month vesting of weekly rewards.

Let’s see if a proposal comes out of this. Otherwise, only time will tell if this is the right move.

To the points about Leviathan based rewards, ive always been for that and it’s baffling to me it’s not yet been implemented.

[umbral quiver]

Yea i saw that, was a response to you but not all points directed at you 🙂

Well there's at least the official one mentioned in the blog which is "incentivizing respending inside the ecosystem "

[proper walrus]

Why should anyone respend' in the eco system if there is nothing there? Leviathan tournaments maybe, but only 20-30 people can benefit from that, as it is still skill based. Why spend or respend, if you get nothing out of it, except one tournament every other month, which 99% or more of the players will win nothing from? Might as well play the f2p Gauntlet.

I can't be the only one seeing how we have a massive flaw in our eco and these gimmicks like rewards v2 and the alliance program will do little to nothing to change that. Then everything will come down and rely on the MMO. Do you guys think this is good idea/structure?

[umbral quiver]

#1427340449701691432 message

[proper walrus]

Yeah I read that, and I agree, been spamming about this since I don't know when.

My comment was moreso about the 'respending' thing. There is no reason for anyone to spend or respend right now, as the game can be played for free to the same extend.

[clear storm]

Pay2NotProgress

[vapid badge]

Out of interest in your view how does a 3 month vesting period for rewards mean the team is treating the community poorly. Vesting periods on rewards are common place and 3 months is not a particularly long period of time to wait for it to be fully liquid.

[dusky gorge]

was it your idea?

[summer jetty]

Vesting is for...well... investors 😅. It has no business being used as a method to throttle in game rewards for gamers playing a video game.

There are multiple ways a typical game rewards it's players for participating. Experience, prestige, cosmetics ect. Gamers are conditioned to receive all of the above instantly and since illuvium decided to also offer tokens to gamers it must align these rewards with that same expectation. Not doing so will only generate negativity imo.

[spiral cypress]

You do make a compelling argument but aren't we also offering Fuel to gamers instantly with a 20% bonus? ILV should be for investors.

[foggy bluff]

It’s a good guess lol

[summer jetty]

We’re offering both to gamers. There are no investors playing Illuvium... by definition.

Once someone’s engaging through gameplay, they’re participating as a player, not managing a portfolio as an investor. There's a design philosophy mismatch here with who is being incentivized with these rewards

[spiral cypress]

I think it's pretty clear who we want to incentivize. Investors or not, what we want is players who are with us for the long term not short term extractors.

[summer jetty]

If that were true I'd be queuing up for a leviathan match rn...not ranked.

[sly abyss]

The token dropped 80% in 3 months. To say its a short amount of time isn't really accurate in this space imo.

1 Month is moderate, 2 weeks is short.

Now if the rewards were USDC, or Pegged to USD throughout the entire vest, then that'd be a bit different.

[normal prism]

should we vest the salary in ILV too?

i was the one who suggested vesting for the P2A and i topped the s1 and s2 of the P2A.
ngl i wish there was no vesting and i genuinely farmed the token to profit because i spent about 0.5 eth during the P2A.

not gonna kid anyone, token in airdrop is to pay people to play not for them to invest

based on fractal, the cycle is potentially ending in 2-3 months, so i apologize for not paying more attention to this vesting, it was a mistake

[edgy lark]

I think you can also argue this isnt even re-spending. Its free fuel so it not really spending. Maybe can call it participation in ecosystem. I think you can argue that instant LV rewards could promote re-spending more so. Eg "wow ive made X amount already I can easily justify spending". In other words kind of converting ILV reward pool to spending real money rather than free fuel

Unless there is a backend purchasing of the Fuel via the forgone ILV rewards (eg selling the ILV they would have got and purchased fuel to give to them)

[umbral quiver]

I think those 2 ways are somewhat like following with just some random numbers:
I get x-amount of Fuel:

• I can buy an emote disk, or a beyond disk (if a sale is ongoing) and might buy another emote disk because i either got an emote that's super funny and i might get another cool one, or i realized that if i buy a couple more beyond disks or buy a couple very cheap illuvitars of the market i get a super cool drone blast i can use in Arena
• I might have gotten fuel worth half the battlepass, and i just buy a little amount of fuel to have enough to get the battlepass.
  It's kinda like give a little bit and he might buy more

I get x-amount of ILV

• Oh i made 50$ because i swapped the ilv on the dex, it's totally fine i buy for 10$ some disks to get some emotes
• Oh i made 100$ even if i buy the battlepass i'm still 80$ in profits

In one case you gave the consumer some freebies (which have to be spent inside the ecosystem) to get him hooked and spend x-amount of $
In the other case you paid the consumer 100$ to make him spend 20$

I think out of a studios perspective there's a clear winner which system you would prefer.

[umbral quiver]

you saying we should stop all ILV-reward programs in 2-3 months because they not worth it to incentivize anymore?

[normal prism]

im saying if the bull ends in 2-3 months these people gonna get rekt so bad

[edgy lark]

yea true and assume they have a better read on what behaviours they see

and have weighed this up against potential lower player numbers with the vesting

the leaderboard rewards are kind of capped on how many people they can onboard anyway, im sure there is something like max of 3-10x the amount that actually get rewarded (eg if 100 get rewards each week realistically its not going to incentivies more than 300-1000 players at a time)

maybe off topic but still think they should add 0.25 ILV for 101-200

[umbral quiver]

i think you can see that in the whole gaming industry.
Rewards in $ is usually just happening in e-sport events.
But in almost all games you get freebies either through ingame achievements, free battlepass versions, achieving high ranks in leaderboards etc. Those freebies are usually cosmetics looking good but just half as good as the thing they sell in the shop for 20 bucks or you might get in a lootbox you can buy with a low drop rate.
Some people are totally immune to that and appreciate the upgrade for free, other people buy the whole shop anyways and then there is the target audience for that kinda stuff which either just realized he can upgrade his account/avatar/whatever with x-cosmetic or they already knew, didn't got hooked but now get the feeling of being more special than the total newcomers and now want to be more special than the average user and want to stand out of them and buys out a cosmetic in the shop or spend x-amount of playtime to achieve y-achievment, or spends money for boosters to either be able to achieve y-achievement at all or achieve it faster.

[edgy lark]

would be awesome if you could use ILV as a payment

but yea can see where they are coming from now

[proper walrus]

It's more important to fix multi accounting the leaderboards first. Unless we want the fake higher daus for the raise.

We should also step away from using mainly ilv as rewards, it is the most lazy form of rewards that only brings extractors and focus more on in-game and gameplay stuff, which if done properly would also have monetary value and if not needed the players can still sell their rewards for $$$. But that's offtopic yeah

[meager escarp]

It's probably a bit off topic, but I think that could work... but maybe 101-200 only rewards in Fuel... I think it can help attract more casuals to play, even if its a small amount in fuel.

[edgy lark]

yea though as player numbers increase it would be harder to multi account / not worth taking those games away from your main + nature of the game makes it hard as is. And yea also does it matter if DAUs is the goal like you said

[edgy lark]

yea that would be good

[summer jetty]

That or we go fuel only. It's never really made sense that a governance token with no utility game side is offered as a reward

[edgy lark]

dont think reward pool can be used for anything else

[summer jetty]

That's just a matter of passing a proposal though right?

[foggy bluff]

Looks like this did not get answered/addresssed…

@exotic cobalt seeing as there is significant community support for your feedback, think you will write a proposal to get a vote for change?

Sounds like you would have support from council members @fiery coral @fervent plover

1 or 2 month vest seems like a reasonable compromise.

[slender pike]

Work in progress community

[fiery coral]

Talked with Ricardo already and its written, gave the day to other icc to confirm/revise then Ricardo can give the good to go if he approves

[foggy bluff]

Community governance in action! Cheers Patate

[proper walrus]

Dau should be the goal, but not in this disingenuous way. Do I really need to explain why?

And increased playerbase will do almost nothing, as it will be pretty much the same people multi accounting to the top, unless we get a massive influx of pro players

[exotic cobalt]

🚨 IIP-XX VOTE IS LIVE! Our voice matters now! 🚨

The Subcouncil has officially advanced the proposal, IIP-XX: Remove the 3-Month Vesting Period on Rewards, to the Main Council for voting!

#1428076942627835996 message

[foggy bluff]

Community Governance for the win! This has reached the required 25 upvotes to go to council vote ✅

[hearty girder]

Nice that Team cares about our voice. Yesterday, I decided to finish my OW runs, but if the vesting will be removed (=will not take effect from Thursday), I will keep grinding.

[peak goblet]

My stance on the 3-month vesting

I don’t think we should remove vesting. The goal has always been to push people to claim in Fuel and keep value inside the ecosystem. The only thing I’d change is the timing. It felt sudden, but it was urgent because these changes are best for the DAO. It might piss off some extractors, but the players who actually enjoy the game and see ILV as a bonus will be fine with it.

Here’s the truth. If everyone expects to be paid more than they contribute, the whole thing collapses. If every player only plays to extract, the reward pool runs dry and the game dies. That’s not opinion, that’s just math. We’re trying to build a sustainable ecosystem.

The people who play because they love the world we’re building, who care about progression and collecting, will always outlast the ones who treat this like a job. The loudest complaints are usually from people who don’t care if the treasury burns down, as long as they get their cut first. That’s not the kind of community we’re building.

Re governance, you didn’t “lose your vote.” The IMC is elected to make operational calls. When the community disagrees, you raise an IIP. That’s exactly what happened. It hit 25 upvotes and is moving to a council vote. That’s the system working. If you don't like the IMC’s direction, use the VONC process.

The vest wasn’t about punishing players or protecting price. It was to encourage Fuel claims and keep spend in-ecosystem.

I support revising the vest (No idea why, it seems completely reasonable). I liked the system we used for the airdrop where you are penalised for claiming early. I'm open to what other council members have in mind, but also don't want to have to allocate more resources to change how the rewards system is built.

We shouldn’t drop changes like with only a couple of days notice. I totally see how that would be frustrating, but again, we think this will improve the ecosystem and economy so its best to get it implemented sooner rather than later.

The reality is we’re not here to pay people to log in. We’re here to build a game worth playing that rewards real participation. If that offends you, you were never here for the right reasons.

[proper walrus]

That's why we need to move away from using ilv as the primary source of rewards. There are just not enough of it for everyone. Currently the rewards only go to a handful of pro players, 24/7 grinders and multi accounting the leaderboard. It does very little to bring new people in.

Also, let's say we have 1000 or 10000 daily active players, what are going to use for rewards? Still ilv tokens for top 100?

Right now we don't have any progression system, or any feel of it. Why should people spend or respend into the eco, if there is no purpose? The only reason would be to play Leviathan. But people can play the game for free, and seeing the hassle around building a Leviathan collection, it would stay that way.

Because of those reasons, we should expand the rewards by a huge margin, similar to the battle pass but bigger, and tie it to the players collection, as a multiplier.

That way there would be no need for vesting, it won't drain the treasury since most of the rewards would be Labs generated nfts and consumables, and maybe still ilv tokens for the very top. But tieing the rewards to your collection means to get rewards, you need to participate in the eco and improve your illuvials over time, to get to the higher rewards. It brings revenue in.

It will also slowly act as a bridge to Leviathan for everyone, if we include stats and levels into the multiplier.

If build a nice system with cool rewards around it, it will spike a massive demand for good illuvials. And unlike the battle pass, it doesn't have a 40$ cap per 3 months, people can spend and improve their collection on a daily basis.

For rewards we can go wild - ranger skins, drone skins, weapon skins, battleboards, XP crates of different value of proportions based on tier, fuel, illuvitar pieces or shards that you combine, we can go crazy, depending on what's possible and what not. Make the cosmetics season exclusive and tradable. If the game turns successful, these things will have insane collectors value over time. And being traded for the next 20 years they will constantly generate passive revenue from the fees. That's how items and skins in other games reach insane values of 10-20k$ or more.

This way we complete our loop here, and Gauntlet can bring in revenue by itself, independent of the MMO.

And it's very important to make it a combination of collection + leaderboard placement, because:

1. if the rewards would be based purely on the collection, then it would turn into a p2w/whale thing and exclude normal players

2. using a combination of both gives the feeling of fair chance to everyone to participate, even with a weaker collection they can still try to climb the ladder higher through skill and still get their rewards, or a bigger chunk of it at least

[steel latch]

i mean encouraging a free roll tournament also with loot where you dont need to own assest is also bad, meaning people dont need to play OW to loot the needed rolls etc, having it in leviathan would kick in the economy atleast, free rolling to only extract is very bad and will just will dry out the game

but in todays market the vesting is just a killer and a pretty out dated meta,
may its ok with penalty claiming like the 1st campaign was.

but also i think plenty ppl wanna gain from the game not just spend so only trying to enforce fuel what does like nothing currently isnt really sounding cool

[misty basalt]

I totally agree. Leviathan should at least have tournaments like the ones in gauntlet now. This would encourage players to stay in the economy (play OW, buy fuels, buy illuvials, etc.). In my opinion, another very important thing is the stable servers, I get a lot of server crashes in gauntlet every day.

[hearty girder]

The real extractors are the Gauntlet Ranked players, who doesn’t have any Illuvials or Illuvitars, etc (there are some) and just playing for free in Arena. Inviting TFT players was a really big mistake.

Without name…

So vesting is would be okay for Arena. But in OW, we invested a lot of efforts (fuel, time), it is a fact that people would like to get rewards back and not just fuel.

[normal prism]

https://tenor.com/view/hes-not-wrong-hes-right-he-makes-a-point-not-wrong-that-makes-senses-gif-15543920

i believe we need both free players and paying players

altho imo we need to incentize paying customers much more when leviathan is ready

i understand what ur saying tho, getting $150k without needing to spend $1 might be hurtful to people who have been collecting our assets

[hearty girder]

Just don’t say that we are extractors. With my 0.8ILV/week in OW. Illuvium wouldn’t collapse because of me or the others, who got less than a “lunch money”.

[normal prism]

thank you for your support

[hearty girder]

Not to mention that you can’t buy items on Illuvidex via ILV, so obviously we need to sell/swap ILV.

[peak goblet]

Gain / extract

Once again, let me be clear, the game cannot survive with just people who want to gain. No economy can. Obviously…

[peak goblet]

We just finished 4 weeks of tournaments including a 10k final

[steel latch]

yea so tourney on a free roll entry is pretty bad cuz its max extraction 0 injection

thats why leviathan would be better where you need assets to play

[torpid lagoon]

I agree that leviathan would be better for larger rewards..... but the overworld is boring and a real horrible grind right now. If leviathan was the main incentivised system right now we would be forcing everyone to grind a really negative part of the game. Until there is a more fun more sustainable overworld/mmo I think putting money into leviathan would potentially be a mistake. It might encourage some more overworld runs and sales in the short term, but I think people would burn out pretty quick.

We really need the mmo and illuvial levelling systems in place first.

[hearty girder]

Yes, Team should switch from Arena Gauntlet Ranked to Arena Leviathan Ranked.

or if it is impossible now, then cut the ILV rewards for Arena leaderboard 😛

or vesting just for Arena

[steel latch]

also need bigger asset burning mechanics as like itemsinks etc else supply delutes too much

but yea overworld is a meh experience to get forced into rn thats true

[meager escarp]

The main goal should be for people to **prefer **to claim in Fuel, which they will if there is a demand to spend to build a stronger team for Leviathan and build collections, etc. Also. currently you need to use OW to "target capture" and XP (also get some from Arena, but it's not quite the same), if we had some sort of XP Boost buffs you could buy for fuel (ideally also produce from ILZ) that could be one more way to spend Fuel.... But completely get, that there is limited dev resource, and have to prioritize MMO hard.

I liked the system we used for the airdrop where you are penalised for claiming early. ...

I think that would be a good "compromise", and I personally like this idea the most. But can the system we had for the Airdrop be reused for current reward system somehow, without too much dev work ?

[fiery coral]

The initial proposed plan when announcing vesting of 3 months is like old airdrop

50% on first day and slow unlocks until 100% after 3 months

[hearty girder]

Yeah, but the old airdrop was significantly higher than now.

it was 10-12ILV for me... I would wait 3 months again, if we wouldn't get so low ILV

and not just ILV amount is reduced, but also the price

[hearty girder]

and my effort isn't less then it was...

[vapid badge]

Largely agree with Kieran on this. I think mirroring the system we used for the airdrop is a good solution. I don't think the 3 month vest is particular a long period of time to access the tokens but will discuss.

[normal prism]

vesting is just delaying the sell pressure. the sell pressure is $12500/month.
i bet thats relatively much smaller than the sell pressure from IPL and salary in token

If we really cant afford the sell presure we could lower the prize amount

[meager escarp]

ohh, I might have missed that in the announcement. I don't think that part was made super clear. 🤔
I think it makes a difference that people have a choice, if they want the claim now or leave for 3 month. (some might still be unhappy though) 🙂

[fiery coral]

The price amount was already cut down ~x2

[normal prism]

thats why i dont see why we need vesting for such low amount

maybe we should do vesting for the IPL prize pool see how they react

[hearty girder]

I recently checked OW rewards and still 200ILV for this week. So nothing has changed yet?

[fiery coral]

thats what im thinking too

i get all the reasons for vesting but at this point its like the worst timing because our focus is acquiring / retaining player with not so big rewards

part of it is also that we get the feeling of it being taken away cause we didnt have vesting until now but its mostly that this makes the perception of the rewards worst and its a greater barrier of entry which at this stage doesnt make sense when our focus is attracting players

[normal prism]

i will never see farmers as extractor. People who are calling extractors probably spent less in our ecosystem.
why dont we do vesting on beyond leaderboard too

[hearty girder]

It won't be a wise step... 😄
Not because of me, but the whales who invested the most in Illuvium.

[proper walrus]

I guess because for OW and Beyond you have to actually spend to get on the leaderboard, where in f2p Gauntlet you don't

[normal prism]

it's only fair if we apply vesting for everyone 😂

[hearty girder]

Maybe yes, but it would be really risky. Nobody would care if I leave the game, but if the biggest whales would, this is another case.

[normal prism]

i care about tchu
uWu

[foggy bluff]

Everyone gets a vest!

Yea the whole attack/focus on extractors take is strange to me. Some IMC are not recognizing the players/investors/community/council that wrote this proposal and engaged with the thread the most are some of the longest standing and most passionate Illuvium fans who spend $, run guilds, organize tournaments and typically choose fuel over $ILV for rewards anyway. We want the best for the game and DAO in the long term.

Saying 3 months is not a long time is a WILD take for crypto/web 3 gaming. As Jag mentioned, 3 month vest just delays the sell pressure for a relatively small amount of tokens.

I agree with the 50% discount from earlier airdrops, and also think reducing the vest to 1 or 2 months is a reasonable compromise. No need to remove it entirely.

We need more players, and introducing a sudden 3 month vest as we’ve also just reduced total rewards (until player base scales) doesn’t seem like a smart play. But it’s in the hands of IMC now.

[peak goblet]

I’m not sure if you’re missing the point about the vesting period pushing people to take fuel, effectively meaning no sell pressure or you just don’t think that will happen?

[normal prism]

illuvial is very illiquid with only $500 volume per day.
what if the IPL and beyond leaderboard is paid in fuel too, will the TFT players play? if they wont we are attracting the wrong players

[edgy lark]

tft is a free to play game, guessing over 95% dont spend. Hard to target that 5% without them seeing large player numbers / other tft players moving over

my point is no tft player being attracted is the "wrong players"

[uneven zodiac]

I agree with this. If we want the game to grow, we need to set a baseline for growth and not extraction

[foggy bluff]

Good point

[foggy bluff]

We also need more players for baseline growth. Some good solutions were raised above such as discount claim of ILV before vest ends, similar to previous airdrop. And reducing vest from 3 months (lifetime in crypto) to 1 or 2 months.

I’m yet to see anyone here pushing for ‘extraction’

[vocal seal]

I Like the vesting idea but we should let the community vote on the time frames to unlock

[foggy bluff]

It’s up to IMC to vote not community as Kieran (IMC) mentioned above. If they vote and community is unhappy someone can run a VONC to remove them from council or perhaps just push back the vote?

[summer jetty]

I get the goal of sustainability, but some of this logic doesn’t really align with how players think imo.

1. Vesting doesn’t = loyalty
   Locking rewards for three months just demands a big time investment from new players and removes the sense of gratification. People stick around when the game gives them reasons to such as fun, progress and connection. You can’t force loyalty through vesting. All it does is undermine the purpose of rewards.

2. “Extractors vs real players” misses the mark
   Most of us giving feedback actually care about Illuvium. Players need quick reward loops: play, earn, claim, feel progress, feel good. That isn’t extraction, it’s normal game psychology. If you don’t want to reward with money that’s fine, but if you do it has to align with player expectations and fulfil its purpose. You're in danger of handing out ILV while removing it as an incentive. It's literally the worst of both worlds.

3. The rollout breaks trust
   Big economic changes need time to be communicated, discussed and phased in. Dropping them suddenly and using emotional or moralising language to justify it makes people feel blindsided and attempts to paints critics as selfish. It undermines the long term mindset your actually trying to promote.

4. You can encourage Fuel use without vesting
   If you want people to claim in Fuel then give them a reason to. Right now there isn’t one, and no amount of vesting changes that 🤷‍♂️.

5. Retention comes from emotion, not arbitrary rules
   Games keep players through consistent rewards and a sense of progress. Even the most loyal fans lose steam when that feedback loop breaks. You want loyalty and retention, reward leviathan not ranked

Nobody’s asking for handouts (I've personally always thought it bizarre that we reward with what is essentially a governance token anyway). We just want a system that feels good to play and makes sense both emotionally from a player’s perspective and economically from Illuvium’s.

[exotic cobalt]

Thank you for sharing your position, Kieran. I completely agree that our goal should be to build a sustainable ecosystem and discourage those who play solely to extract. The DAO's longevity is paramount

However, its current solution (a 3-month restriction) fails to distinguish between extractors and the 55+ engaged community members who express concerns about player retention. These are the players who care about progression and item collection, and are concerned about the health of the game

The reality is that a 3-month restriction is not a restriction, but an impediment to sustained engagement from the casual player base, which is crucial for adoption

[normal prism]

lets list the 56 of the so-called "extractors"

damnit @azure flower

[summer jetty]

https://tenor.com/view/game-of-thrones-shame-ringing-bell-walk-of-shame-gif-13316112511080767236

[exotic cobalt]

My sincere apologies, there's been a huge misunderstanding!

I was using this argument to refute Kieran's statement, not to classify our backers. The point was exactly the opposite:

Kieran tried to label the complainants as "extractors."

My counterargument was that our 55+ votes are proof of engaged players, concerned with retention, not extraction.

I didn't mean to imply that any of our backers are extractors. They are the reason we won!

The important thing is that our strategy worked: Labs conceded and gave us the immediate right to 1 month / 50%. Let's focus on celebrating this victory.

[spiral cypress]

#📣〕announcements message

[normal prism]

i get it lol was just proofing a point that these are our long term supporters who upvoted

[summer jetty]

This is definitely an improvement imo. Thank you for acknowledging our feedback

[normal prism]

@exotic cobalt do you still want to proceed with your proposal or ru happy with this change?

[exotic cobalt]

Our Main Victory is Secured: We've reduced the 3-month lock-up to 1 month This is the victory we fought for player retention

However, we need to talk about the 50% forfeit on immediate claim This is a heavy penalty for players who need liquidity on Day 1. It’s an effective defense against extractors but it’s something we should discuss and potentially raise with the council again down the line

[normal prism]

https://tenor.com/view/peon-warcraft3-evil-gif-17603374800786823208

[exotic cobalt]

[azure flower]

https://tenor.com/view/arrested-development-tony-hale-buster-bluth-im-a-monster-monster-gif-4218285

[foggy bluff]

Cheers Filo!!

GG to IMC pivoting based on strong community sentiment. Seems like a win for all ✅

[steel latch]

facts

with the penalty unlock vesting method it spread it more and not all at once but yea

[round token]

So +20% for fuel!! It's been like six months now. When exchanging the reverds, it was written the same!

[runic sedge]

I'm sorry, I don't understand yout comment. It's always been +20% if you take fuel instead of ILV.

[round token]

If something is added to the Battle Pass for OW, why not…

It just wouldn’t be nice if it’s only to shorten the vesting period. Arena is not for me; open world has always been my first choice.

Also, the team needs to first consider the things they said and implemented. In the interview you did, if our CEO says Leviathan is valuable and that there could be a Leviathan league in the future, even with low rewards, then we need to remember that the path to Leviathan goes through OW and not forget the costs I mentioned above.

If we want player X to level up, then it’s necessary to know how much fuel that person spent to reach level 60, right? If no one knows about this and everything related to Leviathan stays just on paper, I don’t know… the light at the end of the path would only be related to the MMO

[edgy lark]

Great changes! 1 month or 50% instant feels much better. Highlights to me the idea/premise wasn't bad just 3 months felt too long

[peak goblet]

I’ll accept your sincerity regardless of the bias (almost everyone on that list is receiving rewards and would be negatively affected by the vesting). I trust your goal is to bring in more casual players, not just protect immediate gains.

But do not create a divide between the community and the DAO or team.

This isn’t a victory parade. Don’t shove it in the face of the council and team. Act like a player, not a disgruntled worker upset about a delayed paycheck.

[dusky gorge]

The government is still shut down in the usa 😕

[exotic cobalt]

Thank you for your honest feedback and for trusting my sincerity regarding the goal of casual player adoption and retention

I completely agree that the last thing we need is a split. My intention has always been to seek a sustainable outcome that balances the economic needs of the DAO with the motivational needs of the player base

We are all players building this game together. Thank you for making this vital adjustment

[torpid lagoon]

Yeah I agree! If it doesn't produce the desired effect we can always adjust the locking period later.

@peak goblet is there anything else we could do to encourage people to take rewards in fuel instead of ilv?

Either increasing the % bonus or maybe something clever like a stacking bonus. Eg if you constantly claim fuel as a reward you get a increase in that %

1st week 20% bonus
2 weeks 25% bonus
3 weeks 30% bonus max

Once you max out at 30% if you claim ilv again you have to build your bonus up again.

Im sure you could tweak the numbers to sweeten the deal and encourage people to keep their bonus as high as possible.

[normal prism]

lets just change all rewards to fuel including beyond

and put the same vesting.
Both OW players and beyond players are paying customers

IPL need to be changed to fuel too, we want players who love the game

and in it for the long term, not just huge prize pool

[summer jetty]

Maybe...but what does a player actually do with fuel right now? Why do we need it?

[normal prism]

exactly 😂

[torpid lagoon]

Exactly make things people want to buy and the problem is solved

[normal prism]

imagine working at mcdonalds and getting paid in cheeseburgers

do you know why they call it Pro Players?
ye no sht they play for money

now remove the money

what i dont understand is why are we keep paying beyond players? they are suppose to be collectors? do pokemon card collectors get paid by niantic just for owning the cards?

[edgy lark]

i get you think it only attracts pro players but they do also bring in other players. Ive spoken to a few in lobby that came over last few days just by word of mouth from those pro players

[normal prism]

if they love the game they woulnd mind getting paid in fuel

[edgy lark]

and they perceive illuvium as a legit autobattler which is cool

[edgy lark]

i dont think they would have come in the first place or even glanced at it (just to provide a counter argument, i dont totally disagree with you)

[summer jetty]

I prefer your cheeseburger idea as rewards over fuel. Wen IIP?

[torpid lagoon]

+1

[normal prism]

there is a reason why the prize pool is advertised in USD, not in ILV token.
where do you think the USD comes from

[normal prism]

mcdonald makes the best cheeseburger. change my mind

[edgy lark]

marketing budget or ILV reward pool? Not sure either makes it a bad idea / attempted at marketing

[normal prism]

guess how to turn 10k token into usd

[edgy lark]

you sell it. I'm guessing the idea is everything goes to zero anyway if there isnt a decent crack at some marketing

[normal prism]

we will survive with another raise, there isnt many investable gaming projects left

[azure flower]

VoNC incoming?

https://tenor.com/view/fozzy-bear-fozzie-muppets-jokes-dad-joke-gif-16043362

[peak goblet]

Drone runs, cosmetics, battlepass

[proper walrus]

We already have 2 and 3 mate, but we want to spend more. There is nothing for us to spend on. Drone runs, but there is no utility or demand for the illuvials except Leviathan, and it's a ghost town

[fiery coral]

its hard to have demand for leviathan when its still just a forward looking dream

Its been 15 months the economy only runs on that future dream of utility

As long as leviathan isnt as big or bigger than f2p, there no concrete reason to invest in the ecosystem & play ow/adr runs or zero

We saw how just little 5k tournaments sparked interest before the IPL and the last month series was really good for its size but what the players miss to really want to invest and participate in our ecosystem is 1) decent rewards & 2) the confidence that it will be constant and even better in the future

Ive come to accept and agree with the team decision of prioritizing f2p for the first season to focus on onboarding as much as possible but i think a little something for illuvial utility at the same time can go a long way

I think the Illuvial Collection (#1427981181906976778 message - #1428071923677401099 message) could also be a great first step to go towards utility and incentivizing people to participate in the ecosystem and not just extract

[proper walrus]

How are we prioritizing onboarding as much as possible right now? It's a genuine question, it can't be the top 100 rewards, cause that does little to nothing in that regard.

You said it yourself, the community, token and illuvial prices, the whole ecosystem reacted well to Leviathan tournies, because they could actually use their illuvials for once. Good thing you guys finally decided to revisit the collection based rewards, it can have a similar or even greater effect than that on a consistent basis, not once per few months.

And regarding the part that demand for illuvials/Leviathan being just a forward looking dream, I think 15 months and the time before are quite substantial to figure out the demand side. That's why I was surprised we declined the last collection based rewards suggestion, the reasoning didn't make sense and it's the perfect system for us that can provide a ton of utility

[meager escarp]

Agree.. There needs to be more reasons to spend fuel, and it starts with wanting to collect and strengthen your Illuvials, Which is why we need some sort of collection system and Leviathan game modes people want to play. (I still think a Leviathan Survival would be a good idea to get high on the priority list, doesn't even have to come with leaderboard prices, and there are no "tournaments" to organize etc but that is probably a separate discussion).

When there is a reason to Collect and strengthen your Illuvials, people will want to spend fuel on OW, ADR, and XP boosting.

Cosmetics are nice, but I think it will only really kick off with the MMO, but there could be an option to explore how people would feel if you were able to sell your Skins in the in-game shop for fuel as an alternative to ETH/USDC on IluviDex. (not sure how much effort that would take though).

[clear storm]

Leviathan Survival with some roguelite twists and ownership

https://tenor.com/view/a-country-romance-jonathan-bennett-one-that-got-away-gif-26726511

[fiery coral]

When i say that we currently prioritize onboarding (player acquisition) i say this because its that goal that made the team/IMC decide to have most all season 1 rewards for the free to play mode

I can get behind the approach of getting players before asking them to spend but personally i think if we dont have one of the best rewards in web3 & equivalent of better than TFT then its a wasted effort

In any case i also believe that at all time the demand side (leviathan) should have been incentivized at least in some way cause otherwise our ecosystem doesnt run. All assets go towards 0, we get no revenue and player/investor confidence keep falling

its a wasted effort
Wasted effort is a strong word, what i mean is i believe being over the threshold of one of the best in web3 and bigger than TFT would make the marketing campaign and player acquisition much much more effective

[meager escarp]

Something like this...
#1415250772177977435 message

Eventually on mobile too... I would 100% want to play that 😄

[proper walrus]

I agree with the idea and everything you said, I was just wondering about the method to achieve that. If it's the rewards for top 100, then it will do little, especially considering it's not even purely top 100, we have multi accounting.

Besides some pro bringing in a few players, what does it do for onboarding new ones by itself? That's an issue even currently with our small playerbase, what if it increases mainly through f2p players, what will we use to keep them in?

[edgy lark]

always thought this would be the best + realistic to do. The PvE aspect works so much better with P2W plus still very competitive mode

[summer jetty]

We could have a leviathan weekend event with big rewards once a month whilst maintaining the current push to onboard with ranked. This way we get the best of both worlds. People will spend to prepare for these events

Then illuvium can pivot into fuel only rewards for ranked and ILV for leviathan. A player will use the fuel to build their team to have a chance at earning ILV. This approach makes more sense to me

[foggy bluff]

This makes so much sense. What seems to be the blockers for finding a happy medium with the two?

@fiery coral @edgy lark do you see issue with fuel only for Gaunlet Ranked (F2P) IF Leviathan is pumping out $ILV rewards?

[normal prism]

fuel for gauntlet ranked sounds good
they can use the fuel to prep for gauntlet leviathan and if the like the game they prob spend more than they receive

[proper walrus]

Sounds good but we should implement a burning tech with this switch, increase the amount of the rewards significantly and spread them on a larger scale.

We should have implemented the burning tech with the introduction of the drone runs since they synergize well together, like it was suggested in the proposal, but that's another story

[fiery coral]

I would currently see a big issue yes. But that is just because theres no utitlity for illuvial, i hate to say it but as an arena player fuel doesnt have much value to me because i cant do anything with it (except now pay 40$ 4 times per year for BP)

When leviathan is the main thing and our collection has utility then yes 100% rewarding fuel will be super valuable and should be used as a reward where it makes sense

[foggy bluff]

OK make sense. So back to the question I posed earlier and many others like @summer jetty have too, what’s the delay with pushing utility for Leviathan? I know there’s probably better thread for that question

[fiery coral]

I have no idea, ive been trying to push for it since 15 months

Season 1 is currently a first slow attempt at first getting the players by incentivizing F2P

The first random 5k leviathan tournament before IPL had traction way over expectations and since then we keep seeing more than ever people asking for utility. That was really good for leviathan and the team introduced a 1 month event in september which i think was great but i think it would be very important that this is constant and that we, the players can finally look forward with our head up

I dont know how season 2 will be. My hope is that we finally put the most emphasis on the demand side of the ecosystem and in the worst case if we still go for F2P because we didnt get the players yet i hope we do it for real (one of the best in web3 + bigger than TFT) while also incentivizing consistently leviathan, even if its a fraction of the total prizes we really need a reason to spend in adr/ow/zero

[foggy bluff]

Cheers, it’s good to remember it’s just szn 1. I trust the DAO & team will continue to take on feedback for szn 2

[edgy lark]

isnt that kind of already happening with lev tourneys? I think they should announce them much further out. Like almost always have 1 announcement at any given time

[foggy bluff]

Need to get the word out more yea!

[summer jetty]

Tournaments aren't all that inclusive though. It's great for the small group that have the time and collection to compete but for the rest of us leviathan tournaments don't really make a difference

I just want to come home from work, play a few games with my own illuvials and improve my collection. It ain't even about the rewards for me. I just want rewards in leviathan so we can fill lobbies

[edgy lark]

i worry that even with rewards the lobby wouldn't fill super frequently at this stage. What are your thoughts on survival leviathon?

[summer jetty]

Survival leviathan wouldn't really appeal to me tbh. I'd try it out but I fear the novelty would wear off pretty quick. I enjoy PvP more 🙂

[edgy lark]

yea that's fair, I dont know enough about P2W games but thought generally they work best with mix of pve and pvp

[torpid lagoon]

Survival leviathan would be the perfect way to test skill and list strength!

Would love to push survival mode to my lists limits... get stuck, go into the overworld/mmo level up my illuvails or find better ones then push even higher up the ranks!

Incentives wouldn't even need to be ilv they could be cosmetic!

[edgy lark]

yea and no issue with wating for a bigger player base. No issue with people trying it a few times, realizing they just get shit on unless they have 10x better deck

and small improvements to deck to get an extra wave or two, rather than feeling like you need the best deck to even compete in lev gauntlet eg small improvement feels like doesnt make a difference

[torpid lagoon]

Would also be a great tool just for learning how the game and synergies work.

Hopefully no time limit etc etc

I still remember the first time I played gauntlet! That first round you have 5 seconds or so to read all the tool tips before you make your first move... impossible

[summer jetty]

Maybe in some cases, yeah. The P2W games I’ve played before tend to lean heavily on PvP though, that’s usually where the competition and spending drive each other.

As for P2W itself, I’m all for it. There’s this strange moral hangup about embracing it in Illuvium and I don’t really get why. P2W goes hand in hand with ownership. If you’re going to build a game around asset ownership, then giving players ways to leverage that ownership competitively shouldn’t be taboo. Illuvium is getting in it's own way with it's current approach imo

[edgy lark]

yea I thought it was more about que times/player base issue. Ideal world leviathan would be my pick, but just the middle ground / more realistic i think survival could be great, as much as it was pve it always felt like a pvp game with the leaderboards

[dusky gorge]

Soooo... why is there no in client Poker style buy in Levi or Gauntlet tourneys? Players buy in X amount, Illuvium takes their cut and we all live happily ever after?

[summer jetty]

Isn't the MMO going to be the PvE playground for ownership though? If so where does survival leviathan fit into the mix?

[edgy lark]

I guess it would be for right now. Even for the MMO we don't know how ownership will play out and still a long way out from release

[fiery coral]

Legal :(

[sly abyss]

Could have been 0% start vest into 100% after 1 month tbh. Either way, this is the right overall approach for sure.

[sly abyss]

No longer a barrier really, I'd like to see Illuvium actively working towards this ASAP tbh.

[fiery coral]

Why is it not anymore?

[sly abyss]

Illuvium stopped pursuing VARA due to ongoing difficulties, this was the blocker since Dubai is very clear about anti-gambling laws.

Rn Illuvium isn't really 'based' anywhere I don't think. @vapid badge can correct me if I'm wrong.

[fiery coral]

It was a legal problem even before illuvium went to dubai and was following vara from what i remember

But i could be wrong, its been a while

[sly abyss]

Before the DAO was 'established' it could definitely lead to Aus exposure given the founders' homebase.

But now the DAO can't come under near as much scrutiny, from a time perspective, how deep they delved into VARA to further decentralise and so on.

But it would become easier if they base the DAO in caman islands or one of them.

[dusky gorge]

If Illuvium wants to make money this is a good way to do it

Players love a good poker style format

[fiery coral]

Checked with IMC and still as much an issue

A 3rd party could do it

[dusky gorge]

That’s one of the biggest challenges imo. User experience is crucial to success. And having users need multiple windows open and separate systems in order to make things work is no bueno.

Having in client tourneys with buy in option makes it simple and easy for the user. Otherwise, I’m afraid won’t gain the traction that it needs.

Unless someone can develop a plugin for arena that users install to modify the game client… but there’s a lot of risk in that.

Crazy they can’t work out legality of wagering.

[fiery coral]

They could work it out in theory, its just that it falls under gambling so we would need a gambling license but then that would ban illuvium from certain countries, make us go out of epic game, wont be able to ever be on steam etc so its just not worth doing for illuvium

Agree that its less appealing if its a 3rd party but i still think it would be amazing. I wonder if its as "risky" for the 3rd party though or because its not their game they are fine

[summer jetty]

What happened to those ETHlizard guys. Surprised they wouldn't jump at the chance to build such a thing

[fiery coral]

pretty much dead

[normal prism]

deadlizard

[summer jetty]

https://tenor.com/view/not-undecided-cringe-eeeekkkk-oh-nooo-gif-9556280905605722659

[sly abyss]

I have laid off it, since Lizard Labs was doing it. But that's no longer an option and this is still critical imo.

[sly abyss]

Yeah the difficulties around Epic Games and Steam defs makes shit difficult.

Could go the Hearthstone/Pokemon Route where a 3rd party builds an automated tournament platform with entry fees etc.

We have the APIs and things clearly working well now, just need maybe Rich to integrate it.

[dusky gorge]

There's also zkEVM and maybe other migrations... so now prob not the best time for externals to build out until future path is made public

And anyone who decides to try and build out a 3rd party wagering platform will also have to do their own due diligence about local laws yk yk

[sly abyss]

Thats the worst part. A third party theoretically needs to get their own gambling license etc, otherwise I'd honestly do it myself.

[summer jetty]

If labs came out and said we want to do more with ownership, gambling ect but it means taking the game off epic and no steam.

I'd support it.

[sly abyss]

Nah we kinda need steam. Its actually quite the edge against TFT tbh.

Idk any Riot fanboy who wouldnt rather have their games on their Steam Library

[summer jetty]

There are many dead/failed games on steam already. I'd be cautious about thinking illuvium on steam is going to change anything for the better. In fact I'd argue it would hurt innovations like ownership and real risk based gameplay.

[dusky gorge]

The slow march has been towards web2 not the other way around. The goal I assume is to make the game as accessible as possible so if it catches fire there is easy onboarding. Nfts, ownership, gambling, asset management are all challenges to the average casual gamer. So I can also see the hesitation from that perspective.

Nevertheless... would be very cool to have buy in lobbies in the game client in an 'adults only' section.

[normal prism]

the past 4 years have proven that gamers dont give a fck if you offer ownership.
gamers just want to play games

and phantom liberty is a great DLC

[sly abyss]

Steam is a marketing tool for new game launches. Its clear that even paying timthetatman and shroud 5 billion dollars doesnt matter without a good game. Point is that there's a graveyard anywhere if the game doesnt have that spark. Illuvium shouldnt go to steam until its ready, and you are right that wagering could bring that 'spark' as well.

[dusky gorge]

i perfer the casual jag over the pc jag

[normal prism]

casual jag cant afford crypto price tag

[proper walrus]

Not true at all, it just shows there is not a single "ownership" game worth playing. Both things are very different

[summer jetty]

The issue with this is that I don’t think it’s going to work. Even as far back as 2021 I said that if Illuvium tries to appeal to everyone, it risks appealing to no one.

The best games start with a clear vision and stick to it. Illuvium, on the other hand, seems to chase every new bs trend. Land, pfps, AI, airdrops, rewards, the MMO it never ends. Always hoping that this time will be the silver bullet. But of course, it never is and it never will be.

[summer jetty]

Players don’t care about ownership any more than they care about any other backend tech. What matters is what it does for them. Status, freedom, permanence, identity. Ownership isn’t the selling point, it’s what allows features they do care about to be possible.

[normal prism]

live-service games make up the majority of gaming industry. how is "ownership" in fortnite, genshin, WoW, destiny

pubg, LoL, CoD, GTA

[normal prism]

for me, ownership is just a nice-to-have feature. FIFA is prob the longest franchise ever, and people are still re-spending every fckin year lmao

didnt stop millions of people buying the same sht every year

[dusky gorge]

Nice thing is that arena is fun to play now… it’s an objectively good game. But who knows if it will catch a fiyah

[summer jetty]

These studios have been studying player psychology for decades. They don’t care what their fans say, only what they respond to. That’s why they keep winning.

If Illuvium did the same, it would stop chasing Web2 approval and go all in on Web3. Leviathan only, real stakes, real money on the line. Be unapologetic in it's vision and double down on those we know will spend.

That, or we just keep giving away money to the top 5% of F2P players through the IPL and rewards, then keep scratching our heads wondering why Illuvium still can’t break 1k players. 🤷‍♂️

[normal prism]

they keep winning because they have monopoly in licensing

and the game is good

[summer jetty]

FIFA’s the exception, not the rule. Plenty of games make billions without licenses. It’s not about branding, it’s about knowing how to push the right psychological buttons.

I’ve spent $30 on a good game and over $1k on a good game. The difference was the latter knew how to extract from me.

[proper walrus]

You just described well polished, very addictive and fun games to play. It has nothing to do with ownership. Do 1:1 copy of wow but with ownership and we will have more than 500 players trust me

[normal prism]

blizzard had a run with RMAH in diablo 3, they shut it down because it ruined the game

[umbral quiver]

wasn't the problematic there that people were forced to run to the AH because the loot distribution was totally random?
Like the systematic was more like get some rare drop and sell it to get money to buy the rare drop you want.
Probably shut it down because they had 1 chance to save the game and rather not experiment with it further but go back to the roots that worked.

[normal prism]

When we initially designed and implemented the auction houses, the driving goal was to provide a convenient and secure system for trades. But as we’ve mentioned on different occasions, it became increasingly clear that despite the benefits of the AH system and the fact that many players around the world use it, it ultimately undermines Diablo’s core game play: kill monsters to get cool loot. With that in mind, we want to let everyone know that we’ve decided to remove the gold and real-money auction house system from Diablo III.

[umbral quiver]

which is ultimately linked to the bad loot system they updated if i remember right in the same patch where they removed the RMAH

[normal prism]

i quit before that happened. i spent like $100 and and i refused to spend more. anyway blizz tried it and gave up.

[proper walrus]

That's not what happened at all. Blizzard ruined the game, not the rmah lol. They put it away because of whiny crybabies who were spamming it's making the game p2w. But it's a single player game, there is nothing to 'win', no pvp either.

Gaming has also changed alot since then. P2w is much more accepted these days, in various formats.

It was quite successful before they shut it down, despite what you read in articles nowadays.

[summer jetty]

P2W is just outsourcing time/effort. The item still had to be found or crafted by someone. You’re simply paying them for their time instead of spending your own.

I don’t care if you bought your max stat Rhamphyre or not, someone still put in the work to acquire it and got rewarded for their effort. That’s a healthier ecosystem than pure extraction like we have rn.

[foggy bluff]

It’s a meme coin now

[normal prism]

https://tenor.com/view/a23-gif-10433102321146277054

[sour wraith]

Failed, spend 1.2m on battle in the beyond just to please illuvium, a platform no ethlizard holder cared about, along with some other failed products.

https://x.com/Eliph_Liz/status/1980650553450340574?s=19 starting a takeover now

Trying to convert a bunch of degens into gamers was a bad idea

Eliph ❤️ $Liz 🦎 (@Eliph_Liz)

Ethlizards TAKEOVER ALERT!

This community has been fucked over again and again due to no passion or no web3 knowledge from previous teams (the OG team and the 2 @KieranWarwick put in charge after) which managed to lobotomize one of the best web3 degen communities.

Time to save

X · Oct 21, 2025, 3:01 PM

[sly abyss]

I'd agree but disagree. I'd say they pivoted way too frequently, however I'd say the MMO is a return to the original vision, less of a pivot.

[foggy bluff]

Ascendant Arena Leviathan 😮‍💨 Start S1 as Survival PVE to find balance/refine rewards etc. @summer jetty @dusky gorge

[normal prism]

CTO?
money is drained, gone

but yea u gotta kick the drainers out

[sour wraith]

The portfolio money is still there, that couldn't be touched without votes unlike the separate dao (lizard labs) that was created after the raise, right now it's around 500k worth I think probably a lot less after most worthless tokens unlock, but even 200k would be good for some fun

[sour wraith]

Be careful they still have the rules against shit talking that were recently created, gonna delete all of these when we take over

[sly abyss]

Really? Thats not very degen, those rules are anti degen

[sour wraith]

That's why they need to go, free shit talking must be enforced

[normal prism]

valvle just ruined cs skin market with one update. This is why

[fiery coral]

What did they do? im curious as i used to invest/trade a lot in cs 5-10 years ago

[umbral quiver]

simply said

i guess people burned those low value skins immediatly (might even bought additional low value skins) so they can possibly sell high value knives before their prices acommodate to the new economy.

[fiery coral]

Price of the rest go up but best items got rekt hard, higher end investors and collectors got rekt

[slender pike]

economie system are sensitive to little change

[proper walrus]

What has that to do with what I said? 🤔 if anything it supports it, since it's valve who screwed things again, other than that it actually proves my point about ownership

[normal prism]

so two of the biggest gaming studios screwed it up but web3 studio gonna get it right. 😏

It proves that gaming shouldnt be mixed with real money trading

valve doesnt support ownership ur only allowed to trade for steam cash to buy other steam stuff

[fiery coral]

still lots of ways you can cash out, people do it via marketplace or theres apps for it in china

valve doesnt directly support ownership but they dont enforce against it because otherwise they wouldnt make that amount of money on trading fees and crates

[normal prism]

still no ownership. Enforcement has nothing to do with EULA

[proper walrus]

No idea what you are talking about Jagins, you can sell cs skins even for crypto like btc, eth etc. It's just this recent change which Valve did that sucks

[normal prism]

Steam does not allow you to sell or transfer those licensed items for real money or via mechanisms outside of the Steam-approved marketplace/trading system. It's in their EULA that you have agreed upon.
You are breaking this agreement by selling or buying with crypto etc. do you understand?

for example, you are not allowed to jaywalk, but hey u can still do it and you probably get away with it, doesnt mean you didnt break the law.

now crypto gaming like ILV, allows the licensed items (note that you do not own the copyrights) to be bought or sold with real money like eth, usdc etc.
huge difference

[proper walrus]

What's the huge difference if the end goal is the same? No one was punished for doing that, people are trading their stuff freely. And it's a blooming economy around this trading. So what are you saying here exactly?

[normal prism]

im saying you need to learn the difference

[proper walrus]

What difference? You gave cs and valve as an example of why gamers don't care for ownership, and I explained you why that's total bs

[normal prism]

people are still playing diablo even after they removed the rmah and im sure people will still play cs even if valve make skin non transferable.
because these games are good, players will play them even if they dnt offer ownership

[normal prism]

i also gave you a list of the most popular games which doesnt even have 3rd party marketplace like cs does

[proper walrus]

You are changing what we are talking about, you used cs and valve and an example of why gamers are not interested in ownership. I said this is simply not true.

Are there more people who want to just play games than those who care for ownership? Sure, not many have tried to go that route. But it doesn't mean gamers don't care for ownership, your own examples contradict that sentence

[normal prism]

nasty how many times i have to tell you that none of these games offer ownership

Gamers play games because the games are good. Counter strike was the most popular pc games before they have skins.

skins were added 13 years after the game was released

did you play CS when it was released? I did. Did we even ask for skins?

so tell me why people keep playing CS for 13 years when you u dnt even have skins and there were many other shooter games?

[proper walrus]

What are you arguing here Jaga, I don't understand. Yes the main factor is the game being fun, I've always said that. But when you said gamers don't care for ownership, and try to apply it to everyone, it is just not true, even based on your own examples

[normal prism]

👍

[fair slate]

Easy - core loop + truely competitive ranked scene. (I started cs1.6 through css + csgo)

[umbral quiver]

everything after 1.5 was shit