Am sure other groups are interested in creating tools for CU as well. Let there be a competition of offered tools/services between these groups so that we can find the best one and also get the best price out of them all. It’s always best for CU and the community if there is competition for these type of services as your proposal looks very pricey to me especially when we don’t have anything to compare it to right now…
- These tools are useful
- These tools are not useful
I am interested to know more. I wrote some responses to your proposal below.
Can you respond to how your services would be different or better then existing services we currently have and expect to be live in game in the near future. As new features come into being as the roadmap unveils such as game loops and shadowcorns for example before the end of the year. Would we also be seeing additional proposals this year to include these functions to truly make Gamelabs a one stop destination for players. What addition cost might these additions have. Also since we are only able to use 9 lands in a wallet and many of us with larger or more complex accounts have had to split into many wallets. Would your services be able to cross reference or combine all of out CU accounts.
Point 1. Team has said they want us to explore the game and learn for ourselves. Community of course will make how to guides for free. Team provides us with updates and medium articles. Should CU not be where we check for game information,
Point 2. One of the main things we are supposed to learn and master ourselves is breeding.
Once again this is something the community will gather information and share for free. We have a breeding guide in white paper and a medium article explaining it
Point 3 Since Opensea is where we buy and sell Unicorns and Lands we can use the tools they already provide for free.
Milestone 1 is called Sire Feature which will be built in game. We will be able to see Genes in the Nursery.
Milestone 2 We have been told the point of the game is to explore and learn for ourselves the best ways to specialize. Otherwise team would give us a guide.
Milestone 3 Is the White Paper + Medium
Milestone 4 is called Opensea.
I love the interest your team has for Crypto Unicorns. While in discord the number 1 question I see is there a website I can see the rarity of my unicorns. For now we have Opensea which is not the best website for showing rarities. I have seen the cost to show rarity on a rarity website is 1 eth I believe.
I am trying to be a tough sale on purpose here. If you convince me of how your proposal will help the CU community I am sure you will convince the majority of the community. My main concern is not with the proposal but making sure then money from the treasury is spent in the best interest of the community, team, and investors. I also believe I have heard other companies are planning on writing proposals for making tools for users to access information in the game. I would be interested to hear their proposals as well before entering into a year long contract. Without playing the game I find it hard to know how helpful any of these tools will be. I do spend 17 hours in discord a day so I may have more information and know my way around the information that has been released by CU. Others may find the information easier in another format condensed. This is also something I expect to see in the future from CU once the game has been released. I would greatly rather rely on getting my CU game information directly from the team. This way information is as current and correct as possible. Thank you for your time reading and thank you for your responses to my questions. Sincerely Timetraveler
fair requirements. It is important to know the answers to these questions
This is insane amount of RBW. Yes they do build good tools in Axie but they have not proven their worth yet in CU. Prove to us your worth first in CU before asking for any RBW. My suggestion is modify your proposal and propose with Milestone 1 only. If everything looks good then make another proposal.
I gonna be simple, it seems too much money for tools that I had see being developed for free by the community on other projects. Of course, not with much details or being a pretty visual platform. Btw, I think these tools are useful, but I would like to wait the launch and see how the things will going to. We need to assess why do we need in the game and I don’t think we can already do this.
Wouldn’t community members make this tools themselves for free? But if this one goes through then RBW should be locked and released in a drip manner.
Seems like the equivalent of paying to get RBW listed on an exchange. If the game is good people will be incentivized to build tools anyway, paying for it through an ecosystem grant doesn’t make sense.
As a long time user of your Axie tools, I have big confidence that these features will dramastically help out new and current players. Although have you guys considered instead of tinder, something like “UniMatch” ? I feel like itd feel more friendly
This is a great idea. The project side has been working, very good
I disagree with the grant but I acknowledge the tools presented seem very useful in growing CU. However, if the CU developers feel the immediate need for these tools because the Discord community can’t properly disseminate the information, then it should have been developed with the game. Having said that, the convenience this proposal can bring is at least negligible at this stage and at the early stage of the game. Moreover, the truly die-hard and passionate CU members will definitely come up with similar tools to address whatever challenges they experience in the game. Such tools freely and organically developed should be the one to be supported and can be proposed to be given a grant if proven helpful and advantageous to the CU community.
I think that all of the above are useless products and functionality. The market value is easy to find out just by opening the activity on opensea. Calculators, too, that no one here knows how to count? Guide to the game, well, here, too, if you wish, I think anyone will figure it out.
Helping to summarize the points made in the replies above:
For the proposal:
- They are overall useful for the game
- They make information more available
- “Uni Tinder” sounds cool
Against the proposal:
- Similar functionalities in existing tools
- Community members develop these tools for free
- Game is too early for these tools
- They take a way the fun of exploration
I personally find the case against the proposal stronger, by a large margin.
Thank you for doing it. That gonna help user a lot.
Pretty much good UI, but weak usability.
milestone1 - 1st feature is the breeding planner in CU discord, also a breeding planner in moonstream discord, also Venticello made a telegram bot to calculate different types of breeding.
milestone 2 - most of such calculators, for example, on farm gameplays on WAX are made by players for free, easy to access and easy to calc
milestone 3 - wow millenials explored the whitepaper?
milestone 4 - in-game marketplace + opensea, not interesting
usually the guides are made for free by the players for the players
for example, wowhead.com for WoW
stop putting data into newbies mouths, otherwise they won’t be able to find the proper data themselves, we need to teach people to FIND information they need.
Adding to the point of “Community members develop these tools for free”.
I’m personally against granting RBW fund to proposal of community tool blueprints that are not built yet. Some reasons:
- We can’t meaningfully debate how useful the tool is, without speculating how it will be used
- We may need to ask for changes in the design as the game changes. I expect the process to come with friction.
I much prefer grant proposals which satisfy:
- The tool already makes an visible impact.
- The proposal only covers ~3 months worth of development; It’s OK to include a bigger blueprint, but each fund grant is for a shorter segment. Owners can submit more proposals in next phase of development.
- Include what exactly the $ will go to: hardware, cloud services, personal compensation, etc.
To be clear we are only talking non-essential community tools. I have volunteered time to build a tool, and I know many who spent more time helping out. I’ll speak for all of us that we do it for the better of the community. The model above expects developers to volunteer time before getting any fund. I think that’s reasonable. The fund is for the better of the community after all.
Given what you said, there also may be a conflict of interest here too. I assume that axielabs would have exclusive access to game mechanics data (actual code) before the entire community would. This gives your scholarship network an advantage with having access to CU team and data sets that the community might not be privy to.
In effect we are paying you to get info/access we don’t have so you can use for your own scholars while you develop the tools. This is one of the reasons I disagree with this proposal.
I agree with the majority.
This is a “nice to have” not a need. This would be better if built separately as a tool for some players who prefer easier and faster learning of the game (for those who are willing to pay/ instead of putting time and effort to gather free info). Your team asking for subscription would be a great form of income + curated courses and subscribers support.
This would create a general basis of strategy which somehow spoils the excitement of the breeding game. This could also be built for free by CU community’s content creators and could be brainstormed in one of discord channels. You could also be one of the content creators (if you are willing to share some game tips for our community).
You could also get RBW by playing and staking, let’s invest instead the Ecosystem Fund for some projects that could generate income for the project. End of the day, this is still a business that we want to be sustainable.
We should convince the community by showing estimated benefits for every cost.
For the CU community.
Focussing on areas that others have not yet pointed out I would like to add the following observations/query’s to help support this proposal:
- The milestones, are not milestones in the traditional sense, they are packages of work. If asking for grant funds up front, I would need to see milestones in the sense of outline time to deliver and payment tied to a release schedule tied to significant events (e.g. a 4-point scale of concept, MVP, Initial Capability, Final Product)
- I think the end products the milestones represent are of wildly varying utility to the community - I support in principle, the idea of the Uni Tinder tool but am not really excited by the other. As a result I wouldn’t support this proposal as I am not willing to have to chew through the other products to get the one I want - I would suggest breaking each milestone into its own smaller proposal and allowing the community to vote on the merits of each.
- I see no plan for the longer term ownership of the tool - I am far more likely to support proposals that indicate plans that turn the tools over for community for long term ownership.
With My Understanding
50000 RBW for initial cost of 4 milestone.
48000 vesting for 1 year with 4000 montly emission.
Total 98000 at current price $230300($2.35 current price)
I think it’s too early for tool on the game that will just launch on May 2.
I don’t really have the knowledge to check out what should be the right price for this type of tools.
I saw on your website that you offer pay per use/month on axie breed tool, I think this would be better as the user would know what is needed to get your services.