Sounds good to me. I will try some LP staking. I understand I may incur some impermeant loss. But it will be good for the games ecosystem to have a healthy liquidity pool. I think I will focus mainly staking my RBW but will be adding some to the liquidity pool as well. I like that it will all be done on vault page making it easy to keep track of all of my staked RBW. Excited for Weth/RBW as I see both having a good year.
6 Likes
I think its a great idea, but will be some drop for staking?
4 Likes
The yield is nice, but I agree with you. I feel like a lot of people staking for a year are actively invested in the game and playing/managing it. In game items make for nice motivating factors, even if it is berries or consumables needed to upgrade items/corns. I know I’d really like that 
5 Likes
Personally not interested in any LP staking where I have to lock up more than one type of asset/token as it never seems to reap rewards which outweigh the value that’s being locked up.
And as far as the leaderboards, it’s an insanely long amount of time that you need to be locking up large amounts of game assets to receive monthly rewards. This is obviously only to the benefit of RBW whales who have an excess supply of RBW (and wETH) to commit to LP staking, so it’s pointless for the majority of people intending to play this game.
7 Likes
Or a MATIC/RBW LP. I mean seriously, the game is built on Polygon 
4 Likes
@Bahis is correct, we do reward the top 2000 LP providers via the leaderboard program. In general LP staking is not for average players (given the risk of IL) who would be better suited simply staking RBW. It’s more for larger holders.
8 Likes
Single side RBW staking is a separate reward pool. LP rewards will not effect the APY on that other pool.
7 Likes
You basically hit the nail on the head. Most players should not be interested in LP staking given the increased risk. Larger holders will be incentivized to do so and they ultimately are the ones who can meaningfully increase liquidity.
The lockup is an important feature as it mitigates mercenary providers who will simply farm and dump. We’ve seen this happen time and time again with various defi projects. The lockup helps to mitigate and insure only committed LPs join the pool.
On your comment of MATIC vs wETH… which asset would you rather hold long term? For now I think the choice is wETH even though I’m a believer in Matic.
11 Likes
As my understadning, the motivation is good but it may mainly benefit to larger holders. It may not be able to draw attention of small holders like me.
4 Likes
And why was it decided to choose wETH pool and not USDC?
If I’m not mistaken in the discord, the majority voted for a stablecoin.
3 Likes
amazing very cool!!!
3 Likes
I think this is a good initiative that will provide stability to the project. However, I still don’t understand the difference compared to RBW staking. As an investor, why would I chose one or the other? I’m already invested and locked in RBW staking and probably will try some RBW/wETH LP, but just to be part of it and to help the ecosystem. Otherwise, I would just compound RBW staking. Thanks!
5 Likes
Pairing a volatile token against a stable one puts you at the highest level of risk for impermanent loss. When pairing two volatile tokens against each other this risk is somewhat mitigated. We felt the community that voted on Discord did not have the experience with providing liquidity to understand this very important distinction.
You can check out a bunch of feedback in dev-discussion from other community members supporting the wETH/RBW pairing over USDC and so we put forward a proposal that made the most sense for potential LP providers.
9 Likes
That what i wanted thank you so much.
3 Likes
I really like the way the project is developing!
4 Likes
Make it like yfi staking? The lp token will be the stakable or can be added to the rbw staking?
3 Likes
wow so nice! RBW will moon! keep it up!
2 Likes
so good i like unicorn
2 Likes
marvelous! rbw/eth LP is exactly what I was looking for!
3 Likes
LP needs to bear free losses, there are many uncontrollable factors of the currency price, and the list even needs a lot of money. The reward of the proposal is not proportional to the risk it bears, and it is not attractive enough. There should be additional rewards for 12 months of pledge! It should also be more lucrative than a single coin pledge
5 Likes