Is rewarding every move a sustainable model for a chess token? Let’s dissect the economics

[офк]

Honestly, getting paid for every single move sounds like a massive inflation bomb waiting to happen. How is the token supposed to hold any value when the supply is getting diluted that fast? I want to see the math on the burn mechanisms vs. emission rates.

 

[SeiroS]

I think rewarding every move is a great way to incentivize players and create a loyal community, but like any sustainable model, it needs to be carefully balanced with the cost of emissions or whatever the token burns for each move. I'd be curious to see some numbers crunched on the current burn rate and how it scales as the token gains more traction.

 

[kochegar]

I'm not sure rewarding every move would be the best approach, it could get pretty expensive for the devs to keep up. Maybe a model where you get rewarded for specific achievements or milestones in the game would be more feasible. It'd also give players a sense of goal-oriented progression.

 

[pok65]

I think rewarding every move could lead to an inflation problem, where the supply of tokens grows too fast and loses value. If the token's primary use is for in-game transactions, maybe rewarding milestones or achievements would be a more sustainable model.

 

[anatoliidjalo]

I think rewarding every move is a slippery slope - it incentivizes superficial engagement, rather than meaningful long-term strategy which is where the real value in chess lies. What's to stop users from creating an algorithm that simulates moves and rakes in rewards, devaluing the token in the process?