My request is not because I’ve ignored your messages in the multiple topics you have on the forum, but because this is the thread of your UCG application, and every conversation regarding your continuation in the program, including your reports and progress, must be posted here.
We will use this drive to evaluate your last 3 months of updates within the program since that is what you provided us.
Sorry for the outburst then. We hope for sincere interactions from everyone.
Hi @SFY_Labs
This is a friendly reminder that your final report for the first UCG period is due on October 18th. Please note that this report will be a key factor in the evaluation of your request for a second UCG period, should you choose to apply.
If you have any questions, feel free to reach out.
hi @Mouthmouth68 ,
If i am not mistaken (open to correction), all original deliverables are delivered for UCG period 1.
Sfy have also been busy establishing a relationship and creating a joint proposal strategy with NFT Bridges. This is two current UCG projects teaming together , and if Aradia NFT marketplace get accepted that will more than likely turn to 3 UCG projects collaborating - a massive success for the initiative.
Hi guys,
Sorry for replying only now — over the past two days we’ve been finishing our move to the new office, and it’s been quite busy.
Exactly as Dumbell said, but if you want, we can rewrite everything here point by point.
———————————————————————————————————-
Regarding the final report: Dapp staking is definitely a helpful tool, but unfortunately it’s not enough on its own to fund the entire game. However, together with the team we’re planning a major marketing initiative for the new dapp staking period, with significant rewards that we want to unlock automatically for all stakers.
We already have several million ASTR more than those from the UCG, but the visibility campaign we’re about to launch will probably be even more decisive.
We officially request the renewal of our spot for another 4 months. I hope it’s clear to everyone how much effort the team continues to put in. @Mouthmouth68 **
**
———————————————————————————————————–
On the community side, we have a solid plan. If it were also supported by the treasury proposal, we’d be a team capable of working at 100% alongside the community council and organizing weekly events for a long period.
I believe Astar should seize this opportunity — the community, through the referendum vote, has clearly expressed its support. So once again, exactly three months after our first request, after continuous proposals, revisions based on your feedback, and collaborations with other teams ready to start, we ask the community council to support us.
The ongoing lack of response on the treasury support, despite the time that has passed and the approaching UCG expiration, we hope is just a coincidence — and that the UCG renewal won’t be used as a substitute for the external support we’ve requested.
We are determined, and our game — in the month following its launch on Moonbeam — achieved numbers not lower than the zombie game launched (and, I believe, funded) on Soneium.
Perhaps fewer users (given a smaller base), but the same total number of transactions.
Give us the chance to keep working. Few are doing it; we are among the few — please give us this opportunity. We’ve earned it.
P.S. If any member of the council would like to have a clarifying call with us, we’re fully available. I believe there are also some Italian members. Thank you.
As a requirement for all UCG-supported dApps, a detailed final report must be submitted at the end of each UCG period. This report should comprehensively summarize the achievements and milestones reached, clearly outline your current work, and provide a thorough plan and roadmap for the upcoming UCG period. Please ensure the report is detailed and substantive
While this may seem routine or unnecessary, it is essential information for the community and ACC. It enables them to effectively monitor project progress and establish fair, realistic checkpoints to determine whether a project qualifies for continued participation in the UCG program.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
JULY:
Deployment of 4 Parent NFT smart contracts for the 4 main game characters on the Astar network with RMRK standards.
Deployment of 16 Children NFT smart contracts for the equippable slots of the 4 main game characters on the Astar network with RMRK standards.
Creation of new graphic assets for Astar:
New environment for the entire basic 3D dungeon structure.
New 3D graphic assets to be used for in-game items for the first levels and creation of the relative 2D icons for the game menu.
AUGUST:
Design and conception of the new game menus to be able to switch between different networks.
Design and conception of an in-game minting system in addition to the one on the main website (a request from several users during the first development phase on Moonbeam).
Creation of a simplified import system for adding new levels without modifying the main code; the dungeons will basically be JSON files that can be converted to CSV via the developer’s build tool and modified by game designers to quickly create new levels.
SEPTEMBER:
Creation of the project folder and division of all graphic assets on Filebase for their use via IPFS.
Deployment of the Manager Contract for handling on-chain missions and leveling within the game with RMRK standards.
Creation of new graphic assets for Astar:
New environment for the entire basic 3D dungeon structure, import, optimization, and addition of effects via Unity WebGL.
OCTOBER:
Testing new levels in the developer build model
Creating a reward system for the new dapp staking cycle
Technical calls with the NFT Bridge team to design a cross-chain system within the game.
Here are all the details.
Again, we ask you not to ignore our team regarding the request for treasury support.
We officially request the renewal of our spot for another 4 months. I hope it’s clear to everyone how much effort the team continues to put in.
Have a good day all.
Hello @SFY_Labs,
The Community Council has already begun evaluating your request for UCG slot renewal. From my side, I have several questions:
Over the past few months, you’ve deployed NFT assets on Astar Network using the RMRK standard. Where are the links to those transactions?
As of now, the game is still only on Moonbeam. How can we evaluate the graphics you created for Astar? The assets in the Drive can’t be opened, so we’re unable to review them.
Hi @Juminstock,
Thank you for taking the time to share these questions — we really appreciate the careful review and want to make sure everything is clear. Let me go through each point:
Updates since July
The Drive folder contains the core deliverables we outlined in the proposal (assets, contracts, build materials). While the modification dates show July, this reflects the initial uploads. For clarity, all the relevant files are there and correspond to the work committed during this period.
Game access
Thanks for flagging the login issue. Can you try Incognito mode on your browser and see if this works?
In the meantime, we can provide support so you’re able to log in and experience the game logic directly.
On-chain transactions
We’ve deployed 4 Parent NFT smart contracts for the main characters on Astar using RMRK standards, along with 16 Children NFT contracts for equippable slots.
Game build and assets
At present, the live build is on Moonbeam. The graphics and assets for Astar are in the shared folder, but some (such as .glb files) require a viewer to open.
gltf-viewer.donmccurdy.com
To make things easier, we’ll also provide screenshots and previews of the models so they’re readily accessible.
Other contracts
The additional contracts mentioned have been deployed, and we’ll provide the links so you can easily verify them.
————————————————————————————————————————
Parent Contracts - Total: 4
Ready for the Mint. Contract on pause right now.
Ryker Blade: Subscan | Astar Account Details
Luna Stronghold: Subscan | Astar Account Details
Aria Zephirion: Subscan | Astar Account Details
Thaddeus Luckstride: Subscan | Astar Account Details
CATALOG for Equippable parts - Total 4
Catalog for the use of the RMRK protocol, they are used to subsequently add the item collections to the main characters
Catalog CatalogAria deployed to: 0x0716cCCAdEF170C8235FE8642a8048ecA3D5092a
Catalog CatalogLuna deployed to: 0x198a67C9BF601faA889480EB40288F9EF03aa95B
Catalog CatalogRyker deployed to: 0x1aE09336Bf3b432ecF11A1a8Be494f53DC0Fbf8E
Catalog CatalogThaddeus deployed to: 0xbC29913e098629701d0F41ebc74e01A9F1721f27
I can’t copy all the file here, but please we have added also the README file in each folder, follow the instruction.
We hope you understand what it means to make a game from scratch where every single asset is created by us and not use templates or assets downloaded from third-party marketplaces that we don’t even own the rights to use.
We hope this clears up the questions and are happy to provide further details if anything else is needed. Thank you again for the guidance and ongoing support.
Best regards,
SFY Labs
@SFY_Labs I appreciate the level of detail in your message, this is exactly what we need within the Astar Community Council and community in general to evaluate your work. Thank you!
On the other hand, I believe there has been a misunderstanding from the beginning regarding your project’s participation in the UCG program. Allow me to explain a bit:
The Unstoppable Community Grant (UCG) is a Staking Grant awarded to projects that are in an early stage and seeking financial support during this initial phase. The goal is to provide features or functionalities that increase the value of Astar or ASTR and strengthen the relationship between your project and the Astar community, which will be evaluating your progress.
This program REQUIRES a monthly report for every month you are part of the program (currently 4 months). So far, you have only submitted one report last month, and this one, which serves as your final report.
You can read more about this in our official documentation: Astar Unstoppable Community Grant Program | Welcome to Astar.
Now, this was your proposal when you joined the UCG program 
Based on this, the UCG funds should have been used for the purposes stated there. Could you please send us a justification for these expenses?
You are absolutely right that building a fully onchain game from scratch is extremely challenging and requires a solid funding base at the start of development. However, this was the UCG proposal that was approved for your participation.
The UCG program should not be related to your direct grant request, that is a different matter and should be discussed in another thread. Here, I am only evaluating the results you delivered during your participation in the UCG program. The issue seems to be that both topics got mixed up, which was an error on both sides.
Everything you are delivering here is the same as what you are requesting through the direct grant from the Main Council and the Community Council.
hi @Juminstock
Thanks for the detailed clarification and for laying out the expectations so clearly — this really helps ensure everyone is aligned.
Having worked with both @SFY_Labs and @ilan offline over the last few weeks/months, I wanted to share some context from behind the scenes.
This program REQUIRES a monthly report for every month you are part of the program (currently 4 months). So far, you have only submitted one report last month, and this one, which serves as your final report.
I’ve looked through other UCG threads to see what “acceptable” updates usually look like, and to be honest, the update from SFY here is significantly more detailed than many examples I could find (example screenshot below). Sometimes quality and depth can matter more than frequency. Otherwise, there’s a risk of teams spreading things out or slowing progress just to meet reporting requirements, which doesn’t necessarily create the best outcomes.
Example Screenshot:
It’s also worth noting that every milestone SFY Labs committed to prior to UCG acceptance has been completed. On top of this, there’s been a lot of behind-the-scenes alignment work with NFT Bridges — calls, strategy sessions, proposal shaping. For two teams that had never worked together before, achieving that level of collaboration has taken real effort and has resulted in a genuinely innovative treasury proposal. While not strictly “UCG deliverables,” it has added real value to the ecosystem.
Based on this, the UCG funds should have been used for the purposes stated there. Could you please send us a justification for these expenses?
The UCG program should not be related to your direct grant request, that is a different matter and should be discussed in another thread. Here, I am only evaluating the results you delivered during your participation in the UCG program. The issue seems to be that both topics got mixed up, which was an error on both sides.
I do understand your point about separating the UCG and Treasury matters. At the same time, this is a fairly unique situation where the two are interlinked. The UCG support allowed SFY to reach the point of partnering with NFT Bridges, and the direction of UCG usage naturally evolves if the Treasury proposal is accepted. In my view, that’s a positive — showing the ability to pivot when a stronger path emerges.
SFY also made it clear in their original post that, if the Treasury grant were to be accepted, UCG funds would then be redirected to cover server costs and other core game expenses — which, again, enriches the project and strengthens its sustainability.
So while I appreciate the concern around reporting and separation of topics, I hope you and @Community_Council can take this unique context into account. This is not a case of neglect, but rather of a team delivering on its initial commitments while also adapting to build something larger in collaboration with others.
Just my perspective, but I felt it important to share.
Thanks
Exactly, @Dumbell has explain all from our point of view!
Please extend our ucg program @Community_Council
Hi @Dumbell, I always appreciate your participation in this discussion and for sharing these details. Let’s continue the conversation.
You’re absolutely right, we haven’t been rigorous enough in requesting reports from the projects that are part of the UCG program, and we will definitely start improving this area.
I’m 100% aligned with you on this point. The result itself is proof of the work that’s been done.
However, this is a UCG rule that was communicated from the very beginning, and the SFY Labs team agreed to follow it, unfortunately, that wasn’t the case. That said, it’s not a major issue at this point; they’ve now presented a good, detailed report, which deserves recognition.
Here’s where my main concern lies: the SFY Labs team requested a direct grant from the Main Treasury for the milestones you mentioned, and that’s still under discussion. The UCG program funds were requested for the following purposes:
Now, my questions are:
Although I recognize and appreciate the effort behind what SFY Labs x NFT Bridges are proposing, that work isn’t relevant to this UCG evaluation, simply because they haven’t delivered anything jointly (yet), nor was it part of the original proposal.
IMPORTANT:
This is not a personal attack, nor an excuse against SFY Labs, I want to make that clear from the start. I’m simply evaluating what the SFY Labs team has accomplished during their four-month participation in the UCG program. My only intention is to assess their performance.
And no, this Drive folder is not a valid justification for that question: Age Of Chronos - ASTAR - Google Drive
This Drive folder contains SFY Labs’ work for Milestone 1 of their direct grant proposal. That work will be rewarded if the Main Council or a public referendum approves it, but the UCG funds were requested to cover other costs like the ones mentioned above.
Lastly, I’m requesting this information to share it with the rest of the Community Council members so they can also conduct their evaluations, since, as you know, we are a team of six.
Perhaps we didn’t explain ourselves well.
From the beginning, we said that the UCG resources would be invested in marketing, ThirdWeb costs, Paymaster to make the game free to play, and other expenses such as event promotion, if—and I repeat, if—the grant was approved.
Since that wasn’t the case, we used these resources to pay for what we presented, albeit a small portion (10%).
If the grant isn’t granted (but it seems the Main Council is perhaps available, according to Gaius’s final words), we’ll continue on this path, even though production times will obviously be much longer.
If we’re funded through milestones and grants, we’ll use UCG resources to cover these expenses.
Currently, the monthly cost of servers and ThirdWeb on Moonbeam exceeds $600 anyway.
I hope we’ll understand each other on this point this time. We’ve specified this several times in AOC’s presentation post; if you check, we’ve given the exact two options.
With the grant activated, we’ll switch resources.
The grant will enable development, and UCG will enable community action.
I think it’s all very logical and, above all, honest, given what has been produced and what is expected to be produced.
hi @Juminstock ,
Happy to have a constructive conversation with you!
Some of the UCG conversation spilled over into the original grant request thread linked below
This last post on June 13th has all agreed milestones and scenarious clearly written with the details actually:
@Juminstock
The UCG funds were removed from our dapp without even waiting for the final build and earn period—there were 15 days left.
We expected a reconfirmation in time before the deadline, since we responded a few days ago, but that didn’t happen. In fact, the funds were removed without even notifying us.
@Dumbell @SFY_Labs,
Thanks to both of you for answering all my questions, I think we’re now fully aligned on these points.
SFY Labs, just to clarify and as my final question: if the direct grant is not approved, but the Community Council approves the renewal of your slot in the UCG Program, would we be able to count on a usable game by the end of this next UCG period (within 4 months)?
I know this program provides fewer funds than what you requested through the direct grant, but it still represents income that should be used for the game’s development.
If that’s the case, I’ll be happy to support your renewal.
Regarding this, your first round in the UCG program successfully ended on October 18, completing exactly 4 months in the program.
I don’t understand why you’re relating this to the end of the current Build & Earn period, since your slot has already expired. That’s not how it works.
The ACC is currently discussing the renewal of your UCG slot, and we’re committed to giving you a response before the end of this week.
Hi @Juminstock,
Thank you for the clarification and for asking directly.
We’ll do everything we’ve written to do.
That remains fully in line with the milestones and commitments we’ve already shared.
Of course, the scale of what can be achieved depends on the level of support available. While the UCG funding on its own is more limited compared to the direct grant request, it still allows us to keep development moving forward at a steady pace. With additional support unlocked through the grant, we’d be able to accelerate significantly and expand functionality — but either way, we’re committed to delivering.
We’ve invested ourselves deeply into this project from the beginning and will continue to do so. Our goal has always been to make sure the community sees tangible progress and has a playable experience on Astar as soon as possible.
Thanks again for your engagement and guidance — we look forward to showing you concrete results in the next phase.
@SFY_Labs I really appreciate your response.
As I mentioned, the ACC is committed to providing you with an answer to your UCG slot renewal request this week.
Ok we will wait you….
