[Council Treasury Request] SFY Labs – Age of Chronos: Developing a Strategic Multichain NFT Game on Astar (Milestone 1 of 3)

Governance Community Council
21

Thanks for the clarification @FFR23
Furthermore, I’d like the MAIN Council members to share their thoughts on the above discussion. @Maarten @0xRamz @Shaun @Ivan @shaunpshaunp

Perhaps there’s someone who cares more about the community vote, which is already very low right now. The actions of a few could further undermine confidence in this network.

Remember that 93% and more voted for Sfy, and that several projects expressed their willingness to support it, including NFT Bridge, Astar Degens, Apexchimpz etc…… On the other hand, we have Dino and BLD’s votes, stop.

image
image624×593 35.5 KB

This is good publicity for Astar? Anyone who wants to develop on this network and for the community itself? I’ll let you decide.

22

I’m part of the Main Council, and our mandate is clear. Our role is not to overturn or reinterpret the outcome of community referendums. Going against the community outcome is not part of what the Main Council should do.

As @gaius_sama already explained earlier in this thread: “We will not reopen a Main Council vote on this proposal.” This statement reflects the governance structure we all agreed upon, and I also support it.

For these reasons, I’m against the proposed solution to turn the vote in favor of SFY Labs by using the Main Council authority. Solutions has been proposed before for the team to follow.

This has nothing to do with Dino or BLD voting ‘nay’ on this proposal. Focussing on those voted ‘nay’, for me is the wrong approach. Embrace those voted ‘aye’ and ensure you keep them behind you for any future referendums, my recommendation is to just build and try again later, showcasing the real potential.

1 Like
23

Thank you for your response. As mentioned earlier, we do not want to change the voting system. At this point, we are putting forward a new proposal, having revised our “go-to-market” plan, which was the only point of concern raised by the Main Council. We would like to remind you that this was the issue—not technical or community aspects.

We have shown a clear ability to sustain the project by outlining the expenses already covered and by building a structure that can continue to grow in a scalable way. There are also possible collaborations with other Astar projects that have expressed support several times. This should be taken into account, rather than saying that the proposals are the same or that nothing has changed. As @FFR23 pointed out, we have made enormous efforts.

Governance is not functioning properly. Maarten, you tried to address this, but it was not enough. What happened cannot be treated as if nothing occurred. The community has expressed its will clearly, yet that alone does not seem to be sufficient—it still requires the core team’s approval. We are also waiting for the opinion of the Community Council.

The game has also been proposed as a community product, meant to bring people together and help them discover Astar. Could we discuss this aspect? We suggest a new proposal with a new voting method through the Community Council, taking into account the results of the last vote. With such low turnout, it is impossible to bring about change in the current system.

SFY cannot work for months without compensation on new milestones while simply hoping that Dino’s opinion will change in the future. Instead, we believe the core team should adopt the same voting method you used. The community is almost no longer present. Do we want to listen to their voice, or do we want to keep pretending nothing is happening?

Our goal is to bring innovation and to collaborate also with agents in marketing. The game is a complete 360-degree tool

24

If i can get a reply on this from someone i’ll be able to get closure from this thread

Today was a BIG learning day when it comes to governance on Astar.

Glad the core team could clear it up but unfortunate this was made public after advising Sfy to go down this route. (Almost moving the goalposts to be honest - this should have been made clear beforehand)

Sfy knew the reality of the community vote situation but chose to have faith in the process.

@Maarten i really do hope that @SFY_Labs take your advice below and prove the haters wrong.

They increased their supporters massively between vote 1 and vote 2.

Embrace those voted ‘aye’ and ensure you keep them behind you for any future referendums, my recommendation is to just build and try again later, showcasing the real potential.

I know for a fact that teams have expressed an interest in migrating an NFT collection to Astar for the sole purpose of having utility in this game.

Soneium have reached out for collaborations, and 70M aye votes from the community.

But 1 or 2 people have decided to try and stop this with their combined 600k Astar bag.

EDIT: why can’t we lower the super majority needed until the turnout issue is fixed? 95% is way too high that 600k Astar at high conviction can have such an impact

1 Like
25

In the meantime, while we’re discussing marginal matters about small grants, SFY is once again being recognized as a serious builder by the Polkadot community. The Kusamarian has followed the development of AOC since the early stages — they tested the game and, as you can see from their videos, they’ve always been very positive about it.
:link: https://x.com/TheKusamarian/status/1965203541720473606

The next video might cover the outcome of the concluded referendum — and it won’t be a good look for Astar.

You won’t be able to talk about the fairness of the vote with any developer observing from the outside — all you’ll be able to do is highlight the gaps in terms of active community numbers.

Across the entire Dot ecosystem — excluding games promoted on Myth — AOC is practically the only serious project still standing, along with a few others.

AOC is the perfect example of grassroots development: low investment, high potential for return in terms of benefits and visibility.

In the broader discussion about the game, the narrative that it’s irrelevant or poorly made has passed too easily — driven by just a few voices clearly in strong opposition to the team.

It’s disappointing that we haven’t had a single external voice truly focused on the technical side, able to validate what the game already is today. Everything is available: public code, deployed contracts, and verified on-chain stats on Moonbeam.

As things stand, and sticking to the current funding request, the total amount asked by SFY is probably what Astar uses to pay 4-5 ambassadors in a year. A truly negligible sum — and clearly, a grant that’s been blocked for reasons entirely unrelated to its actual merit. Reasons we had supposedly agreed to move past — but clearly, that hasn’t been the case.

This is truly disheartening — because our team has worked hard, and we’re not asking for a grant while presenting ourselves as a AAA game studio. If that were the case, we’d be talking about millions — not $10,000 per milestone.

Our work could even help others reach that level more easily. This is the right MVP for that — the perfect tool to kickstart marketing around gamification: a real Web3 game, prioritizing both tokens and NFTs, with a merit-based rewards system.

There isn’t much left to discuss — it’s clear that the hate and resentment toward us have deeper roots. It’s frustrating to see no accountability for those who should be ensuring fairness and supporting the growth of the network.

As Peter Parker’s uncle once said:

“With great power comes great responsibility.”

We’ve genuinely appreciated your attitude, Maarten. As a team, we’re motivated to create something that could completely change your opinion of us — but you can’t keep advising us to follow the same broken path.

The voting system doesn’t work — and it never will. This is mathematically certain.

I’m confident that if the same vote had taken place two years ago, when the developer ecosystem and community were much more active, no one would have dared to take a stance like the one seen in the recent Nay votes. They would have been harshly criticized.

So now we wait for a decision from the Community Council. Let’s set aside the Main Council for now.
With a new proposal, is it possible to go through this route?

Are there any technical, ethical, or community-related differences with our proposal?

The ease with which funds are distributed in other cases is astonishing — and to be clear, we’re not criticizing any project — we’re simply pointing out the incredibly low friction others seem to face.

SFY has faced problems since DApp Staking v2 on Astar — and to this day, we’re still struggling. Even though we’re still active, producing, and delivering 1/3 of the game through milestones, we always seem to be in the wrong.

We’ve worked really hard to improve our standing in other communities and have been proactively seeking collaborations.

We’re proposing to the community council to use our game for a gaming event to attract new developers to Astar. It would be great if someone would take up the task; we’d be happy to help.

How is that a negative thing? How is that not deserving of a different kind of attention?

26

Maybe @Mouthmouth68 @Juminstock or other from community council can answer?

27

Hello @SFY_Labs,

I just read the conversation that has taken place in this thread and I noticed that you mention the Community Council multiple times but I don’t understand what you expect from us. Could you create a message summarizing what you’re seeking from our side?

On the other hand, I want to let you know in advance that as Community Council our main focus is the community, the projects that are currently part of dApp Staking and the Agents of our ecosystem. Any request from you that differs from this focus will simply be omitted.

Having this very much in mind, I’m willing to listen to you.

cc @Community_Council

28

Thank you @Juminstock , I’ll summarize for you.

We’ve noticed that the community council can vote on treasury funding, as was done for funded events in South America.

The AoC game is currently experiencing a very serious support problem due to a governance lack, and I think you noticed the last vote and have an idea of ​​what’s happening.

Maarten tried to use his vote to prevent this, but it wasn’t enough. For us, this is a very serious issue, as the community has clearly expressed support.

Since no one has come up with a solution between the adamant opinions of two totally opposed people and the will of the only currently truly active community, we’re considering other ways to circumvent flawed governance.

Our first idea was to try with the main council. Despite a new proposal and a clear response to the main council’s requests regarding go-to-market and the game’s long-term sustainability, the main council responded through Gaius and Maarten that it is not possible to change the referendum vote.

Obviously, that’s not what we’re asking for. We personally believe it’s better for key members and the core team to understand the right behavior when the only active community makes a clear request, rather than blocking everything out of sympathy or antipathy.

At this point, we’re asking the Community Council, supported by some of its members, to present a new proposal that highlights the game’s community status, the representation and use of AOC as a dapp to promote events, and restore interest in the use of the Astar token and related technology.

We’ve reached a collaboration agreement with NFT Bridge and plan to bring other collections and communities already present elsewhere to Astar via Bridge.

All within the game.

This second rulebook is possible, right?

A public referendum is currently unviable, a path corrupted by low turnout. A supermajority is not something that can be circumvented with real support.

Ready to talk with you, the council and the marketing team for use this game for more different events.

29

Before we can continue the conversation, there are key factors we need to clarify:

  1. The Community Council is responsible for and has authority only over the management of the Community Treasury.
  2. The Community Treasury is intended to support dApps from the dApp Staking under the UCG program. In addition, it can be used for event funding, community proposals, and payment of tips for ecosystem Agents.
  3. A maximum cap for funding proposals from the Community Treasury has not yet been established and is still under discussion.

You can read more about our governance structure here: Astar Onchain Governance | Welcome to Astar

Now, nothing prevents you from submitting a proposal to the Community Council as long as it complies with one of the three points I mentioned above. Just like the Main Council, we are a collective that rigorously evaluates proposals.

IMPORTANT: Any funding proposal under this Council must be formally submitted. How? Like any other governance proposal in Astar, following the model you already know:

  1. A conversation in the Astar forum presenting the proposal and ALL the necessary material for its evaluation (the conversation must remain open for at least 7 days).
  2. After this and/or if you receive approval from the Community Council, you may proceed with creating a proposal under the Community Treasury (it’s important that you do this correctly).
  3. The Community Council will then create a motion and will either approve or reject your proposal.

I kindly ask that you review the documentation I provided before proceeding.

cc @Community_Council

1 Like
30

Of course, everything is crystal clear.

We will work to present the right proposal to meet not only all the criteria requested of us to date, but also those you just described above.

As mentioned, the game was designed primarily to empower the community and reward all players completely free of charge.

Since the community was not protected in the last referendum (in our personal opinion and that of 70 million other votes, while others hold a contrary and entirely respectable opinion),

We would like to proceed along this path and hope that the current council will protect them.

It is clear that regardless of the applicant, governance must be supported by SERIOUS decisions based EXCLUSIVELY on data and nothing else.

We will make a proposal very soon.

Then, if anyone has anything else to add after this referendum, out of respect for the voters, we are available to listen, as always.

Thank you

31

Hi @FFR23,

  1. The Community Treasury is specifically intended to support initiatives related to community development. This includes events, meetups, social campaigns, community agents, and other efforts that foster and grow the broader Astar community (as opposed to individual project communities). In contrast, funding for infrastructure, project development grants, large-scale ecosystem campaigns, incentive programs, or marketing activities typically falls under the Main Treasury. The Community Treasury operates independently and is managed solely by the Community Council. As I am no longer a member of this council, I defer to its current members for evaluation of this proposal. Carlos has already provided valuable and accurate insights on this matter.

  2. This could be a strong starting point. I would need more information about the specific use case and the team involved to better understand the proposal’s value. However, in principle, I believe this is a promising direction. If AoC is able to bring together multiple teams around a collaborative initiative that introduces new use cases and value for ASTR holders, it could be positioned as an ecosystem incentivization or funding proposal; one I’d be open to reviewing again.

I hope this clarification is helpful.

3 Likes
32

@SFY_Labs, please keep this message from G’ in mind before any action to the Community Treasury, it’s important that we are aligned from the beginning.

2 Likes
33

@Gaius_sama @Juminstock @Maarten @FFR23 @Mouthmouth68 @Sota.Watanabe @sota @Community_Council

Joint Proposal: Age of Chronos & NFT Bridges on Astar Network/Soneium

To the Members of the Main Council and Community Council,

With this joint proposal, SFY Labs and NFT Bridges @ilan ask you to evaluate a project that is more than just a video game; it’s a strategic initiative for the entire Astar ecosystem. We ask the Main Council to reconsider its position in light of this new proposal and the Community Council to evaluate everything we have discussed in recent weeks, taking into account the will of the community and the potential of Age of Chronos (AOC) as a tool to increase interaction on Astar and as a bridge to Soneium for the next saga.

We hope this proposal will be accepted by at least one of the two councils.
We’ve had several calls with the NFT Bridge team and structured our idea as best we can to change your mind.

The Vision: An Interoperable Bridge for the Future of Gaming

Astar Network is at the forefront of Web3 innovation. This collaboration aims to create a practical and interactive demonstration of interoperability, uniting technology, storytelling, and the strong spirit of our community.

At the heart of it all is Age of Chronos (AOC), a role-playing game (RPG) that transforms NFTs into evolving heroes. Combined with the infrastructure of NFT Bridges, we are not just creating a game, but an adventure that travels between different blockchains. Our goal is to demonstrate that digital assets can move freely, evolve, and thrive beyond the boundaries of a single chain.

Our Work Plan

The project is divided into several phases, with the goal of launching a complete gaming experience that leads to a cross-chain migration.

The journey begins on Astar, where we will launch Age of Chronos with smart contracts for NFTs, an on-chain progression system, and the first playable adventures. Time-limited epic dungeons will be created to challenge players, who can earn the exclusive “Teleporter” NFT. This NFT is not just a trophy, but the key to the subsequent phases of the project.

The “Teleporter” NFT will open the portal for the Great Migration through NFT Bridges, a crucial moment that will allow players to transfer their heroes from Astar to Soneium. This migration is not just a feature, but the first true cross-chain saga in blockchain gaming, which will bring the Astar spirit to new chains, amplifying our reach and reputation.

Upon arrival on Soneium, the adventure will continue with a new saga and global campaigns. Every player who migrates will participate in monthly raffles with rewards in $TLPT tokens, distributed fairly via Chainlink VRF. Special badges and exclusive items will honor players as pioneers of interoperability.

Funding Breakdown

  • $30,000 for Age of Chronos:

    • Expansion of on-chain logic, character progression, and development of the first levels.

    • Creation of exclusive dungeons and the “Teleporter” NFT.

    • Marketing campaigns to increase adoption and visibility.

  • $10,000 for NFT Bridges:

    • Implementation of RMRK NFT bridging between Astar and Soneium.

    • Integration of Chainlink VRF for transparent raffles.

    • Informational campaigns for the community on $TLPT incentives.

There will be a total of four milestones, with the last one focusing on the bridge we discussed earlier.
SFY will integrate everything needed for this phase into the current milestones.

Conclusion: Writing the Legend Together

This proposal is an invitation to adventure, not just a simple funding plan. With your support, we can:

  • Launch a blockchain-native RPG that grows and thrives on Astar.

  • Demonstrate the true potential of interoperability in a tangible way for players.

  • Position Astar as the benchmark for cross-chain gaming in Web3.

    This collaboration is just one of many possibilities once the game is live. In fact, since the game is based on dungeons with different maps and exploration, we could, at the request of the councils, also create ongoing events or unique gaming weekends, interacting with other projects and communities.

    We have the concrete ability to create the game, there is no doubt about that. We have already created a saga on Moonbeam, and we will certainly have the ability to create sagas on other networks as well, with the goal of cross-chain. NFT Bridge will be a future ally for much more.

We have discussed and presented our work with three public referendums, refining and improving everything you asked of us. The public referendum to date has expressed incredible community support; it is not an adequate means of supporting teams seriously interested in developing. It could be done in the future with a higher voter quorum, but not today. Suggesting the public referendum as a governance test is fine, but suggesting that we, or any other team, commit time, resources, and money to developing on Astar in the public referendum at this time is essentially utopian.

We are taking the public referendum vote as an aid in supporting a YES vote in the evaluation of the following proposal, and we will not get into polemical and sterile discussions about voter confidence.

Astar needs community movement and events, and this proposal allows for exactly that.

We hope to receive a response as soon as possible, considering all the efforts made by the team, and that many others can participate in this discussion.

SFY Labs

3 Likes
34

I love the partnership between @ilan and @SFY_Labs

This partnership only arose due to the feedback received in this forum and the huge support on the public vote - the result is now the most powerful proposal yet (also need to thank the critical comments for identifying weaknesses).

The go-to-market sticking point is now solved - and the bridge to Soneium with this game is addressed.

Due to how dynamic this proposal is it also looks to be eligible for both council votes.

ApeXChimpz are excited to work together with both teams here and bring new life to the Astar NFT community and social scene.

We look forward to see NFT Bridges community playing AOC on Astar network and we have already agreed collaboration opportunities with both teams here for this game and our community, and also future development (a potential NFT Marketplace with frontend bridging functionality between different chains with Astar as the central HUB…probably nothing…)

3 Likes
35

Thanks, @Dumbell

We had discussions regarding the bridging infrastructure needed and the gameplay frontiers it can open for players and Age of Chronos as a Cross-Chain game.

It will make the game more interesting and fun, and will facilitate liquidity transfers between Asat and Soneium (or vice versa).

We are excited to work on this initiative.

Ilan

3 Likes
36

@Juminstock @Gaius_sama

Can you please advise what needs to happen here for this joint proposal from @SFY_Labs and @ilan to move forward?

Should they decide on the type of treasury request and council to apply for, or will this be decided by yourselves which is most appropriate?

Hopefully the path to proceed is easy and clear.

Thanks

37

Hi @SFY_Labs team,

Thanks for taking the time to put together and share such a detailed proposal :folded_hands: I really appreciate the effort you’re making to involve the community and align your work with Astar’s vision.

That said, from my perspective (this is only my opinion) I don’t think this request falls within the scope of the Community Council and the Community Treasury. Mainly for two reasons:

  • Budget size: the amount requested here ($30k + $10k) is above the typical range that has so far been handled under the Community Treasury.

  • Purpose of funds: the Community Treasury is designed to support community-driven initiatives such as events, meetups, campaigns, UCG , or Agents — while development-focused milestones like those described in your proposal are usually managed via the Main Treasury process.

I just wanted to share my personal view on this point to avoid confusion between the two treasuries. At the same time, I recognize the effort you’ve put into shaping this collaboration and the intention to create value for the ecosystem, which is always appreciated. I really respect your work guys :folded_hands:

38

Thanks @SimonB for replying!

Just to confirm that this is a milestone based proposal so falls within the remit of a council vote

ApeXChimps and NFT Bridges already confirmed above they are collaborating for this

39

Thanks for your input.
What does “Typical Budget” mean?
There are rules; if I’m not mistaken, we’ve divided everything into milestones of less than 1 million astr each. Each milestone is independent.

We’ve shared a detailed plan that encompasses not only the technical aspect, but also the actual will of the last referendum (93% versus 7%) and, above all, a community aspect that we believe would be far superior if optimized with the work of agents like you.

We wrote the proposal to:

  1. have it reevaluated by the main council (which would be the most logical and fair path after the referendum)
  2. have it evaluated by the community council for the first time.

Since there have been different events and contributions paid by the council, we can be evaluated in the same way (as explained in the last proposal above).

The pressure is due to an important aspect that everyone is highlighting but that no one is willing or able to address at the moment, given the low quorum (the lack of proper governance).

Grazie, Simone. @SimonB We were hoping you could help us, since you’ve known us for a long time. If I remember correctly, we also participated in a live broadcast together on The Crypto Gateway Italia channel, when we discussed Astar a few years ago.

40

Hi @FFR23. I explained the model that must be followed for the Community Council evaluation to take effect some time ago.

We’ve talked about this in multiple threads and repeated the same information, and it’s becoming exhausting to keep responding to this. Please take a few minutes of your time and read our documentation, which has been there for a long time: Astar Onchain Governance | Welcome to Astar