dApp staking v3 - tier algorithm adjustment proosal

This thread was derived from dApp Staking v3 - proposal.

The hybrid model and other methods proposed for the purpose of improving the current Tier system will be discussed.
Algorithms, not specific compensation amounts or parameters, are the subject of the discussion.


The current Tier system is a fair system whereby a certain reward can be earned by exceeding a certain threshold. However, this system creates a kind of unfairness: “If the threshold is not exceeded, the evaluation is the same no matter how many Stakes are collected”. “Fairness” and “Impartiality” do not necessarily go hand in hand.

This system itself was proposed more than a year ago, and enough time has been spent on it. However, it is true that some dissatisfaction arose in the implementation of the system. Therefore, I proposed a hybrid model that combines dynamic rewards in v2 and fixed rewards in v3.

Hybrid Model

In the hybrid model, a range of rewards is set for each slot in each Tier. It is set per slot and is not affected by the stake amount of other dApps (except for the Tier up or down due to slot limits).

Currently, once a specific Tier is reached, the amount of reward does not change until the next Tier is reached, but in this model the reward will increase until the Tier 1 limit is reached (if the stake decreases, the reward will also decrease). Also, if the Tier falls by a small margin, the amount of reward will not decrease drastically.
We believe that this allows for “Fairness” and “Impartiality” to cohabitate.


  1. On-chain logic should be made as simple as possible.
    This proposal will certainly be more complex than the current reward logic. It is preferable to make the logic as simple as possible, as this will reduce the burden on the blockchain.

Specifically, we currently only generate a fixed reward for each Tier slot, but we need logic to dynamically calculate the amount of reward.

Rewards for dApp with Tier A =
TierA minimum reward + (TierA maximum reward - TierA minimum reward) / (TierA+1 threshold - TierA threshold) x (dApp current Stake - TierA threshold)
  1. The amount of distribution is expected to increase from the current level
    (but the maximum amount will remain the same)

While 2 is not considered a problem since it is within the range of adjustable parameter settings, 1 is very important. Discussion by developers is needed.
*Sorry, I am not a developer.

Compromise and short-term solutions

One way to implement a pseudo-hybrid model without changing the logic significantly is to "massively increase the number of tiers. However, this is not considered optimal because it does not solve the problem fundamentally and requires an increase in Portal display.


We agree with the proposal.
There is a need for more correctness and linearity towards dapps rewards.
If necessary, proceed to strictly check who is worthy of being part of dapp staking and who is constantly working to bring value to the community.
Regarding the proposal, we are absolutely in favor. :+1:


@you425 I’ve created an issue ticket in Github to serve as a reminder of this post: dApp Staking v3 - Tier Assignemt & Reward Distribution Algorithm Assignment Proposal · Issue #1198 · AstarNetwork/Astar · GitHub

I’ve added it to the project, and we’ll consider it once the time comes.


Thank you very much!

1 Like

Incredible how this post received 0 attention. There would be so much to talk and write about today. But we are tired.

I think it’s also fair to say that the general discussion was done in the thread before the branching.
However, it would be nice to see more community input written in.


Hello @SFY_Labs
It’s just an UI issue. Currently the UI displays only 10 dApps but the pallet supports many more slots.
Your dApp has more than 15M ASTR, this means you are in Tier 3.

Just claimed 66 astar. We are in tier 4 , but the system is ridiculous so, it’s better hidden us.

Hello @SFY_Labs,

I think you have a misunderstanding of dApp Staking V3 and should base your research with on-chain data and not the just the Portal UI.

A) As GuiGou explained, the portal UI only displays 10 dApps at the moment (a PR is underway to fix this) but the palette supports many more slots.

dappStaking.tierConfig: PalletDappStakingV3TiersConfiguration
numberOfSlots: 230
slotsPerTier: [

→ Tier 3 has 69 slots and Tier 4, 103 slots.

B) A dApp enters or exits a tier when a new era begins, depending on how much stake the dApp had at the end of the previous era, since that’s when the snapshot is taken.

E.g.: We’re in Era 371, and the dApps are sorted in tiers according to their staking during the last block of Era 370.

Looking at Age of Chronos (ID: 37 in dApp Staking), at Era 670, you had 14,9M ASTR staked on your dApp which means that for the current Era 671 (which is what you see on the Portal), you’re in Tier 4.
During Era 671, you have reached 15.1M ASTR tokens (which is what you see on the Portal) which means that, if the stakes remain the same until the end of the Era, you will enter Tier 3 during Era 672.

The portal displays two different pieces of information:

  • The tier, which is based on your stake in Era n-1.
  • The amount staked, which is the current amount staked on your dApp (Era n).

Currently, if you see more than 15 million on your dApp, it doesn’t mean you’re in Tier 3; you may be in Tier 4 if the amount staked was lower than 15 million in the previous era. However, it is very likely that you will enter Tier 3 in the next era.

C) dApp Staking rewards

When you claim rewards during an Era, you claim rewards for finished Eras. Today (Era 671), you’ve claimed rewards for Era 670.

What GuiGou has explained is correct and dApp Staking is an automatic system, there is no manual forcing to move dApps into one tier or another. The dApp Staking UI on the portal needs to be improved and we’ll work on that, but the dApp Staking back-end is correct.


JUST CHECK HERE: Subscan | Aggregate Substrate ecological network high-precision Web3 explorer

We had more than 15 million before the claim of the 670 era. So what you wrote is fundamentally wrong.

Also a question, given that you told us that the difference between 14.9m and 15m is our lack of marketing, is being not present in the leaderboard, even just on a graphic level, something correct for you? whoever enters the portal and doesn’t see our dapp, what can he think?
Who made these choices?
Do you think SFY Labs’ complaints are the problem? Have you understood that over time, everything we are writing will be written by many other dapps who will inevitably be disadvantaged by the many problems of this less than perfect system?
We have been trying to make our voice heard regarding these issues for 3 weeks, but we are systematically ignored.

There have been promises of support from the community, and promises of development from us.
There is currently no incentive for us to develop seriously on astar, that’s the reality.


1 Like

You’re right, Age of Chronos reached 15.1 million ASTR at the end of Era 670, which means you’re effectively in Tier 3 during Era 671. I used a different block in my previous post.

As I explained in my previous post, the PR to fix the UI tier leaderboard bug has been deployed on the portal and we can now see that Age of Chronos is in Tier 3 as it should be.

This means that when you claim rewards for Era 671 during Era 672, you will receive rewards corresponding to Tier 3.

However, all my other explanations are correct and I don’t see where I’m saying anything about your “lack of marketing”.

Our team is currently overloaded with the launch of Astar zkEVM and the Yoki Origins campaign, so we’re fixing bugs in dApp Staking V3 and the Portal interface when they’re brought to our attention.
Improvements of the interface and the dApp Staking V3 model will come later, once we’ve collected enough data, feedback and carried out tests.


It doesn’t refer to you, t was said to us in previous posts.

In any case, this system is not very rewarding and the levels have a great impact on those who truly develop. More linearity is needed, the developer cannot base his income on the future value of the astr token, they needs to spend day by day and a sudden decrease in rewards for a few astar is madness.

from 12th to 69th place in tier 3, which can be defined as the first tier of real support for developers, the slots are all burned.
This is a policy that makes no sense to exist even for the valorization of the token, it cannot be thought that a similar quantity of astar would have an impact on the market. We could put fewer places, but bring greater linearity both within the tier and in tier 4…
So it’s pure speculation.

At the same time, small developers could receive great help.

Why not focus on controlling the Dapps and the work done instead of cutting completly the support ? You could put very small incentives to give to everyone who participates in the evaluation of the dapps in a certain period of time for example.

No one will be able to complain about such a control rule, because it is right. Instead everyone will be able to interpret this system badly because it is not fair. It’s not that you solve things by spending less, we also agree that the old v2 needed to be modified, but not like this.

my suggestion may be misconsidered.

I think the core team is busy right now, so I think this improvement will take some time.

so if your project requires additional development costs, why not apply for the [Unstoppable Community Grants program]? UCG
Although you will be required to report, this should help increase your motivation.

I would be happy if many projects utilize UCG and further revitalize the ecosystem.
I hope your project and the Aster community grow. :rocket:
thank you.

1 Like

As user( staker ) point of view, we don’t need any dApps( even DEX ).

For example, Shiden( $SDN ) has NO DEX, NO Defi long time, But work well.

Because dAppStaking exist. Now over 50% APR.
( Basic rewards : 25.1%, Bonus rewards : 27.94% )

In Astar, No1. dApp? in dAppStaking is “Astar Core Contributors”( 419M $ASTR ), No4. is “Community Treasury”( 129M ).

NOT dApps. ( I don’t know, why NON-dApps exist,entry? )

Again, We don’t need any dApps but dAppStaking.
How ironic. :sob:


Hi @naoyo4,

I’m removing this message because it’s not relevant to the topic.


To receive the correct support with this non-linear tiering system, we would have to ask for 50 million grants.

Then the Grant is something highly controversial compared to the idea of promoting dapp staking itself… our team was told not to do marketing for a few hundred thousand ASTR, but then you can ask for the millions you need to join a tier? The promise of development and updating on what has been done is already periodically done by our team, a UCG makes no sense to exist at this moment. Our community is not small and 200 stakers are very respectable.
We made a proposal in a different context, made our calculations, then everything changed. It was already planned but we were not aware of this at the time of the proposal. But the fact that this change was foreseen does not justify it if it is not meritocratic. this must be clear. DappStaking certainly could have been a help, but today it is no longer.

A web 3 game with nfts 2.0 interactions, I don’t know if you have any idea of the costs involved in doing a project like this.
The problem is that our team is too serious to deal with certain topics, but we had to migrate an already created nfts collection, like the Donkey Gang, and do a dapp staking process like many others, without costs, without commitment and probably without contributing any real development value.
Just go and check on the portal how the projects are presented to understand who has used time and resources and who has not.

In a few months the whole community will reflect on the effectiveness of this staking dapp and it will certainly have changed. In the meantime, however, we must continue on our own path.