# Proposal: Tokenomics 3.0 & dApp Staking Changes

**URL:** <https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345>\
**Category:** Astar\
**Created:** [February 4, 2026, 11:57am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345 "2026-02-04T11:57:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 4, 2026, 11:57am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/1 "2026-02-04T11:57:27Z")

</div>

## Overview

Following community feedback on the [Astar Foundation Forward: dApp Staking & Tokenomics](https://forum.astar.network/t/astar-foundation-forward-tokenomics-dapp-staking-discussion/9292) post and onchain data analysis, the Astar Foundation is proposing adjustments to Tokenomics 3.0 parameters and a revised dApp Staking model.

These changes address inflation concerns, simplify the user experience, and focus rewards on high-impact projects.

This proposal reduces max yearly inflation from 7% to 5.5%, removes bonus mechanics, moves to a single yearly staking cycle, and caps dApp Staking to 16 projects. Combined with Burndrop, these changes tighten Astar’s token economics significantly.

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/plasmnet/original/2X/1/1634ed096593284da260ac8fe4fd29b7f6fdf68f.jpeg)

* * *

## Current Issues

Based on community input and onchain analysis, four key issues have been identified:

**High inflation ceiling.** The 7% max yearly inflation creates sustained selling pressure perception.

**Free-rider dynamics.** With ~69 projects in dApp Staking, inactive projects can extract rewards without meaningful contribution. This creates a perceived value leak and dilutes incentives for active builders.

**Complex user experience.** The current period structure (Voting + Build & Earn) and bonus mechanics require frequent re-staking and re-voting. Combined with the tiering system and large project count, users face unnecessary friction and confusion.

**APR instability.** High fixed rewards and low dynamic rewards contributed to unstable APR and rising inflation pressure.

* * *

## What Changes

### 1️⃣ Inflation Parameters

The following parameter changes reduce max yearly inflation while rebalancing staker rewards:

| Parameter | Current | Proposed |
| --- | --- | --- |
| **Max yearly inflation** | 7% | **5.5%** |
| Base staker allocation | 10% | **15.8%** |
| Adjustable staker allocation | 55% | **63%** |
| Bonus allocation | 13.8% | **0%** |
| Collator allocation | 3.2% | 3.2% |
| Treasury allocation | 5% | 5% |
| dApp reward allocation | 13% | 13% |
| **Decay rate** | 100% (inactive) | **99.999996%** |

Bonus rewards are eliminated. That allocation moves to base and adjustable staker rewards.

The decay rate activation applies a per-block decay of 0.000004%, enabling the emission reduction mechanism described in the original Tokenomics 3.0 proposal.

📌 **Reminder:** These figures represent the maximum inflation cap. Due to Astar’s dynamic tokenomics, actual inflation is currently ~2.77%. Lowering the max inflation means real inflation will decrease further.

### 2️⃣ Emission Impact

Based on current total issuance of **8,622,347,668 ASTR** :

**Current Model (7% max):** ~603.6M ASTR yearly cap

| Component | Allocation | Yearly Emission (Max) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Collators | 3.2% | ~19.3M ASTR |
| Treasury | 5% | ~30.2M ASTR |
| Base Staker | 10% | ~60.4M ASTR |
| Adjustable Staker | 55% | ~332M ASTR |
| Bonus | 13.8% | ~83.3M ASTR |
| dApps | 13% | ~78.5M ASTR |

**Proposed Model (5.5% max):** ~474.2M ASTR yearly cap

| Component | Allocation | Yearly Emission (Max) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Collators | 3.2% | ~15.2M ASTR |
| Treasury | 5% | ~23.7M ASTR |
| Base Staker | 15.8% | ~74.9M ASTR |
| Adjustable Staker | 63% | ~298.8M ASTR |
| Bonus | 0% | 0 ASTR |
| dApps | 13% | ~61.6M ASTR |

**Net reduction: ~129.3M ASTR less emitted per year** (21.4% reduction in the emission ceiling).

This is the starting point for inflation reduction. The decay factor will continue lowering emissions over time. As a reminder, the decay factor applies an exponential reduction per block. At the ideal 50% staking ratio, emissions decrease to ~81% after year one and ~65% after year two.

### 3️⃣ Max Supply Convergence

Tokenomics 3.0’s core principle is an asymptotic max supply determined by the emission decay mechanism. With the reduced inflation ceiling:

- **Previous target:** ~10.5B ASTR
- **New target:** ~10B ASTR (~9.9B)

### 4️⃣ Burndrop: Amplifying the Effect

Burndrop is a key initiative for Astar in 2026 and works directly with these tokenomic changes. Under Tokenomics 3.0, any burn event reduces total issuance and lowers the eventual max supply by the same amount.

**Example:** If max supply converges to ~10B ASTR and 2B ASTR are burned via Burndrop, the effective max supply becomes ~8B ASTR.

Lower inflation ceiling plus active burns equals tighter supply economics.

### 5️⃣ dApp Staking Model

**Remove bonus period and rewards.** Setting bonus allocation to 0% eliminates bonus mechanics entirely. No more voting rewards, no bonus period tracking and re-staking.

**Move to yearly cycle.** Because the inflation system recalculates annually, dApp Staking will align to a single yearly cycle. Users stake once and maintain their position until the next yearly reset, reducing restaking frequency from 3 times per year to once per year.

**Cap participation to 16 projects.** Rewards distributed across 16 projects instead of ~69 means qualifying projects receive more meaningful allocations. This shifts dApp Staking from broad onboarding to rewarding top-performing projects.

**Strengthen entry requirements.** Project eligibility requires governance approval (Onchain Governance or ACC).

**Implement regular review.** Projects that become inactive or stop delivering can be removed. This creates competitive pressure to keep contributing and building.

**Simplify tiering in the UI.** Tier logic remains in the backend for reward calculation. The frontend experience will be streamlined.

**Note:** Detailed dApp Staking parameters (expected rewards per project, staking thresholds, tiering modifications) will be shared with the technical implementation post.

**This proposal focuses on strategic direction and key changes.**

* * *

## Why This Approach

### Parameter-Based Implementation

We’re proposing changes that use configurable parameters already in the current code rather than a complete rework.

This approach is faster and safer. It minimizes breaking changes, reduces audit requirements, and keeps development focused on UI updates and governance execution.

**Note:** Technical details on code modifications and the new backend approach will be shared in a follow-up post.

### Quality Over Volume

The shift: move from broad project participation toward rewarding a limited number of high-impact projects.

This preserves dApp Staking’s core idea while removing accumulated complexity. The result is a system easier to understand, participate in, and trust.

* * *

## Why These Parameters

### Why Inflation Is Necessary

Astar’s inflation is not generic token printing. Each block reward goes to specific beneficiaries:

**Collators** receive block rewards plus transaction fees to maintain network performance by producing blocks and state transition proofs.

**Treasury** receives a variable portion for ecosystem grants, and long-term development initiatives.

**dApp Staking** receives a variable portion split between builder rewards and staker rewards.

The goal is controlled, productive inflation where every emitted token serves a purpose. The decay factor ensures emissions decrease over time as the ecosystem matures.

### Why 10% APY Is Competitive

Comparing Astar’s proposed ~10% APY against other L1 networks:

| Network | Staking APR | Staking Rate | Inflation |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Ethereum | 2.82% | 29.57% | 1.5% |
| Polkadot | 12.18% | 50.87% | 7.72% |
| Solana | 6.29% | 67.72% | 4.12% |
| Cosmos | 20.35% | 59.01% | 10% |
| Sui | 1.91% | 74.77% | 17.4% |
| Cardano | 2.32% | 57.73% | 2.30% |
| **Astar (proposed)** | **~10%** | **18%** | **2.3% actual** |

Astar’s position is notable: competitive staking returns with one of the lowest actual inflation rates in the comparison set.

Networks with higher APR often have significantly higher inflation (Cosmos at 10%, Sui at 17.4%). Networks with lower inflation typically offer much lower yields (Ethereum at 2.82%, Cardano at 2.32%).

At ~10% APY with ~2.3% actual inflation, Astar offers strong real yield. The proposed changes maintain attractive staking returns while tightening the inflation ceiling further.

* * *

## Expected Outcomes

### For Tokenomics

✅ **Fixed supply model activated.** The decay factor activation switches Astar from inflationary tokenomics to a fixed supply model with emissions converging toward a max cap.  
✅ **Lower inflation ceiling.** Max yearly inflation reduced from 7% to 5.5%.  
✅ **~129M ASTR less emitted yearly.** 21.4% reduction in the emission cap.  
✅ **Tighter supply convergence.** Max supply target drops from ~10.5B to ~10B ASTR.  
✅ **Burndrop amplifies deflation.** Burns reduce the max supply cap directly.

### For Stakers

✅ **Simpler experience.** No bonus staking, no voting period mechanics. Stake once per year.  
✅ **Sustainable APY.** Expected APY moves from ~17.5% today to ~10%. Lower, but more predictable.  
✅ **Predictable rewards.** Returns rely on base and adjustable components rather than period-specific incentives.

### For Builders

✅ **Higher quality set.** Rewards concentrate on 16 high-impact projects.  
✅ **More meaningful allocations.** Fewer projects sharing the reward pool means more per qualifying project.  
✅ **Incentive to keep building.** Regular review creates pressure to deliver.  
✅ **Ecosystem cleanup.** Enables removal of dormant projects.

* * *

## Timeline

⚠ **Critical deadline: March 7, 2026**

1. **Inflation parameters must be updated before March 7, 2026** to apply for the upcoming yearly cycle.
2. **dApp Staking model transition targets the next voting cycle starting on March 7, 2026** , allowing users to claim existing bonuses before the change.

Governance proposals need to pass with sufficient time for implementation.

* * *

## Next Steps

1. Community discussion and feedback on this proposal (~2 weeks)
2. Technical implementation post with code modifications and backend details (next week)
3. Finalize parameter values based on community input
4. Submit governance referendums for inflation parameter and dApp Staking model changes
5. Implementation and UI updates ahead of March 7, 2026 deadline

We welcome feedback on the proposed parameters, eligibility criteria, and transition timeline.

* * *

Gaius\_sama :astr:

_Astar Foundation_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![you425](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/you425/32/3313_2.png) [@you425](https://forum.astar.network/u/you425)\
**Post date:** [February 5, 2026, 7:15am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/2 "2026-02-05T07:15:03Z")

</div>

Thank you!

There were a huge number of discussions last month, but I think this is a well-balanced proposal that can be implemented quickly. We can apply this change first, and if any issues come up afterward, we can simply reopen the discussion. There’s no need to force a drastic change all at once.

That said, what concerns me is the per-block decay rate. If my memory is correct, when this parameter (99.999992%) was originally proposed, Astar’s block time was still 12 seconds. But now it’s 6 seconds, so applying the same decay rate would cause the inflation rate to decline more than originally assumed at the time.

Was this intentional?

For reference, I graphed the difference here.

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/plasmnet/original/2X/d/d3c0c452520307cd1ec6477cc139c20d6ebb7a2b.png)  
The previous assumption was the blue line, but with the current decay rate it shifts to the red line.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![SimonB](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/simonb/32/2727_2.png) [@SimonB](https://forum.astar.network/u/SimonB)\
**Post date:** [February 5, 2026, 9:36am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/3 "2026-02-05T09:36:00Z")

</div>

Nice point @you425 ! Since the current block time is 6 seconds, the decay rate would effectively be half compared to the original one, which was designed for a 12-second block time

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Matt](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/matt/32/1502_2.png) [@Matt](https://forum.astar.network/u/Matt)\
**Post date:** [February 5, 2026, 12:15pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/4 "2026-02-05T12:15:59Z")

</div>

Good proposal overall, and +1 to @you425 for spotting the block-time issue 👏

One important point to clarify: the decay rate (99.999992%) was originally designed when block time was ~12s. Now that blocks are ~6s, the same per-block decay means emissions will fall faster in real time than originally intended. That’s not just a small detail — it changes how quickly supply converges.

I think the follow-up technical post should clearly state:

- What the effective yearly decay looks like with 6s blocks, and

- Whether this faster emission decline is intentional, or if the parameter should be adjusted to match the original time-based curve.

On dApp Staking, the move to 16 projects makes sense to fix free-riders and focus rewards on real impact. Just important that entry/exit criteria are transparent so this doesn’t feel like a closed club for builders.

Overall, I support the direction: lower inflation, simpler UX, and more focused incentives. Small, fast parameter changes now + iteration later feels like the right approach.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 5, 2026, 4:01pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/5 "2026-02-05T16:01:54Z")

</div>

Hi @you425

You caught a valid point here. The 6-second block time does change the math on decay rates, and we need to recalibrate accordingly.

Our target convergence timeline hasn’t changed, we still want the same endpoint in real time. That means the decay rate parameter needs adjustment to account for the faster block cadence. It’s a straightforward correction, but an important one.

I’ll update the proposal with the recalculated numbers.

* * *

Gaius\_sama :astr:

_Astar Foundation_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GuiGou](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/guigou/32/1366_2.png) [@GuiGou](https://forum.astar.network/u/GuiGou)\
**Post date:** [February 5, 2026, 5:45pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/6 "2026-02-05T17:45:14Z")

</div>

From my side, I am generally in agreement with the proposed changes.

Reducing inflation is necessary. However, it will also be important to introduce additional use cases for the ASTR token, which is the main issue facing most cryptocurrencies. I hope to see many dApps using ASTR across the different networks (Astar, Soneium, Strium) of Startale ecosystem.

The current version of the dAppStaking is indeed too complex, both for users and developers. Simplifying it can only be beneficial. The proposal makes it possible to achieve this in a simple and effective way.

The burndrop can provide demand as well as temporary utility.

Go for it!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Vangardem](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/vangardem/32/2184_2.png) [@Vangardem](https://forum.astar.network/u/Vangardem)\
**Post date:** [February 6, 2026, 2:06pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/7 "2026-02-06T14:06:56Z")

</div>

The simplification of dApp Staking is simply exceptional in the terms proposed. Accepting fewer dApps also makes it more manageable and controllable, thus making it easier to audit each one.

The community has spoken, and this is the result. Well done, guys! These modifications will lead to less inflation and give an incredible boost. Together with the other mechanisms that will be implemented based on usability (Astar Stack) and scarcity (Burndrop), I am sure that Astar will become a strong and prosperous network. Well played!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ERC20s](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/erc20s/32/34_2.png) [@ERC20s](https://forum.astar.network/u/ERC20s)\
**Post date:** [February 9, 2026, 7:20pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/8 "2026-02-09T19:20:59Z")

</div>

> [@Aetheria - An Astar ETH Reserve Mechanism](https://forum.astar.network/t/aetheria-an-astar-eth-reserve-mechanism/9311):
>
> Aetheria proposes a long-term ASTR–ETH reserve mechanism designed to gradually convert value into ETH while preserving continuous user liquidity. Rather than aiming for rapid buybacks or short-term price action, Aetheria focuses on slow capital accumulation, optional redemption, and eventual ETH-backed value convergence. The core idea is simple: ASTR is gradually converted into ETH (or yield-bearing ETH), creating a growing reserve that users can redeem against at any time. The reserve is sol…

Can we include the aetheria concept in the new tokenomics?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2026, 10:29am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/9 "2026-02-10T10:29:09Z")

</div>

Hi @ERC20s

I would advise against incorporating the Aetheria concept into Tokenomics 3.0 at this time.

**On design readiness:** The proposal requires further development before it’s suitable for protocol-level integration. Mechanism design, risk parameters, and success criteria have not been sufficiently defined to meet the standard required for a major tokenomics overhaul.

**On timing:** The current market environment makes this approach counterproductive. Any mechanism that converts ASTR to ETH introduces sell pressure. Executing such a strategy when ASTR/ETH ratios are at historical lows would be value-destructive for token holders. Treasury diversification should be pursued from a position of strength.

Tokenomics 3.0 is designed to enhance value capture and long-term sustainability for ASTR. Introducing a mechanism that creates sustained conversion pressure away from the native token conflicts with these objectives.

I recommend keeping these initiatives separate and revisiting the Aetheria concept once market conditions improve and the proposal has been further refined.

* * *

Gaius\_sama :astr:

_Astar Foundation_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2026, 11:50am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/10 "2026-02-10T11:50:54Z")

</div>

Hi @GuiGou,

ASTR token utility is a core focus for 2026. Our strategy has three pillars, outlined in the recent blog posts:

1. **Tokenomics improvements** – refining dApp Staking mechanics and incentive structures
2. **Supply reduction** – Burndrop to decrease circulating supply
3. **Demand-side products** – shipping tools and services that create organic buy pressure on ASTR

- [Astar 2026: Product-led Execution](https://astar.network/blog/astar-2026-roadmap-226)
- [From Activity to Value Capture: ASTR in 2026](https://astar.network/blog/astr-value-capture-230)

This is how we’re working to restore trust and rebuild value in the ecosystem.

* * *

Gaius\_sama :astr:

_Astar Foundation_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Poggi\_Luca](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/poggi_luca/32/9_2.png) [@Poggi\_Luca](https://forum.astar.network/u/Poggi_Luca)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2026, 4:51pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/11 "2026-02-10T16:51:49Z")

</div>

Fully support this proposal! It’s the right time to take such kind of actions, based on the complete overview and pillars of Astar) 🚀🔥

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2026, 4:56pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/12 "2026-02-10T16:56:45Z")

</div>

Hi @you425

Circling back on this. After internal review, the parameter we’ll propose is a Decay Rate of **99.999996%** (0.000004% decay per block).

I’ve updated the initial post accordingly.

Thanks again for flagging this!

* * *

Gaius\_sama :astr:

_Astar Foundation_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 11, 2026, 1:47pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/13 "2026-02-11T13:47:50Z")

</div>

Following our previous post on the Tokenomics 3.0 & dApp Staking Revamp direction, we are sharing the technical implementation overview today. Please review the post and feel free to ask questions or request clarification under this post.

## Overview

This post follows up on the [Tokenomics 3.0 Update & dApp Staking Model Revision proposal](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345) with the technical details.

The first post outlined the strategic direction: lower inflation, simpler staking, and a focus on fewer high-impact projects. This post explains how we’re implementing those changes - specifically the new dApp Staking parameters, tier structure, staking thresholds, and expected rewards.

* * *

## 🔍 What We’re Changing and Why

### The Problem with the Current Model

Today, dApp Staking has ~72 registered projects across four tiers. This creates several issues:

- Rewards are spread thin across too many projects
- Inactive or low-impact projects can extract value without meaningful contribution
- The tier system confuses users about reward disparities
- The period structure (Voting + Build & Earn) requires restaking three times per year

### The New Model at a Glance

The revised dApp Staking model addresses these issues:

- **16 projects maximum** instead of ~72
- **2 active tiers** instead of 4
- **Higher thresholds** to ensure only impactful projects qualify
- **Yearly cycle** instead of three periods per year
- **Simplified UI** that hides tier complexity while maintaining backend logic

* * *

## 🛠 Implementation Approach

### Parameter-Based Change, Not a Rewrite

Rather than rebuilding dApp Staking from scratch, we’re achieving the new model by adjusting existing parameters in the current codebase. This approach:

- Minimizes breaking changes and audit requirements
- Keeps development work focused on Portal UI updates
- Allows faster delivery through governance referendum
- Reduces risk compared to a full system rewrite

### What Changes Technically

**Program size cap.** The `max_registered_apps` parameter is reduced from **500** to **16** , hard-capping the number of projects that can enter dApp Staking.

**Fixed slot allocation.** The `slotNumberArgs` parameter changes from `[1000, 50]` (dynamic calculation) to `[0, 16]` (fixed). This switches slot allocation from a dynamic formula to a fixed 16 slots.

**Cycle alignment.** dApp Staking moves to a yearly cycle aligned with the annual inflation recalculation. This is a constraint of how the inflation system works - it recalculates once per year, so dApp Staking positions reset at that point.

**Tier configuration.** We’re reconfiguring tier parameters to effectively use only two tiers (Tier 2 and Tier 3), with Tier 1 and Tier 4 set to zero allocation.

**UI simplification.** The Portal will display a cleaner list view without tier labels, while keeping detailed tier and reward information on individual dApp pages.

* * *

## 🏗 The New Tier Structure

### Why Two Tiers Instead of Four

The current four-tier system creates confusion. Users see different reward levels across tiers but don’t always understand why. Projects compete for tier placement in ways that don’t always reflect actual contribution.

The new model simplifies this to two meaningful tiers:

- **Tier 2** for top-performing projects with strong community support
- **Tier 3** for qualifying projects that meet the baseline threshold

Tier 1 and Tier 4 remain in the code (for technical reasons) but are set to 0% allocation - they’re effectively inactive.

### Slot Distribution

| Tier | Slots | Purpose |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Tier 1 | 0 | Inactive |
| Tier 2 | 6 | Top projects with highest staking support |
| Tier 3 | 10 | Qualifying projects meeting baseline threshold |
| Tier 4 | 0 | Inactive |

**Total: 16 slots**

This distribution reflects the intent: a small group of leading projects (Tier 2) receiving the majority of rewards, with a broader base of qualifying projects (Tier 3) receiving meaningful but smaller allocations.

### Reward Pool Distribution

| Tier | % of dApp Reward Pool |
| --- | --- |
| Tier 2 | 70% |
| Tier 3 | 30% |

Tier 2 projects share 70% of the total dApp reward allocation. Tier 3 projects share the remaining 30%. This concentrates rewards on projects with the strongest community backing.

### Within-Tier Reward Distribution

Rewards within each tier are distributed using a weight-based system controlled by a **rank multiplier** :

| Tier | Rank Multiplier | What It Means |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Tier 2 | 240% | Rank 10 earns 2.4x what Rank 0 earns |
| Tier 3 | 467% | Rank 10 earns 4.67x what Rank 0 earns |

The multiplier determines the spread between top and bottom performers within each tier. A higher multiplier (like Tier 3’s 467%) creates more differentiation based on staking support.

* * *

## 📊 Staking Thresholds

### How Thresholds Work

To qualify for a tier, a dApp must have at least the threshold amount of ASTR staked to it. Thresholds are defined as a percentage of total issuance, so they adjust automatically as issuance changes over time.

### Current Threshold Values

Based on total issuance of **8,627,106,523 ASTR** :

| Tier | Threshold (ASTR) | % of Total Issuance | What It Means |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Tier 1 | 200M+ | ~2.32% | No dApp rewards (stakers still earn) |
| Tier 2 | 80M+ | ~0.93% | Projects need 80M-200M ASTR staked |
| Tier 3 | 30M+ | ~0.35% | Projects need 30M-80M ASTR staked |
| Below Tier 3 | \<30M | \<0.35% | No dApp rewards (stakers still earn) |

### Why These Thresholds Are High

These thresholds are intentionally set high. The goal is to ensure that only projects the ecosystem genuinely wants to support can qualify. Reaching 30M ASTR (Tier 3 minimum) or 80M ASTR (Tier 2 minimum) requires significant community conviction.

This design filters for:

- Core infrastructure projects
- Key ecosystem applications
- Projects with demonstrated community support

Projects that cannot attract meaningful staking support do not receive dApp rewards. This is the “quality over volume” principle in practice.

Additionally, reducing from 72 to 16 dApps will concentrate ASTR staking across a smaller number of applications. Given that 1B\> ASTR is currently locked in dApp Staking, this would result in an average staking allocation of 62.5M ASTR per dApp, which is double the minimum threshold for Tier 3.

* * *

## 💰 Expected Rewards Per Project

### Tier 2 Projects (6 slots)

- **Threshold band:** 80M - 200M ASTR
- **Expected reward range:** ~$3,500 - $8,000 per month (at $0.01/ASTR)

The exact reward depends on rank within the tier. A project at the top of Tier 2 (close to 200M ASTR staked) earns toward the higher end. A project just above the 80M threshold earns toward the lower end.

### Tier 3 Projects (10 slots)

- **Threshold band:** 30M - 80M ASTR
- **Expected reward range:** ~$500 - $2,500 per month (at $0.01/ASTR)

Same principle: more staked ASTR means higher rank and higher rewards within the tier.

### Important Notes on Reward Estimates

- These ranges assume $0.01/ASTR. Actual USD value varies with token price.
- Rewards are paid in ASTR, not USD.

* * *

## ⚙ How Rank-Based Rewards Work

Understanding the reward calculation helps projects and stakers know what to expect.

### Step 1: Tier Qualification

A dApp qualifies for a tier when its total staked amount crosses the tier threshold, provided that available slots exist within that tier:

- 30M+ ASTR → Tier 3
- 80M+ ASTR → Tier 2

### Step 2: Rank Determination

Within each tier, projects are ranked based on their staked amount. The system uses **11 ranks per tier**.

The ranking formula:

`rank_divisor = (upper_threshold - lower_threshold) / 10 rank = (stake_amount - lower_threshold) / rank_divisor`

For example, in Tier 3 (30M to 80M range):

- A project with 30M ASTR staked = Rank 0 (lowest)
- A project with 55M ASTR staked = Rank 5 (middle)
- A project with 80M ASTR staked = Rank 10 (highest, about to enter Tier 2)

### Step 3: Weight Calculation

Each dApp receives a weight based on its rank within the tier. The weight starts at 100% for Rank 0 and increases with each rank level.

The increment per rank depends on the tier’s multiplier:

- **Tier 2 (240% multiplier):** Each rank adds 14% (so Rank 0 = 100%, Rank 5 = 170%, Rank 10 = 240%)
- **Tier 3 (467% multiplier):** Each rank adds 36.7% (so Rank 0 = 100%, Rank 5 = 283.5%, Rank 10 = 467%)

Higher rank means higher weight, which means a larger share of the tier’s reward pool.

### Step 4: Reward Calculation

The tier’s total budget is divided among all qualified dApps based on their weights:

1. Add up the weights of all dApps in the tier
2. Calculate reward rate = tier budget ÷ total weight
3. Each dApp’s reward = their weight × reward rate

This ensures the entire tier budget is distributed proportionally. Projects with more staking support (higher rank) receive a larger share.

> **App Reward Formula**
>
> **Full Formula**
> 
> dApp\_reward = tier\_allocation \cdot \frac{base + rank \cdot \frac{multiplier - base}{10}}{\max(filled\_slots \cdot base + ranks\_sum \cdot \frac{multiplier - base}{10}, \ max\_slots \cdot (base + 5 \cdot \frac{multiplier - base}{10}))}
> 
> Where:  
> - `base` = 100%  
> - `multiplier` = tier rank multiplier (240% for Tier 2, 467% for Tier 3)  
> - `rank` = dApp’s rank within the tier (0-10)  
> - `filled_slots` = number of dApps currently in the tier  
> - `ranks_sum` = sum of all ranks of dApps in the tier  
> - `max_slots` = maximum slots for the tier (6 for Tier 2, 10 for Tier 3)  
> - `5` = average rank (middle of 0-10 range)

  

> **Example for Tier 2 (6 dApps, 240% multiplier)**
>
> Assume the tier budget is $21,000/month and all 6 slots are filled with dApps at various ranks:
> 
> | dApp | Rank | Weight |
> | --- | --- | --- |
> | Project A | 10 | 240% |
> | Project B | 8 | 212% |
> | Project C | 6 | 184% |
> | Project D | 4 | 156% |
> | Project E | 2 | 128% |
> | Project F | 0 | 100% |
> | **Total** | | **1,020%** |
> 
> Reward rate = $21,000 ÷ 1,020% = $20.59 per 1%
> 
> | dApp | Weight | Reward |
> | --- | --- | --- |
> | Project A (Rank 10) | 240% | $4,941 |
> | Project B (Rank 8) | 212% | $4,365 |
> | Project C (Rank 6) | 184% | $3,789 |
> | Project D (Rank 4) | 156% | $3,212 |
> | Project E (Rank 2) | 128% | $2,636 |
> | Project F (Rank 0) | 100% | $2,059 |
> 
> The top-ranked project earns 2.4x more than the bottom-ranked project, matching the 240% multiplier.

### What Happens to Unfilled Slots

If fewer than 16 projects qualify, the unused allocation is **not minted**. It doesn’t redistribute to other projects - it simply isn’t created.

**Note:** Full technical details on reward formulas and edge cases will be available in Astar’s official documentation.

* * *

## ❓What Happens If a dApp Doesn’t Qualify

If a dApp does not reach the 30M ASTR threshold:

**For the dApp:** No dApp rewards. The project is still listed but does not receive emissions.

**For stakers:** No impact on staker rewards. Stakers still earn base + adjustable staking rewards regardless of whether their chosen dApp qualifies for a tier.

This separation is important: staking to a project is never “wasted” from a staker reward perspective, even if the project doesn’t hit tier thresholds.

* * *

## 🖥 Portal UI Changes

### Main List View (Simplified)

The main dApp Staking page will show:

- All 16 dApps
- Sorted by staked amount (highest first)
- Displayed info: staked amount, staker count, category, project name

**Not displayed on main view:** Tier labels, dApp reward amounts

This removes the tier comparison that caused confusion. Users see a ranked list of projects by community support.

### dApp Detail Page (Full Information)

When viewing an individual project page:

- Current tier and rank
- Estimated dApp rewards
- Staked amount

This keeps detailed information accessible without cluttering the main experience.

* * *

## 🔄 Yearly Cycle: What Changes for Users

### Current Model (Three Periods Per Year)

Today, dApp Staking runs in cycles with Voting and Build & Earn periods. Users must:

- Restake or re-vote three times per year
- Track bonus periods to maximize rewards
- Perform maintenance actions to avoid missing incentives

### New Model (One Cycle Per Year)

Under the new model:

- Stake once per year
- Maintain position until the next yearly inflation recalculation
- No bonus tracking required (bonus allocation is now 0%)

The yearly reset aligns with when the inflation system recalculates. At that point, dApp Staking positions reset and users restake for the new cycle.

* * *

## 📋 Summary of Parameters

| Parameter | Current | New |
| --- | --- | --- |
| `max_registered_apps` | 500 | 16 |
| `slotNumberArgs` | [1000, 50] (dynamic) | [0, 16] (fixed) |
| dApps listed | ~72 | 16 |
| Active tiers | 4 | 2 |
| Tier 1 slots | 5% (~3) | 0 |
| Tier 2 slots | 20% (~12) | 37.5% (~6) |
| Tier 3 slots | 30% (~18) | 62.5% (~10) |
| Tier 4 slots | 45% (~27) | 0 |
| Tier 1 threshold | ~307M (3.57%) | ~200M (~2.32%) |
| Tier 2 threshold | ~76M (~0.89%) | ~80M ASTR (~0.93%) |
| Tier 3 threshold | ~20M (~0.23%) | ~30M ASTR (~0.35%) |
| Tier 4 threshold | ~1.7M (~0.02%) | 0M (~0%) |
| Tier 1 reward share | 25% | 0% |
| Tier 2 reward share | 47% | 70% |
| Tier 3 reward share | 25% | 30% |
| Tier 4 reward share | 3 | 0% |
| tier\_rank\_multipliers\* | NA | [0, 24\_000, 46\_700, 0] |
| Restaking frequency | 3x per year | 1x per year |

\*_Values are expressed in bips, where **10,000** = **100%.** The multipliers are [0%, 240%, 467%, 0%]. For clarification: 10,000 (100%) indicates that dApps receive only base rewards with no rank-based multipliers, while 0 indicates no rewards._

* * *

## 📅 Timeline

Assuming referendum cycles commence on Sunday (as anticipated), the following outlines the expected timeline for all governance procedures and the complete activation of Tokenomics 3.0 and the dApp Staking revamp.

### Governance Process

Two referendums will be executed:

1. **Tokenomics parameter updates**
2. **dApp Staking implementation (runtime upgrade)**

### Referendum 1: Tokenomics Parameters

| Milestone | Date |
| --- | --- |
| Main Council External Proposal | Saturday, February 21 |
| Voting period | Sunday, February 22 - Sunday, March 1 |
| Enactment | Tuesday, March 3 (2-day delay) |
| Inflation recalculation | Sunday, March 8 |

### Referendum 2: dApp Staking Runtime Upgrade

| Milestone | Date |
| --- | --- |
| Main Council External Proposal | Saturday, February 28 |
| Voting period | Sunday, March 1 - Sunday, March 8 |
| Runtime upgrade | Week of March 9 |

**Target go-live: March 9-15**

### Testnet Rollout

| Network | Timeline |
| --- | --- |
| Shibuya upgrade | This week (Thursday) |
| Shiden upgrade | Next week |

* * *

## 💬 Questions and Feedback

We welcome questions on:

- Threshold levels and whether they’re appropriate
- Reward distribution between tiers
- The rank-based reward calculation
- UI changes and what information should be visible
- Any other aspect of this implementation

This is a follow-up for community discussion. Final parameters will be confirmed before governance submission.

* * *

Gaius\_sama :astr:

_Astar Foundation_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![EzioRed](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/eziored/32/3665_2.png) [@EzioRed](https://forum.astar.network/u/EzioRed)\
**Post date:** [February 11, 2026, 11:19pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/14 "2026-02-11T23:19:36Z")

</div>

Personally, I find it highly positive when an ecosystem is clearly focused on achieving long-term appreciation and sustainability for its native token. This reflects a genuine commitment to the community and token holders—an element that is absolutely essential if we understand game theory within the framework of cryptocurrency decentralization.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![you425](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/you425/32/3313_2.png) [@you425](https://forum.astar.network/u/you425)\
**Post date:** [February 12, 2026, 5:43am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/15 "2026-02-12T05:43:58Z")

</div>

> [@Gaius\_sama](#):
>
> Circling back on this. After internal review, the parameter we’ll propose is a Decay Rate of **99.999996%** (0.000004% decay per block).

Thank you for the clarification!  
I’m glad we were able to confirm.

There were a few points in the technical details of the Tier system that I wanted to clarify:

- As I understand it, the Tier reward pool is determined by how many slots are filled. So if the full pool corresponds to $30,000 worth of ASTR when all slots are filled, then if 70% of the slots are filled, the reward pool would be $21,000, and from that amount rewards would be allocated according to the multipliers for each rank — is that correct? (In the previous ranking system, unallocated slots were used to increase rewards for higher ranks, so I just want to confirm.)
- This would also mean that if everyone were in the same rank, the reward amounts would end up being the same.
- The example is labeled as “Tier 2,” but based on the multipliers it appears to correspond to Tier 3. The number of slots and the total reward amount look like Tier 2, but the multipliers match Tier 3, which is a bit confusing.

> [@Gaius\_sama](#):
>
> Example for Tier 2 (6 dApps, 240% multiplier)
> 
> Assume the tier budget is $21,000/month and all 6 slots are filled with dApps at various ranks:

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 12, 2026, 8:47am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/16 "2026-02-12T08:47:58Z")

</div>

Hi @you425

Thanks for the question.

> [@you425](#):
>
> As I understand it, the Tier reward pool is determined by how many slots are filled. So if the full pool corresponds to $30,000 worth of ASTR when all slots are filled, then if 70% of the slots are filled, the reward pool would be $21,000, and from that amount rewards would be allocated according to the multipliers for each rank — is that correct? (In the previous ranking system, unallocated slots were used to increase rewards for higher ranks, so I just want to confirm.)

The reward pool is fixed and determined by inflation, 13% of inflation goes to dApp rewards, split proportionally between Tier 2 (70%) and Tier 3 (30%). Only the **distribution** depends on filled slots. If not all slots are filled, the remaining tokens are not minted (same as the current model).

**Example:** Tier 2 has a reward pool of $21,000 worth of ASTR, but only 4 slots are filled. Rewards for each dApp are calculated using the weight system and their ranks. For simplicity, let’s say only 65% of allocated rewards ($13,650) are needed to reward the 4 filled slots. The remaining 35% ($7,350) is not distributed and therefore not minted.

See this section for details: [Reward Pool Distribution](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/13#p-35332-reward-pool-distribution-11)

> [@you425](#):
>
> This would also mean that if everyone were in the same rank, the reward amounts would end up being the same.

Correct, but the amount depends on which rank. If all dApps in a tier are positioned at the same rank (e.g., Rank 10), they split the max tier reward allocation pool with equal weight. Their rewards will be identical, but lower compared to a scenario where only one dApp holds Rank 10. This prevents overspending and ensures the tier’s allocated pool isn’t exceeded when all dApps reach top positions.

These are edge cases, I’ll share a spreadsheet soon to illustrate expected rewards across different scenarios. Also note: full technical details and formulas will be published in the documentation rather than discussed on the forum.

> [@you425](#):
>
> The example is labeled as “Tier 2,” but based on the multipliers it appears to correspond to Tier 3. The number of slots and the total reward amount look like Tier 2, but the multipliers match Tier 3, which is a bit confusing.

The Tier 2 rank multiplier is **240%** and Tier 3 is **467%** , as referenced [here](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/13#p-35332-within-tier-reward-distribution-12) and [here](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/13#p-35332-step-3-weight-calculation-24). The example is correct: Tier 2, 6 dApps for 6 slots, with a 240% multiplier.

Let me know if anything needs clarification.

* * *

Gaius\_sama :astr:  
_Astar Foundation_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 12, 2026, 11:39am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/17 "2026-02-12T11:39:34Z")

</div>

Hi everyone,

As mentioned earlier, here are some reward calculation scenarios for better visibility.

**Note:** These visuals illustrate expected reward calculations under various scenarios, they are not predictions of actual distribution in the new model, which depends on multiple factors (ASTR price, slot and rank filling, staked amounts, etc.).

## Main Scenario (Ideal)

These scenarios assume all 16 dApps fill all available slots across different ranks (e.g., dApp 1 at Tier 2 Rank 10, dApp 2 at Tier 2 Rank 8, [..] dApp 16 at Tier 3 Rank 0).

### Tier 2

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/plasmnet/original/2X/b/b790ca9542f0113f1f4dea084e94b01960754b55.png)

### Tier 3

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/plasmnet/original/2X/2/236d8c580a97d458a517ba4e78591f10046b9d1d.png)

## Edge Cases

The following scenarios assume an ASTR price of **$0.01** :

| Line | Scenario | Description |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | **Target** | Ideal scenario, all 16 slots filled, all dApps on different ranks, no rank collision |
| 2 | **All Max Rank** | All dApps have similar staked amounts, placing them at the same rank (Rank 10), rank collision |
| 3 | **All Rank 0** | All dApps at the lowest rank (Rank 0). Undistributed rewards are not minted |
| 4 | **Partial Filling (4)** | Only 4 slots filled by 4 dApps. Undistributed rewards are not minted |
| 5 | **1 dApp Rank 4** | Single slot filled with one dApp at Rank 4 |
| 6 | **High Ranks** | All slots filled, dApps clustered at higher ranks with some collision |

### Tier 2

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/plasmnet/original/2X/9/9142e57d67a177b4939992dbdfc6ec08dd8d400e.png)

### Tier 3

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/uploads/plasmnet/original/2X/a/ab873e5d96b5ffcd54ad937324ce031ed12a1be4.png)

I hope this helps clarify the technical implementation and expected outcomes for dApp rewards.

* * *

Gaius\_sama :astr:  
_Astar Foundation_

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![you425](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/you425/32/3313_2.png) [@you425](https://forum.astar.network/u/you425)\
**Post date:** [February 13, 2026, 6:11am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/18 "2026-02-13T06:11:39Z")

</div>

> [@Gaius\_sama](#):
>
> The Tier 2 rank multiplier is **240%** and Tier 3 is **467%** , as referenced [here](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/13#p-35332-within-tier-reward-distribution-12) and [here](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/13#p-35332-step-3-weight-calculation-24). The example is correct: Tier 2, 6 dApps for 6 slots, with a 240% multiplier.

My apologies — I misunderstood and thought it was the other way around.

> [@Gaius\_sama](#):
>
> As mentioned earlier, here are some reward calculation scenarios for better visibility.

Thank you. With the additional examples provided, I believe I now understand the previous calculation formula more clearly.

If the total of the rank multipliers exceeds half of the allocation, the base reward decreases accordingly. And if it is below that threshold, not all of the rewards are used, meaning the unused portion is simply not issued — that is my understanding.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gaius\_sama](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/gaius_sama/32/4741_2.png) [@Gaius\_sama](https://forum.astar.network/u/Gaius_sama)\
**Post date:** [February 13, 2026, 8:11am UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/19 "2026-02-13T08:11:14Z")

</div>

> [@you425](#):
>
> If the total of the rank multipliers exceeds half of the allocation, the base reward decreases accordingly. And if it is below that threshold, not all of the rewards are used, meaning the unused portion is simply not issued — that is my understanding.

This is correct. 👍

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![0xMR\_IMAN](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.astar.network/0xmr_iman/32/5496_2.png) [@0xMR\_IMAN](https://forum.astar.network/u/0xMR_IMAN)\
**Post date:** [February 14, 2026, 6:10pm UTC](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345/20 "2026-02-14T18:10:13Z")

</div>

> [@Gaius\_sama](#):
>
> Astar’s position is notable: competitive staking returns with one of the lowest actual inflation rates in the comparison set.
> 
> Networks with higher APR often have significantly higher inflation (Cosmos at 10%, Sui at 17.4%). Networks with lower inflation typically offer much lower yields (Ethereum at 2.82%, Cardano at 2.32%).
> 
> At ~10% APY with ~2.3% actual inflation, Astar offers strong real yield. The proposed changes maintain attractive staking returns while tightening the inflation ceiling further.
> 
> * * *
> 
> ## Expected Outcomes
> 
> ### For Tokenomics
> 
> ✅ **Fixed supply model activated.** The decay factor activation switches Astar from inflationary tokenomics to a fixed supply model with emissions converging toward a max cap.  
> ✅ **Lower inflation ceiling.** Max yearly inflation reduced from 7% to 5.5%.  
> ✅ **~129M ASTR less emitted yearly.** 21.4% reduction in the emission cap.  
> ✅ **Tighter supply convergence.** Max supply target drops from ~10.5B to ~10B ASTR.  
> ✅ **Burndrop amplifies deflation.** Burns reduce the max supply cap directly.
> 
> ### For Stakers
> 
> ✅ **Simpler experience.** No bonus staking, no voting period mechanics. Stake once per year.  
> ✅ **Sustainable APY.** Expected APY moves from ~17.5% today to ~10%. Lower, but more predictable.  
> ✅ **Predictable rewards.** Returns rely on base and adjustable components rather than period-specific incentives.
> 
> ### For Builders
> 
> ✅ **Higher quality set.** Rewards concentrate on 16 high-impact projects.  
> ✅ **More meaningful allocations.** Fewer projects sharing the reward pool means more per qualifying project.  
> ✅ **Incentive to keep building.** Regular review creates pressure to deliver.  
> ✅ **Ecosystem cleanup.** Enables removal of dormant projects.
> 
> * * *
> 
> ## Timeline
> 
> ⚠ **Critical deadline: March 7, 2026**
> 
> 1. **Inflation parameters must be updated before March 7, 2026** to apply for the upcoming yearly cycle.
> 2. **dApp Staking model transition targets the next voting cycle starting on March 7, 2026** , allowing users to claim existing bonuses before the change.
> 
> Governance proposals need to pass with sufficient time for implementation.
> 
> * * *
> 
> ## Next Steps
> 
> 1. Community discussion and feedback on this proposal (~2 weeks)
> 2. Technical implementation post with code modifications and backend details (next week)
> 3. Finalize parameter values based on community input
> 4. Submit governance referendums for inflation parameter and dApp Staking model changes
> 5. Implementation and UI updates ahead of March 7, 2026 deadline
> 
> We welcome feedback on the proposed parameters, eligibility criteria, and transition timeline.

This is not a cosmetic update.

It’s a structural tightening of Astar’s monetary policy.

Cutting max inflation from 7% → 5.5%, activating decay, capping dApp Staking to 16 projects, and aligning it with Burndrop signals one clear shift:

Astar is moving from growth by expansion to growth by discipline.

Less token leakage.

Less passive reward farming.

More focus on high impact builders.

More predictable supply dynamics.

The real story isn’t just “lower inflation.”

It’s supply convergence + active burn mechanics + capital efficiency at the Collective level.

That’s how you transition from experimental tokenomics to long term economic architecture.

[Next page](https://forum.astar.network/t/proposal-tokenomics-3-0-dapp-staking-changes/9345.md?page=2)