Ericsson

gmgm! some post TGE thoughts, been gathering feedback over the past day and talking to many of yall 1:1, figured I'd summarize some of the learnings. on price action: we dipped significantly below our starting price of $30m FDV. currently around $8M FDV with around ~26% floating. its hard for me to comment on price besides the fact that I of course think we're undervalued. nothing much though we can do here besides deliver on Genesis and our roadmap. on the airdrop: we ended up airdropping 16.25% of total supply to 46,718 wallets. another ~6% of total supply went to presale buyers. presale allocations from the feb 2026 sale were increased by 1.5x. another 1.25% funded RSGP incentives for CEX trading and DEX LP activity. re. the airdrop, 26.6% of the 810M RSGP dropped was sold on DEX, 13.8% was transferred to other addresses, 3% of went back into LP positions, and 56.4% is still held. wallets that started selling within the first hour account for 56% of airdrop sells, within six hours 87%. the 500 biggest sellers account for 72%. how the airdrop worked: there were three buckets - season points (10% of supply), NFT holdings and renown (5%), and the public loot drop (1%). for season points, there were eleven airdrop points seasons that the 10% had to be split between. two of these we'd explicitly promised a fixed allocation (Gold Rush S2 - 3%, First Landing - 1.5%). these ended up being significantly overweight, leaving only 5.5% to split between the remaining 9 seasons (theater of magic - 0.65%, Gold Rush S1 - 0.5%, dungeons - 0.5%, airdrop s1 (base) - 0.125%, airdrop s2 (blast pre-TGE) - 0.3%, airdrop s3 (blast post-TGE) - 0.3%, mando's christmas - 0.125%). within a season, tokens were split pro rata based on points earned in that season. for NFT holdings, 3% of supply was a flat airdrop to NFTs held on the Aug 28th snapshot - 1.9% to Founders (depr), 0.9% to Cores (depr), and 0.2% to islands. 2% of supply went to Renown - a time-holding weighted composite of overall NFT holdings and loyalty. the public loot drop, 1% was split to chests rolled. for this drop, anyone could claim, and the # of chests they got were based on their onchain history score (activity, holdings). how season bucket splits (outside the fixed / promised allocations) were decided: a combination of factors, including - effective fees paid ($), how early the season was, how many participants, subjective factors like impact on cambria growth, etc. how the Airdrop Recipient Profile (ARP) score worked: for each airdrop recipient, we calculated a score that affected how raw season points converted to actual token allocations. this only touched the points (10%) bucket - nfts, loot chests were not affected. this score ranged from 0.4 to 1.25 (1 by default). what raises score: dozens of factors - NFTs held, first founder / loyalty status, net spend, engagement over time, seasons played, charters minted/held, presale participation, cosmetics held, creator scores, etc. etc. what lowers score: player conduct signals (exploit abusing, cheating, botting, sybil activity, wash trading, referral group farming, etc). certain seasons where airdrop point distribution was curved (in an attempt to scale rewards not purely on $ risked and have the average player benefit) were subject to significant sybil activity to exploit this distribution. players who sybilled these seasons were penalized accordingly (but limited only to the points earned in those seasons). nft selling patterns (scaling with share sold, not volume) were also analyzed and contributed to lower scores, as this was considered a factor indicating "farmer" vs "long term participant" skew. transfers between multiple wallets linked were ignored. this factor touched 1,792 accounts with a median cut of 25%. as a group, these players were still paid ~88% of raw, and many were actually above raw with higher starting scores. sales were considered against net buying - nfts held at time of snapshot lowers share sold - net buyers were up. retroactive thoughts: in retrospect, I think we made two mistakes. 1) we should have just increased the total % supply for the airdrop, from 16.25% to 20%. this would have fixed the imbalance between the fixed seasons with already-promised allocations (GR S2, first landing) and the rest. players most affected by this imbalance were the early Duel Arena players on Blast, and Gold Rush Season 3, whose allocation came in under expectations set (but not explicitly promised). 2) we should have just done the airdrop pro rata instead of using the ARP score. there's two conflicting arguments here: A (pro ARP): the ARP score DID end up accurately identifying "farmers" / people that were going to just cash out and dump their tokens. the penalised bands sold 60% of their tokens, the capped band only 11%. out of the 25 largest sellers, 23 had a score below 1, and 23 were marked as players that were linked to a farm / sybil group. NFT holding DID also accurately predict token holding. NFT holders above a score of 1 held 72% of their airdrop, players that held and then sold most of their nfts held 50% of their airdrop, while points-only recipients held only 38%. players that ONLY held NFTs and never farmed airdrop points held an incredible 90%. B (against ARP): the airdrop goals should not have been "calculate a distribution that scientifically predicts who will hold." given we ran an airdrop campaign, the implicit expectation of players is that they'd be rewarded tokens based on their points. everything that we "fixed" with the distribution (punishing sybils, cheating, exploits, botting, wash trading) was done retroactively instead of just straight up banning these players early on. what we ended up doing over the past few years was create an environment and community culture that harbored these players, with only sporadic enforcement of rules. thus, they have a rational counterpoint that 1) their continued engagement benefited us, 2) that many were forced to engage in these behaviors to remain competitive, 3) that they were not told ahead of time that this could be a consequence, and 4) getting "vibe-filtered" actually led to them selling it all in rage, instead of the other way around. ultimately, the ARP ended up not changing distribution much (~12% of the tokens shifted as a result of ARP) while creating unnecessary FUD, confusion, uncertainty, and division within the community. we also made a timing mistake during launch. to run a final simulation test to ensure no reverts would impair distribution, we queued up / pre-signed a bunch of transactions in our multisig. because all signatures were present, a 3rd party (0x5AF5b3FB44B758c8d998fFeDAFd35a6D5b97E16A via 0x92E92dA7495daCbA7b088899255f3dCf2b41423D) was able to execute the 1st batch of presale distributions, accounting for around 3.5% of the supply. moving forward: at the current moment, i don't think dwelling on these issues too long is a good use of our time - we should be laser focused on shipping genesis and growing the protocol, any more time spent here is massively expensive in terms of opportunity cost. however, I do want to eventually revisit and correct the two biggest imbalances (duel arena / gold rush s3 weighting, and token allocation lost to ARP scores specifically due to nft selling) at some point in the future when there's more value to distribute. this will not be in additional tokens (it's too late for that, tokens are scaling units of value). but more in terms of adjusting for the value of the slashed tokens at time of TGE. our community is something we pride ourselves on, and though the recent airdrop has strained and tested some of those connections, I have no doubt that we will weather this storm. crypto is ugly - there's no question about it - the financial incentives create extremely pvp scenarios sometimes. decisions that we are required to make daily touch assets that people care extremely deeply about, and being even slightly off from perfect can hurt a significant amount of people. we have our fair share of fuckups, so I am endlessly grateful for the continued grace that most of our holders continue to extend to us. what's next: our current priority will be continuing to ship - token utility / roadmap and the launch of genesis testnet -> mainnet. this is the only way we can demonstrate the value of the token and make the vision clear to a bigger segment of traders and market participants. wish us luck!

why is @playcambria launching a token? sharing a few deep dive thoughts on the topic from my POV 🧵 Q: to start, what is cambria building? albion/RS-like persistent world w/ hyperfinancialized economy of onchain stakes (NFTs, tokens, vol). axie infinity-style eco flywheels on top of a few core risk gameplay loops we've designed around real stakes (artifact farming pvm, raids, ruined dungeons). at a high level, there's only 2 assets at the top that matter: the token (RSGP, think AXS) and charter NFT (think Axies - founding set, then controlled emission of more charters). we don't have a SLP-equivalent floating currency ingame, instead using Silver (1:1 ingame currency pegged to USDC deposited). key starting observation: the token has ultimate primacy. it directly owns the economy and the treasury. if we were ever to end the game, everything folds back into the token first before discontinuation. utility #1 with the token is an algorithmic % allocation of incoming rev from game loops going out to buybacks / bribes (think rng airdrops to holders). this is a clean, modelallable base layer that represents the first step of the flywheel. now we layer in charters, which represents the asset speculation layer of the digital economy being created by this protocol. here, players buy charters / issue new charters / stake charters to various yield venues / sell charters to actively compete in the core gameplay loop. charters is something you pick up after acquiring RSGP if you want to directly engage with the game. there's more further down: energy ($ burned in real time to earn Gold, Silver, Royal Favor, net revenue generating), game NFTs (islands, legendaries, heirlooms) that serve as early juice to reward the core energy loop, royal favor -> locked token emissions, etc. but all you really need to know is that the game takes a revenue cut from these loops into the treasury. zooming back out, the core flywheel is simple - revenue generating loop that's (unsustainably) incentivized early for big green candles / FOMO -> treasury expansion from stables -> backing for asset speculation and token -> bigger incentives budget. utility #2, #3, etc. of token all becomes downstream of this. vote-escrowed governance / proof of stake to control incentive gauges. token required to do x, y, z in the ecosystem. as the "onchain nation state" of cambria grows, it accumulates TVL, assets, network effects with players, etc. which are owned by RSGP. Q: why not launch token earlier? tbh we just haven't really needed a token, until now. it didn't make sense as a design lever for the risk-to-earn minigames we've launched before this. durable, non-incentivized onchain fee rev from these minigames has proven elusive, so the clean revenue token model of e.g. Hyperliquid isn't quite there. we're getting close w/ Dungeon Fishing, but its at like $1m of annualized rev post-airdrop incentives. a full MMO that's 24/7 online and has deep, sustainable economics is something we've been iterating on since we started Cambria. as you can imagine, its a massive endeavor. 3 playtest seasons later, we're finally reasonably confident enough to take it to mainnet. Genesis is the first thing we'll ship that actually does need a token w/ deeper liquidity than genesis nfts for the flywheel to work. it does kind of suck that the macro environment (which is also a key tailwind for the eco flywheel) is significantly degraded now vs even 2 years ago. but this is out of our control. there's been gamefi launches in the past 2 years that have achieved wins for holders (at least immediately on TGE) just because of the macro (market good, lots of people win) before the reality of product fit hit, we started building later in the cycle and never had this a slam dunk option. BUT - I do think though there's also pros to launching low in these environments. part of the reflexivity needs the massive upside NOT to be baked in at the beginning. if everyone is early to a "ponzinomics" loop, no one is, the bar to get things going gets so much higher. and at least personal motivation wise, i much prefer an outcome where we actually win here and reinvent the industry / bring a new type of "game" to the market. Q: why 25% float day 1, fully unlocked, no CEX? we have a lot of airdrop overhang from 2 years of points programs, most of which were earned in better market conditions. we explored the usual low float, "engineered" TGE with day1 speculation model, but this at the end of the day, this involved vesting/lockups that would have just been almost insurmountable sell pressure later on. given we have a probably the best shot (from a core product standpoint) of making wide scale crypto gaming work out of anyone, we're looking to play to our strengths here. if the flywheel takes off, we plan to ladder up into broader, "earned" retail CEX distribution instead of blowing all of our stables on day 1 in a market where retail day1 speculation is close to ATL. honestly, i also really just want us to be as close as possible to what our real market FDV is before we launch. as we release more info / get closer to mainnet, people can naturally speculate and gradually enter as the r/r of the trade fluctuates and we get closer to obvious PMF. I think this is natural and fun. after TGE, our new holder base will naturally evolve. Q: what's the bull case? axie infinity but without the crash. we have a sustainable, net revenue generating core loop. the speculative assets (mostly nfts) on top can 100x or -90% like macau real estate, but there's a floor of players that will always come to the casino. cambria becomes THE MMO of ethereum, with billion-dollar asset / guild treasury TVLs, war games with massive stakes, all onchain and governed by a protocol made up of its biggest players and guilds. a game where value alignment between the game as its players is enforced in code and tokenomics. stories and stakes that people actually care about, with an economy bigger than most countries. Q: what's the bear case? flywheel sputters out, macro continues to deteriorate. execution issues - hacks/security, industrial farming / edge exploitation that can't be designed around, UA doesn't scale / conversion of gamers into risk takers fails. incentives cost more than revenue brought in. high-effort gaming continues to lose to passive entertainment. crypto adoption continues to slow. Q: why an actual game? instead of a gamefi "game" thats just a web UI / idle defi wrapper #1 because I think its more interesting to build. #2 is because its a billions-or-zero bet. only an actual game can be fully immersive. actual games are also imo the only way something like this actually massively breaks out into the mainstream - you get viral footage, real interactive stories, emergent content from MMO sandbox / pvp that scales. our biggest growth inflection point will be winning over Albion Online, Runescape, WoW players who want to play actual games and enjoy the hyperfinancialized RMT-leaning edge of oldschool degen runescape or the current grey market RMT of current MMOs. imagine all of that with digital, instant money that you can layer prediction markets, perps, etc. on top. "your loot is real" / "earn massive $ by mastering the meta of this game" Q: how can I get involved? buy RSGP or put us on your watchlist. i'll share the journey / PMF signals as we go. if you want to play - get a charter NFT, join our upcoming testnet. LPing into the @aeroxyz RSGP / USDC pool early is another cool way to potentially get in w/ early incentives.

genesis is our biggest release to date, the full @playcambria MMORPG. everything starts w/ Founding Charters (4,096), which forms the genesis of the Crown Treasury ingame, a "prize pool" that's managed like a central bank - deploy Charters to earn from the game eco. no WL giveaways, no collabs, and no free mints for Founding Charters. only way to get in is to apply. our onchain profiling tech helps us evaluate your onchain activity, holdings, and X presence to hand curate a starting group of adventurers and traders for Voyage I. Viceroy phase opens Wednesday at 11am ET, GTD / FCFS opens Thursday. mint price TBD. this mint is where the initial mainnet economy starts, with all mint revenue going towards the Crown Treasury (yield) Fund or RSGP Fund deployed over the first few weeks to kickstart the flywheel. note: Genesis is a fresh start - historical Cambria holdings and other progress helps in your application, but these are by no means required. Founding Charter minters = first generation of Genesis players.