The token allocation lacks transparency, as there is no explicit information on how tokens are distributed among team members, advisors, early investors, and gamers. This raises significant concerns about fairness and transparency.
The vesting schedule is entirely absent from the provided sources, making it impossible to assess whether it aligns with industry standards or ensures long-term team commitment. This is a critical oversight.
There are no measures mentioned to prevent token dumping by early investors or team members, which could destabilize the game's economy and undermine stakeholder trust.
The alignment between token allocation and long-term project goals is unclear due to the lack of detailed information. While player ownership is emphasized, the absence of team and advisor allocations creates ambiguity.
The communication about allocation details and any changes is nonexistent, further reducing transparency and stakeholder confidence.
The allocation and vesting strategy significantly underperforms industry standards, as it fails to provide basic details that are typically expected for fair and transparent token distribution.
Introduction
Token allocation and vesting schedules are critical components of any Web3 game's economic design, as they directly influence the project's long-term success and stakeholder incentives.
In Phantom Galaxies, the Astrafer token (ASTRAFER) plays a central role in governance, in-game transactions, and player ownership.
[1a]This report will examine the extent to which Phantom Galaxies's token allocation and vesting schedule demonstrates fairness, transparency, and strategic alignment with the project's long-term goals.
A detailed analysis of the token allocation among team members, advisors, early investors, and gamers.
An assessment of the vesting schedule, including whether it employs linear, graded, or cliff periods.
A discussion on the fairness, transparency, and strategic alignment of the token distribution with the project's long-term success.
Token Allocation
Token allocation in Phantom Galaxies is a critical aspect of its economic design, yet the exact distribution of ASTRAFER tokens among team members, advisors, early investors, and gamers is not explicitly detailed in the provided sources.
However, the sources do highlight the role of player-owned planets and asteroids in generating ASTRAFER tokens, suggesting that a significant portion of the token supply may be distributed to players through gameplay and ownership incentives.
[1b][1c]
Player-owned planets and asteroids are allocated a set amount of ASTRAFER, which can be increased based on engagement and development.
[1d]
The Community Treasury takes a percentage of revenue streams, which is then used to fund reward pools and distribute ASTRAFER back to holders.
[1e]
The lack of explicit information on team and advisor allocations raises questions about transparency and fairness in token distribution.
Vesting Schedule
The provided sources do not include specific details about the vesting schedule for ASTRAFER tokens allocated to the team, advisors, or early investors.
In the absence of such information, it is challenging to assess the fairness of the vesting schedule or its alignment with industry standards.
No information is provided on whether the vesting schedule employs linear, graded, or cliff periods.
The absence of a vesting schedule raises concerns about the potential for token dumping by early investors or team members, which could destabilize the game's economy.
Further transparency regarding the vesting schedule would help ensure that team incentives are aligned with the project's long-term success.
Fairness and Strategic Alignment
While Phantom Galaxies emphasizes player ownership and engagement through its tokenomics, the lack of transparency around token allocation and vesting schedules is a notable concern.
The project's focus on player-owned planets and community-driven governance suggests a commitment to decentralizing token ownership over time.
[1f]
The game’s design incentivizes players to earn and hold ASTRAFER through gameplay and ownership of in-game assets, which aligns with long-term project goals.
[1b]
However, the lack of transparency around team and advisor allocations could undermine stakeholder trust and raise questions about fairness.
Transparency in token allocation and vesting schedules would help ensure that the project’s economic design is robust, fair, and aligned with its long-term vision.
Conclusion
Phantom Galaxies demonstrates a strong commitment to player ownership and community-driven governance through its tokenomics design, but the lack of transparency around token allocation and vesting schedules presents a significant limitation.
While player incentives and decentralized ownership are well-aligned with the project's long-term goals, the absence of detailed information on team and advisor allocations raises concerns about fairness and economic stability.
Player-owned planets and community treasury mechanisms effectively incentivize engagement and ASTRAFER distribution among players.
[1c][1i]
The lack of information on team and advisor allocations and vesting schedules undermines transparency and raises questions about fairness.
Future research should focus on obtaining detailed information on token allocation and vesting schedules to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of Phantom Galaxies's economic design.
