Introduction

Token allocation and vesting schedules are critical components of Web3 gaming economies, ensuring that incentives are aligned with long-term project success and that the interests of all stakeholders are protected. For Spider Tanks, the SILK token's allocation and distribution mechanisms are designed to balance player rewards with the sustainability of the game's economy, but key details about team and advisor vesting schedules remain undisclosed. This report will cover:

• The allocation of SILK tokens among players, node operators, and other stakeholders, highlighting the balance between player rewards and ecosystem sustainability. [1a] [1b]
• The role of Gala and GAMEDIA in the SILK allocation process, including their combined 30% share of the daily Non-Replacement Allowance. [1c]
• The missing information on team and advisor vesting schedules, which is crucial for a full assessment of Spider Tanks' tokenomics.

Token Allocation Mechanisms

Spider Tanks employs a dual-token allocation system based on Replacement and Non-Replacement Allowances, which are designed to balance player rewards with the long-term sustainability of the game's economy: [1a] [1b]

• The Replacement Allowance is tied to daily SILK spending, with burned SILK from player purchases determining the size of the following day’s Replacement Allowance. This creates a direct link between player activity and token issuance. [1a]
• The Non-Replacement Allowance is governed by the circulating supply of SILK relative to its soft cap, ensuring that token issuance decreases as the supply approaches the cap. This mechanism encourages sustainability by limiting long-term inflation. [1b]
• Players, node operators, and map owners receive SILK based on their contributions to the ecosystem, with allocations tied to gameplay activity and operational efforts. This ensures that rewards are earned through participation rather than speculative holding. [1h] [1i]

Role of Gala and GAMEDIA

Gala and GAMEDIA, the publisher and developer of Spider Tanks respectively, play a significant role in the SILK allocation process, as evidenced by their combined 30% share of the daily Non-Replacement Allowance: [1c]

• Gala and GAMEDIA’s 30% share of the daily Non-Replacement Allowance suggests a significant degree of control over SILK issuance, which could raise concerns about centralization and transparency if not managed carefully. [1c]
• The discretionary power of Gala and GAMEDIA to add temporary Non-Replacement Allowance to NFT Player SILK issuance further underscores their influence over the tokenomics, which could impact the game’s economic stability if misused. [1l]
• While this allocation supports the development and maintenance of the game, the lack of detailed information on how these funds are used or distributed limits transparency, potentially undermining trust among players and other stakeholders.

Missing Vesting Schedule Information

A critical gap in the available information is the lack of detail on vesting schedules for team members, advisors, and early investors, which are essential for evaluating whether the tokenomics align with long-term project success:

• The absence of information on team and advisor vesting schedules makes it difficult to assess whether these stakeholders are incentivized to contribute to the project’s long-term success or if they could potentially dump tokens for short-term gains.
• Without clear details on vesting periods, cliff durations, or performance-based unlocks, it is impossible to determine whether the token allocation aligns with the project’s strategic goals or if it risks destabilizing the economy through excessive token sales.
• The lack of transparency in this area could undermine stakeholder confidence, as players and investors may question whether the team’s incentives are fully aligned with the health of the game’s economy.

Conclusion

Spider Tanks' SILK token allocation demonstrates a thoughtful approach to balancing player rewards with the long-term sustainability of the game's economy, but key gaps in transparency remain: Future research should focus on obtaining detailed information about team and advisor vesting schedules, as this is essential for a comprehensive assessment of Spider Tanks' tokenomics and its alignment with long-term project success.

• The dual-token allocation system, based on Replacement and Non-Replacement Allowances, effectively ties token issuance to player activity and ecosystem health, promoting sustainability. [1a] [1b]
• Gala and GAMEDIA’s significant role in SILK allocation raises questions about centralization and transparency, particularly given their discretionary power to add temporary Non-Replacement Allowance. [1c] [1l]
• The lack of information on team and advisor vesting schedules is a critical gap that must be addressed to fully evaluate the fairness and long-term alignment of Spider Tanks' tokenomics.

References

[1] Spidet Tank. Spidet Tank Economy Litepaper. Spidet Tank. 27 Mar 2023. Available from: https://www.spidertanks.game/docs/Spider_Tanks_Lite_Paper.pdf