Not sure why something inevitable, predictable, and discussed year+ ago is called bad economics :P
let's compare 2 economics models:
actual dcity model
- fixed income on items
- % decrease variables
- governance affecting inflation
- roi being dependant from long term governance and market price for token(managing inflation to keep it high "enough" for long term, or to keep inflation super high short term then whatever - that's how dcity was governed by holders)
one of the other possible versions considered at creation:
- income shares and fixed SIM distribution (harder to explain, and understand to players)
- roi going down every next item and player
- governance not affecting inflation
- minimal or 0 player influence on game economics
We print tokens from air to people and it's inevitable that people will sell tokens and price will go down.
First model creates much more gameplay around politics and multiple different ways to maximize roi. Also it auto-adjust level of printed tokens to actual game economy, automated sustainability and makes whole thing more dynamic. So it doesn't print 5000$ of tokens if players can sell only 600$(buy orders)
Second model with time makes 1 income share produce less and less SIM. Less decisions to make, less game to play.
Both eventually end same way, ROI goes down, hard to even imagine for me ROI going up long term, i guess roi going up would be best economics, but is it really possible.
If model we used is bad economics, is it possible to print few k $ from air to players = good economics? How?
There is an answer for that :) in hive rewards, could go splinterlands way and give 0% of spent hive back, and buy tokens to keep you happy. Maybe distribute SIM also as ranking rewards. But idea here was to make it clear from the beginning about funds and decrease dev share over time. Until we reach 5% for dev, 95% back to game, with community fund, and holders managing it.
I think second model above represents Splinterlands, could add for both what happens with $ spent on random items as another point, but focused more about just token.