Alpha updated the rules again yesterday! There will no longer be prior announcements of specific airdrop projects (i.e., 'blind airdrop'); I believe this adjustment for ordinary players is a double-edged sword. Considering the current point rules, airdrop mechanisms, and market feedback, as an old Alpha player, let's analyze the pros and cons together. If you have other views, feel free to discuss in the comments:
1. Potential benefits: reduced competition, increased fairness
1, reducing the participation gap caused by 'low profitability'
In the past, when project names were announced earlier, players would choose to participate in high-profile projects with expectations (such as AI, blockchain), while lesser-known projects remained ignored. The new rules force all projects to be 'anonymized,' avoiding situations where players refuse participation due to subjective assessments of 'low profitability,' compelling studios and retail investors to constantly participate in all airdrops, which, in turn, may allow lesser-known quality projects to gain an even distribution.
2, weakening the studio's advantage in previous forecasting
Studios rely on informational advantages of projects for pre-planning (e.g., accumulating relevant tokens, executing specific transactions on the blockchain). After the rule update, their effectiveness in data mining and resource allocation decreases, and the gap in starting positions between retail investors and studios narrows.
3, point expenditures become more dispersed, reducing the intensity of competition
Each time, 15 points must be spent to obtain, if a player hesitates due to unknown projects, some high-point users may choose to 'leave' the game, which indirectly reduces pressure on competition. For example, a user with 200 points, if they refuse to obtain, may lead to a faster drop in the threshold for subsequent airdrops to 185 points, benefiting players with average and low points.
2, significant drawbacks: rising risks of decisions and costs
1, unable to assess the value of the project, obtaining turns into 'opening blind boxes'
Players need to spend 15 points (about 1.5 days of active participation) to obtain an unknown project; if they encounter tokens with low liquidity (like assets similar to ZKJ/KOGE, which can quickly depreciate), they may face the risk of loss upon obtaining. Examples show that recently the average income from airdrops was only $70; if the project is bad, income may fall below $30, not even covering transaction costs.
2, loss of the opportunity to optimize the points strategy
According to previous rules, players could focus on high-value projects (for example, PublicAI requires 240 points) to accumulate points. With the new rules, players are forced to 'broadly spread the net'; they need to maintain high points for a long time (daily over 16 points), but they cannot accurately distribute points, which may lead to insufficient points when high-value airdrops appear.
3, re-verification increases the burden on experience
If face verification frequently appears during obtaining (e.g., users report the need for preliminary verification + formal double verification), players may abandon actions due to a poor experience, spending points without benefit.
3. How can an ordinary player find a way out?
· Pros: rules aimed at 'reducing inequality,' studios' advantage decreases, players with average and low points find it easier to obtain residual airdrops; the distribution of project traffic becomes healthier, avoiding speculation congestion.
· Disadvantages: rising costs of personal decisions, increasing uncertainty of profits, need to bear higher risks of experimentation.
Regarding this update, three small tips for personal use, welcome to discuss:
1, conservative: focus on 'the second stage of airdrops with reduced points,' using lower points (from 200 points) to obtain opportunities for experiments, even if the project is unsuccessful, losses will be limited.
2, radicals: maintain a daily minimum of 16 points using the 'get everything' strategy to cover odds, relying on the law of large numbers to cover low profits.
3, technical approach: prioritize using Binance Wallet to reduce transaction costs, and use blockchain tools to monitor new project contracts to pre-identify potential high-value airdrops and allocate resources in advance.
This update essentially marks another stage of the game between the platform and the studio, retail investors need to rethink strategies between increasing fairness and informational opacity.
If the verification process can be optimized further or hints for project categories (e.g., labels like 'AI' or 'DeFi') can be added, it may reduce players' anxiety.
