Ending the Zero-Sum Game: An In-Depth Research Report on Web3 Incentive Engineering and Odyssey Behavioral Dynamics

1. Preface — The “Singularity” of Odyssey

Web3 incentive mechanisms are at the critical point of transitioning from the “traffic illusion” back to the “essence of value.” Over the past few years, the Odyssey model has experienced peaks and bottlenecks. We have found that simple replication of the pattern can no longer create ripples in the overloaded information chain world.

1.1 Paradigm Shift: Why Do Most Odyssey Projects Fail to Achieve Results?

Although the Odyssey model has created many wealth-generating myths, by 2026, developers have realized that merely copying top projects is unlikely to produce a “breakout effect.” This poor performance fundamentally stems from a deep disconnect between incentive logic and user ecosystems.

• Increased Incentive Entropy Causes Homogenization and Internal Competition
  When 90% of projects demand users to repeatedly “cross-chain, stake, share” to earn nearly identical “Points,” the marginal returns on user attention sharply decline. This mimicry leads to rising incentive entropy—the scarcity of rewards is diluted by countless homogeneous projects. For example, in Linea’s “The Surge” and subsequent L2 point wars, users find themselves moving liquidity across dozens of highly similar protocols, only to receive shrinking inflationary points. Fatigue turns into “lying flat,” and incentive effects are exhausted in endless internal competition.

• Witch-Hunt Growth Without Game Mechanics Creates Fake Prosperity
  Many projects only learn the superficial “task wall” but ignore the deeper anti-witch game theory, resulting in most incentives being siphoned by professional farms using automation scripts. The experience of zkSync Era is a warning: despite over 6 million active addresses on paper, data reveals most are automated interactions for arbitrage. This “paper prosperity” caused governance crises during TGE, and most addresses (90%) quickly zeroed out after airdrops. Projects paid high customer acquisition costs but gained no real ecosystem depth.

• Disconnection Between Product Logic and Incentive Interaction Makes Participation Mechanical
  Breakout effects often stem from deep coupling between core product functions and reward mechanisms. If Odyssey tasks become unrelated to product value—like requiring privacy protocol users to publicly shout on Twitter—users cannot develop brand loyalty. Early platforms like Galxe forcibly bundled social tasks with DeFi projects, gaining tens of thousands of followers quickly, but attracting mainly low-net-worth task hunters. Larger capital users, annoyed by Web2-style forced interactions, left. Once tasks end, TVL often crashes within 24 hours, unable to generate emotional resonance or competitive barriers.

1.2 Defining Win-Win: Protocol Unit Economics (Unit Economics)

To break the deadlock of “poor results,” a win-win logic must shift from “buy traffic” to “build ecosystems.” We need to find a mathematical balance point:

1.2.1 Marginal Unit Revenue at the Protocol Level
Project teams must realize that the essence of Odyssey is precise customer acquisition cost (CAC):

Unit Margin = LTVuser − CACincentive

Only when the long-term fees, liquidity stickiness, or governance contributions (i.e., LTV) generated by users within the protocol exceed their rewards (Incentive), Odyssey ceases to be just “money printing” and becomes sustainable capital expansion.

1.2.2 Total Utility Capture at the User Level
Users’ pursuit of Odyssey in the future becomes more rational. They no longer settle for “potentially zero” points but calculate the overall return rate:

• Airdrops: Immediately liquidatable token shares.
• Utility: Long-term protocol rights (e.g., lifetime fee discounts, RWA income shares).
• Reputation: On-chain credit assets, the core credential for access to top-tier future projects.

1.3 Core Assumption: Incentives Are More Than Tokens — They Are a Composite of Credit, Privileges, and Revenue Rights
In deep incentive design, we overthrow the old assumption that “ERC-20 tokens are the sole driver.” A successful Odyssey capable of breaking out must have value support in three dimensions:

• Credit (Identity)
  Binding user contributions permanently via soul-bound tokens (SBT) or on-chain identity systems. Credit is not just a badge but an efficiency multiplier: high-credit users can unlock “no-deposit loans” or “task weight bonuses,” giving genuine contributors advantages over scripts.

• Privileges (Utility)
  Embedding rewards into product usage rights. For example, Odyssey winners could earn “veto power medals” in governance or priority access to new ecosystem projects. Privileges turn users from “passersby” into long-term holders.

• Revenue Rights (RWA / Real Yield)
  As compliance advances, the most attractive Odyssey projects in 2026 will introduce underlying profit-sharing logic. Rewards are no longer just inflationary air but anchored to real income streams (e.g., RWA bonds, DEX fee shares). This injection of real yield is the ultimate card for projects to stand out in bubbles and truly break out.

2. User Behavior Spectrum: From “Profit Seekers” to “On-Chain Citizens”

In future on-chain ecosystems, the traditional definition of “users” has dissolved. With chain abstraction and AI agents becoming widespread, the “soul” (or algorithm) behind addresses shows high differentiation. Understanding this spectrum is key to designing win-win incentive mechanisms.

2.1 User Layering Model: Deep Portrait Based on Motivation and Contribution

We categorize Odyssey participants into three representative Greek-letter tiers, based on behavior entropy and protocol loyalty, not just TVL.

2.1.1 Player Tiers

Gamma — Arbitrageurs (AI bounty hunters)

• Role: Pursuing maximum efficiency.
• Motivation: Purely rational. They care little about project vision; their only reference points are “risk-free rate” and “certainty of return.”
• Behavior: Script-driven interactions with ultra-low latency, congregating in gas fee valleys. Their paths are highly standardized and homogeneous.

Beta — Explorers (Hardcore users)

• Role: Deep ecosystem participants.
• Motivation: Resonance-driven. They value deep product experience, community identity, and long-term rights.
• Behavior: Actively participate in beta tests, proud of earning rare badges (SBT). They provide high-quality feedback, with interactions showing personal flair and subjective bias.

Alpha — Builders (Ecosystem pillars)

• Role: Core supporters and stakeholders.
• Motivation: Sovereignty-driven. Their goal is long-term governance, dividends, and building an unbreakable moat.
• Behavior: Large, long-term locked assets, submitting core proposals, running validation nodes. As noted, “they produce no noise, only credit.”

2.1.2 Behavioral Features and Quantitative Models

• Gamma’s Survival Law: Cold cost estimation
  For Gamma, Odyssey is a game of precise calculation. They ignore project vision, focusing solely on capital efficiency per unit time.

• Alpha’s Moat Effect: Power dynamics
  Alpha players disdain social media likes and retweets; their Odyssey manifests in sovereignty contributions. Their large asset holdings and technical maintenance directly determine protocol valuation and resilience.

2.1.3 Identity Collapse and “Consensus Alchemy”
Identity is not static but a dynamic spectrum. In excellent Odyssey design, user identity can undergo “quantum leaps”:

• From “Arbitrage” to “Exploration”: A Gamma player initially motivated by profit may, through deep interaction, be moved by excellent product experience or robust logic. When long-term holding yields surpass immediate profits, they experience “identity collapse” — shifting from “profit and leave” to “deep holding.”
• Project “Consensus Capture”: This leap is essentially a form of “alchemy” by the project. Low-quality projects only attract arbitrageurs, eventually collapsing as incentives dry up; high-quality projects generate centripetal force, turning “bounty hunters” into “guardians.”

Key insight: Incentive mechanisms are no longer rigid divide-and-conquer tools but a process of screening, filtering, and transformation. They recognize Gamma’s value but aim to leverage incentives to induce users to evolve from profit-driven retail to value partners.

2.2 Behavioral Heatmap Analysis: Nonlinear Paths of Mainstream Layer 2 Tasks

Before 2024, Odyssey tasks followed linear paths (e.g., follow Twitter → cross-chain → swap). In the future, “intent-centric” design makes user behavior heatmaps highly nonlinear and network-like.

2.2.1 From “Task-Driven” to “Intent-Driven” Pathways
Data from Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base shows:

• Path Uncertainty: The same Odyssey task can be completed via different routes—e.g., user A via “lending → staking → mint,” user B via “aggregator → auto-strategy pool.”
• Cross-Chain Hotspots: Behavior is no longer confined to a single chain. Actions on Layer 2 often trigger immediate feedback on Layer 3 dedicated apps, e.g., after 10 minutes on L2, heatmaps show users triggering auto-reward scripts on related AI chains.

2.2.2 Behavioral Entropy Distribution
Data indicates high-quality users (Beta and Alpha tiers) exhibit higher “behavioral entropy” in heatmaps:

• Gamma — Arbitrageurs: Highly mechanical, with interactions concentrated in minimal closed loops, short and repetitive paths.
• On-Chain Citizens: Dispersed and long-tail, exploring secondary pages, reading on-chain documents, or interacting with other dApps.

Insight: Successful Odyssey projects have heatmaps that resemble a gravitational field, attracting users to stay within the ecosystem after completing core tasks, engaging in “unexpected” interactions.

Users no longer see themselves merely as “wallet addresses.” In Odyssey 3.0, the end of the behavior spectrum is “On-Chain Citizenship,” which signifies not just reward distribution but also identity endorsement across multiple chains.

3. Mechanism Design: Mathematical Models and Game Balance for “Win-Win”

Historically, early Odyssey projects suffered from “Ponzi deadlocks,” where project teams used future inflation expectations to create false prosperity. Escaping this cycle requires incentive compatibility—ensuring that users’ pursuit of self-interest aligns with the protocol’s long-term health through rigorous mathematical modeling.

3.1 Incentive Compatibility Equation (IC Constraint): Rebuilding Cost-Reward Game

In traditional airdrops, Sybil attacks have near-zero marginal costs. To protect genuine contributors, future Odyssey designs incorporate game-theoretic IC constraints.

Core Game Model:
Let R© be the total reward for honest, genuine interactions, and C© the associated costs (gas, slippage, capital lock-up).
Let E[R(s)] be the expected reward for a Sybil attacker using automation scripts, and C(s) the attacker’s costs (servers, IP pools, detection evasion, sunk costs).

Achieving Nash equilibrium for win-win:
Require:
R© − C© > E[R(s)] − C(s)

Evolution and Intervention in 2.0 Era:

1. Increase C(s) (attack resistance): Future defenses include AI-based behavioral entropy detection, analyzing spatiotemporal interaction patterns, fund flow entropy, and “human-like” operation. Suspicious accounts face dynamic gas fee penalties, destroying script profitability.
2. Optimize R© (reward structure): Shift from pure governance tokens to “hybrid rights packages,” including:

• Cash flow rights: Direct share of protocol fees (Real Yield).
• Privileges: Permanent fee discounts or cross-protocol interest bonuses.
• Governance leverage: Weighting governance rights for long-term holders, turning participation into power.

3.2 Dynamic Difficulty Adjustment (DDA)

Future Odyssey projects will adopt a dynamic difficulty mechanism, inspired by Bitcoin’s adjustment algorithm, to prevent overloading during explosive growth.

Operation logic:
When total addresses and TVL surge rapidly, the system detects overload (“hotness”). It automatically increases the difficulty of earning points:

• Funding threshold: Higher liquidity lock-up or interaction amounts required for equivalent points.
• Task complexity: From simple swaps to multi-protocol strategies (e.g., lending, staking, hedging).

Win-win outcome:

• For the protocol: DDA acts as a safety valve, preventing liquidity crashes caused by speculative surges.
• For alpha citizens: It filters out less capable “wool hunters,” ensuring rewards flow to high-net-worth, genuine users.

3.3 Proof of Value (PoV) Model

In Odyssey 3.0, “address count” is recognized as a vanity metric. Projects shift toward a PoV model centered on contribution density:

Contribution Density Formula:
D = ∑(Liquidity × Time) + γ × Governance_Activity / Total_Reward

• Liquidity: Measures how long funds stay within the ecosystem, not just entry and exit.
• γ (Community Contribution Factor): Amplifies for active governance, documentation, or positive social impact—up to 2x or more.
• Total Rewards: Used as a denominator to balance inflation and reward value.

Win-Win Deep Dive:
PoV yields a genuine ecosystem participant map, not just a list of wallet addresses. Users’ labor and engagement, amplified by γ, can generate high returns, harmonizing capital efficiency with human creativity. This ensures Odyssey becomes a process of real value co-creation, not just a “digital game.”

4. Technical Pillars: Behavior-Aware Zero-Knowledge Incentive Protocols

In future paradigms, Odyssey will evolve from a front-end “task wall” into a bottom-layer protocol capable of automatically capturing, analyzing, and transforming user behavior. Using ZK tech and chain abstraction, it creates a closed loop from behavior perception to precise incentives.

4.1 Behavior Perception Engine: From “Passive Check-in” to “Full-Chain Behavior Tracking”

This core protocol functions as a chain-wide data crawler and indexer, recording deep interactions without manual input:

• Multi-dimensional modeling: Real-time capture of liquidity depth, transaction frequency, governance participation, and even on-site dwell time (via zk proofs).
• Dynamic weighting: Analyzing behaviors to classify users as “HODLers,” “high-frequency liquidity providers,” or “deep governance participants,” transforming Odyssey from mechanical tasks to “behavioral badges.”

4.2 ZK-Proof Driven Privacy Analysis and Filtering

Post data collection, the protocol employs ZK proofs to verify user attributes without revealing PII:

• ZK-Credentials: Users can prove high-net-worth or active governance participation without exposing wallet details.
• Anti-witch filtering: Set thresholds (e.g., 180 days of unique interactions) via zk-STARKs, generating “proofs of real human activity,” preventing automation scripts from infiltrating incentive flows.

4.3 Intent-Centric Chain Abstraction Incentives

The protocol records behaviors and simplifies participation via an intent engine:

• Intent-driven automation: Users express “I want to participate in this liquidity incentive,” and the system automatically manages cross-chain transfers, gas balancing, and contract calls.
• Instant conversion and win-win: Seamless, “perception-free” interactions enable users to participate effortlessly, while projects capture authentic user intent, boosting conversion and returning incentives to core product value.

5. Future Evolution — From “Marketing Campaigns” to “Persistent Incentive Protocols”

Odyssey will shed its “limited-time” nature, evolving into a protocol-native, always-on growth layer.

5.1 Embedded Incentives (GaaS: Growth-as-a-Service)

Odyssey becomes embedded in smart contracts, with dynamic reward logic:

• Evolution: As users generate positive value (reducing slippage, providing long-term liquidity), contracts automatically recognize and distribute rewards, turning Odyssey into an “autonomous driving” mode.

5.2 Cross-Protocol “Credit Lego” (Interoperable Incentives)

Odyssey points will become portable. Performance in one protocol (e.g., lending) can be proven via zk to unlock initial status in another (e.g., social).

• Ultimate form: A universal “on-chain contribution score” across ecosystems, replacing fragmented points. This cross-protocol synergy will propel Web3 from “stock inter-division” to “incremental co-building,” achieving a true global on-chain republic.

6. Practical Execution Guide (The Playbook)

Odyssey is no longer a “send and run” airdrop game but a sophisticated ecosystem growth and capital consolidation project. Success hinges on balancing “traffic explosion” with “system resilience.” Here are 10 key principles and operational frameworks:

6.1 Paradigm Shift in Core KPIs: From “Vanity” to “Hardcore”

Avoid metrics like Twitter followers or address counts alone. In an era where intent engines can simulate millions of addresses cheaply, these are easily faked.

• Indicator A: Sticking TVL (sticky funds ratio):
  Retention Ratio = TVL_t+90 / TVL_peak
  If below 20%, the incentive design is flawed.

• Indicator B: Net Contribution Score:
  Total protocol fees generated by an address divided by its incentive costs.

• Indicator C: Governance activity entropy:
  Measures genuine participation depth in snapshots or on-chain proposals, not just voting volume.

6.2 Modular Task Design: Building a Laddered Funnel

Top Odyssey projects often use a “three-tier” architecture to convert massive traffic into core citizens:

Basic Layer (L1) — Icebreaker & Reach

• Target: Newcomers / Web3 novices
• Core Tasks: Complete basic interactions (e.g., one-click swap, social share)
• Incentives: SBT badges, future airdrop points
• Retention: Minimize barriers, establish first touchpoints via SBT footprints

Growth Layer (L2) — Liquidity Engine

• Target: Active traders / LPs
• Core Tasks: Deep liquidity provision, position management, cross-chain staking
• Incentives: Native tokens, real-time fee discounts
• Retention: Yield-driven, increasing opportunity costs for withdrawal

Ecosystem Layer (L3) — Core Sovereignty

• Target: Key contributors / developers / governance reps
• Core Tasks: Write docs, submit code, propose governance
• Incentives: Governance weight, RWA dividends, whitelist access
• Retention: Grant “citizenship,” binding contribution to long-term benefits

6.3 Risk Control & “Circuit Breakers”

During Odyssey execution, market volatility or bugs can cause “woolly attacks.”

• Dynamic incentive adjustment: Based on on-chain congestion, automatically reduce point coefficients during overloads.
• Anti-witch preemptive measures: Use AI fingerprinting to shadow suspicious addresses from day one, limiting their rewards.
• Liquidity release smoothing: Avoid one-time reward releases; implement gradual unlocking based on ongoing activity, ensuring long-term incentive compatibility.

6.4 Community Governance “Pre-Deployment” Experiments

Don’t wait until token launch to start DAO governance.

• Simulated voting tasks: During Odyssey, assign high weight to “protocol parameter improvement” proposals.
• Purpose: Filter genuine stakeholders, cultivate governance habits, reduce future coordination costs.

6.5 Deployment Checklist (Pre-Launch Must-Read)

1. Value Loop: Are rewards derived from protocol revenue (Real Yield)?
2. Anti-witch: Is there zk-ID or real identity verification (e.g., World ID, Gitcoin Passport)?
3. Capital Stickiness: Do tasks require funds to stay locked >14 days?
4. Technical Redundancy: Can contracts handle 100x load spikes?
5. Emotional Value: Are tasks framed with social storytelling, not just “digital copying”?

Conclusion — From “Game of Game” to “Value Coexistence”

Odyssey is fundamentally a revolution in filtering efficiency. By integrating “incentive compatibility equations” and “behavior entropy analysis,” the goal is not only to defend against witch attacks but to establish a precise value metric in a decentralized anonymous network.

This new paradigm recognizes that project and user are no longer zero-sum opponents. Through dynamic difficulty adjustment (DDA) and Proof of Value (PoV), we transform simple capital interactions into quantifiable contribution density. The byproduct is on-chain credit—an accumulation of trust built through high-entropy interactions, long-term locking, and governance participation.

In the future ecosystem, incentives will no longer be mere token distribution tools but the forge of credit. Every genuine effort will be etched into code, making “trustworthiness” a more scarce and valuable passport than capital itself.

Ultimately, the Odyssey journey does not end with airdrops but marks the beginning of a contractual relationship between protocol and citizens. By dispelling flow bubbles with mathematics and technology, the solid foundation of credit remains—Web3’s core from “speculative wilderness” to “value civilization.”