PlayMate on Nimiq Pay Funding Proposal

Proposals & Bounties
#1

1. Project Description

What is PlayMate?

PlayMate is a skill-based PvP gaming platform. Players deposit funds into a non-custodial smart contract escrow, play a head-to-head match, and the winner is paid automatically by the contract. There is no house taking the opposite side, no platform custody of funds, and no token speculation.

The platform launches with chess and checkers, with additional skill-based games planned based on player feedback. Every game follows the same model:

  • Stake USDT
  • Play the match
  • Verify the result
  • Receive an automatic on-chain payout

PlayMate also includes a tournament layer.

Anyone, communities, DAOs, creators, livestreamers and gaming groups can launch branded tournaments without writing code or managing payouts. They choose the tournament format (swiss or single elimination tournaments) while PlayMate handles registration, brackets, prize distribution, and on-chain settlement automatically.

What problem does it solve or what opportunity does it address?

Onboarding users is only half the battle; retention is the real barrier to crypto adoption, including Nimiq. Creating a wallet is only the first step. Users need a reason to return.

PlayMate gives Nimiq Pay a recurring use case by rewarding skill-based play with real USDT payouts.

It keeps players engaged because:

  • Skill earns rewards. Winners earn through gameplay and merits of their skills rather than token emissions or price speculation.
  • Fast matchmaking. Players join by stake size or challenge friends directly.
  • Every match uses Nimiq Pay. More gameplay means more wallet activity inside the ecosystem.
  • Trust comes from smart contracts. Funds remain in escrow until results are verified on-chain.

Why build on Nimiq Pay?

Nimiq Pay natively handles wallet connection and USDT on Polygon, so players onboard in seconds and every payout is verifiable on-chain, all within the Nimiq Pay without needing to install additional app.

PlayMate fits naturally into Nimiq Pay’s Mini App ecosystem by providing a real consumer use case that encourages recurring wallet usage instead of one-time onboarding.

Grant Scope

This proposal funds only two areas:

  • Weekly free-entry tournament prize pools
  • Security, infrastructure, and platform operations

The PvP stake-and-win layer described above is PlayMate’s organic retention mechanic, it is an out-of-scope product feature that players engage with on their own. No Council funds touch PvP stakes, and PvP is not part of the funded deliverables.

Fraud Prevention

Because real money is involved, PlayMate includes multiple layers of fraud protection.

Device intelligence

Fingerprint Pro Plus identifies duplicate accounts, VPN usage, bots, and incognito sessions using server-side device identification.

Bot protection

Cloudflare Turnstile blocks automated registrations and match entry.

Risk scoring

Accounts sharing devices, IP addresses, or suspicious behavior receive a fraud score that can restrict tournament participation.

Match monitoring

The platform detects repeated matchups between linked accounts, suspicious move timing, abnormal win rates, and likely engine assistance.

On-chain settlement

Prize payouts are released only after verified match results, and every transaction can be independently verified on-chain.

Who benefits?

Players

Competitive players who want to earn real USDT through skill.

Communities

DAOs, creators, and gaming communities looking for a ready-made on-chain tournament platform.

Nimiq Ecosystem

A recurring Mini App use case that drives wallet activity and showcases Nimiq Pay’s browser-first experience. Every session starts and ends in a Nimiq Pay wallet. The more they play, the more they live in Nimiq’s ecosystem.

2. Project Goal

This proposal focuses on three outcomes:

Adoption

Every new player connects a Nimiq Pay wallet. Wallet activations can be exported directly for Foundation and Council reporting.

Awareness

Weekly tournaments create content that players naturally share across social platforms, bringing new users into Nimiq Pay.

Engagement

Tournaments attract new users while regular PvP matches keep them returning. Together they create long-term wallet activity instead of a one-time spike.

New Use Cases

PlayMate introduces two new use cases for Nimiq Pay:

  • Skill-based gaming with real USDT payouts
  • Community-created tournaments with automatic on-chain prize distribution

The platform launches with chess and checkers, with more games added over time without changing the underlying payout system.

Community Benefits

  • A recurring use case beyond payments
  • Community-led tournaments that bring new audiences into Nimiq. Perfect Co-marketing flywheel.
  • A live demonstration of trustless, browser-first payments

Monthly KPIs

  • New Nimiq Pay wallet activations: 80–150
  • Returning users: At least 25% return the following month
  • Matches played: 200+
  • Tournaments completed: 4 per month (12 total)
  • USDT distributed: Approximately $1,000 per month
  • Platform fee revenue: Tracked from month one to demonstrate sustainability

3. Budget Request

Total requested: $6,000 USD equivalent, paid in NIM according to milestone completion.

Grant Scope

Council funding covers only:

A. Weekly tournament prize pools

B. Security, infrastructure, and operations

A. Weekly Tournament Prize Pools — $3,000

Three months of weekly tournaments.

  • $250 per tournament
  • 12 tournaments total
  • Free entry for all players

Each tournament distributes prizes automatically through the smart contract.

Placement Weekly Amount
1st $100
2nd $75
3rd $50
Platform fee (10%) $25
Total $250

Across twelve tournaments:

  • $2,700 distributed to players
  • $300 retained as platform fees

All prize distribution is automatic and verifiable on-chain.

B. Infrastructure, Security, and Operations — $3,000

Item Cost Purpose
Nethermind AuditAgent $500 Smart contract security review before mainnet deployment
Vercel Pro (12 months) $240 Frontend hosting and public dashboard
Railway (12 months) $240 Backend, matchmaking, and tournament services
Dedicated Polygon RPC $480 Reliable blockchain connectivity
Paymaster Gas Sponsorship $300 Gasless player experience
Fingerprint Pro Plus (6 months) $594 Fraud detection and device intelligence
Maintenance & Development $646 AI subscriptions, Ongoing fixes, monitoring, and content production
Total $3,000

Budget Justification

Tournament funding drives player acquisition through free weekly competitions.

Infrastructure funding keeps the platform secure, reliable, and operational for twelve months. It covers smart contract auditing, hosting, blockchain infrastructure, gas sponsorship, fraud prevention, and ongoing maintenance and operations.

4. Sustainability Beyond the Pilot

This grant is intended to launch adoption, not provide ongoing support.

Once the pilot ends, PlayMate is sustained through platform fees.

Existing Fee Structure

  • PvP matches: 2% platform fee
  • Tournament prize pools: 10% platform fee

Conservative Example

  • 100 weekly active players
  • 5 matches each
  • $5 average stake
  • 3% effective fee

This generates approximately $3,600 per year, enough to cover the platform’s annual operating costs.

The three-month pilot establishes the player base while the infrastructure is already funded for a full year.

No recurring Council funding is expected.

5. Timeline

The tournament program begins immediately after approval.

Month 1

  • Complete AuditAgent review
  • Publish public dashboard
  • Run tournaments 1–4

Month 2

  • Run tournaments 5–8
  • Launch community and DAO partnerships
  • Publish mid-pilot report

Month 3

  • Run tournaments 9–12
  • Publish final report and sustainability update

Months 4–12

Operations continue using platform fee revenue while infrastructure remains fully funded.

6. Milestones

M1 – Audit & Launch ($3,500)

  • Infrastructure and security stack provisioned
  • Weeks 1–4 tournaments completed
  • Public dashboard live
  • Audit report published

M2 – Growth ($1,250)

  • Weeks 5–8 tournaments completed
  • Community partnerships active
  • Mid-pilot report published

M3 – Completion ($1,250)

  • Weeks 9–12 tournaments completed
  • Final metrics and sustainability report published

Unused tournament funds will either be returned to the Council or rolled into a continuation grant at the Council’s discretion.

7. Terms of Completion

The project is complete when:

  1. PlayMate is publicly available as a Nimiq Pay Mini App.
  2. Twelve tournaments have been completed with automatic on-chain payouts.
  3. A public dashboard displays wallet activations, participants, matches, and USDT distributed.
  4. Mid-pilot and final reports have been published.
  5. The AuditAgent report has been shared with the Council.
  6. All results can be independently verified through on-chain data and the public dashboard.

8. Compliance with the Legal and Ethical Guideline Framework

This proposal addresses paragraphs 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 11.

  • Skill-based gaming only. Chess and checkers contain no randomness, loot boxes, or house odds. Prize payouts are determined solely by verified match results.
  • Grant scope. Council funding is limited to tournament prize pools and platform infrastructure. PvP stake matches remain separate and receive no grant funding.
  • No financial advice. PlayMate makes no investment recommendations and has no token associated with this proposal.
  • Non-custodial architecture. Funds remain in smart contract escrow until settlement. PlayMate never takes custody of player funds.
  • Transparency. Escrow, payouts, fees, and platform activity are publicly verifiable on-chain through a public dashboard.
  • Privacy and security. Minimal user data is collected. Fraud prevention uses Fingerprint Pro Plus solely for account integrity rather than marketing or profiling.
  • Compliance. The project lead is not a sanctioned individual or entity. Wallet screening will follow Nimiq’s requirements.
  • Risk disclosure. Smart contract risk is mitigated through independent auditing, while fraud risk is reduced through device intelligence and behavioral monitoring.

Applicant Attestation

  • [x] This project complies with Community Council guidelines.
  • [x] Funds will not be used for prohibited purposes.
  • [x] Material risks and conflicts will be disclosed.
  • [x] Milestone reporting requirements are accepted.
  • [x] The applicant is not a sanctioned individual or resident of a sanctioned jurisdiction.

9. Resources

#2

Thank you for submitting the PlayMate proposal and for the work invested in presenting the project.

After reviewing the proposal, the Council has decided not to approve the requested funding in its current form.

Our principal concern is the project’s limited technical connection to the Nimiq blockchain. The proposal describes a non-custodial escrow contract, USDT stakes, automatic contract payouts, a dedicated Polygon RPC, and Polygon gas sponsorship. These core functions would therefore operate on Polygon rather than on the Nimiq blockchain.

Nimiq Pay can provide access to EVM-compatible networks and USDT on Polygon from within a Mini App. However, in this architecture, Nimiq Pay primarily serves as the wallet interface and application container. The escrow, game settlement, platform fees, and prize distribution would all remain Polygon transactions. This means that its central on-chain functionality is not built on Nimiq. Consequently, we do not see sufficient direct use of the Nimiq blockchain to justify ecosystem funding:

Players do not stake or receive NIM.
Escrow and settlement do not take place on the Nimiq chain.
Platform fees and recurring transaction activity accrue on Polygon.
The primary Nimiq-related benefit is connecting through Nimiq Pay.

While wallet engagement can be valuable, wallet connection alone is not enough in this case to compensate for the absence of meaningful Nimiq-chain activity.

We also have concerns regarding the real-money competitive model. Although the proposal characterizes the games as skill-based, stake-based head-to-head matches and platform fees may create legal, regulatory, and reputational risks depending on the jurisdiction. Separating the PvP feature from the formal grant deliverables does not entirely remove this concern, as the funded tournaments and infrastructure are intended to acquire users for and support the same platform.

Finally, the proposal does not provide sufficient technical detail about how match results are verified, how disputed or manipulated results are handled, what administrative control exists over the contracts, and which parts of the system are genuinely trustless. Automatic on-chain payment only guarantees execution after a result has been submitted; it does not by itself guarantee that the submitted result is correct.

For these reasons, we have decided to decline the proposal.

A substantially revised proposal would need to demonstrate meaningful native use of NIM or the Nimiq blockchain, provide a clearer technical architecture and trust model, and address the legal and ethical risks associated with stake-based gameplay.

Thank you again for your submission and your interest in contributing to the Nimiq ecosystem.

#3

Thank you Paul for your valuable feedback, that’s exactly the kind of feedback that’s actually usable. We didn’t try to reword our way around the issues you flagged. Treated the decline as a build brief, not a wording problem. Since then we rebuilt the Nimiq edition of PlayMate around your three requirements. This is the revised proposal. It assumes the original OP as background and focuses on what changed and how it answers you.

Direct answers to the three conditions

1) “Meaningful native use of NIM / the Nimiq blockchain”

You were right that the original architecture was Polygon-primary:

  • USDT stakes / prizes
  • EVM escrow
  • Polygon RPC + gas sponsorship
  • Nimiq Pay mainly as wallet shell

That is no longer the product we are asking you to fund.

Your concern Revised product
Players do not stake or receive NIM Players receive NIM prizes (free entry; grant-seeded)
Escrow / settlement not on Nimiq Prize custody via native Nimiq HTLC accounts (lock → redeem → timeout reclaim)
Fees / activity on Polygon No Polygon settlement path in this edition. Fees retained in NIM
“Wallet connect only” Nimiq Pay still onboards; value movement is on Nimiq

Nimiq Albatross already has HTLC as a native account type.
Prize NIM locks on-chain before a tournament runs, redeems to the winner on verified result + preimage, or reclaims to the funder on timeout.
Locks and payouts are explorer-visible.

We also dropped the EVM cost stack that no longer applies: independent smart contract audit, Polygon RPC, paymaster gas.

2) “Clearer technical architecture and trust model”

On the issue of result verification, disputes, admin control, and what is actually trustless. Direct answers:

Current Flow

  1. Ops locks prize NIM in an HTLC (builder RPC on a dedicated Nimiq node — public nodes often gate HTLC builders).
  2. Player connects via Nimiq Pay, joins a free tournament.
  3. Chess/checkers run off-chain (WebSocket) with a deterministic rules engine.
  4. Backend produces a signed result proof (match id, winner address, score, transcript hash).
  5. Dispute window (default up to 24h) before preimage reveal / redeem. Contested results freeze payout.
  6. Clean path → HTLC redeem to winner. Incomplete/abandoned → timeout reclaim to funder.

What is trustless

  • Custody of locked prize NIM after HTLC creation (no admin redirect outside HTLC conditions)
  • Execution of redeem / timeout once conditions are met
  • Public audit via explorer tx links

What is not trustless (stated plainly)

Piece Who Mitigation
Match outcome Game server / engine Deterministic rules, move logs, signed proofs, anti-cheat
Preimage until reveal Backend oracle Key isolation, rotation, dispute window before reveal
Multi-account / bots Off-chain signals Turnstile + FingerprintJS + internal risk graph
Bracket admin Backend Logged actions; cannot rewrite an active HTLC’s conditions

Your line was exact and we agree with it:

Automatic on-chain payment only guarantees execution after a result has been submitted; it does not by itself guarantee that the submitted result is correct.

We do not claim otherwise. The chain enforces the published HTLC condition. Correctness of the result is oracle + anti-cheat + dispute — disclosed, not papered over.

Admin can: create HTLCs it funds, broadcast authorized redeem/timeout, pause new entries, flag accounts, freeze payout during dispute.
Admin cannot: rewrite locked HTLC recipient/value rules, seize locked NIM outside redeem/timeout, or rewrite explorer history.

3) “Legal / ethical risks of stake-based gameplay”

You correctly rejected semantic fencing — putting PvP “out of grant scope” while using grant-funded infra to feed the same stake product.

We removed stake-based PvP from the Nimiq edition of the product entirely.

In product (this grant) Not in product
Free-entry weekly skill tournaments (chess/checkers) Head-to-head stake / wager matches
Free practice USDT escrow loop
Free friend invite Player deposits for stakes
Grant-seeded NIM prizes via HTLC “Organic stake product” sitting behind the pilot

Funded infra does not acquire users for a stake loop that isn’t there. Skill-only, free entry, prizes as skill awards in NIM.

Post-pilot sustainability is community/DAO-funded tournament pools (TaaS) with a 10% NIM fee

What stayed the same (no need to re-read the whole OP)

Unchanged intent from the original submission:

  • Nimiq Pay Mini App delivery
  • Chess & checkers only
  • Free-entry weekly tournaments as the adoption funnel
  • Public dashboard + milestone reporting
  • No token, no yield, no financial advice
  • One-time grant; not recurring Council support
  • Skill-not-chance compliance posture

What follows is only the revised budget, timeline, milestones, completion terms, attestation, and links.

Revised budget — $5000 (was $6,000)

A. Tournament seeds — $3,000
12 weeks × $250 = $1,000/month for 3 months.

Line / week
1st $100
2nd $75
3rd $50
Platform fee (10%, retained in NIM) $25
Total seed $250

→ $2,700 to players, $300 fee NIM across the pilot.
NIM amounts set at lock from the then-prevailing rate; USD for Council accounting.

B. Infrastructure and continuous ops: $1,997 (12-month runway, rebuilt around the Nimiq-native stack)

Item Cost Why
Dedicated VPS server for Nimiq full node (12 mo) $480 Public RPC nodes often gate HTLC builder methods; a dedicated Albatross node is the reliability requirement for prize lock/redeem/reclaim.
Vercel Pro, frontend + dashboard (12 mo) $240 Hosts the app and public metrics dashboard.
Railway, API/sockets/game server (12 mo) $240 Matchmaking, tournament engine, payout oracle.
Cloudflare Pro, WAF + Turnstile (12 mo) $240 Bot and Sybil defense on entry flows.
Fingerprint Pro Plus, device intelligence (3 mo) $297 Server-side device identification at 99.5% accuracy, with VPN, bot, and incognito detection, funded through the pilot itself when fraud exposure is highest. Renews from platform fee revenue after Month 3 if warranted.
Continuous development and maintenance, incl. AI-assisted ops (12 mo) $500 Covers ongoing bug fixes and HTLC/dispute-window monitoring across the pilot and the following nine months of live operation, routine maintenance such as dependency updates and uptime checks, and the AI-assisted content workflow that produces weekly social posts and tournament recap graphics for @PlayMate. Error tracking runs on Sentry’s free developer tier at this volume.
Total $1,997

Cut vs original OP (because architecture changed):

Removed Why
Nethermind AuditAgent $500 No custom Solidity — native HTLC
Polygon RPC $480 No Polygon settlement
Paymaster gas $300 No EVM gas path

Timeline & milestones

Start: on approval. Pilot tournaments: months 1–3.

Milestone Amount Deliverables
M1 — Launch (Month 1) $3000 $1,997 stack provisioned + $1,000 (weeks 1–4) prizes. Mini App live, dedicated node up, dashboard live, 4 tournaments with explorer HTLC links
M2 — Growth (Month 2) $1,000 Weeks 5–8 prizes; community co-host; mid-period forum update
M3 — Complete (Month 3) $1,000 Weeks 9–12 prizes; final metrics + sustainability report; 12 tournaments done

Unused prize NIM at M3: return to Council or roll forward at your discretion. Stack lines non-returnable (12-month services).

KPIs (conservative, monthly): 60–120 new Nimiq Pay wallets · ≥25% return next month · 150+ tournament matches · 4 tournaments · ~$1,000 USD-eq NIM seeded (~$900 to players after fee) · 100% prize slots linked on dashboard.

Terms of completion

Done when all are true:

  1. Live as a Nimiq Pay Mini App
  2. 12 free-entry tournaments completed with NIM via native HTLC (explorer links)
  3. Public dashboard: activations, participants, matches, NIM out, HTLC txs
  4. M2 + M3 forum reports posted
  5. Verifiable from chain + dashboard, not team claims alone
  6. Funded-period product stays free-entry / free practice / free friend invite — no stake-PvP

Compliance (paras 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11)

Delta vs OP, rest unchanged in spirit:

  • Skill-only (4.2): chess/checkers; free entry; no RNG/loot/house odds.
  • Stake-PvP (your main risk flag): not in the Nimiq product — not “out of scope while still shipping.”
  • No financial advice (4.3): no buy/sell/hold, yield, token sale.
  • Native chain use: NIM in / HTLC on Nimiq / fees in NIM.
  • Non-custodial prizes (4.4): HTLC accounts hold prize NIM under chain conditions. Welcome any Team Nimiq conditions.
  • Transparency: explorer + dashboard + milestone posts.
  • Sanctions/AML: lead not sanctioned; wallet below for screening.

Attestation (para 11)

  • [x] Project and funding comply with Community Council guidelines (legal, gambling, financial advice, sanctions, fraud).
  • [x] Funds will not be used for prohibited purposes.
  • [x] Conflicts, sponsorships, and material risks will be disclosed.
  • [x] Milestone reporting and possible payout suspension for non-compliance accepted.
  • [x] Not a sanctioned individual / not from a sanctioned country.

Resources

GitHub (Nimiq edition): https://github.com/roadsidedev/playmate-nimiq
Project X: https://x.com/PlayMate__

#4

Thanks for taking the previous feedback seriously and for substantially revising the proposal. We appreciate that the Polygon settlement and stake-based PvP were removed and that the revised version now actually moves NIM on the Nimiq blockchain.

That said, we still have several concerns and unfortunately cannot support the proposal in its current form.

Our main technical concern is the HTLC architecture. As described, the backend determines the match result, produces the signed result proof, controls the preimage, and decides when a disputed payout can proceed. This means the backend is still the source of truth. A signed result proof proves that the backend signed a result, but it does not independently prove that the result itself is correct.

The HTLC provides useful custody and timeout guarantees once it has been created, but we dont see how it imprroves the trust model around determining the winner. If the backend is already trusted to determine the result and release the preimage, a normal backend-authorized NIM payout would achieve much of the same practical result with considerably less complexity.

There is also one part of the proposed HTLC flow that we would specifically like to understand better. The proposal says that the prize NIM is locked before the tournament and then redeemed to the winner afterwards. However, an HTLC already has a recipient when it is created. At the time the tournament starts, the winner is obviously not known yet.

So who exactly is the HTLC recipient when the prize is locked?

We also noticed that the current HTLC spike passes htlcRecipient to createNewHtlcTransaction while commenting that it is “filled later at payout”. We may be missing part of the intended architecture here, but we would like to see the exact transction-level flow explaining how a prize can be locked before the winner is known and later redeemed directly by that winner.

The second concern is the infrastructure budget. $480/year for a dedicated Nimiq node, plus additional Vercel Pro, plus additional Railway, plus Cloudflare Pro, plus Fingerprint, while only $500 is allocated for twelve months of actual development and maintenance, feels disproportionate to us.

We understand that separating services can have operational advantages, but we don’t see why this project requires all of those paid services and that amount of funds. If there is already a dedicated VPS with predictable resources, we would expect at least parts of the backend, API, dashboard and related services to be able to run there. Similarly, we don’t currently see a strong justification for Cloudflare Pro at this scale rather than the free tier.

The result is almost $2,000 just to keep the infrastructure and operations running for a relatively small application. That also makes us question the sustainability argument: the project needs a fairly expensive stack before it has demonstrated meaningful usage or revenue.

Finally, there is already considerable overlap with gaming projects coming out of the Mini App Competition, including NIMIQ-ARCADE. With chess, checkers and more as the initial core offering, we don’t currently see enough differentiation to justify another significant Council-funded gaming project at this cost.

So while we definitely appreciate the effort that went into addressing the previous feedback, our vote would still be No in the current form.

A substantially simpler architecture, a clearer explanation of what the HTLC actually adds to the trust model, a much leaner infrastructure budget, and stronger differentiation from existing Nimiq gaming projects could change our view.

  • Mike, on behalf of The Nimiq Community Council.