The resource rank: what it is, and what it isn't

We rank every Otherdeed by a single measure of their resource deposits — species scarcity weighted by deposit tier — and nothing else. Because the future importance of resource scarcity and deposit tiers is not yet known, we use a defined baseline methodology and show how every rank changes under alternative assumptions.

What we actually measure

Every Otherdeed has up to four resource slots; each filled slot holds one of 74 resources at tier 1, 2 or 3. That is the entire input. For each resource we count every deposit in the collection and weight it by tier: effective supply = n₁ + 3·n₂ + 9·n₃. A deposit is worth more the scarcer its resource, and more again at a higher tier. Add up a deed's four slots and you get its resource index; sort every deed by that score and you get its resource rank, 1 to 100,000. The counts are exact — derived from every deed and checked against a second, independent copy of the trait data, which agrees on every deed.

What this ranking deliberately ignores

Environment. Environment Tier. Sediment. Artifact. Koda. Location. All of it — a Chaos plot and a Steppes plot with the same four deposits get the same resource rank. That is the point: this number answers "how scarce are this deed's resources?" and nothing else. It is not a "which deed is better" score, it is not a price, and it does not feed the model estimate anywhere on this site.

The two numbers we chose, not measured

α = 1 controls how much scarcer resources are worth — at α = 1 a resource half as common is worth twice as much per deposit. We cannot prove 1 is right. Our published ranges run α from 0.5 to 2.0 and stop there; they exclude α = 0 (the case where resource identity carries no value) because at α = 0 all 74 resources become identical and the collection collapses from ~26,270 distinct positions to 27 — that is a different measurement, not a harsher version of this one, and sales data gives strong evidence that resource identity carries price information beyond deposit count alone. y = 3 is our baseline yield step between tiers. Yuga has not published final tier mechanics, so we test y from 2 to 4 rather than treating 3 as known. The scale constant 34,100 is not a third assumption — it is simply the effective supply of Psychosilk, so the unit price is 1.00 there; it cancels out of every rank and is verified to do so at every build. There is, however, a third structural choice we should name as plainly as the first two: the four slots are combined by summation. Addition says four modest deposits can outrank one ultra-scarce tier-3 — a max-weighted or concave aggregate would say otherwise and would produce a materially different top-100. We publish the sum because it matches the tier-weighted yield reading the rest of this method rests on, but it is a chosen aggregator, not a game mechanic. The later order-based diagnostic below found that sum tracked sale-price order more closely than max in its tested sample. That limited comparison does not validate the aggregator as a game mechanic, establish an optimal weighting, or test every alternative. Treat cross-deed gaps that are smaller than a deed's own published range as unresolved by this ranking.

Why every deed shows a range

Because the rank moves when α and y change, we recompute the entire ranking across a grid of values and publish the best and worst rank each deed reaches at the tested settings. The near range (12 cells: α 0.75, 1, 1.25 × y 2, 2.5, 3, 4) is a defined perturbation — not a confidence interval, and no coverage claim is made; most of its width comes from y. The stress range (24 cells: the near grid plus α 0.5, 1.5, 2) is deliberately aggressive and always contains the near range. Both are the best and worst rank over those specific cells, not bounds over every value between them: at settings inside the limits but off the grid a deed can land outside its published range (an independent recount on a finer grid found this for about a quarter of the collection, by up to ~1,400 places, with no top-250 badge lost). Of the top 100 deeds by baseline rank, 40 stay in the top 100 across the near range and 18 across stress. Use the rank as the baseline estimate, and the ranges to judge how robust it is — a deed at #40 with a narrow range and one at #55 with a wide range may be closer, or farther apart, than their headline ranks suggest. Deeds marked ◆ hold the top 250 under every stress assumption; sixty deeds do — 0.06% of the collection — and 228 hold the top 500, reported as a statistic rather than a badge.

Ties are the normal case

Two deeds with the same deposits at the same tiers are the same package and share a rank — 79.8% of deeds sit in a tie group, the median group holds 40 deeds, and the 12,739 deeds with no resources are all tied at rank 87,262. The panel says so when it applies.

What we will not tell you

We do not publish an ETH figure for the index — we cannot yet identify what a unit of resource scarcity is worth in the market with enough confidence to put a number on your screen, and two independent reviews said withhold. We do not price same-resource concentration: 299 deeds carry the same resource at tier 3 twice (one carries it three times), and only 40 of those repeat a rare resource; in the current diagnostic window (March–September 2026) the first group has 12 sales on 8 deeds and the rare group 2 sales on 2 deeds — not evidence of a premium either way. And we do not claim your rank is the true market rank — the ranges exist so you can see for yourself how firmly a position holds across the tested settings, and adjacent ranks inside overlapping ranges should never be used to argue that #12 beats #19. Supply is gross — deposits on deeds held by wallets that have never sold still count.

How stable is this rank? — what the card says

Each deed's rank card opens a "How stable is this rank?" line that states, in words, how far the rank moves across the whole tested grid: at most 2% of the collection ("moves at most #a–#b under every tested assumption"), at most 8% ("stays within…"), at most 20% ("ranges…"), or wider ("read the range, not the rank"), together with the near range (α 0.75–1.25, y 2–4) and the stress range (α 0.5–2.0, y 2–4). Deeds that hold the top 250 under every tested setting carry the ◆ badge. A tie is named as a tie, with the number of deeds sharing the rank and the positions they occupy together (competition ranking: tied deeds share the best position and the next rank skips the span). The sentence describes the rank's dependence on α and y — it says nothing about the deed's quality, and a narrow range near the bottom of the ranking mostly means there are few positions left to move to. Deeds with no deposits share a single rank and cannot move. The ranges are across the tested settings, not bounds. (Until 5 September 2026 the card carried a one-word chip — "Assumption sensitivity: low / low–moderate / moderate / high" — with the same thresholds; every top-100 deed earned "low", so the chip told the reader nothing and was retired after the Resource Rank review of 5 September. The thresholds behind the sentence did not change.)

What recorded sales say — a diagnostic, not an input

The completed 6 September order-based check uses 2,107 clean ETH prints from thirteen historical windows spanning 8 March–23 August 2026, including 1,753 prints on deeds with deposits. Each price is divided by its sale-day market level. Spearman correlation measures whether higher index values tend to accompany higher normalized prices; it does not measure pricing accuracy or isolate resources from every other trait.

At the published baseline, the summed resource index has correlation 0.448, compared with 0.415 for the strongest single slot. Across all twelve near-grid settings, sum ranges from 0.408 to 0.460 and exceeds max in every cell. The published rank, reversed so a better rank is higher, has correlation 0.441. Read the dated output and all twelve cells.

This is a descriptive comparison on an existing historical sample, not an independent forecast test, a causal resource premium, or proof of precise ordering in the scarce tail. It identifies neither the scarcity exponent nor the yield step. It does not change the baseline, ranges or deed price model, and does not test concave or root-sum-square alternatives.

Automated data output. Not investment advice and not an appraisal. Every parameter is an assumption. The operator of this site actively trades this collection — see disclosures.