.
@bread_ actually makes a great point here, but let’s dig deeper.
The real question isn't just "can you retain liquidity/builders" but it's also understanding the interdependent triangle of chain success:
Retention → Liquidity → Good Apps
Liquidity
Liquidity is actually the easiest piece to acquire. Public liquidity mining programs and private Lp deals are standard playbook now.
We've seen countless chains artificially inflate TVL through mercenary capital that evaporates the moment incentives dry up. It's not sustainable.
Retention
Retention is brutally difficult because it requires users to genuinely relocate their onchain life and not just temporarily farm yields.
This isn't straightforward: users already have habits, existing positions and/or preferred apps on their current chains.
Apps
Apps are the actual interface between users and infrastructure.
A genuinely good app can succeed despite beign on an "average" chain (i.e. Polymarket thrived on Polygon).
But here's the pattern: great apps often attract organic users, therefore liquidity; effectively keeping the chain alive, with a few rare exceptions.
So what happens when a chain not only focuses on attracting great builders but actually helps them succeed?
Well… there’s only one way to find out
gOMEGA
Same-same imo. Liquidity also follows ambitious founders and net-new usecases.
If we become a gravity well for talent they'll bring usecases which will bring liquidity for that liquidity
MegaETH is the first instance of the EVM where app builds don't have to design around it's shortcomings and can focus on product