Main Disc. Thread - Season 4: Into the Wonder [9.28.25]

[RockyHandsome]

Does WDB and EE have adaptive scripting ?

[Parsifal]

Wasn’t it just launched with CC?
It’s the first time they mentioned it.
So I don’t think it was part of any former title.

[MAkh]

Yeah it’s just in CC so far

[GoldenTiger]

Keeping my eyes peeled on the forum for announcement regarding Paragon’s release or Rich Trader’s release date announcement.

Paragon is basically 4 titles so it’s expected to be longer before release.

[Judoka]

@SaintSovereign

How close are we to the other pyhsical shifting titles being updated?
Spartan,Lots,EF

[Moon]

Everyone about to eat good once those 5 come out.

[Judoka]

Just waiting for R.I.C.H so i can just become an overnight millionaire and never have to work again lol

[SaintSovereign]

Inspired by @Azriel 's recent posts in his journal – where he has used AI to extract measurable, repeatable metrics (key performance indicators in corporate speak) from C&C’s copy, is this something you all would like to see integrated into future copy?

It won’t be as thorough as what he’s posted – I’m thinking a new section (possibly replacing the pro-tips) with specific, very clear metrics that you can measure the title’s effectiveness against?

[Azriel]

A new section would be awesome and very useful

Of course, subjective and external metrics

I would love to see a use case solo vs. with other stacks.

I also love to see the overall intended outcome. I know that sounds so obvious but with things being more concept/skill/ process transformation based, its harded to discern for me sometimes

I think people grapple with new eog vs. old eog because the understated and obvious can get missed. I know I do it, so others probably do as well.

Never look at your bank account again when buying something and manifest a constant stream of wealth opportunities is a clearer felt outcome/ intention than than scaled structuring or adaptive growth strategies (Even if the latter is what leads to the former)

I totally missed in the C&C copy and the ChatGPT analysis that steady income growth would be a KPI. I assumed, based on the structuring of current assets and improved opportunities, that net worth and capital would be a secondary outcome, but it wouldn’t be clear whether they directly impact day-to-day income in current endeavors outside of that structuring and building.

[SaintSovereign]

@Azriel

I think people grapple with new eog vs. old eog because the understated and obvious can get missed. I know I do it, so others probably do as well.

Never look at your bank account again when buying something and manifest a constant stream of wealth opportunities is a clearer felt outcome/ intention than than scaled structuring or adaptive growth strategies (Even if the latter is what leads to the former)

That’s exactly what I was thinking when I saw your journal posts. This new section could help.

[Philemon]

Read Azriel’s journal on this.

I think it would be great.

If it was structured in a certain way we could make our own “workbook” Style journals with it aswell.

[Moon]

@SaintSovereign

It won’t be as thorough as what he’s posted – I’m thinking a new section (possibly replacing the pro-tips) with specific, very clear metrics that you can measure the title’s effectiveness against

I’d say keep the pro tips and add the new sections. Both will be extremely useful

[Forexpreneur]

That would be incredibly helpful and appreciated to have some kind of metrics to gauge progress and areas that need more work.

[ksub]

@SaintSovereign

is this something you all would like to see integrated into future copy?

No! There’s only so much babysitting and care taking you can do @SaintSovereign. The products are already groundbreaking and the copies are just detailed enough for people to understand what they should expect. If you introduce metrics, some people might start looking for those specific metrics and disregard everything else. Personal introspection is a part of the process. That’s what people need to get better at.

[Pyro]

@SaintSovereign

, is this something you all would like to see integrated into future copy?

Yes!

Also thank you @Azriel for short term, mid term, long term prompts. I have added that to my synergistic analysis of the stack I am running and its a game changer.

[HansLanda]

It would be useful, but copies are already very long (and very clear) and IMO you should consider the time required to make a copy.

So, if could be implemented easily and would not make copy even longer, go for it.

[MAkh]

• First post - Need, it does such a good breakdown of what to expect. I usually ask Claude anyway for this information

The first post that I'm meaning

@Azriel

This copy is built around a two-throne model:

1. Crown = internal sovereignty

• decisions without approval-seeking (“seal pressed into wax”)
• strong boundaries (“energy as imperial currency”)
• calm, high-status presence (“gravity,” “fortress nervous system”)

2. Capital = external structures that compound

• systems that keep paying without your constant presence
• protected assets + layered risk management (“Treasury Shield”)
• strategic relationships organized into tiers (“Inner Circle”)
• information/narrative control, discretion, privacy (“Discernment,” “Information Command”)
• long-horizon thinking (“decades not quarters,” “House of the Emperor”)

Long-term intended outcome (the “end state”)

To become a person whose authority is internally anchored and whose wealth/influence is externally systematized—so your results persist through volatility and even beyond your lifetime.

The copy repeats this outcome in multiple ways:

• “empire that endures,” “structures that outlast you,” “fortress,” “resilient,” “compounds,” “not dependent on continuous effort,” “still standing when tested.”

If I compress it into one precise deliverable:

Enduring sovereignty + enduring compounding structures.
You become “hard to move internally” and “hard to break externally.”

How it is measured (based on the copy)

The copy itself gives measurable signals; they’re just embedded in metaphor. Here are the operational metrics that match what it claims.

1) Crown metrics — internal sovereignty

Decision finality

• Fewer reversals and second-guessing after committing
• Shorter decision cycle time on important choices
• Less “permission seeking” (asking for approval, reassurance, consensus)

Boundary strength

• Fewer unwanted commitments
• Higher “no” rate to misaligned asks
• Reduced time spent in low-value conversations/meetings

Nervous-system stability under pressure

• Lower emotional volatility during conflict/negotiation
• Faster recovery after stress events
• Ability to slow down when others rush (“pace control”)

Social gravity / presence (observable)

• More deference without you pushing
• Fewer interruptions / less pushback in meetings
• People mirror your pacing (they slow down when you do)

Simple scorecard (monthly):

• of major decisions made without external validation

• % of calendar that is “chosen” vs “obligated”

• of times you held terms/boundaries without emotion

2) Capital metrics — external structure & compounding

Nonlinear income / leverage

• % of income not tied to hours (equity, carry, royalties, recurring revenue)
• Revenue continuity during your absence (does it keep running?)

Resilience / downside protection

• Drawdown resistance: a setback doesn’t collapse the whole system
• Diversification: multiple channels for opportunity/income
• Liquidity + reserves: runway and contingency capacity

Deal quality

• Improved terms (pricing, control rights, downside protection, timelines)
• Fewer “bad-fit” deals accepted
• More walk-aways without regret

Network architecture

• More warm intros into high-value rooms
• Increased inbound opportunities from trusted nodes
• Clear tiering: inner circle / allies / contacts (less social noise)

Information & privacy hygiene

• Reduced oversharing
• Fewer reputation fires / fewer misunderstandings
• Cleaner operating footprint (docs, contracts, recordkeeping)

Simple scorecard (quarterly):

• % income that’s recurring / equity-based

• Months of runway/reserves

• of inbound deals vs outbound chasing

• Average deal terms vs last year (price, control, protections)

• of warm intros from high-trust relationships

3) “Empire endurance” metric — the ultimate test

The copy’s ultimate claim is persistence beyond your presence.

The cleanest measurement:

If you stepped away for 30–90 days, what still works?

Track:

• revenue continuity
• operations continuity
• relationship continuity
• reputation continuity

If those hold, you’re building what the copy calls “fortress” and “legacy structure.”

The most important measurement principle in the copy

This line is the hidden KPI:

• “not dependent on continuous effort”
• “systems that persist even when your attention is elsewhere”

So the best single metric is:

Dependence Ratio

How much of your life’s outcomes require your constant presence?

As Crown & Capital “works,” that ratio should fall.

Bottom-line answer

Long-term intended outcome:

Embodied authority + compounding systems that endure volatility and reduce dependence on your constant effort, creating legacy-level continuity.

How it’s measured:

By decision gravity, boundary integrity, calm under pressure, deal-term quality, income leverage, resilience, network centrality, and the “absence test” (what still works when you’re not there).

(If you want, I can turn this into a one-page tracking sheet (weekly + monthly metrics) tailored to your PE/fundraising world (LP outreach, deal flow, terms, reputation, and operating cadence).

• Short term, Mid term, Long term - Very good, I feel like seeing what sticking to a title long term is so important to see what results you can get from that. I also think results will increase all across the forum once people realise the power of sticking to titles long term

[Parsifal]

@Azriel

the understated and obvious can get missed

I think this is big point.

I’ve seen it with a couple of upgraded or reimagined titles. Some important features of the sub just fly under the radar.
Longtime forum members might know about it, but the copy isn’t exactly screaming “This is a big point of running this sub”.

Let’s take New Wanted for example.
Everyone in here knows it has great physical shifting. So great that many asked for Wanted based Beauty PS module.

But if you look at the copy, there’s this one paragraph about physical shifting:

Profound physical shifting is included on all levels for the most aesthetic, appealing look. This includes muscles, bones, ligaments – and the usual disclaimer applies, that it can take weeks, months, years for physical shifting results, and is highly dependent on the user.

Theoretically it has it all.
But it’s neither listed in the features section nor amongst the goals.

So if you, like me, aren’t that interested in Wanted and just skim the features and Goals, you don’t see anything about PS in Wanted.

And IIRC there were similar occurrences with other titles as well. Forum members know this sub is so famous for X, but it gets only slightly mentioned in the copy.

Not complaining here, just giving food for thought.

[Risky]

Absolutely! Of course you can’t list all metrics, I would imagine it’s hard as the titles grow and varies with the user and their life situation, but something, any type of metric would be awesome!

Yes please

@ksub

No! There’s only so much babysitting and care taking you can do @SaintSovereign. The products are already groundbreaking and the copies are just detailed enough for people to understand what they should expect. If you introduce metrics, some people might start looking for those specific metrics and disregard everything else. Personal introspection is a part of the process. That’s what people need to get better at.

I’m considering this as well, so but I’m sure this will be taken into consideration just like in the objective list it says we can’t list every objective.

[Judoka]

For an overthinker like me i would like this alot,the more information the better and less questions ill have