cryptosnif
Heroes of Mavia (MAVIA)
Documentary contract0x24fcfc492c1393274b6bcd568ac9e225bec93584
Unrated · 0% Evidence coverage
Operational strength remains unproven; unrated with 0% scoring coverage.
Documentary mechanisms alone cannot establish actual network behavior or investment outcomes.
Inspect the evidenceThe source review explains documented mechanisms. Independent network checks remain pending.
Promise
This dossier examines the documented purpose and mechanisms of Heroes of Mavia (MAVIA) on the Ethereum network. The objective is to explain the stated aims of the token based on available registry data, without verifying live network operation or investment outcomes.
Established facts
The pinned Trust Wallet Ethereum integration record identifies Heroes of Mavia with the symbol MAVIA and contract address 0x24fcfc492c1393274b6bcd568ac9e225bec93584. The record specifies 18 decimal places for amount representation, a technical detail that does not measure supply or value. The entry is labeled ERC20 and active within the community-maintained registry. The registry description states that Heroes of Mavia is a mobile free-to-play Web3 MMO Strategy game developed by Skrice Studios. It describes a fantasy-themed island setting where players build bases and battle neighbors to earn resources like Gold, Oil, and Ruby. These statements are attributed registry claims, not independently established issuer statements. The general ERC-20 specification defines a standard interface for fungible tokens, including totalSupply, balanceOf, transfers, and allowances. An allowance permits a named spender to use a specified amount, with repeated approvals overwriting previous amounts. This specification outlines requirements for conforming implementations but establishes no independently checked compliance for this specific contract. The wallet blockchain-information file confirms the network context as Ethereum, identified by symbol ETH. The Trust Wallet Assets README clarifies that the registry is community-maintained, allows anyone to submit assets, and excludes brand-new tokens from submissions. Inclusion does not imply a direct partnership with listed projects. No deployed bytecode, controller, supply, reserve, use, concentration, liquidity, security audit, incident completeness, or investment return has been established through this documentary review.
Unknowns
Independent control, beneficial ownership, actual usage, client adoption, supply distribution, concentration, liquidity, and complete incident history remain unverified. The registry status is a metadata label with no live-network validation. No token transaction was performed in this review. The economic niche and scoring criteria for this asset remain unclassified.
Consequences
Documentary mechanisms alone cannot establish actual network behavior or investment outcomes. The absence of independent verification means that operational strength remains unproven. Users relying on registry labels should understand these are community-submitted descriptions rather than audited operational guarantees.
Verdict
Operational strength remains unproven. The asset is unrated with 0% scoring coverage. Critical missing evidence includes identity verification, supply confirmation, and control assessment. The current state reflects a documentary snapshot without independent operational verification.
What would change it
Reproduced identity checks, independent dated network observations, and criterion-specific evidence would be required to alter this verdict. Calibration and editorial review following such verification would be necessary to assign a score.
Each check earns its result.
| Check | Weight | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Exact asset identityEssential | 3% | Verification pending |
| Observable use | 15% | Verification pending |
| Economic role of the token | 10% | Verification pending |
| Supply mechanismsEssential | 10% | Verification pending |
| Ownership concentration | 8% | Verification pending |
| Value capture | 7% | Verification pending |
| Control powersEssential | 10% | Verification pending |
| Security verification | 7% | Verification pending |
| Decision process | 8% | Verification pending |
| Accountability | 7% | Verification pending |
| Incident history | 6% | Verification pending |
| Operational continuity | 4% | Verification pending |
| Execution conditions | 5% | Verification pending |
Family-specific checks: Observable usage, token necessity and dependencies.
Inspect the evidence
Sources behind this analysis
Trust Wallet: captured Ethereum record for Heroes of Mavia
The pinned Trust Wallet Ethereum integration record names Heroes of Mavia with symbol MAVIA, contract 0x24fcfc492c1393274b6bcd568ac9e225bec93584 and 18 decimal places. Decimal places concern amount representation and do not measure supply or value. The record labels the entry ERC20 and active. Its community-maintained description states: "Heroes of Mavia is a mobile free-to-play Web3 MMO Strategy game developed by Skrice Studios. The game takes place in a fantasy-themed island called Mavia, where players build bases on plots of land and battle neighboring bases and armies to earn in-game resources, such as Gold, Oil and Ruby." Every project, economic, partnership, performance, supply, date and adoption statement within this quoted description is an attributed registry claim, not an independently established issuer statement or operational observation. This dossier may explain those stated aims with that attribution. No deployed implementation, rights, ownership, safety, supply, use or investment outcome was checked. The general ERC-20 specification is separate from this token implementation. Treat the generic application family as a documentary contract subject; its economic niche and scoring criteria remain unclassified and unknown.
Inspect the primary source ↗Trust Wallet Assets: blockchains/ethereum/info/info.json (bbe582d25a22)
The pinned wallet blockchain-information file names the network Ethereum, symbol ETH, and lists its project website and explorer. That named network context accompanies token records in the repository's Ethereum subtree. This identifies the documented integration network without reproducing its operation. This source is the wallet project's own integration registry, maintained with community submissions. Its project descriptions are documentary claims from that registry, not independently verified issuer statements or operational observations. The active status is a metadata label, with no live-network validation. No deployment bytecode, controller, supply, reserve, use, concentration, liquidity, security audit, incident completeness or investment return has been established.
Inspect the primary source ↗Trust Wallet Assets: README.md (bbe582d25a22)
The Trust Wallet Assets README describes a community-maintained registry of token information and logos across blockchains, used by the wallet and other projects. It says additional token information is optional and unavailable on-chain. Anyone can submit assets, and inclusion does not imply a direct partnership with the listed projects. It also explicitly excludes brand-new tokens from submissions, so this source cannot provide an exhaustive inventory of recent launches. The README states that its scripts and documentation use the MIT license. This source is the wallet project's own integration registry, maintained with community submissions. Its project descriptions are documentary claims from that registry, not independently verified issuer statements or operational observations. The active status is a metadata label, with no live-network validation. No deployment bytecode, controller, supply, reserve, use, concentration, liquidity, security audit, incident completeness or investment return has been established.
Inspect the primary source ↗Ethereum ERC-20: pinned token interface specification
The pinned ERC-20 specification describes a standard interface for fungible tokens in smart contracts. It defines totalSupply and balanceOf reads, transfers, third-party transfers after authorization, approval and remaining allowance. An allowance is the amount a named spender may use; a repeated approval overwrites that amount. The specification says callers must handle a false transfer result and describes Transfer and Approval events. Name, symbol and decimal-place metadata are optional in the standard. These interface requirements describe what a conforming implementation should do. A wallet ERC20 label establishes no independently checked compliance, actual deployed implementation, controller permissions, token use, supply or security. No token transaction was performed in this review. Copyright and related rights are waived under CC0.
Inspect the primary source ↗Only original summaries are distributed. Licensed raw market data stays private.