I keep thinking about @Vanar in a way that’s a little different than the usual “L1 vs L1” debate.
Most chains still feel like they’re built for humans clicking buttons — trade here, mint there, bridge when it breaks. But the next wave doesn’t look like that. It looks like automation: AI agents, payment routers, subscriptions, background settlements… the stuff that runs quietly while people live their lives.
And for machines, the #1 requirement isn’t hype. It’s predictability.
That’s where Vanar chain keeps standing out to me. The whole fixed-fee idea matters more than people realize. If you’re building anything automated, you need costs that don’t randomly turn into a bidding war. When fees are stable and execution feels consistent, an app can plan. An agent can schedule. A payment flow can run daily without “surprise, gas spiked.”
Another part I like is the direction they’re taking with validation. Moving from early controlled stability into a reputation-driven model is basically saying: we want validators to be accountable, not anonymous. That’s a very “real world” design choice, especially if you want brands and businesses to trust the rails.
And then there’s the bigger picture: Vanar doesn’t just talk about AI like a sticker. It’s trying to make data + context usable for automation — so payments aren’t just “send token,” but tied to receipts, rules, identity checks, and the boring stuff that actually makes finance work.
To me, VANRY’s real bet is simple: when crypto stops being a hobby and starts being infrastructure… will this chain still feel reliable?
That’s the lane Vanar is choosing. Quiet. Deterministic. Built for systems that run in the background.
