I think this proposal is solid on the technical side, but if Orbit wants to attract developers like Superchain has, it’s going to take more than just the stack. Superchain has a clear narrative and strong identity that attracts people who want an aligned community. Without something similar, Orbit chains might keep feeling a bit fragmented.
I have seen other initiatives, like the Orbit Ecosystem Fund and the Orbit Stimulus Pilot. These programs help to boost growth and are great as a foundation, but to keep up the momentum long-term, it’s probably going to take more than just funding.
Also, the intent-based architecture is powerful, but it’s going to need education and some incentives for people to really get on board. We know that new technologies like cross-chain liquidity solutions tend to struggle at the start without good support strategies. Orbit would benefit a lot from offering educational resources and grants to help developers understand and use the new stack.
About incentives, Superchain has stayed in the spotlight because they’re consistent with their support for developers (RetroPGF, Build). Orbit already kicked off with funds and initiatives like the Stimulus Pilot, but I agree that a structured and steady approach would help secure that long-term growth.
Finally, making Orbit attractive to developers isn’t just about incentives. Improving the onboarding process with things like an easy deployment template and tutorials could make a huge difference. For devs who value decentralization, Orbit has an opportunity to emphasize interoperability without enforcing centralized chain configurations, setting it apart from Superchain’s centralized approach. Overall, I think that a well-defined narrative and clear resources for developers could make Orbit the place for those looking for flexibility and support.