I haven't really ever thought about the issues that you have brought up. At least not in these terms. And I think having the cards BCX as part of the Rshares formula is interesting.
I have thought about the larger issue a bit, though. I believe that the real problem that everyone wants to address is farming, which is to say accounts that play merely to drain value from the system with no actual interest in playing the game as a game. This behavior is most rampant at low levels, and to the extent that it is possible to farm, it will always be most rampant at the lowest level where it is possible. For a farmer, why advance further?
But the thing about playing the game for the game is that any player that is doing so will want to see that they have a path to advance. A game where you are stuck at the lowest level and can't advance isn't any fun to play. So, measures that try to address the drain but also make it more difficult to advance in the game run the danger of discouraging real players which is surely not the goal.
If I have the problem wrong, then naturally, my thoughts on solutions are meaningless. But when it comes to combining accounts and cards, I think players who want to play the game for the game aspects want to level up. Few accounts with leveled cards are clearly the way to do this.
So, addressing the problem by simply cutting off rewards at the lowest levels becomes a sword that cuts in multiple directions. I think it might be better to try to find a scalpel that only cuts at the problem.
One approach would be to link rewards to how far a player has advanced with the rewards they have previous earned. To advance from Bronze III to Bronze II requires a certain amount of reward value. Players can earn rewards to move from Bronze III to Bronze II. When the player has exceeded the amount of reward value needed to actually enter Bronze II their rewards are reduced (perhaps drastically) if they don't advance into Bronze II. This can be done between all levels, with the severity of reductions tuned to address the problem as it actually exists at each level. Now the rewards are more directly linked to combining cards and doing the kinds of things needed to advance in the game.
Another approach is to introduce the idea of "game equity." When you buy your spell book you gain some game equity. When you buy new assets (like card packs) you gain game equity. Game equity can be earned by advancing levels, combining cards, renting cards, whatever. Game equity is gained for doing things that the governance board believes add value to the game. Likewise game equity can be depleted. Staying at the same level for extended periods of time, selling off reward cards, transferring DEC from your game account all reduce game equity. Game equity is lost for doing things the governance board believes drains value from the game. Now, the amount of game equity amassed can be part of the rewards formula. Players who retain their assets to advance in the game are rewarded more than players who cash out. At some level of cashing out, or not progressing, the game could reduce future rewards to zero. Here rewards are directly linked to the value the player is bringing to the game, which is the say in relation to the player not farming.
I really don't know. But my feeling is that the more directed a solution is toward the actual problem you are trying to address, the less collateral damage you risk doing.
well what would the collateral damage be if low players still received same amount of nfts as today, which is super high, but if the drop rolls epic or legendary in bronze, or legendary in silver, a non tradable nft is minted, this nft becomes a long term part of collection of player allowing them to still get same drops, just not able to sale and access the highest rarity card markets. If the value of epic and legendaries are preserved, who cares if bots crash common and rares.
A key structural issue is, unless we add ways to differentiate accounts and cards, and add massive permutations to the game, the bots will always find the highest win chance cards and spam them, the more diverse and unique the game possibilities, the less any particular card will be overpowering, on average. right?
I will start by saying that I think there is a structural issue with P2E gaming in general. That is that what a player calls the ability to advance, the farmer calls profit. The farmer is simply taking the gains that a sincere player would use to advance, and monetizing them without advancing. Do you disagree that this is also the root of the problem for Splinterlands?
I think spamming particular cards is a means of farming, just like starter cards are a means of farming. I don't think bot operators are wed to any one particular means of farming. If a player can make adjustments to how they play, or can buy-in at a price below the values of rewards, then a bot operator can adjust his botting programs and make the same buy-ins. Are the problems really being solved or are we in the same place except all the bots have a minimal set of cards rented? I don't know all the details of how card differentiation would work, but I wonder if the new system allows players to earn, then the bots can use the same means to farm.
I have considered non-tradable NFTs as low level rewards. This puts up a barrier to entry as far as earning is concerned, but not playing. Ultimately, I think it won't deter bots. They have nothing but time to first farm enough non-tradable NFTs to get to the point where they can earn. Then they can farm. Might still be fun for players, but they will just earn later. I think bots won't care about this change; humans may or may not care depending on their personalities.
Differentiating accounts I am all for and is in my view one of the few things that can work. My suggestions are just ways of trying to differentiate between players and farmers based on if their activity is in the pattern of playing or farming. For Splinterlands, the point is probably mute because I get the impression that they are firmly against any kind of account differentiating approach.
Have you been keeping up with Exode? I think I joined the game with your referral link, so our planets should be close to each other. Are you in a faction or alliance? I minted the planet and then didn't check back in for a while. So I missed some of the testing stages. But looking forward to the game using its new UI.
"I think there is a structural issue with P2E gaming in general. That is that what a player calls the ability to advance, the farmer calls profit. The farmer is simply taking the gains that a sincere player would use to advance, and monetizing them without advancing. Do you disagree that this is also the root of the problem for Splinterlands?"
Exactly 100%
"Differentiating accounts I am all for and is in my view one of the few things that can work. My suggestions are just ways of trying to differentiate between players and farmers based on if their activity is in the pattern of playing or farming. For Splinterlands, the point is probably mute because I get the impression that they are firmly against any kind of account differentiating approach."
By differentiating accounts I didnt mean Splinterlands the company analyzing and watching players. I mean differentiation along the lines of RPGs, lets say this month costs this amount of dec, but I cant get enough by end of month, I will never be able to acquire that permanent buff to my account again, In this way, you get token consumption quickly, more uniqueness to accounts because not all will have currency, or maybe not all want that upgrade. Maybe a bot owner can only upgrade 2 or 3 main accounts not all 1000. Over time these mains that get upgrades should end up with significantly higher yields leading bot owner to want to invest to make more big accounts, thats my theory.
"Have you been keeping up with Exode? I think I joined the game with your referral link, so our planets should be close to each other. Are you in a faction or alliance? I minted the planet and then didn't check back in for a while. So I missed some of the testing stages. But looking forward to the game using its new UI.
"
I was actually in their discord today asking when the colony management update is coming, and looks like its coming in the next 2 days! I dont think I joined a faction or alliance yet ill check tom. off to bed
!PGM
!PIZZA
BUY AND STAKE THE PGM TO SEND A LOT OF TOKENS!
The tokens that the command sends are: 0.1 PGM-0.1 LVL-2.5 BUDS-0.01 MOTA-0.05 DEC-15 SBT-1 STARBITS-[0.00000001 BTC (SWAP.BTC) only if you have 2500 PGM in stake or more ]
5000 PGM IN STAKE = 2x rewards!
Discord
Support the curation account @ pgm-curator with a delegation 10 HP - 50 HP - 100 HP - 500 HP - 1000 HP
Get potential votes from @ pgm-curator by paying in PGM, here is a guide
I'm a bot, if you want a hand ask @ zottone444
Ah, Ok. Right. Any measure that chokes off the bottom will get low level accounts to combine into a larger one, for sure. Just large enough to earn again, I suspect.