I agree with much of what you say. And I think it has a lot to do with the following 2 points (one of which is being addressed, but the other has not YET):
the prevalence of so many shit decks in the higher league matches... when they are comfortable that we have true peer to peer competition, then I think that will change (or show where all the abuse is happening).
the reward structure is heavily weighted to the top. While its better than it used to be, basically the top 16 decks get paid the most. I would think they need to re-work this concept in the future if they want to have more than 50 large decks competing for those 16 slots... Otherwise you are right, the game will go nowhere as the top 16 eventually wear down all other competition.
FYI: I'm actually in the process of dropping a delegated account that I play. And I know @jacekw has been on the verge of also dropping an account.
There are two main challenges to your idea:
It's a major step towards increased centralization (just like with the occasional proposals people make that Splinterlands should ban bots).
It is extremely hard to adjudicate. Without requiring extremely invasive software, there aren't any good ways to determine the difference between one player multi-accounting and multiple people in the same household all playing their own accounts. IP address solutions don't work because people can just spoof their IP addresses.
I do prefer that people are more upfront and transparent about their multi-accounting (or their botting). But the problem is that a lot of so-called solutions are imperfect and just result in people continuing the same behavior, just in secret.
I agree with much of what you say. And I think it has a lot to do with the following 2 points (one of which is being addressed, but the other has not YET):
the prevalence of so many shit decks in the higher league matches... when they are comfortable that we have true peer to peer competition, then I think that will change (or show where all the abuse is happening).
the reward structure is heavily weighted to the top. While its better than it used to be, basically the top 16 decks get paid the most. I would think they need to re-work this concept in the future if they want to have more than 50 large decks competing for those 16 slots... Otherwise you are right, the game will go nowhere as the top 16 eventually wear down all other competition.
No scolding or hate!
FYI: I'm actually in the process of dropping a delegated account that I play. And I know @jacekw has been on the verge of also dropping an account.
There are two main challenges to your idea:
It's a major step towards increased centralization (just like with the occasional proposals people make that Splinterlands should ban bots).
It is extremely hard to adjudicate. Without requiring extremely invasive software, there aren't any good ways to determine the difference between one player multi-accounting and multiple people in the same household all playing their own accounts. IP address solutions don't work because people can just spoof their IP addresses.
I do prefer that people are more upfront and transparent about their multi-accounting (or their botting). But the problem is that a lot of so-called solutions are imperfect and just result in people continuing the same behavior, just in secret.