Hello Praetorians!
It is I, The Psi, back with another article questioning the very fabric of the Splinterverse! You can always count on me to try and shake things up with another suggestion to make the game better for our player base!
This time, I'd like to talk about the fact that I believe the best way to move forward into Conclave Arcana would be to REDUCE the pack price from the 4000 DEC point that was established during Chaos Legion, back to the "classic" 2000 DEC price that was used in Untamed and before.
There are many reasons I'd like to offer as to why this would be beneficial, and I've created both this Hive post as well as a video to explain my position in the hopes of a successful DAO vote to implement this change. In the last Town Hall, Matt himself said that IF a DAO proposal were to pass, that YES, the price WOULD be changed! So it is not a question of "if a proposal passes, the team would consider it", NO, if it passes, the team WILL make this change! That fills me with hope that we will have a lot of participation in this conversation, as well as the DAO proposal that would accompany it. (NOTE: I would love to have some help getting the DEC together to fund the proposal! If you can help, send me a message!)
The first thing we need to consider as to WHY this would be a beneficial change would be to look at the economic position and the changes that have been made to the game since Chaos Legion, when the pack price change to 4000 DEC first happened. That was an entirely different ecosystem that may have justified such a price, but those days are in the past, and with them, the huge profits that used to be able to be generated in order to fund such a price.
- There is no more SPS airdrop encouraging people to invest in DEC and cards, so less capital coming in to earn the "free" airdrop in the form of SPS. Many who were only here for that airdrop (including the VCs) have already left the game.
- Reward cards are now SOULBOUND. You can no longer get lucky when you open a Djinn Oshanus and sell it for $30 to use towards the cost of packs. In fact, unlocking Reward cards is now a DEC sink, and the "profits" that can be earned form them are vastly reduced
- You now require a Wild Pass to play in wild, reducing seasonal profits from that format and discouraging players from playing it at all with lower tier collections.
- Wagons are now required, as well as required to be repaired to earn the airdrops, requiring further investment and reducing the amount you'd have free to roll back into packs.
- Chaos Legion has lost most of its value and will no longer be able to be sold at a massive profit the way Untamed was to fund the next Standard set.
- No more "Pack Bonuses" for buying a large quantity of packs at the same time, which for many "whales" is an additional 15% "loss".
All of these factors will result in more OUTSIDE capital being needed to purchase packs, instead of being able to roll EXISTING collection value into buying future sets. As such, we are relying on NEW money coming into the game, whereas previously there were more ways to leverage your existing collection
You also have to take into consideration community sentiment, and the fact we have a reduced player base vs previous releases. There is a sentiment that the "buy in cost" of Splinterlands is so high, that it no only discourages NEW players, but also older players! We can see this evidently in the backlash from the pricing of the "Hall of Legends" promotion, where many players felt they were priced out of important meta cards that would never be available again.
Many of the people I have spoken with over Discord have expressed that at $4 they would NOT be buying into Conclave Arcana! Based on their previous experience with Rebellion, the large amount of money they invested didn't even materialize into a max nor competitive Rebellion deck, that they will just buy singles, if even that. Would we rather have a large number of players buying lower prices packs, or a smaller number of players buying more expensive packs?
Some of the questions become:
- Do we want 1000 people buying 10 packs each at $2, or 10 people buying 100 packs each at $4?
- Will the whales buy with a number of PACKS in mind (ie: "I am buying 1000 packs, whether they are $2 or $4")
- Will the whales buy based on a spending BUDGET (ie: "I am spending $1000 whether that gets me 250 packs or 500 packs).
- Will the price attract non-crypto people, or only those who are already into web3?
I feel I should also address 2 points that have been brought up around why pack prices should stay at $4.
- "Reducing the price of packs will devalue Rebellion cards": This is a fallacy because the FLOOR price of Rebellion would remain higher since the pack price was higher to begin with. Pricing Conclave Arcana at a lower price will not suddenly make the price of Rebellion cards decrease because although if the same amount of money is spent on both, it would result in twice the supply of CA vs REB, keeping the value of REB higher.
- "Less players in Modern will result in higher SPS rewards": True, but is even LESS players in modern what we WANT? And if SPS is a utility / transactional token (utility because you need to stake it to earn / transactional because you need to burn it into DEC to buy things) would less players not reduce the demand, and therefore the price? If you are theoretically earning 50 SPS a win worth $0.01 per SPS vs earning 100 SPS a win worth $0.005 a win, the overall "value" of each win is still $0.50.
We also need to look at how competitive we are when we compare ourselves to OTHER games people could be playing.
Splinterlands is VERY expensive.
For the cost of a Diamond deck you could EASILY build multiple Magic the Gathering decks. You could buy a brand new Playstation 5 with a ton of games. You could have a Vacation. You could buy an entire bag worth of Disc Golf discs. Heck, you could buy a used CAR!
If we are to compete with these other opportunities, there has to be a strong value proposition. It's hard to justify spending thousands on mid tier deck in the face of other opportunities and the DRAW and INCENTIVES need to be there. Lowering the cost of packs would at least lower the barrier to entry and allow more people to try playing the game instead of looking at the price tag and immediately dismissing it.
I have created a YouTube Video that you can watch that further explains some of my thoughts and goes over these points in audio format. You can view that video HERE:
I hope this post has energized you to vote for reducing the pack prices to 2000 DEC. I feel strongly that this is the best way to bring in more players, and elicit more investment into the ecosystem from existing players.
The "old" Splinterlands economy is no more, we have to adapt along with the many changes both the game and player base have experienced.
Please vote "YES" should there be a DAO vote on the subject!
Until next time, it's your guy, The Psi, and I'll see you around Praetoria!
Cheers,
Psilence
I am generally in favor of this, though I will admit I haven't spent a ton of time thinking about it.
In a nutshell, it'll double the number of CA cards and cut their values by 50%. However it should make it more accessible to bring in new players, which I think will be very important given how scarce and expensive Rebellion is.
As for me, it likely won't affect how much I spend on CA. I'll probably spend just as much if the packs are $4 or $2. I'll most likely buy 10-20k packs to try to get in the leaderboard, and I don't think the amount I'll need to spend will differ much based on the pack price. Oh and don't worry, if I get to design another summoner it won't be another cute animal (you heard it here first!).
If this goes to a proposal, I'll carefully read what others have to say before casting my vote. However I'm leaning towards supporting this idea for the time being.
Thank you for the reply, big T! I'm always happy to hear your opinions on these controversial topics since you're one of the major players that will help to sink or swim these kinds of ideas! The fact that you are (kinda? mostly?) behind it gives me some hope that should it come up for a proposal that it has a chance to pass! Cheers! <3
Hey PS. I think the bad part of the proposal system is that we (the community) take every vote so personal. Because people are so vested (which is a good thing) it creates winners and losers with every vote. If it were a "preference process" and then the team could decide knowing the opinions of the community members (individually and collectively), then I think this type of thing would be a good thing to vote on.
However, as currently configured, in conjunction with what Matt said that he wants the DAO to vote on these things, then I feel that these votes are more divisive than productive.
In reality on this issue in particular, there is a natural dynamic from the "customer always wanting a cheaper price in ANYTHING" vs. the "business always wanting the most earnings possible in ANYTHING". So trying to find the right balance is not as easy as making a binary decision. (meaning $2 or $4 and nothing else considered)
Since I look at both sides of the argument and feel that each has its merits, then I will be opting to find a better idea than either $2 or $4. I believe its possible and I hope the community doesn't get divided so bad that we are unable to find a 3rd alternative that works much better.
I'm willing to discuss further with you or anyone if you want. I'm happy to find solutions, but I would prefer not to have a divisive DAO vote until we've had further discussion.
Thank you, Dave! I am looking forward to hearing your ideas on a "middle ground". While I am not necessarily pushing for a proposal (yet), I figure we should start the conversation NOW before we cut it too close to make any changes. Always a please to chat with you my man! Cheers!
I'm preparing for our Saturday conversation. Just hit me up when you're around PS. And always a pleasure to chat with you too!!! :)
It really as complicated as you are making it. I came in during Untamed and bought packs. I even bought the some vouchers at $20+ dollars to make it to 100 in a buy with a friend during the CL presale. I even bought some RW packs. At $4/pack for rebellion I drew the line for all the reasons that psilence pointed out. I bought 3 packs out of boredom one day and never again. I'll pass on Conclave as well. I imagine I'll get tired of buying wild cards at some point and lose interest in the game entirely as deck building is one of the most enjoyable parts of the game for me.
I'm not making anything, this isn't my proposal. My point is that people are going to fight over 2 very valid points of view. I'm sure that you will have people with your perspective of what's right, as there will be people on the other side that feel their perspective is right. My point is you guys should be talking and finding a solution.
But I also realize there are people that think their way of thinking is the right way to think, and that applies on both sides of the issue.
So it is what it is, I was trying to help bring people together to solve a solution.
@cryptomancer said he'd fund this proposal if someone would write it because he's curious what the general sentiment is around it. It was in discord in the last few days.
While I'm not yet pushing for that proposal (yet), I feel we at least need to start the conversation. Things move at glacial speeds within SPL so starting the conversation well in advance seems like a jumpstart on a future concern. Thanks for the reply!
I LOVE the IDEA of $2packs, GREAT POINTS OVERALL 🚀🚀🚀 I would rather have the Packs be SOLD INstead of being BURNED so yeah $2 packs
You got it, fella! Sell them all, increase cards in the market, bring in new players, and level up those decks! :)
I appreciate the effort you're putting into making a case for this. It's not just the price of the packs, like you've said. It's a combination of things. It's the lack of sellable rewards cards, the lack of any bulk bonus at all, the fear from getting burned on Chaos Legion. To be involved in this game now takes new money, and many of us are understandably skeptical to spend the amount it would take to max out a set.
This really should go up for a proposal. The post you've made is most of the way there already. Cryptomancer said he'd fund it. Some of the bigger SPS holders are already saying they're against it, which is not surprising. But others have said they're not sure yet. If we can even win a few of the biggest whales over, it might stand a chance.
I understand why they had to get rid of the bulk bonuses, and even the real rewards cards. It curbs some of the exploitation, but it also puts it out of reach for some of us. With older sets, I would try to save up the funds to get at least 500 packs at a time, to get a few extra, to bring the cost down to something more reasonable. And to open enough packs to hopefully even out the fact that most packs are worth only a fraction of their cost. With enough packs opened, though, a few jackpot pulls will sometimes even it out.
Packs are fun to open, though. And trying to figure out where to spend money on singles is daunting. I like to buy the packs and open them and hope for jackpots. I did buy a lot of Rebellion packs, but like you, I didn't get most of them to the levels I wanted. And I just couldn't spend the amount of money it would take to get them there. I'm questioning how much I want to get into the next set at all.
I absolutely agree with you. We are in a different place within the game, with an entirely different ecosystem. What we might have once been able to support, we no longer can. The changes were made during a certain level of growth in the game, and now that period has subsided, and with it the growth and earning potential that led to the increased pack prices. We need to factor these new economic considerations into the pack prices as well. Cheers!
EXCELLENT post, and excellent points you make. I am very strongly in favor of $2 packs, it is definitely a sweet spot. RB sales were abysmal, and many community members cited the $4 cost as the reason they did not participate. We need to be as inclusive as possible, not continue to maintain a whales only club... that is simply not sustainable long term!
JIMMYYYYY!! You know that I'm with you on this Jimmy! Let's let things shake out for a bit and we'll reevaluate after it's had a chance to marinate :) Cheers!
Great video and post. Lots thoughts and explanations.
I'm in favor of the change from 4$ pack 2$. Not just because its cheaper and i can buy more.
I think its key for new players to be able to spend a little less and play at a decent level, because the fun and strategy start at silver and gold. IMHO i think get more players with less investment then a view players with high investment.
More player can spread the word easier and is beneficial for the whole community
These are just my current thoughts, lets see how it goes when the official proposal is there.
Also this is what i like from SPL the company got paid for making the set so they should be covered, now it also on the DAO to help the sales...
Hope to read more comment also on why this would be a bad idea...
For the downvotes i hope they can speak up on why they think its a bad idea iso of downvote only.
I am glad you also see things this way, it seems a majority of people do as well. I agree that once the set is paid for that the DAO should be more involved in helping make the sales. I'm sure Blaze has something in mind in this regard as well :) Thanks for the reply!
It also needs to be in balance with the new starter package.
Just watch a video about of aftersound. The math should be correct. $1 for 5 common and one rare (no gold or legendary change).
It might be good the have 3$ standard pack in the case 2$ for a standard pack, just saying we should also consider new starter pack price.
IDK if the focus should be on the starter packages or not TBH. That's an idea I've wrestled with as I feel like it's almost an overcomplication of a simple solution. At $2 / pack there would be no need for a starter package at all, so is it something we should even be considering? I feel like we could scrap that entire "starter package" idea if we just had a reasonably priced base pack, so don't necessarily agree with that entire concept TBH...
Agree keep it simple also fine by me just to have one pack type. I think blaze should have some opinion in this from a marketing perspective. Curious about is opinion.
I am not in favor of this. However I am glad you made a post about it and not done the usual discord bitching.
You will be rewarded for it.
Thanks, AZ! I like the fact that we can have a discussion about these things in this manner. Sometimes I feel like things get out of hand in discord, but on hive where ideas are not lost or buried, we can all talk things out and at least pass ideas around.
BTW I had another Tim Hortons coffee today and thought of you.... that truly is a vile liquid that needs to be heavily sugared and creamed so as not to actually taste it haha.
Cheers!
Appreciated!
As you can see, writing a post created two thing that discord doesn't do.
You kept a record on your idea, and also how people reacted to it. You can hold yourself and your commenters accountable at a later time.
You kept your thoughts organized, so did your commenters. Rant is less likely when you take time and write a organized post, it automatically help in the organization of your thought process
You were rewarded for your time, rather handsomely, wouldn't you say.
At least it will get you several nice cups of coffee! So that you don't have to drink TH coffee, if you call that liquid coffee! :)
Congratulations @psilence! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 100 replies.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPGreat video, thank you for taking the time to make it. Makes a lot of sense and I agree with you, Ive been playing since the end of 2021. I'll be votes yes. ⚔️🍻💰
Thanks for sharing! - @azircon
I'm a buyer at $2 per pack for all the reasons you mentioned. I'll sit out at $4 just like I did on Rebellion for all the reasons you mentioned. I didn't buy any of the promo cards because I was priced out. I have 2M CP so it's not like I don't enjoy buying cards. I just can't afford the current pricing trends. I quit the game for months when they removed leagues. I came back to realize it was a fire sale on cards and it was quite cheap to buy the cards to take my gold CL level deck to max level. Had that not been the case I wouldn't be playing now. I'll just be running a bot to play my account if I sit out on Arcana. How long before I lose all interest in the game as I currently only actively play in modern league? Will it be economically viable to pay 2000 DEC/month to run a bot? Pack price will be completely irrelevant without demand. You're losing me SPL. Slowly, but surely you're losing me.
I am with you. I financially can not go for $4 packs again. I am currently botting wild and renting out my modern cards to save up for CA... that is until I spent everything instead getting ready for Survival mode lol. Stretched too thin so less pack cost will help me participate! Cheers!
JUST IN CASE you don't know how many are going to be MINTED!!!!
$2 packs are a great IDEA and our last chance to acquire new players!! we shouldn't worry about too much on how many being MINTED because it has been NOTED:
10% of each type of pack (500k Booster, 100k Alchemist, and 50k Legendary) will be made available in the presale phase, which will begin roughly 30 days before the set is released. Packs purchased during the presale phase will not be able to be opened until the general sale begins and the Conclave Arcana set is released. Any packs allocated to the presale phase that are not sold will be burned when the presale phase ends. Please note that Starter packs are not planned to be available in the presale phase.
I honestly think we need more real discussion, take in account teams funding.
I think maybe lowering the price might be the wrong angle, but maybe we need an angle the essentially does the same thing.
The amount of card required to max is absurd and likely a huge barrier of entry for new players once they understand that.
I do thing we need the game to be even more affordable than a $2 pack equivalent, but maybe something cool for big spenders that doesn't break the gameplay for others to keep the team funded.
more game modes with league caps might be an awesome goal too. Create a fun space for casual players with limited income.
we need kids to be able to afford this game if we want it to have a chance to go big.
The introduction of survival mode may help with giving the whales a bigger pond to play in? But I agree. More accessible entry points will encourage more people to participate in the ecosystem, and could help grow the playerbase. Cheers!
Im against this idea. I think it devaluates older cards like Rebellion in this case.
For example, just in airdrops reb will be able to be used in wagons but if this change is made then reb will efectively cost 4 times more than CA for wagons.
It is after all a way to devaluate assets.
On the other hand, we might sell more packs, even might raise more money but the cost is just too great. Its something similar to what Aggroed did for CL. Yes, he sold more packs and raised more money but at what cost?
That being said in the grand scheeme of things this is not really that important. The amount of packs we sell and the money raised will be related to how big our playerbase is and devaluating assets might actual atract more players (especially considering lower leagues wont exist).
What's the point of having valuable assets and no players? That's what we have to consider, in my opinion. People are always quick to keep things expensive because it keeps them scarce and valuable. But we're losing players faster than we're gaining them. And what are many of them saying "it's just too expensive."
It might be a bigger issue than just the price of packs, though, and I'll admit it's a tough place to be in. There are no paths to take that don't have a downside.
I dont have an answer. Like you say, theres no paths without downside. I dont like this change but wont opose to it either because I dont have enough evidence to be certain about its result either way.
If things stay as they are Conclave Arcana packs will be a lot MORE expensive than Reb. Lets remember that 2 very important things were eliminated: The used of vouchers and bonus packs. If those things dont come back in some form the packs will be efectively more expensive.
Im against lowering the price but im much more against increasing the price. So it might be worth proposing to just set packs at 3$. This would mean still a decrease in price like Psilence is proposing but the impact wont be that big. That being said, theres one more point to consider that Im not sure @psilence touched on his post:
I'm just glad we're starting to have more thought-out discussions about it instead of simply arguing in Discord. And by we, I don't mean you and/or me... just everyone in general. Some sort of compromise like $3 packs may be the sweet spot. Or we can just let it go as planned and see what the demand is. Maybe another set being mostly burned will send a message.
Yup, your things could cost millions but if there's no one willing to buy them they might as well cost 0...
I think part of the problem with Aggs approach wasn't so much that he sold cheap CL packs... it was that he sold cheap CL packs AFTER having already sold them for so much INITIALLY. If he'd started and ended CL sales at the same price, some people would not have been bitter buying packs for $25 in the presale only to have them "go on sale" a few moths later for under $2. It's a different world now under Matt's leadership. One way or another we will see how things shake out, I just hope we make the right choice because it's sink or swim time IMHO.