Allow me to go slightly off-topic here...
So, in a roundabout way, we're admitting that SPS staking requirements are unattractive to new players? I feel like that's one thing people aren't talking about within Splinterlands itself, but I think it's a major reason the game is tanking. Regardless of how much it costs to have hundreds of thousands of SPS staked, just seeing those numbers is off-putting. The fact that they were just doubled for Wild is batshit crazy. The staking requirements (or recommendations or whatever) were meant to increase demand for SPS and help the price, but it does not seem to have worked out that way.
I do see we're back UP to a penny, though. Woo hoo...
SPS is not back up to a penny. SPS is still around 0.8 cents or so.
Yeah, it's just displayed differently and shows up as $.01. I was fooled by that. My bad.
I feel like we already had this discusion.
Its like stating the obvious. Ofc is bad for new players.
The spl sps staking requirement design is really bad.
Ah, okay. I might have missed that. I have dipped in and out in terms of paying attention to what's going on in Splinterlands.
have you still not realized that you are dealing with a bunch of greedy idiots who can do nothing but cheat and lie?
I think if what was originally scoped out, purely single player experience, the SPS earnings would have made a lot more sense. The problem is they aren't using a single player or a pvp setup where there's only rewards for one account. They're using a tournament structure for their prizes and the only way I could really see implementing SPS stake requirements for that would be to gate league access (their leagues are not like Splinterlands ranked leagues) and that would essentially kill the marketability to the "web 2" folks they're trying to reach. Like if you're playing a tower defense game, get to the end of a level, and you don't have the option to advance unless you go learn about web 3 and staking SPS etc, it's a big wall. When it comes to Splinterlands, there are other walls, like card level, skill and then the rewards you earn for winning are multiplied by the SPS stake. It's kind of apples to oranges. The two games are just very different.
Yes, that's true. The games are very different. I like that. I'm not even saying I'm against the staking requirements in Splinterlands. All I was suggesting is that maybe we look at what effect that does have on possible new players when they see such high numbers. Hundreds of thousands of staked SPS, to me, might just deter people from even wanting to try. So I don't even know what I'm getting at. I'm not suggesting anything be changed, I'm just wondering if it's considering that the SPS staking requirements are part of the reason the game doesn't seem to be attracting new players. What good would considering it do? I don't know. Carry on.
So back in 2021, I looked up the tournaments requirements /prizes etc.
Not only did they have collection power requirements, and then later on SPS staked requirements, the prizes were also unattractive if people were to rent. (And the cost of cards were too high.) SPS rentals weren't around back then.
So deck for 8k or so (to be competitive.) SPS for another 4k why not (probably more cause SPS was higher.)
All to compete for a prize of $40 (if first place.)
Or, could just go play MTG: Arena, spend $25 for a chance to win 2.5k. (Probably won't, but in theory, it is possible.)
People in SPL have a dream of profiting by just doing nothing which is mathematically flawed. All the renting, staking ,etc, is just economic manipulation that provides zero value.
If SPL had a better prize structure, people can be motivated to spend.
We're not back up to a penny, it's just displayed with one less decimal point and rounded up. I wonder what will happen if we drop below $.005.