Summary
This proposal introduces a gradual efficiency tapering mechanism for rented and delegated SPS used in gameplay reward calculations.
The goal is to strengthen the SPS economy, support smaller holders, and reduce excessive sell pressure — while keeping full rental freedom and market stability.
Under this system, the reward efficiency of rented and delegated SPS would decrease by 1% per week, applied globally and uniformly.
It’s a smooth and predictable transition that encourages staking and sustainability without disrupting the market.
👉 Note: This proposal is still a work in progress (WIP).
I’m publishing this draft here to gather your thoughts and feedback before officially submitting it for a DAO vote.
📖 Background and Rationale
SPS rentals were designed to improve accessibility and participation.
Over time, however, the system has created an imbalance:
📉 Rental prices have dropped to around 0.001 SPS, making renting far cheaper than staking.
🔄 Many players prefer renting to buying, which reduces buy pressure.
💸 Gaming rewards earned through rented SPS are often immediately sold, creating constant sell pressure on the token.
The result is a structure that rewards short-term extraction more than long-term engagement.
Raising the rental floor or removing rentals altogether would be too disruptive.
This proposal offers a balanced and gentle alternative that allows natural adaptation through time-based tapering.
⚙️ Proposal Details
A 1% weekly decay would apply to all rented and delegated SPS in gameplay reward calculations.
The decay is global, based on calendar time, not individual rental dates.
When SPS is newly rented or delegated, it starts at the current efficiency level.
The SPS token itself is not modified — only the reward contribution changes gradually.
Example of 1% weekly decay:
Week 1 → 100% efficiency
Week 2 → 99%
Week 3 → 98.01%
Week 4 → 97.03%
… and so on
Rented and delegated SPS will continue to function normally in all gameplay mechanics; only their reward efficiency will gradually adjust over time.
📊 Visual Representation
Below is a visualization of the 1% weekly tapering effect over 52 weeks, compared to a 2%, that was the initial thought.
Even after one year, efficiency remains near 60%, ensuring accessibility and gradual change.
🌍 Expected Results
✅ Smooth, progressive adjustment without sudden disruption
✅ Reduced sell pressure, improving SPS stability
✅ Gradual incentive shift toward staking
✅ Continued access for smaller players and guilds
✅ A healthier, fairer reward structure for the whole ecosystem
✅ The long life span of the tapering and smooth reduction in efficiency allows players to transition naturally from renting to holding, without the immediate need to buy SPS or face sharp gameplay disadvantages
Over time, the tapering system encourages organic growth, greater staking participation, and a more sustainable token economy that benefits everyone — from new players to large holders.
🧠 Implementation
Taper rate: 1% per week (adjustable via future DAO votes)
Activation delay: 2 weeks after DAO approval (grace period)
Technical complexity: Low — simple adjustment to reward logic
Transparency: The efficiency rate and taper schedule will be visible to all players
🗳️ DAO Vote Options
YES – Approve the 1% weekly SPS Rental Efficiency Tapering Mechanism, applied to all rented and delegated SPS in gameplay rewards, activated two weeks after approval.
NO – Keep the current rental and delegation systems unchanged.
🏁 Conclusion
This proposal offers a measured, inclusive, and sustainable path forward for the SPS ecosystem.
It keeps rentals open and accessible while progressively strengthening staking and long-term value.
Through small, predictable adjustments, we can reduce sell pressure, stabilize rewards, and ensure that the SPS economy grows stronger for everyone — from major stakeholders to the newest players entering the game.
I feel like it's easier to just uniformly reduce the value of rented SPS by some number, e.g. 25%.
I also wouldn't want to treat delegated SPS negatively, firstly because it's used for new player onboarding and secondly because many of us (including myself) use it to delegate to our alt accounts. I don't want to have to distribute my SPS just because of this mechanic, seems unnecessary.
To be honest I'd rather not make changes to rentals for now. There is new utility coming to SPS soon - let's see if that impacts demand and the rental market before we make a decision on other things.
Also if we had a bid-ask market for SPS then you'd see prices go up as SPS owners could list it for higher and, in all likelihood, people would take those prices. I.e. get SPS owners to anchor the price, rather than the other way around. To me doing this and adding other utility to SPS is a better "fix" than trying to "taper off SPS rentals".
I like 25% immediate reduction. Can live with 50% or 100% too for rented SPS.
Also agree on that it is unnecessary for delegated SPS
As I've said before, I would be against completely removing SPS rentals. But I DO think there should be a difference in the VALUE of owned vs rented SPS. 25% or 50% decreased value towards ranked rewards would basically achieve that.
If I can just jump in with my point of view and reffer to your comment. Mainly I agree on everything I said but.
Thank you for reading :)
🔧 Potential Compromise Amendments
To summarize possible refinements based on community input:
Delegation carve-out for new players:
Delegated SPS retains 100% efficiency for accounts less than 3 months old, to preserve onboarding.
Immediate 20% Decay:
All rented and delegated SPS begin at 80% efficiency immediately upon implementation.
Unified decay for fairness:
After the initial grace period, both rented and delegated SPS follow the same global tapering curve, preventing abuse or distortion.
Adjustable tapering rate:
DAO can review and modify the weekly decay rate (e.g., 0.5%, 1%, 2%) periodically to maintain flexibility and adapt to results. I suggest to start with a 1%.
Efficiency cap:
The system could stop decaying at a predefined floor (e.g., 50%), ensuring that rented SPS remains viable but less rewarding long-term.
Implementation timing:
Activation should occur only after clear DAO consensus and with a grace period (e.g., 2 weeks) to let all players adjust.
If it goes to proposal I will vote against for 2 reasons:
I don't like making delegation worse because the DAO delegates to new players and because players often delegate to their alts. I understand the delegation part is needed because people could get around the rental decay with delegations.
Most importantly I think this effect will have a very low impact and it would probably take significant dev time. I believe we have dozens if not hundreds of things that should be higher priority than this.
Thank you for your feedback — even if critical, it’s genuinely appreciated. My intention was to design something that isn’t development-heavy and remains simple to implement.
I agree that the initial impact is moderate, but that’s by design: the mechanism favors players who wish to gradually transition from renting to staking without any shocks or abrupt, unfair changes to the current system. It’s meant to guide the economy gently in the right direction, not disrupt it.
I understand your intentions. I agree that it is a simple concept but even those can take significant hours to implement. Remember when players were asking on discord for a button to make them not face bots for weeks? Something as simple as that was initially answered with "we will do it but there are other priorities right now. If you want it faster pass a proposal." To me this was an issue of extreme importance and much more simple to do. And the team still had other priorities and knew it wouldn't be that simple. I guess at some point the priority increased and it was pushed.
I understand the impact on rewards is moderate (although making rentals 40% less efficient in one year doesn't seem as moderate as it seems when you look at %1) but that's not what I was talking about. I was talking about the impact on the economy. I don't think it's going have any meaningful impact there.
Thank you for your thoughtful comment — I completely understand your point. You’re right that even seemingly simple implementations can take time, and I respect that the dev team has to prioritize carefully. My intention here isn’t to push something technically heavy, but rather to open a discussion on the direction we want SPS economics to take, so that if and when priorities allow, the concept is already refined and supported by the community.
As for the economic impact — I agree that on day one it won’t move mountains. The tapering isn’t meant to “fix” the market overnight, but to start shifting incentives gradually and raise awareness about the benefits of owning and staking SPS. Right now, renting creates almost one-way sell pressure. Over months, this system could encourage players to hold and stake more of what they earn, which cumulatively reduces constant selling and increases long-term demand.
Personally, I would be in favor of a more direct intervention, such as raising the rental floor or even temporarily disabling SPS rentals altogether. However, I’m fully aware that this would likely cause a strong shock to card prices and the rental market, and that’s precisely what I want to avoid. The tapering approach offers a progressive, non-disruptive path that lets players and markets adjust naturally, while still moving us toward a healthier SPS economy.
I agree this is a better solution than stopping rentals or increasing the floor. I just don't see it ever moving mountains. Not on day 1, not in a year, and not in 5 years.
I think it's an interesting idea, I just don't believe the effect will ever be meaningful. The biggest impact is that some people will rent more at some point to cover the loss the efficiency and some will rent the same and accept slightly lower rewards which means slightly higher rewards for the rest of the people. IMO it doesn't justify the dev hours.
But this is my opinion and it's nothing against you. I also believe we should have never implemented SPS staking for rewards before we had the player staking that the whitepaper mentions. That would be a massive project but it's one that would have a significant impact.
Maybe it could be worth to ask the team if it effectively will have a deep impact on dev hours of coding. I will do it.
That's a good idea. Ultimately I'm only slightly against it and it's not that important to me.
Congratulations @meredorn! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 1500 upvotes.
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
STOP