Here's the problem I see:
Right now we are losing players because they feel the game decision makers (big players and devs) don't really care about the new and/or smaller players.
Changes like this are probably ok, but it seems to me like we want to do everything BUT think about what the new player faces. For instance:
First and most importantly, a new player has to face over 100k automated bots that have been programmed to have the perfect teams in the bronze and silver levels for each of our rulesets and mana caps. Unless a person has some insight as to some work arounds, they simply have no fun getting their brains beat in day in and day out.
Secondly, these automated bots ONLY EXIST because they get FREE cards to play. These aren't new accounts, these are accounts that have been opened for many months (and in some cases years), but THEY DON'T HAVE TO OWN/RENT THE CARDS that they play. They simply rent the key cards necessary to milk the system, and do it by relying heavily on the free cards to do so.
In other words, if you took away the starter cards for all accounts after an introductory period, then a substantial portion of those 100K+ accounts would either 1) cease to exist or 2) have to rent/own.
These 2 things affect the game for new players in the following ways:
Gameplay at the low level is not fun, and in order to rise above this unnecessary hurdle a player must decide to spend many hundreds of dollars to build an adequate deck. So enabling these 100k bots to have FREE CARDS to play and stomp in the lower leagues, not only ruins the small player experience, it take a massive amount of their earnings (see below).
Because a bronze and silver player must share their earnings with these 100k+ accounts, their earnings have be destroyed. I would suggest that there is probably 50 to 100 bots for each human in those leagues. This is a massive hit to the "little guy's" earnings from playing. Just like larger players think large players should make their fair share, little players feel the same too. The same frustration is applicable.
For a game that suggests (rightly) that you should own your assets to earn from the game, it seems like this concept is being lost when it comes to the little guy. It seems like little players don't matter. While I know better and know that the DEVs do care, the appearance is terrible.
I have made this point before and I can tell you the first reaction: The nerfs put in already have made the bots not use the starter cards since they don't earn on them. If this were true, which isn't, then removing the starter cards would have no negative impact. In other words, what is the point of having them after an introductory period?
Summary
While I like the game trying to always improve the way in which rewards are given out, I HATE when the game neglects a segment of our community. If someone has been here for more than an introductory period, they should own or rent the cards they play. PERIOD.
While people can debate if my solution would work or not relative to chasing away the bots, one thing is clear. All changes to rewards at this point mean nothing to the little players, they will continue to feel that they stand no chance and aren't listened to as long as their competition gets FREE CARDS to both steal their rewards and beat the shit out of them.
I love this game, I think the team truly cares about everyone. But I think they've lost touch with what the smaller players feel and should put much more thought into this issue. The community was built for all size players, and I don't think its possible to grow much larger without getting back to those roots.
Please help people and not bots.
Honestly, what needs to happen too is draining the players rating slowly when they don't have the required CP (or Power). That is a huge RED FLAG for people double dipping.
So if they don't have the 'Power' for that league then each day their rating is reduced, and helps the active players push past them.
Yes agree completely @just2random
I would support the no hibernation proposal :)
Just seems lazy to do that
Fair enough bcarloan curious where you are on the SPS DEC proposal now actually
Makes sense I kind of like combo packs so hope they all pass :)
Wow, this is a fabulous idea! This would also even out the rental market. It's not unreasonable to expect players (or bots) to maintain a consistent deck throughout the season in order to reap the leaderboard rewards. That looks plain ugly anyhow, I don't see a downside to ratings decay mechanism.
Yes, the new player experience is 100% an area that needs a lot of focus and we're currently looking at the data on starter cards and how we can address the issues there.
That's all completely separate from this particular proposed change though. This is just about making sure that players to own or rent the appropriate assets in order to be able to earn the rewards for them.
If I have "No Melee"-Ruleset I need a chicken with Level 1 (By the way: Why can't I use my Max-Level-Chicken at Level 1 - this update was promised a long time ago), so when I put this in future in my team this will cut my rewards ?
For new player experience, have you considered creating a ghost league with progression to earn new ghost cards the more you play the game? This will allow new players to really experience the game for what it is than worrying about how much money they should spend to compete in ranked games? Of course ghost league will not earn you anything.
This is already possible to some degree, I believe. If you don't buy a Summoner's Spellbook, you can play the game, but you won't earn rewards.
the ghost league will allow you to use max level cards unlike in the ranked league ghost cards, you can only use level 1. There should still be progression in this league to earn the max level ghost cards or other ghost cards on diff levels. This is the only way majority of players can experience the game to its fullest potential.
Ok, that's an interesting idea. And I think it would be beneficial for new players because the gameplay is more entertaining at higher levels and they can only experience the lower leagues in ranked battles and may think the game isn't fun at all.
This is going to be possible with the new open tournaments (although there is a 20SPS entry fee) https://splinterlands.com/?p=tournament&id=a9cceda6e3921f65baef72a14a9e66cd8d28c534
It doesn't allow you to experience climbing the leagues with the changes in abilities, though.
Yes correct!
Agreed.
It could if it used the same leagues and ranking system as the main game does though
thank you Matt!
In my opinion Splinterlands think since a long time not to the small player anymore, they aren't interested in them, the time is over when somebody who spent 500$ or 1000$ in the game is worth something.
They showed it again and clear with the promotion for Splinterfest, the smallest package was 4000 packs for 4$ = 16.000$ and if you buy the biggest pack for 160.000$ you got 40-times more SPTD packs than with 16.000$, additional bonus packs (with this promotion) you got also only in the more expensive package.
I don't understand why it is not possible to make also a package for 500$ or 1000$ - the only answer I have is that they don't care about such people with such "small" amounts.
So this is IMO the real problem.
100% in agreement, a lot big players see that issue as well. We need new players. Period! And currently I do not see a lot that attracts new folks.
The problem is the game is not competitive at all. If all cards would have the same stats and level up means only " more rewards" it would be the pro gaming scene.
But what we see is money = higher rank means the game is meaningless to compare it to skill.
only investment needed + time.
Pretty much, I sold 90% of my account in the last year or so cos I don't like the direction things are going and it makes me think it's all just a waste. I mean who wants to play a game with 50 people with max everything and 100k bots.
I spoke from the promotion for Splinterfest, this is on top to the normal bonus packs (who aren't free - they need one voucher). To take part in the promotion for Splinterfest you need to buy 4.000 packs for 16.000.000 DECs. Even this packet is very poor if you compare with the paket for 40.000 Packs for 160.000 DECs, if you spent 10-times more you get 40-times more SPTD-Packs, 10% additional bonus packs, more potions & runis.
So IMO you see clear the splinterlands-management is only interested in big investors, they obvisiouly even not thought that their can be people who want (or can) spent only 500$ or 1000$ - This is the point.
yes you can pool but you cannot share what you get, f.e. potions aren't transferable, so you cannot share them with the member of your pool. So one have the potions to open all packs and other have packs without potions.
Also it is a question of trust to make a pool as in the end the account-owner can just keep all and sent you nothing.
So I think it would be much easier to just allow to buy small packages.
Nice for you, but not everybody can buy 25k packs ...
But what have this to do with the question if you value small investors or even if you value investors at all ?
I don't know how many player / investors took part in the Splinterfest-promotion, but when I see the shop-page and see how many packs needed till next airdrop it seems for me that it wasn't really much.
The question is f.e. if it is better to collect from 2 investors (this is only a example as I don't know the real participants) 160.000$ = 320.000$ pr from 1000 investers 500$ or 1000$ each = between 500.000 and 1.000.000.
But I can also ask other question:
I'd say that the problem with removing starters after an introductory period is that it doesn't allow for someone trying the game briefly then coming back at a later point, only to find they can't do anything because the starters have all gone. Even if you did it as the starters going after a certain amount of games it wouldn't take into account various development speeds. I recall when I started losing hand over fist as I tried to figure things out. It was only because I was lent some cards by Matt Clarke and got the odd reward card that I actually started getting anywhere. That's how slow a learner I am. 😆 I'd do better today if I had to start over, but that's a few years of experience behind me.
I agree that is an issue to consider @minismallholding , I have suggested that instead of time being the determinant for their removal, instead make it x amount of charges for each card. So for instance you can use each card 100, 200, 500, xxx times, then it will go away. If you did that then you could also give them popups to let them know that they can rent the card on the market when its getting ready to be used up. To me this would make the most sense, because we want people to try the cards and then if they like them, they can either buy or rent them in the future.
and Matt Clarke will go in the hall of fame for all he's done for the game :D
THIS. I don't even need to right a direct reply for the article, you covered nearly everything. Great job! I'm going to stop my unstaking just to vote this bs down ;)
The game is simply heading in the wrong direction, no new players would be attracted by this, not gameplay nor rewards.
And we need new people and also keep old ones interested that leave already, a clear no to this proposal and any other changes that is purely intended to influence money and reward part. Maybe a cool gameplay attracts newbies?
@uwelang I agree very much about the perceived direction (that isn't necessarily their intent though) and about the retention issues. I've spoken directly with @yabapmatt about these issues in particular. He has promised that it is high on his priority list. While there are no single fixes (there are many steps needed to be taken), I think Matt is on it. I do trust that when Matt puts his mind to something, then he will make it happen in a way that we are all impressed!
I don't think we have to vote "no" on this proposal to be heard though, Matt says clearly this is just one step he's taking with many more to come.
I agree 100% with this analysis and think the starter card issue needs to be addressed ASAP. It's not being given enough attention for how important of an issue it really is. My wife enjoyed the game but quit playing after a few weeks because of how awful the new player experience really is.
This really, really needs to be given top priority. And it's an easy fix!! 30 days and starter cards go away. Or a set of 'charges' per card aaaaand... they're gone. This is LONG overdue, especially when you consider the tremendous impact of this particular bot exploit.
Good ideas! I would also like to add on this. In order to make the bots go away, let's separate everyone who has those free cards into a "Free League", which is basically same as the normal leagues, but without rewards. It doesn't serve anyone to have bots playing for rewards.
I like that idea @gamer00 !!!
Nice, I like that introductory period thingy.
Dave for President!
lol :D
The bots are not designed to beat your deck IF you actually use max level cards for the league you are playing in. This results in more people renting cards like I do and using the highest levels for each card which I have never had a problem beating the bots since I don't just play nonstop to pick random cards and "hope" to win. That is how people are abusing the rewards right now and if you stake SPS, this shouldn't even question the proposal here as it is a no brainer.
I like your idea. I play a whole lot less these days because it is not worth the massive amounts of time it would take to even begin to make this rewarding. I'm trying out brawls to see if I can at least bring back the fun.
Good @bcarolan639 ... I agree as well... my criticism is about the free cards (starter cards) that enable hundreds of thousands of accounts to take rewards (both SPS and reward cards). If those accounts rented or owned the same cards then I would not have an issue with them.
Good job to help others too, that is very nice to hear!!!
I'm with you. I think that's the plan with the new projects SPL is doing, bringing in more players to increase awareness and attract more gamers. And if they do that then we both will do really well! :)