RE: SPS Governance Proposal - Split Ranked Battle Reward Pools By League by sps.dao

View this thread on: d.buzz | hive.blog | peakd.com | ecency.com

Viewing a response to: @sps.dao/sps-governance-proposal-split-ranked-battle-reward-pools-by-league

·@splinterlands·
0.000 HBD
A number of players have asked for more data relating the the proposed ranked battle reward changes above. The following table shows the number of unique accounts and % of total SPS earned by league and battle format over the past week (8/24 - 8/31):

|Modern|Players|% of SPS|Wild|Players|% of SPS|
|--|--:|--:|--|--:|--:|
|Bronze|52,323|1.06%|Bronze|141,589|6.44%|
|Silver|111,212|81.84%|Silver|118,704|25.92%|
|Gold|15,042|13.18%|Gold|18,506|38.72%|
|Diamond|1,601|3.72%|Diamond|2,807|17.71%|
|Champion|202|0.20%|Champion|823|11.21%|

As you can see, the most glaring issues are in the Modern format battles. The goal of these changes is to encourage more players to buy/rent higher level cards and participate in the higher leagues rather than spread out across a large number of accounts in lower leagues.

One of the most important things for voters on the governance proposal to note is that **even if this change gets approved and implemented, it does not mean that it's set in stone forever.** As with anything, if it doesn't have the intended effect and/or anything needs to be tweaked, then we will listen closely to the community and put up new proposals for additional changes going forward.

In the future we also plan to propose additional changes that build on top of this base. For example rather than fixed reward pool sizes per league/format, they could be dynamic based on the number of players or other factors. We are also looking at proposing changes to the collection power system or other ways to help properly group players into the appropriate leagues.
👍 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,