@jacekw: Proposal 1A:

RE: RE: Splinterlands: Suggested Improvements to the Tournament System

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Splinterlands: Suggested Improvements to the Tournament System

View the full context

jacekw(69)

Published in

#steemmonsters

Words

1022

Reading

5 min

Listen

Play

Proposal 1A: YES

For symmetry and balance reasons, I think there should be adjustments for Silver and Champion leagues.

Seems reasonable to keep it consistent.

Proposal 1B: NO

Alternatively, we can separate out Diamond vs Champion events. So Diamond players have cheap access to Gold and Diamond events (but not Champion) while Champion players have cheap access to Gold and Champion events (but not Diamond events, with the exception of Diamond Alpha and Gold Alpha Diamond).

It's seems weird and counterintuitive.

Proposal 1C: YES/NO

For Gold Foil events, Diamond league accounts should pay extra to enter Bronze league events. Champion league accounts should pay extra to enter Bronze and Silver league events.

After consideration, maybe better just keep the same way as regular tournaments?

Proposal 2A: YES

Accounts that are above the max for that league (who no longer get the win streak and choose not to advance) are reset to the bottom of that league category instead of dropping to a lower league.

Proposal 2B: YES

I would change Silver I (1600-1899) to reset to Bronze III (900 or 999) since people in the past have complained about how hard it is to drop to Bronze from Silver.

Proposal 2C: YES

Instead of cheaper tournaments being based on "current league" it is instead based on the leaderboard of the account. That addresses the "delegate away all my power to drop leagues for cheaper fees" exploit.

Proposal 3A: NO

Decouple tournament prize payouts from collection power entirely.

The Current solution is not perfect and needs to be adjusted, but it's BETTER than the previous one when there were just fixed values put by Aggroed.
It's better if it is based on X, calculated using some formula, and not just set randomly by someone because he thinks it will be a good value.
The current formula is payout = weight * TOURNAMENT_POWER/ALL_TOURNAMENTS_POWER * WEEKLY_POOL, of course, it's not perfect. But having a formula is better than using some "random" value, not based on anything.
This NO can technically be YES, because it's NO to not back to previous system, but it doesn't need to be based on POWER.

Proposal 3B: YES/NO

For this proposal, I'd suggest eliminating all Untamed + Dice for Silver, Gold, Diamond, and Champion leagues and instead have only All Edition tournaments (with has higher total collection power and thus better payouts). We can keep it to 50% Untamed only for Bronze league and 100% for Novice league.

Personally I am okay with this. Not sure if it will be accepted because Untamed+Dice tournaments are supposed to boost packs sales :shrug:

Proposal 3C: YES

Alternatively, instead of eliminating Untamed only and Untamed + Dice only entirely, we can just reduce the amount.

I think 3C is better than 3B.

Proposal 3D: NO

As a compromise, hybrid solution: Let collection power of the league set a baseline but don't penalize tournaments with Untamed only, Untamed + Dice only, NLS, or NL formats.

Gold Foil and Alpha tournaments, should probably be calculated separately though.

So Bronze, Silver, Gold, Diamond, and Champion will have a baseline payout based on collection power. But the Untamed or Untamed + Dice events won't have lower payouts. We can reduce their frequency in accordance with Proposal 3C if desired.

Actually I think All Edition tournaments should have higher prizes that limited tournaments. Before it was really profitable to just have only Untamed deck and play only Untamed tournaments. That strategy gave the best tournament ROI.

But... there can be put some weight (multiplier) so the tournaments with newest edition of cards have prize pool multiplied by some constants (it already happens for some low level tournaments, e.g. Novice tournaments have 25x higher payout than based on POWER, Gold Foil tournaments have 2x LOWER payout)

Proposal 4A: YES

Decouple tournament fees from tournament prize payouts (and thereby collection power) entirely. 5K and 10K entry fees are ridiculous!

What is more, I think you should never pay fee higher than 10 DEC if POWER of your playable deck for this tournament is above requirements.

Proposal 4B: YES

Instead of trying to use tournament fees to regulate player behavior, instead replace tournament fees and use either: a competitiveness score (###7), a new tournament rating that better reflects actual skill (###8), league exclusive tournaments (###9), or mutually exclusive tournaments (###10).

Proposal 5A: YES

Instead, there will be 1 Gold Alpha tournament each week and it will alternate between 1 Bronze, 1 Silver, 1 Gold, and 1 Diamond (for each 4 week cycle).

Proposal 6A: YES/NO

For example if we pair:

Novice events + Gold league events
Bronze events + Diamond events
Silver events + Champion events

On a given day, why have both Bronze and Silver events? Or both Gold league and Diamond events? It's likely that there will be lots of accounts that are playing both. Instead, the schedule should be rearranged to even out the distribution of events.

I'm okay with this proposal but it's not a big deal for me. If there are too much tournaments for you, you can just SKIP some of them :shrug:

7. Competitiveness Score: YES

Instead, a Competitiveness Score calculates how competitive an account is for each league category.

For me, Collection POWER was never a good enough metric.

8. Tournament Rating: YES

League and rating are very poor indicators of skill due to rating inflation. Also, a player who does well with max cards isn't necessarily good at lower leagues.