RE: SPS Governance Proposal - Adjust Rewards Based on Card Level

avatar
(Edited)

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

Nice to see that you take the time to answer to questions and concerns so thoroughly!

As you are 'here' I take the opportunity to let you know what is my only real worry concerning the future of Splinterlands (I think all other problems should be anyhow solvable). I fear that bots will completely dominate the game sooner or later (and to a certain degree already do, even in the highest leagues - you might ask @jacekw for confirmation).
I wrote about that topic here, but since then the problem even increased.

I understand that the philosophy of blockchain and decentralization makes it difficult to take any effective measures against bot dominance.

I also know the view point of the Splinterlands team to be 'bot agnostic'.

Nevertheless, I would really apreciate you to read my bot post in case your time allows it.
(Of course then you could also answer in Discord instead of on chain if you prefer that.)



0
0
0.000
10 comments
avatar

I read your post and I agree with you about bots. If they can beat chess and go they can beat Splinterlands (which is currently much simpler than chess or go). I have two comments on that:

  1. The plan is to make the game more and more involved with more player input over time. I know it's still a while out, but the item and spell cards that are part of the land expansion are a good example of that. That type of thing will increase the complexity for bots by many orders of magnitude and hopefully give human players a big advantage, at least for a while, by which time hopefully we can add even more things to the game. The advantage we have over chess or go is that chess and go don't change and add new features, but Splinterlands does (it's just been very slow, but will be getting faster).

  2. I'm not sure it's necessarily a bad thing if bots are ultimately better than human players. Many people will still just enjoy playing the game and they will be matched up against opponents at a similar skill level - especially as the game grows and there are more players at all levels. So at the highest levels people may use bots and compete on the best bot software (which is also kind of cool), and then at other levels human players can compete against other players (whether bot or human) at their skill level so they can enjoy the game and work on improving. So I'm not sure that it's necessarily bad or good - it's just different and has its own pros and cons.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

Nice reply!

The first part sounds promising.

Concerning the second part:
Yes, actually, I am also fascinated by some chess programs, 'masterpieces' of software and (partly) AI.
And I also respect people who will write better and better Splinterlands bots in future (yes, that's indeed also "cool"). :)

A pure bot championship would be actually fascinating, too: who is able to write the best, most sophisticated Splinterlands bot? In chess there are competitions only for software ...

Especially in chess, bots are great tools to practice one's skills, analysing games and learning to understand chess better.
(Interesting also for Splinterlands could be the idea that some chess programs are having certain modes in which they intentionally don't always play the best possible move to make the games against human opponents more exciting and variable.)

However, one difference is that in chess (or GO) in (human) tournaments and public servers bots are strictly forbidden. That means human players are never forced to play against a bot if they don't want. They can intentionally challenge a chess program (if they really think they would be able to beat 'God') :-) or just practice with it, but in human tournaments they can be sure to face human opponents only.

Concerning Splinterlands that could mean, there could be different kinds of competitions in future, for example "bot only", "human only" and "mixed". Then at least everybody would have a choice. And I know very well that even if 'we' would try to implement these different kinds of tournaments it would be very difficult to verify that a 'human' is really a 'human'.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I agree tournaments and guild brawls no bots is cool but a high investment account should be able to earn all day in normal battles for ranked rewards and i dont make as much if i were to actually play it all day but i come back to play when im in the leauge i want i dont want to sit thought the lower leauges when i want to work on my guild project to help ppl get into the game plus make some money with it to. Like i cant do that with out my high level bots, There will be alot of things that dissapear if those go away like get banned not if they become obsolete then i neeed to deal with it and find another way

0
0
0.000
avatar

Why should anybody play themselves, if bots do the same without wasting time and energy? In the end with this vision Splinterlands might become an inhabited ghost town where bots play against bots. A pure staking mechanism but no game anymore.

If the daily games are too many for a human, just make them less.
You also don't tell a soccer player like Lionel Messi to play 5 soccer games per day. :)
Create conditions within the game which humans can fulfil.

I wrote a longer post about it some time ago.

0
0
0.000
avatar

There not i can play beter and have a better win rate but when im not playing i want more money with my level of investment in the game im a investor first now but also a player bc i like it which is why i invested in the company in the first place in 2019.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yes, we are all investors (I am also one since 2018), but in my opinion long term every investor earns most if the game is developing well and attracts as many as possible satisfied new players.
And the big majority of human players prefers to play against other humans ...

0
0
0.000
avatar

100% why im dong what im doing with my project to grow it

0
0
0.000
avatar

On point 1 and 2
Would it make more sense to wait for land to implement then propose this change?
Depending on how far land is from implementation it could be factored in then.

0
0
0.000
avatar

On the first point, would it be a good idea to commit to something like 1 new ruleset per month? And maybe deprecate some older ones in favor of newer ones after a while to not make it super complicated for the human players after a while.

That should give bots a hard time keeping up. The question is, would we tolerate the rapid changes better, as humans?

0
0
0.000
avatar

And a bot say like mine with a lot of cards and power will be able to compete while i cant play and give ppl a opponentin diamond and champ

0
0
0.000