Proposal: Maximum 2 Piloted Scholar Accounts
https://hivehub.dev/tx/8c45aa4d20137badb4103daef077494adac51dc2
I propose updating the Terms of Service to limit each player to a maximum of 2 piloted scholar accounts, while keeping any personally owned accounts outside of this limit.
The main reason is skin in the game. When you own an account, you have something to lose. You invested in the cards and assets, so you are directly invested in the game and its future.
With scholar accounts, you are playing with someone else's assets. If one person can manage 10, 20, or more accounts, they can extract value from all of them without having the same level of investment or risk.
A limit would also help keep people who are already invested in Splinterlands invested, rather than allowing a small number of highly skilled players to concentrate control over large numbers of accounts they don't own and extract disproportionate value from accounts they have little personal stake in. With that, lowering the SPS pool significantly.
Proposed rule:
A player may pilot a maximum of 2 accounts owned by another player, in addition to any number of accounts they personally own.
This would require an update to the Terms of Service so the rule is clear and enforceable.
Simple, fair, and easy to understand.
Good proposal, let's do it!
YES! better late than never. While it's too late for me, (I'm just in the land game now) this should hopefully make ranked a more pleasant experience
If you think it's such a good idea, could you please explain to me exactly what it means? Does it apply only to ranked play or to everything? As I see it, we already have this rule for tournaments, but it’s not clear to me exactly what it’s supposed to cover in the future. I’m also not sure how it’s actually supposed to be enforced, since most accounts aren't linked to KYC.
Big part of the reason I play the way I play now...
Mostly Land
Bot Wild
Play Modern (1 Game) Drop rating. Repeat until low enough - run up to Champ. Repeat...
Playing is not fun against Scholars who play all day, every day and rotate accounts... but I know I can't change anything so I decided instead of continuing to voice my opinion... just control my controllables.
Fair enough, but why this proposal focus than all and not only modern ranked ?
Why it also restrict brawls what will bring a lot of guilds in big trouble ?
I understand if you have a problem in modern ranked, but why than apply this rules also for brawls, wild ranked ... ?
who scholars more than 2 account in wild or in brawls?
I think here is not the place for doxing, but I know personally at least three player who scholar for than 2 accounts in brawls and I know that at least 10 guilds will be highly affected when this three player cannot do it anymore and part of this 10 guilds can even now not fill all frays with player.
I am in support. When I considered using a scholar for my account, my main condition was that they did not scholar anyone else's account. I think a limit to two accounts is very reasonable.
Almost worth re buying my SPS to vote for this. Then I think of the SPS narcissist and think nah what will be will be
Why stop at 2, it should be 1 scholar = 1 account max they can play.
Each person should only be able to play 1 account per season per league/bracket. Allowing multiple people to play on accounts that are supposed to be competing against each other is so antithetical to competitive gaming. Splinterlands will never be taken seriously as a competitive game if a leaderboard is filled with the same people running multiple accounts.
1000% true.
I've tried getting some esports folk into it and it's all the same stuff.
5 players ruling top of the game just gets laughed at.
It's a shame as it could be up there and draw a decent amount of people in
yes yes yes!!!!
Embora eu não possuo conta escolar e nem gerencio alguma.
Não vejo problemas nessas contas, pois as vezes não tem jogadores reais online, então é o que aparece para gente batalhar.
Jogo Splinterlands por diversão e não como meio de ganhar dinheiro.
Já tive vitórias e derrotas batalhando contra escolares.
Obrigado pelo seu comentario
Although I don’t have a strong opinion about it and I don’t really care that much about it; there is some negative sentiment I am observing regarding scholars and that is not warranted. Scholars are important and inseparable part of Splinterlands and they contribute positively towards the game. As this proposal can be interpreted as a negative sentiment towards scholars, especially from the developing world, I have voted it down.
Also I think this will be very hard to enforce with a TOS and I am typically a big supporter of TOS. Still the narrative and fluid is circulating on discord was the primary reason for my downvote; because I thought I would be fairly neutral towards it. However, I can’t support any negative sentiment towards scholars.
sure, that must be it..
Buy more SPS. Or SHUT THE FUCK UP!
I'm buying, but not because of you :) peace and love
Copying from my other post to expand. "Allowing multiple people to play on accounts that are supposed to be competing against each other is so antithetical to competitive gaming. Splinterlands will never be taken seriously as a competitive game if a leaderboard is filled with the same people running multiple accounts."
Even if it's hard to enforce, the perception is extremely important here. Right now we are literally broadcasting on the leaderboard that a small group of players is running it. People hate competing against that, especially knowing it gives those players an advantage since they don't play against themselves.
Making it against the TOS would stop a lot of it and would help mask the rest, improving player sentiment and the perception of the game.
I understand the sentiment for modern, but for wild and survival this proposal is inherently anti-human. If you do that, you would have to effectively ban bots out of fairness, because the bot services play more than 2 accounts for sure.
As long as it is (draconically) enforced that scholars can only play one account at a time so there is no win trading and only one entry per tournament scholars are no different from an owner splitting its asset into multiple accounts.
If you are worried about scholars selling off SPS, well, the account owners pay them in SPS. Scholars would sell off what they get to have a salary in their preferred currency, so if that is your problem, the problem is really with big account owners paying in SPS and there is no problem with that either.
And the argument for scholars not having skin in the game is quite weak too. The owner has the skin in the game, the scholars are just providing a service. They are "draining" the owners rewards, not the ecosystems rewards. So again, if the owner pays for service in SPS, they are the ones selling part of their rewards. If this is an issue for you, your issue is with the owners, but I don't see how owners are not allowed to do with their tokens whatever they please, so I really can't make a logical conclusion to how scholars are particularly bad for the ecosystem.
I grant your point that it is not fun to good for the competitiveness, but frankly, without scholars there would be times of the day there are simply no games to be found. Better to play humans and not liquidity bots.
I'd support this in general but honestly if it was revised to "Modern Only" that'd still work.
Ban bots? Yes freaking please!
There is neither in tournaments nor in ranked any problem with win-trading as you can ask Splinterland to group your account or they group them from themselves and than you won't face any of your account in ranked play and when you face your account in a tournament after both accounts have entered the battle it is determind as auto-draw.
So how can be win-trading between groupped accounts at all in tournaments or ranked ?
Account owners spend, what, $10k USD to max a new modern set? Scholars don't extract that amount over the life of a particular set per account. I suspect this proposal is more about frustration over the ultra-elite scholars playing thousands of matches every season. Why don't we see how the new brackets play out when they're introduced? Let's let the team cook.
Great idea, thanks.
For those asking why this proposal is needed, the top 10 of Champ last seasons shows why.
Also its pretty much same every season
Okay I understand your point, but if there is a problem in modern ranked why apply this rule not only for modern ranked but also for wild ranked, frontier, survival & brawls ?
I feel it should be across everything.
More Scholars would mean more competition.
Thats what the game is missing
Wow, played this game for years thinking the scholar tag was just some fancy title. This scholarship feature is a really unique selling point in its current form and really needs more front page promotion by Splinterlands marketing. I hope it remains unchanged. I'm struggling too in modern, but that's because of my lack of ruleset I.Q. . Blaming multiple scholar accounts for lack of league progression would be like blaming climate change on minuscule amounts of co2 while ignoring other major factors like clouds and cyclical solar activity. And God forbid that should ever happen, if there is one 😇
Scanning some of the posts. So what about major multiple accounts? I mean is the purpose of this proposal (I kinda agree with it btw) to limit being matched against skilled experts of the game when your trying to have fun? It can be frustrating to be matched up against people who have analyzed everything and have the best set ups possible every hand. - But... you run into the same thing with multiple accounts. and I mean MAJOR Multiple accounts not just 1-3 extra. I'm talking about people with like 20+ that they technically "scholar" by rotating so when you play there are times of day that that is all you get. --- Name123 Name 456 Name789 and so on.
In other words IMHO if we are going to propose this... then there **also should be a limit of how many alts you can play in each area per season. **
though the leagues may help with that. Because an argument may be that the person's accounts stretch between silver and champ "leagues" Which I guess would be tiers in the future? - later as we will be able to pick maybe we can say you can only play up to 2 of your own accounts and 2 scholars in each league -- adapt, novice, intermediate etc. So you don't have someone playing 20+ accounts in silver/gold for example.
Here is my take on what would be a better proposal for this that can actually get support from the big stakeholders: https://ecency.com/@seattlea/why-a-unique-player-leaderboard
Hey — we noticed you're holding VKBT, and wanted to invite you personally. We just opened a bridge so it can cross to our chain and actually move. There's finally somewhere for it to go: https://peakd.com/@angelicalist/hivers-guide-to-the-melek-prana-kula-ecosystem-20260830 Glad you held. 🙏