I believe renting for a season vs daily makes the user experience much better for the game. I think its better to have certainty for both the renters and the people with cards to rent out. One of the worst experiences imo is when I get a card cancelled and have to find out by missing it in a match. This will solve that problem, so I support it.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
This is something I actually strongly agree with. I always hated when I'd rent a card and then it gets cancelled immediately so I only have it for 1 or 2 days instead of like 5 or whatever I agreed to. I know this one is going to be a split issue either way we look at it and I get that some people don't want to see a change like this. I'll abide whatever the DAO wants to do, but currently I'm in favor of this as I think ownership should always be the most valuable option and I don't like the idea that I could run two accounts, rent cards from myself and get twice the rewards for owning one set of cards. That seems like a serious exploit and I'm starting to wonder how many people have actually been doing this and why it was never addressed earlier.
However this turns out, at least it's been brought to the DAO's attention to decide on.
I agree, and hopefully the people who are legitimately concerned about overall costs rising, see your other point in the comment section about the 1 DEC minimum application. I don't see this proposal as a cost issue, I see it as a better user experience issue. If the DAO wants to re-interpret the application of the DEC minimum, then that's fine by me too.
Wouldnt it be better then to just remove the option to cancel the rental? Because basicly I think if you agreed to rent out for a season you should have stick with it. I dont think anyone renting out cards would be hurt by this. If I rent out a max lvl Kitty for 14 days, I know I cannot play it even if I wanted it short term. It wont kill me to wait the rest.
I am always on the side of new and poor players. These are the real backbone of growth. I do think we should focus on them more. We are limiting their options more and more. I was a player with decent amount of money I think but struggled also sometimes. Imagine how it is if you come from a poor country, just want to try out Kitty or Tofu but you cant because we removed the option to rent for 2 days.
We should create more options, not limit our players more.
I'm very much on the side of the new and poor players too, but not where it creates a bad user experience. It appears to me that the people that are not for this are using 2 arguments:
This is a very complex situation involving many moving parts. For instance, my issue is the fact that when I rent cards, I don't want them cancelled.
But there are other issues people have too, key among them (and there are more).
bot services were created that enable players to squeeze every penny possible out of a rental. This created many useless micro transactions where the bot would have an advantage renting out their card at the detriment of a player simply wanting to list his card to rent out. This cost the team in extra useless server costs, and at the same time dissuaded people like me from either a) renting out their cards and thus stopping buying cards to rent out or b) running to the bottom in price, thus moving the floor lower and lower til we went to the point where it could go no lower.
longer term players that used rentals as a way to arbitrage the unintended loophole where rental players could use each card twice as much as someone that owned it. This was good for the rental player, but it put downward pressure on the value of cards because a person that owned a particular card was disadvantaged in rewards compared to the people that rented them.
So while you want to see people that are new and poor be happy (as I do), I think its important to see the whole picture. I also think once flaws get fixed, then we can give people on all sides something they want - a growing player base and a growing reward.
These flaws in the system create a perpetual downward spiral by not incentivizing things properly. So fixing them is a good idea so that we can indeed help people that are poor, new, rich, or anything in between to enjoy the game and feel confident they have a lot of opportunity ahead.
As I said in further comments on this page, I have no issue with making the total minimum cheaper on a per card/per day basis. If the rest of the community is ok with that, then I'm fine as well. But I feel that season rentals are a much better user experience for most people involved, PARTICULARLY the new players.
I don't usually interact but this made me think. What if.. instead, we combine the two solutions?
As for the tournament problem, then just combine the rental cooldown and delegation cooldown. For example, if you delegated the card and cancelled, and the cooldown is for 48 hours, there would be a warning that the card cannot be used for 48 more hours. Or an easier way is that you cannot rent/sell cards with delegation cooldown.
With these things,the community can still rent for 2 days when they have the time to play or rent for the whole season if they play everyday. The daily and season rental is like combined into one which I think does a compromise for all issues.
I rent 2500 DEC worth of cards every 2 days. So putting it to seasonal, It FORCES me to have 18750 DEC (1259/week x 15 days) to rent for the season. If I only have 5k budget per week, then I will be FORCED to wait until the last 5 days until I can play because I only have 5 days worth for my weekly budget.
First, I'm very glad that you took the time to write your thoughts Mavis, interaction is great to understand other people's point of view. So thank you for the 2 messages :)
Re: your point #1, I think it might be how you are suggesting, but I'm not sure. My understanding is that you will rent for the remaining days of each season. So if that is 14 days or 3 days left, then you rent only for the days left. If I read your solution wrong, then please let me know.
Re: your point #2, I do believe (and hope) that the end of the season is the end of each rental cycle. So people can re-renew, wait, etc. I will personally just rent out everything on the first day and then not think about it til the following season. I'm not sure I understand about your point about the adjustment of the price to be favorable, but like I said IMO the goal should be for both sides to have a easy experience by just renting out/for one time per season.
On the tourney issue, I'm not sure that would work but I haven't really thought of that issue.
On your personal story, I realize this will be a big change to not only you, but to everyone that primarily rents. However this will all change a lot anyways with the new upcoming set, so figuring out how to make it work is important. I'm personally glad we can see how this works now, so that we can make adjustments if the results are negative and it needs to be tweaked.
Also if you want, I'm happy to help you earn some extra SPS that you can cover some of that extra costs you are incurring. I have some accounts that are going unplayed right now, and I am letting people play them and keep all the SPS they earn by doing so. These accounts are not top level accounts, but if you are an experienced player then you should be able to earn roughly 2 SPS per win. If you are interested, then message me on Discord and I'll get you set up.
Again thank you for the nice message and for taking the time to give some thoughts and suggestions, I appreciate it Mavis!
@davemccoy Your thoughts are in line with my suggestions but a little different.
The players should be free to rent whenever and how long. For example, the current season is on day 3 of 14. That means the season has 11 days left. If the player rent for 6 days, he would be renting the card from day 3 to day 9. Since this is on the current season, this cannot be cancelled by both sides. The player and owner cannot cancel the rental giving security for both of them.
If the player wanted to rent the card for more than the season left the owner can cancel the rent at the end of the season. For example, The current season is on day 7 of 14, which means the season has 7 days left. The player rented out the card for 30 days. Now, that card can be cancelled by the owner or player because it exceeded the days left for the current season BUT it would only be cancelled on day 8, which is after the current season. The card will still be rented by the player until the end of the current season, which in this example, for 7 more days. This compromise is so that the owners can adjust the price if needed to but will not give a bad experience to the one renting the card.
My suggestion is just combining the daily and season rental. This compromise doesn't force the players to rent for whole 14 days or the whole season. They can still rent 2, 3 or 5 or whatever but if the rent falls within the current season, it cannot be cancelled. That's the only difference.
If the player rents for the whole season, it still cannot be cancelled since it's still within the current season. In other words, it also acts as a season rental at the same time.
For the tourney issue, @clayboyn point on another reply is correct. I think my solution can be bypassed and they can just rent another card on another player. While that solution solves the part of "renting my own card to another one of my own accounts", which recycles the money back to the same owner, the solution still bypasses the problem which the player having 2 accounts can earn 2x rewards on tournaments. It just throws the rental money on another person instead of himself.
Lastly, for the unplayed accounts, I will be glad if you lend me one of those accounts if you don't play it. We can talk it more over on discord. I have discord link at the end of my posts here in hive. My discord name is @mavisthemuggle ID: 1293083397408686171
Well you make some good arguments Sir. Maybe we should just try out and find out.
Or keep discussing in a communicative way. I am a fan of discussion, recognition of all sides of an issue, and then constructively trying to find a solution that gives balance and fairness.
I appreciate you listening to my points @octavian1 and I also respect that you are trying to make sure that small and/or new players get thought about as well!
The good thing is once Splinterlands saw the lost of game time because players can only play towards the end of the week, then they might reconsider and remove this in the future.
Or the whales stick with it if they earn more than before because we all know this passed not because it's good for players but because the people at the top want this to happen.
You don't think this is going to be yet another measure that continues to squeeze out the low budget players? Could this possibly be another tone deaf decision made by people at the top of the food chain that puts additional stress on grassroots players?
I agree this might squeeze out some players, particularly because we have such a binary culture here. Instead of people looking to "give and take" on issues to solve them, we instead fight to the death on each and every issue.
So the question is will people compromise to solve problems that the other side has? In my case, its yes, but in most cases its no.
I am willing to accept a lower rate than the 1 DEC minimum per day, to be 1 DEC minimum per season. NOTE: that is cheaper than people have now on a per day basis.
But it doesn't seem like anyone wants to budge and actually solve the issue I have (even though I'm willing to address their concern). And that applies to most everyone on each issue they have. So no matter which way this goes we will squeeze out players. Whether its small vs large, established vs new, or human vs bot; I don't think until we actually start discussing things and finding solutions in a non-binary way then we will continue to lose players.
If every decision comes down to a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't', you're just plain damned.
100% agree