This is a poll request submitted to allow the community to build consensus around running a potential proposal to give Survival Mode a longer rewards runway. The request stems from a Team Possible weekly call where many discussions related to the game, DAO and community happen on a weekly basis. Here is the requested poll:

On a recent call, something came up that we think is worth discussing more broadly with the community.
Survival Mode is still very new. We’re learning how people engage with it, how bots are interacting with it, and how rewards are flowing. Because of that, a question was raised:
Are we trying to refine the mode while it’s fully live — and is that the best way to do it?
This isn’t about saying something is wrong. It’s about recognizing that we’re still in a learning phase.

The Primary Consideration

Survival has a relatively small reward allocation. If we distribute rewards at full pace while we’re still experimenting with structure, we may reduce our flexibility to make meaningful adjustments later.
So the broader question becomes:
Should we intentionally create more space for testing and iteration?
There are a few possible approaches we'll explore below.

Other Important Considerations:

What Are We Optimizing For?

Before voting, it may help to step back and ask:

• What role do we want Survival to play long term?

• Is it primarily competitive? Strategic? Experimental?

• How important is reward intensity during this early phase?

• There may be options we haven’t considered yet.

Option 1 – Alternate Seasons (On / Off)

One idea suggested was running Survival every second season.
That would mean:

• One season live with rewards

• One season paused for review, discussion, and potential adjustments

This could give breathing room for:

• Reviewing data

• Gathering feedback

• Implementing changes more thoughtfully

At the same time, some players may prefer consistent access to the mode. The “on/off” rhythm may not suit everyone.

Option 2 – Keep It Live, Reduce SPS Temporarily

Another option is to keep Survival active each season but reduce SPS payouts for a defined tuning period.

This could:

• Stretch the allocation

• Reduce short-term pressure

• Allow refinement without fully pausing the mode

Since most engagement currently appears to be in automated brackets, lower SPS rewards may not dramatically change bot behavior. However, it could impact manual players more directly — which raises its own considerations.

Option 3 – Adjust the Reward Mix

Rather than simply reducing rewards, we could explore adjusting the mix:

• Lower SPS

• Add or increase Glint

• Consider stronger incentives for manual play

This might support progression while limiting extractive pressure during the tuning phase.

Option 4 - Alternate SPS/Glint Seasons

A different approach that could blend the other options would be to have "on/off" seasons for SPS rewards while keeping the game mode active every season.
This could:

• Allow us to explore if players engage without SPS incentives.

• Stretch the allocation.

• Reduce short-term pressure.

• Allow refinement without pausing the mode at all.

It may still encourage "on/off" behavior with renters while having owners maintain the same behaviors as there's no cost consideration. The data gathered could help shape future decisions about whether or not the mode is sustainable without SPS funding.

Option 5 - Change Nothing

Some may feel nothing needs to change at this time.

Option 6 - Other Suggestion (comment)

If you have a better or more productive idea, choose this option and comment below.