Community Proposal #9

The purpose of this proposal is to start the process of finding meaningful reform of the current tournament structures to account for the release of Land and the Rebellion set. There will be future proposals related to tournaments to address other issues in the coming days. In this one, we're simply looking to get consensus on a fair way to breakdown the rewards distribution.

If this proposal passes, future tournaments will fall into one of 4 categories: Rebellion, Modern, Wild or Classic. Rebellion is for the current main set only. Modern is for the current Modern format sets, Rebellion and Chaos Legion. Wild is for all sets to be used. Classic tournaments will consist of only the Alpha, Beta and Untamed sets, which will be pooled together.

The reward pool percentage for each League and Format as well as the number of tournaments for each 2 week cycle are listed in the table below:

If this proposal passes, there will still be 4 tournaments per day. The total tournament reward pool will remain consistent with the whitepaper distribution details. As stated previously, there will be more proposals related to tournaments coming soon.

Author Notes

I feel it is absolutely critical to vote on how to apportion tournament rewards and reach consensus as this is something we've never done. The white paper outlined a distribution number, but I feel it is up to the DAO to come to consensus on how to apportion that inflation in responsible ways.

This proposal is not going to make everyone happy. Those hardest hit and most likely to be upset by this proposal will surely be those that participate in the Alpha GF tournaments. The Classic format is an honest attempt at maintaining some form of tournaments that should help to maintain value for the oldest 3 sets of cards while also taking into consideration that a large amount of those sets are now being utilized on land.

Is it a perfect solution? No, but after more than a month of discussion on how to reform tournaments it was the solution presented that seems to have the most support. This vote will help to determine if that assessment is accurate or not.

While trying to build consensus it became clear that tournament reform would have to be done on a per issue basis as there are too many conflicting interests to create a "one and done" proposal to reform tournaments.

There will be a proposal on how to breakdown prizes for tournaments. Currently the discussion group is split between top 256 places with half of those spots getting their buy in back and top 64 places which get much higher prizes. I'm going to be exploring another option altogether over the next few days to see if we can find a good middle ground and I hope those of you that are passionate will join the discussion as well.

Other issues that we should probably vote on are the CP requirements and the SPS staking requirements for each Format and League as well as whether or not we want to limit access to tournament by a player's league. Some players want accounts limited to one League below their current ranking, others want no downward restrictions. We'll keep working to build consensus.

Some of these decisions were made for us in the past. That is not how I want to operate. If this proposal passes, I will work on rebuilding tournaments and getting the new formats in place for early January to match the outline in the table shared in the proposal above.

Thanks for your time and consideration.