Survival: For Players, By Players

avatar
(Edited)

Survival Mode Beta Test Brackets: A Framework for Testing

Survival Mode is one of the most exciting additions we’ve seen in Splinterlands in a long time — but it’s also clear the current structure isn’t working for the majority of players. If we want this format to succeed, we need to test something bold.

This post outlines a bracket-based Survival Mode aimed at creating meaningful competition for players across every level, while also giving the DAO a testing ground for new mechanics.

And to be clear: NONE of these reward payout numbers have been put through anything other than my own brain. This is a framework for discussion, not a finished product.


Group 4.png


The Proposed Brackets

  • A total pool of 850,000 SPS per season for 3 months (~6 seasons) - set to serve as a Beta Test before making a DAO decision re: long-term parameters
    • Reduced pool for the Beta Test Bracket test; intended to bump to 1.5m per season (ie., in-line with Modern & Wild Ranked) with identical percentage allocations per bracket once approved for long-term
  • 10 brackets ranging from Novice to Unlimited
  • Bot restrictions based on bracket
  • Summoner caps, card level floors & unique mechanics for specific brackets
  • Cooldowns across brackets are adjusted to reflect archon caps:
    - See Splinterlands’ original post for Cooldown details: https://peakd.com/hive-13323/@splinterlands/introducing-splinterlands-survival-mode
    • Novice: 10% of max cooldowns
    • Silver: 25% of max cooldowns
    • Gold: 50% of max cooldowns

This mix is designed to cover the bulk of player type.

Screenshot 2025-08-06 at 9.28.52 PM.png


Group 5.png


The Fine Print

  • Liquidity Bots: E = Easy; A = Average; H = Hard
  • You play within the bracket you’ve selected for the entirety of a season

EDIT: August 6

% Based Rewards: The Smarter Approach

I think the real answer actually lies in % based rewards. Instead of assigning fixed SPS payouts to each bracket, we treat the entire Survival Mode reward pool (say, 1M SPS) as a single pool shared across all brackets.

Here’s how it works:

Each bracket’s share of rewards would be determined by its total Bracket CP (Collection Power) relative to the Total Survival CP across all brackets.

Rewards would then be distributed retroactively within each bracket based on the same % formula, ensuring that payouts dynamically match actual participation and competition.

By “retroactively,” I mean that a player’s rshares (or another similar metric) would still be tracked for each win during the season as usual. Then, at the end of the season, the total reward pool for each bracket would be finalized, and each point or rshare would be assigned an exact value. Rewards would then be paid out in a single clean settlement.

For example:

Total Survival CP across all brackets: 500M CP

Bracket 8 CP: 100M CP (20% of total)

Bracket 8 would therefore receive 20% of the 1M SPS pool = 200K SPS to be distributed among its participants.

This model does a few things really well:

  • Eliminates arbitrary bracket payouts – rewards scale automatically with participation.

  • Encourages healthy competition – players know their share is tied to real engagement.

  • Removes the guesswork – the DAO and community won’t need to micromanage reward pool allocations every season.

In short, this adjusted rewards structure creates a self-correcting rewards system that grows or contracts naturally with player behavior—without the need for constant manual adjustments.


Group 3.png


Next Steps

I’d love to hear the community’s thoughts:

  • Are these bracket definitions fair?
  • Are the payouts balanced?
  • Which bracket would you play?
  • If this were an official DAO proposal, where would you stand?

If we get this right, Survival Mode could evolve from a niche experiment into one of the most important pillars of Splinterlands.


Group 2.png


Until next time




0
0
0.000
36 comments
avatar
(Edited)

At first I thought this would be overly complicated but on looking at the brackets it has been laid out in a great way.

I would be looking at bracket 5 when playing manually and bracket 4 if I’m on vacation.

Do we need to change the cool downs though? Now it doesn’t restrict using them in other modes it really should be a collection management game, add in “phoenix potions” and don’t have end of season resets to really make it a challenge!

My SPS vote is minor but I'm definitely up for voting yes to brackets, I'm sure bigger brains than me will see some flaws but at least we can start having the discussion in public!

0
0
0.000
avatar

The major advantage to the adjusted, bracket-specific cooldowns is that everyone can participate multiple times a season - which is a huge win, imo. I, for example, would 100% be playing my silver deck (with A's and B's and all the other awesome wild stuff); whereas without adjusted cooldowns, I won't bother as I'd only get to play once per season anyway.

Cheers dude!

0
0
0.000
avatar

I would love to see less brackets. Especially for early testing. I think we should test with a few and then expand. It is hard to monitor with so many variables are differences. It could be something that during the current season we are voting on the 4 brackets we want to test for the next season.

I would also love it if everybody can play in every bracket each season if they want, I don't think they should be locked in

0
0
0.000
avatar

Word! Well, we gonna agree to disagree here, keegsy. I'd rather have more brackets up front, see where the population opts to play, and filter from there. Folks are gonna play where they feel they can be the most successful & have the most fun - why limit the menu when the depth of menu is most important, during a test run?

Yea, ya might be right re: pt 2 - however, the best A-B test will be to keep things contained as much as possible for a few seasons. Confining players allows for a stable data set for each bracket, makes it easier to track retention and makes it possible to tie behavior (such as participation over time) to bracket design. I could be wrong, but definitely trying to suggest as much of a scientific method here as possible.

At any rate, cheers hombre! Thanks for the thoughts

0
0
0.000
avatar

Hey @bjangles - great write up! I love the bracket approach with modified cooldowns based on level limits!

I have to agree with @keeegs here - too many brackets is no good for a trial...

  • it will be overwhelming to decide what you want to lock into
  • match liquidity will be lopsided;
  • some pools will deplete much faster

I expect it will be a confusing and frustrating experience for many.

TDLR: Cut to 3 manual leagues and 1 botted league.

  • Manual only Silver
  • Manual only Gold
  • Manual only Diamond/Champ
  • War of the Machines mode - all card levels allowed.

Read below for my reasons...

I'd much rather ask: what does Survival mode solve?

First, Survival Mode is a lot of fun as a manual player in a high stakes game.
It allows players to think creatively in a way that ranked play doesn't.

I don't think we need a novice or bronze league version of survival. The costs of novice and bronze and silver decks are still fairly close, and we have Frontier mode specifically designed to guide players up to Silver level decks.

Survival mode is designed for players with lots of cards, but we still want to encourage card scarcity through combining.

By the same token, having liquidity bots with ghost cards in manual mode defeats the purpose of survival, and I'm 100% convinced that the bot operators aren't able to "tune the difficulty" consistently, and it creates too much work to keep adjusting them.

I'd much rather modify the matchmaking to address the known issues (see my earlier post with specific adjustments to the matchmaking algorithm)

Secondly, I do think there is benefit to a bot-friendly survival mode.
This provides utility for lots of excess unused cards, allowing the deeply-invested an opportunity to make use of their extra copies of max cards.
The whole point is we want to use bots in this mode to chew up cards. No one is going to say "I'm having so much fun botting my 10,000 Level 1 Kelya decks". Plus it will create too many matches for the servers if bots can play endless level 1 cards with 1/10 of the cooldown.

So just one botted survival league - and it's no league limits, no holds barred....
I'm saying we literally call it bot mode. If it wasn't copyrighted, I'd call it SkyNet.

In Summary: Cut to 3 manual leagues and 1 botted league.

  • Manual only Silver
  • Manual only Gold
  • Manual only Diamond/Champ
  • War of the Machines mode - all card levels allowed.

As for Playing in Multiple Brackets?

I think players probably should only be able to pick one manual league. Allowing play in multiple leagues will make understanding cooldowns more complicated ("Is the cooldown right? Which league did I lose my Tofu?").
Also for overall player satisfaction, it makes players feel weird when top accounts dominate low level leaderboards, etc.

But I see no problem with allowing players to play survival manually and in bot mode - My thinking though is that cooldowns from one mode would also be on cooldown in the other bracket.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Hey, really appreciate the thoughtful breakdown—and I do think a lot of your points make sense in isolation. That said, the goal of this whole idea, imo, is to test a system that invites more player types to actually show up & participate.

We’re not launching a final product here—we’re running a sandbox.

So while I get the argument for trimming things down to 3–4 brackets, I’d argue the reverse:
If we don’t test more, we won’t know which player segments are showing up, which brackets are working & where we’re missing traction.

A few quick clarifications:

Liquidity across brackets is something to watch, but that’s precisely why this format matters—let the data show us where things are sustainable.

I agree the system needs to be easy to understand—but I’d argue locking people into one bracket per season actually simplifies that, not complicates it.

Bots are here because we can’t ignore them—this mode can either absorb card supply or be gated for manual diehards. This test explores both angles side by side.

If we limit the menu too early, we end up baking in assumptions before we’ve seen actual results. The whole point here is player-driven evolution—the brackets with poor turnout, lopsided cooldowns, or confusing UX? They’ll be the first to go. But let’s start with options, and trim back from real feedback.

Again, appreciate the feedback—and I think once we’re through a full few seasons of data, this’ll all be a lot clearer.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I can get behind a sandbox testing concept :)

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think we should do 4 for 2 seasons and then try another 4 for 2 seasons etc and then we can try refine it down from there.

10 is way to many. Especially if you are locked into one. We need to slowly engage the wide community into survival. Not overwhelm them

0
0
0.000
avatar

Could we not just do a poll or 2 early to gauge where players want to be? Pick the top 4 to trial?

We can gauge where they want to be without having to do all the admin of setting up a bunch of pools were people mostly play bots or spend ages waiting for a human to show up

0
0
0.000
avatar

I mean it's definitely not a dealbreaker for me if we opt to go for a smaller bracket pool but I really don't understand the insistence upon a smaller bracket pool size - it's a 3 month test. I don't think any one of us can say, with absolute certainty, that we know which style bracket the average players would like to compete in. Why not cast a wide net for a test then plan to reel it in from there as necessary?

0
0
0.000
avatar

I want to see the return of league caps in survival. The mode right now is mostly either to use your highest-level cards to overpower the opponent or use the lowest-level cards to throw the game.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yes, please! Thanks for the support Saydie!

0
0
0.000
avatar

League caps, you say?? 😃

I might finally try Survival Mode if this is the case....

Overall, great writeup, homie. Always adding value to the community!

0
0
0.000
avatar

Word! Exactly the sorta sentiment we after here, Jedo! Let's friggin go.

0
0
0.000
avatar

If I played, it would most likely be in bracket 7 or 9 based on your spreadsheet. Depending on how long it takes waiting for a match in a "no bots" league. If the wait is too long, I'd probably go for 6 or 8. 8 is the most tempting with 35% of the pool.

My concern with this many brackets is it's already hard to get players, this might dilute the play and increase wait times even further.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Cheers UM! Totally fair concern—and match liquidity is definitely something we’d need to be tracking closely. But part of the reason for this structure is to see where demand actually lands. If certain brackets can’t sustain activity, they’d be adjusted or cut in future phases. Appreciate you dude!

0
0
0.000
avatar

Thanks, likewise! I appreciate all you do for the community!

0
0
0.000
avatar

Thank you for working to try to find a solution. I hope you get a lot of feedback on this in the community with all types of participants so that you can see if this would pass a vote.

I will also check internally with the team to see what issues we would have with it and what we could support.

I love the effort, thanks to you and the group you are working with to try to find a path forward. Hopefully either people love this, want to tweak it, or provide a different solution. We are getting close to the time where the DAO will need to make a decision.

0
0
0.000
avatar

I like to get this idea tested out. I have always liked leagues and brackets. I think right now without enough people to play survival mode it is not truly a game mode but a faucet of SPS rewards to say 10 accounts.

I think the brackets will get people interested in lower leagues.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Appreciate that, Az. Totally agree — right now Survival isn’t functioning as a real game mode. It’s barely holding on as a reward faucet. Brackets give us a shot to turn that around & pull more players in across all levels. Let’s test it!

0
0
0.000
avatar

Thanks, Dave — appreciate you taking the time to read through it and offer support. We’re all just trying to give the DAO a few solid, player-driven options to evaluate before crunch time hits. Whether this proposal gets adopted as-is, modified or sparks a completely new idea, I think it’s worth having the conversation. Looking forward to hearing both what the team thinks & how the broader community responds.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Are the payouts balanced?

I would distribute a little more from Champion to Gold, Right now it seems 600K in Champ/diamond total. I will keep that 500K, and move that 100K to Gold.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Totally open to that! I think tweaks like this are exactly what we need to dial things in. Appreciate it, Az!

0
0
0.000
avatar

Brilliant post, love this idea. I'll let someone else do the math to work out the exact ranges but the concept is fantastic

0
0
0.000
avatar

Ah yea! Cheers Pete! Hopefully it gets enough support to see itself through to a proper proposal - fingers crossed!

0
0
0.000
avatar

Overall I like this concept, normally I balk at adding complexity but by the time a player progresses to Survival mode it shouldn't be a stretch.
Not sure if the voluntary league lock ads a lot of benefit though. Breaking through to a new league a few times a season throws in a few hits of dopamine, which is very much good for the game. Could players choose their starting league, but be allowed to move up and down? The cooldown would be based on the league the card was in when it was beaten.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Appreciate that, MC! I see where you're coming from with the dopamine hit of moving up leagues - though I think that could also serve as a distinct differentiator between Modern/Wild & Survival. The lock is mainly about clean data for testing and preventing liquidity from getting stretched too thin. That said, I’m definitely open to exploring a hybrid option where movement is possible with cooldowns tied to the league the card was played in. Cheers hombre!

0
0
0.000
avatar

I think brackets are the key - not just for survival but for modern and wild as well! Let's give it a test run!

0
0
0.000
avatar

Congratulations @bjangles! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)

You distributed more than 900 upvotes.
Your next target is to reach 1000 upvotes.

You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Check out our last posts:

Our Hive Power Delegations to the July PUM Winners
Feedback from the August Hive Power Up Day
Hive Power Up Month Challenge - July 2025 Winners List
0
0
0.000