Which name best represents our new 100% free-to-play format?
Splinterlands Community!
We're excited to announce that we're one step closer to naming our new, 100% free-to-play format! We heard your incredible feedback and received over a hundred fantastic suggestions.
Help Us Choose the Perfect Name!
Our team has carefully narrowed down the extensive list to six top contenders. Each of these names embodies the core spirit of this new mode: a free to play, free to earn, and competitive starting point for new players!
Now, it's your turn to cast the final vote! Head over to the poll and vote for your favorite name. As a bonus, tell us in the comments why you made your selection – we can't wait to hear your thoughts!
Just a friendly reminder: While we truly appreciate your participation and votes, the final decision on the name will rest with the team.
Thank you!
-Splinterlands Team
P.S. Mavs: The new mode is up on the MAVS server
Frontier
Gateway, get them hooked on the game and wanting moar!
Vote Academy!
okay
What was wrong with Foundation mode? Academy is where you just got out of in the end of the campaign. Base sounds like a city builder mode. Frontier is either space mode or refers to pioneers who move in front of everyone else. Gateway has bad connotations and makes me feel like I'm fooled if I buy in through a "gateway drug" Initiate is fine to be fair. Primer sounds like some news magazine for Alpha males.
Rookie?
that is another good option
I voted Academy
Format names need to be instantly clear. Most new players will only see the word Frontier in a menu. They won’t read the backstory or the metaphor. And at a glance, Frontier suggests a sci-fi or wild west theme, a dangerous or high-stakes mode, or something experimental... not onboarding.
The actual format is the opposite of a “frontier.” It’s safe, guided, and curated. It’s designed to help new players learn the game and compete without pressure. It’s about building a foundation, not pushing limits.
New players need immediate understanding. A good format name should make sense in one glance—and unfortunately, Frontier creates more confusion than clarity.
I like Foundation Format myself. If we introduce new card sets, we'd just call them Foundations II, Foundations III, etc. But we probably shouldn't ever do that, because we'd end up with Foundations Wild and Foundations Modern. Better to just add new cards to the Foundations set, similar to how Clash Royale does it. Alas, Foundation Format is just so long and would require edits to the UI to make it fit.
I also like Foundry Format. Definition: an establishment where founding is carried on. Founding is to take the first steps in building or to set or ground something... perfectly matches the fact that we are taking the first steps in building new players' experiences and grounding them in our game.
I also like Core Format. Definition: a central and often foundational part usually distinct from the enveloping part by a difference in nature.... and Foundations is the foundational part of Splinterlands for onboarding new players and different (free-to-play) in nature. Definition 2 (that fits): a basic, essential, or enduring part... It's basic (without calling it basic), essential for new players, and will be an enduring part of our onboarding process.
Edit: I also like Academy, which is what I voted for. Works well with our Waur Medge Academy of Battle Magic, with players battling in the safe-space of a magical institution, a place of learning the basics before venturing out into the wild frontier of Modern, Wild, and Survival.
I think the campaign leading into the academy where you can stay and battle in safety seems like its meant to be to me
Frontier isn’t just a name. It’s a statement. A call to a new kind of player, a new kind of energy. Yes, it carries themes of exploration and unknowns—but that’s the point. We’re not just handing players a rulebook; we’re inviting them into a living, evolving game world. One where their choices matter. Where they can belong before they even believe in crypto.
The concern about “Frontier” sounding too rugged or high-stakes is valid—if we let the word sit alone, unexplained. But that’s where UI, onboarding flows and in-game prompts do their job. Let the Creative and UX teams frame it right: intro text, guided tutorials, smart copy.
This isn’t a naming problem—it’s a presentation opportunity.
Compare it to names like Basic, Gateway or Academy. They might be “safe,” but they’re also flat. Forgettable. Passive.
If we want to spark curiosity, build momentum, and create something players talk about, we need a name that has flavor. That evokes a feeling.
Frontier is memorable. It’s metaphor-rich. And most importantly, it scales. It’s not just about the starting line—it can grow with the format, with the players, with the game itself.
This isn’t just onboarding.
It’s an invitation to something bigger.
Let’s call it what it is.
Let’s call it Frontier.
And hey — at the end of the day, any of these suggested names are a win for the community. The fact that we’re even having this conversation is massive. It means we’re listening, evolving and pushing for better.
That’s the real W.
The exploration and starter side of things is where I was going with Pioneer for the name instead. First ranked mode to play as you explore the game of Splinterlands.
Another concern: let's say the most new-battle-mage-friendly format is called Frontier.
Meanwhile, the "the farthest most limits of knowledge and achievement" is Champion League Modern or Wild format (depending on your perspective).
So you might start in Frontier format and then move to the frontier formats.
Because the primary definition of frontier here is "the farthest most limits of knowledge and achievement."
Other definitions?
"a border between two countries" or "a line of division between different or opposed things" -- lorewise, we can't say it's a border/line/division between traditional TCG and Web3 TCGs, because those don't exist in-world, and the Order of the Scale, which runs the Arena Games, wouldn't use this as a reason to name their latest format.
"a new field for exploitative or developmental activity" -- obviously this isn't a format where fledgling battle mages are exploited. But it could be a format for developmental activity. As long as that happened IRL (i.e. introducing achievements, glamours, missions, quests, etc. here first), we would have an in-world justification for the name, as the Order of the Scale experimented with new concepts to spice up the Arena Games, and that's what we'd focus the format's lore on.
I like both Frontier and Foundation. Why isn't Foundation on the poll??? I got the sense that a LOT of people liked that name.
And I'm a little bit concerned about this push to make this mode too 'safe' - that's not what it needs to be. This is a fast paced, fast thinking one on one head to head TCG battle game, where one player wins and one loses, EVERY TIME. There is nothing 'safe' about that, and people don't play games like this to be 'safe'.
They play for fun, excitement, strategy, wits, fast thinking, adrenaline, dopamine. It's only 'safe' because it's free to play. I'd think the goal better be for creative to make it seem fast, fun, and exciting!! Marketing it as 'safe' is... not a great idea imho... kind of handicapping it before it even gets started. But then it makes sense why 'basic' was the original choice if that's the goal...
By the way I'd also be down to call it 'KICK ASS!!' mode, but don't think that would fly... 🤣
@fatjimmy not safe in gameplay; safe in the sense that:
• Many traditional gamers view NFTs and cryptocurrencies as speculative, unnecessary, or even predatory additions to games.
• There’s worry that web3 games prioritize profit over fun, pushing pay-to-win mechanics.
• Concerns about hacks, scams, and the volatility of crypto assets make traditional gamers wary.
• Skepticism exists about the real value and utility of digital ownership in games.
Academy for me. Seems self explanatory to me, which is exactly what noobs need.
I would say GATE as it looks more friendly and gateway is too much. Im not on academy i see a lot of votes there but honestly i think we also need some new, being original
I will echo what breakingbenjamin stated and add to it.
I don't like any of these names personally because to a new player they don't gel well.
Academy I think is the worst name because to me Academy refers to school or learning or practice and between 'Campaign' and 'Challenge' and 'Practice', adding a "Academy" would just overly confuse new players.
Foundation would be the best name in my opinion. You already have Foundation Cards which are free to earn for players and so continuing on with that same theme of "Free2Play" being Foundation would make the most sense to me.
However given the 6 options, Gateway is going to get my vote because it is a Gateway for new players into this whole realm of Splinterlands. Like a Gateway Drug, give them a taste to hook them!
I love that the Creative and Marketing Department were both open to letting the community decide. There were some great ideas and I appreciate the participation from so many on the naming! My favorite of the group is Frontier, even though I have my own name that didn't make the cut :D
We win either way, thanks for the people that are participating for having the interest and passion for this new mode!!!
I voted for Academy. Although all the names have merit, "Academy" checked all the boxes for the UX on that screen:
Fantasy theme - after successfully completing 12 chapters in Waer Medge Academy (Campaign Mode), a new player will already understand how "academy" fits into our world (and their place in it). I like the resulting immersion.
Format mechanics - it supports the gameplay for that specific format. It's easy for new players to connect the mental dots that the Foundation cards rewarded in Campaign Mode (ie, Waer Medge Academy) are the cards to be used in the Academy format. As such, it's that much easier for a new player to grasp and remember the purpose of the format.
Parallel Construction - the name fits linguistically and stylistically with the other format names in a manner that feels natural.
Starting Point - since Ranked Play will not be unlocked until the new player completes the basic chapters for Campaign Mode, a new player will intuitively identify the Academy format as the natural "starting point" for Ranked Play. When a new player first approaches ranked play, we want them to immediately identify the "safe place" from which to start this new game mode.
Linear Progression - the name Academy suggests that the matches are at a "school level" (like high school or college games). In other words, this is not the "pro level", which is exactly what we want to imply. Additional earnings happen at the "pro level" formats. As such, Academy sounds cooler than "Basic" while still preserving a sense of progression (in the same way that Bronze league leads to Champion league).
Like I said, all the names have merit. Some of the other names check off some of these boxes, but I thought Academy checked them ALL. So thank you for whoever first suggested that name (maybe JediElf?). Whoever it was, good job!
Academy worked for me better than the others because it's the most accurate description for "getting trained and ready for an adventure". It would be nice to recognize battling and card collecting in the title or perhaps add more of a fantasy vibe but the UI and our theme will tie it all nicely together.
I chose Academy as it best describes the beginner stage in Splinterlands journey. Frontier may not be understood by some as it applies to American history (Wild West).
academy juz nailz it!
So who selected the names for the poll? Seems like some of the cooler ones I have seen suggested did not make the cut... And what about 'Foundation'? That seemed pretty popular, it would be cool to at least see what people think about it. Initiate? Primer? In the top 6? Really??
I mean ANYTHING is better than 'Basic'... but we should really be trying to choose from the best of the best.
The name depends on what this mode is for. If it's for beginners then academy is fine, but if this is to be a F2P mode for all players of all abilities and stages of gameplay then Academy isn't a good fit.
In 2021 we sold stuff though FOMO, those extreme days are behind us. I'm assuming that sales in future will be based on perceived need. People will have a greater perceived need if they know they enjoy playing the game and they get fairly competent at it. Players also need to develop a playing habit, which will be made easier when the new iOS app arrives. So the aim should be spreading the enjoyment of the game as far and wide as possible. People that play for free will tell their friends and some of them after mastering the game may start buying cards and packs.
This way of growing the game organically could be very powerful and because the entry is a web2 approach it's attracting gamers not P2E types too.
Who are the target groups of players:
All groups could end up eventually spending money on cards and packs because they realise how much they enjoy playing. Playing itself instils a need in people if they enjoy it.
Therefore any name that sounds too beginnery could be missing the mark. At the moment I'm seeing Frontier as the best choice from those listed above
I think it's important to understand that:
This is not a new game mode. This is a format for Ranked Play. Ranked Play is the game mode.
The primary goal and purpose for the new format is absolutely without a doubt the onboarding of new players. Yes, the new format can be enjoyed by others for a wide variety of purposes, but the top priority and function of its design is to give new players a simple, easy, and intuitive entry point into Ranked Play.
The new format is intentionally limited in gameplay for the reason stated above.
The new format is a stepping stone--not the final destination. It is not intended for anyone to stay in the new format indefinitely. They are welcome to stay if they want, but the point of the format is to eventually advance to new formats or game modes.
Having said all that, it is clear to me that players really want what "Frontier" represents. I'm just not certain that this format is that "thing". But it does have me pondering what WOULD be worthy of the name "Frontier". Dave has these ideas which he has code named "Launchpad". And given some time and further collaboration with the community, I bet we could come up with something pretty cool to dub "Frontier", which truly embodies the concepts that players want to champion.
I guess what I'm saying is that even if Frontier loses the vote, I still see value in getting it into the game somehow. I do think it's a cool idea.
I hope the real point/goal is not getting lost here... in the ftp format, we DO want a TON of players playing here indefinitely. THEN, a PERCENTAGE of them advance voluntarily to the 'premium mode' which is our regular game.
If we try to make this mode only a temporary and mediocre, lackluster 'beginner's arena' we are handicapping the format before it even gets started. We want this new format to be fun, exciting, and offer gamers a very real taste of what Splinterlands is all about.
If we approach this like we're trying to push every single player of this new format into the premium game, it will fail. If new players get that feeling, the suspicion that they will be forced to pay (and pay a LOT) to get the good stuff once hooked with a little taste, they will likely leave.
We can't FORCE them to move into the real game by offering a subpar or excessively limited experience in the ftp format... that angle is counterproductive, and it literally frightens me when I hear both you and Matt say this is the direction you're leaning towards.
We want to ENTICE players to WANT to VOLUNTARILY move over to the premium version because they got a taste of not only how much fun the game is but also a taste of the other things we have to offer beyond just ranked battle. We want to offer new players an absolutely incredible experience in this new format, and then, once they are hooked, point out to them that the premium format is EVEN BETTER if they should choose to engage. And if you, the ftp player don't WANT to take the leap to premium? No problem, you are still welcome here in the ftp version. :)
@fatjimmy I think there is definitely a disconnect in what the purpose of the format is and what players are trying to force it to be.
This very specific format is intended to be an extension of the onboarding. That does not mean all sorts of players can't enjoy the format forever in whatever way suits them. That's totally cool.
But there seems to be this strong push to force this format to be the FTP version of Splinterlands. Yes, it is free-to-play. But it's free-to-play for very specific reasons, and those reasons revolve around the new player experience. And OF COURSE we want that experience to be fun and engaging and awesome. Nobody wants it to be a bland or stupid experience. That would be silly and counterproductive.
If we were asking for a name for a Modern or Wild type FTP experience, I would be all over the name Frontier. After learning the fundamentals, a new player is then encouraged to seek a web2 or web3 path...choosing a name for one of those paths also makes sense for the name Frontier.
I'm pretty sure we all want the same things, man. It's all semantics to a certain degree.
My job is to ensure that we don't force one thing to encompass too many purposes. My job is also to ensure that the primary purpose for any particular thing is embraced and fulfilled to the fullest extent possible.
My commitment to you is that regardless of the results of the survey, I will try to make sure the name, concept, passion, and purpose behind "Frontier" is fully realized in the manner in which you guys were hoping. There's lots of ways to push the bridge between web2 and web3 in ways that aren't hampered by the restrictions necessary for this new format. In my head, I see how Frontier can be everything it's meant to be.
But I'm also open to the possibility of making Frontier the name for this particular format. Do I think Frontier is the way to go? Nope. Does it follow the rules/parameters I set forth before the poll was created? Nope. But the name is on the candidate list, because we knew it was important to you guys. We want to make sure you're heard. Despite my reservations, I do honestly and sincerely promise to give the name every chance as the other names. In case you were wondering, it stands just as strong a chance to be the new format name as the other names.
Thanks for the reply Nate. I understand your points and I understand this is supposed to be just a new format. But the fact that it's a sectioned off F2P mode with it's own energy means this has the potential to eclipse everything else in Splinterlands if people enjoy it and word spreads. If people play enough, join Discord & guilds many, will end up buying cards and packs, especially if they are good at playing. This could be the cornerstone of some Marketing campaigns. This mode could go viral in a way the paid aspects of the game just can't, and you can promote it squarely to Web2 audiences removing the financial fear or inexperience of crypto blockers. For these reasons I'm viewing it as a new Mode, not a new format.
Why specifically can't this mode be the destination for many players? They could be ambassadors for the game and help spread the word. You could even try to encourage that behaviour for F2P players. This game is very complex, for some players that just want to play a few battles once or twice a week this is perfect and they could still contribute in different ways.
I think the point I'm trying to make is that if we want a FTP mode where free-to-play is the primary objective (and making that FTP experience as fulfilling as possible)...then great. We should add that mode properly and call it Frontier.
But it seems to me that we're hijacking what is supposed to be an onboarding tool and trying to use the name to make it into something else. The end result may end up being a format with identity crisis that doesn't quite fulfill either objective very well.
!PIZZA !LOL