Where does it state per person? Oo
| Finishing Position | Token Rewards (per person) |
|---|---|
| 1 | 10860 ANT |
| 2 | 9320 ANT |
And the general lingo is per person, like here:
Each week we’ll look at the amount data payments your wallet has received from your nodes (measured in attos), pitting you against other node operators for an overall leaderboard position.
1 Like
Right - the topic of the table =D
1 Like
That combined with how Launchpad does not allow you to set individual addresses per node, might give any rookie an impression that it is indeed not possible.
1 Like
Can’t you change the address and add another node +repeat multiple times?
I agree this is not how maidsafe wants us to run this… But I think it might already be possible even with launchpad (if one really won’t to go through that pain… And at the same time risk dropping in rank)
Anyway… I think multi addresses are obviously a risky strategy in multiple dimensions but the current rewards scheme does look somewhat like the middle ground between the last 2 versions… So maybe this is not too bad and everyone needs to see what level of risk is acceptable for him individually …?
1 Like
Not sure.
But it is not just about me. It is about the basic premise of any fair play: the clarity about rules.
Whether small players are in an unfairly disadvantaged position, is up to a debate. But the unclarity about using multiple addresses, is just not needed.
1 Like
For the last rounds the rules changed midway or even in retrospective 
I would be conservative and not place all my bets on one card… But that’s just me and what do I know 
Imho there’s no point in trying to understand it precisely… It’s not sure if the rules will still be the same tomorrow anyway =D
1 Like
It’s especially risky in lower ranks.
But if, by splitting your batch in two equal batches, you catch positions 49 and 50 you get 7340 ANT, which is better than position 4, that you might get by using one address for all nodes.
My gut feeling is that risk vs. reward seems to favor multiple addresses, especially if you are not at risk for dropping outside of the 6500 limit.
2 Likes
And that’s exactly my main point.
2 Likes
It really doesn’t matter, the folk without the technical ability and or resources are never going to be competitive anyway.
There are 6500 spots more than enough.
If a few big players gamble for the top spots so what they would be the ones up there anyway.
Moot in my opinion.
2 Likes
10 charsssss
1 Like
I don’t think there’s unclarity about running multiple addresses; the incentivisation system makes it clear it should be done by anyone running a lot of nodes.
2 Likes
The issue could end up being the 28K node operator gets 8 - 10 spots in the top 15, the 12K node operator get 5 - 8 spots in the top 15, the 10K get 4 - 6 spots in the top 20, and similar for the 8K, 5K 3K, 2K etc (maybe 10-15 of big players). Its not just fighting for top spot, but all the “worthwhile” spots.
Then those putting in a lot of effort, not money, doing the real work of testing nodes with what you brung, finding the issues to be fixed.
Its that it is not weighted for the targeted audience of Autonomi but for the “rich”
I agree that its good we have people who spend a lot of money to provide the nodes and should get a proportional amount for it, but not to give a proportionally higher amount because they can game the system.
I do wonder though that when the incentives stop for people to provide storage to get the network up and running, what will happen since they will not be able to afford to run all those nodes and the storage drops and we see 10K-15K nodes like there was when no incentives were there.
7 Likes
Yeah I hear you, rewards like this are always going to be problematic, did you hear about that time folk had to invite others to get a boost? 
The sooner we get to the real system of supply and demand which I thought we were doing last week the better.
8 Likes
I thought the simple system of sharing the rewards amount equally according to amount earned was pretty good. Then number of accounts doesn’t matter you earn x attos get y tokens rewarded. Y is (total rewards/total attos earned) * account attos earned
6 Likes
This is very relative. If you had enough nodes yes, but with few nodes you got tokens for 2-3 euros, which does not stimulate small players.
With the new system, there is a chance for 30x more players to enter and get 3x the amount for their efforts…
This won’t be soon, don’t forget the millions of token subsidies that will probably be poured year or two after launch…
Check out the Dev Forum
4 Likes
I have had my 5 nodes running for about 24 hours for a grand total of 0 attos 
Anything I should be trying differently or do I just need a little more patience<
Otherwise a very painless set-up for a non-technical user
Bravo!
1 Like
You could try changing the connection type to home-network
The memory used also looks small, maybe that is because you are not getting many peers.
1 Like
Thanks for the comment.
The memory started off much higher in the beginning. At least over 1GB, but seems to have gone down alot overnight.
Let me try making the tweak you suggested.
Thanks
1 Like
Yup, no restrictions. Use one address, or multiple. Whatever suits your workflow or needs.
6 Likes