Lets imagen for a second that I have an idea for a really unique coin and not just a clone ...

If I created this coin to have an average new block-time of 1 day would it need to give more coins for a reward (than average / quicker block-time coins) to be worth mining?

(imagen if the value of the coin was the same value as another popular coin) ...

Would miners have to hash at the same power as they would for any other (quicker block-time) coin but, instead, have to spend all day to achieve the same results?

What is the benefit from longer interval blocks (besides shorter chain length) from having the difficulty (time estimate) as a unique 'setting' when creating a coin?

Disclaimer: features can be anything outside of the scope of this question. I understand that differing block timings and mining rewards don't count as 'features'!

2 Answers 2


To target a block time of a day, difficulty would be adjusted to make the likelihood of finding a block require a days worth of hashing (work). The big drawback to such a large block time would be slow confirmation of transactions.

  • Thanks, would longer block times require more electricity? Commented Aug 25, 2018 at 21:24
  • 2
    Block time doesn't dictate energy usage. The amount of miners mining does.
    – jtgrassie
    Commented Aug 26, 2018 at 10:49

I'll address only the point about block time.

If we'd have a blockchain with long block time then to get financial outcomes from the system each miner has to invest more money than they would have with short block time.

Let's say we have two miners and they don't do any hashing but toss a coin in the end of each day or even a month. In this scenario it's easy to win twice in a row and this makes the losing miner wait longer until he can claim his first reward.

Block time reduction also reduces hash difficulty of the block. This means that there would be more short-term bumps of difficulty and more temporary forking, because network speed is the same as before. Also for shorter times network would be used more often.

With shorter block time the system can address difficulty changes very often and with longer times the difficulty may be too low or too high. Also block times would be less predictable.

For end user (as from the other answer) longer block times would mean longer wait to get full-consistency of his transactions.

So I suggest to obtain more statistics whether it's cost-effective to have shorter block times with temporary and harsher fluctuations or have the blocks fixed in difficulty for longer.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.