Competitive Splatoon Ruling Proposal

[Danny]

Hi. I think there have been many of these but I'm just here to toss my proposal into the ring. Also I don't post here often but I posted this here so I can get some feedback on the proposal since this is most likely what I will be using in my own tournaments. Most of the people I talked to this about have told me that the rules are fine so I would like to have more opinions. I take all constructive criticism very seriously.

First a little intro. I'm part of the Hypest team which dealt with online competitive tournaments for Smash related games so I have a lot of experience TOing online tournaments. However, Splatoon is not Smash. Splatoon is a Third Person Shooter and it needs to have different rules to accommodate this. I play some competitive first person shooters and I read a lot of rules on other competitive shooters. The number of competitive third person shooters is slightly low so I couldn't find many rules for TPSes. This rule was made with the effort

Second, I want to enumerate the issues I had with creating this ruleset. The first issue were the number of stages, currently set at 10 which is an even number. This was the biggest issue by far because it disallowed the naive and intuitive straight full-list-stage-strike system. After all, in this early meta we have to assume that all stages are perfectly fine. The problem with stage selection is also that the game will update with more maps down the line and will fluctuate the number of stages from even to odd periodically. A proper stage selection has to make up for this.


There also had to be a way to disregard Smash's stage selection due to the incompatible (and somewhat annoying) way that they do it. Splatoon should not separate stages into Neutral/Starter and Counterpick. This complicates the stage selection process immensely. There isn't a single tournament I've done without having to explain how the process itself works. The process also isn't fair and opens another can of worms regarding stage debate such as: "Is this stage neutral or is it counterpick material?". These types of arguments do not belong in the current fresh meta and hopefully not belong at all.

The other main issue with the ruleset that I had to address was the concept of modes. Most games offer a single mode and then consider that mode to be its competitive mode. This happens over time and people adapt to it. However, in Splatoon we do not have this luxury and we might not have it at all. For our current early meta we need to have a diverse number of modes that allows us to reach out to everyone. I do not want to impose what I believe to be the one true competitive mode onto others. Players should determine this. It could even end up that the mode switching ruleset I end up proposing will be heavily favoured. Only time will tell but we need to be as open as possible in the beginning and then refine it to suit the meta.

This ruleset was made with the collaborative effort of many of my friends from Hypest, personal friends, and Imperious. Without them, this proposal would have suffered immensely so thanks in advance.

You can see the markdown version of the rules here. I'll be reproducing them down here though. Considering how annoying it was to convert Markdown to BBCode I'm not sure I wanna convert it again. Some things are specific to the format, e.g. double elimination, top 8, best of 5, etc. These aren't really something I need criticism on since it's just how I plan to run the format on.

Definitions

• TO: Short for Tournament Organiser. The people who are organising the event.
• Team: A group of players that play together.
• Game: A single period of play in a round. For example, in a Bo3 round the round can be composed of at most 3 games.
• Set: The games that make up a round. For example, in a Bo3 round all 3 games are part of the set.
• Map: The stage that the game is being played on.
• Global Map Pool: The maps allowed to be played in this tournament. These maps can be part of the regular map pool.
• Map Pool: The maps allowed to be played in the current set. This changes every round.
• Mode Pool: The modes allowed to be played on in this tournament.
• Set winning condition: The first one to reach majority wins in a Best of 3 or Best of 5. e.g. 2 wins in Bo3 and 3 wins in Bo5.
• Strike: To temporarily remove a map from the map pool. This is basically you saying "I don't want to play in this map for the first game".

Global Map Pool
All maps are part of the global map pool. For brevity, they are as follows:

• Bluefin Depot
• Walleye Warehouse
• Moray Towers
• Blackbelly Skatepark
• Kelp Dome
• Saltspray Rig
• Camp Triggerfish
• Port Mackerel
• Urchin Underpass
• Arowana Mall

Mode Pool
These modes are allowed to be played on:

• Tower Control
• Splat Zones
• Turf War

Rules

• Gentleman's Clause is in effect.
  
  • If two teams agree to play on a specific map, then that map shall be played.
    
  • If two teams agree to play a specific mode, then that mode shall be played.
    
  • This rule overrides every other rule.
    
• All teams must be composed of a minimum of 3 players and a maximum of 8 players.
  • Note that only 4 players can participate in a game. The extra members are there for substituion purposes only.
    
  • Note that this means that 3v4 games will be possible, despite the chance of being at a disadvantage.
    
  • Note that a player may only be in one team only.
• The tournament format is double elimination.
• Games are done on a Best of 3 basis.
• The top 8 teams remaining shall play on a Best of 5 basis.
  
  • This includes the loser's bracket as well.
    
• A map can only be played on once in a set.
• If a player disconnects, the game is allowed to be replayed once.
  
  • Subsequent disconnections require TO's discretion and must be notified to the TO.
    
• Any rule not listed here falls under the TO's discretion on the condition that it does not impede the tournament.

Set Order
A set shall be played in the following order.

Preparing the Map Pool

1. The TO shall select one map randomly. This map shall be added to all player's map pool.
   
   • The TO reserves the right to change the last map in the map pool for any or all players if needed.
     
2. A team shall be decided to be Team A or Team B through mutual agreement.
3. Team A shall select two maps from the currently allowed pool of maps.
4. Team B shall select two maps from the same pool. These maps must differ from Team A's.

These 5 maps shall encompass the map pool for the rest of the set and are redone every set.

Playing the Set

1. Team A shall strike 1 map from the map pool.
2. Team B shall strike 2 maps from the map pool.
3. Team A shall strike 1 map from the map pool. The remaining map shall be the one played on.
4. Team A shall strike 1 mode from the mode pool.
5. Team B shall strike 1 mode from the mode pool. The remaining mode shall be the one played on.
6. Both Teams are allowed to change weapons and/or gear if they please to.
   
   • The weapon and/or gear change does not need to be told to the opposing team.
     
   • Note: The game tells you upon starting the game which weapons are used.
     
7. The first game will start with the selected mode and map.
8. The losing team shall select the map to play on.
   
   • The previous map is removed from the map pool and cannot be chosen.
     
   • You may only choose a map that is in the map pool.
     
9. The losing team shall select the mode to play on.
10. Both teams are allowed to change weapons and/or gear at this point.
11. If someone wants to be substituted, they can be substituted by another player in the team at this point.
    
    • You only get one substitution per set.
      
12. Play the game with the chosen map and mode.
13. Repeat steps 8 to 12 until the set winning condition is met.

 

[TheRapture]

Why implement a counterpicking system? Why not select the gametypes for each map as the TO before the tournament starts? That way teams know what gametype/map combination to prepare for for each game of every round and we don't have to use a clunky, 13 step system just to get games going. Plus, counterpicking isn't very intuitive nor is it accessible for new players or ppl who just want to enter the tournament.

I also think Best of 3 is too short for regular bracket matches, considering how quick Splatoon goes. Best of 5 seems like a more consistent choice and can be extended to Bo7 for Winners, Losers and Grand finals.

Thoughts on these topics?

Otherwise, looks good.

 

[Danny]

Why implement a counterpicking system? Why not select the gametypes for each map as the TO before the tournament starts? That way teams know what gametype/map combination to prepare for for each game of every round and we don't have to use a clunky, 13 step system just to get games going. Plus, counterpicking isn't very intuitive nor is it accessible for new players or ppl who just want to enter the tournament.

I assume by counterpick you mean the fact that the losing team picks the next map/mode. The reason for this is because I believe it'll be fair for the other team to have to choose their map/mode that they're comfortable with after losing. I disagree with this being unintuitive, many people are familiar with the concept of "loser's pick" because it's natural to expect, I believe. Since most games do it that way that I know of. Even in other genres such as trading card games the loser typically gets to pick if they want to go first or second.

If you meant something else, then I'm not sure what you mean. Sorry.

I also think Best of 3 is too short for regular bracket matches, considering how quick Splatoon goes. Best of 5 seems like a more consistent choice and can be extended to Bo7 for Winners, Losers and Grand finals.

I had a lot of internal debate about this and I agree with you. On one hand I picked Bo3 because of time reasons (I think rounds lasting over an hour are an issue) and because of the way things are currently set up (3 modes could make it have equal representation). The time issue is due to my experience TOing. Despite Smash games only lasting 4 minutes on average and it having Bo3, we ended up having rounds take approximately 45 minutes due to external factors. On the other hand I do believe that games are short and that things wion't move along as slowly as I think they will.

I'm willing to take this consideration truthfully since it makes sense to me. The only thing I'd have to extend is the map pool, turn it from 5 to 7. Ergo Team A picks 3 stages and Team B picks 3 stages along with 1 TO pick. I believe that might make the initial pool selection difficult though so I'm not sure.

Otherwise, looks good.

Thanks!

 

[TheRapture]

I assume by counterpick you mean the fact that the losing team picks the next map/mode. The reason for this is because I believe it'll be fair for the other team to have to choose their map/mode that they're comfortable with after losing. I disagree with this being unintuitive, many people are familiar with the concept of "loser's pick" because it's natural to expect, I believe. Since most games do it that way that I know of. Even in other genres such as trading card games the loser typically gets to pick if they want to go first or second.

If you meant something else, then I'm not sure what you mean. Sorry.

Every team shooter, iirc, has the maps and modes pre-selected before the tournament rather than having a counterpick system like this.

Not saying you have to do it this way, was just curious. I feel like people are trying to implement Smash's stage selection system just because, when it was really a thing that Smash specifically needed.

I had a lot of internal debate about this and I agree with you. On one hand I picked Bo3 because of time reasons (I think rounds lasting over an hour are an issue) and because of the way things are currently set up (3 modes could make it have equal representation). The time issue is due to my experience TOing. Despite Smash games only lasting 4 minutes on average and it having Bo3, we ended up having rounds take approximately 45 minutes due to external factors. On the other hand I do believe that games are short and that things wion't move along as slowly as I think they will.

I'm willing to take this consideration truthfully since it makes sense to me. The only thing I'd have to extend is the map pool, turn it from 5 to 7. Ergo Team A picks 3 stages and Team B picks 3 stages along with 1 TO pick. I believe that might make the initial pool selection difficult though so I'm not sure.

Thanks!

I don't think any external factors would make a Best of 5 set too ridiculously long. But it's always worth testing.

Not sure what you mean by the map pool. As I said, I'd do it with all the gametypes and maps pre-selected, so all of them would be used in some manner.

 

[Box]

This is actually a really complex system. I understand how you got here but there's a tremendous amount of map/mode selection metagame involved here. It's not really hard to understand how it works so much as it's hard to understand how you're supposed to use it for maximum benefit.

I feel like the map pool itself is a good idea but it gets complex in a multi-mode system because there are mapXmode interactions. The consequences of striking maps and modes together is just not intuitive.

 

[LittleSoundDJ]

I agree with rapture here. I understand that a lot of people are trying to create tournament structure similar to smash, but striking/counterpick system doesn't really benefit a game like splatoon in the way it benefits a game like smash.

Halo-style tournaments are a much better starting model for splatoon, in my opinion. The map/mode should be paired into a "gametype," then the TO defines which gametypes will be played for the tournament. Then the TO decides which 5 are played each round factoring in encouraging a variety of strategies. This way, variety is forced, and teams will know what gametypes to practice. Stage striking is actually a main factor in what causes tournaments to take longer than they should, from my experience, and since Splatoon does not benefit from it, I don't think it belongs. With a defined system like this theres little reason for there to be much delay between games, opening up the opportunity for Bo5 sets to be played for the entire tournament.

 

[Kbot]

I think that the base of this rulset is good. What I think we need to do as a community is compile all of the possible ruleset ideas that have been thrown out for discussion over the past few weeks and try all of them (unless there are a few that are in concept the exact same. It will take some work to weed these out, but I think it's necessary.)

So, yeah. A map pool seems like a good idea in concept. We just actually have to try it out.


One small thing that the community as a whole might have a problem with is your 6-person limit when making a team. I understand why you chose 6, as this would only leave 2 subs, and that's a good number to have. However, I think the number that is being pushed for by the community is 8, as the SCL and Ink or Sink have each adopted the number, and it doesn't put the captains of the team in a nice place to say "Okay, well, we think you're going to sit out this tournament."

But, yeah. Other than that small thing, I think your proposal is worth a shot.

 

[Danny]

Every team shooter, iirc, has the maps and modes pre-selected before the tournament rather than having a counterpick system like this.

Not saying you have to do it this way, was just curious. I feel like people are trying to implement Smash's stage selection system just because, when it was really a thing that Smash specifically needed.

The only thing borrowed from Smash is the stage striking mechanism. Which Smash borrowed from countless other games that do this because it's fairly straightforward. e.g. CS:GO also does this and probably many other games. Smash refined their stage selection system by separating it into Counterpick/Starter which complicated it a bit more but I don't think striking is necessarily Smash specific.

Not sure what you mean by the map pool. As I said, I'd do it with all the gametypes and maps pre-selected, so all of them would be used in some manner.

This has way too many combinations to really be feasible in its current state. Also I have definitions and explain how to create the map pool in the actual post.

I agree with rapture here. I understand that a lot of people are trying to create tournament structure similar to smash, but striking/counterpick system doesn't really benefit a game like splatoon in the way it benefits a game like smash

I'm still not seeing the issue of loser's pick here.

Halo-style tournaments are a much better starting model for splatoon, in my opinion. The map/mode should be paired into a "gametype," then the TO defines which gametypes will be played for the tournament. Then the TO decides which 5 are played each round factoring in encouraging a variety of strategies. This way, variety is forced, and teams will know what gametypes to practice. Stage striking is actually a main factor in what causes tournaments to take longer than they should, from my experience, and since Splatoon does not benefit from it, I don't think it belongs. With a defined system like this theres little reason for there to be much delay between games, opening up the opportunity for Bo5 sets to be played for the entire tournament.

The problem with Halo style is that Splatoon has 30 different combinations and with Rainmaker and new stages that number will increase rapidly. The Halo system also was created due to people knowing the optimal map/mode tuple due to experience. Maybe Splatoon will adopt this mode in the future but I don't think it should be there initially.

One small thing that the community as a whole might have a problem with is your 6-person limit when making a team. I understand why you chose 6, as this would only leave 2 subs, and that's a good number to have. However, I think the number that is being pushed for by the community is 8, as the SCL and Ink or Sink have each adopted the number, and it doesn't put the captains of the team in a nice place to say "Okay, well, we think you're going to sit out this tournament."

Yeah that was my intention with 6 rather than 8. 8 makes sense in a way too so I'm willing to change it.[/QUOTE]

 

[LittleSoundDJ]

The problem with Halo style is that Splatoon has 30 different combinations and with Rainmaker and new stages that number will increase rapidly. The Halo system also was created due to people knowing the optimal map/mode tuple due to experience. Maybe Splatoon will adopt this mode in the future but I don't think it should be there initially.

That's why at first the TO should select a wide variety, and as we discover which combinations are good, and which could be dropped, it'll filter itself. The meta will evolve with teams, teams will scrim, they will discover the most competitive gametypes, then tournaments will feature those gametypes. I also don't understand why it's necessarily a problem in the first place. This method will force people to play every game mode so that we will see which are good and which are not, whereas with a strike/counterpick system, things will just naturally gravitate towards specific maps or gametypes.

 

[Danny]

That's why at first the TO should select a wide variety, and as we discover which combinations are good, and which could be dropped, it'll filter itself. The meta will evolve with teams, teams will scrim, they will discover the most competitive gametypes, then tournaments will feature those gametypes. I also don't understand why it's necessarily a problem in the first place. This method will force people to play every game mode so that we will see which are good and which are not, whereas with a strike/counterpick system, things will just naturally gravitate towards specific maps or gametypes.

My point is that as we currently stand we can't make these assumptions. We don't know what's "good". We don't know what people will gravitate towards. We have no notion of these things. These things will figure themselves out in time. I'm not going to force my views into the ruleset. There is no consensus yet.

 

[LittleSoundDJ]

My point is that as we currently stand we can't make these assumptions. We don't know what's "good". We don't know what people will gravitate towards. We have no notion of these things. These things will figure themselves out in time. I'm not going to force my views into the ruleset. There is no consensus yet.

which even goes more in favor of TO defining which modes are played each round. For example: I don't like Turf wars. Every single game I will ban turf wars. Turf wars will never be played in any of my matches. How do we know that there's not 1 or 2 competitive maps for turf wars?

With TO defined gametypes, they can say: This round everyone plays turf wars on x map game 1, TC on y map game 2, etc. That means everyone tries that gametype, and if the community decides, that gametype didn't really work out, let's remove it from the pool. rinse and repeat for every gametype. whereas, when the players decide what they play each game, it will be based on what their current perception is, so even if something has competitive potential, it won't be played because teams just won't choose to play it.

That's not even mentioning the fact that when you have a team that picks 2 of the stages every round, all they have to do is pick the same 2 stages they are the best at every round, and suddenly 40% of the games played are static. Variety is absolutely necessary right now.

 

[TheRapture]

The only thing borrowed from Smash is the stage striking mechanism. Which Smash borrowed from countless other games that do this because it's fairly straightforward. e.g. CS:GO also does this and probably many other games. Smash refined their stage selection system by separating it into Counterpick/Starter which complicated it a bit more but I don't think striking is necessarily Smash specific.


The problem with Halo style is that Splatoon has 30 different combinations and with Rainmaker and new stages that number will increase rapidly. The Halo system also was created due to people knowing the optimal map/mode tuple due to experience. Maybe Splatoon will adopt this mode in the future but I don't think it should be there initially.

CS:GO only plays one game-type - Attack/Defense. They don't need to worry about mode/map combinations because its always the same mode.

If you're doing something like Halo/Gears/CoD, which uses combinations of modes and maps, then you just pick the most optimal. Sure, experience helps, but we also know from playing the game for several months which modes work on which maps and which don't. And we can test more or less by actually trying them out in tournament. We should try as many combinations as possible before narrowing it down, if we even need to.