My opinions on the maps competitive balance.

[CutestFish]

I'm CuteFish and I'm A+ 99. I get this question a lot on my stream so I made a tier list (because those are fun!). Tell me what you guys think.

My basis on Splatzones is that, once the points are taken by one team, it should be a 60:40 split in difficulty to hold on:take them back. There are of course many other factors such as options to move around the map, what kind of angles you can take, if theres anything overwhelmingly powerful (E Liter on Moray for example) that factor in too.

My basis on Tower Control is what options does the tower path present both the pushing and counterpushing team. I'm also interested in the creative uses the tower path gives both teams (part of why saltspray ranks so low).

I'm looking for your guy's thoughts and would be more than willing to explain how I feel about each map individually if you ask.

The lists are down below.

 

[Setu]

I didn't know that tier lists were a thing for maps..... I just thought they were for characters in fighting games lol

 

[CutestFish]

I didn't know that tier lists were a thing for maps..... I just thought they were for characters in fighting games lol

It's an easy visually appealing way to group things into categories for comparison against each other. You can (and people do) make tier lists for anything competitive for mostly comparison purposes.

 

[Grafkarpador]

I didn't know that tier lists were a thing for maps..... I just thought they were for characters in fighting games lol

That's because tier lists do not conceptually apply to maps/stages. This is practically a disguised personal favorite maps list.

 

[Setu]

It's really hard to compare maps when they bring different factors into play. Determining if anything is "more competitive" than anything else won't work if it's just a personal preference or even the preference of a majority.

 

[Ryuji]

Moray Towers for Splat Zones definitely needs to go in the 'really good' tier. It's incredibly easy to take the zones since they're so small. An inkstrike can capture one with no effort, but even so, also easy to reclaim.

 

[ILikeKirbys]

Sorry if this seems like an obvious thing, but I've only seen one E-Liter on Moray Towers, and that guy wasn't very effective, so what's so bad about E-Liters on Moray? Is it because of their range? And is the regular better than the Custom on Moray? Because I could see it going either way (Burst Bombs give a decent quick attack and Echolocator reveals enemies to prevent ambushes, while Squid Beakons can get fallen teammates back in the fight faster (or let you escape bad situations, maybe) and Kraken is a great defensive panic-button (since it's invincible) and mobility special, especially on Moray with all the walls to swim up).
Also, I have a few other questions:
First, why is Kelp Dome only okay for Splat Zones? It seems a lot like the Really Good stages on your list, since there are quite a few easily-accessible ways to reach the Zone, but maybe I'm missing something.
Also, what exactly makes Port Mackerel awful on both modes? I can understand for Splat Zones, I feel like the Zones are too far apart and holding both Zones requires that you practically spawncamp the other team (just keep them penned into that area right outside their spawn point and you win 90% of the time; I know spawncamping would result in a win in every mode on every map (except maybe Saltspray, not sure it's possible there), but it feels almost too easy to do once you hold both Zones), but why on Tower Control?
And how is Urchin Underpass really good for Tower Control? I've never really liked it for that mode. I agree with its place in Splat Zones though, I really like it for that.

Moray Towers for Splat Zones definitely needs to go in the 'really good' tier. It's incredibly easy to take the zones since they're so small. An inkstrike can capture one with no effort, but even so, also easy to reclaim.

Actually, I dunno if it's just that they're poorly aimed, but I've never seen an Inkstrike capture a Zone by itself on Moray. It does make it really easy to capture afterward, and it probably can capture if there are a few spots of your team's ink already on the Zone though.

 

[CutestFish]

Moray Towers for Splat Zones definitely needs to go in the 'really good' tier. It's incredibly easy to take the zones since they're so small. An inkstrike can capture one with no effort, but even so, also easy to reclaim.

It's absolutely retarded to try to hold onto it the points. People with a shooter (red) can stand completely out of sight and rain ink on the point with virtually no counterplay nonstop. E Liters on the yellow area cover the entirety of mid, the entirety of their own point, and half of the enemy point in a spot thats not easily reached. Try getting to the person in red while an E Liter shoots you on the wall from yellow. I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm just saying the difficulty to maintain the point is tremendous and taking it away from them is largely trivial.

Sorry if this seems like an obvious thing, but I've only seen one E-Liter on Moray Towers, and that guy wasn't very effective, so what's so bad about E-Liters on Moray? Is it because of their range? And is the regular better than the Custom on Moray?
First, why is Kelp Dome only okay for Splat Zones?
And how is Urchin Underpass really good for Tower Control? I've never really liked it for that mode. I agree with its place in Splat Zones though, I really like it for that.

E Liter 3K (either one is good) can effectively hold control of roughly 66-75% of the main combat areas (mid/both splat zones/enemy sniper nest) while sitting in a very safe location on Moray Towers.

Kelp Dome has numerous good qualities but its hindrered by having a very small splatzone for a 1SZ map along with how strangely camp-able it is for such a large map. There is strictly only 4 real ways in that are heavily chokepointed.

Underpass is great because it goes through many different areas where different strategies are involved. The middle is wide open and has the same great qualities as Splat Zones. Then it moves into a serious chokepoint that isn't unconquerable at all. After that you ride along a track thats both wide open and very clastaphobic where the top of the tower rides close to a wide area near the enemy spawn. There's numerous flank and alternate paths and I think the way the path sets up so many different scenarios is great.

 

[Squadaloo]

I'm curious as to why Port Mackerel is rated so lowly for Tower Control. I mean, it's honestly one of my favorites in both TC and SZ, but given how easy it can be for great players to hold the other team to spawn, I'm not surprised by the low competitive rating. I'm not saying I disagree with the TC rating, I just am interested in why it's so low.

On the flip side, why is Walleye Warehouse so high for TC? Personally, I absolutely hate it and want to know why a more skilled player would find it enjoyable at all.

 

[CutestFish]

I'm curious as to why Port Mackerel is rated so lowly for Tower Control. I mean, it's honestly one of my favorites in both TC and SZ, but given how easy it can be for great players to hold the other team to spawn, I'm not surprised by the low competitive rating. I'm not saying I disagree with the TC rating, I just am interested in why it's so low.

On the flip side, why is Walleye Warehouse so high for TC? Personally, I absolutely hate it and want to know why a more skilled player would find it enjoyable at all.

Port Mackeral is just chokepoints upon chokepoints upon chokepoints upon chokepoints. In only roughly 25% of its journey is there any breathing room for its path. There's very few means of changing elevation and is usually rather impractical to do that. TC is pretty bad, at least in my opinion, without elevation options as theres no way to drop down on the tower which is one of the most effective means of dealing with people on it.

Walleye is an uphill trek straight into their spawn and gives both teams numerous ways to get around your opponents until the final 25% when only the counterpushing team has those options. I think this is very excellent design for TC.

 

[Squadaloo]

Ah, makes sense to me. I mostly like Port Mackerel because I love long tracks in Tower Control and is the reason I don't like Walleye Warehouse: basically, if the losing team dies entirely once, it's almost all over. I 100% agree on Kelp Dome though: it's long and has so much variety on the path for both attacking and defending.

 

[ILikeKirbys]

E Liter 3K (either one is good) can effectively hold control of roughly 66-75% of the main combat areas (mid/both splat zones/enemy sniper nest) while sitting in a very safe location on Moray Towers.

I see. Yeah, that seems possible, but isn't it possible to deal with an E-Liter sitting in the yellow point by swimming up the wall from the center and coming around from there? I do that basically every match on Moray at some point, and it usually works.
Though this leads to another question: this can still be done in Tower Control, so why is Moray listed as okay for that mode?

Kelp Dome has numerous good qualities but its hindrered by having a very small splatzone for a 1SZ map along with how strangely camp-able it is for such a large map. There is strictly only 4 real ways in that are heavily chokepointed.

I think I understand, but couldn't you go around to their side to use their entrances as well (or were those part of the 4 entrances you mentioned?)?

Underpass is great because it goes through many different areas where different strategies are involved. The middle is wide open and has the same great qualities as Splat Zones. Then it moves into a serious chokepoint that isn't unconquerable at all. After that you ride along a track thats both wide open and very clastaphobic where the top of the tower rides close to a wide area near the enemy spawn. There's numerous flank and alternate paths and I think the way the path sets up so many different scenarios is great.

Ah, I hadn't thought of it that way. I just hold our side's chokepoint until we have the tower, then throw Seekers into their chokepoint and press forward (which works since, if I get splatted, I can get back into position at our chokepoint fairly quickly, and if we break through the chokepoint we can get into position to defend the tower on the last part of the journey).

Walleye is an uphill trek straight into their spawn and gives both teams numerous ways to get around your opponents until the final 25% when only the counterpushing team has those options. I think this is very excellent design for TC.

That makes sense, but I've always felt like it's too easy to overrun the center on this map, which kinda swings the match in that team's favor.
Though I'm curious now: what do you think is good design for a Splat Zones map?

 

[Squadaloo]

I see. Yeah, that seems possible, but isn't it possible to deal with an E-Liter sitting in the yellow point by swimming up the wall from the center and coming around from there? I do that basically every match on Moray at some point, and it usually works.
Though this leads to another question: this can still be done in Tower Control, so why is Moray listed as okay for that mode?

I just reached A- rank and had to go up against an A+ sniper sniping from the yellow point. The problem is unless you have ninja squid, they can watch you as you jump on to the wall, and they'll just back off and splat you as soon as you crest the top. It just doesn't work against snipers who, in a competitive setting, would more likely be ready for you than not. Also, from my TC experience, the tower moves too close to the red spot which makes it a bit harder to hit because it's almost straight down. It's still easy to defend from up there, but not quite as easy as in SZ.

 

[CutestFish]

I see. Yeah, that seems possible, but isn't it possible to deal with an E-Liter sitting in the yellow point by swimming up the wall from the center and coming around from there? I do that basically every match on Moray at some point, and it usually works.
Though this leads to another question: this can still be done in Tower Control, so why is Moray listed as okay for that mode?

Though I'm curious now: what do you think is good design for a Splat Zones map?

Good luck going across the entire middle area to get up that wall.

Good splat zone maps have numerous ways to go from spawn to point while still being able to be controlled is the #1 feature. Walleye and Blackbelly show this off best IMO.

 

[WaifuRaccoonBL]

All of what I am about to say is for Splatzones.

Well, first off, including a map that was out for less than a day is ridiculous. It is almost impossible to rate it. Your rank doesn't even matter for that stage considering you were probably a+ when the stage was first entered into the rotation, and we can't possibly judge how many times you played that map to affect your ranking.

Second off, most of the stages in the good category are the simpler stages for the base game. All stages released after launch were said to be more technical. We have no idea if this list is more actually bias towards the simpler stages.

Third, we have no idea if this is base on how much fun you have on this stage or not. What I mean is, we have no idea how hard you try to stop any broken strategies that come up. Sometimes, it means doing the most stressful thing, or switching to an unfun playstyle, like choosing a weapon you don't normally play, and going into that:

Fourth, and most importantly. While it is true that a tier list is based off comparison, thats where the problem comes up. Whats the comparison? I mean, where's the data? What are you basing everything off of? Are you basing this on all weapons in Splatoon you can use? Are you basing this on being an individual or teamwork? It has to be based off teamwork btw if we are talking in a competitive sense. But we can't even do that since it is impossible to be a true team without it being with friends or voice chat.

Things like tier list for stages need to wait until a month after the august update at the very least so we can get true tests out.

I'm not trying to be insulting. Rather, I'm just saying why a tier list like this doesn't work.

I'm rank A-.

 

[CutestFish]

All of what I am about to say is for Splatzones.

Well, first off, including a map that was out for less than a day is ridiculous. It is almost impossible to rate it. Your rank doesn't even matter for that stage considering you were probably a+ when the stage was first entered into the rotation, and we can't possibly judge how many times you played that map to affect your ranking.

Second off, most of the stages in the good category are the simpler stages for the base game. All stages released after launch were said to be more technical. We have no idea if this list is more actually bias towards the simpler stages.

Third, we have no idea if this is base on how much fun you have on this stage or not. What I mean is, we have no idea how hard you try to stop any broken strategies that come up. Sometimes, it means doing the most stressful thing, or switching to an unfun playstyle, like choosing a weapon you don't normally play, and going into that:

Fourth, and most importantly. While it is true that a tier list is based off comparison, thats where the problem comes up. Whats the comparison? I mean, where's the data? What are you basing everything off of? Are you basing this on all weapons in Splatoon you can use? Are you basing this on being an individual or teamwork? It has to be based off teamwork btw if we are talking in a competitive sense. But we can't even do that since it is impossible to be a true team without it being with friends or voice chat.

Things like tier list for stages need to wait until a month after the august update at the very least so we can get true tests out.

I'm not trying to be insulting. Rather, I'm just saying why a tier list like this doesn't work.

I'm rank A-.

You keep using the term 'we have no idea' when I already disclaimed the majority of what I found good map qualities are. Simple tends to be better (Look at Smash) as 'more technical' stuff tends to introduce some silly mechanics. The comparison is simply how many opportunities it provides both sides in a game. Since it's very much feasible to get 40 points on Port Mackeral than lock down and just hold for the next 3 minutes, there isn't a lot of opportunity both ways which is why it scores so low. Compare this to Blackbelly where many different approaches can work and a lot more skills are used that in PM including how well you can use walls and how well you can deal with higher elevation, which is why I put Blackbelly higher. This list isn't based on any hard data, obliviously. That's why I asked for discussion. Even with hard data tier lists, it still garners dicussion.

'Are you basing this on all weapons in Splatoon you can use?' I can and do use every (viable) weapon.

Also I've played Moray Towers at least 40 times in SZ and about 20 times in TC since it's been out for 24 hours straight and I've seen and tried enough stuff to give me an idea of the absurd level of cheesiness present on that map.

 

[Citrus]

Moray Towers is such a terrible map, lol

 

[flc]

Simple tends to be better (Look at Smash)

STOP

while I won't disagree that dumb gimmicks tend to make maps suck, I've got two problems with this.

first, you've got blackbelly in the top half of your maps for both modes. this is a map with so many walls, railings, ramps, and gimmicks in general that you cannot simply say something like this and not qualify blackbelly's position
second, what constitutes 'too complex' for smash has nothing in common with what is 'too complex' for a shooter.

moray might be trash or it might not (personally I don't mind it that much aside from the awful tower pathing) but its only gimmicks are size and walls.

I also take issue with a lot of what you say constitutes a good competitive map, since if every map were 6-4 for the defence then the map rotation favours teams that prioritise defence over those that are more all-around skilled. it's like how CS:GO needs to have CT-sided, T-sided, and even-split maps; without a good mix of all of them, a team that is good at what the map rotation favours but bad at everything else could do just as well as a very well-rounded and overall better-skilled team.

what constitutes a good map in a shooter is depth, not any sort of arbitrary number; you touch on this with your point about e-litres. arowana is a **** map because e-litres break it. mackerel (though I don't mind the map) is a **** map because walls break it. then you have maps like walleye that are actually god tier and always will be because of how much depth they have to them.

 

[Kaliafornia]

I don't really think there is a good map vs a bad map for competitive SZ or TC. It seems like all of them with the exception of Moray seem to be pretty balanced in terms of holding/pushing and ways to get to the point.

Port Mackeral is just chokepoints upon chokepoints upon chokepoints upon chokepoints. In only roughly 25% of its journey is there any breathing room for its path. There's very few means of changing elevation and is usually rather impractical to do that. TC is pretty bad, at least in my opinion, without elevation options as theres no way to drop down on the tower which is one of the most effective means of dealing with people on it.

Port is actually one of my favorite maps to play TC on. Although it surprises me that even in high level rooms there is an alarming number of players who don't watch their backs or have awareness when going through the corridors.Also you can also drop down on the tower when its near your/the enemies base in the last stretch. You can get to both sides on the open part of the map as in TC there is a box there that isnt there in SZ or Turf.

 

[CutestFish]

STOP

while I won't disagree that dumb gimmicks tend to make maps suck, I've got two problems with this.

first, you've got blackbelly in the top half of your maps for both modes. this is a map with so many walls, railings, ramps, and gimmicks in general that you cannot simply say something like this and not qualify blackbelly's position
second, what constitutes 'too complex' for smash has nothing in common with what is 'too complex' for a shooter.

moray might be trash or it might not (personally I don't mind it that much aside from the awful tower pathing) but its only gimmicks are size and walls.

I also take issue with a lot of what you say constitutes a good competitive map, since if every map were 6-4 for the defence then the map rotation favours teams that prioritise defence over those that are more all-around skilled. it's like how CS:GO needs to have CT-sided, T-sided, and even-split maps; without a good mix of all of them, a team that is good at what the map rotation favours but bad at everything else could do just as well as a very well-rounded and overall better-skilled team.

what constitutes a good map in a shooter is depth, not any sort of arbitrary number; you touch on this with your point about e-litres. arowana is a **** map because e-litres break it. mackerel (though I don't mind the map) is a **** map because walls break it. then you have maps like walleye that are actually god tier and always will be because of how much depth they have to them.

You're correct. I did say 'tends to be better' and not is better. Blackbelly I feel is very well executed (in SZ) because having good knowledge of all the various angles doesn't allow you to pull any silly shenanigans but does allow you an advantage over your opponents. There's a lot to a good competitive map and I was trying to be as simple as humanely possible because lolsquidboards. Arowana has more problems then just e-liter tho :p.

It's not a matter of 'too complex' but rather leaning to some kind of extreme (Moray's vertical-ness, Bluefin's unbreachable one-way mid section in SZ, etc). Blackbelly does do this with the crazy amount of elevation in a relatively small area but I felt it was done well.

I still think that tournaments (assuming they ran SZ only) that the maps in 'Really Good' would be great neutral stages and the maps in 'Okay' makes good counter-pick material if that were to ever be a thing in competitve. That's the kind of thing thats hard to say before 4v4 comes out.

Offtopic but how was the VoD analysis? I never felt I could learn much going back to rewatch. That seems far more suited towards 4v4 strat analysis.