How do rulesets work for competitive shooters?

[Setu]

Lol the war of the admins. x)

I feel like it's too early to base conclusions on which games/genres the rulesets should be based off of at all. For example, MK's standard ruleset for wars uses the total points of a team to determine it a win or a loss, which I guess could also be done in Splatoon. Or if we use the smash/shooter method of counting W/L to determine the winner, which would be another method. However, I agree with Agosta in the fact that the community is not structured enough to do rulesets that are used in games that mainly are played offline competitively. Splatoon has to have an online based community before it can have an offline one. I think you guys are simply misunderstanding each other in ways as you guys have repeated each others' reasoning.

I believe they're saying they don't understand why you'd model Splatoon's competitive scene off of MK's when MK is a completely different genre than Splatoon (racing game vs third person shooter). Competitive shooters would be a closer comparison since it's only a jump from first to third person rather than going completely across genre lines.

I think both TheRapture and Agosta clearly realize this. Agosta is meaning to say that he likes the system of having clan wars in mario kart be completely open AND competitive, and can be played competitively by using any method.

 

[TheRapture]

Lol the war of the admins. x)

I feel like it's too early to base conclusions on which games/genres the rulesets should be based off of at all. For example, MK's standard ruleset for wars uses the total points of a team to determine it a win or a loss, which I guess could also be done in Splatoon. Or if we use the smash/shooter method of counting W/L to determine the winner, which would be another method. However, I agree with Agosta in the fact that the community is not structured enough to do rulesets that are used in games that mainly are played offline competitively. Splatoon has to have an online based community before it can have an offline one. I think you guys are simply misunderstanding each other in ways as you guys have repeated each others' reasoning.

I think both TheRapture and Agosta clearly realize this. Agosta is meaning to say that he likes the system of having clan wars in mario kart be completely open AND competitive, and can be played competitively by using any method.

Yeah, I kinda got that vibe that this has something to do with online clans and whatnot, which truth be told I don't have much experience with. But I feel like that, again, has to do with the process of setting up games, not the actual rules of how to play them, which we can't know until the game is out.

How you choose games when playing matches with friends, competitive or not, seems ultimately irrelevant. "Competitive" is pretty arbitrary except when it's tangibly depicted by being used in tournaments.

And again, being online or offline really doesn't affect rulesets. It does affect structure but not the rules of the game.

 

[Agosta44]

I'm not really understanding where you're going with this. No one is forced to play every mode by default. And again, online play of offline play has little to do with this. It's irrelevant. And not every FPS is "funded and sponsored." I mean, if we're going to be specific, Splatoon is a third-person shooter like Gears of War, which isn't funded or sponsored at all.

I think we're mixing up some definitions here. It just seems you're discussing how you'd get a friendly match together with other people. That has little to do with a competitive ruleset. Players will use whatever Splatoon offers or assume the competitive ruleset used in tournaments.

My first post was in response in 2 ways: what rules I believe would make for the healthiest competitive scene (it will not be tournament/league matches only), as well as directly responding to what you had posted as standard procedure for other FPS'. All of my posts afterwards have the structure you posted in mind while responding if that helps clear up confusion on your end.

I think both TheRapture and Agosta clearly realize this. Agosta is meaning to say that he likes the system of having clan wars in mario kart be completely open AND competitive, and can be played competitively by using any method.

This 100%. The scene will be very open in terms of competitive play. It will not only have competitive matches for tournaments, but will most likely play under a standard, uniformed rule set. This is the comparison I was deriving from Mario Kart. It has always had a massive and robust online community and followed certain guidelines for competitive play. There was 35 million+ copies of MKW sold and all competitive players in clan wars followed the same basic guidelines for all competition (which was the same rule set for the global leagues over the years).

I feel that competitive play should be as open as possible, that's my main point.

 

[TheRapture]

My first post was in response in 2 ways: what rules I believe would make for the healthiest competitive scene (it will not be tournament/league matches only), as well as directly responding to what you had posted as standard procedure for other FPS'. All of my posts afterwards have the structure you posted in mind while responding if that helps clear up confusion on your end.



This 100%. The scene will be very open in terms of competitive play. It will not only have competitive matches for tournaments, but will most likely play under a standard, uniformed rule set. This is the comparison I was deriving from Mario Kart. It has always had a massive and robust online community and followed certain guidelines for competitive play. There was 35 million+ copies of MKW sold and all competitive players in clan wars followed the same basic guidelines for all competition (which was the same rule set for the global leagues over the years).

I feel that competitive play should be as open as possible, that's my main point.

Alright, yeah I think we're agreeing on this. I definitely did not mean to imply that competitive play would be tournament or league matches only. And yeah, it would be ideal to have a universal ruleset. That'll certainly be the intention.

 

[flc]

mario kart isn't really in the discussion, it's just an example of a competitive format that is easy, universal, malleable, and functional. we're not so much wanting to model the ruleset on mk as much as we're trying to take cues from one of the things the mk comp scene did well. it's trying to impose maplists and gametypes isn't likely to work in tournament play, especially since it will create an imbalance in the meta where everyone knows how to play those three maps and that's about it

csgo bo3 works by having a pool of 7 maps, of which 4 are banned and 3 are picked (2 bans and 1 pick each, last remaining map is the tiebreaker). this may work in splatoon, of course, but that would limit us to bo3 or repeating maps. bo5 with all maps may work but may also make the game stagnate, at least until a few more maps have been released. also, central to this concept is the fact that csgo maps are inherently and intentionally not balanced between ct and t sides, meaning teams that are better at one side or the other can pick the best map for the side they're good at (getting a scoreline of 6-9 on a map that's usually 4-11 is a huge deal), which is something that does not apply to splatoon.

I'm not entirely sure how comp tf2 works now (haven't followed it for a while now) but it has historically worked similarly, just with the addition of gamemodes that are tied to certain maps (so you may have a koth and a capture point version of the same map and they would be treated as though they were different maps).

not sure which shooters you're talking about (assuming mlg?) but having set maplists for something like this will almost certainly not be desirable just because of how maplists push certain aspects of the metagame forward, which, early on in the game's cycle, can actually be very harmful to its development. without wanting to invite yet more complaints about drawing comparisons to mario kart, in 2008 the largest tournament set match sizes to 5v5, which turned out to be vastly inferior to 6v6, and as a result the 5v5 metagame (which had a lower team skill ceiling and was more reliant on a single luck element) was what developed. 6v6 never got beyond where it was at the end of 2008.

 

[TheRapture]

mario kart isn't really in the discussion, it's just an example of a competitive format that is easy, universal, malleable, and functional. we're not so much wanting to model the ruleset on mk as much as we're trying to take cues from one of the things the mk comp scene did well. it's trying to impose maplists and gametypes isn't likely to work in tournament play, especially since it will create an imbalance in the meta where everyone knows how to play those three maps and that's about it

Well, in most cases, those are created because there are maps or modes that aren't suitable for competitive play. If Splatoon doesn't have that, we won't have that issue. I can see all the maps being used.

csgo bo3 works by having a pool of 7 maps, of which 4 are banned and 3 are picked (2 bans and 1 pick each, last remaining map is the tiebreaker). this may work in splatoon, of course, but that would limit us to bo3 or repeating maps. bo5 with all maps may work but may also make the game stagnate, at least until a few more maps have been released. also, central to this concept is the fact that csgo maps are inherently and intentionally not balanced between ct and t sides, meaning teams that are better at one side or the other can pick the best map for the side they're good at (getting a scoreline of 6-9 on a map that's usually 4-11 is a huge deal), which is something that does not apply to splatoon.

Right. But the game seems to have a healthy amount of maps off of launch at the very least.

not sure which shooters you're talking about (assuming mlg?) but having set maplists for something like this will almost certainly not be desirable just because of how maplists push certain aspects of the metagame forward, which, early on in the game's cycle, can actually be very harmful to its development. without wanting to invite yet more complaints about drawing comparisons to mario kart, in 2008 the largest tournament set match sizes to 5v5, which turned out to be vastly inferior to 6v6, and as a result the 5v5 metagame (which had a lower team skill ceiling and was more reliant on a single luck element) was what developed. 6v6 never got beyond where it was at the end of 2008.

Well, I was discussing Call of Duty, Halo, Gears, etc. which all do this (has nothing to do with MLG). I definitely bring up Gears since it's exactly a third-person arena shooter like Splatoon is, but that has little to do with affecting the ruleset in the long run.

I'm not quite sure where you're going with "maplists push certain aspects of the metagame forward." Right, that's the point. What's left behind is determined to be not that competitive or worth developing. Can't expect to cater to absolutely everybody when it comes to competition.

 

[thefro]

Here's the rules for UGC, which is a Team Fortress 2 league

I guess that won't be applicable to tournaments, but they do generally allow the teams to pick the first two maps for the finals, with the final map being a neutral map picked by the tournament organizers in advance.

 

[flc]

Well, in most cases, those are created because there are maps or modes that aren't suitable for competitive play. If Splatoon doesn't have that, we won't have that issue. I can see all the maps being used.

Right. But the game seems to have a healthy amount of maps off of launch at the very least.

Well, I was discussing Call of Duty, Halo, Gears, etc. which all do this (has nothing to do with MLG). I definitely bring up Gears since it's exactly a third-person arena shooter like Splatoon is, but that has little to do with affecting the ruleset in the long run.

I'm not quite sure where you're going with "maplists push certain aspects of the metagame forward." Right, that's the point. What's left behind is determined to be not that competitive or worth developing. Can't expect to cater to absolutely everybody when it comes to competition.

to the first two lines: we have 5 maps at launch, and with maps being symmetrical and generally all about the same size, it's (as you say) not likely we'll be banning maps.

to the third line: was more using mlg as a blanket term for console shooters (since mlg handles those almost universally), my apologies for the confusion

to the final line: where I'm going with that is that having a set maplist for a bo3 or bo5 will by necessity exclude perfectly acceptable map/gametype combinations, and if these maplists turn into a standard, then the maps that are selected for tournament play will be developed further than others. this is as opposed to a free veto/pick system wherein maps that are frequently banned would imply that said maps are undesirable for competitive play. later on, it might be that some maps are demonstrated to be awful, but we won't know unless the largest possible number of maps and gametypes are available for competitive play early on.

perhaps I'm being overly defensive on account of this site having a lot of smashboards members who are used to a game where 80%+ of the content is patently awful for competitive play and, even if you personally don't, a LOT of people are going to get banhappy. I'd like to avoid that if possible.

 

[TheRapture]

to the first two lines: we have 5 maps at launch, and with maps being symmetrical and generally all about the same size, it's (as you say) not likely we'll be banning maps.

to the third line: was more using mlg as a blanket term for console shooters (since mlg handles those almost universally), my apologies for the confusion

to the final line: where I'm going with that is that having a set maplist for a bo3 or bo5 will by necessity exclude perfectly acceptable map/gametype combinations, and if these maplists turn into a standard, then the maps that are selected for tournament play will be developed further than others. this is as opposed to a free veto/pick system wherein maps that are frequently banned would imply that said maps are undesirable for competitive play. later on, it might be that some maps are demonstrated to be awful, but we won't know unless the largest possible number of maps and gametypes are available for competitive play early on.

perhaps I'm being overly defensive on account of this site having a lot of smashboards members who are used to a game where 80%+ of the content is patently awful for competitive play and, even if you personally don't, a LOT of people are going to get banhappy. I'd like to avoid that if possible.

Mhm, I agree completely. I definitely will not be pushing a pro-ban campaign or anything unless I think there's really anything overtly worth banning.

Right now, the only thing I can see is Walleye Warehouse not being used because spawn camping is so easy on that map. If that gets abused, I can see it being banned.

 

[Setu]

Mhm, I agree completely. I definitely will not be pushing a pro-ban campaign or anything unless I think there's really anything overtly worth banning.

Right now, the only thing I can see is Walleye Warehouse not being used because spawn camping is so easy on that map. If that gets abused, I can see it being banned.

There isn't really spawn camping at all in this game, especially if you are invincible in your respawn point. And if you can't directly shoot/splat with a main weapon, use a sub weapon.

Edit: if the enemy team is all hiding on your side of the map, sneak past them and cover on their end of the map.

 

[TheRapture]

There isn't really spawn camping at all in this game, especially if you are invincible in your respawn point. And if you can't directly shoot/splat with a main weapon, use a sub weapong.

Walleye Warehouse is easily spawn campable because there's only one route out of spawn. You don't need to actually go into spawn, you just camp at the bottom of the ramp. It's super easy to dodge all paint going down the path because you can hide right at the bottom thanks to all the walls.

 

[Setu]

Let me just use this as a visual.

This is where the splat charger comes in handy. As you can see, there is a piece of cargo that would aid in escape, and is easily reachable by chargers. I'm sure there are many other methods that can be used as well, like a splash wall or simply have on person on your team with a bubbler in his loudout. Everyone on your team can charge up subweapons on the spawn point, and there are plenty of subs that can completely counter this method of spawn camping.

 

[TheRapture]

Let me just use this as a visual.

This is where the splat charger comes in handy. As you can see, there is a piece of cargo that would aid in escape, and is easily reachable by chargers. I'm sure there are many other methods that can be used as well, like a splash wall or simply have on person on your team with a bubbler in his loudout. Everyone on your team can charge up subweapons on the spawn point, and there are plenty of subs that can completely counter this method of spawn camping.

It's not as easy as it seems. You can lay all the paint you want on the ramp, but spawn campers don't need to be on the ramp to camp. You hide at the bottom where the walls are so weapons can't hit you.

 

[Agosta44]

Considering we've only had 3 hours of play with the game I highly doubt spawn camping will be an issue on that stage. You have missles and you have Wail which would OHKO everyone camping there if someone tries.

 

[TheRapture]

Considering we've only had 3 hours of play with the game I highly doubt spawn camping will be an issue on that stage. You have missles and you have Wail which would OHKO everyone camping there if someone tries.

We'll see. I saw it happen every game I played it on (mostly cuz I was doing it). It's pretty easy to dodge everything at the bottom of the ramp.

 

[Setu]

We'll see. I saw it happen every game I played it on (mostly cuz I was doing it). It's pretty easy to dodge everything at the bottom of the ramp.

Unless its the echolocator, the seeker, or the other locating subweapon. We haven't even experience half of the content that this game offers.

 

[TheRapture]

Unless its the echolocator, the seeker, or the other locating subweapon. We haven't even experience half of the content that this game offers.

Very true. Good points. I do think the map would benefit from more spawn routes, though. Would not hurt at all.

 

[Kayeka]

Walleye Warehouse is easily spawn campable because there's only one route out of spawn. You don't need to actually go into spawn, you just camp at the bottom of the ramp. It's super easy to dodge all paint going down the path because you can hide right at the bottom thanks to all the walls.

Seems like the sort of thing you can defeat with liberal use of splat bombs.

 

[Astral]

Mhm, I agree completely. I definitely will not be pushing a pro-ban campaign or anything unless I think there's really anything overtly worth banning.

Right now, the only thing I can see is Walleye Warehouse not being used because spawn camping is so easy on that map. If that gets abused, I can see it being banned.

We can also hope Nintendo would patch an overpowered weapon/strat. They have been on top of this in Smash and are doing a pretty good job

 

[TheRapture]

We can also hope Nintendo would patch an overpowered weapon/strat. They have been on top of this in Smash and are doing a pretty good job

I do too. I would love to see the map patched. Never hurts having another spawn route.