ye that's what I was meaning. bad as in bad for comp.
Ink or Sink Tournament! v.1.1b Final Version!
- Thread starter RoyLee
- Start date
- Status
Flying_Tortoise
Sushi Chef
oh of course. I guess I should've been more specific. It's fun and great for introducing the mechanics to new players, but there's a reason it wasn't made a "ranked mode"
edit: oh lol, thought he was referring to my post x)
Hitzel
Inkling Commander
I wonder... if this whole tournament was gametype striking, would the whole thing have been Turf War as teams would have refused to play each others' preferred ranked game modes?
it would be turf chicken
first team forced to ban turf war (thus giving the other team mode pick) loses
LittleSoundDJ
Full Squid
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2015
- Messages
- 36
- NNID
- littlesounddj
maybe, but at least with rm it has the benefit of being new enough that people haven't yet figured it out, so maybe something will come of it. turf on the other hand has been solved for going on three months now.
the suggestion I made in the ink or sink skype chat was to do zones/tower with map+mode combinations as a map pool (so if you ban arowana zones, the other team can pick arowana tower), since mode striking is obviously not going to work until rainmaker has been more thoroughly playtested
EDIT: also rainmaker needs certain maps banned because
>saltspray
>north stalling
CutestFish
Pro Squid
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2015
- Messages
- 129
- NNID
- Ultimatumm
That's what I did in my tournament and the participants were generally satisfied.
There was a process.
Step 1) Losing team decides if they want to pick mode or map. (Example: Team A beats Team B. Team B decides to select the mode.)
Step 2) Winning team now must choose the opposite. (Team A now chooses Kelp Dome)
Step 3) Using that information, Team B can make the decision about what the mode is. (Team B decides Splat Zones since Team A chose Kelp Dome).
Pros:
* Both teams get a choice in whats happening with the next game
* Losing team gets the more "impactful" choice since they get to choose around what the winning team chose
* Both teams can pick to their strengths/counterpick but it requires a lot of planning
Cons:
* Can take a little while since so many decisions are made
There's also 1 map/mode combination ban per set so that things your team considers total crap can be avoided.
I'd love to hear what you think about that flc.
Hitzel
Inkling Commander
I am more and more agreeing with DJ, that Halo-Style is probably best for this game. I had originally thought that map and gametype striking would be best, but as time goes by I am no longer seeing the benefits.
As someone who volunteered for MLG for years, I strongly feel the one thing about Halo-style we should NOT adopt is the restriction of map+gametype combos down to a small few. MLG Halo only used 11 map+gametype combinations, which cut off a large portion of the maps and made it extremely difficult to add something new to the rotation because it meant that one of the "favorites" had to be cut for its inclusion. There also was a small, closed-doors group that made the calls, and they looked to the pros for opinions, who generally didn't want change because they wanted to keep playing what they were good at. Things became very stagnant and closed off to change.
IoS Messfest seems to have it done right. It has different gametype+map combos every round, and RoyLee has told me that he is going to change the rotation every Halo-Style tournament he does. It's much more simple, it prevents the kind of shenanigans we saw in winners finals, and it forces teams to be good at EVERYTHING instead of being able to ban what they aren't good at.
Of course, if certain combos end up being unfit for competition for whatever reason, things can be done about it. They can be excluded from use later in the brackets, it can be made sure that there is not more than one "bad" combo per round, or we can talk about excluding them from most tournaments altogether.
Smash-style can still be made to work, especially now that we have four gametypes instead of three, but some modifications need to be made.
As someone who volunteered for MLG for years, I strongly feel the one thing about Halo-style we should NOT adopt is the restriction of map+gametype combos down to a small few. MLG Halo only used 11 map+gametype combinations, which cut off a large portion of the maps and made it extremely difficult to add something new to the rotation because it meant that one of the "favorites" had to be cut for its inclusion. There also was a small, closed-doors group that made the calls, and they looked to the pros for opinions, who generally didn't want change because they wanted to keep playing what they were good at. Things became very stagnant and closed off to change.
IoS Messfest seems to have it done right. It has different gametype+map combos every round, and RoyLee has told me that he is going to change the rotation every Halo-Style tournament he does. It's much more simple, it prevents the kind of shenanigans we saw in winners finals, and it forces teams to be good at EVERYTHING instead of being able to ban what they aren't good at.
Of course, if certain combos end up being unfit for competition for whatever reason, things can be done about it. They can be excluded from use later in the brackets, it can be made sure that there is not more than one "bad" combo per round, or we can talk about excluding them from most tournaments altogether.
Smash-style can still be made to work, especially now that we have four gametypes instead of three, but some modifications need to be made.
Agosta44
Inkling Fleet Admiral
Just rotate game modes each game. SZ -> TC -> RM -> SZ -> TC -> RM etc. The 1-2-1/3 striking system works with it and you get plenty of variety.
So that leaves us with Moray?
If you ban Salt Spray you would have to ban almost every map. You can do similar stalling in Mackerel, Arowana, Blackbelly, Warehouse, Flounder, Bluefin, Urchin, Kelp, Triggerfish.
So that leaves us with Moray?
Last edited:
and fuck moray.
I think the idea of "halo-style" map picking is a good idea but I do have one rather large concern about it. There are currently 30 (40 if you include TW) map/mode combinations in the game, with even more maps being released later. This is obviously way too many to handle. The only way I see to combat that is to choose a few to make legal and ban all the rest, which I am very uncomfortable doing.
I think the idea of "halo-style" map picking is a good idea but I do have one rather large concern about it. There are currently 30 (40 if you include TW) map/mode combinations in the game, with even more maps being released later. This is obviously way too many to handle. The only way I see to combat that is to choose a few to make legal and ban all the rest, which I am very uncomfortable doing.
Agosta44
Inkling Fleet Admiral
There's really no reason to ban maps outside of the ones in Rainmaker (ones that you can win in 5 seconds ie blackbelly and flouder). Personally I just think that RM is a ****ty mode but whatever. SZ/TC is personal preference on what you don't like which is why the striking system works over a generalized ban.
Agosta44
Inkling Fleet Admiral
It's not 30 maps. It's 11 for each separate mode. After the meta develops and more information is apparent for the stronger teams it will take 5 seconds to decide on what you want to ban. Like I mentioned a few pages ago, give a hardcap for 60-90 seconds (maybe 2 minutes tops) for map bans. If they go over you either pick what you want or pick random.
WydrA
Inkling Commander
None of those maps have an issue like Saltspray does. North is completely closed off except for the single chokepoint with lots of containers to hide behind. It's a stalling haven/nightmare.
LinkLuigi
Inkster Jr.
Uhhh I don't know if everyone was satisfied with the Salty Splatoon Ruleset. I suggest creating a poll regarding that. BTW, did you notice that out of the 24 matches played, there was only three matches that were not clean sweeps?
jamesrcade
Senior Squid
Too much ban talk for my liking, it's still early days.
We could simply ban Saltspray RM from tournaments, as well as other maps. It's not like there's something saying we can't do that. People have been suggesting making a map pool. Great. The only issue is time. I think that making a map pool and saying "these 12-or-so gametypes will be used for our tournament" and then selecting 5 of those for the starter (implimenting the 1-2-1 ban style) and then goning with what IoS does seems like a decent idea.
Whatever. As long as we think of something temporary that sticks is good for now, and as we evolve, certain gametypes will be favorable for tournies to pick.
Whatever. As long as we think of something temporary that sticks is good for now, and as we evolve, certain gametypes will be favorable for tournies to pick.
I'm uncomfortable banning any maps at this point in time. I think it's a very unhealthy habit that we don't want to get into. There's nothing stopping any of the maps from being competitive (except perhaps stalling on SS RM, but we can just make that illegal. it's very easy to tell when a team is stalling and when they aren't), so we shouldn't get into the habit of banning any of them.
- Status