Is The Aerospray Viable In Ranked Battles?

[Kaliafornia]

And that's why we have a crap meta where there's a few viable weapons, and the others are junk, hopefully this will change a bit with 2.20, but that way of thinking is ruining the meta, you must play what you like, not what you think is god tier because other players say, what happened on Inkstorm? Omohide(Memories) won playing what they like, not what meta said, meta in Japan before 2.20 was
"S+ (nearly necessary for a team)
Tentatek Splattershot/Octoshot Replica
.96 Gal Deco
E-liter 3K and variants

S
.52 Gal
Krak-On Splat Roller
Blaster Custom

A (occasionally viable)
Luna Blaster
Splattershot Jr.
Dynamo Roller

and clearly, Inkzooka, Kraken, and Splash Wall are the essential factors of competitive matches."

On most matches BS used 3K, .96, .52 and the octoshot, three S+ tier and one S tier.
While MM used Luna blaster, Range Blaster, Dynamo and a 3K, we'll say Range Blaster is A tier for now, so we have three A tier and one S+ tier.

What is remarkable is that the one with the Luna Blaster is usually the center of the game, because of his style, really aggressive and he moves a lot, if you watch the videos of the grand final you will see that Omohide has a more stable game, and they had the win in their hands since the begin, I think because they use the weapons they like and then make strategies to make that setup work, indeed they have some S+ weapons like walls and the inkzooka, but they prove that question here is how you master the weapon, more than what weapon you use, that's why I say it's viable, if a player likes that weapon and want to use it on tournaments and rankeds he can do it, just because it doesn't appear on S and S+ tier weapon list automatically you have to discard that weapon.
The whole inkstorm shown that Japanese teams has one or two weapons per player and they usually play with the one they like more, no matter map, mode and opponent setup, they build strategies with the setup they have, not based on the tier list like an unbreakable rule.
Also you said we're not talking about the player, but I think that our target is to build ourselves as good players, do you think it really matters what weapons we use if we don't build ourselves as good players? I think the viability of any weapon rely directly to the players. As musician is like If I think I'll be an awesome musician because I invest more money on instruments and setup than time on mastering the skills needed.

If people like that weapon, they just have to take it, they have the prove that S+ 99 is possible with that weapon if you train enough.
Also I'd like to say as a Dual Squelcher main, when I got to S and didn't saw any of them I nearly dropped the weapon, I nearly took the .96 gal, and finally I dropped the idea because until that point I didn't have to change the weapon to be the top layers a lot of times, to deal with splash walls, or inkzookas and dynamos, and then after few weeks other Dual Squelcher on S+ showed in my games, and got top player, proving is the skill of the player that matters.

Dude. You do not understand what weapon viability in meta is, clearly. Again lets simplify: Weapon viability in meta, does not consider individual's skill, but the success of the weapon relative to other weapons in its class in terms of effort vs payout taking into consideration the weapons main, sub, and special offensive/defensive capabilities.

Saying a weapon is not viable in the meta isn't saying people cannot have success with unpopular or non meta weapons, it's saying that given the playstyle, loadouts, strategies currently in trend do lend towards certain weapons being easier to have success with when up-against similarly skilled individuals. No one bans any weapon from being used in tourneys. If you want to use an e-liter like a sploosh, go for it. In this respect viability means practicality. All weapons serve roles in teams, and if you have to alter the function of your role because of the limitations of your weapon against its counterparts that makes it nonviable and impractical to use.

Also just for the record. The consensus isn't that omohide won because they're "playing what they like, not what meta said." It's that they won because they were much more coordinated, used good concise comms and did not go on tilt under pressure." All the weapons that you listed aren't all S+ tier but all of them are popular in tourneys and in different teams strategies. There is no aerospray, inkbrush, rapid blaster in that list.

 

[Vintagestep]

I can appreciate that some players are best with "bad" weapons just due to their natural playstyle. This kind of thing happens in smash bros too (see aMSa). However that doesn't mean your weapon choice won't cause you problems, because ultimately your weapon is bad and will be beaten out by better weapons, assuming all other things are equal.

Also Omohide isn't a great example; luna blaster, e-liter and dynamo were totally top-tier abusive weapons at the time of the tournament, and even the range blaster is very strong. Also, normally Yugo uses a .52 gal which is also a top-tier.

Of course if you just want to S+ or whatever you can do it with basically any weapon you're competent with. It's only when you get into tournaments that you'll realize why something like the inkbrush just doesn't cut it. You can't consistently outplay the best players in the world.

well, there's also Squid Box with their sloshers and that stuff, they did very well in the tournament, but I ended using Omohide as they won, yes, their weapons are top tier, but BS used weapons that were "better" at that moment, but still, nothing below A+ tier if we follow that Japanese tier list.

But I think the inkbrush at that moment was viable, I met S+ squads with my fellows and our inkbrush did amazing, they need a lot of "ink support" but once you gave them that it pays off, that's why I believe that view this topic by tier list is not a priority on squads or ranked, indeed, you can't do a squad of 4 inkbrushes, but if you have one and you think how make the game viable with it you can make it work, the guy with the inkbrush is now S+ and there's a lot of variety of weapons right now, he saw a lot of underrated weapons doing extremely fine, like the rapid blaster, him with the inkbrush, sloshers, splattershots pro...
Any weapon has weak points and strong points, you just need to keep them in mind and see what you can improve and what you are doing bad, since I got to lvl 16 I used the same weapon, and had troubles with all the other weapons because mine is not strong, sure, it has range, but is not strong, and I haven't deranked to A+ in more than a month, just can't pass S 70 barrier right now, walls, 3K and dynamos were a big problem but lately I was feeling I can deal with them easily, and I did, just focused more on Squads were I needed to learn communication, question is, even with more troubles than other weapons you can do excellent, Walls OP>trick them to fall on the splat bombs, .96 Gal stronger than you> keep fire rate in mind, flank it and show what good map control can do, 3K too much range>If you don't eat the splat bomb, I'll use the time you avoid it to get close...

You can do with any weapon.

Dude. You do not understand what weapon viability in meta is, clearly. Again lets simplify: Weapon viability in meta, does not consider individual's skill, but the success of the weapon relative to other weapons in its class in terms of effort vs payout taking into consideration the weapons main, sub, and special offensive/defensive capabilities.

Saying a weapon is not viable in the meta isn't saying people cannot have success with unpopular or non meta weapons, it's saying that given the playstyle, loadouts, strategies currently in trend do lend towards certain weapons being easier to have success with when up-against similarly skilled individuals. No one bans any weapon from being used in tourneys. If you want to use an e-liter like a sploosh, go for it. In this respect viability means practicality. All weapons serve roles in teams, and if you have to alter the function of your role because of the limitations of your weapon against its counterparts that makes it nonviable and impractical to use.

Also just for the record. The consensus isn't that omohide won because they're "playing what they like, not what meta said." It's that they won because they were much more coordinated, used good concise comms and did not go on tilt under pressure." All the weapons that you listed aren't all S+ tier but all of them are popular in tourneys and in different teams strategies. There is no aerospray, inkbrush, rapid blaster in that list.

Well ,they used very strong weapons, I said that, also I can't deny what you said, they had better comm and took better the pressure.
But still, I don't think the low tier weapons can't make it, sure, is better to take the octobrush, the N-zap, and the Ultra rather than the weapons you listed, but if you're not flexible you can't make it, what's that "you have to alter the role because of the limitations of your weapon"? On Squad as long as we're coordinated we can fill a lot of roles, I usually take the front line, but also make a lot of support, I don't hesitate to take the tower or defend zone, when I have a free seconds I ink the place to have map control, most weapons can fill these roles more or less fine, the thing is know when and how.

Still feel is more natural to master what you like more than what the trend say, trend is something cool to break, if there's people thinking to take easy way rather than what they like because is unpractical go for it, I respect that, but still, people falling for that is not fresh and is what makes competitive boring, is more interesting pursue success with what you like and not with what the trend says.

 

[MrL1193]

Any weapon has weak points and strong points, you just need to keep them in mind and see what you can improve and what you are doing bad, since I got to lvl 16 I used the same weapon, and had troubles with all the other weapons because mine is not strong, sure, it has range, but is not strong, and I haven't deranked to A+ in more than a month, just can't pass S 70 barrier right now, walls, 3K and dynamos were a big problem but lately I was feeling I can deal with them easily, and I did, just focused more on Squads were I needed to learn communication, question is, even with more troubles than other weapons you can do excellent, Walls OP>trick them to fall on the splat bombs, .96 Gal stronger than you> keep fire rate in mind, flank it and show what good map control can do, 3K too much range>If you don't eat the splat bomb, I'll use the time you avoid it to get close...

If you are willing to go to such lengths to find tactics to counter Splash Walls, E-Liters, and such, then why would you not consider the possibility of simply using a different weapon? That is also a valid way to change your strategy and gain an advantage over your opponents, is it not?

You can do with any weapon.

That was never the point of contention. The real question is: How much effort is required to succeed with a given weapon in the environment of a typical competitive match? The answer to that question is not going to be the same for every weapon, and that is what separates them into different tiers of viability.

Still feel is more natural to master what you like more than what the trend say, trend is something cool to break, if there's people thinking to take easy way rather than what they like because is unpractical go for it, I respect that, but still, people falling for that is not fresh and is what makes competitive boring, is more interesting pursue success with what you like and not with what the trend says.

You seem to be mixing in subjective ideas of what is "fun" or "boring" in judging people's weapon choices. Opinions of that type are going to vary from person to person, and they have nothing to do with competitive viability anyway.

 

[Kaliafornia]

Still feel is more natural to master what you like more than what the trend say, trend is something cool to break, if there's people thinking to take easy way rather than what they like because is unpractical go for it, I respect that, but still, people falling for that is not fresh and is what makes competitive boring, is more interesting pursue success with what you like and not with what the trend says.

That's perfectly fine as pushing the boundaries and experimentation is how meta evolves and changes. No one is saying you aren't allowed to play what you want and use it accordingly.I don't understand why you are arguing against meta and viability when it has nothing to do with individual skills with the weapon nor what an individual likes to play. Saying something isn't viable doesn't mean it wont ever see success. In competition its not about taking "the easy way out" its about leveling the playing field so you have the greatest chance of winning. You aren't leveled if you weapon puts you at a disadvantage the majority of the time.

 

[Lucarii]

I've used the ink mine variant before in TC and it does a decent job. On Saltspray I used it to kill the whole enemy team as they rushed in for the tower to give my teammates an advantage, before placing ink mines to secure the tower. It's really about how you use it. I mean if you're playing competitively with a full team of pros over voice chat, then yeah I'd say it's a bad pick since other stuff is more optimal, but in solo I've seen plenty of good aeros.

Another thing to consider about it is if you can get close enough, it kills super fast, which is an awesome ability to have depending on the map and situation. But that's just me, weapon choice is often up to preference.

 

[Vintagestep]

If you are willing to go to such lengths to find tactics to counter Splash Walls, E-Liters, and such, then why would you not consider the possibility of simply using a different weapon? That is also a valid way to change your strategy and gain an advantage over your opponents, is it not?


That was never the point of contention. The real question is: How much effort is required to succeed with a given weapon in the environment of a typical competitive match? The answer to that question is not going to be the same for every weapon, and that is what separates them into different tiers of viability.


You seem to be mixing in subjective ideas of what is "fun" or "boring" in judging people's weapon choices. Opinions of that type are going to vary from person to person, and they have nothing to do with competitive viability anyway.

-I tried other weapons, in fact I tried all, not to the point to master it, but at least I tried to do good with all of them, had troubles with the rapid blaster tho. Also I'm training with other two weapons properly. I had a moment when I nearly changed to the .96 gal due to damage, and the same range, but It felt odd, and knowing I'd be just another .96 gal guy made me retake my weapon "I'll have my own play style and people will notice it". It's ok to switch if you're willing to use the new weapon like the old one, with love and learning your pro and cons against every other weapon or in situations of 2,3 and 4 vs you, even if you have to train a lot, mastering tactics against other weapons and sub weapons is really interesting, after all we're playing sets, so the sub weapon and the special must have a lot of consideration when you take them. I'll brag bit and say people on my national circuit recognized my care for the sub weapon as one of my footprints. Also I ended knowing more of my own weapon by learning others, the way to take other weapons make me consider to increase the ways I play with my main and it pays off, and I bet there's still stuff to discover.

Well, there's it, if you put enough effort you can make a weapon viable, so even if the weapon is crap tier, is still viable, that was the main question here.
Sure, I'm saying some subjective stuff, but at the end the point was proved.

That's perfectly fine as pushing the boundaries and experimentation is how meta evolves and changes. No one is saying you aren't allowed to play what you want and use it accordingly.I don't understand why you are arguing against meta and viability when it has nothing to do with individual skills with the weapon nor what an individual likes to play. Saying something isn't viable doesn't mean it wont ever see success. In competition its not about taking "the easy way out" its about leveling the playing field so you have the greatest chance of winning. You aren't leveled if you weapon puts you at a disadvantage the majority of the time.

Here's very similar, but I'll answer as well, at first you were saying that the weapon in question isn't viable it just was the inkzooka and the player in question, meaning it won't have success if you end the quote like that, that's why I'm against people considering the meta too much, the work with any weapon is be concerned when you have the disadvantage, why and how you can reverse that, probably with top tier weapons is easier, but you will have to take the same process anyway, you have to learn how the other weapons works on a lot of conditions, and then take that information to build your approach knowing how your weapon[set] works, so even if you take a top tier weapon you're not guaranteed to have success if you're not willing to put effort, if you want to put more because you like a weapon is up to you, but that doesn't mean that weapon is not viable for rankeds and tournaments, you just have to be really sure on how approach it on combat and roles, multiple roles, because conditions changes the whole time, and you're likely to fill the space of your team mates when they're down some times.

 

[Dragonuto]

Personally I believe in the right hands the Aerospray can be great in Splatzones. But other than that I think it doesn't have that many uses outside of Turf war, the weapons strengths lie in it's ability to quickly cover lots of ground which makes it useful in splatzones for taking back zones quick. This is also the reason it's good in turf. I've dabbled with it in ranked but I can't really say that it's all that useful as a weapon in game modes with objectives which you have to protect and prevent others from getting/taking/riding.

 

[Remillo]

So, let's see, Pros and Cons of the Aerospray Family in Competitive play

Pros:

• High rate of fire covers splat zones and breaks the RM shield easily
• Seekers on the MG can create a path on straight stages and occasionally lock on to a RM Carrier
• Ink Mines on the RG can catch people taking the tower off guard
• If ambushing, can splatter opponents very quickly

Cons:

• Very Short range makes fair fights and support difficult
• Must be very close to even consider splatting an opponent
• Requires a much more stealth-based approach to combat and approaching zones, which just aren't viable on certain maps
• Gets outclassed by pretty much everything else in terms of range and damage

Honestly, if you're wanting to use the Aerospray, I'd rather just use the Jr. for the Bubbler and increased damage, or an N'ZAP for the crazy strafe speed. The Aerospray just needs so much support and the correct map choice to work well. You need multiple ways to stealthily get to the zone which just doesn't exist on most maps. Off the top of my head, Saltspray Rig (for the multiple entries into the zone area), Flounder Heights (If you can get the ink trails up to the perches above the zones) and Blackbelly Skatepark (Just because of proximity of the zones) seem like the best maps for them based on that, and in each of those stages, I'd prefer to use something else.

If you wanna use it, go for it. Just don't complain if you get outclassed in firefights. For the rest of us, we prefer something else.

 

[SupaTim]

While I like the aerosprays, and I still have the most turf inked with the RG, I wouldn't take them into Ranked or competitive Splatoon. Their main purpose seems to be covering turf, and they are arguably the best at covering every inch of turf you point them at. And while map control is vital in ranked, the kits of the aerosprays hold them back.

In the same class (short range, high rate of fire, high ink coverage) you have the Jr, the o-Matics, and the NZaps. You can get everything but the subs from those weapons all with better upsides. All of these weapons cover turf as well or just slightly less well than the aerosprays, but they can more easily splat people or have more utility out of their kits.

You want the ability to cover turf quickly and inkzooka? Splash-Neo.
You want the ability to cover turf quickly and inkstrike? Nzap 89.
You want the ability to cover turf quickly and ambush? Sploosh.
You want the ability to cover turf quickly and zone (arguably what the seeker offers)? Splash.
You want the ability to cover turf quickly and fill a support role? Jrs and NZap 85.

So, if all you want to do is cover turf for map control and hopefully splat a few people here and there, you still have better options than the aerosprays. They are fun for getting really high points in TW, but it seems to me that other weapons fill the same role and do it better in ranked/competitive.

One possible exception though: I think the MG could really be effective in Arowana Mall. The kit seems solid for that map: seekers can take people off guard in the zone and the 'zooka can take out snipers on the perch. Perhaps the Splash-Neo fills the same roll by spamming burst bombs into the zone though...

 

[Deleted Member]

You want the ability to cover turf quickly and inkstrike? Nzap 89.

Gold Dynamo

You want the ability to cover turf quickly and fill a support role? Jrs and NZap 85.

Dynamo

 

[SupaTim]

Gold Dynamo


Dynamo

Sure, but those aren't in the same weapon class, which kinda defeats the point I was trying to make...

 

[Deleted Member]

Sure, but those aren't in the same weapon class, which kinda defeats the point I was trying to make...

Oh

True

 

[Water Inkling]

Imo the aerospray MG is worse than the RG in TW.

However, ranked with the seeker and Inkzooka giving range to the weapon its viable but not your best options as you'll get countered by Defense up and 96 gal builds which are very common now unless u run speed up to confuse people. With the short range and low damage (even with the fire rate) it will take a lot of surprise attacks or stalling to benefit ur team

 

[Gks1]

I think that is so difficult use this weapon in ranked mode because we have other weapon that can make better that the Aerospray in this mode but no is impossible use it.

 

[Water Inkling]

I think that is so difficult use this weapon in ranked mode because we have other weapon that can make better that the Aerospray in this mode but no is impossible use it.

Basically yes but it's better than RG in ranked tho

 

[Super Lucario Sunshine]

I'm just going to preface this with IN MY OPINION!
RG: The only good thing about it in ranked over MG is the ability to take a zone in a matter of seconds, but its sub and special are horrible for it's sub-par range, so lots of fights end in you getting splatted. you'd need to sneak up on someone to splat them, even good positioning doesn't matter if your opponent just sits back and kills you
MG: The seeker and Inkzooka nicely compliment its pros and cons. SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE RG! Very good.

 

[Water Inkling]

I'm just going to preface this with IN MY OPINION!
RG: The only good thing about it in ranked over MG is the ability to take a zone in a matter of seconds, but its sub and special are horrible for it's sub-par range, so lots of fights end in you getting splatted. you'd need to sneak up on someone to splat them, even good positioning doesn't matter if your opponent just sits back and kills you
MG: The seeker and Inkzooka nicely compliment its pros and cons. SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE RG! Very good.

This is very tru but the weapons overall viability is out ranked still by weapons such as the tentatek which had a similar load out but is more suited to ranked, but nice references thi

 

[Super Lucario Sunshine]

This is very tru but the weapons overall viability is out ranked still by weapons such as the tentatek which had a similar load out but is more suited to ranked, but nice references thi

Think of it as a mid tier in a fighting game, there may be things that do what it does even better, but it still does what it does well

 

[Water Inkling]

Think of it as a mid tier in a fighting game, there may be things that do what it does even better, but it still does what it does well

Like others on here have said, it's the viability that were looking at here. It's a lot harder to get the needed kills to stall out the team which is one of the aerosprays key points. Also with its low range and damage you have to get in quite close to the enemy to kill them to. Seekers aren't as reliable since there are people who have the needs timing that can just jump over it. Also with the recent Inkzooka nerf it's even more annoying when having to tune ur shows a lot more frequently than just shooting away at ur hearts content.

 

[Super Lucario Sunshine]

Like others on here have said, it's the viability that were looking at here. It's a lot harder to get the needed kills to stall out the team which is one of the aerosprays key points. Also with its low range and damage you have to get in quite close to the enemy to kill them to. Seekers aren't as reliable since there are people who have the needs timing that can just jump over it. Also with the recent Inkzooka nerf it's even more annoying when having to tune ur shows a lot more frequently than just shooting away at ur hearts content.

although, you can use the seeker to approach your opponent instead of using it solely offensively.