Ranked point system MUST change!

[jsilva]

I watched an S+ rank brush player stream last night, and S+ only lobbies definitely made a difference and I could tell he was having a lot more fun being able to take more aggressive flanks as he did not have to worry about carrying S rank players. The only issue I see is lobbies filling up in S+ lobbies on certain times.

It occurred to me after reading this part of your post that the new 'mono-matching' (as I'm calling it) might help more than I thought.

You said about S+ players carrying S players, but what about S+ players carrying other S+ players? I'm not sure that I'm S+ material but I did get up to S 98, and what if I had won that last match? I would have been a potentially undeserving S+ player.

With S+'s having to play S's up until now that probably reduced the skill level somewhat of the S+ bracket, so people (perhaps like me) might make their way up to S+ and hang around undeservingly since the bar is lower.

So ... the point ... mono-matching might ensure a better representation of a particular rank, making games overall more fair. I had previously only thought of it from the perspective of (hopefully) more balanced games.

 

[Award]

Last night I could definitely see an improvement where matches were a lot closer for most of the time and there was good back and forth retakes for zones on d'Alfonsino and Underpass. Splat zones usually is a big hit or miss on solo q, but last night went pretty well albeit still the same issue of teammates not inking the point enough to prevent timer penalty (literally our timer was at 1 and trying to cover zone with my splattershot pro and splat bomb...) and taking too long to recapture after a wipe or pushing in general.

Zones traditionally has been my favorite mode, but as a result of seeing the same problems you're describing, it's been on a decreasing favorability rating with me as of late. And I certainly feel you on SSPro....I love that shooter more than almost any other shooter (except sploosh & splash) but when your team leaves you to paint the zone with it's 20 shot ink tank...

I watched an S+ rank brush player stream last night, and S+ only lobbies definitely made a difference and I could tell he was having a lot more fun being able to take more aggressive flanks as he did not have to worry about carrying S rank players. The only issue I see is lobbies filling up in S+ lobbies on certain times.

#firstrankproblems :p

It occurred to me that with the matching within a rank it might help with the alt issue. The system will be less likely to match higher ranked players in order to compensate for the skill imbalance, so maybe the alts will rise faster and not pollute the rank they're in to the same degree?

Hmm...that would be nice if it were true. Though over the weekend I wasn't seeing S/S+ pulled in to compensate. The matchmaker thought it was balanced within rank despite it not being so in practice. And to be fair to the matchmaker, my teams were no slouches either, they held their own pretty well, even defending a lead for the majority of the match. But EVERY time the last minute and a half was a massive onslaught that could turn a 20-90 lead into a 20-2 defeat all at once. Either the other team was simply superior all by chance in a mix of 2 teams, or the other team was vastly superior and "pretending" to be equal for the first few minutes before really playing to full ability. I don't think the new system will help that much. But that could have been a coincidence and maybe they were still in that rank because in OTHER matches it was giving them S+'s to balance them out. Hopefully my dozens of defeats that day quickly advanced them on to S :p They they were all "A-" at the time, most of them, so it still will take a while to move them up. (Yeah, like those guys were B+ a few days prior. I seriously feel for the B's that are stuck facing these S+ alts just to get out of B. In the A's it's just kind of expected to have to play SOMEWHERE in that ballpark, but these guys are plaguing the B's before the A's.

It occurred to me after reading this part of your post that the new 'mono-matching' (as I'm calling it) might help more than I thought.

You said about S+ players carrying S players, but what about S+ players carrying other S+ players? I'm not sure that I'm S+ material but I did get up to S 98, and what if I had won that last match? I would have been a potentially undeserving S+ player.

With S+'s having to play S's up until now that probably reduced the skill level somewhat of the S+ bracket, so people (perhaps like me) might make their way up to S+ and hang around undeservingly since the bar is lower.

So ... the point ... mono-matching might ensure a better representation of a particular rank, making games overall more fair. I had previously only thought of it from the perspective of (hopefully) more balanced games.

It also carries the danger of thinning out lobbies, particularly S and S+ to the point that it becomes too small a player pool, as well though. That could lead to more having to "force" (or allow) players into ranks anyway. Or if it gets bad, reverting to the old system as the patch notes say the will do if wait times become too long. I can easily foresee S/S+ joining together again while the other, larger ranks are left on the new system. If S+ becomes even MORE selective of "only the best of the best" there won't be very many to play against!

But, yeah, I think the real point has always been to make the ladders more meaningful (I've said myself endlessly that the ladder is pretty pointless if it has different ranks playing each other. It's only a real ladder if it's same rank only.) Ideally/ the 3 C's, 3 B's, and 3 A's shouldn't really be playing each other either. Currently that means that an A- player will have a harder time getting to A due to facing A+'s than a true A+ player will have getting to S due to playing A-'s (unless you're me in which case those A-'s are really S & S+'s. :p)

 

[CknSalad]

It occurred to me after reading this part of your post that the new 'mono-matching' (as I'm calling it) might help more than I thought.

You said about S+ players carrying S players, but what about S+ players carrying other S+ players? I'm not sure that I'm S+ material but I did get up to S 98, and what if I had won that last match? I would have been a potentially undeserving S+ player.

With S+'s having to play S's up until now that probably reduced the skill level somewhat of the S+ bracket, so people (perhaps like me) might make their way up to S+ and hang around undeservingly since the bar is lower.

So ... the point ... mono-matching might ensure a better representation of a particular rank, making games overall more fair. I had previously only thought of it from the perspective of (hopefully) more balanced games.

I understand your concern, but I think it still will be all good as if you get into S+ rank, that means you are probably at least high S rank material overall since you been beating S ranked players for the most part. If you are not good enough, you will lose to S+ rank players and drop down, but at least you will learn faster how S+ rank players play since it will S+ only lobbies. If you are indeed 'good enough', you will get back up with relative ease to S+ and eventually be able to hold your S+ rank.

 

[Award]

I understand your concern, but I think it still will be all good as if you get into S+ rank, that means you are probably at least high S rank material overall since you been beating S ranked players for the most part. If you are not good enough, you will lose to S+ rank players and drop down, but at least you will learn faster how S+ rank players play since it will S+ only lobbies. If you are indeed 'good enough', you will get back up with relative ease to S+ and eventually be able to hold your S+ rank.

Also keep in mind S+ is a very special case as the peak like I said to Binx further up. Due to the point system, staying in S+ means you are not in fact S+ but that you are S++ - because you are required to consistently BEAT S+. You are pretty heavily penalized for losses, so if you play "as well as S+" you will not stay in S+. You must outperform them and consistently so. So S+ is made up of a small number of players who are so good they consistently beat almost all newcomers that challenge them, and a majority of players that fail to challenge them successfully and transit between S and S+. It's a very special case rank and is intended to be such. Those players are effectively bouncers :D

 

[jsilva]

Also keep in mind S+ is a very special case as the peak like I said to Binx further up. Due to the point system, staying in S+ means you are not in fact S+ but that you are S++ - because you are required to consistently BEAT S+. You are pretty heavily penalized for losses, so if you play "as well as S+" you will not stay in S+. You must outperform them and consistently so. So S+ is made up of a small number of players who are so good they consistently beat almost all newcomers that challenge them, and a majority of players that fail to challenge them successfully and transit between S and S+. It's a very special case rank and is intended to be such. Those players are effectively bouncers :D

I know you weren't replying to me, but all I meant is that I think the mono-matching may result in the skill of each rank being more reliable and distinct, using the matching of S and S+ together as an example of how it brings down the level of skill required to be an S+.

 

[Award]

I know you weren't replying to me, but all I meant is that I think the mono-matching may result in the skill of each rank being more reliable and distinct, using the matching of S and S+ together as an example of how it brings down the level of skill required to be an S+.

Yeah, that's the real purpose of it, moreso than individual matches being more balanced for the same reasons I described in another thread when I was discussing the merits of progressive versus floating ladders with birdiebee. That's now it NEEDED to be all along and they cut corners due to the low population.

Though it's really just less chaotic by a bit. Matching the ranks like they did certainly muddled things. Not only did being mixed with S's and A's make the level of skill for S+ lower in some cases, it also made it higher (by matching the S+ players with S's and A's against other S+'s) and worse, it made the requirements for S and A even higher by having to take on S+. I've seen S+'s in matches as low as A, and I wouldn't doubt they were in A- too. The S+ player gets to gain S+ points playing an easy round, the A's get crushed backward by playing someone 3 ranks above them.

So yes, it will be better to a degree. But it's not a free pass on some deeper problems the scoring system still has.

I still wonder how the CCC/BBB/AAA matching works out with completely random mixes of the trios. Apparently it's always worked that way. But it does make me wonder why they have a +/- at all. Why not just do C, B, A, S, S+? Because that's how it really works under the hood anyway.

 

[モモコ]

Yeah, that's the real purpose of it, moreso than individual matches being more balanced for the same reasons I described in another thread when I was discussing the merits of progressive versus floating ladders with birdiebee. That's now it NEEDED to be all along and they cut corners due to the low population.

Though it's really just less chaotic by a bit. Matching the ranks like they did certainly muddled things. Not only did being mixed with S's and A's make the level of skill for S+ lower in some cases, it also made it higher (by matching the S+ players with S's and A's against other S+'s) and worse, it made the requirements for S and A even higher by having to take on S+. I've seen S+'s in matches as low as A, and I wouldn't doubt they were in A- too. The S+ player gets to gain S+ points playing an easy round, the A's get crushed backward by playing someone 3 ranks above them.

So yes, it will be better to a degree. But it's not a free pass on some deeper problems the scoring system still has.

I still wonder how the CCC/BBB/AAA matching works out with completely random mixes of the trios. Apparently it's always worked that way. But it does make me wonder why they have a +/- at all. Why not just do C, B, A, S, S+? Because that's how it really works under the hood anyway.

because it means making the point gains/losses less in the other ranks if they do that, really there is no point other having smaller steping stones to make people they achieved something. If they kept the gain as is and simply made it C and B, there be WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy to many people in C that would not belong there.

 

[Nero86]

Now matchmaking is really delivering quality matches. S and S+ split seems like creating a new fauna, I'm really playing great matches until the very end.
For me it was something very rare on old matchmaking system which looks like focusing on keeping players with 50% w/l ratio, a system that made matches centered on its own.
I normally had easy wins and easy loses, almost never a quality battle, since 2.3. Now splatoon's fixed!

 

[Award]

because it means making the point gains/losses less in the other ranks if they do that, really there is no point other having smaller steping stones to make people they achieved something. If they kept the gain as is and simply made it C and B, there be WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy to many people in C that would not belong there.

Good point! I forgot about the points weirdness in the C's (and B-). B and above stops that and it's quite literally all the same. Technically I'm not sure it was ever a GOOD idea to make it all the same after that since it then stops actually separating the ranks. But if they're going to keep same point totals in B through A+ (for whatever odd reason) it would have made sense to keep the C's separated that way and have C-, C, C+, B, A, S, S+. And make B- the cutoff on the disjointed points.

But even in C it matches C-, C, C+ together in lobbies, so despite the points shift (and C- passes almost everyone!) there's not much point to it there. Right now if you get from C+ to B- you were playing C-, C, C+ all along. And if it were just C, B, A - you'd be playing C-, C, and C+ in C just the same. I think a 300p pool would have been more interesting than a 100p pool if they have wins/losses as high as 12. 9 games can make an entire rank right now, and that means deranking waaay too fast in a losing streak, and possibly ranking up waay too fast in a winning streak. It would be more sensible seeing your points within a rank go up and down on a 300p scale to see your sense of progress in a rank than these huge leaps in a 100p scale (including the 30p gift and penalty when switching ranks. So technically in a streak there's only 70p per rank 6-7 games possibly. A better fix might have been just reducing the points. A win/loss is a flat 2p or something. 2p for win/loss 3 for ko. It transits people too fast. Which is probably part of the problems or the perceptions of them.

Now matchmaking is really delivering quality matches. S and S+ split seems like creating a new fauna, I'm really playing great matches until the very end.
For me it was something very rare on old matchmaking system which looks like focusing on keeping players with 50% w/l ratio, a system that made matches centered on its own.
I normally had easy wins and easy loses, almost never a quality battle, since 2.3. Now splatoon's fixed!

Neat! At least in S, that's great news! I still haven't played too much solo. I played a few more yesterday. Lost two won two. I THINK I gained a few points out of it due to a ko. In terms of the balance I'm not sure I can comment on the A's just yet. I'm not sure if the patch is what changed it or if it's the weird cycle. It went from all-A lobbies on Sunday playing like all S/S+ lobbies with losses due to being outplayed to yesterday being back more to "normal" where losses were due to teams that seemed incapable compared to perfectly normal opponents. I was playing eliter in TC and found in these rounds that the tower did NOT move. So I spent much of the match riding the tower instead of sniping (which meant of course our base kept getting flanked.) But if I wasn't on the tower, no one was on the tower. It would sit at 97p or so half the match and I'd be on constant defense otherwise. That sort of thing leads to me being reckless and charging into enemy ink head on like a splattershot....with an eliter. Bad habit.

This is the "old A" that I knew...where A-'s play like B+'s that just moved to the A's. Which is a WHOLE different meta than Sunday and the pro level presses and non-stop pressure. Which A is the real A? And how does 2.6 play into it? I still don't know. Maybe it will sort out soon! Or, maybe not much has changed and the cycle will repeat.

 

[モモコ]

Good point! I forgot about the points weirdness in the C's (and B-). B and above stops that and it's quite literally all the same. Technically I'm not sure it was ever a GOOD idea to make it all the same after that since it then stops actually separating the ranks. But if they're going to keep same point totals in B through A+ (for whatever odd reason) it would have made sense to keep the C's separated that way and have C-, C, C+, B, A, S, S+. And make B- the cutoff on the disjointed points.

But even in C it matches C-, C, C+ together in lobbies, so despite the points shift (and C- passes almost everyone!) there's not much point to it there. Right now if you get from C+ to B- you were playing C-, C, C+ all along. And if it were just C, B, A - you'd be playing C-, C, and C+ in C just the same. I think a 300p pool would have been more interesting than a 100p pool if they have wins/losses as high as 12. 9 games can make an entire rank right now, and that means deranking waaay too fast in a losing streak, and possibly ranking up waay too fast in a winning streak. It would be more sensible seeing your points within a rank go up and down on a 300p scale to see your sense of progress in a rank than these huge leaps in a 100p scale (including the 30p gift and penalty when switching ranks. So technically in a streak there's only 70p per rank 6-7 games possibly. A better fix might have been just reducing the points. A win/loss is a flat 2p or something. 2p for win/loss 3 for ko. It transits people too fast. Which is probably part of the problems or the perceptions of them.



Neat! At least in S, that's great news! I still haven't played too much solo. I played a few more yesterday. Lost two won two. I THINK I gained a few points out of it due to a ko. In terms of the balance I'm not sure I can comment on the A's just yet. I'm not sure if the patch is what changed it or if it's the weird cycle. It went from all-A lobbies on Sunday playing like all S/S+ lobbies with losses due to being outplayed to yesterday being back more to "normal" where losses were due to teams that seemed incapable compared to perfectly normal opponents. I was playing eliter in TC and found in these rounds that the tower did NOT move. So I spent much of the match riding the tower instead of sniping (which meant of course our base kept getting flanked.) But if I wasn't on the tower, no one was on the tower. It would sit at 97p or so half the match and I'd be on constant defense otherwise. That sort of thing leads to me being reckless and charging into enemy ink head on like a splattershot....with an eliter. Bad habit.

This is the "old A" that I knew...where A-'s play like B+'s that just moved to the A's. Which is a WHOLE different meta than Sunday and the pro level presses and non-stop pressure. Which A is the real A? And how does 2.6 play into it? I still don't know. Maybe it will sort out soon! Or, maybe not much has changed and the cycle will repeat.

Sorry i am really confused with all the 300p and 70 p stuff.

in c- you gain 20 and lose 10 unless there is some huge rank average difference, so it is only 5 wins, but that is ok like i said it is stepping stones to help people feel like they achieve something. On average from what I seen, all the c's are all the same, b- there is some gap, not much to b, b+ you see a gap, A- is a decent gap, a is not much different, A+ you get a gap again, then S should be a step up but so far lately, I see A+ and S blending more then it used to. Plus those are the grades you see in school so people are used to seeing them like that.

 

[Award]

Sorry i am really confused with all the 300p and 70 p stuff.

in c- you gain 20 and lose 10 unless there is some huge rank average difference, so it is only 5 wins, but that is ok like i said it is stepping stones to help people feel like they achieve something. On average from what I seen, all the c's are all the same, b- there is some gap, not much to b, b+ you see a gap, A- is a decent gap, a is not much different, A+ you get a gap again, then S should be a step up but so far lately, I see A+ and S blending more then it used to. Plus those are the grades you see in school so people are used to seeing them like that.

What I mean with the 300p and 70p stuff is that, since All the A's are matched together like one big rank, and since all the A's have the same point reward/penalty, it's really not 3 100 point rainks, it's more like a single 300 point rank (A-0 to A+100 is really A0 to A300.) What I mean by 70p is when you jump from B+ to A- you start with 30p. When you jump from A- to A you start with 30p (you hit 99 and they gave you the 30 points into the next rank. Similarly when you drop from A to A-, they remove 30p starting you at 70. But in a win streak (going from 30 to 99) or a lose streak (going from 70 to 0) it's only 70 ponits worth of wins/losses to change ranks. Or potentially less than 7 games between ranks. Meaning each rank is very small and that causes so much of the flux between ranks.

Honestly I don't see too much gap between B+ to A-. At least not previously. That might change now that B's WON'T be matched with A's, meaning B+ is also playing with B-. That alone should make for a monumental jump to A-. It might make the B's even nastier than before though. There really can't be any difference at all from B to B+, now (same lobbies, same point rewards/penalties) - and there can't actually be any difference from A- through A+ now since they play the same lobbies and have the same point rewards/penalties. All 3 are the exact same rank. In theory one might assume the A+'s have won more than the A-'s and that some A+'s are recently dropped S's while A-'s probably wont be as frequently. So in practice there may be some difference, however the A-'s and the A+'s will be playing the very same lobbies and therefore have the same level of difficulty in a match and the same rate of progression/regression.

You're right that A+ and S blends a lot. Though that will probably change now with 2.6 since A+ and S lobbies won't actually be the same lobbies. A+ difficulty MAY come down a little as a result. Or it might go up with the pinned down S's when they drop.

 

[モモコ]

What I mean with the 300p and 70p stuff is that, since All the A's are matched together like one big rank, and since all the A's have the same point reward/penalty, it's really not 3 100 point rainks, it's more like a single 300 point rank (A-0 to A+100 is really A0 to A300.) What I mean by 70p is when you jump from B+ to A- you start with 30p. When you jump from A- to A you start with 30p (you hit 99 and they gave you the 30 points into the next rank. Similarly when you drop from A to A-, they remove 30p starting you at 70. But in a win streak (going from 30 to 99) or a lose streak (going from 70 to 0) it's only 70 ponits worth of wins/losses to change ranks. Or potentially less than 7 games between ranks. Meaning each rank is very small and that causes so much of the flux between ranks.

Honestly I don't see too much gap between B+ to A-. At least not previously. That might change now that B's WON'T be matched with A's, meaning B+ is also playing with B-. That alone should make for a monumental jump to A-. It might make the B's even nastier than before though. There really can't be any difference at all from B to B+, now (same lobbies, same point rewards/penalties) - and there can't actually be any difference from A- through A+ now since they play the same lobbies and have the same point rewards/penalties. All 3 are the exact same rank. In theory one might assume the A+'s have won more than the A-'s and that some A+'s are recently dropped S's while A-'s probably wont be as frequently. So in practice there may be some difference, however the A-'s and the A+'s will be playing the very same lobbies and therefore have the same level of difficulty in a match and the same rate of progression/regression.

You're right that A+ and S blends a lot. Though that will probably change now with 2.6 since A+ and S lobbies won't actually be the same lobbies. A+ difficulty MAY come down a little as a result. Or it might go up with the pinned down S's when they drop.

Yeah I kinda do c- to X ranks every month or 2 just to see what I can carry (lately been doing it on blasters) Some A+ rank people would be VERY hard (like S or S+ acting chargers) while some A+ or A chargers leave me "did I really just get away with that?" I gauge them how much I carry and how easy it is, all Cs are pretty easy unless you find some kind of alt (carry wars are funny sometimes) in b's you start needing teammates a bit, and I also seen some fantastic teamwork out of some b's and a's (rare but they would outshine some of the junk I seen in S and S+ though, why in the ef can a S team lack the ability to claim zone in heights when I splatted 2 people at once with a kraken hit then split seconds later splatted the super jump with the kraken making it 3 v 1 think it was, the last splatted me on the other zone and that single person kept it neutral till the teammates got back and captured both zones again,shutout loss.) compere that to an A rank team on TC camp where a squiffer? (something with inkzuka and we had a squiffer) went left side solo, 2 down the middle and me on tower. That is pretty much all I did.. was ride the tower... I mean I tried to jump off and help splat someone when it looked bad but they splatted them before I landed the jump and just got back on tower. Then when it started to raise up, I thought I was going to be amused for sure by this one player ( I was using krak on roller so I had limited options for range) and the person that was protecting me from the left took out inkzuka and splatted the person. I was like no way, that kind of timing is better then a lot of stuff I seen in S ranks. But ya some B's and as have impressed me here and there. Also for the B+ and A- gap, A- is where I am able to stop carrying. There been a few times I nearly had 100% win rate up to a- (one tc loss on c- only for best record) But that kind of win rate stops at A- and my progress gets slower in a and even slower in A+

 

[Award]

Yeah I kinda do c- to X ranks every month or 2 just to see what I can carry (lately been doing it on blasters) Some A+ rank people would be VERY hard (like S or S+ acting chargers) while some A+ or A chargers leave me "did I really just get away with that?" I gauge them how much I carry and how easy it is, all Cs are pretty easy unless you find some kind of alt (carry wars are funny sometimes) in b's you start needing teammates a bit, and I also seen some fantastic teamwork out of some b's and a's (rare but they would outshine some of the junk I seen in S and S+ though, why in the ef can a S team lack the ability to claim zone in heights when I splatted 2 people at once with a kraken hit then split seconds later splatted the super jump with the kraken making it 3 v 1 think it was, the last splatted me on the other zone and that single person kept it neutral till the teammates got back and captured both zones again,shutout loss.) compere that to an A rank team on TC camp where a squiffer? (something with inkzuka and we had a squiffer) went left side solo, 2 down the middle and me on tower. That is pretty much all I did.. was ride the tower... I mean I tried to jump off and help splat someone when it looked bad but they splatted them before I landed the jump and just got back on tower. Then when it started to raise up, I thought I was going to be amused for sure by this one player ( I was using krak on roller so I had limited options for range) and the person that was protecting me from the left took out inkzuka and splatted the person. I was like no way, that kind of timing is better then a lot of stuff I seen in S ranks. But ya some B's and as have impressed me here and there. Also for the B+ and A- gap, A- is where I am able to stop carrying. There been a few times I nearly had 100% win rate up to a- (one tc loss on c- only for best record) But that kind of win rate stops at A- and my progress gets slower in a and even slower in A+

LOL sounds all so familiar. One thing I find as a charger caught in the A's is that after you've been on teams that can't push for a while, you start to become reckless and take on the aggro role that all the mid-range shooters on the team don't seem to want. As a result, you become a very bad sniper for the rest of that play session and let people get away with anything :p yesterday I found myself rushing people for CQC, C-Liter vs TTK. Stupid...but the habit just happens after you're the one having to go rambo to move the darned tower enough matches :)

Interesting that the win rate would slow through the A's. I wonder why that would be, and if that will change your next time through now that they won't be sticking S/S+ in the A lobbies (and B+ in the A lobbies)?

The majority of (clearly alts) devastators I was seeing Sunday seemed to be mostly A- and a few A's. I seldom see A+'s no matter which A I'm in. One or two in the lobby. The bulk seem to be A-. Of all different skills. Maybe that, too will sort out over a few weeks.

 

[jsilva]

One thing I find as a charger caught in the A's is that after you've been on teams that can't push for a while, you start to become reckless and take on the aggro role that all the mid-range shooters on the team don't seem to want.

Well, I for one love it when a sniper on my team takes on an aggressive role! I will always remember this one elitre I played with when I deranked to A+ and was on my last game back to S. This sniper was an A (absolutely an alt) and he was so incredibly aggressive, even up in the enemy upper area in Bluefin Depot taking people out 1v1 and got a K/D something like 25/4. He was fabulous.

 

[Award]

Well, I for one love it when a sniper on my team takes on an aggressive role! I will always remember this one elitre I played with when I deranked to A+ and was on my last game back to S. This sniper was an A (absolutely an alt) and he was so incredibly aggressive, even up in the enemy upper area in Bluefin Depot taking people out 1v1 and got a K/D something like 25/4. He was fabulous.

LOL, yeah, the aggressive sniper role is part of the magic of the S+ sniping aces. I learned that a while back in TW when I'd be put on teams with this second eliter who was an S+ and pretty much cleared that map solo and watched how aggressive and entirely offensive he was with an eliter. I watched a few more S+ eliters over various TW matches, a lot of Japanese eliters, one time one was on the other team in depot, like you described, and sniping us from the perch in our own base! I figured out that was the trick to using it right. I've been much more aggressive and on the ground ever since! The trick is you HAVE to be good at Bamboozler-like CQC with it which is actually one of the most fun things to do with it, IMO and a big reason I switched to Custom, BUT, it's still not an excuse to go run aggro deep into enemy ink trying to shoot the campers head-on and clear a path. That's just stupid....but a habit that's easy to get into when you play rounds with teams that make you play the role of midrange shooter that they inexplicably are unwilling to play (with their midrange shooter.)

The most fun I've ever had in the game is still those TW rounds where I go 1v1 with a Japanese S+ eliter. They have all too much fun with it, and trading Booyahs to match. There seems to be this "eliters club" among Japanese players and playing a rivalry with one for a few rounds always feels like being in the club. :D In ranked there's never time to have fun with those 1v1 situations though. :(

 

[モモコ]

Interesting that the win rate would slow through the A's. I wonder why that would be, and if that will change your next time through now that they won't be sticking S/S+ in the A lobbies (and B+ in the A lobbies)?

welp, you can see for your self here:

and here:

XD

oh opps it would help to show the ones past that but i never put one together cuz it would just be too long. But I think lag effects me too much after A- and I just haven't figured out how to deal with it. I seen someone do new account to S+ in 11 hours XD

 

[Award]

welp, you can see for your self here:

and here:

XD

oh opps it would help to show the ones past that but i never put one together cuz it would just be too long. But I think lag effects me too much after A- and I just haven't figured out how to deal with it. I seen someone do new account to S+ in 11 hours XD

Interesting viewing, and it makes sense that the A's in general would start posing an issue. I can relate to lag, especially when maining rollers. My eliter's my "main main" but if you notice most of my other weapons are close range. Formerly carbon roller, splat roller, now brush & dynamo. I might add Sploosh in there somewhere. But lag presents serious problems to any close/melee weapon and to a degree there's no way to deal with it.

But I have to say the best takaway from the portions of the videos I watched was just the fun roller play style :) It makes me want to take the splat roller out again! Overall I play with a number of similar tactics, and it was interesting seeing you play it on Hammerhead Zones since that's one map I was never able to figure out with it, but you're also a lot more "spastic" with it than me in a number of ways (and I favor splat over krak-on for the wail.) But it nevertheless it's an interesting and fun roller style to watch!

Also, I couldn't help but notice in the newer video you're a member of [C-] (or were?) jsilva and I played a squad match together against a duo from [C-] a few weeks ago. It was brutal as expected, and we lost, as expected, but it was one of the more memorable matches we've played to be sure :D I don't remember who, unfortunately. :( I remember taking note of the carbon player since I've played a lot of carbon myself and didn't even know most of the tactics I was seeing played existed, and my big memory of it was their uncanny ability to miss every single splat bomb rush I could throw! :p

 

[モモコ]

Also, I couldn't help but notice in the newer video you're a member of [C-] (or were?) jsilva and I played a squad match together against a duo from [C-] a few weeks ago. It was brutal as expected, and we lost, as expected, but it was one of the more memorable matches we've played to be sure :D I don't remember who, unfortunately. :( I remember taking note of the carbon player since I've played a lot of carbon myself and didn't even know most of the tactics I was seeing played existed, and my big memory of it was their uncanny ability to miss every single splat bomb rush I could throw! :p

yes i left, currently trying to find a clan, and ty for the comments, lol XD you might like this then:

only +13 as b- /salt

 

[Award]

yes i left, currently trying to find a clan, and ty for the comments, lol XD you might like this then:

only +13 as b- /salt

LOL, And SOME people never believe me when I tell them "that roller was clearly an S+ alt!" :p I don't want to hear "maybe they were just having a good day" from them ever again :D

I feel bad for that poor 0/4 S+ eliter though. :(

I'm guessing you were running a LOT of ink saver main? I barely ever saw you swim to recover ink and yet you never seem to run out!

Otherwise it's heartening to see that your general approach and strategies with it aren't very different from mine. I never saw anything in there that made me think "oh I never thought of doing that!" it's really all in just the speed and precision of execution that sets it well above. The only major difference is you're more aggressive. Where I'd be more likely to hold back and defend, you charge straight at the opponents. Sploosh is the only weapon I tend to play THAT offensively. Though this gives me interesting insight that I'm doing sploosh right! ;)

 

[モモコ]

@Award
no that is just the squidgirl set with random abilities, pretty sure it is the same abilities as the other 2 vids, also it is shown at the end what they are.

keep in mind using special refills you and a lot of times i may fling once or twice, squid to move then repeat, it is not much but that small amounts of refilling is helpful