Squidboards Ranking System Proposal

[Draayder]

I agree with several others that it looks like there's too many tiers right now, personal preference but I'd also like some different names for the tiers so it doesn't seem so directly copied from LoL and the like.

A question regarding team rules, how are you going to handle people who share a console? My bf and I do, would we count as two people for the team count or just one? If we count as two can we be on different teams? What happens if those teams fight?

For the elo reset for inactivity, have you considered some form of decay instead? That way if life gets in the way a team isn't suddenly back to 0 and the higher you were the longer you'd have before completely resetting.

 

[StarForce]

I agree with several others that it looks like there's too many tiers right now, personal preference but I'd also like some different names for the tiers so it doesn't seem so directly copied from LoL and the like.

A question regarding team rules, how are you going to handle people who share a console? My bf and I do, would we count as two people for the team count or just one? If we count as two can we be on different teams? What happens if those teams fight?

For the elo reset for inactivity, have you considered some form of decay instead? That way if life gets in the way a team isn't suddenly back to 0 and the higher you were the longer you'd have before completely resetting.

That's a good question. I'm part of the 15 members at SCO and Flying and Aweshucks are the ones authorized to make a clear statement but I'd like to throw my two cents.

For starters if you both are in different teams on same console well it can't be helped. One of you will not battle. Enemies cannot share screens lol. But if you share the console and the team you (to my understanding) will be treated as two people of course. Makes the most sense. I don't see a problem there. In that event the ranking system won't have a problem with you both since the game itself won't let you play on different teams at the same time. You can ask your captains to substitute one of you if your teams clash. It's not a problem for us just the game won't let you no game does actually share screen for ally and enemy in games with divided forces.

I see the concern for the ELO Decay. I don't know much about tourneys but I did suggest something to the group. I don't want to make a statement yet but I suggested something. Not yet expanded on. But it was an option.

For the tiers yes we came with them a bit fast. There's still time of course for a change but we'll need to revise the numbers first. We need first t listen to as many in the community as possible. Thank you for your concerns. This thread is watched by the group (SCO) so your concerns will be reviewed.

 

[Aweshucks]

I agree with several others that it looks like there's too many tiers right now, personal preference but I'd also like some different names for the tiers so it doesn't seem so directly copied from LoL and the like.

Alright yeah, I hear that people think there are too many tiers. We'll try to rethink that. Same with the names. We have those now because we weren't creative enough to come up with anything better, lol. If anyone has other suggestions, I'd love to hear them

A question regarding team rules, how are you going to handle people who share a console? My bf and I do, would we count as two people for the team count or just one? If we count as two can we be on different teams? What happens if those teams fight?

That's an interesting question. I see no reason you shouldn't be counted as two people. And you should be able to be on different teams. If those teams play eachother, obviously one of you wouldn't be able to play.

For the elo reset for inactivity, have you considered some form of decay instead? That way if life gets in the way a team isn't suddenly back to 0 and the higher you were the longer you'd have before completely resetting.

We did, but we thought it would be a bit too complicated on our end to calculate that, but we're willing to revisit it.

 

[Draayder]

I ask for the count because it seems like a disadvantage with the limit since we can't both compete in the same match. With a limit of 7 the team would effectively only have 6 players to choose from since I would be mutually exclusive with my bf as a choice.

Speaking of limits on team size, is it really all that necessary in the first place? Most of the arguments seem to be that smaller teams stop people from having to sit out and not play but if they want to play more wouldn't they just join/form a smaller team? It kind of seems like a self solving issue since there's no limit on number of teams. You also mentioned being worried about players being carried to higher elos than they should be at, so I think you guys really need to sit down and decide if this is supposed to be a personal measure or a team measure (I'd vote for team to keep things easier for you guys and stop people jumping teams just to go up elo).

Another question; are you restricting your tourneys to only the pre-registered teams that are already in the elo bracket? If not how are you going to handle outside teams?

 

[Aweshucks]

I do think a limit is necessary, but there was a lot of debate even within the group as to what that limit would be. Now that you guys have demonstrated that you aren't happy with the number we chose, we'll go back and reevaluate that.

As for tournaments, that was a pretty small part of what we're doing, and we haven't quite figured that out yet. It may end up that they have no bearing on the rankings anyway. People don't enter tournaments to increase their ranking. They enter tournaments to try and win the tournament

 

[doop]

I do think the team limit should be increased to 8 also even numbers just feel right

 

[Flying_Tortoise]

I'll tell you why I'd personally like to see 8 members on a team. Team practice matches. With 8 members you can organize team practice times and you won't have to pull somebody from somewhere else just to make it happen. I don't know if that matters to anybody else, but I think it will be important to have these team practice matches to have everyone on the same page and to get used to playing with each other. And if teams have to pull somebody else from one of the other teams on their squad or from elsewhere, I just think it will be inconvenient (and potentially not that beneficial to the one random person). I'll agree that having any more than that will probably not be necessary.

Other than that, I think everything sounds pretty good to me. I can see why some people might have issues with the one team limitation, but I think it's fine and it will work especially with the two week team roster change thing you guys have proposed.

Thanks to you guys for the hard work, and for sharing this with us. Looking forward to the future.

This definitely makes a lot of sense. At least allowing the people the option to go to 8 members sounds like something teams would be interested in. If they really see the 8th person being necessary I doubt we'll stop them by keeping the 7 person team rule. So most likely it'll change to 8. However do realize that should that 8 want to divide into 2 teams, most likely that 2nd team will be considered a brand new team with the elo according to one. This is because the new team has no history of playing against other teams.

For the elo reset for inactivity, have you considered some form of decay instead? That way if life gets in the way a team isn't suddenly back to 0 and the higher you were the longer you'd have before completely resetting.

We have definitely considered it, but we figured that one month was long enough period for inactivity that we believed it was fine. However we did say we wanted to hear your guys' input on it. We were trying to find the middle ground between too strict on inactivity and being too lax and allowing people to be inactive. About inputing a decay formula, the decay would still have to be a great deal, to make sure people at the top aren't taking .

Very looking to see a league or a ranked system to be honest, this game can be a lot competitive.

We definitely agree. Hopefully Splatoon can be as huge as any other competitive shooter, because it's definitely unique and amazing enough to deserve it.

 

[TheMH]

In Mario Kart we used the names of the items as league or tier names back then in the World Clan League (Star = 1, Lightning = 2 etc). How about we transfer this thinking to Splatoon and name the tiers after something in-game? Like weapons or brands for example.
We could also introduce tiers one by one after a certain time. For example leave out Platinum Tier for now and make Gold the max. Then introduce Platinum 6 months later when top teams established themselves.

Just mindstorming here a little.

A restriction of 7 players per team feels very limited to me right now. 8 sounds a lot better and feels way more healthy as you get a full 50% buffer. If a team doesn't want this buffer, because let's say they are super-active, they can still decide to register fewer players.

 

[Nintendome]

Just wondering: what would make your ranking system official exactly? What incentivises teams to stick with you as opposed to going to someone else (or just allowing Squidboards to develop its own ranking system)? The manner in which you are choosing to do this seems fairly standard.

Sorry if that sounds a bit rude. I just do not really understand the point of an external ranking system.

 

[grandpappy]

In Mario Kart we used the names of the items as league or tier names back then in the World Clan League (Star = 1, Lightning = 2 etc). How about we transfer this thinking to Splatoon and name the tiers after something in-game? Like weapons or brands for example.
We could also introduce tiers one by one after a certain time. For example leave out Platinum Tier for now and make Gold the max. Then introduce Platinum 6 months later when top teams established themselves.

What if we use different species of squids as the names for the tiers? :p

Also, this is just something I was thinking about. Are we planning on listing the squad that a certain team is affiliated with in the rankings? That way squads will have reasons to help and encourage other teams of 7 8 on their squad to do well. Squads can brag like "Check it out we have two "Platinum" ranked teams and a "Gold" ranked team in our squad. We're the bees knees man." That's just something that popped into my mind. Not really super important.

 

[Gunster25]

Even though most of these rules are fine for me I think that the banning because of inactivity is just outright ridiculous. If a team loses a member because they have a medical issue or something similar that entire team will then lose their ranking.

 

[[EJ]_Locke]

In my squad Ender’s Jeesh, I have multiple formations planned out and almost ready to go. In the future, however, I have to improvise some of them according to the people I meet, what weapons they roll with, and just how many people are calling to me. Right now no one has come to me, but that is fine (around August time traffic should pick up.) With eight players, although just one more player seems like hardly a good enough, I can have more weapon variety. What if the eighth person I pick happens to be an excellent Blaster? What if that was exactly what I was looking for to be prepared for all the formations I had planned out? This all seems like a huge WHAT IF, but sometimes, you just need room. Another exciting prospect of having eight players on a single squad is how tournaments will be able to progress. Let’s say that Apex was suddenly hosting Splatoon as a side event, but the clock was ticking, and you needed to make some progress if you wanted to stay in the tournament. Why not have two games going at once?

 

[[EJ]_Locke]

e? You could easily split your group of eight squids into two groups of four squids, and have them battle at the same time. No spectator likes to wait for hours just to see his/her favorite player or team get on stage. The human brain is incredibly complex and I have met a great number of people with a great number of different ideas. No matter what, another individual, beautiful human mind should always be welcome, both strategically and socially. Practice Skirmishes can make the entire squad as a whole gain much more experience. The skirmishes allow you to see weaknesses in a formation you are running, or a bad habit that a certain squad member has. Correction, correction, correction. It’s a whole lot less boring than basketball class! An idea I have for which is called “peeping” can gain an advantage from this. (Don’t worry; it isn’t what it sounds like.) If you can somehow have one of your teammates look at the map in real time as the battle is happening, you can be aware of a great number of things going

 

[[EJ]_Locke]

If you can somehow have one of your teammates look at the map in real time as the battle is happening, you can be aware of a great number of things going on in the battle. This includes, enemy ambushes, enemy formations, weak links needed strengthening on key points on the battlefield, and more. All of which can be done by looking at how the opponents ink’s growing and where. Conclusion? Although these are just my opinions, I think we should have 8 players per squad instead of seven.

 

[Hinichii.ez.™]

??? Learn to use the edit feature.

 

[[EJ]_Locke]

I can only put so much text in one post, excuse me.

??? Learn to use the edit feature.

 

[Hinichii.ez.™]

Spoiler: your posts

In my squad Ender’s Jeesh, I have multiple formations planned out and almost ready to go. In the future, however, I have to improvise some of them according to the people I meet, what weapons they roll with, and just how many people are calling to me. Right now no one has come to me, but that is fine (around August time traffic should pick up.) With eight players, although just one more player seems like hardly a good enough, I can have more weapon variety. What if the eighth person I pick happens to be an excellent Blaster? What if that was exactly what I was looking for to be prepared for all the formations I had planned out? This all seems like a huge WHAT IF, but sometimes, you just need room. Another exciting prospect of having eight players on a single squad is how tournaments will be able to progress. Let’s say that Apex was suddenly hosting Splatoon as a side event, but the clock was ticking, and you needed to make some progress if you wanted to stay in the tournament. Why not have two games going at once?

e? You could easily split your group of eight squids into two groups of four squids, and have them battle at the same time. No spectator likes to wait for hours just to see his/her favorite player or team get on stage. The human brain is incredibly complex and I have met a great number of people with a great number of different ideas. No matter what, another individual, beautiful human mind should always be welcome, both strategically and socially. Practice Skirmishes can make the entire squad as a whole gain much more experience. The skirmishes allow you to see weaknesses in a formation you are running, or a bad habit that a certain squad member has. Correction, correction, correction. It’s a whole lot less boring than basketball class! An idea I have for which is called “peeping” can gain an advantage from this. (Don’t worry; it isn’t what it sounds like.) If you can somehow have one of your teammates look at the map in real time as the battle is happening, you can be aware of a great number of things going

If you can somehow have one of your teammates look at the map in real time as the battle is happening, you can be aware of a great number of things going on in the battle. This includes, enemy ambushes, enemy formations, weak links needed strengthening on key points on the battlefield, and more. All of which can be done by looking at how the opponents ink’s growing and where. Conclusion? Although these are just my opinions, I think we should have 8 players per squad instead of seven.

Remember, when using the forum, to follow the rules. All of your text can fit into one post. Check around, and you see will posts with a lot more content then yours.

 

[Aweshucks]

In Mario Kart we used the names of the items as league or tier names back then in the World Clan League (Star = 1, Lightning = 2 etc). How about we transfer this thinking to Splatoon and name the tiers after something in-game? Like weapons or brands for example.
We could also introduce tiers one by one after a certain time. For example leave out Platinum Tier for now and make Gold the max. Then introduce Platinum 6 months later when top teams established themselves.

What if we use different species of squids as the names for the tiers?

Yeah, we talked about both of those, but we couldn't think of anything that would both look nice and be intuitive as to which tier is better and which is worse. If you have any suggestions, please share them!

A restriction of 7 players per team feels very limited to me right now. 8 sounds a lot better and feels way more healthy as you get a full 50% buffer. If a team doesn't want this buffer, because let's say they are super-active, they can still decide to register fewer players.

That seems to be the common opinion, so we'll look into it.

Just wondering: what would make your ranking system official exactly? What incentivises teams to stick with you as opposed to going to someone else (or just allowing Squidboards to develop its own ranking system)? The manner in which you are choosing to do this seems fairly standard.

Nothing right now, unfortunately. We are banking on people using us because we are a quality option. That said, we are trying to work with squidboards on having this be official, but we are still in the early stages of that conversation.

Also, this is just something I was thinking about. Are we planning on listing the squad that a certain team is affiliated with in the rankings? That way squads will have reasons to help and encourage other teams of 7 8 on their squad to do well. Squads can brag like "Check it out we have two "Platinum" ranked teams and a "Gold" ranked team in our squad. We're the bees knees man." That's just something that popped into my mind. Not really super important.

We hadn't thought of that, but I see no reason we couldn't do it. Thanks for the suggestion!

In my squad Ender’s Jeesh, I have multiple formations planned out and almost ready to go. In the future, however, I have to improvise some of them according to the people I meet, what weapons they roll with, and just how many people are calling to me. Right now no one has come to me, but that is fine (around August time traffic should pick up.) With eight players, although just one more player seems like hardly a good enough, I can have more weapon variety. What if the eighth person I pick happens to be an excellent Blaster? What if that was exactly what I was looking for to be prepared for all the formations I had planned out? This all seems like a huge WHAT IF, but sometimes, you just need room.

Makes sense

Another exciting prospect of having eight players on a single squad is how tournaments will be able to progress. Let’s say that Apex was suddenly hosting Splatoon as a side event, but the clock was ticking, and you needed to make some progress if you wanted to stay in the tournament. Why not have two games going at once?

Does not make sense. In any legitimate tournament ever, they would never allow this. I would guess that most tournaments will only allow teams of four anyway, or maybe one sub. This is because there is not the problem of players not being able to play, because if they are at the tournament, they are available to play. Not to mention having two separate teams compete as one is just silly.

Practice Skirmishes can make the entire squad as a whole gain much more experience. The skirmishes allow you to see weaknesses in a formation you are running, or a bad habit that a certain squad member has.

While I understand this argument, one of the reasons that we originally chose 7 as the number was to make squads have to look outside of their squad to practice. This leads to much more engaging skirmishes and would help teams more, I think.

An idea I have for which is called “peeping” can gain an advantage from this. (Don’t worry; it isn’t what it sounds like.) If you can somehow have one of your teammates look at the map in real time as the battle is happening, you can be aware of a great number of things going

I'm no expert on this, but that sounds like something that probably wouldn't be allowed in any kind of competitive environment in another community.

 

[[EJ]_Locke]

Yeah, we talked about both of those, but we couldn't think of anything that would both look nice and be intuitive as to which tier is better and which is worse. If you have any suggestions, please share them!


That seems to be the common opinion, so we'll look into it.


Nothing right now, unfortunately. We are banking on people using us because we are a quality option. That said, we are trying to work with squidboards on having this be official, but we are still in the early stages of that conversation.


We hadn't thought of that, but I see no reason we couldn't do it. Thanks for the suggestion!


Makes sense


Does not make sense. In any legitimate tournament ever, they would never allow this. I would guess that most tournaments will only allow teams of four anyway, or maybe one sub. This is because there is not the problem of players not being able to play, because if they are at the tournament, they are available to play. Not to mention having two separate teams compete as one is just silly.


While I understand this argument, one of the reasons that we originally chose 7 as the number was to make squads have to look outside of their squad to practice. This leads to much more engaging skirmishes and would help teams more, I think.


I'm no expert on this, but that sounds like something that probably wouldn't be allowed in any kind of competitive environment in another community.

Regardless, peeping will be hard to restrict. Its advantages outweigh its disadvantages and its hard to call people on it. Especially if peeping is done by someone in the same household like a sister or brother. I have no idea how they would enforce it, honestly.

 

[Pusha]

I understand the need to have over 4 players for these "squads" since playing regularly would be difficult with only 4 people since ALL 4 would always need to be online whenever anyone felt like playing. But as for tournaments (both online and irl) i don't think teams should be allowed more than 4 players