The difference between Ranked and Turf War

[_Ness10_]

This is something I have seen some people debate. Some people wonder if we should use Turf War in competitive tournaments, and even scrimmages. First, we need to know some differences.


Probably the most obvious thing about Turf War, is that it is about covering ground. In Ranked, the main objective is similar in Splat Zones. You have to keep an area inked over, so that you won't lose. In Turf War, it is slightly similar. While they aren't exactly alike, especially since some areas get overlooked in Splat Zones, the main objective is to keep area inked.
Another thing to consider though, is the lower time limit. In Turf Wars, you only get 3:00 minutes to cover as much ground, while in Ranked you get 5:00 minutes. Some may argue that in ranked it may be more fair, seeing as you will have 2:00 extra minutes, but it could end up being bad. IF the other team makes a huge push either at the beginning or the end, it could result in a lose. If they push at the beginning, your team could get spawn-camped the entire game.In Turf War, you have less time, but it still could be unfair, with the smaller amount of time to make a comeback.
The final thing we should consider is the difference in weapons. Usually, you see many different weapons in Turf War than in Ranked. We all know what you see in ranked. .96 Gal Deco, Octoshot Replica/Tentatek Splattershot, E-liter Scope, there are many more that are usually used for Ranked. I feel, if Turf War were played competitively, it would encourage players to learn different weapons, ones that will be better at covering ground. A popular weapon for example, would possibly be Aerospray MG. It has a use competitively, as well as being able to cover ground fairly well. This doesn't mean people will be forced to learn new weapons, but it could encourage them. It also would help weapons that aren't used very much for Ranked.


So yeah, that's about all I can think of that would help. If you have any other ideas, feel free to share them below.

 

[Teeny Weeny Man]

The first two and a half minutes of the match mean almost squat in turf war. The tide of battle is too fast, and any early lead cannot be reasonably maintained in an even match.

 

[Rockenberg]

Well, when I think about competitive Turf War the first thing that comes to mind are the Splatfests. I feel like Splatfests, in a way, are what it would be like if Turf War was indeed included in Ranked Battles. So, I could definitely see Turf War working in a competitive atmosphere! Also, what I've noticed is that in regular Turf War, most players' number of splats are significantly lower than their number of splats during the Splatfest Turf War, which matches that of Ranked Battles. (Just to further push my argument for Competitive Turf War)

 

[MintChipper]

Turf War is very boring to watch compared to Ranked gamemodes, where there's clear, established metagames and objectives.

 

[Tyson TH]

Turf War is very boring to watch compared to Ranked gamemodes, where there's clear, established metagames and objectives.

That's exactly how I feel whenever I'm watching anything Splatoon-related. I can't last very long watching Turf War matches simply due to how it's structured. I mean, I personally don't find it very entertaining to watch someone just running around, completely avoiding combat and just looking for patches of enemy ink to ink over until the match ends. Meanwhile, Ranked matches can get insanely hectic and crazy to watch seeing how people strategize to overcome their opponents through team efforts. Not only that, I'd much rather see each individual's skill on how they handle the situation they're put in with a clear goal in mind.

Well, when I think about competitive Turf War the first thing that comes to mind are the Splatfests. I feel like Splatfests, in a way, are what it would be like if Turf War was indeed included in Ranked Battles. So, I could definitely see Turf War working in a competitive atmosphere! Also, what I've noticed is that in regular Turf War, most players' number of splats are significantly lower than their number of splats during the Splatfest Turf War, which matches that of Ranked Battles. (Just to further push my argument for Competitive Turf War)

Yeah, surprisingly enough I'm amazed at how gruesome Splatfest battles can get compared to regular Turf War, but after a while it gets boring for me having to be obligated to ink more turf rather than focusing on the opposing team.

 

[SupaTim]

I like turf war a lot, and I DO wish it could be in the competitive scene. The mode is unique among shooters and requires a different mindset/strategy than normal objective based modes. I loved watching high-end turf war games back when they were still being done.

HOWEVER, there are still some major problems with the format in regards to competitive play. The lack of spectator mode and the inability to see the mini-map on stream are the two biggest problems. And note, these are huge problems. Every other mode allows stream viewers to see who is in the lead and by how much. But the only indication we get about the lead are the squids at the top, which give next to no information. The mode can never be competitive if spectators don't actually know the score during the game. Still, I think if the top squads developed strategies for Turf War and analyzed what works and what doesn't (besides repeating cliches about specials at 30 seconds), then it would show that the mode has a lot of depth.

The 30-40 second push and snapshot wins are a secondary problem, and honestly, the more I think about them the less defensible as problems they become. My Dukies (who aren't very good this year...) won the national championship last year. They went on a run through most of the second half which gave them a more-or-less comfortable lead. However, Wisconsin started clawing their way back and made it close. The game ended with the game clock read 0 and Duke won. DESPITE Wisconsin probably being a better team overall, and DESPITE them probably winning if there was more time on the clock due to the momentum shifting, Duke gets to hang the banner.

Similar thing happened in 2010, when Duke played Butler. Give Butler a few more seconds on the clock and Gordon Haywood would have a better angle to the basket for the half-court 3 and Butler goes away with their first championship. The current momentum of the game is irrelevant when the game clock reaches 0.

Turf War is really swingy, but so is UFC. Doesn't make it less exciting....as long as we can watch it.

 

[LongswordSamurai]

Until the day comes that we're given a Spectator Mode and a projected Minimap for us to see how the Turf is getting split between the two teams, I don't think that Turf War will become very viable as a competitive mode for Splatoon. Perhaps it could be used as a "gimmick" type of mode, for special challenges? Like, a tiebreaker match between two teams vying for 3rd or 5th place might include a Turf War in their rotation of game modes, just to shake things up and make it a bit more intense due to the flowing nature of Turf Wars.

 

[WydrA]

*Latias regularly runs tournies with turf wars thrown in, so it can be done from a competitive standpoint. It really is mostly just the spectator thing that's a problem. Especially when you can only see one person't point of view.

 

[Tuff]

It's not the most fun for me to play let alone watch. More often than not I end up just doing my own thing in some corner that someone forgot to ink and it gets kinda dull. In Ranked there's always a clear point that the teams are fighting over, and strategies change and evolve as the match goes on and the teams gain leads and advantages over each other. Turf is really just all over the place and doesn't really lend itself to intensive play very much.