The X-Battle Ranking System-It Needs a Revamp

athen

Inkling
Joined
Jan 30, 2024
Messages
13
Location
United States
Switch Friend Code
SW-7099-0665-2210
Hey everyone, this is going to be the first long document that I post onto Squidboards! My name is Athen, I'm a competitive player that specializes in the Splatana Wiper and Dynamo Roller. I play around a high level, and I'm here to talk about something I've always wanted to discuss: the X-Battle Ranking System.

X-Battle itself is a controversial topic, as it brings up many things from the way it distributes points, matches weapon compositions, rotations, and more. I want to focus on the distribution of points, and ranking up/down in general. I want to preface this with saying that I am not a professional with data and math, and I'm only here to give ideas. I should also apologize in advanced if these feels a bit all over the place, as it's my first time writing a document on a topic like this. If you, or anyone else, has something to say about this, whether it be that you disagree, or that you have your own idea, please feel free to comment! I take all criticism! With that out of the way, let's begin.


Achieving X
I want to start with the way you get into X-Battle. I think this plays the largest role in the flaws of this system. Why? Because I think it's too easy to get into "X Rank" and I also think that it having its own playlist is unnecessary. Let's take a look at Anarchy Battle (series). Your rank in this mode carries through every rotation, no matter the mode. This means that you are in the same rank no matter what. This is a good feature, and should stay the same within X-Battle. Some may disagree because they see some modes as inferior to others. I would agree if the gap was that large, but I don't think it is, at least in a solo environment. Splat Zones tends to be THE competitive mode, but "competitive" and "solo" do not intertwine. That's why I think it is okay for X-Battle to share ranks between rotations. (I should say that I don't like the rotation system, but that's a different topic).

Ranking Up
Next, let's look at how you rank up in Anarchy Battle (series). Win 5 to triumph, lose 3 and you're out. Once you begin a series, a certain amount from your point total is cut out, and you gain a certain amount of points for however many wins and losses you receive. I honestly don't see why this isn't already in for X-Battle. You don't lose points for losing matches, but if you lose more than you win, then you're not going to gain as much. This is good because it gives the player more control with their matches with the badge system applying more points the better you play in a given match, and losing doesn't feel as detrimental, especially since winning is more rewarding. You might argue that since X-Battle is supposed to be harder that it shouldn't have this level of leniency when ranking and deranking players, and I kind of agree. As I've stated, I'm not an expert with math and all of that, but I'd expect "X Rank" to cut more points than previous ranks for starting a series, and it'd also give a bit less for each win, still keeping the 5-to-win/3-to-lose format. There should also be an in-game document displaying how many points are gained from what badges, win/loss ratios, and ranks. For example, Silver badges would give less points than Gold badges, and less wins would give less points than more. You could even get deeper with specific badges (like higher splat amounts and painting amounts,). This helps players understand how their rank is being effected each time they play a match.

Combining Anarchy and X
Let's go back to the unnecessary separation of "X-Rank" from the C to S ranks. I think reverting back to how Splatoon 2 did it would benefit us more than it did in that game. If you're reading this, I'm sure you already understand how it works, it's just the rank above S+. You'll have to change how many S+ ranks there are and all of that, but we're not here for that. Combining Anarchy (series) and X into one, they should make it so that you aren't shifting to a new ranking system of "X Power" but instead keep the same "Anarchy Power". On the topic of Anarchy, I think every rank should have a certain "Anarchy Power" threshold. For example, C Rank could be 500 Power, S Rank could be 1500 Power, X Rank could be 2500 Power, and so on. This is similar to other ranking systems like Apex Legends and Overwatch 1.

Calculations
Whenever you reach X-Battle, you must conduct 5 placement matches, and then your X Power will be calculated. I do not like this feature (for X Rank). Why? Most of the time it isn't consistent, and winning doesn't feel as if it grants higher calculations. At the beginning of a new ranking season, mainly after rank resets, players should be doing calculations no matter their rank. The level of their matches should loosely be based off of population averages, their previous seasonal power, and so on. The better you do, the higher you go. I also think it should show where you're being calculated as you go on in the calculations, just so you have an idea of where you'll be placed if you continue to win or lose. What I just explained doesn't sound too different from what we already have, and you'd be correct, I just do not think Nintendo actually implemented it as well. Calculations feel random or predetermined. No matter how many wins or losses, you may be placed similarly to how you were calculated last season.

Ending
In conclusion, the current system for entering and progressing through X-Battle has flaws, mainly how easy the attaining X Rank is and the unnecessary separation of ranks within different modes. To improve the experience, adopting certain features from Anarchy Battle (series), such as a consistent rank across rotations and a more fleshed out point-based ranking system, could provide players more control and a better understanding of their progression. Combining Anarchy and X Rank, utilizing "Anarchy Power" threshold, would simplify the ranking system and create a smoother transition between ranks. Additionally, revisiting the calculation process for your power, ensuring it considers factors like population averages and previous seasonal power, would contribute to a more accurate and satisfying ranking experience. Finally, these adjustments aim to refine the existing system, making it more transparent, fair, and enjoyable for everyone! That's all I have (for now)... Let me know what you think! Is there something I missed? Something you wanna share? I'll try to respond to everyone! I hope you all have an amazing day, see ya!
 
Last edited:

Tidal

Inkling
Joined
Jan 29, 2024
Messages
8
Location
Splatsville
I am in agreement here, specifically on what you mentioned about X series. I love how Anarchy Series plays out, where you pay a fee to participate in and you are challenged to do better so you benefit and do not lose what you paid for. THIS is what I'd like to see in X, why? Because you still GET something even if you lose the series. I'd much much rather have that over a -115 any day.


Though, having X rank combine all modes I am a bit hesitant about. I think it should still keep this so you can better understand your weaknesses of each mode because you could be doing great in SZ but horrible in TC or RM. Which tells the player which area(s) they should improve.

Another thing that I'd like to add-on here that wasn't mentioned is map pools similar to how they were done in League during Splatoon 2 I do not understand why this has not returned as it was a huge incentive to play each month because there would be a different map pool in which you can be guaranteed one of those maps. This will be huge because there are a lot of maps in this game that do not work on all modes. This would make X rank so much healthier in terms of rotations.
 

Joy

Data Nerd
Premium
Joined
Aug 8, 2015
Messages
61
Location
Texas
NNID
joythegreat
I think one of the hardest parts to consolidate is the tradeoff between a progression system and a ranking system. The former definitely feels a lot better for the player, if at the expense of being an adequate representation of player skill. The latter is a much better representation of player skill, but combines negatively with player psychology (as an example, a winrate of 50% objectively means the ranking system is performing amazingly, but to a player it feels unfair. Around 55-60% winrate is what “feels” fair to players.)

X battles achieve neither, being a poor representation of player skill and don’t really give a sense of progression for players. I agree wholeheartedly that it needs a rework, and I’m very grateful you penned your thoughts on the matter. I think it’s a fair potential rework, though I think players trying to use XP as a representation of skill will have even more trouble than before (which is probably not a bad thing, tbh)
 

Tidal

Inkling
Joined
Jan 29, 2024
Messages
8
Location
Splatsville
I think one of the hardest parts to consolidate is the tradeoff between a progression system and a ranking system. The former definitely feels a lot better for the player, if at the expense of being an adequate representation of player skill. The latter is a much better representation of player skill, but combines negatively with player psychology (as an example, a winrate of 50% objectively means the ranking system is performing amazingly, but to a player it feels unfair. Around 55-60% winrate is what “feels” fair to players.)

X battles achieve neither, being a poor representation of player skill and don’t really give a sense of progression for players. I agree wholeheartedly that it needs a rework, and I’m very grateful you penned your thoughts on the matter. I think it’s a fair potential rework, though I think players trying to use XP as a representation of skill will have even more trouble than before (which is probably not a bad thing, tbh)
I wholeheartedly agree with you, X rank is so much harsher and does not feel like you are progressing at times. Majority of the time players feel like they're getting worse because they keep losing series which could be majority of reasons as to why but most of the time it's cause of the system not the players.
 

missingno

Inkling Fleet Admiral
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
627
Location
Pennsylvania
Pronouns
he/him
NNID
missingno
Switch Friend Code
SW-6539-1393-3018
Glicko-2 is the tried and true gold standard for how to best measure player skill. That's the one thing they're doing right. The real problem is twofold:

Matchmaking is a disaster because low X is a weird limbo of players who were good enough to unlock X, but not good enough to win in there. While I've heard a lot of people ask for X to have stricter gatekeeping, I actually think the solution is the reverse: open it up so that there's a wider pool of low level players to match them with. X ought to just be how ranked worked from the start, there's no good reason for Series to exist.

Batching updates into best-of-5 sets and then clamping a minimum point gain/loss, which they made even worse a little while back, means that they're overriding the Glicko-2 algorithm with bad homebrew. No homebrew will ever improve on the good math Glicko-2 is based on. Glicko-2 is supposed to account for any rating difference between you and your opponents. If you're going 2-3 against opponents rated higher than you that could potentially be positive, and if you're going 3-2 against opponents worse than you that could potentially be negative, but this gets overridden. As a result, it feels like you're just more at the mercy of matchmaking luck, and not being properly measured by Glicko-2.

I get why Nintendo did this, batching results to only update every few games helps conceal the frustration players might feel when one game turns out to be extra volatile like in S2. But then they saw another potential frustration factor in the unintuitiveness of losing points in a 3-2 or gaining in a 2-3 and wanted to preemptively address that, but their solution is worse than the problem and they broke Glicko-2 in the process.
 

Kuwata

Inkling
Joined
Aug 18, 2017
Messages
13
Switch Friend Code
SW-7653-5007-4128
I really like your thoughts on X rank and how you wrote them out! I know you vaguely touched upon it in your post by mentioning:
"...C Rank could be 500 Power, S Rank could be 1500 Power, X Rank could be 2500 Power, and so on..."
This is a pretty dramatic jump in power compared to the historical power cutoff of X Rank being 1900XP (as in Splatoon 2).

I have heard from people stuck in 2000XP and below (thanks to the new matchmaking) that it feels more hellish than before. In Splatoon 3, there is no "absolute minimum" of X Power that you can possibly be matched with or against. You could be 1800 power and possibly have a 1600 power player on your team or a 1900 power or etc. I'm sure the gaps in power aren't THAT wide, but it's something to think about. People in lower powers might get "stuck" because of this system, but I'd like to see if this is actually statistically proven.

I think that having the 1900XP cutoff might be a good thing again, but that's only speaking from my experience where I did the majority of my X Rank grind in Splatoon 2. I barely touch X Rank in Splatoon 3 due to fudging my calculations and the sheer gap between them. In a single season, I calculated 1870 XP and 2347 XP in TC and Rainmaker respectively. As I continue to calculate my scores across seasons, I'm sure that 2200-2300 is where the game wants to place me. How does this even happen?!
 

Joy

Data Nerd
Premium
Joined
Aug 8, 2015
Messages
61
Location
Texas
NNID
joythegreat
Glicko-2 is the tried and true gold standard for how to best measure player skill.
It’s not actually! The gold standard is either EloMMR or TrueSkill 2, depending if you want a battle tested measure or not. Glicko-2 is vulnerable to volatility farming, which I suspect the latest update to X battles actually makes it more vulnerable to. New accounts are able to reach Top 10 in XP much more easily than before, getting way more than the minimums even in high XP ranges.
 

BronySquid

Inkling
Joined
Jan 30, 2024
Messages
5
Location
Nebraska
Switch Friend Code
SW-1961-9274-4704
I agree that it shouldn't be a separate Playlist. I think we should do away with the whole letter system anyways and just have the Glicko2 power. Just make sure you have strict matchmaking. For example someone at a power of 2100 could be matched with someone between 2050 and 2149.
 

youre_a_squib_now

Inkling Fleet Admiral
Joined
Jan 30, 2024
Messages
618
Switch Friend Code
SW-8478-8105-6114
They absolutely should not bring the badge system into x. It shouldn't even be in series, but definitely not x battles.

If x power is a measure of how often you win and who you can win against, those should be the only things impacting your ranking. How often you win, and who you win against. Not how well you can get #1 enemy splatter.
 

athen

Inkling
Joined
Jan 30, 2024
Messages
13
Location
United States
Switch Friend Code
SW-7099-0665-2210
I really like your thoughts on X rank and how you wrote them out! I know you vaguely touched upon it in your post by mentioning:
"...C Rank could be 500 Power, S Rank could be 1500 Power, X Rank could be 2500 Power, and so on..."
This is a pretty dramatic jump in power compared to the historical power cutoff of X Rank being 1900XP (as in Splatoon 2).

I have heard from people stuck in 2000XP and below (thanks to the new matchmaking) that it feels more hellish than before. In Splatoon 3, there is no "absolute minimum" of X Power that you can possibly be matched with or against. You could be 1800 power and possibly have a 1600 power player on your team or a 1900 power or etc. I'm sure the gaps in power aren't THAT wide, but it's something to think about. People in lower powers might get "stuck" because of this system, but I'd like to see if this is actually statistically proven.

I think that having the 1900XP cutoff might be a good thing again, but that's only speaking from my experience where I did the majority of my X Rank grind in Splatoon 2. I barely touch X Rank in Splatoon 3 due to fudging my calculations and the sheer gap between them. In a single season, I calculated 1870 XP and 2347 XP in TC and Rainmaker respectively. As I continue to calculate my scores across seasons, I'm sure that 2200-2300 is where the game wants to place me. How does this even happen?!

Considering that power would now be a measure between all ranks instead of just X Rank, you're much less likely to get "stuck", unless you're just not good enough to rank up.
 

athen

Inkling
Joined
Jan 30, 2024
Messages
13
Location
United States
Switch Friend Code
SW-7099-0665-2210
I agree that it shouldn't be a separate Playlist. I think we should do away with the whole letter system anyways and just have the Glicko2 power. Just make sure you have strict matchmaking. For example someone at a power of 2100 could be matched with someone between 2050 and 2149.
Glicko2 is highly overrated NGL.
 

zyf_

Pro Squid
Joined
Jan 29, 2024
Messages
109
I guess the important question to ask is whether Nintendo cares more about making MMR accurate or if they care more about players having fun and continuing to play

Unfortunately I think we're in a fairly significant minority (relative to the overall population) as people who care a lot about how accurate our number is relative to other people's.

Idk
I watched a video about matchmaking for things other than skill a while back and it got me thinking, especially given Nintendo's general approach to things as a company
 

Supa Fern

Inkster Jr.
Joined
Jan 30, 2024
Messages
27
Not much to add to the discussion. Mostly just that Being a high level player it does feel easy to get into rank X, and people said the same in S2. Then a report came in from nintendo that showed 1% of the players were in Rank X. So i will have to disagree with that part.
Since it becomes a metric definition at this point to what hard means.

Nintendo chose to use Glicko2 and I doubt they could change it to something different with a patch, so not going to debate changing its features since it is mostly pointless, but I will bring the fact that the more players are in Rank X the better Glicko2 can execute and properly give points to players and can give less extreme points scenarios and better place people on powers accordingly.
-Watch video above from zyf_
-And that the higher the player amount the higher the highest peak becomes. Check S2 powers after august/22 and tell me why no JP player reached pass 2800 consistently like before.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom