Weapon kits were designed for different game modes

[plantknowsyourlocation]

This is only SoloQ if you think map design is more important than individual game objectives. From a weapon design perspective, it would absolutely be made for SoloQ. Saying comp is the exact opposite of soloQ irks me because then all competition becomes meta counterplay rather than mastery of the individual weapon.

"if you think map design is more important than individual game objectives" undermines the effects of other factors as to why people pick weapons. both things can be important, we don't need to discredit the effect of one thing to highlight the effect of another. and, while mastery of the individual weapon does matter a ton, comp is definitely also dependent on meta counterplay, so it is a different deal.

Because individual weapons are valued more than others, their kits are valued in specific game modes because at that level of play, all minor changes matter. For weapons like the previously mentioned Nova, well even aNova doesn't see much competitive play, so it is assumed vNova has even less value. But if you dedicated yourself to Nova as much as to any high tier weapon, you'd see the kit has importance for the purpose of flexing weapon roles. That killer Wail is obviously more useful to it in Tower Control than in Clam Blitz (for instance), where turf control and individual kills are required.

elaborate on why a kit meant for tc has a point sensor? you can say "to stop flanks, because you may get flanked in tc" but why won't you get flanked elsewhere? tc is one of the modes where you're least likely to need a point sensor, people crowd around a tower with a set path. a kit actually made for tc is more likely to have a suction bomb or something. what it looks like to me is that vnova was made specifically for people who like locating weapons, NOT for a specific mode.

if weapons were made for specific modes, id also feel like there would be more emphasis on that from sheldon's monologues. instead, they focus more on playstyle.

"playstyle" isnt game objective under a different name, it's how you end up approaching the objective or what surrounds it, and there is more than one way to do that. something does not need to be given a very specific set of tools to function in a mode, and some weapons can thrive in modes without needing to be the one to interact with the objective, instead focusing on how they affect the enemy team before they can affect the objective or their teammates.

 

[takoyakispl]

part of the problem is that aside from objective interaction, most modes play largely the same. for example if vcarbon wanted to use autobomb to catch sharkers in say rainmaker and zipcaster could be used for like distraction while pushing and threaten things alongside rainmaker shots, thats great and all but at the end of the day deco carbon has a burst bomb and a zooka and will kill everyone, and because all modes rely on winning engagements the weapons that are best at that are gonna be chosen more at the end of the day.

 

[plantknowsyourlocation]

It's not just about better paint, it's about creating a focus point for others to see, from there you can better get into people's face and pop brella. The enemies you wish dead in Splat Zones won't see Autobomb as a viable threat. In fact, even in the modes where Brella wants Autobomb, it uses them to shake a static board state within the enemy side of the map. How do you get in people's face as brella? Use your subweapon. But sometimes you wanna attract people, sometimes you want to cause a distraction because they're so focused. This changes by game mode, because the mode dictates the weapon role

itd be very funny to me if you were serious about vbrella, one of the least synergistic kits in the game, being better than sbrella, one of the most synergistic, in zones, just because the kit of vbrella can kinda paint a little bit better.

 

[takoyakispl]

It's not just about better paint, it's about creating a focus point for others to see, from there you can better get into people's face and pop brella. The enemies you wish dead in Splat Zones won't see Autobomb as a viable threat. In fact, even in the modes where Brella wants Autobomb, it uses them to shake a static board state within the enemy side of the map. How do you get in people's face as brella? Use your subweapon. But sometimes you wanna attract people, sometimes you want to cause a distraction because they're so focused. This changes by game mode, because the mode dictates the weapon role

i don't fully understand your point here. "the enemies you wish dead in splat zones wont see autobomb as a viable threat" if thats the case they sure as hell wont see sprinkler as one. In order to effectively push any objective you have to win a fight first or use displacement to force them back. Displacement specials are gonna be the same ones in all modes and the subs that help you win fights are gonna be the same in all modes. the objectives just aren't different enough for this to be the case i feel.

 

[SquidAbortions]

Trying to read this but honestly I'd rather not, its just speculation....... . Do comp players even think about this

 

[vitellary]

i think there's absolutely merit to thinking about which kits are designed with the philosophy of being better in other modes than its alternate forms, but it's clear that it's a stretch to assume every kit is explicitly designed that way. and, to give some credit, i don't even think you're necessarily wrong about brella in theory; the devs could definitely have thought that the vanilla kit would be better when paint is needed. the problem is that in practice that's just not how it works.

i think a better example of this theory being wrong is with something simple: there is effectively no difference in ability to tackle various game modes between vanilla splattershot and the tentatek splattershot. maybe you could argue that strikes are better for tower control... but, the vanilla kit has suction bomb, so that cancels that out. maybe you could say trizooka is better for rainmaker or clams where quick kills are important... but the ttek has splat bomb, which can just as easily force a push to come to a stop. you'd be hard pressed to say that the tentatek was clearly an answer to the vanilla shot being weak in some game mode

 

[missingno]

You've started from the conclusion that every kit is better on a certain mode, and that mode is the only factor to consider here. And now you're working backwards to force every kit to fit that conclusion, closing yourself off to considering that sometimes a bad kit is just that bad, or that there are other factors you are overlooking. I think in most cases, the team comp is a much bigger factor than mode!

When a weapon has two good kits, there's more to think about than just mode. I don't think there's any mode where you can say TTek should always be played and vShot should never be played, nor vice versa.

When a weapon has one good kit and one situational kit, mode alone is often not the sole justification for the situational utility. If you're playing Snipewriter, 9 times out of 10 you're running 5H because Tacticooler is your job. But if someone else on your team is already running a Cooler weapon, then you can consider 5B. Mode doesn't matter here, it's just whose job it is to run Cooler. For Ballpoint, 9 times out of 10 vanilla is the top tier. Vac definitely has utility in Zones cheese, to Uber a Rainmaker carrier, or to Uber a Clam push, but does that make it universally better in everything but TC? Definitely not! I would only consider Zones cheese if another teammate doesn't already have a Zones cheese special, if they do you don't need two. In RM and CB, an Ubercharge playstyle means playing a much more aggressive Ballpoint than usual, and that again comes down to what role your teammates want out of you more than it's an autopick for these modes.

When a weapon has one good kit and one terrible kit, no mode justifies the terrible kit. If you think the good kit isn't good enough on this mode, then you should probably consider a different weapon entirely before trying to play Splat Brella.

 

[vitellary]

When a weapon has two good kits, there's more to think about than just mode. I don't think there's any mode where you can say TTek should always be played and vShot should never be played, nor vice versa.

haha jinx, i think we wrote this at the same time

 

[missingno]

Yup, I saw the thread update just as I clicked send.

 

[Sorcerer]

i don't fully understand your point here. "the enemies you wish dead in splat zones wont see autobomb as a viable threat" if thats the case they sure as hell wont see sprinkler as one. In order to effectively push any objective you have to win a fight first or use displacement to force them back. Displacement specials are gonna be the same ones in all modes and the subs that help you win fights are gonna be the same in all modes. the objectives just aren't different enough for this to be the case i feel.

They'll see a Sprinkler in Zones as something to take out, which gives you room to pop in. To win a fight against the hated turf support unit in Splat Zones, you want a subweapon that draws people in, not one that displaces. Contrast with other modes where a Sprinkler can be left alone, but since you seem sold on the superiority of sBrella over vBrella, I'll just say the vanilla kit can find more use in Clam Blitz which is objective crowded as it is.

"if you think map design is more important than individual game objectives" undermines the effects of other factors as to why people pick weapons. both things can be important, we don't need to discredit the effect of one thing to highlight the effect of another. and, while mastery of the individual weapon does matter a ton, comp is definitely also dependent on meta counterplay, so it is a different deal.


elaborate on why a kit meant for tc has a point sensor? you can say "to stop flanks, because you may get flanked in tc" but why won't you get flanked elsewhere? tc is one of the modes where you're least likely to need a point sensor, people crowd around a tower with a set path. a kit actually made for tc is more likely to have a suction bomb or something. what it looks like to me is that vnova was made specifically for people who like locating weapons, NOT for a specific mode.

if weapons were made for specific modes, id also feel like there would be more emphasis on that from sheldon's monologues. instead, they focus more on playstyle.

I already have a Nova guide on gamefaqs, but here's a video which helped in my decision. Again by Pika because I respect them very much and benefit from the match annotations.

 

[plantknowsyourlocation]

They'll see a Sprinkler in Zones as something to take out, which gives you room to pop in. To win a fight against the hated turf support unit in Splat Zones, you want a subweapon that draws people in, not one that displaces. Contrast with other modes where a Sprinkler can be left alone, but since you seem sold on the superiority of sBrella over vBrella, I'll just say the vanilla kit can find more use in Clam Blitz which is objective crowded as it is.

I already have a Nova guide on gamefaqs, but here's a video which helped in my decision. Again by Pika because I respect them very much and benefit from the match annotations.

ok lmao

 

[Sorcerer]

You've started from the conclusion that every kit is better on a certain mode, and that mode is the only factor to consider here. And now you're working backwards to force every kit to fit that conclusion, closing yourself off to considering that sometimes a bad kit is just that bad, or that there are other factors you are overlooking. I think in most cases, the team comp is a much bigger factor than mode!

I started from the conclusion that SOME weapon kits were better than the other in certain modes, then worked from there to figuring out if ALL kits had their mode specific benefits. Which makes more sense than saying "bad kit bad". "Bad kit bad" is PRECISELY the mindset I wish to avoid, and my texts were designed to see the advantages of what people considered "bad kits".

They're both situational, and I'm explaining the situation! You might answer that comp(etitive) wants specific comp(osition) but I'm going at it from the perspective of a weapon main using the options given to it (the set) to excel in the situation it finds itself. And if the map choice is fixed, I still say game objective is more important than the map it is played on.

 

[ffionn]

ok lmao

works great if ur playing at a level where sprinklers are irresistible bait I guess

 

[vitellary]

I started from the conclusion that SOME weapon kits were better than the other in certain modes, then worked from there to figuring out if ALL kits had their mode specific benefits. Which makes more sense than saying "bad kit bad". "Bad kit bad" is PRECISELY the mindset I wish to avoid, and my texts were designed to see the advantages of what people considered "bad kits".

They're both situational, and I'm explaining the situation! You might answer that comp(etitive) wants specific comp(osition) but I'm going at it from the perspective of a weapon main using the options given to it (the set) to excel in the situation it finds itself. And if the map choice is fixed, I still say game objective is more important than the map it is played on.

but surely you understand that "this kit has specific advantages if you ignore all of the weaknesses that it ends up having because of it" is more arbitrary than "this kit isn't very good"? like, you can argue all you want for whatever very niche advantages the sprinkler has on vbrella, but the fact is that 10 times out of 10 people end up picking the sorella brella over it. i haven't seen a vanilla brella in solo queue in months, and i've seen plenty of sorella brella. and, even then, it's perfectly valid for people to prefer the vanilla kit over the autobomb (even if i've never seen it personally), but it's obviously flawed from an objective analytical standpoint to try to argue that every single kit in the game has a use case, when it's fully possible for a kit to just, be bad for a weapon

i think that's the main reason why there are so many people willing to debate this with you, too: it's a biased way of attempting to analyze the game, and leads you to conclude things that don't really hold up in actual practiced gameplay. the splat brella is just one example of this that we've latched on to because it's pretty universally accepted that there's almost nothing the vanilla kit can do that the sorella kit can't do better, and it's a perfect indicator of why the reasoning that every kit must have some merit is flawed

 

[RubberCF]

I started from the conclusion that SOME weapon kits were better than the other in certain modes, then worked from there to figuring out if ALL kits had their mode specific benefits. Which makes more sense than saying "bad kit bad". "Bad kit bad" is PRECISELY the mindset I wish to avoid, and my texts were designed to see the advantages of what people considered "bad kits".

They're both situational, and I'm explaining the situation! You might answer that comp(etitive) wants specific comp(osition) but I'm going at it from the perspective of a weapon main using the options given to it (the set) to excel in the situation it finds itself. And if the map choice is fixed, I still say game objective is more important than the map it is played on.

I dont think anyone is insisting upon smth as simple as "bad kid is just bad" but the point is that theres an in between of assessing a kit in terms of its overall effectiveness and only in terms of its synergy with a specific mode. Like ive said, every kit has a unique combinations of strengths and weaknesses, and exploring that is great. And if you want to use mode specific strengths as a franework to look at that, then great. But the idea that *every* kit has a mode where its better than its variant just has no reason to be true.

 

[Sorcerer]

i haven't seen a vanilla brella in solo queue in months, and i've seen plenty of sorella brella. and, even then, it's perfectly valid for people to prefer the vanilla kit over the autobomb (even if i've never seen it personally), but it's obviously flawed from an objective analytical standpoint to try to argue that every single kit in the game has a use case, when it's fully possible for a kit to just, be bad for a weapon

Every single kit in the game was designed for a use case. Because if you see it in some, why wouldnt it be for all? Why would there be bad kits? Mistakes? Well id trust the judgement of the game developers over that of players. Particularly on the subject of the Splat Brella, which has little changes between Splatoon sequels. Specials change a bit but subweapons wise Nintendo saw no reason to see a "bad kit". Here the 96 Gal is a better example for having the same subweapon kits across three games, and people calling the Deco universally better than Vanilla throughout them all. So why are kits designed the way they are? For different game modes.

 

[ffionn]

Every single kit in the game was designed for a use case. Because if you see it in some, why wouldnt it be for all? Why would there be bad kits? Mistakes? Well id trust the judgement of the game developers over that of players. Particularly on the subject of the Splat Brella, which has little changes between Splatoon sequels. Specials change a bit but subweapons wise Nintendo saw no reason to see a "bad kit". Here the 96 Gal is a better example for having the same subweapon kits across three games, and people calling the Deco universally better than Vanilla throughout them all. So why are kits designed the way they are? For different game modes.

The insistence that "it seems true for some, so it must be true for all" is pretty strictly speculation, friend. Unless you've got word directly from someone involved with determining kits, it's more reasonable to concede that it's simply a possibility. Given how different kits perform in practice, it doesn't seem like it's being done that well even if it is the developer's intent. Your logic is bordering on conspiratorial :(

 

[plantknowsyourlocation]

Every single kit in the game was designed for a use case. Because if you see it in some, why wouldnt it be for all? Why would there be bad kits? Mistakes? Well id trust the judgement of the game developers over that of players. Particularly on the subject of the Splat Brella, which has little changes between Splatoon sequels. Specials change a bit but subweapons wise Nintendo saw no reason to see a "bad kit". Here the 96 Gal is a better example for having the same subweapon kits across three games, and people calling the Deco universally better than Vanilla throughout them all. So why are kits designed the way they are? For different game modes.

reeflux deco

 

[takoyakispl]

They'll see a Sprinkler in Zones as something to take out, which gives you room to pop in. To win a fight against the hated turf support unit in Splat Zones, you want a subweapon that draws people in, not one that displaces. Contrast with other modes where a Sprinkler can be left alone, but since you seem sold on the superiority of sBrella over vBrella, I'll just say the vanilla kit can find more use in Clam Blitz which is objective crowded as it is.

I already have a Nova guide on gamefaqs, but here's a video which helped in my decision. Again by Pika because I respect them very much and benefit from the match annotations.

I... What ?? Sprinkler gets taken out idly by simply happening to shoot in that area or throwing a bomb, it requires so little of your attention to take care of and barely poses a threat

 

[Sambews]

But more to the point, by understanding which kit goes in which mode, you understand the root role of the weapon.

While there may be some merit to looking at the dev's intent as an indication of how a weapon should be played, I think it's far more beneficial and effective to consider what the weapon can do. The Tenta Brella isn't good on splat zones because the devs want it to be good at splat zones, the Tent is good at splat zones because of its unique strengths. And maybe the devs made those strengths specifically so the weapon could be good at splat zones, but either way, it feels more productive to consider the capabilities of a weapon rather than what the devs want you to do with said weapon.

The splat brella, which we've been talking about, is an excellent example of this. Maybe we can agree that the devs want the vanilla splat brella to be 'the splat zones brella,' and so if we only considered dev intent we might always choose the vanilla kit for splat zones. But the simple fact of the matter is that the sorella kit is dramatically better. Perhaps considering dev intent is beneficial for our understanding of what "should" be, but considering weapon capabilities is much more productive for our understanding of what *is*, which is dramatically more important for improvement.

And besides, a weapon's role usually doesn't change dramatically due to its kit. The vshot and ttek are going to play more or less the same. Maybe certain weapons will play more passive/supportive if they're given a particularly influential special, but the main weapon has much more influence over how a weapon plays than its kit.