Why Competitive Splatoon should use all Game Modes instead of one

[seakingtheonixpected]

So basically people are against Turf due to a falsely perceived concept that in Ranked modes your whole team can throw/mess up in the last 30 seconds and are still guaranteed to win the game for [insert random faulty reasoning here]... OK. Inaccuracies aside you guys are so concerned about competition being based on skill yet want handicaps in case you happen to mess up... o_O. Don't mess up, don't throw, you will win... it's a revolutionary concept I know .

I know right! I watched this one video where this guy was whining about Turf War being decided by the final triple kill and all I could thing was.

New Strat: Don't get killed in the last 30 seconds!

 

[Kosaki]

Yeah, everyone, let's try not getting killed in a close game of Turf war in the last 30sec.
Remember that if you retreat and avoid combat, that's ink your opponent can take.
And let's try remembering that engaging a fight still puts you at the risk of getting splatted yourself.
"Don't get killed" easier said than done I guess.

Yeah, basically, following your genius strat', the winners in this situation are the dudes that have the better range. Great, really. The turf war metagame has a bright future in your hands !

EDIT : I know I'm being a passive-agressive prick right now. But come on, let's do some efforts in making this debate intelligent and not just a laughable bad sarcasm fest.

 

[Njok]

Let me play devil's advocate for a bit here.

When someone says the last 30 seconds will decide the match in turf wars too often, he is not saying this can't happen in any other mode. If i say i am not going left, it doesn't immediately mean i am going right.

But to get into that point, yes your whole team can get killed in the last 30 seconds and still win if you build up a strong enough lead. If it's taken to overtime you can still take it back before they get the lead unlike in turf wars.

I personally still haven't made up my mind about this though (aside from TW not being very exciting to watch).

 

[Kosaki]

Of course, we're not saying "the last 30seconds" thing can't happen in the other modes. We're just saying it makes more sense and it's fairer the way it is in TC and SZ. I'm even using plenty of comparisons to state how comebacks are better designed in those 2 modes.
Report to my previous posts from developed thoughts on that.

The main message is, "only the 30 last seconds really matter in Turf wars", and "All the freaking seconds of the game matter in Tower Control / Splat Zones, from beginning to end".

 

[Kaliafornia]

Where is your argument here ?
Instead of a bunch words telling me that what I say is complete bs, I don't see any reasonning proving me that my point is wrong and that I should just shut up.

Please.
I take the time to write things because I have some respect for you guys that don't think Turf war has issues as a competitive game mode. At least have the decency to stay silent or write something worth being read.

EDIT : And hell no, if A team wins in a ranked battle, while B team was making a push in the 30 last seconds, it's because the damn A team stopped that push, and B team messed up. And there's something called extra time in Ranked that helps those kind of push.
Have you really played a single game in ranked ?

You must think you're funny, aren't you ?

First off, calm down... because never is it that serious.

Secondly, I have been posting in this thread since page one so if you want to go back and read all my arguments you are more than welcome to do so, in fact you can just scroll up on this page to a post that counters a lot of what you wrote in your post before you even made it. I'm not going to keep writing out explanations to the same posts over and over.

Third, my post wasn't directed at you personally, but everyone in general as your post is saying the same thing in different verbiage as everyone else whining about Turf these last few pages.

Fourth, I'm S ranked. Not that it matters, at all, to anything really ever than to ego but apparently you need to assert your rank on this forum and to have a valid opinion to tryhards. So yes, @Kosaki I have played a single game in ranked. But just a single game, stopped right after that...

 

[missingno]

Imagine if in basketball every point scored during the final quarter is worth 10x as much. Is that a sensible scoring system?

 

[Kaliafornia]

LOL you do realize basketball games often come down to the tenths of a second for the final score and often a team who has a lead in the first quarters of the game does not win. Did you watch NBA finals this year? LeBron would disagree with you (Sidenote: DUB NATION!! KING CURRY!!). Regardless scoring system, doesn't matter as long as each team is given the same rules. Basketball actually is a good example of turf fundamentals working competitively as there is a lot of turnover, comebacks and close games. You better score more points in the end then...

 

[Agosta44]

Turf War is bunk. Wait for Rainmaker and play the 3 ranked modes. That's great that diehards want to play Turf War. Run some turf tournies and don't force it onto people that want to play more competitive modes.

 

[Box]

Fundamentally all matches are based on the game clock. Ranked just gives the loosing team (be it the match dominate team or not) a chance to make a final push for the win if they have control. Realistically in any mode, but especially turf, if you were truly the better team you will win, if for some reason your team that was spawn camping the entire game gets wiped out and loses the map... then you weren't the better team if you couldn't hold for the full 3 minutes. Who cares what happens for the rest of the 2 mins and 59 seconds? You either win or you lose.

Same in ranked. If you get your tower or zone clock to 1 sec, stop the other team all game until the final push and then the other team manages to get it to 0, your past efforts before that don't amount to you winning the game just because you dominated the majority of it.

Your assertion about the better team always winning isn't true. It's why people play multiple games in a set, because performance on any one moment is sort of like a random variable. More games means less variance in outcome. In turf you're increasing the variance in outcome by only scoring 1 moment. If we didn't care about variance, we could just play one game of turf in a tournament and determine the better team.

The timer is a factor in all modes in the sense that that's as long as you have to get into a winning position. But it's only in turf where we only care about what's happening at the very end of the game. I don't know why you're brushing aside my analogy considering it's probably one of the best analogies on squidboards. Turf is not scored the same as ranked. This is something I'm sure you understand at this point but are not conceding for some reason.

 

[Sitri]

or if tower control was scored by what position the tower was at at the end of the game.

In my experience with TC, that's how games typically end.

Spoiler

 

[veovis]

In racing, only the final lap counts so what do you do for the other laps? Set it up.

This is a bad analogy. If you're racing at 2 MPH for the first laps, then it doesn't matter how fast you go for the final lap, you're not going to have a chance of winning. In Turf War, you can sit around and play the Splatoon equivalent of "driving at 2MPH" and still end up winning the match due to a lucky wipe in the last 25 seconds. This is the problem people have; those first few minutes aren't exciting if they don't matter.

 

[Benjamin Hellcat]

After scanning through a number of these comments ( not the whole 9 pages) i have noticed a common misconception that is widely accepted as fact.

The idea that Turf Wars is only decided in the last 30 seconds of game play because the opposing team can make a last second push and unfairly win.

The flaw i see here is that in the last 30 seconds there are still two teams who can both equally make that final push. The assumption here is that the trailing team will always at 30 seconds make an unfair push and win... this is silly. If this is known before hand, then the dominating team needs to step up in those last 30 to secure that win. This seems like the very crux of what competion is. Both teams need to stay on the alert for the entire duration of the game and not allow those "swings" to go in favor of the opposing team. Knowing that those final moments of the battle are crucial strategically both teams need to set up for that latter party of the match to ensure that the end state is in their favor. Sounds pretty darn competitive to me.

That's my two cents. I hope it's logical.

 

[Hope]

The problem with turf is not that you can comeback, the problem is that it is only the last moments of the game that matter. The fact is you can mess around for 2:30 and still win is a problem, and should give people a clue as to why this mode isn't suited for competitive. You mess around on splatzones and what happens? You get knocked out. You mess around on tower control and what happens? You get knocked out. This is because all of a game of zones or towers matter, unlike turf. You have to be better than the enemy team for a longer period of time in tower control or splatzones to win, you only have to be better than the enemy team for one 5 second fight in turf war to win.

You get the zones to 9 and then get wiped on zones after you've been dominating the whole match and they don't just automatically win because the clock is almost done, they still have to work as hard as you if not more so to win at that point since they have to hold the zone longer than you without any mistakes. You get the tower to 5 at the thirty second marker in tower control then the enemy team wipes you and what happens? They have to get it back to neutral AND up to 4 in order to pull off the win, you have plenty of time after you respawn to stop them, and you will if you are the better team. You're dominating a turf war for 2 minutes and 30 seconds and they wipe you with a fluke zooka into bubbler and what happens? You lose. It's that simple, by the time you respawn they have covered at least half the map and have their specials back, in addition to the clock being very low and essentially ending the game. It's as if you outplaying them for 83% of the match didn't matter because they outplayed you in the last 17% of it or got a fluke play on you once. No team will ever play perfect there will always be mistakes, even S/S+ players get killed by C rank players. It's almost as if the last 17% of turf is worth MUCH more than any other part of it, which is a problem because you can literally play like you bought the game yesterday for 83% of a match and then still win. I don't know any sport or video game that lets you do this and win in a competitive mode, so why should splatoon?

After scanning through a number of these comments ( not the whole 9 pages) i have noticed a common misconception that is widely accepted as fact.

The idea that Turf Wars is only decided in the last 30 seconds of game play because the opposing team can make a last second push and unfairly win.

The flaw i see here is that in the last 30 seconds there are still two teams who can both equally make that final push. The assumption here is that the trailing team will always at 30 seconds make an unfair push and win... this is silly. If this is known before hand, then the dominating team needs to step up in those last 30 to secure that win. This seems like the very crux of what competion is. Both teams need to stay on the alert for the entire duration of the game and not allow those "swings" to go in favor of the opposing team. Knowing that those final moments of the battle are crucial strategically both teams need to set up for that latter party of the match to ensure that the end state is in their favor. Sounds pretty darn competitive to me.

That's my two cents. I hope it's logical.

Editing my post to reply to you.

The crux of competition is being better than your opponent a majority of the time, not 17% of the time. It isn't a problem that you can regain control of the map in turf in the last 30 seconds, the problem is that you can be holding the objective for a vastly shorter period of time than the other team and still win. Last time I checked turf was about controlling the map with your ink for longer than your opponent, not winning because you got the objective 1/6 of the time at the end of the clock. If the same thing happened in zones or towers they would have to hold the objective for longer than the other team to win, but in turf you only have to have the objective for a specific period in time to win. This is the fundamental problem with competitive turf wars.

 

[Hope]

did not mean to post this.

 

[veovis]

Nintendo announced that Rainmaker is coming out tomorrow and I honestly think (assuming it turns out to be a good/balanced competitive mode) that 3 modes is more than enough. Most successful competitive games only play one mode. I don't think Splatoon needs to be like everything else and limit itself to a single mode but since there are a large number of people who believe Turf War to be unbalanced and not interesting to play/watch, I don't think we should force it into the rotation if we already have 3 other competitive modes.

 

[Benjamin Hellcat]

17

The problem with turf is not that you can comeback, the problem is that it is only the last moments of the game that matter. The fact is you can mess around for 2:30 and still win is a problem, and should give people a clue as to why this mode isn't suited for competitive. You mess around on splatzones and what happens? You get knocked out. You mess around on tower control and what happens? You get knocked out. This is because all of a game of zones or towers matter, unlike turf. You have to be better than the enemy team for a longer period of time in tower control or splatzones to win, you only have to be better than the enemy team for one 5 second fight in turf war to win.

You get the zones to 9 and then get wiped on zones after you've been dominating the whole match and they don't just automatically win because the clock is almost done, they still have to work as hard as you if not more so to win at that point since they have to hold the zone longer than you without any mistakes. You get the tower to 5 at the thirty second marker in tower control then the enemy team wipes you and what happens? They have to get it back to neutral AND up to 4 in order to pull off the win, you have plenty of time after you respawn to stop them, and you will if you are the better team. You're dominating a turf war for 2 minutes and 30 seconds and they wipe you with a fluke zooka into bubbler and what happens? You lose. It's that simple, by the time you respawn they have covered at least half the map and have their specials back, in addition to the clock being very low and essentially ending the game. It's as if you outplaying them for 83% of the match didn't matter because they outplayed you in the last 17% of it or got a fluke play on you once. No team will ever play perfect there will always be mistakes, even S/S+ players get killed by C rank players. It's almost as if the last 17% of turf is worth MUCH more than any other part of it, which is a problem because you can literally play like you bought the game yesterday for 83% of a match and then still win. I don't know any sport or video game that lets you do this and win in a competitive mode, so why should splatoon?


Editing my post to reply to you. The crux of competition is being better than your opponent a majority of the time, not 17% of the time. It isn't a problem that you can regain control of the map in turf in the last 30 seconds, the problem is that they can be holding the objective for a vastly shorter period of time than the other team and still win. Last time I checked turf was about controlling the map with your ink for longer than your opponent, not winning because you got the objective 1/6 of the time at the end of the clock. If the same thing happened in zones or towers they would have to hold the objective for longer than the other team to win, but in turf you only have to have the objective for a specific period in time to win. This is the fundamental problem with competitive turf wars.

17% is an arbitrary number. How did you arrive at that number?

It seems to me that there are two types of people on the issue of last moment pushes in Turf Wars. Those who see it as an unbeatable and unfair strategy only used by less skilled players. And those who see it as a fact of the game and ( and competition in general) and plan for it.

 

[Hope]

17



17% is an arbitrary number. How did you arrive at that number?

It seems to me that there are two types of people on the issue of last moment pushes in Turf Wars. Those who see it as an unbeatable and unfair strategy only used by less skilled players. And those who see it as a fact of the game and ( and competition in general) and plan for it.

17% is far from an arbitrary number, 2:30 out of 3 minutes is 5/6ths. So the last 30 seconds would be 1/6 or roughly 17% of the entire match.

That's the thing, it isn't a fact of the game yet. It is very early in the game's meta and we can still drastically change stuff. You didn't actually respond to the main point in my post (you literally just said "deal with it"); however, so I guess I will just quote it again for you:

"The crux of competition is being better than your opponent a majority of the time, not 17% of the time. It isn't a problem that you can regain control of the map in turf in the last 30 seconds, the problem is that you can be holding the objective for a vastly shorter period of time than the other team and still win."

 

[Benjamin Hellcat]

No, i get that. It is just that i have seen this strategy work elsewhere. It seems just as viable here.

In a foot race, especially longer distances, it is acceptable to not push yourself until the end. In wrestling and other martial arts it is acceptable to play it safe awaiting an opening our to whittle an opponent down until the latter part of the match.

To me... in my opinion... it seems bizarre that a tried and true strategy is seen as unviable only in this game.

Perhaps the issue here is perceiving the opposing team as incompetent and this being a mere fluke. whereas in an organized play environment with team communication were the same thing to occur it would feel like a legitimate strategy... am i close?

 

[veovis]

No, i get that. It is just that i have seen this strategy work elsewhere. It seems just as viable here.

In a foot race, especially longer distances, it is acceptable to not push yourself until the end. In wrestling and other martial arts it is acceptable to play it safe awaiting an opening our to whittle an opponent down until the latter part of the match.

To me... in my opinion... it seems bizarre that a tried and true strategy is seen as unviable only in this game.

Again, racing is a poor analogy. Nobody is saying that Turf War is bad for serious competitive play because you can make a comeback and win in the last 30 seconds. They're saying Turf War is bad for serious competitive play because doing so is so easy that it makes the rest of the match completely pointless. It means there are almost no stakes in the first 2:30 of the game. If there are no stakes, it's not exciting to watch or play.

I hope I'm not coming off like an elitist who hates Turf War or something. It's perfectly suited to being a casual game mode and it's great for teaching newer players one of the most essential parts of the game (spreading ink). But it really doesn't have any place in competitive play due to its poor balancing.

 

[Inyo]

I think it is very poor form that this thread has devolved into personal attacks. Who is that going to help?