Why the less popular team wins. (My Theory)

[ThatSquidYouKnow]

Have you ever wondered why the less popular team wins? Well, I sure have, and during the last Splatfest, I thought up a theory. I mean, how is it possible, that with the popularity being a landslide win for Ninjas, that the Pirates still won. Well, I'm here to answer that question. So, the theory goes a bit like this: If a team is more popular, then it has higher chances of having bad players. And if it is more popular, then it will spend time fighting itself, which won't even add to the total. (I think)So, if there are more bad players, then you get more losses and if you fight yourself, then you get nothing. And then the Pirates come in, always fighting Ninjas, racking up points, while the Ninjas are still busy fighting each other. And that's why I think that the less popular team wins. Oh, and the X6 multiplier helps. So, what do you think? I personally think that this breaks Splatfest, and Nintendo should really find a way to fix this.

 

[ShinyGirafarig]

This has already been theorized since the Roller Coaster victory since kids were more likely to pick Waterslides as there is a height restriction for Roller Coasters therefore having more inexperienced players on the more popular side.

 

[Wiebenjijzeg]

I think the initial way points were calculated (wins x2, rather than x6), balanced this better.
More popular but less experienced players vs less popular and more experienced players.

 

[ThatSquidYouKnow]

This has already been theorized since the Roller Coaster victory since kids were more likely to pick Waterslides as there is a height restriction for Roller Coasters therefore having more inexperienced players on the more popular side.

Oh, I didn't know about that.

 

[Of Moose & Men]

I think the initial way points were calculated (wins x2, rather than x6), balanced this better.
More popular but less experienced players vs less popular and more experienced players.

Or, they could just not factor Popularity in at all. If the multiplier would have been x2, Ninjas would have won, but the Pirates clearly should have won that. 59% win rate is enough to show Pirates should have won either way. Had the ninjas Pulled ahead simply because of popularity, what's the point in battling in the first place?

 

[1o2]

Although this idea has been said by others many times, with the 6x multiplier it's gotten to the point where popularity hurts the team more than helps. Popularity serves no purpose other than matching you up vs your own team, which demotivates me (and perhaps others) as well as makes it possible that weaker members of the team to fight the opposing team.

I think the easiest solution would be just to add more components. A nice one I saw around the forum here was whatever team got the most kills, perhaps they would get 50 points added to their score. Then something like most turf covered, 50+ added, etc.

 

[GreenKirby]

The majority of Splatfest victories came the popular teams.

 

[Of Moose & Men]

The majority of Splatfest victories came the popular teams.

Well, only in Japan.
There is no formula that allows us to pinpoint an exact reason because there will always be variables that change everything. It is nothing but coincidence. However, for every other region, Popularity and/or lack of such did not show who would win or lose, since it was for the most part split down the middle.

 

[GreenSpiny]

More players doesn't equal more bad players. Whether little kids gravitate towards certain teams and make them more popular is another story.

In this Splatfest, ninjas fought ninjas more than they fought pirates. Having huge differences in popularity like this adds variance, but it's still an equal chance of which members get to fight the less popular team.

Still, fighting your own team over and over again is demoralizing imo. A good player on the less popular team can carry for sure, but good players on the other are less inclined because once they hit King / Queen, they're wasting their time in 50% of matches (ninjas vs pirates example). Again, statistically it's even but on a personal level, not so sure.

 

[Smychavo]

I like to think that popularity in splatfest behaves like a double edge sword. A splatfest team might have a majority of the popularity, but they might be fighting against themselves so much that they hinder their own overall results. Meanwhile, the team with the lesser popularity doesn't fight against themselves as often and has more opportunities to actually fight against their opponent, therefore contributing more to their results. And as we all know, matches have more relevance to the final score than popularity.

 

[Of Moose & Men]

As it should.

Honestly speaking, it should be entirely win percentage based. However, the reason popularity exists is for if two teams miraculously tie win wise, popularity pushes it over to allow one team to win. That is honestly all Popularity should account for anyways. So although I am against it playing into the scoring at all, I understand why it's there. However had this splatfest been win percentage x2 like it was before, it would have caused a huge ruckus, no doubt. Popularity should only exist to decide the winner between a tie.

 

[cwjakesteel]

Also please note that I put "Ninjas CAN win" and "Pirates WIN". I.e. the bottom pie diagram showing the range of "ninjas can win" show the chance from 50% and upwards, while the other range called "Pirates win" shows where the chance to win a splatfest is very high.

I posted this in the Ninjas vs. Pirates thread.

I believe this explains statistically why the least popular team wins most of the time.

 

[SquiliamTentacles]

As it should.

Honestly speaking, it should be entirely win percentage based. However, the reason popularity exists is for if two teams miraculously tie win wise, popularity pushes it over to allow one team to win. That is honestly all Popularity should account for anyways. So although I am against it playing into the scoring at all, I understand why it's there. However had this splatfest been win percentage x2 like it was before, it would have caused a huge ruckus, no doubt. Popularity should only exist to decide the winner between a tie.

Now that I think about it, what would happen if two teams tie? Would Callie and Marie reveal a secret statistic, or would both teams win, or would Nintendo panic because they didn't program anything in?

 

[cwjakesteel]

Now that I think about it, what would happen if two teams tie? Would Callie and Marie reveal a secret statistic, or would both teams win, or would Nintendo panic because they didn't program anything in?

The odds of that happening are so slim, but I think if that happened they would just say everyone wins and give everyone the win bonus for super sea snails.

 

[Vitezen]

Players will often stop playing the moment they reach king.This means that for a team that has a huge numbers advantage, because there are so many mirror matches, good players will quickly reach king and turn off their Wii U, leaving the mediocre players behind to grind out the matches that count. So that means that players who play more often, and therefore face the enemy team more often, are more likely to be bad than good

 

[cwjakesteel]

Players will often stop playing the moment they reach king.This means that for a team that has a huge numbers advantage, because there are so many mirror matches, good players will quickly reach king and turn off their Wii U, leaving the mediocre players behind to grind out the matches that count. So that means that players who play more often, and therefore face the enemy team more often, are more likely to be bad than good

Maybe, but I was a Pirate and I quit as soon as I hit King and didn't play a single mirror match. Playing 50 turf war battles on the same 3 maps in 24 hours AND only getting 1000 coins per match is killer. After Splatfests I quit playing splatoon for a whole week.

 

[SkyBound]

Well in Cats vs Dogs Eu splatfest i had to fight with teams full of lvl. 10 against teams with >lvl.40
On my team i was pretty much always the only person doing things.
I remember an inkbrush that surfed the whole time

 

[Graff]

Because Callie chooses the least popular team.

 

[Travelingpik]

Maybe, but I was a Pirate and I quit as soon as I hit King and didn't play a single mirror match. Playing 50 turf war battles on the same 3 maps in 24 hours AND only getting 1000 coins per match is killer. After Splatfests I quit playing splatoon for a whole week.

What he's saying though is that after winning those 50 matches, you contributed 50 wins to the win/loss ratio against ninjas, while good ninja players would win 50, but only contribute maybe like 25 or less of their wins and then would leave because like you said, splatfest is killer. The only ones left would be the less than stellar players who loss most of their matches grinding out 2 points with the rare 5 points.

 

[Ink dweller]

I feel like just like any sport out there, the older players are the better ones. Experience doesn't matter that much. Why? I got Splatoon on July 31. My 7 year old cousin got the game on launch day. I'm better at the game than him. Why is that the case? He is just simply younger than I am. The age where I think that a player has the potential to be anice A+ (heck, even an S+ but you'd have to play the game a lot) is 12-13 years old. I personally don't think that age is a factor. Experience with the splatefest themes is the determining factor.