Jaxas
Smash Champion
Not massive; Smash 4 is definitely bigger in Salem. P:M's been averaging around 12 people lately, though.
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Oregon Smash Community [OSC] - Oregon's official Smash Community est. 2005
- Thread starter T0MMY
- Start date
KarmaCastle
Smash Journeyman
Really surprised at the turnout
Jaxas
ZelDUH was me tag.
I was looking at your previous weeklies and it looks like anywhere from 6-15 people, 45 is a HUGE spike. Exciting and kinda overwhelming.
But hey Oregon scene, just wondering if there's anything/anybody closer to the Tualatin/Tigard/Wilsonville area that play sm4sh at all. Recently moved here and going to that tourney in Salem made me really want to learn to sm4sh in person.
Turns out my first tourney with my first Gamecube controller and non-wifi matches was a bit tricky to learn
Had tons of fun! Hope to see even more at Salem. Except then we'll be way over the firecode.
Jaxas
ZelDUH was me tag.I was looking at your previous weeklies and it looks like anywhere from 6-15 people, 45 is a HUGE spike. Exciting and kinda overwhelming.
But hey Oregon scene, just wondering if there's anything/anybody closer to the Tualatin/Tigard/Wilsonville area that play sm4sh at all. Recently moved here and going to that tourney in Salem made me really want to learn to sm4sh in person.
Turns out my first tourney with my first Gamecube controller and non-wifi matches was a bit tricky to learn
Had tons of fun! Hope to see even more at Salem. Except then we'll be way over the firecode.
It was good seeing you there even though I didn't play with you, I remember hearing/seeing your name and thinking it was a funny name. Glad to hear you had fun and hope to see you there again (I attend about once a month).Really surprised at the turnout
I was looking at your previous weeklies and it looks like anywhere from 6-15 people, 45 is a HUGE spike. Exciting and kinda overwhelming.
But hey Oregon scene, just wondering if there's anything/anybody closer to the Tualatin/Tigard/Wilsonville area that play sm4sh at all. Recently moved here and going to that tourney in Salem made me really want to learn to sm4sh in person.
Turns out my first tourney with my first Gamecube controller and non-wifi matches was a bit tricky to learn
Had tons of fun! Hope to see even more at Salem. Except then we'll be way over the firecode.
Step
Smash Rookie
Hi everybody/anybody on here! I have been itching to find more people to play Sm4sh with locally, and I have to say, trying to find the community has been surprisingly tricky. Hopefully this is a good place to start making some connections and find events. I really want to find people that are better than me, who can smash me horribly and by doing so, help me improve. ^_^ (and sadly, since I want to main Greninja, playing online is an extremely poor test, as even the most mild lag really screws me over).
Hi KarmaCastle, I live in the outer edge of Tualatin and Tigard, and I was hoping to come on here and find some people to improve my game with in person (and have a ton of fun doing so!). It would be awesome to have someone to test my skill against and improve with, so if your interested, we should meet up sometime!
KarmaCastle
Smash Journeyman
I sent you a message with the details on our local tournaments and some other details, though I know Smashboards can take a bit to get used to navigating. If you have any other questions though, let me know! I'd love to have a practice partner that's not online.
Heyo - Nice to see you around here. The Oregon scene can be kind of tricky to track down in some areas (I keep seeing people post here about where to find a playgroup in Portland). But it also doesn't take much more than a simple post like yours before the ball gets rolling.
A lot of people like to meet up at the Salem weeklies for SSB4 since it is about the best middle-point we've got for our major areas (Portland area, Eugene/Springfield, Salem/Corvallis/Albany). If you don't mind a little bit of a travel once in a while you would find a lot of people who are pretty good at the game there, and only $1 entry it's a pretty cheap afternoon/evening of entertainment for any Smasher.
Hope you can find a steady playgroup near to you as well. And if you want to get in contact with some people specifically there is also the facebook group where people hang out.
Step
Smash Rookie
Thank you both for the quick responses! I am super excited to come check out the tourney in Salem tomorrow and meet some awesome people ^_^
Jaxas
Smash Champion
Hi!
If you want to find more information about the Salem Smashfests, you can head to our Saturday Event Thread.
Also, if you haven't yet you should also probably Pre-Register for the tournament tomorrow (as we've had to implement a 40-person cap due to our building's fire code).
Anyways, let me know (here or tomorrow in person) if you have any questions; see you there!
somanymike
Smash Rookie
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 2
Anyone know of any tournaments near Eugene?
itrombe
Smash Cadet
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2014
- Messages
- 29
- NNID
- itrombe
There're enough Eugene players that there's probably a weekly somewhere. Otherwise, Fight or Flight 5 is the next big one.
LAIN_mememe
Smash Rookie
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1
I just moved into Portland and created an account to find other players in the city or to get wind of a tournament or event. Its been tough finding the local smash scene so far.
There's a good number of Smashers in Eugene, but we usually just go up to Salem for the weeklies there since it's a good place to meet people from other areas. I am not hosting weeklies on Wednesday during fall/winter term, it's kind of just a meetup and Smashfest for now.
And Fight or Flight is at the end of this month. That is probably one you'd be interested in attending.
The weekly tournaments on UO campus probably have started back up every friday as well if you're interested in checking those out.
Aside from Fight or Flight, there aren't any other tournament events currently being held in Eugene. More often than not there are weekly smashfests and trips up to Salem.
Oregon Competition Information!
Regarding Mii rulings
Regarding Mii rulings
Mission Statement
I am posting the information I gathered from attendees at the "Salem Smashfest" (October 10th, 2015 in Salem, Oregon) regarding the recent Mii ban/restriction discussion that took place online (I think it might have been on a Facebook discussion).This data and my evaluation may be used by us Oregon Smash Competitors to make decisions regarding Mii and/or bans/restrictions as well as any other rules decisions in the future, if so desired.
Data: Poll numbers & "reason"
Poll data
Quantitative in nature, that is how many attendees were interviewed/took part in the interview (a total of 38 competitors out of 39 were interviewed, looks like I missed on person) and how many of that total may have been supporting any kind of: 1) Ban, or 2) Restriction.
Reason data
The "reason" data is the response to the question of "why?" when an interviewee stated support for either 1) Ban, or 2) Restriction.*
This was a sample of just one Salem Smashfest and most certainly does not reflect the entire state's opinion, so I see it as a good starting point for further investigation to make a conclusive decision later when other factors are taken into account (practice, practicality, logistics, affect on attendee number, etc.)
Future data can be collected to get a larger perspective of opinion, reason, and polling as well as show trends in opinion and reasoning.
Future data can be collected to get a larger perspective of opinion, reason, and polling as well as show trends in opinion and reasoning.
It is worth noting that in competition, any change in rules/game-settings must be born of sound reasoning to be warranted of change. That is, it is simply asked:
"Is this game mechanic/element/design violating any Competitive Principle?" *
So the reason data is just me asking "why?" of anyone who was supporting a ban or restriction and their response was concisely recorded and I asked for an "okay" on the recorded response (and made revisions if the respondent so desired).
* A principle is what makes up our foundation of competition itself, assumed to be an axiom in argument. Arguing against an axiom is paramount to completely changing core competition itself; the proposed competition that stands on the new axiom(s) may be reasonably denied competition at all by principle alone ("against one's principles as a competitor to play that way") due to the rules residing outside of Competitive Standards.
Making up out-of-game rules which directly violate Competitive Principles is also known as being a "scrub".
"Is this game mechanic/element/design violating any Competitive Principle?" *
- If the answer is determined (by demonstration) to be: "No, the proposed change of rules is not a sound argument"; then no out-of-game ruling is instated.
- If the answer is determined (by demonstration) to be: "Yes, the proposed change of rules is within sound reasoning"; then procedure moves on to evaluate the proposed ruling for Competitive Value (see below).
So the reason data is just me asking "why?" of anyone who was supporting a ban or restriction and their response was concisely recorded and I asked for an "okay" on the recorded response (and made revisions if the respondent so desired).
* A principle is what makes up our foundation of competition itself, assumed to be an axiom in argument. Arguing against an axiom is paramount to completely changing core competition itself; the proposed competition that stands on the new axiom(s) may be reasonably denied competition at all by principle alone ("against one's principles as a competitor to play that way") due to the rules residing outside of Competitive Standards.
Making up out-of-game rules which directly violate Competitive Principles is also known as being a "scrub".
The Data
- 38 Total attendees interviewed
- Free Mii/No Rules: 25 total (66%)
- Any kind of Restriction: 12 (32%)
- Restrcition on Size: 12 total (32%)
- Restriction on Moves: 5 total (13%)
- Supports a Ban: 1 total (2%)
- Strength of Opinions of Pro-Restrictions:
- Of the 38 interviewed, those who supported out-of-game rules to restrict the Mii fighters did not have a "strong" position. They expressed feelings of "unsure", "on the fence", or they did know know enough about the game mechanics/arguments to take a strong position in the argument.
- Strength of Opinions of those Against Restrictions:
- In contrast, those who supported fully utilized Mii fighters used words like "strongly support" and expressed they felt they had a sufficient understanding of both game mechanics and the debate to make a good decision.
- Change in Position expressed:
- There was some interesting data that contrasted an in-person interview opposed to the recent online poll that had people vote differently - it may be the case that some people will vote "along with the crowd" in a less scientific facebook poll rather than an interview where they can express their opinions and reasons properly.
- It was also expressed that the restrictions being supported could be for a limited time to see how the Mii fighters played without too much variables and then could be expanded to a completely free Mii usage later.
Information regarding "Ban Support"
Supports Ban (1 total)
- Jesse (not the Jesse that goes by the nickname "American Saikyo"/"Peach Cobbler", this is a new player) - Because he thought of them as custom characters and if we ban "customs" then the Mii fighters should be banned.
Of all interviewed only 1 out of the 38 respondents (1:38) was in support of a ban for the Mii fighters. It's worth noting that he may have been using the word "ban" to mean "toggling the Custom Fighter button to OFF" and assumed the Mii fighters were "banned" by the game itself when doing this - In other words, there's a possible miscommunication that he was actually saying he wanted Custom Fighters set to "OFF". I did not have the time to evaluate his reason at the time of the interview, so a clarification of reasoning should be employed in the future.
Although I, myself, can stand in support of a ban on the Mii characters it is only under some stipulation - that is I am so against a "1111" restriction that I would rather simply just have the characters banned completely instead of pushing "scrubby" rules. This is not to say I actually support a ban in general, only that stipulation, so I do not record myself as a ban proper.
Although I, myself, can stand in support of a ban on the Mii characters it is only under some stipulation - that is I am so against a "1111" restriction that I would rather simply just have the characters banned completely instead of pushing "scrubby" rules. This is not to say I actually support a ban in general, only that stipulation, so I do not record myself as a ban proper.
Information regarding "Size Restriction Support"
Supports Size Restriction (12 total)
Name - Reason
- Churro - Because Eric (aka "9tails").
- Step - To help bad players win more.
- Jitio - It's easier to win/less competition.
- Wolfy - No reason (assuming "default" pertained to both size & moveset); "on the fence".
- Shy - Start with a restriction of Guest Mii only, but is open to test without restriction later.
- Bombchu Link - Because it's like allowing them to use equipment (changes weight/speed/etc).
- Bliss - Too much diversity.
- JD - Because it changes them (also have to ban Shulk).
- Koopa - Yeah, they can be changed (also in favor of banning Shulk).
- John - They are fast (Sonic was then in question of ban, he may be too fast).
- 9tails - It's not fair to the rest of the characters which cannot change their Size.
- Sunny - Small is "pretty dumb".
Categorical Reasons
Of all the restrictions being placed on the Mii fighters, the restriction on Size (height/weight) was the most popular and it is interesting to note that when I talked with these pro-restriction attendees that most did not approve of a restriction placed on the Mii fighters' moveset.
Of the twelve responses I recorded I found that they could fit under just 5 categories (4 when/if the ambiguous responses are clarified):
Evaluation of Categories
I will now evaluate each of these categorical reasons within the parameters of Competitive Theory:
It appears I have two "fairness" reasons I need to address:
The first is that of A) "character balance". The second is that of B) "player neutrality".
However, use of Equipment may be "banned", but not because of the inherent value of being Equipment itself!
The ban of Equipment is not axiomatic, it is not necessary to competition - to illustrate why it needs reason: We can obviously still have some kind of competition with Equipment allowed, and it has happened... although the value of such a competition would most certainly come into question.
Because this ban in question is not axiomatic, we need to understand why (what reason/s) Equipment is banned:
My answer to why it is banned is that it actually is not banned. I would say any ruleset stating Equipment is "banned" is probably using improper wording. The proper way to state the ruling is simply to state: the game setting "Custom Fighters" is simply to remain "OFF" (unless there is sound reason to turn it "ON"). This setting disables Equipment, even if it is able to be carried (as the case for the Mii fighters).
This clearly shows a logical conclusion that Stat changes are not to be banned on the basis that they are one and the same as Equipment, but instead shows that not being able to use Equipment is simply a consequence of a game setting (Custom Fighters: OFF).
It makes things much simpler to simply have the game setting stated because we may also have a logical consequence to ban certain characters like Shulk who can change their stats (weight, speed, jump, attack, etc.).
However, if the rules state that "Equipment" or "Customs" are "banned" one may be inclined to argue semantics with the intend to create a concept of "customs" that is not recognized by the software and resides in concept only. This would seem to me more like a dirty trick to do such, but if it is accepted by competitors/TO, whether a trick or not, then the community/representatives could take it into consideration and discuss it. I am sure the stronger argument is to not allow such out-of-game concepts to creep into rulesets because some players could abuse this and create advantages for themselves which violates competitive principles (fairness principle) and results in a standard competition turning into a scrubby casual gathering instead.
However, I think the loss of words in those with a lesser competitive vocabulary may be the case here. When one says "dumb" or "jank" they may actually be trying to express the idea of a degenerate competition. At which point we simply need to evaluate if the Mii fighters are doing just that. The irony here is that in order to evaluate the Mii fighters in competition they would simply be allowed to be used and exploited to their full potential... the reason of Jank/Dumb is actually more reason to fully allow Mii fighters unrestricted.
After a certain amount of time, as decided by the community/representatives, the evaluation of the characters can be determined. The TO should inform the attendees they will have a period of time where the Mii are allowed and will be evaluated and urge the competitors to discuss their opinions and reasons regarding the competitions that had the Mii allowed.
Of all the restrictions being placed on the Mii fighters, the restriction on Size (height/weight) was the most popular and it is interesting to note that when I talked with these pro-restriction attendees that most did not approve of a restriction placed on the Mii fighters' moveset.
Of the twelve responses I recorded I found that they could fit under just 5 categories (4 when/if the ambiguous responses are clarified):
- Fairness (5 total) - This makes the statement that a TO should place restrictions on the Mii Sizes because one of the two reasons:
- Character Balance
- No other character can change their height/weight, so the Mii fighters should not be allowed to change theirs either to balance the supposed character advantage/disadvantage.
- [2 responses]: 9tails and Churro
- Player Advantage
- Changing the height/weight causes too many unknown factors for the players; to make it easier for them to win, the Mii fighters should be restricted to Guest Mii or Default set(s). Too much diversity", "easier" to win, or "less competition" makes winning easier also fall under this).
- [3 responses]: Step, Jitio, and Bliss.
- Same as Customization/Equipment (1 total)
- Makes the case of size change to be equivalent to using Equipment - that is both Size-change and Equipment can affect "stats" (weight, speed, strength, etc.). If Customization is not allowed (Custom Fighters: OFF, Custom Moves disabled, and custom Equipment disabled) and being able to change Size is like Equipment then changing size is not to be allowed.
- [1 response]: Bombchu Link.
- Makes the case of size change to be equivalent to using Equipment - that is both Size-change and Equipment can affect "stats" (weight, speed, strength, etc.). If Customization is not allowed (Custom Fighters: OFF, Custom Moves disabled, and custom Equipment disabled) and being able to change Size is like Equipment then changing size is not to be allowed.
- Jank/dumb (1 total)
- Any argument about the Mii fighters being "too good", "Overpowered", or "Broken" is generally expressed as "Jank". Those who believe the size restriction should be applied due to a janky result of allowing it are arguing from this position.
- [1 response]: SunnyDS
- Any argument about the Mii fighters being "too good", "Overpowered", or "Broken" is generally expressed as "Jank". Those who believe the size restriction should be applied due to a janky result of allowing it are arguing from this position.
- No reason (2 total)
- Either no reason was given or the support was so weak there was no real reason other than saying something along the lines as "on the fence" or "don't have enough knowledge of the situation". Whenever a "no reason" or "I don't know" was given as a response I probed the response once asking where they stood, one respondent gave the reason "on the fence" (Wolfy), another gave a timed restriction (Shy).
- [2 response]: Wolfy and Shy.
- Either no reason was given or the support was so weak there was no real reason other than saying something along the lines as "on the fence" or "don't have enough knowledge of the situation". Whenever a "no reason" or "I don't know" was given as a response I probed the response once asking where they stood, one respondent gave the reason "on the fence" (Wolfy), another gave a timed restriction (Shy).
- Ambiguous (3 total)
- The statements made are too ambiguous to assume to be included in one of the above categories, or could fit into more than one reason. For example saying "it changes their size" is simply just circular reasoning and could be taken as "no reason" or interpreted as being "dumb" or "unfair". Likewise stating the reason of being "fast" could be interpreted in a number of different categories. Until clarification is completed (I had limited time so could not clarify everything) they remain ambiguously in this category.
- [3 response]: JD, Koopa, John.
- The statements made are too ambiguous to assume to be included in one of the above categories, or could fit into more than one reason. For example saying "it changes their size" is simply just circular reasoning and could be taken as "no reason" or interpreted as being "dumb" or "unfair". Likewise stating the reason of being "fast" could be interpreted in a number of different categories. Until clarification is completed (I had limited time so could not clarify everything) they remain ambiguously in this category.
Evaluation of Categories
I will now evaluate each of these categorical reasons within the parameters of Competitive Theory:
1) Fairness
The only principle in Competitive Philosophy that could be argued in regards to what is "fair" is the Fairness Principle. This principle states that all options must be made available to all competitors. Note that this is applicable to the competitors, that is to say not the characters. To try to make things "fair" (that is "neutral" and "balanced") for characters is essentially saying that we are attempting to create balance patches with out-of-game rulings. This would be the same argument as saying that it is the TO's and/or competitor's job to attempt to balance the game.It appears I have two "fairness" reasons I need to address:
The first is that of A) "character balance". The second is that of B) "player neutrality".
A) Character Balance
Competitive theory does not support this argument directly, and I find it a very weak position to argue that any one person or group of peoples' opinion on the game is greater than that of the software or of the game designer's decisions without sound reasoning and proper evaluation (see Sirlin's "What Should be Banned?").
Anyone who is taking this position must formally demonstrate that the Mii fighters have some kind of game-breaking mechanic or completely degenerates the competitive value to the point where a ban/restriction is a greater solution. At this point I would assume an outright ban would be more appropriate, though. But all of this is the burden of those making claim to "Fairness". Seeing as the Mii have been banned/restricted there is not information to evaluate in order to make a fair decision and until this has done then an argument of character balance would actually be argument to allow full access to Mii fighters.
B) Player NeutralityAnyone who is taking this position must formally demonstrate that the Mii fighters have some kind of game-breaking mechanic or completely degenerates the competitive value to the point where a ban/restriction is a greater solution. At this point I would assume an outright ban would be more appropriate, though. But all of this is the burden of those making claim to "Fairness". Seeing as the Mii have been banned/restricted there is not information to evaluate in order to make a fair decision and until this has done then an argument of character balance would actually be argument to allow full access to Mii fighters.
This is in alignment with the Fairness Principle regarding the subject of fairness. However, I believe it is an invalid argument due to a false premise:
The argument states that it is not fair for those who play the Mii fighters to gain an advantage by exploiting the character ability of creating a Mii with variable Size - This, I believe, is false based on the Competitive Principle of "Reward to Skill".
I believe it to be false because the principles in question (Reward to Skill) states that we reward competitors based on skill (i.e. employing certain abilities and knowledge of the game), and to place restrictions/limitations on a player's ability to use a certain character (a skill) without sound reasoning, without warrant, and without a proper evaluation is in direct violation of this competitive practice.
We should reward all players for utilizing any character to its greatest potential, which includes the Mii. If there is any reason to ban/restrict the Mii then the players should demonstrate it by pushing them to their potential and try to "break" the game and cause competition to fall apart. Until that happens we have no proof or knowledge to argue for a ban/restriction and would simply be speculating, which is outside the realm of rulecrafting (reason/logic when crafting rules for competition).
The argument states that it is not fair for those who play the Mii fighters to gain an advantage by exploiting the character ability of creating a Mii with variable Size - This, I believe, is false based on the Competitive Principle of "Reward to Skill".
I believe it to be false because the principles in question (Reward to Skill) states that we reward competitors based on skill (i.e. employing certain abilities and knowledge of the game), and to place restrictions/limitations on a player's ability to use a certain character (a skill) without sound reasoning, without warrant, and without a proper evaluation is in direct violation of this competitive practice.
We should reward all players for utilizing any character to its greatest potential, which includes the Mii. If there is any reason to ban/restrict the Mii then the players should demonstrate it by pushing them to their potential and try to "break" the game and cause competition to fall apart. Until that happens we have no proof or knowledge to argue for a ban/restriction and would simply be speculating, which is outside the realm of rulecrafting (reason/logic when crafting rules for competition).
2) Same as Customization/Equipment
When discussed, the reason was clarified that because a change in Size (Height and Weight) may change Stats (Speed, Strength, and Defense) of the Mii in question and that Equipment also affects the Stats of a character then both Size and Equipment are to be treated one and the same (both banned).However, use of Equipment may be "banned", but not because of the inherent value of being Equipment itself!
The ban of Equipment is not axiomatic, it is not necessary to competition - to illustrate why it needs reason: We can obviously still have some kind of competition with Equipment allowed, and it has happened... although the value of such a competition would most certainly come into question.
Because this ban in question is not axiomatic, we need to understand why (what reason/s) Equipment is banned:
My answer to why it is banned is that it actually is not banned. I would say any ruleset stating Equipment is "banned" is probably using improper wording. The proper way to state the ruling is simply to state: the game setting "Custom Fighters" is simply to remain "OFF" (unless there is sound reason to turn it "ON"). This setting disables Equipment, even if it is able to be carried (as the case for the Mii fighters).
This clearly shows a logical conclusion that Stat changes are not to be banned on the basis that they are one and the same as Equipment, but instead shows that not being able to use Equipment is simply a consequence of a game setting (Custom Fighters: OFF).
It makes things much simpler to simply have the game setting stated because we may also have a logical consequence to ban certain characters like Shulk who can change their stats (weight, speed, jump, attack, etc.).
However, if the rules state that "Equipment" or "Customs" are "banned" one may be inclined to argue semantics with the intend to create a concept of "customs" that is not recognized by the software and resides in concept only. This would seem to me more like a dirty trick to do such, but if it is accepted by competitors/TO, whether a trick or not, then the community/representatives could take it into consideration and discuss it. I am sure the stronger argument is to not allow such out-of-game concepts to creep into rulesets because some players could abuse this and create advantages for themselves which violates competitive principles (fairness principle) and results in a standard competition turning into a scrubby casual gathering instead.
3) Jank/Dumb
Although this seems like the weakest argument, it is actually what I find to be one of the strongest arguments for a ban/restriction. The issue people usually have against this reason is a matter of an emotional reaction to the words used: "Jank" or "Dumb" may stir up feelings that one is simply using rhetoric to change rules to their advantage within a democratic "might makes right" system which would ignore all reason and logic of proper competition.However, I think the loss of words in those with a lesser competitive vocabulary may be the case here. When one says "dumb" or "jank" they may actually be trying to express the idea of a degenerate competition. At which point we simply need to evaluate if the Mii fighters are doing just that. The irony here is that in order to evaluate the Mii fighters in competition they would simply be allowed to be used and exploited to their full potential... the reason of Jank/Dumb is actually more reason to fully allow Mii fighters unrestricted.
After a certain amount of time, as decided by the community/representatives, the evaluation of the characters can be determined. The TO should inform the attendees they will have a period of time where the Mii are allowed and will be evaluated and urge the competitors to discuss their opinions and reasons regarding the competitions that had the Mii allowed.
Information regarding Move Restriction Support
Supports Moveset Restriction (6 total)
- Churro - Because Eric (aka "9tails").
- Wolfy - No reason (assuming "default" pertained to moveset & size); "on the fence".
- Shy - Guest Mii ok to start, can test later without restriction
- Bombchu Link - It's like allowing them to use equipment
- Bliss - Too much diversity
- 9tails - Making the assumption the moves are custom moves so all characters should be locked to 1111 despite what game developers say.
Many who wanted a moveset restriction simply included it as a kind of "restriction package", that they felt if size was being restricted then moveset restriction just came along with it.
Again, the more popular reason was assuming the Mii fighters were somehow unfairly using "customs" (a definition created by concept only and is not supported by the game as far as I can tell) and it would be the TO's job to try to keep the fight clean by balancing the characters with an out-of-game ruling. And again, the main problems with this is:
#Miivolution #FreeMii
"Dumb" Argument
What is "dumb" about the Mii Fighters?
Conclusion
There is no reasonable warrant to ban or restrict the Mii fighters by way of precedence.
Of all the reasons above, the strongest is the argument of "dumb".
This is worth discussing with the entire community - having an educated and unanimous decision made by the community would enable representatives to make an agreeable and unified state ruleset.
The discussion of "dumb" would include an evaluation of:
This is worth discussing with the entire community - having an educated and unanimous decision made by the community would enable representatives to make an agreeable and unified state ruleset.
The discussion of "dumb" would include an evaluation of:
- "Overpowered" - Are these fighters too strong where the entire meta game is disrupted so much it is competitively more valuable to ban/restrict them - think Akuma in Super Turbo or Meta Knight in Brawl)
- "Jank" - Are the Special Moves so "dumb" that the game becomes unattractive to players and we lose considerable/significant attendees from the "dumb-factor" (again, think of Meta Knight in Brawl)?
- Any other factors that could create a degenerative game due to "dumb" to the point of impacting attendance or significant value of competition.
What is "dumb" about the Mii Fighters?
I believe only two moves in particular may possibly be considered in a grey area of being "dumb":
Are these two attacks dumb enough for ban/restriction?- Helicopter Kick (#2 Up-special of Mii Brawler) - due to its power and usefulness.
- Piston Punch (#3 Up-special of Mii Brawler) - due to power and usefulness in certain matchups.
- Note 1: Has been patched (one inch punch oversight was fixed) in recent patch.
- Note 2: Has been nerfed (knockback growth significantly reduced) in a recent patch.
- Note 3: Recent patch/nerf usually removes Piston Punch from any debates of bans/restrictions.
The grey area of "dumb" is what I see as a matter of precedence.
There is no black & white when it comes to competitive value. The "grey area" regarding the charge of "dumb" for the Helicopter Kick and Piston Punch is arguably in the same grey area as some other moves such as Zero Suit Samus' Boost Kick (Up Special):
There are also several other current moves which may be argued even dumber (in power/usefulness/jank) than Brawler's, all of which are currently non-issues regarding ban/restriction.
Even some past moves which are regarded as undoubtedly much more overpowered and jankier (by both players and the developers; e.g. the "hoo hah" or the recent Luigi U-spec nerf), yet none were ever banned nor even restricted by the community.
There really is not much room to reasonably argue for a ban on either Helicopter Kick nor Piston Punch without having to accept other moves should be banned as well.
There is no black & white when it comes to competitive value. The "grey area" regarding the charge of "dumb" for the Helicopter Kick and Piston Punch is arguably in the same grey area as some other moves such as Zero Suit Samus' Boost Kick (Up Special):
- Boost Kick is more powerful, more useful and arguably more "jank"
- No case arguing that her Boost Kick should be banned/restricted.
There are also several other current moves which may be argued even dumber (in power/usefulness/jank) than Brawler's, all of which are currently non-issues regarding ban/restriction.
Even some past moves which are regarded as undoubtedly much more overpowered and jankier (by both players and the developers; e.g. the "hoo hah" or the recent Luigi U-spec nerf), yet none were ever banned nor even restricted by the community.
There really is not much room to reasonably argue for a ban on either Helicopter Kick nor Piston Punch without having to accept other moves should be banned as well.
Conclusion
Even the most powerful and jankiest of Mii Brawler's moves (Helicopter Kick) is within a safe zone for bans, and the lesser of the other moves from any of the other Mii fighters ostensibly should be fully allowed in this regard.
There is no reasonable warrant to ban or restrict the Mii fighters by way of precedence.
Custom Moves/Fairness Argument
Of the above reasons, the argument that the Mii fighters are using "customs" and regarding "fairness" of allowing them their custom moves while not allowing other characters' custom moves (not "fair") was the most popular.
The results of this question is broken down to two more questions:
According to competitive principles (the foundation of competition as outlined in Competitive Philosophy), there is the principle of Software Authority, which states that competition starts at a default to the software settings and is played without any out-of-game rules unless explicitly warranted (see David Sirlin's "Playing to Win").
Thus, competitively, definitions should be set by the software.
Following the competitive principles set forth: Anyone who is claiming the definitions that Mii fighters' special moves are "customs" must either:
The questions generated from these actions are:
I have yet to find the game define Mii fighters' moves as being "custom" moves as far as the software functions... although it's really not my job to do others' homework:
Burden of proof is on the one making the claim - If someone is claiming anything about reality they will have to show the evidence to support what is or is not (e.g. I can claim the sky is made of strawberry jelly, but it's not your job to prove me wrong, it is my burden to prove I am right!).
Custom Fighters vs "Customs"
In a competition that rules the "Custom Fighters" (CF) game setting is to be toggled to the default "OFF" setting is not making any claims outside of what the game functions at. The CF button is real and easily located in the upper right corner of the character select screen and functions simply as "ON" or "OFF" with a simple click of the button.
When following this rule the custom fighters which may have been created are disabled and hidden and Equipment is disabled, this includes the Mii fighters.
Additionally, it is objectively demonstrable that the Mii fighters are still able to be selected as playable characters with their chosen moves intact. It is also objectively demonstrable that their custom Equipment is, however, disabled with the CF:OFF. This is significant because it shows clearly that there is a distinction between custom Equipment and chosen Special Attacks when creating a Mii - the designers consciously chose for us the players to use the Mii in what we could refer to as a "non-custom" environment and that it is probably the case their moves are in fact not Custom Moves at all (outside of a "gross mistake" in programming/design of the game, however the complete lack of defining the moves as "custom moves" is what really makes the "gross mistake hypothesis" highly unlikely)!
Anyone now making a claim that Mii Fighters special moves are "customs" have a very difficult challenge on their burden of proof. Not only is there a lack of evidence to support this claim, but the very software and design of the game seem to be in complete contradiction to such a concept.
Until someone comes up with compelling evidence and or hard evidence then any claims that the Mii fighters should not be used to their full potential regarding their move choices would be expected to prove why it would be beneficial to competition/events to enforce this limitation/restriction on fellow competitors or would be in the murky depths of scrubbery (limiting opponents without reason in order to secure an unfair advantage is violating the Fairness Principle).
Speaking of the Fairness Principle. The second part of the "Customs Argument" also draws upon "Fairness". This seems to make claim of a Fairness Principle violation. But when speaking with the attendees about the matter it seems to not be the case, instead they were making claim of "balance" issues regarding characters.
The Fairness Principle (as found in Competitive Philosophy) is clearly defined as pertaining to the Competitors, not the Characters. I make no claim that it is the job of the rulecrafter to attempt to create a balanced fighting game, I leave that to be the job of the designers and director who are charged by Nintendo and their own volition (as well as a hopefully handsome payment of money and other benefits).
The competitors I interviewed seemed to want to make it a case of "fair" to the other characters rather than the other players. This is not the outlined Fairness Principle, this is, in my opinion, a violation of fairness itself! To attempt to handicap the player of a character because they are exploiting the game to their best abilities without reason is rather despicable to competitive practice. The cold truth of the matter is that any competitor has the same fair ability to chose any character including the Mii fighters and is competitively expected to exploit that character to its fullest potential. To rob a character of its abilities because it's not "fair" to the other characters leads to the ad reductio of the ridiculous, we get arguments like Link shouldn't be able to use his Master Sword since no other character has one or that Kirby can't use his shtick of copying abilities because nobody else has that ability, we can even (il-)logically argue that Mario shouldn't be allowed to be played because of his signature mustache (this ridiculous logic extends to Luigi and Wario).
To put it simply: Any argument of "Fairness" should be arguing in support of the Mii fighters being exploited to their full potential. Fair is fair - every player has the same ability to choose any character (including the Mii fighters) and it is competitively expected to exploit the chosen character to its greatest potential. Any bans/limitations will then be able to be argued soundly after the characters are fully utilized, it is contrary (and embarrassing) to proper practice to ban first without figuring out why it is you are banning.
Conclusion
The above is evidence that Mii fighters are not custom fighters and ostensibly not using custom moves hence should not be considered "customs" and therefore no warrant for being banned nor restricted.
However, let's examine the argument to its full extent:
If we assume the custom argument to be true (without proof, for sake of argument)... then any decision to instate a ban/restriction would be a decision based on putting our friend's opinion over that of the decision of the developers/designers/director of the game - that is, assuming the custom argument to be true without proof then the game itself was specifically designed to allow the Mii fighters to use "customs" anyway!
I believe that simply 'going with the crowd' or supporting friends' opinion over competitive principles is not only a weaker argument but doing so is violating competitive principles which would be embarrassing to our community as well as being disrespectful to the spirit of competition itself.
Conclusively, Mii fighters should competitively be used to their full potential unless warrant is born of sound reasoning based on definitions set forth by competitive practice regarding "customs" and upon formal analysis of "fairness" in competition.
Of the above reasons, the argument that the Mii fighters are using "customs" and regarding "fairness" of allowing them their custom moves while not allowing other characters' custom moves (not "fair") was the most popular.
The first step in this reasoning is definition:
What exactly is "customs"?
The results of this question is broken down to two more questions:
- Who/what should set definitions?
- Who/what is setting the definition of "custom" for Mii fighters' special moves?
According to competitive principles (the foundation of competition as outlined in Competitive Philosophy), there is the principle of Software Authority, which states that competition starts at a default to the software settings and is played without any out-of-game rules unless explicitly warranted (see David Sirlin's "Playing to Win").
Thus, competitively, definitions should be set by the software.
Any definitions we attempt to set for competition outside of the game ("extra ludo" rules) would be conceptual only and these purely conceptual out-of-game rules should be closely examined less the rules have tendency to become "scrubby" (i.e. outside standard competitive terms and thus not allowed in standard competitions).
Out-of-game Defintions
Following the competitive principles set forth: Anyone who is claiming the definitions that Mii fighters' special moves are "customs" must either:
- Prove the special attacks in question are defined as such by the software
or
- Admit they are creating out-of-game concepts. *
Remember, out-of-game concepts must be met with proper analysis in order to guard against scrubby rules from tainting competition.
The questions generated from these actions are:
- Does the software define the Mii fighters' special moves as Customs?
- Would setting these new "customs" definitions for Mii fighters' moves be "scrubby"?
I have yet to find the game define Mii fighters' moves as being "custom" moves as far as the software functions... although it's really not my job to do others' homework:
Burden of proof is on the one making the claim - If someone is claiming anything about reality they will have to show the evidence to support what is or is not (e.g. I can claim the sky is made of strawberry jelly, but it's not your job to prove me wrong, it is my burden to prove I am right!).
Custom Fighters vs "Customs"
In a competition that rules the "Custom Fighters" (CF) game setting is to be toggled to the default "OFF" setting is not making any claims outside of what the game functions at. The CF button is real and easily located in the upper right corner of the character select screen and functions simply as "ON" or "OFF" with a simple click of the button.
When following this rule the custom fighters which may have been created are disabled and hidden and Equipment is disabled, this includes the Mii fighters.
Additionally, it is objectively demonstrable that the Mii fighters are still able to be selected as playable characters with their chosen moves intact. It is also objectively demonstrable that their custom Equipment is, however, disabled with the CF:OFF. This is significant because it shows clearly that there is a distinction between custom Equipment and chosen Special Attacks when creating a Mii - the designers consciously chose for us the players to use the Mii in what we could refer to as a "non-custom" environment and that it is probably the case their moves are in fact not Custom Moves at all (outside of a "gross mistake" in programming/design of the game, however the complete lack of defining the moves as "custom moves" is what really makes the "gross mistake hypothesis" highly unlikely)!
Anyone now making a claim that Mii Fighters special moves are "customs" have a very difficult challenge on their burden of proof. Not only is there a lack of evidence to support this claim, but the very software and design of the game seem to be in complete contradiction to such a concept.
Until someone comes up with compelling evidence and or hard evidence then any claims that the Mii fighters should not be used to their full potential regarding their move choices would be expected to prove why it would be beneficial to competition/events to enforce this limitation/restriction on fellow competitors or would be in the murky depths of scrubbery (limiting opponents without reason in order to secure an unfair advantage is violating the Fairness Principle).
Speaking of the Fairness Principle. The second part of the "Customs Argument" also draws upon "Fairness". This seems to make claim of a Fairness Principle violation. But when speaking with the attendees about the matter it seems to not be the case, instead they were making claim of "balance" issues regarding characters.
The Fairness Principle (as found in Competitive Philosophy) is clearly defined as pertaining to the Competitors, not the Characters. I make no claim that it is the job of the rulecrafter to attempt to create a balanced fighting game, I leave that to be the job of the designers and director who are charged by Nintendo and their own volition (as well as a hopefully handsome payment of money and other benefits).
The competitors I interviewed seemed to want to make it a case of "fair" to the other characters rather than the other players. This is not the outlined Fairness Principle, this is, in my opinion, a violation of fairness itself! To attempt to handicap the player of a character because they are exploiting the game to their best abilities without reason is rather despicable to competitive practice. The cold truth of the matter is that any competitor has the same fair ability to chose any character including the Mii fighters and is competitively expected to exploit that character to its fullest potential. To rob a character of its abilities because it's not "fair" to the other characters leads to the ad reductio of the ridiculous, we get arguments like Link shouldn't be able to use his Master Sword since no other character has one or that Kirby can't use his shtick of copying abilities because nobody else has that ability, we can even (il-)logically argue that Mario shouldn't be allowed to be played because of his signature mustache (this ridiculous logic extends to Luigi and Wario).
To put it simply: Any argument of "Fairness" should be arguing in support of the Mii fighters being exploited to their full potential. Fair is fair - every player has the same ability to choose any character (including the Mii fighters) and it is competitively expected to exploit the chosen character to its greatest potential. Any bans/limitations will then be able to be argued soundly after the characters are fully utilized, it is contrary (and embarrassing) to proper practice to ban first without figuring out why it is you are banning.
Conclusion
The above is evidence that Mii fighters are not custom fighters and ostensibly not using custom moves hence should not be considered "customs" and therefore no warrant for being banned nor restricted.
However, let's examine the argument to its full extent:
If we assume the custom argument to be true (without proof, for sake of argument)... then any decision to instate a ban/restriction would be a decision based on putting our friend's opinion over that of the decision of the developers/designers/director of the game - that is, assuming the custom argument to be true without proof then the game itself was specifically designed to allow the Mii fighters to use "customs" anyway!
I believe that simply 'going with the crowd' or supporting friends' opinion over competitive principles is not only a weaker argument but doing so is violating competitive principles which would be embarrassing to our community as well as being disrespectful to the spirit of competition itself.
Conclusively, Mii fighters should competitively be used to their full potential unless warrant is born of sound reasoning based on definitions set forth by competitive practice regarding "customs" and upon formal analysis of "fairness" in competition.
I will let the merits of the other reasons speak for themselves... however, it is worth noting that when speaking with these competitors many expressed they were not in a strong position for their decision. Most expressed a kind of "on the fence" or did not feel they knew enough about the game itself to make a strong decision on the matter.
In contrast, the players who were in support of Mii being free of out-of-game rulings felt strong in their position and had a better understanding of the game mechanics and functions as well as more knowledge of the competitive rules we generally abide by.
Many of these "other" reasons are, coincidentally, given by newer players - the competitors that placed higher in the weekly tournaments were 9tails, Churro, and Shy. Churro defaulted to 9tails' reasoning which was along the same paramaters as Shy's: A definition of "customs" was given without due respect to software and with the belief that their personal opinion was enough to trump software functionality and developer decision; no evidence of the game defining the Mii fighters moves of custom moves or of some kind of gross oversight on game mechanics/design was given.
In contrast, the players who were in support of Mii being free of out-of-game rulings felt strong in their position and had a better understanding of the game mechanics and functions as well as more knowledge of the competitive rules we generally abide by.
Many of these "other" reasons are, coincidentally, given by newer players - the competitors that placed higher in the weekly tournaments were 9tails, Churro, and Shy. Churro defaulted to 9tails' reasoning which was along the same paramaters as Shy's: A definition of "customs" was given without due respect to software and with the belief that their personal opinion was enough to trump software functionality and developer decision; no evidence of the game defining the Mii fighters moves of custom moves or of some kind of gross oversight on game mechanics/design was given.
Again, the more popular reason was assuming the Mii fighters were somehow unfairly using "customs" (a definition created by concept only and is not supported by the game as far as I can tell) and it would be the TO's job to try to keep the fight clean by balancing the characters with an out-of-game ruling. And again, the main problems with this is:
- "Customs" is not a real thing supported by software and resides in concept only, unless proven otherwise
- (Easy to do as it should just be simply pointed out where it is in the game).
- Assuming "customs" exist:
- It is in question if Mii fighters are even using "custom moves", this must also be proven (again, simply point it out in reality)*.
- Assuming "customs" does exist and assuming the software does recognize them using "custom moves"
- There is still the issue of software authority and game developer authority versus the authority of our friend's/TO's mere opinion about how the game should be played.
The game refers to them as "original fighters" (see menu description) created with a player-selected moveset defined (there is no software recognized "default", simply mashing the A button to create a character cannot reasonably be a default since it still requires a choice and inputs from a player and would then require proof that we should even be using default anything (this leads down a slipper slope of "default" characters only - no DLC or unlockable characters could be reasonably allowed (and would further bring into question of unlockable stages being banned because they are not "default").
*Software authority is a principle to which we competitors adhere; the reason is rather obvious, but if we argue that one persons' opinion trumps the reality of the game itself then the major problems of how to incorporate all players' opinions or which opinions over others manifests -this problem creates and compounds more of an issues than just simply allowing the game to be played without the ban/restriction(s) on Mii to begin with. "Too many chefs" does indeed seem to "spoil the (competitive) broth" in this situation.
#Miivolution #FreeMii
Last edited:
I talked to a few more players at the last Salem on Saturday in regards to the recent Mii ruling.
There were a number of new players there, but I focused on just asking the established and high placing players this time. I'd have liked to get an opinion/reason from RCS_Jr on the topic, but I'll ask him and a few other players this coming weekend if they are at FoF.
However, it is very clear that the attendees are not supporting a restriction of any kind on the Mii fighters and that the facebook poll I heard about was not only unscientific but grossly inaccurate when it comes down to the attendees who are traveling to and paying to compete in.
I hope in the future facebook polls will not be used to determine rule changes in future events and the TO's take just a small amount of time to find out what their attendees who are traveling/paying to compete in actually want from them. And I hope in the future we can make sure the community gets the game they would like to play.
Right now it is highly beneficial to our community's competitors to include all the content we are seeing in majors and regionals, as expressed to me by many players at the Salem weeklies.
I suggest we shift our Smash community to be more inclusive and all regulars who attend tournaments should come to a full agreement on what rules we use as well agree to any other terms that need to be taken care of. Smash events are not a matter of one or two people deciding for everyone.
TO's this is our responsibility to make the best tournament experience for the attendees. I'm sure we can do this right.
Jaxas
@9Tales @Churro @AmericanSaikyo
t!MmY
@xMeowMC @gmanownyou @Charey
- Brobear - did not have any support for any side and said he didn't have a strong enough opinion on the matter.
- Falconmaster1337 - said the Mii should have access to all their moves since we wouldn't know enough about if we should restrict them or not if we haven't looked at the matter. I didn't get clarification if he did not supported a size restriction when he said he didn't support a moveset restriction. He did not explicitly state he did, but it'd be nice to clarify.
There were a number of new players there, but I focused on just asking the established and high placing players this time. I'd have liked to get an opinion/reason from RCS_Jr on the topic, but I'll ask him and a few other players this coming weekend if they are at FoF.
However, it is very clear that the attendees are not supporting a restriction of any kind on the Mii fighters and that the facebook poll I heard about was not only unscientific but grossly inaccurate when it comes down to the attendees who are traveling to and paying to compete in.
I hope in the future facebook polls will not be used to determine rule changes in future events and the TO's take just a small amount of time to find out what their attendees who are traveling/paying to compete in actually want from them. And I hope in the future we can make sure the community gets the game they would like to play.
Right now it is highly beneficial to our community's competitors to include all the content we are seeing in majors and regionals, as expressed to me by many players at the Salem weeklies.
I suggest we shift our Smash community to be more inclusive and all regulars who attend tournaments should come to a full agreement on what rules we use as well agree to any other terms that need to be taken care of. Smash events are not a matter of one or two people deciding for everyone.
TO's this is our responsibility to make the best tournament experience for the attendees. I'm sure we can do this right.
Jaxas
@9Tales @Churro @AmericanSaikyo
t!MmY
@xMeowMC @gmanownyou @Charey
Last edited:
Banning Mii fighters is the #1 scrub fad now. It's what all the cool tryhards do.
It's way past time for Oregon to stop being scrubby and step up to the competitive level of the majors we should be emulating. All players who want to play For Fun with their Mii bans, items, extended stage selection, and other non-standard settings should have the opportunity given to them. But all of us competitive players who want to step their game up to the next level are going to have to come together and play under a competitive banner that segregates the "for fun" type of play that has been so prevalent in our events
I don't want to have to go back to hosting events to give Oregon players their plentiful setups of nice big lagless monitors and competitive philosophy-fueled rulesets. I am enjoying being a competitor that people can look up to and learn from years of experience so they have a grander competitive future. I am going to ask that those who want to play in a competitive environment like I do let their TO's know where improvements can happen and then get those improvements to happen.
Let's keep everyone having fun, and I fully support TO's like Jaxas who offer fun side events, but I think the main events are lacking and it's going to take the community to bring it together. A unified ruleset that emulates majors and proper seeding that are not based on subjective facebook popularity contest posts are the first steps to this greater future.
It's way past time for Oregon to stop being scrubby and step up to the competitive level of the majors we should be emulating. All players who want to play For Fun with their Mii bans, items, extended stage selection, and other non-standard settings should have the opportunity given to them. But all of us competitive players who want to step their game up to the next level are going to have to come together and play under a competitive banner that segregates the "for fun" type of play that has been so prevalent in our events
I don't want to have to go back to hosting events to give Oregon players their plentiful setups of nice big lagless monitors and competitive philosophy-fueled rulesets. I am enjoying being a competitor that people can look up to and learn from years of experience so they have a grander competitive future. I am going to ask that those who want to play in a competitive environment like I do let their TO's know where improvements can happen and then get those improvements to happen.
Let's keep everyone having fun, and I fully support TO's like Jaxas who offer fun side events, but I think the main events are lacking and it's going to take the community to bring it together. A unified ruleset that emulates majors and proper seeding that are not based on subjective facebook popularity contest posts are the first steps to this greater future.
Well, in Mii News, Salem Smashfest will be allowing any combination (of special attacks) with the Mii Fighters. Good for Brawler since he can now get a decent KO move, but Gunner is still going to be sub-optimal as long as height/weight is restricted to medium build.
Jaxas
Smash Champion
Wait what?
No, that was our old rule: any move combo but you have to use guest Miis.
Nothing's changed about that in the last week or two, and we're still using 1111 only at least for now...
I asked you about lifting the moveset restriction because we had a petition to get rid of that ruling and you said it would be ok. Not sure what you thought I said but everyone's been using guest Mii + any move combination for a few weeks now with no issues.
A good bunch of us want a Mii-only side event this weekend, lol. Might want to reconsider going back on the restriction, at least until Genesis 3 makes a ruling (heard they may be using the restriction afterall due to the usual high-profile vocal minority tactics that worked at Paragon).
I think the most efficient way of killing Mii Fighters is to limit them to 0000 move-set. (i.e. disallow any special moves to be used).
What do you guys think of this suggestion? It's sure to alienate any players who might use Mii and fits the criteria of having no logical foundations. From there we can work on an outright Mii Ban Plan.
What do you guys think of this suggestion? It's sure to alienate any players who might use Mii and fits the criteria of having no logical foundations. From there we can work on an outright Mii Ban Plan.
Last edited:
Update on getting Oregon networked:
We have successfully come together to form a collective of competitive Smashers for Oregon. Together we will be able to communicate throughout the state effectively as well as efficiently make decisive orders for the competitive scene.
The members who are representing their respective area: t0mmy (Eugene), Churro (Corvallis), SunnyDS (Portland), Jaxas (Salem), Richard (Klamath).
Oregon Smash Community is Looking Good!
To demonstrate just how awesome a Smash Network is, I have set up a Genesis 3 funding for travel expenses and sent it out to the nascent network. In just about one week we have $100 funding the Oregon Genesis 3 trip, that's 1/5 of the goal I set! Let's see what more we can achieve in the next month!
Help spread the word, get our top Oregon players to Genesis 3!
There's a link on the first post of this thread, and here is a link to the funding as well:
We have successfully come together to form a collective of competitive Smashers for Oregon. Together we will be able to communicate throughout the state effectively as well as efficiently make decisive orders for the competitive scene.
The members who are representing their respective area: t0mmy (Eugene), Churro (Corvallis), SunnyDS (Portland), Jaxas (Salem), Richard (Klamath).
Oregon Smash Community is Looking Good!
To demonstrate just how awesome a Smash Network is, I have set up a Genesis 3 funding for travel expenses and sent it out to the nascent network. In just about one week we have $100 funding the Oregon Genesis 3 trip, that's 1/5 of the goal I set! Let's see what more we can achieve in the next month!
Help spread the word, get our top Oregon players to Genesis 3!
There's a link on the first post of this thread, and here is a link to the funding as well:
I'd say someone ought to ask the Bend and Vancouver players to get involved as well. I'll bring it up with Jitio next time I see him.
Last edited:
EggZaladZandwich
Smash Rookie
I don't really use smashboards much but I'm trying to make some noise with this upcoming event and I figured, why not cover all my bases?
http://smashboards.com/threads/dec-...explain-3-the-revengeance-portland-or.424344/
Literally the biggest house tournament of all time, coming to you LIVE from Portland, NEXT SATURDAY (December 12th).
Ft. Mike Haze (!), Bladewise, Eggz, Fatgoku, and more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
COME OR BE A SUPER LAME-O
http://smashboards.com/threads/dec-...explain-3-the-revengeance-portland-or.424344/
Literally the biggest house tournament of all time, coming to you LIVE from Portland, NEXT SATURDAY (December 12th).
Ft. Mike Haze (!), Bladewise, Eggz, Fatgoku, and more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
COME OR BE A SUPER LAME-O
OMG! The last Smash broadcast will be on the 15th. I'm hyped, but more about the fact that it's the final Smash video than I am about any potential new character reveals. The reason is because I'm sure Sakurai will want to go out with a bang, so whatever he's announcing is going to be epic.
King*Krool
Smash Apprentice
I'll be moving to Oregon soon from California.
Wish I could take my PR with me. Look foward to the new scene.
Wish I could take my PR with me. Look foward to the new scene.
Izayah
Smash Journeyman
Hey, a gigantic amount of Oregon operates on Facebook. Here is the group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/499672353506994/
Which part are you thinking of moving to? I'm guessing by 'soon' you mean sometime after New Year's, because who wants to move during the holidays?
King*Krool
Smash Apprentice
Exactly haha, I"ll be moving in January. It will be Southern Oregon near the Medford/Ashland area.
I know the guys down there. They're awesome.
I think Dylan said he is moving from Ashland about January.
Would love to see the Medford/Ashland area grow, it would be cool if NorCal came up and met Oregon players in that area since it's a pretty good halfway point between states.
Looking forward to seeing you at some Smash events :^)
Would love to see the Medford/Ashland area grow, it would be cool if NorCal came up and met Oregon players in that area since it's a pretty good halfway point between states.
Looking forward to seeing you at some Smash events :^)
Last edited:
King*Krool
Smash Apprentice
Thanks all, I heard central and North Oregon has quite a bit. Hoping to see if any players live in the southern part. Would love to get things going down in that region.
Typically things are more quiet around Thanksgiving until after New Year's, but this year seems to have been full of fun events all the way through. Genesis 3 will be the main focus in January, especially for all the West Coast players. I think there's already a Portland tournament planned on the same weekend though.
Sword Legion
Smash Rookie
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2015
- Messages
- 6
My Brother, Bombchu Link has gotten a monthly tournament going at our local Library here in Florence. Always looking for new players if you can get there. We had a great time, and as of now we have eight regular people, so things are looking cool!