Smash 4 Rulesets, And What We May See Occur: Some foresight and thoughts.

[M@v]

Hi everyone, I'll start with a brief intro of who I am for those who don't know me. My tag is M@v, and I was a Brawl player throughout its lifespan, as well as a key community contributor throughout its life cycle. I'm a member of the Brawl Back Room, and most importantly for the sake of this discussion, I'm a TO who has run Melee/Brawl/and PM tournaments for 6 years, and I was a member of the highly controversial Unity Ruleset Committee (URC) when it existed. What was the URC you ask? It was an effort by TOs to create a standardized brawl ruleset to use around the country. This would allow us to have more fair standards of competition, and make us more appealing to larger tournaments like EVO/MLG, since we would already have 1 nationwide ruleset in place. As you can image, not everyone agreed with the URC, most notably when it issued the MK ban. But those are stories for another time. The point is I have 6 years of experience making rulesets, both by myself and by cooperating with others.

I'm making this post to talk about smash 4 rulesets, what may happen early on with them, and some potential pitfalls I ask people look out for early on.

When Brawl first came out, there were a surge of different rulesets all over the country. What happened pretty quickly was that different regions created different rulesets. Most regions settled on 3 stocks, 8 minutes rather quickly, but stages were a far different story. For years, each region you would go to would offer completely different stages. East coast was known for their extremely conservative stage lists, often not having more than a few stages legal. Regions like the midwest, on the other hand, would have 2 and sometimes even 3 times the amount of stages legal. They were much more liberal and open to experimentation than other places were.

I see something similar happening with smash 4. I predict different regions will make different rulesets based on several factors, such as:
-Character usage(Characters can strongly influence how good/bad a stage is)
-Player Preferences(common feedback to TOs)
-Past region history (ex. Midwest=more liberal EC=more conservative)
-TO Bias(Certain TOs may tweak rulesets to their personal liking rather than input as a whole).

In addition, expect some of the biggest debates to light up smashboards/reddit/etc. to be those over custom movesets. Hopefully we get more information on them soon, but I fully expect them to be hotly debated among the community and TOs. I expect some regions will allow them and others will try banning them. I feel they will take a similar path at first to stages. Unlike stages though, they can affect a match even more, so I suspect this is a topic that will get standardized much quicker than stages.

Next, I feel Its ESSENTIAL that there IS NOT a Unity Ruleset-like effort early on Smash 4; it will do nothing but harm to it. I feel there needs to be experimentation in the beginning to see what works and what doesn't, especially in particular regions. And you won't get that experimentation if everyone uses the same ruleset from the start. After things level out a bit? Maybe. But when smash 4 releases, it will be far too early for any of that. Besides, the rulesets everyone likes will become more prominent by themselves over time; there won't be a need to force them on everyone so quickly. If a region makes a ruleset people like, TOs from other regions who either heard of the ruleset or played in a tourney with it will start adapting it for their own tourneys, and a domino-effect will occur. This will likely occur until there are 1-4 really popular rulesets.

Lastly, a word of caution to the community. Beware of what will probably be known as the "MK syndrome". Actually I'm going to coin that term now before it happens. "MK syndrome" will be when TOs/people/or regions try to ban characters far too early in smash 4's lifecycle because they fear a repeat of the MK situation in Brawl. One of the arguments for not banning MK later on in brawl's life was "Its too late now; it would be too hard to switch gears this late." I fully expect people to try to use this as an argument to ban characters early on in smash 4 they feel are too powerful without much thought. I'm not saying never ban any character; all I'm saying is walk very, VERY cautiously with this topic, and to keep an out for people jumping the gun. If a character or two becomes dominant early on, you can bet money you will be seeing talk of bans. Think logically, look at all factors (region, player skill, stages, movesets, etc.) before buying into a ban like that. Nintendo may even do balance patches for all we know; but that's a whole nother can of worms I won't discuss here.

In closing, I for one learned from the mistakes of the URC when I was in it, and I use that knowledge to be a better ruleset maker and TO, rather than repeat those mistakes. Did everyone there take away those lessons? I hope so, but I can't speak for them either. What I do know is its going to be a very volatile environment for rulesets early on for smash 4. If we want the best results; lets things run their course and don't try to force things down other people's throats.

Cream rises to the top for a reason people.

P.S. If I do wind up being right about all this, I want a cookie.

 

[Pazzo.]

Hear, Hear!

This open, experimenting approach to the early tournaments and metagame will be essential. We've been through the chaos that was early Brawl, so let's learn from our past mistakes and, as M@V put it, 'If we want the best results; lets things run their course and don't try to force things down other people's throats'.

Play our cards right, and we could potentially see the unifying of both the Brawl and Melee crowd... but only, and I stress only if we play our cards right and be very mindful of how we handle SSB4.

 

[Octillus]

So what you're saying is all items, rumble falls only, customizable miis. I think I'm hearing you correctly.

 

[M@v]

If people don't like it they just won't show up to your tournaments

 

[Lopson]

I think that what happened with Brawl is a lot harder to pull off than letting things take their natural course through the early stages of the meta game. Just be patient, that's all!

 

[LancerStaff]

Already, SSB4 has some pretty significant divides.

FD only vs. "standard" stage choice.
Customization vs. no customiztaion.
Miis vs. no Miis.

Personally, I'm in favor of the former in all cases. But the first is definitely going to divide the players very quickly, and it will very quickly determine how the metagame will shape itself.

I'm more in favor of balance then those options though, so I'll quickly abandon them if they're unbalanced enough.

 

[EdreesesPieces]

If people don't like it they just won't show up to your tournaments

I actually disagree. The game will be so popular and people will be so thirsty for competition and to get better they will show up to tournaments regardless of rule set, unless its is completely outrageous. That's why TO's can use whatever the heck rules they want. Nobody's gonna be that picky the first year of the games release. If you hosted a Brawl tournament with Skyloft as a legal stage the first month it was out, you can bet you still had 50 people show up, hence good players were like "well wow i want that money" and showed up anyway. If some people don't show up to your tournaments, the game will be so young they will fall behind in skill level. People will want every chance they can to practice.

 

[infomon]

There has been some discussion over here:
http://smashboards.com/threads/afte...ill-be-a-good-competitive-game.362461/page-23

about defining criteria that should be used (by a backroom and/or community at-large) to discuss and determine rulesets.

It is time. Let's define the arguments that would be appropriate for rule-set determination, and the amount of battle-worthiness that must be considered appropriate to make ruleset decisions.

If we give TOs -- including early TOs -- minimum viable rulesets (leaving some decisions like stages open) early on, then they can be empowered to run tournaments that are at least reasonable for their communities.

If we give TOs bad rulesets (banning characters / tactics / stages too early, before they are proven or without communicating the justification clearly), then there will be fighting and divergence.

We will see ruleset variation early, but this does not need to manifest in region divergence.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

I think a key difference maker is going to be that major tournament organizations like EVO and the MLG are going to be involved with smash 4 from day one most likely, and if the game is a competitive success, this could continue for many years. Whatever rules they use are going to have huge momentum to be an early standard as smaller scale events will want to be optimal practice for these supermajors, and realistically, those decisions will be made a few months into the game's lifespan. I feel like both organizations are likely to give us (the greater competitive smash community) deference for reasonable rules at this point in time, but we definitely will have to make a concerted effort on that point to put together a ruleset of broad agreeability. So while experimentation and such is inevitable and likely even positive, I think trying to make a consensus ruleset early is going to be important. It likely won't be a true unity ruleset early, but the nature of these supermajors is that one ruleset will dominate early, and we should be mindful about what we can do to make that the best it can be.

 

[Tagxy]

M@V beating me to the punch. I was thinking of making a topic like this.

I'm gonna quote myself from another thread because its relevant here:

Unfortunately there is already a secret group of prominent TO's attempting to push a ruleset. Can't say Im a big fan of closed-door, hidden-member, TO only (from what Ive gathered) committees like this; I was pretty against the URC at the time and this seems like a repeat but worse since its hidden-member, so early, and no area for comment whatsoever. Im not against a stanrdard ruleset, but Im gonna be speaking against this one in my region unless it happens to be perfect.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/300411396795174/
(group description for those who cant read it)
"Pre-Smash 4 Ruleset Discussion
This group is for TO's willing to cooperate during the early phases of Smash 4 to ensure and agree upon a finalized community ruleset. A standard ruleset is essential to the life of almost any competitive game. With Smash being an Esport we want the same opportunities as other competitive games. To do this we need to use this group to discuss what should be legal and things around that matter so regions across America will be practicing and playing under a unified ruleset. I put the most important and open minded TO's in here. Let's make the most of this. Everyone has a voice! If done right this will push our community in the right direction!"

 

[infomon]

M@V -- Do you know of, or have you been involved in any discussions regarding the formation of a smash4 backroom (or similar entity, on or off smashboards)?

I will pitch to any such entities the importance of transparency and legitimacy in the eyes of the whole smash community. This doesn't necessarily mean full-public-all-the-things, but I hope that we can have a multitude of perspectives come together, to determine great rulesets that avoid mass-fragmentation.

 

[M@v]

I think a key difference maker is going to be that major tournament organizations like EVO and the MLG are going to be involved with smash 4 from day one most likely, and if the game is a competitive success, this could continue for many years. Whatever rules they use are going to have huge momentum to be an early standard as smaller scale events will want to be optimal practice for these supermajors, and realistically, those decisions will be made a few months into the game's lifespan. I feel like both organizations are likely to give us (the greater competitive smash community) deference for reasonable rules at this point in time, but we definitely will have to make a concerted effort on that point to put together a ruleset of broad agreeability. So while experimentation and such is inevitable and likely even positive, I think trying to make a consensus ruleset early is going to be important. It likely won't be a true unity ruleset early, but the nature of these supermajors is that one ruleset will dominate early, and we should be mindful about what we can do to make that the best it can be.

While a lot of this true, MLG and the others got those rulesets from us in the first place; they did not just go and do their own things. Its been that way throughout the years as Melee/Brawl have been featured at MLG and EVO. And while a "standard" ruleset would be ideal in their eyes, we (as in MLG/EVO and the community) managed fine during the earlier MLGs and EVOs when there were still a lot of different rulesets. We were always able to make rulesets everyone could agree on for those big events . I'm honestly not too worried about that topic, but its still a good thing to bring up.

M@V -- Do you know of, or have you been involved in any discussions regarding the formation of a smash4 backroom (or similar entity, on or off smashboards)?

I will pitch to any such entities the importance of transparency and legitimacy in the eyes of the whole smash community. This doesn't necessarily mean full-public-all-the-things, but I hope that we can have a multitude of perspectives come together, to determine great rulesets that avoid mass-fragmentation.

Things are in the air, but there's a good chance it'll at least start publicly.

 

[metalmonstar]

Truthly TOs need to come together and collect data at events. Experimenting is a good idea but it only leads to speculation and assumptions then it has done us no good. If we collect data that shows a stage has seemingly random results then we can move towards banning. Arguing over elements of a stage or character, albeit entertaining, are not the way to decide what should and should not be legal.

 

[M@v]

I don't know if they did it at Anaheim, but MLG in 2010 would write down tons of data from each match and keep it on record. Its how we got such detailed character usage statistics from those tourneys.

 

[Kalierdarke]

when the 3DS version releases in October, I'm going to be running local tournaments in Missouri starting the following week. Customizations and limited items will be allowed so I'll be more than happy to let everyone know what feedback the early tournament provides on both matches and player comments in regards to these.

I agree completely that early tournaments need to have some differences, and that TOs should share any info they have to help out all tournaments.

 

[Rich Homie Quan]

If you were a rapper, I'd sign you to my label, if I had a label.

 

[Raijinken]

Good tips to hear, since I'm going to try to get a scene started in Raleigh, NC. I've made it pretty clear to my group that we're either going to run a different ruleset every few days/weeks, or start off generous and then cull things down as needed (starting with major hazard stages, then time, then stock, never characters). I want to see as diverse a game as possible, none of the past games' 6-ish character viable rosters.

 

[topspin1617]

Makes a lot of sense.

I think you're absolutely right that trying to make a unity ruleset too early can be harmful. It takes years for a metagame to develop and techniques to be discovered; how can we make standard rules based on almost no information?

It's my hope that Smash 4 ends up having a lot of viable characters and stages. What I'd like is to start with a lot of stages; if you're not sure, use it. Then if any stage really seems like it's being harmful to the metagame, then and only then should it be banned.

Smash 4's success as a competitive game depends in large part on how early tournaments are run imo. The game won't have been out long enough to really see the final product, but on the other hand, because of Brawl I don't think people will be willing to wait very long before dismissing it and going back to Melee. Smash 4 needs to have its own appeal, and I think that appeal can be character and stage variety that we simply haven't had before.

 

[ryuu seika]

I for one, believe that the best way to run stages is to have everything even remotely viable legal at the start and have, in addition to the regular stage options (including normal FD), an option to play on an FD version of a random stage. This means we can analyse everything from the get go but it also means that we can see the effects of all the different FDs without player bias coming into play. If some prove problematic, we remove them from the random select and suddenly the amount of testing the other versions receive goes up. Eventually, we cut all problematic FD versions.

As for the non-FD stages, they're far more different than the FD ones and don't need rigorous comparative testing. Allowing player bias there is not only fine but crucial. In the end, the experience should be about player enjoyment. We can't force players to play on awful stages, even if they aren't actually an issue in any other way.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Or, better idea: all the major TOs could grow a pair of balls and stop bending over backwards to please top players. The fact of the matter is that TOing, especially top tier TOing with stream support and large entry pools, is not easy, and it's incredibly hard for someone without experience or capital to just start hosting quality events. IF the major TOs decide that they aren't going to be scrubby, then the rest of the playerbase will be forced to go to their events because there are no other options.

The entire reason Brawl collapsed was because TOs decided that being afraid of their players and gutting the game so that a few vocal people would stop complaining was a good idea, and look how that turned out. Not well. So, I feel confident that if the major TOs grew a pair and just hosted events without caring what these vocal players think about their rulesets, then the meta will sort itself out. The more TOs mess with the game, the worse the meta will become.

TL;DR: Stop banning stuff like scrubs and the game won't die.

 

[M@v]

As for the FD versions of stages; I honestly don't know. We don't even know if they are going to be in "for glory" mode only or available offline. And if they are, apparently they are all a little bit different.

 

[<π]

Hey mav, miss you man. Can't wait to play a few games with you once Smash4 comes out.

I have to say something relevant now... Yes, No unity rule set. I think trying to force change can definitely shatter the community. It will grow and change organically. I do suggest that we be very very slow to ban anything based just on the feels, you don't ban something because it is uncomfortable.

I hope the leaders of the community learn from brawls mistakes and the recent successes of melee's community.

 

[infomon]

Stage list is not the only part of a ruleset. Smash4 comes with a number of differences from previous games:

• Final Destination versions of most(?) stages
• Custom special moves
• Mii fighters

A ruleset needs to have a good match length, # stocks, procedure for character/moveset and stage selection.

Having a Smashboards ruleset helps smaller TOs to run tournaments. Often the TOs are not people who know the game very well. They have the resources to host, but they need a ruleset (and other aides) that they can use without getting tons of flack in their local community (bawww where's norfair?). A Smashboards Smash4 Ruleset lets them focus on running the tournament.

We need a good ruleset even without a finalized stage list. I think it's okay to say: "Here are all the stages that have not yet been proven ban-worthy", and if some TOs / regions ban things more aggressively, that's ok, they're just scrubs

 

[Terotrous]

Honestly, I don't think coming up with a basic ruleset is going to be that tricky:

4 Stock, 8 Minutes
No items
Tentative Wii U Stage List: Battlefield, FD, Halberd, Kalos Pokemon League, Mushroomy Kingdom, Pilotwings, Pyrosphere, Town and City
Custom Movesets allowed, assuming they can be set up reasonably quickly. Customizable items banned
Mii characters also subject to how fast they can be set up. If there's some intelligent way to get your Mii, they can be allowed. Otherwise if they must exist on the system beforehand it is at the TO's discretion.


Of course, there's some things we can't know until we get the game (like how fast you can set up custom moves or your Mii), but I don't expect things to change that drastically from Melee / PM.


Apart from Miis, which might be a set up problem, there's no point even talking about character bans for the first year.

 

[LancerStaff]

As for the FD versions of stages; I honestly don't know. We don't even know if they are going to be in "for glory" mode only or available offline. And if they are, apparently they are all a little bit different.

We've seen plenty of items on the FD variants, so it's looking like we can choose them offline.

 

[M@v]

Well, games out and we are already seeing several ideas tossed around. 3 stock 8 minutes from brawl is there, as is the 2 stock 5 minutes found in "For Glory" mode.

 

[LancerStaff]

Well, games out and we are already seeing several ideas tossed around. 3 stock 8 minutes from brawl is there, as is the 2 stock 5 minutes found in "For Glory" mode.

2/5 sounds awfully short to me... But it looks like being the better player means alot more this time around. It might work out.

 

[ghaudephaede010]

I have not been on this website in an eternity but I logged on simply to reply to thee opening post to say, judging from that post, if the people in the bbr agree, this community is screwed.

 

[M@v]

I have not been on this website in an eternity but I logged on simply to reply to thee opening post to say, judging from that post, if the people in the bbr agree, this community is screwed.

Why do you disagree? Interested to here why you don't like the idea of experimentation to determine the best ruleset rather than banning things without sufficiently trying them.

 

[ghaudephaede010]

I most definitely did not come in here to pick a fight with you, debate with you, or get into some long-winded tirade. I do understand, however, that if I am going to make that statement, I should be prepared to defend it. I will try to give the short and sweet of it.

I believe in testing rule sets. I am pretty sure anyone that knows my ramblings over the years of Brawl's life know I wanted rule sets tested as thoroughly and vigorously as possible. I used to argue with Bizkit all the freaking time about how silly it was to have a URC in place but not test rules. The problem I have with what you are saying is thee opposite problem I was having with Bizkit and thee other URC people back then.

I believe a URC is a great idea. I have always believed that having one unified rule set is what is best for the community. However, when Brawl first hit, every region had different rule sets and stage listings... and we see how that worked out. The formation of the URC was a great idea simply because in theory, it was to give all these TO's a place to talk about what is and is not successful from their vantage point. What really happened was a group of corrupt people used their position to try giving themselves advantages in the competitive community.

Thee answer I proposed back then and now especially is that a URC exist from day one. And instead of TO's
being corrupt, actually use the system the way it was intended. Have these people. like BBR's get together and test rule sets and combinations. Use a Republic process and nominally come to terms with what works and what does not work. If the process is started now, then there is hope that the community not be split and wrecked like it was back in 2011.

What you are proposing, in essence, is that we take the same steps with this game that we took with Brawl... and we already have that history lesson. We need a URC that is not bias, or corrupt and we need this small group of people to actually test rule sets for the better of the community. That is how I feel and if the community agrees with you, if the powers that be agree with you, then I see a repeat of Brawl's disasters.

I am sure you have no idea how many times I suggested URC test rule sets just to eliminate them as possibilities. Every time I was greeted with resounding no and, "you don't know the process blah blah blah". We need a URC, but we need them to be what thee other URC was not. That is how I feel.

 

[shapular]

I actually disagree. The game will be so popular and people will be so thirsty for competition and to get better they will show up to tournaments regardless of rule set, unless its is completely outrageous. That's why TO's can use whatever the heck rules they want. Nobody's gonna be that picky the first year of the games release. If you hosted a Brawl tournament with Skyloft as a legal stage the first month it was out, you can bet you still had 50 people show up, hence good players were like "well wow i want that money" and showed up anyway. If some people don't show up to your tournaments, the game will be so young they will fall behind in skill level. People will want every chance they can to practice.

I don't know, I don't think anybody would have gone to a Brawl tournament with Skyloft legal, considering Skyloft wasn't in the game and didn't even exist yet.

 

[infomon]

I assume @ G ghaudephaede010 meant Skyworld: http://www.ssbwiki.com/Skyworld

 

[M@v]

@ G ghaudephaede010 , thanks for the reply. I'm not trying to get into an argument either; just was legitimately curious on your reasoning. Just out of curiosity as well, when did you have the back and forth with the URC? I was a later addition to it after Keitaro had left and all that (AKA I wasn't a charter member and was offered to join it later in its life cycle).

 

[Aninymouse]

I most definitely did not come in here to pick a fight with you, debate with you, or get into some long-winded tirade. I do understand, however, that if I am going to make that statement, I should be prepared to defend it. I will try to give the short and sweet of it.

I believe in testing rule sets. I am pretty sure anyone that knows my ramblings over the years of Brawl's life know I wanted rule sets tested as thoroughly and vigorously as possible. I used to argue with Bizkit all the freaking time about how silly it was to have a URC in place but not test rules. The problem I have with what you are saying is thee opposite problem I was having with Bizkit and thee other URC people back then.

I believe a URC is a great idea. I have always believed that having one unified rule set is what is best for the community. However, when Brawl first hit, every region had different rule sets and stage listings... and we see how that worked out. The formation of the URC was a great idea simply because in theory, it was to give all these TO's a place to talk about what is and is not successful from their vantage point. What really happened was a group of corrupt people used their position to try giving themselves advantages in the competitive community.

Thee answer I proposed back then and now especially is that a URC exist from day one. And instead of TO's
being corrupt, actually use the system the way it was intended. Have these people. like BBR's get together and test rule sets and combinations. Use a Republic process and nominally come to terms with what works and what does not work. If the process is started now, then there is hope that the community not be split and wrecked like it was back in 2011.

What you are proposing, in essence, is that we take the same steps with this game that we took with Brawl... and we already have that history lesson. We need a URC that is not bias, or corrupt and we need this small group of people to actually test rule sets for the better of the community. That is how I feel and if the community agrees with you, if the powers that be agree with you, then I see a repeat of Brawl's disasters.

I am sure you have no idea how many times I suggested URC test rule sets just to eliminate them as possibilities. Every time I was greeted with resounding no and, "you don't know the process blah blah blah". We need a URC, but we need them to be what thee other URC was not. That is how I feel.

I don't know jack about any of this back room URC stuff, but I can agree that the fact that I can't learn much more than I'm told by the people who are allowed there is a problem. In short, transparency is the best policy. That doesn't mean that people need to give in to mob rule, here, but it would be nice to be able to discuss things in public as they are being discussed behind closed doors. The back room people aren't exactly elected officials, and they're not obligated to any of us normal folk per se (other than their reputations being on the line). Still, as has been said, it's bigger now than just stocks, time limit, and stages; now we have cutom moves, miis, omega stages, and who knows what else that is still unforeseen. Not only are you going to need some great minds, but you're going to need some fast hands, as well - top players. You're going to need a large group of skilled players to test out possible rules to make sure that the game flows well and is fair and reasonable.

Why don't we start with how it's decided that people are included in the decision maker circle to begin with? Who decides who has the final say on what we go with initially? Because if we're going to nominate a few good people, I have some picks of my own that spring to mind, if they'd even be interested.

Still, there are a lot of average forum-goers on Smashboards who have great minds and could be a great benefit to debating rules for 3DS AND WiiU. And yes, I feel like the two pieces of hardware will have separate rules, in the end. Once the WiiU version drops, I still expect we will see some 3DS tournaments, though in what capacity I cannot foresee. The online for Smash 4 seems to run with very minimal lag as far as I've seen, even when playing with people across the Pacific Ocean. Online tournaments may become a viable strategy, with free websites like Challonge aiding in the logistics.

There is just so much to discuss. I know the game is not even in the hands of most of the world yet, and some things will become more clear to us once we all have it, but there really are many, many avenues that we must explore this time. It's quite a task. I will say, however, that trying to debate every little thing here would be a terrible idea for time constraints. Any topic could easily blossom into a 100-page thread that no human being would ever read the entirety of. There are some things that, I think, deserve to be decided openly, but I think some things can just be put forth tentatively as long as they come with the disclaimer that yes, they can be changed later if need be.

The game's brand new. We're not going to get it perfect the first try. We should try to do so anyway, of course, but we all need to be open to reasonable criticism if a bad decision is made. Just, whatever you do, don't do what Smogon does. Seriously. You can't always make everyone happy, but we do need to figure out what's fair for the largest number of people possible.

My opinions

Stages
I'm not going to offer a starter/counter-pick suggestion, but I do think that all Omega stages should be allowed unless a problem with them arises. There are slight differences between them, but only allowing the REAL Final Destination seems to miss the point of omega stages entirely. Some have walls to cling to/jump off of below, but otherwise they mostly all function like the real deal. The stage list in Smash 3DS is small enough that it should be reasonable to expect players to at least have a basic understanding of the Omega stages and to incorporate them when appropriate.

As far as a stage list goes, I'll hold my tongue until the game is out. I do think that we ought to allow as many stages as is "reasonable." If a stage has no hazards, no walk-offs, and doesn't seem to create any stage-assisted infinite combos, I don't see why it should be banned. Another way of putting it is this: not everyone wants to play on the same 3 stages for the next 10 years. Variety is the spice of life.

Custom Moves
I personally am in favor of allowing them at first. I have not studied all the customs in the game, but of the ones I have seen, I have not seen any horribly unbalanced ones. Yoshi has a glitch custom that causes him to rocket into the stratosphere, and perhaps that move should be banned until/if Nintendo patches it, but I do not think one glitch attack is cause to ban all of them. Many of the weaker characters or characters with terrible recoveries gain a lot of viability from this system. Letting everyone test this system themselves in a real-world setting is the best and fastest way to ferret out problems, anyway. Later, if we spot a lot of problems with this, it can be dealt with. The only argument against custom moves that I think is very reasonable for 3DS Smash is that "there are so many of them." And right off the bat, that is true. But as the metagame develops, the worst of the worst characters will drop off the map, and there will be less to remember as time goes on if history is any indication of where we are going.

Stock and Time Limits
5 minutes seems more than enough for 2 stocks. Probably not enough for 3. I would never do more than 3 stocks in this game. Nintendo has already said that they are going with a 4-stock system, but I'm just not so sure about that. I feel like I need to play a lot of this game myself before I can offer a cohesive opinion.

I will say that there is no real stock/time balance that can eliminate "run away" play styles. The decision to play that way lies on the player. It looks like the game engine is still able to support and reward offensive play with most characters. I would say that most of the streams/videos I've seen so far have offered a good balance between offense and defense.

Mii Fighter
Allowed at all times. Just disable equipment if it's as unbalances as most of us see it to be.

 

[ghaudephaede010]

I was going back and forth with Alpha, Bizkit, dmbrandon, and even Keitaro before URC's official announcement. I continued long after they formed and basically, with the help of Mike Haze, fought with them until their demise. I never really crossed you... I mostly fought with people that post frequently on AiB because I rarely come to this site.

I always believed in a universal rule set but say Bizkit used his authority to get PS2 legalized as a CP when common sense says any stage that messes with the physics of the gameplay should be illegal. But since he never loses on that stage, BAM, it is legal. I killed them over and over again. I begged them to test Japan's rule set just to tell me why it would not work, they refused. I asked them what was the point of having this committee if they were not going to test legitimate, in use, rule sets??? They returned with a big f-you.

We should have a rule set committee, but lets do it right this time. Lets actually follow what Japan started last time around. Their community was slightly ahead of ours and we need to do what they did correctly while adding our own influences to progress. We start by truly unifying with a decent rule set and stage selection, If they could do it, I know we can, but we need the right people with the right mentality as leaders.

That is what I am hoping will happen this time around. I am hoping you are one of those people and I am hoping the community is looking for those people this time around. If you only knew what I went through trying with the people in the Brawl community.

 

[infomon]

I always believed in a universal rule set but say Bizkit used his authority to get PS2 legalized as a CP when common sense says any stage that messes with the physics of the gameplay should be illegal.

This is not at all "common sense" to me, especially when that change in physics is predictable and temporary and still allows for a valid competition between players.

But I generally agree with the sentiment that we should properly evaluate the stages and come up with a good "unified" (as much as possible) ruleset, constructed more from the principle of "enabling competition at smash bros." than anyone's specific desires/whims/strengths.

 

[ghaudephaede010]

I don't know jack about any of this back room URC stuff, but I can agree that the fact that I can't learn much more than I'm told by the people who are allowed there is a problem. In short, transparency is the best policy. That doesn't mean that people need to give in to mob rule, here, but it would be nice to be able to discuss things in public as they are being discussed behind closed doors. The back room people aren't exactly elected officials, and they're not obligated to any of us normal folk per se (other than their reputations being on the line). Still, as has been said, it's bigger now than just stocks, time limit, and stages; now we have cutom moves, miis, omega stages, and who knows what else that is still unforeseen. Not only are you going to need some great minds, but you're going to need some fast hands, as well - top players. You're going to need a large group of skilled players to test out possible rules to make sure that the game flows well and is fair and reasonable.

Why don't we start with how it's decided that people are included in the decision maker circle to begin with? Who decides who has the final say on what we go with initially? Because if we're going to nominate a few good people, I have some picks of my own that spring to mind, if they'd even be interested.

Still, there are a lot of average forum-goers on Smashboards who have great minds and could be a great benefit to debating rules for 3DS AND WiiU. And yes, I feel like the two pieces of hardware will have separate rules, in the end. Once the WiiU version drops, I still expect we will see some 3DS tournaments, though in what capacity I cannot foresee. The online for Smash 4 seems to run with very minimal lag as far as I've seen, even when playing with people across the Pacific Ocean. Online tournaments may become a viable strategy, with free websites like Challonge aiding in the logistics.

There is just so much to discuss. I know the game is not even in the hands of most of the world yet, and some things will become more clear to us once we all have it, but there really are many, many avenues that we must explore this time. It's quite a task. I will say, however, that trying to debate every little thing here would be a terrible idea for time constraints. Any topic could easily blossom into a 100-page thread that no human being would ever read the entirety of. There are some things that, I think, deserve to be decided openly, but I think some things can just be put forth tentatively as long as they come with the disclaimer that yes, they can be changed later if need be.

The game's brand new. We're not going to get it perfect the first try. We should try to do so anyway, of course, but we all need to be open to reasonable criticism if a bad decision is made. Just, whatever you do, don't do what Smogon does. Seriously. You can't always make everyone happy, but we do need to figure out what's fair for the largest number of people possible.

The people that should ideally be involved in the process are tournament organizers (as they run the tournaments) with assistance from top players for specific testing of things like move sets. Some things do not require top players to test, but my main idea was to test new and especially big changes in thee online community. If it holds up, take it to offline events. Use the community and their feedback as much as possible but be willing and flexible to test anything. No matter what I proposed, URC shot it down because certain people had their agenda and I was interfering with it.

 

[M@v]

I think I may want my cookie now, especially for the custom moves segment.

 

[Das Koopa]

With few likely stages left, I'd like to make a guesswork list on tournament legal stages. Will depend on regions:

Neutral:

-Final Destination/Omega Variants
-Battlefield
-Smashville
-Town and City
-Lylat Cruise
-Miiverse


Neutral/Counterpick:
-Big Battlefield
-Duck Hunt
-Kongo Jungle 64

Counterpick:
-Halberd
-Castle Siege
-Wuhu Island
-Pilotwings
-Skyloft
-Delfino Plaza

Counterpick/Banned:
-Garden of Hope
-Wooly World
-Orbital Gate Assault

-Not sure on Lylat's placement. I know the stage tilt at some points made it a counterpick.
-Kongo Jungle 64's issues seem to be pretty much rectified. It's not a huge stage anymore and the camera doesn't go willy-nilly.
-Duck Hunt seems to have no hazards and kind of reminds me of Yoshi's Story.
-Big Battlefield might be a bit big, could even see it being banned depending on how it goes in competitive play.
-Most travelling stages seem at least as fine as Delfino in Brawl. The iffiest one looks to be Wuhu Island.

 

[M@v]

Its almost as though I was seeing the future with Diddy Kong when I wrote the "MK syndrome" part. ;3