When do you think the Sm4sh backroom will be established, if at all?

[AccountsDept]

Now, I'm quite sure on how the backrooms came into existence, but from my understanding, they're the group of experienced players and vocal members of the community that are selected to construct the tier list.

Given that most community pooled tierlists seem to be unreliable and a little bit silly, I'd like to know at what point of the metagame is considered "appropriate" for establishing a backroom. Of course, I'm not asking for one RIGHT RIGHT now, but i'm just curious.

 

[digiholic]

I think after Apex it's time to seriously consider Smash 4's competitive future. I'd like to see a backroom shortly after that tournament.

 

[M15t3R E]

This is a better tier list. But you're right that we should not take any current tier list seriously. That's partialy what Apex 2015 will be for. A whole lot of data will be gathered. I agree that the Smash 4, or Sm4sh, backroom could and should be formed following that massive event.

 

[warriorman222]

Neither of those tier lists are good, far too many characters are being slept on in both. It's way too early for a tier list, and you have to be able to justify every single spot. Like Falco is being slept on so hard.

 

[Pazx]

I wouldn't mind seeing a back room being formed in the wake of Apex and being tweaked regularly (members coming in and going out) even if we don't get a tier list until the end of the year.

It's also worth noting that the tier lists aren't the only responsibility of the back room.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Truthfully, I'm not entirely on board with the idea of a back room. While I acknowledge the necessity of something resembling a unified body for the sake of deciding upon standard rulesets and the like, I don't like the idea of such a body being so...secretive? IIRC the Brawl Back Room forum was completely hidden to non-members and there was basically no transparency in their decision making. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong, I didn't pay huge amounts of attention to the Brawl scene.)

IDK, it just seems to me like it's basically inevitable that controversial decisions will have to be made and I think it would be better for everyone if there was plenty of transparency involved instead of the whole thing being a black box sort of affair.

 

[Indigo Jeans]

@ Shaya this is important

Anyway I agree with what @ ParanoidDrone said. There's really no point to secrecy... at least in my relatively uninformed opinion? Idk what goes/went on in the BBR that needed to be kept secret. Then again it might be one of those things where if all processes are completely transparent the situation can get rocky from misunderstandings on the part of the greater community.

Imo partial transparency like what was done with the Smash Lab closer to the end of its life would work just fine but shrug

 

[HeroMystic]

From my knowledge during Brawl, the BBR handled the tier list, handed out the official MU chart, and made the recommended tournament ruleset. Eventually they handled the banning on Metaknight.

A lot of this was thrown out because the public started to view the BBR as a "government", when in reality it was just a group of really informed and respected community members that put in a lot of work to keep up with data for the metagame. TOs now handle keeping a standard for the tournament ruleset, and of course the general public keeps track of MUs now.

I dunno what a Backroom would do outside of making a tier list and being a VIP clubhouse basically.

 

[etecoon]

A lot of this was thrown out because the public started to view the BBR as a "government", when in reality it was just a group of really informed and respected community members that put in a lot of work to keep up with data for the metagame. TOs now handle keeping a standard for the tournament ruleset, and of course the general public keeps track of MUs now.

I dunno what a Backroom would do outside of making a tier list and being a VIP clubhouse basically.

Memory is a little hazy but IIRC the back room only made recommended rules and there was a lot of deviation from those from region to region. The defining feature of government is that it uses coercion to create order, that was unity which began outside of the back room and a similar conspiracy could just as easily happen now in the absence of a back room.

As for the argument that it's "too early for a tier list, character X is being slept on so hard, character Y is so overrated!" that a few people have brought up, that's nonsense. No one should expect it to be accurate in the earliest incarnation regardless of when it is made, you have to make a rough draft before you can review it and attempt to perfect it. It also only represents a current state of thought among high level players and knowledgeable people, if you expect it to be objectively correct even 5 years from now your expectations are unrealistic.

 

[Amazing Ampharos]

From my knowledge during Brawl, the BBR handled the tier list, handed out the official MU chart, and made the recommended tournament ruleset. Eventually they handled the banning on Metaknight.

A lot of this was thrown out because the public started to view the BBR as a "government", when in reality it was just a group of really informed and respected community members that put in a lot of work to keep up with data for the metagame. TOs now handle keeping a standard for the tournament ruleset, and of course the general public keeps track of MUs now.

I dunno what a Backroom would do outside of making a tier list and being a VIP clubhouse basically.

What standard for a ruleset? Smash 4 right now is pretty much a different game region to region or even moving around in local areas. I feel like a BR could help with that, even if not be an independent solution, because right now the ruleset gaps are so large that you see the game diverging in different directions depending on local rules. Like I agree tier lists/MU charts aren't really important (and we're lucky they aren't for so many reasons) and a VIP clubhouse is a pointless status symbol, but we really, desperately need a way to bring people together on these rules as this game begins to grow and get serious. If there's not a BR, we need something else; "nothing" is really not working right now.

 

[Shaya]

"nothing" is an assumption.
A disconnect between tournament organisers and rule set enthusiasts/theory crafters is the real factor. Certain sects are already firmly veered away from adopting as many platformer elements as possible to coincidence with later melee/brawl philosophies and the expectation that a "BR" can change this wracks my brain.

There's a my way or the highway force in this community that isn't assailable by anything other than the voices of a majority of tournament going players. Right now most TOs are running on a model of profit, so good luck to any individual convincing them the system's broke when events are packing hundreds of people multiple times a week all over the world and it's safe to assume they are making choices that coincide with the wishes of their tournament attendees.

Scenes/TOs need to want change. There's nothing stopping people from gathering or creating resources that will benefit those who want to find the 'best choice'.

 

[TriTails]

This is a better tier list. But you're right that we should not take any current tier list seriously. That's partialy what Apex 2015 will be for. A whole lot of data will be gathered. I agree that the Smash 4, or Sm4sh, backroom could and should be formed following that massive event.

Don't know why Luigi is so high.

A BR.... dunno when will it be formed, or at all. But I guess time will tell.

 

[Raijinken]

I see no need for a Backroom. Just gives people more justification to elitism, and I doubt anything would change for the better.

 

[Neoleo21]

I see a need for a standard rule set, but do we need a back room to establish it? I don't think so.

 

[AccountsDept]

I was talking less in terms of a ruleset and more in terms of making a competent tier list.

I think the best ruleset will just arise naturally as the game progresses.

 

[Neoleo21]

I was talking less in terms of a ruleset and more in terms of making a competent tier list.

I think the best ruleset will just arise naturally as the game progresses.

I'm not sure I agree with that, Conservative stage lists which ban Skyloft, Wuhu and Kongo Jungle 64 are slowly creeping up especially with APEX using a more conservative stage list. I see customs being used in the long run, but I feel that the stage selection is going to narrow even further going with previous iterations of the game and stock usage is a point of contention as well. Actually now that I think about it an elected backroom from as many regions as possible with semi-transparency wouldn't be that bad for this game since there's huge variance in the game from custom moves and that Stage lists are more expandable than ever. So long as the ruleset doesn't collapse like Unity did. There needs to be a group that people can get behind and point to otherwise, we'll go nowhere and rulesets remained fractured as they stand now.

Tier Lists are the things that sort themselves out in the long term imo not rulesets. We'll know whose the best given time and why they're the best.

 

[Piford]

I think a sort of "governing body", if you will, is needed for Smash 4. In regards to tier list, obviously most people shouldn't be making them as they are biased towards their own characters and whichever character they tend to lose too. The most analytical players mixed with top players would make sense to determine the actual matchups.

I think its much more important that a governing body that knows what's best for the scene decides on a ruleset. A lot of times players want rules or bans for stupid reasons, and they tend to not realize the harm they can do. For example, it seems as if a large amount of players (at least based off the Smash World Wide survey and the vocal community) want Miis banned. Obviously banning Miis for no reason is a bad idea, but its something that might happen without a back room. Player's don't know whats best for them sometimes, and someone needs to tell them what is. Also the fact that stages are being banned for arbitrary reasons and that they have no consistency across tournaments is bad. Also the whole 2 vs 3 stock needs to be settled (3 stock FTW).

I think the point of having the backroom secret is to keep other people from judging players based off what they say there. While I do think it would be nice as the community to understand what is going on, I understand the privacy. Maybe there can be a halfway where the backroom constantly provides updates as to whats being discussed and details, but keeps players exact discussion hidden.

Edit: Fixed a sentence that didn't make sense

 

[Eji1700]

Every other competitive game i've ever played doesn't have a "backroom" and we still get accurate tier lists and matchup charts. Yeah they're usually from top players getting together and talking it out, but it's not in some secret clubhouse, and is usually quite public.

The backroom is one of the worst decisions of the smash community.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I think the point of having the backroom secret is to keep other people from judging players based off what they say there. While I do think it would be nice as the community to understand what is going on, I understand the privacy. Maybe there can be a halfway where the backroom constantly provides updates as to whats being discussed and details, but keeps players exact discussion hidden.

I'm not sure I agree. Speaking mostly for myself here, but I don't generally express any opinion in a debate that I'm not capable of backing up and defending to some degree or other. Thus I am completely comfortable with the idea of such a debate being made public in a hypothetical BR4 that I'm also somehow a member of. And I would hope that others are also capable of defending their own opinions when asked. So I fail to see the point of secrecy at all except to prevent people from having to defend their opinions and decisions.

TL;DR: Accountability is a Good Thing(TM).

 

[Piford]

I'm not sure I agree. Speaking mostly for myself here, but don't generally express any opinion in a debate that I'm not capable of backing up and defending to some degree or other. Thus I am completely comfortable with the idea of such a debate being made public in a hypothetical BR4 that I'm also somehow a member of. And I would hope that others are also capable of defending their own opinions when asked. So I fail to see the point of secrecy at all except to prevent people from having to defend their opinions and decisions.

TL;DR: Accountability is a Good Thing(TM).

Yeah, it's definitely better for the community that it's public. That being said, some people might be afraid to say what they actually think. They might just conform to the communities view to avoid criticism. Basically, if someone says something unpopular, then the community reads it and reacts by criticizing them and saying they should be kicked off the backroom. Then they might not want to take the backrooms rules seriously because X person is a member of it. In a perfect world, the community would be mature enough to respect each others opinions, but this is a community where people constantly get criticized for liking a game. The backroom would basically have to be extremely mature to allow for it to be public. I 100% agree that it being public would be better, but there are issues with it being public. I wonder what the original intention of making the backroom private was because I could just be missing the actual reason its private.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Yeah, it's definitely better for the community that it's public. That being said, some people might be afraid to say what they actually think. They might just conform to the communities view to avoid criticism. Basically, if someone says something unpopular, then the community reads it and reacts by criticizing them and saying they should be kicked off the backroom. Then they might not want to take the backrooms rules seriously because X person is a member of it. In a perfect world, the community would be mature enough to respect each others opinions, but this is a community where people constantly get criticized for liking a game. The backroom would basically have to be extremely mature to allow for it to be public. I 100% agree that it being public would be better, but there are issues with it being public. I wonder what the original intention of making the backroom private was because I could just be missing the actual reason its private.

I would suggest that people who would conform to the majority for the sake of dodging criticism are not the sort of people we'd want in a back room anyway.

 

[Piford]

I would suggest that people who would conform to the majority for the sake of dodging criticism are not the sort of people we'd want in a back room anyway.

I guess so, but the world's a cruel place and being constantly hated isn't something most people enjoy.

Also, who would decide who is in the back room anyways?

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I guess so, but the world's a cruel place and being constantly hated isn't something most people enjoy.

Also, who would decide who is in the back room anyways?

That's the million dollar question, isn't it?

 

[Pazx]

dream oligarchy back room: drone thinkaman ampharos cobbs capps jtails shaya venks yink m2k zero

#bias

edit: please don't turn this thread into "post your back room recommendations" because that won't be fun for anyone I just really wanted to call them an oligarchy

 

[ぱみゅ]

I like diversity as much as anyone, maybe a bit more because I like different regions having different views on the game and accommodating their settings to appeal their players.

But there is a point where a standard is needed.
And I'm not talking about an "use these 3 stages" standard, but a guideline that says "Temple leads to degenerating the game and it is not recommended for its competitive use".
That's what a Backroom is for: using a couple of educated/experienced minds to get into an agreement and show results, with a basis, to the public, presented in a way that makes sense and everyone can agree/compromise for.
We can't just let everyone vote it out, or DK will remain bottom tier forever....


btw, not to let you down Pazx, but there is a reason m2k is not a BBR member (and that reason is not time)

 

[LiteralGrill]

@ T0MMY this is a thread for you!

T0mmy has been working on trying to unite some TOs and thinkers together to be able to be unified and debate things like rulesets. I'm happy to say I entirely support that notion.

If you want a "backroom" all it takes is to make a group here on Smashboards and to get everyone in there who wants in on a debate to go and talk! We don't gotta have fancy applications and such.

"Be the change you wish to see"

(P.S. If I gotta I'll go make that group too. DONT MAKE MY WORKLOAD WORSE!!!)

 

[Thinkaman]

All I'll say is that it turns out no one being at the wheel is worse than whatever distaste anyone may have previously had towards the idea of a backroom.

 

[DeLux]

I see threads like this while I'm re-reading The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and I'm not sure whether to have faith that we'll probably be alright or fear the paradigm shifting crisis that we're in.

I think it's the former more so than the latter.

 

[ぱみゅ]

It's either a System Reconstruction or a Status Quo Collapse. I'd just flip a coin.

 

[DavemanCozy]

I completely agree that we will need some form of governing pool, not so much for a tier list but for a standard ruleset. I've gone to three tournaments in the past week, and all of them using different rulesets. The only consistency I've noticed: Smashville and Battlefield as starters.

Everything else, we disagree on:

• 2 stocks vs 3 stocks
• Custom moves banned or not (the online tournament I went to had them on)
  
• FD as a counterpick or starter
• Which other stages qualifiy as starters (Lylat, Duck Hunt, etc)
• The counterpicks list is a mess
• Miis and their movesets (baffles me how some want them banned)

We really, really need something to establish a ruleset, because right now it's chaos and learning how to play in 15 different stages where different ones are legal each weekend has made counterpicking a hell of a chore. There are also certain characters who perform much better under 2-stock than 3-stock, simply because of the pace of the game and how it allows opponents to adapt.

It doesn't have to be a Backroom, it can be a Public Order Group or a Sm4sh Illuminati Society or whatever.

 

[DeLux]

Learn to play on all 15 stages and counterpicking becomes a treat and not a chore.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

I see threads like this while I'm re-reading The Structure of Scientific Revolutions and I'm not sure whether to have faith that we'll probably be alright or fear the paradigm shifting crisis that we're in.

I think it's the former more so than the latter.

I have every confidence we'll muddle through somehow, it's just a question of how frustrating/painful/civilized/eye-rolling the experience will be. And, you know, whether any given person agrees with the end result.

It doesn't have to be a Backroom, it can be a Public Order Group or a Sm4sh Illuminati Society or whatever.

Smash Illuminati Society has a certain ring to it. We could call it the SISters.

Learn to play on all 15 stages and counterpicking becomes a treat and not a chore.

I think the issue is having to keep track of which stages are legal at each event.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Backroom works when you want to limit who will contribute and set-up an established ruleset.

We could use something to unify the ladder, but we may not need a backroom.

 

[DeLux]

I think the issue is having to keep track of which stages are legal at each event.

Just assume everything is legal until your opponent tells you otherwise. And have a backup plan for if your original plan isn't legal. And another backup plan if your backup plan isn't legal. Continue to do this until you must play on 0 stages in your own mind so as not to influence how the matchup plays out.

 

[T0MMY]

Oh my...

Yes, it almost seems like the opportunity has come for me to put out an idea of a unification of sorts that allows for a reasonable maximum amount of people to be very much content with the decisions being made regarding projects like rulesets and tierlists.

Before I go on much, I have to echo so many of your sentiments about a secret type of backroom not being the best organization for the Smash Community. I think the saying...

Democracy dies behind closed doors

...sums things up about a backroom.

But complaining about a situation is never a practical solution, what the Smash Community is really needing right now is a strong system that is a frontroom* rather than a backroom, and yet one where very educated individuals can meet to formulate the solutions that represent the ideals of the everyday individual.

Please welcome a project I have worked on since 2008:

The Smash Community Representatives

The Goal
Get Smashers communicating with their Local Representatives (most likely the TO in your city).
Get Local Reps communicating with other Reps
Get a Regional Representative to talk with the other Regional Reps on matters regarding national rulesets, tier lists, and every other national issue - in this way each and every one of us will have a say in things and guarantees no overlord or oligarchy calls the shots for your local community.
Finally, there will be a kind of "Constitution" - articles that capture the essence of what competitive Smash means to each and every one of us. Things like "Right to Speech" is a self-evident and unalienable human right and likewise Smashers have the self-evident right to enjoy a fair, safe, respectable tournament. They have the right to speak out and have their ideas best represented.

How it works
What this project will do is work to build, from the ground up, a true grassroots community and get this community together, organized, and networked so that every single person can enjoy the events they attend knowing that they are represented by a greater organization that is looking out for them.

Your local scene will decide who will best represent the Smashers of that area.
They will communicate openly with other Representatives and form a Local Network (city to city) and ultimately a Regional Network (state to state).
These Representatives will have a lot of authority invested behind them - theoretically the ENTIRE Smash Community should be content with who is representing them. And these are the people who will be a new "backroom" which does away with secrecy and swears to uphold the values of their constituents.

Of course we cannot expect this to be a perfect system as it is unreasonable to ask of perfection (Nirvana fallacy) - I bring this up because this will NOT guarantee you get every last ruling in your favor. This system is not going to be set up to play favorites and will come with checks and balances so, for example, a group of Donkey Kong players cannot get a competitively viable Stage banned just because it is a weak Stage for Donkey Kong. This system is looking to guaranatee a middleground that everyone can be "okay" with.

As long as that "constitution" is ratified - that is acceptable by EVERY region involved and the local Smash scene is represented by a TO/Rep who adheres to that constitution then you have yourself a Smash Republic... for as long as you can keep it, ma'am (to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin).

*shoutout to t1mmy for coining the phrase "frontroom" to describe a public and transparent alternative to a backroom.

 

[ぱみゅ]

I think the issue is having to keep track of which stages are legal at each event.

There is a point after doing a bit of stage practice, maybe few hours, where you already know the stage and don't really get surprised by anything.
For Tournament A and B certain stage wasn't legal, no big deal; but for Tournament C it was and now you're like "good thing I already am aware about it".

 

[HeavyLobster]

It doesn't have to be a Backroom, it can be a Public Order Group or a Sm4sh Illuminati Society or whatever.

We already have a Smash Illuminati. They're the ones who secretly control the global Amiibo market, are responsible for all the top players switching to Diddy Kong, and are trying to suppress Ganon, Palutena, and Ike by keeping customs banned. It's a conspiracy I tell ya!

 

[thehard]

dream oligarchy back room: drone thinkaman ampharos cobbs capps jtails shaya venks yink m2k zero

When's the fanfic?

 

[Conda]

The backroom is not intended to be an elite clubhouse, but rather a "get it over with" force that decides the ruleset so people can stop disagreeing and nitpicking over rules. This constant nitpicking causes the ruleset to be inconsistent region-to-region which hurts competitive play and the competitive community's strength. Things become more local-focused, which is nice in a sort of sunny grassroots way, but not for the health of the overall competitive scene.

Standardization is important for any competitive sport or game, and making the task of creating a standard ruleset a 'public' ordeal simply does not work. Some towns will ban customs, some will ban miis, some will ban Kongo Jungle 64, some will ban Omegas, etc. Leave it to public choice and we'll have a ton of different variants from town to town. All just because people were given the power to do so, but not actually achieving anything positive or good in the process.

It's a meaningless thing to be in control of - a standardized ruleset that a team of respected and intelligent community members come up with after many months of decision making will be the better ruleset. It's not a democratic approach, but it doesn't need to be. This is not civilization governance, it's deciding a standard ruleset. Towns can deviate if they want, but the standard will be what they deviate from - an important distinction to how things are now.

The Brawl BR went too far with the stage bans and such as time passes, but they tried their best to make things work with the characteristics of that game. Smash 4 won't have that issue hopefully.

 

[Coffee™]

Can't we just do it like Smogon and have a Backroom where BRoomers talk about BR things (Inside Scoop) and then in a "Front Room" (The Policy Review) the actual intricacies of their initial decisions and thoughts are discussed amongst a wider audience where the public can view discussion?

Sure it does promote elitism in a way but without some kind of "governing body" nothing will get done....and this way does provide quite a bit of transparency.