Backroom Reform: Current Topic -> Success?

[-Vocal-]

I keep seeing the "voting mandatory" catchphrase popping up. How would this cover the BBRoomers who followed and participated in the discussion, and failed to come to a conclusion, or as some people already pointed out, people like M2K and Ally, who are extremely valuable when it comes to the discussion of character capabilities, but generally have an agenda when it comes to stuff like stage lists?

I don't see how it could. If a member feels that he or she does not have enough information in a topic, then he or she should not vote on it.

However, he or she should be an active part of another one of the BR's projects and should vote in that.

Voting in all things is not necessary. Voting in some things (and, preferably, all things one has adequate knowledge in) is.

Of course I feel a bit pompous saying all of this really; who am I to assume they don't already do many of the things I suggest :/ I really don't know what goes on back there. Could a BBroomer contribute his/her opinions?

 

[Chsal]

Hm... I understand not having "Voting mandatory" because then people who are unsure what to vote would suffer.

But why not have:

"Voting mandatory"
and then
"You are free to "Vote for None""

As in, during stage discussion, theres
STARTER | COUNTERPICK | BANNED | VOTE FOR NONE

That way they could separate the inactives from the people who just don't know what to vote for.

 

[-Vocal-]

You're only thinking about stages, and the BR does much more than that, although I'm under the impression that their voting system is more complicated than just "Counter." I don't see what difference it would make, as long as they are an active part of something on which they are knowledgable.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

You're only thinking about stages, and the BR does much more than that, although I'm under the impression that their voting system is more complicated than just "Counter." I don't see what difference it would make, as long as they are an active part of something on which they are knowledgable.

Apart from setting up a standard of competitive play, probably not much else that is of any importance. Tier list is fairly pointless to a competitive stand point.

 

[-Vocal-]

There are more to rulesets than stage lists, and many stages within any stage list.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

All right. About PTAD.

If you are complaining about "fighting the stage", you are ignoring something. You say "I don't want to fight the stage, I want to fight my opponent". You see the stage as an environment to do your fighting. Wouldn't it just be better to only have FD and BF in that case? You know, the stages without hazards? If you drive that philosophy to its logical conclusion, you get a stagelist with two, maybe three stages. How correct is this assumption? Why are you even running stages like Brinstar or RC?

Now. Let me tell you what is wrong with this. What is wrong with this is that you are removing a massive element from smash. The fact that, to make it ALMOST purely PVP (even BF and FD have slight PvS elements), you have to remove about 1/2 of the selectable items in the game! You still have all your characters, but no more stages. You have to realize exactly how much of an impact stages are supposed to have-ridiculous.

I welcome any of you to read these posts and refute them.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10868618&postcount=2147 <- Dissecting non-interactiveness as a positive stage feature
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10868632&postcount=2148 <- Interaction is necessary
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10802925&postcount=1916 <- Dynamic stages are a part of smash

 

[-Vocal-]

Dude.

STFU and GTFO of this thread. Educate people all you want (some of them need it), but don't make this thread the classroom. Did you even READ the title? How about the multiple posts where I ASKED PEOPLE TO STOP DISCUSSING STAGES.

Now someone's gonna reply to that in here

*sigh*

Excuse my gruff response to your post but I'm tired of people making this thread like every other thread on Smashboards when it's trying to discuss something different.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

\

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10868618&postcount=2147 <- Dissecting non-interactiveness as a positive stage feature
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10868632&postcount=2148 <- Interaction is necessary
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10802925&postcount=1916 <- Dynamic stages are a part of smash

I was just finishing reading the other two, about to reply and now you edit with a 3rd source. How many are you going to add? lol

Will edit once done reading.

Now someone's gonna reply to that in here

It is a rather good post though lol
But, yeah, I know what you mean by it being off topic.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Just those 3. I initially intended just that third one and the one right after it, but LS's post jumped in for some reason.

@-Vocal-: We have a serious disconnect here, man. It's time to deal with this while people are paying attention.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

Actually, I would say this thread's purpose has already been seen. The ripples of discontent have been spreading, and with Pierce's sticked thread, it has been noticed. Whether or not anything will be done that people approve of is another question. But for the most part, attention is being seen. Staying on topic does not seem to be of the utmost importance right now considering dicussiong of the BBR is being seen all over the place.

I don't about replying anymore to your post and points in any great depth BPC. I will tell you that they point out some very basic fundamentals of competition in smash that I feel are overlooked. Thanks for putting it out there. We all need to be reminded from time to time.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I'm collecting posts like that. Here's what I have total so far...

Stage legality thread:
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10873961&postcount=2174 <- Is every stage legal?
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10875264&postcount=2179 <- MK deserves a buff because he's the best in the game; which system is the best, one that favors him, one that nerfs him, one that is neutral to him?
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10868618&postcount=2147 <- Dissecting non-interactiveness as a positive stage feature
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10868632&postcount=2148 <- Interaction is necessary
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10802925&postcount=1916 <- Dynamic stages are a part of smash
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10865235&postcount=2137 <- Onett is not that bad
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10844284&postcount=2084 <- What to ban
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10832913&postcount=2056 <- 9-starter is still good for ground chars
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10803065&postcount=1918 <- ICs on FD are as strong as MK on Brinstar
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10800775&postcount=1892 <- Larger starter lists are better (tblock)

Daigo:
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10799439&postcount=10 <- WE BAN TOO MUCH
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10807220&postcount=89 <- Game design as a medium
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10810342&postcount=108 <- More stages at MLG next year
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10826649&postcount=121 <- Real vs. Viable Choice/counterpicking is foreign to game
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10827857&postcount=126 <- ITEMS ARE NOT BANNED
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10833082&postcount=133 <- Smash is inherently random
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10841893&postcount=168 <- AA ends the thread
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10841962&postcount=170 <- Null Hypothesis of Brawl
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10849364&postcount=193 <- Changing the null state for real problems

YI+SV
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10835421&postcount=3 <- Assuming randomness is bad and should be avoided

Liberal Stagelists
http://allisbrawl.com/forum/topic.aspx?pid=1563390#p1563390

BBR 3.0
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10892071&postcount=900 <- Just try the stagelist

 

[-Vocal-]

It is a rather good post though lol

I know it's a good post. It was a good post the first time I read it. And the second.

And the seventh.

He has been posting responses quite similar to these in threads nearly since a day after the release of 3.0, and his effort to educate the masses on alternative viewpoints is commended; however, I do not think this thread is the place to inform people of these things.

edit @BPC: I understand your desire to show these threads to people who should see them, and I am glad that you have taken the time to collect them for responses to people when appropriate. However, your agenda does not give you the right to use someone else's thread to do this when that matter should not be discussed here. I would have been fine with you saying "Here's a link to where you should go if you want to discuss PTAD" and link to a post in another thread with those thread links included, so that you can continue your mission without making a different thread the battleground.

 

[-Ran]

As mentioned by others. Discuss the Back Room, not the stage list here. The biggest issue with most threads in Smashboards is that they all get merged together and become more of a social thread. Forums are meant to have threads for separate ideas, but I digress. Please stay on task here, or post elsewhere. Later today I'll post my thoughts on everything. I just haven't had a chance lately.

 

[TreK]

All right. About PTAD.

If you are complaining about "fighting the stage", you are ignoring something. You say "I don't want to fight the stage, I want to fight my opponent". You see the stage as an environment to do your fighting. Wouldn't it just be better to only have FD and BF in that case? You know, the stages without hazards? If you drive that philosophy to its logical conclusion, you get a stagelist with two, maybe three stages. How correct is this assumption? Why are you even running stages like Brinstar or RC?

Now. Let me tell you what is wrong with this. What is wrong with this is that you are removing a massive element from smash. The fact that, to make it ALMOST purely PVP (even BF and FD have slight PvS elements), you have to remove about 1/2 of the selectable items in the game! You still have all your characters, but no more stages. You have to realize exactly how much of an impact stages are supposed to have-ridiculous.

I welcome any of you to read these posts and refute them.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10868618&postcount=2147 <- Dissecting non-interactiveness as a positive stage feature
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10868632&postcount=2148 <- Interaction is necessary
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=10802925&postcount=1916 <- Dynamic stages are a part of smash

I don't want the stage to be a bigger threat than my opponent himself.
I don't want the stage to be a bigger threat to my opponent than myself.
Fighting the stage ? Sure. Why would I leave PS1 unstroke otherwise.
Fighting with the stage ? Sure. Why would I CP Fregate otherwise.

There's a limit. Something stages shouldn't cross and still be tournament legal. I think that you are intelligent enough to figure it out by yourself.
Are you ?

/doesn't care cus Europe is a big backroom

 

[Deleted member]

I think the next topic of discussion for this thread should be "what should it take to be accepted into the backroom"?

 

[Crow!]

^^^ Supporting that suggestion, with emphasis on the ideal selection process as much or more so than the qualities that process actually seeks. Because when you get down to it, the method of selection has more practical influence on the outcome than the ideals.

 

[smashmachine]

don't get grabbed

you might as well just say don't get hit
oh wait

 

[Eddie G]

you might as well just say don't get hit
oh wait

You dare question Isai's word? What kind of smasher are you?

@ Clowsui- I see, it must have been some time after I stopped playing it competitively. What were their reasons for getting rid of them?

 

[-Vocal-]

I think the next topic of discussion for this thread should be "what should it take to be accepted into the backroom"?

Great idea, and I'm glad to see a BBroomer supporting it

I think part of the system now is fine. If I'm not mistaken, while applying to the BR, candidates must provide proof of their use with links to threads and posts of theirs, correct? This seems like a good part.

However, in addition to this, I think it would also be a good idea to look over a person's post record. In this way, you could see if someone is the type of person that just pops in, says "this is a bad/good thing," and disappears; or if he actually discusses topics on which he is knowledgeable and has an opinion. Paying attention to a person's habits of activity would probably give a lot of insight into how active and useful he would be once admitted to the BR.

Of course this does sound like a lot of work; it might be asking too much of you guys

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I don't want the stage to be a bigger threat than my opponent himself.
I don't want the stage to be a bigger threat to my opponent than myself.
Fighting the stage ? Sure. Why would I leave PS1 unstroke otherwise.
Fighting with the stage ? Sure. Why would I CP Fregate otherwise.

There's a limit. Something stages shouldn't cross and still be tournament legal. I think that you are intelligent enough to figure it out by yourself.
Are you ?

/doesn't care cus Europe is a big backroom

Yes. This limit is around Mario Bros. PTAD? Potentially ridiculously harmful. The player has the potential to make it about as obstructive than PS1-that is, both players either fight on a very small area for positional control while camping (think jockeying for the left side on the rock transformation), or they stick around, avoiding the obstacles (think having lost positional advantage on the rock), or they fight like normal (water/grass transformation).

PTAD is only an issue if you don't know how to play the stage or if your opponent outplayed you by whacking you into the cars (this is not that easy, even as metaknight! It's pretty heavy outplaying. If you play smart, guys like Falco or DDD aren't gonna get you well with it either).

 

[BSP]

Great idea, and I'm glad to see a BBroomer supporting it

I think part of the system now is fine. If I'm not mistaken, while applying to the BR, candidates must provide proof of their use with links to threads and posts of theirs, correct? This seems like a good part.

However, in addition to this, I think it would also be a good idea to look over a person's post record. In this way, you could see if someone is the type of person that just pops in, says "this is a bad/good thing," and disappears; or if he actually discusses topics on which he is knowledgeable and has an opinion. Paying attention to a person's habits of activity would probably give a lot of insight into how active and useful he would be once admitted to the BR.

Of course this does sound like a lot of work; it might be asking too much of you guys

It'd be worth it IMO. We want as much quality as possible in the people that lead the community somewhat.

 

[-Vocal-]

It'd be worth it IMO. We want as much quality as possible in the people that lead the community somewhat.

My thoughts precisely, and this is a way to tell what quality of material a prospective member commonly produces.

 

[gallax]

you might as well just say don't get hit
oh wait

This guy knows whatsup lol. How to win at brawl!!!

But to actually be on topic, the newest members the bbr have actually been very vocal and have added a lot the discussions. Adding in new members is not a bad thing, as long as that member has proven themselves to be knowledgeable AND respectable.

 

[-Vocal-]

From what I've heard from other BBroomers, new people tend to be the most productive on average

 

[vVv Rapture]

I'd hope so. If they didn't have a great amount of motivation and momentum going into the BBR, I wouldn't expect it from them at later times. That's a good sign.

 

[memphischains]

You guys do know I was saying stuff like this like... 6 months after brawl came out right.

The BBR is a joke. The idea of a "back room" is also a joke.
Like, talk about creating social classes in a place where its completely unnecessary

EDIT : Actually, I think I started saying they were ******** close to 3 months after Brawl's release.

Most of the people that have been given acces are a joke and they are horrible as a "group leadership". It basically dwindles down friends invited friends into a private forum to burst their ego and have a smash related pillow fight sleepover extravaganza

 

[Kewkky]

You guys do know I was saying stuff like this like... 6 months after brawl came out right.

The BBR is a joke. The idea of a "back room" is also a joke.
Like, talk about creating social classes in a place where its completely unnecessary

EDIT : Actually, I think I started saying they were ******** close to 3 months after Brawl's release.

Most of the people that have been given acces are a joke and they are horrible as a "group leadership". It basically dwindles down friends invited friends into a private forum to burst their ego and have a smash related pillow fight sleepover extravaganza

Social classes?

So, the idea of taking the people who are supposed to know the most, ask only them about their opinions on stuff regarding the game, tally up and write up a synopsis as to the whole discussion, and bring the results of this to the public's eye is competely unnecessary?

Because that's exactly how the BBR works. It's not just a bunch of people in a super secret fun club, it's MUCH more structured than that. We're not one entire entity, but we try to be the guiding hand of the competitive environment when it comes to Brawl. It's true that some members that have been admitted could be questioned as to their admittance not being a smart move, or members whose rejection to being admitted being a bad move... But that goes the same for every other kind of private organization in the world.

It's not about 'social classes', or 'having more rights', it's about people who have proven that without a shadow of a doubt, their input on all/most of the topics concerning the BBR's discussions would be greatly beneficial. I'd much rather have a group of people who have proven to be smart handling out competitive scene's direction, than the entire community, including all the numerous trolls and idiots that love causing mischief, to be able to affect something as important as our game's competitive direction. Some members of the community are very awesome, and those members are eventually admitted in the BBR so long as they prove to be consistent in their knowledge and resources. So, why is it bad to collect all of the brightest minds and ask them for their opinions regarding subjects from the competitive scene?

 

[memphischains]

Social classes?

So, the idea of taking the people who are supposed to know the most, ask only them about their opinions on stuff regarding the game, tally up and write up a synopsis as to the whole discussion, and bring the results of this to the public's eye is competely unnecessary?

Because that's exactly how the BBR works. It's not just a bunch of people in a super secret fun club, it's MUCH more structured than that. We're not one entire entity, but we try to be the guiding hand of the competitive environment when it comes to Brawl. It's true that some members that have been admitted could be questioned as to their admittance not being a smart move, or members whose rejection to being admitted being a bad move... But that goes the same for every other kind of private organization in the world.

It's not about 'social classes', or 'having more rights', it's about people who have proven that without a shadow of a doubt, their input on all/most of the topics concerning the BBR's discussions would be greatly beneficial. I'd much rather have a group of people who have proven to be smart handling out competitive scene's direction, than the entire community, including all the numerous trolls and idiots that love causing mischief, to be able to affect something as important as our game's competitive direction. Some members of the community are very awesome, and those members are eventually admitted in the BBR so long as they prove to be consistent in their knowledge and resources. So, why is it bad to collect all of the brightest minds and ask them for their opinions regarding subjects from the competitive scene?

Because in reality most of the BBR are not the best or the brightest. You said it yourself that there have been a lot of questionable moves as far as giving people access goes, and its happened way more times than it should have.

It seems sort of pointless to me to but all the effort in the something that is as arbitrary as making guidelines for a good stage list, when the BBR can't even make a good one. I agree that there is a lof of great people in this community, I consider some of my better friends people I have met through here, but just because someone is an awesome person doesn't mean they are BBR material.

And it totally creates a social class wether you believe it or not. The Back Room spawns pricks like Inui who just think they are great because he can comment in a private forum and he can hit the B button a lot. Giving certain people private access to something that people off the street can't partake in projects the idea of an upperclass. Its basic stuff.

 

[-Vocal-]

Because in reality most of the BBR are not the best or the brightest. You said it yourself that there have been a lot of questionable moves as far as giving people access goes, and its happened way more times than it should have.

It seems sort of pointless to me to but all the effort in the something that is as arbitrary as making guidelines for a good stage list, when the BBR can't even make a good one. I agree that there is a lof of great people in this community, I consider some of my better friends people I have met through here, but just because someone is an awesome person doesn't mean they are BBR material.

And it totally creates a social class wether you believe it or not. The Back Room spawns pricks like Inui who just think they are great because he can comment in a private forum and he can hit the B button a lot. Giving certain people private access to something that people off the street can't partake in projects the idea of an upperclass. Its basic stuff.

What I see here is a problem with who they admit to the BR, not the BR itself, so you should speak about how they can admit better members.

And this is a good stage list. The only questionable stages are Distant Planet and Luigi's Mansion to some extent, but otherwise this is a good list. Just because it does not reflect a conservative stage list such as the one you favor does not make it bad; you must realize that this is a ruleset for all of America, not just the EC.

 

[AfroQT]

TBH the BBR does try so i give them that.

Rofl i dont even have anything against PTAD or the BBR. I just like giving them ****.

 

[memphischains]

What I see here is a problem with who they admit to the BR, not the BR itself, so you should speak about how they can admit better members.

And this is a good stage list. The only questionable stages are Distant Planet and Luigi's Mansion to some extent, but otherwise this is a good list. Just because it does not reflect a conservative stage list such as the one you favor does not make it bad; you must realize that this is a ruleset for all of America, not just the EC.

I can't speak on how to bring in new people because I actually have barely any idea how they base their criteria, it is just blatantly obvious it needs some serious work. I also also admit I have no idea what they "talk" about in the backroom because the only thing they release as a group are things like a stage list or a synopsis of individual characters (which were borderline ******** because they felt the need to do spit something at the community early after the release)

 

[Icyo]

Don't let TO's in the BR.

 

[Deleted member]

Don't let TO's in the BR.

Why not? TOs are kind of essential if you ask me. The backroom makes the rule set, and the TOs run the tourneys with said rule set.

 

[-Vocal-]

I can't speak on how to bring in new people because I actually have barely any idea how they base their criteria, it is just blatantly obvious it needs some serious work. I also also admit I have no idea what they "talk" about in the backroom because the only thing they release as a group are things like a stage list or a synopsis of individual characters (which were borderline ******** because they felt the need to do spit something at the community early after the release)

Then you should talk about what admittance criteria you think they should require in order to get the best quality members and produce the best results.

@everyone else: TOs are already a part of the BR, a lot of them in fact.

 

[The Real Inferno]

I just want to say I take offense at the implication that I actually have any friends.

The admission process is pretty simple. You have to prove you are one of three things basically (preferably two of them). An amazing player, a knowledgeable player, or an amazing TO. Then there's much discussion and voting involved. (It may or may not involve nude picture, you'll never know). That's the base generalization. The admissions threads are open to the public, so it shouldn't be hard to look at what is in those, and guess by those that were admitted what the qualifications might be.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Don't let TO's in the BR.

Completely wrong. TOs are the only people that actually matter in the BBR, because if TOs decide "let's ignore these guys", then the BBR has NO power. Nada. And top players have a record of being misinformed, stupid, or biased. Like, all three top players in the world right now? Pretty **** stupid. IIRC two of them were thrown out of the BBR for both ridiculous bias and the failure to formulate points.

 

[memphischains]

Then you should talk about what admittance criteria you think they should require in order to get the best quality members and produce the best results.

@everyone else: TOs are already a part of the BR, a lot of them in fact.

There really isn't any solid way to do it unless you base it on results and most successful tourneys, I don't know if they are going something similar to that now but if they are then I have no idea.

Or we could just not have it at all

I just want to say I take offense at the implication that I actually have any friends.

The admission process is pretty simple. You have to prove you are one of three things basically (preferably two of them). An amazing player, a knowledgeable player, or an amazing TO. Then there's much discussion and voting involved. (It may or may not involve nude picture, you'll never know). That's the base generalization. The admissions threads are open to the public, so it shouldn't be hard to look at what is in those, and guess by those that were admitted what the qualifications might be.

I am actually offended that I was never offended by the fact that someone thought I had friends and never had one. I have never seen a girl naked.

 

[-Vocal-]

@Memphis: Not having it at all is a terrible idea. The community needs some sort of collective to come together and decide on a standard. Call it what you will, but in the end any collective would serve the same purpose as the Backroom, and a collective is necessary.

Before you post, consider that this also would refer to TOs agreeing on a ruleset.

 

[Justblaze647]

And top players have a record of being misinformed, stupid, or biased. Like, all three top players in the world right now? Pretty **** stupid.

I find it interesting that you think that top players are so uninformed about a game they have apparently mastered.

 

[Juushichi]

Misinformed and uninformed are two different things. Also, one could "master" a character and still be not very knowledgeable about the game on a whole. It's considered to be unlikely... but some of our top players show that to be the case. With the game as variable as it is (unlike other traditional 2D fighters) being misinformed is a very, /very/ likely thing.