Creation of BBR Ruleset Committee; Brawl Nationals Agree to Same Stagelist! New TO's!

[SuSa]

Susa, I think you missed the point. Local TOs want their players to do well, so they adopt the official rules. New players see this and assume these are the only competitive stages. Eventually there's so much "unity" that changes cannot happen.

Right now:
"Hey I think [insert any T3 cp here] is pretty awesome and should be used more. [reasons]"
*lively debate ensues*

Down the road:
"Hey I think Japes is pretty awesome. [reasons]"
"Shaddup, random hazards are gh3y lolol"
"But Japes isn't random."
"go to a tournament sometime u scrub"

The sticky thing is merely annoying.

RR: Then you get the "you haven't collected enough data so leave" dilemma. (And of course, "enough" is always a few events more than whatever we have.) Even if experiments happen at first, eventually local TO's will either get frustrated from the BRC brickwalling such efforts and give up, or cut ties with the BRC and thus the organization loses credibility and dies, defeating the purpose of its existence.

On another note, out of curiosity what does the MBR think? (Besides the whole "lolbrawl" thing.)

The first issue doesn't already happen? *looks at most stage debates*

The second issue doesn't already happen? *looks at MK debate*

Damn. It's almost like nothing bad's actually happening that isn't already happening regardless.

 

[Ripple]

so can we have the conversations that went on between the 5 TOs?

still angry at the fact that only 5 TOs had input, 1 not being raziek, and now its "official"

 

[Flashing]

I'm still up for the labeling system.

 

[BSP]

The first issue doesn't already happen? *looks at most stage debates*

The second issue doesn't already happen? *looks at MK debate*

Damn. It's almost like nothing bad's actually happening that isn't already happening regardless.

That's what bothers me. We've got stuff like that going on right now, but no is trying to fix it or anything. Heck, some people are happy with it lol.

Why are people so against justifying their rulesets and stages? You'd think it would be important, but I guess not.

 

[SuSa]

Because of what I brought up. There is two "types" of competitive groups out there.

Those who wish to be the most competitive.

Those who wish to see a growing and active/stable scene.

The US is largely the latter - and that's pretty much what this entire group is... those who are arguing for the most objectively correct rulesets (BBR's, NS, etc.) are part of the former.

It's possible to have the two mingle.... but at this point (3 years) the likelihood of having everyone accept drastic change of beliefs... is... simply..

NOT REALISTIC

It's ideal. But then again - so is a utopian society. Why doesn't that exist? Because it's simply.. not realistic. Possible? Arguably. Going to happen? No.

 

[ShadowLink84]

And how many tournaments currently get a sticky? Not a whole lot. This will not affect your typical local TO at all.

Yes it will, because now, it isn't a case of not getting a sticky for not being of great importance, now its not getting a sticky because you did not conform to the standard put forth by FIVE TO's.

You really want to play oddman out?

 

[SuSa]

Yes it will, because now, it isn't a case of not getting a sticky for not being of great importance, now its not getting a sticky because you did not conform to the standard put forth by FIVE TO's AND you aren't of great importance.

Fix'd that for you. It's simply another level of organization.

 

[Life]

Susa: I'd argue that the BRC and its ruleset, as it stands now, cements such problems into place. Right now, these problems are out in the open and being debated, and are gradually being resolved. Gradually, but it's happening--no argument can stand on ad hominem and the like forever. (You personally should know, this process forced you to search for objective criteria favoring restrictive stagelists.) The BRC would slow this process even further by creating disincentive for people to experiment (at the national/regional levels due to stickies/AIB feature, and at the local level from TO's who want their players to do well at said national/regional levels and hopefully gain a little notoriety on their own), thus reducing experimentation and hindering advancement at the testing stage, which is where things like DP/PTAD/LM/Pipes get hung up already.

tl;dr BRC makes these current problems worse.

(And it's "and/or", not "and". If, say, Raziek [I use you too much] decides he wants to hold an APEX or MLG-sized event? Too bad!)

I also have a bit of a consolidation-of-power issue with this. Currently the BRC has five TO's. If three of them arbitrarily decide something, it's law. Three TO's could turn America's scene into a worse version of Japan's if they so chose.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Yes it will, because now, it isn't a case of not getting a sticky for not being of great importance, now its not getting a sticky because you did not conform to the standard put forth by FIVE TO's.

You really want to play oddman out?

The tournaments that normally got the stickies are still getting them. The ones that don't normally get the stickies still won't be getting them, even if they use this rule set. Just because you're using this set up doesn't mean your 20 man tournament will get a sticky suddenly.

I don't see an issue with this set up at all. More or less nothing is changing. The only clause I can think of that they should add is an exception for tournaments for charity.

 

[BSP]

I'm going to agree with Susa. I may not like all of our reasoning, but I would rather a stable community first.

But like Inferiority Complex keeps bringing up, I think this will negatively impact incentive to test. We can't have it all though I guess.

 

[theunabletable]

as you have the ability to add depth to a game that, let us face it, sorely needs it.

lol'd. Brawl isn't depthy enough without a bunch of crazy stages?

and yeah, raziek not having a say as THE TO of NS is pretty BS.

It's Nova Scotia lol. Being the TO of a region of terrible players and no significance, really, doesn't give you much authority.

Not trying to be rude, but... come on. If Raziek being the TO of NS is enough reason to be in the new BRC (I like that acronym, though. I think it's good for this grouop), then that's like saying the main TO of like... Bakersfield should be in the BRC lol.

I mean, really... What has Raziek done to deserve a spot in a group that makes rulesets for America?

 

[SuSa]

They are being "resolved" on the forums - and "plans to be tried out" by a few liberal/open-minded TO's. I can't even name over 3. Of these 3 - I think only Jack is within the US. From what I understand, he doesn't host often (at least not nowadays?)

I'm for the separation of rulings of forums. Japan has it's own forum. Germany has it's own forum. I honestly support that. Why?

How often do you see Japanese/German players traveling to the US - or vice-versa?

It's only for the really large nationals - at least; from what I understand/know of.

Plan to travel to the US? You're going to have to put up with our ruleset.
Does the US plan to travel to Europe? Well... we're going to have to put up with your ruleset.

On a LOCAL level, if a LARGE NATIONAL is around the corner - you're going to see those tourneys adopting that ruleset for the time being. (See many locals when MLG was running it's circuit.... most were "practice tourneys" for MLG)

In the end... this largely only effects the US; and those who wish to go to the US. Then again.. if you did the same for your country. It would largely only effect you and those who wish to travel to your country.

Seems like a level playing field.

Too lazy to make a similar group for yourselves? Well damn.... stop being so lazy.

PS:
I understand the title of this forum is Smash World Forums. As far as discussion, PR, sharing techniques and such; I agree. I also believe that there should be room for other countries to have similar groups and find a way to order the confusion. Possibly giving different titles to the groups. I'd find this more suitable and the more correct course of action than what I described above. So don't go all "OMFG SuSa with that American superiority complex" on me. Bring it up with the admins and get your voices heard. Don't care enough to do that? Well bug off.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

I mean, really... What has Raziek done to deserve a spot in a group that makes rulesets for America?

He's probably either the biggest or second biggest TO in Canada if I had to guess. *shrugs*

 

[Life]

Nid: that's because they decided to conform to the set. If one of them realizes "hey wait, Japes is COMPLETELY FINE", then they have to either convince two out of the four other TO's, or suck it up and deal. This was at your sticky argument btw

@unable: Perhaps I've been lurking the Melee boards too much?

 

[Flashing]

The tournaments that normally got the stickies are still getting them. The ones that don't normally get the stickies still won't be getting them, even if they use this rule set. Just because you're using this set up doesn't mean your 20 man tournament will get a sticky suddenly.

I don't see an issue with this set up at all. More or less nothing is changing. The only clause I can think of that they should add is an exception for tournaments for charity.

Not really. There could be some tourney's that were stickied because of the popularity and got stickied but now they won't because it's a requirement to use the universal ruleset for a stick, so some may not accept this new ruleset and won't get stickied anymore.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Nid: that's because they decided to conform to the set. If one of them realizes "hey wait, Japes is COMPLETELY FINE", then they have to either convince two out of the four other TO's, or suck it up and deal.

That's their choice. Obviously, they did so before this list came out. Let them decide how they want to sort things out. It's only affecting them after all. As long as there is some consistency for national tournaments, and they aren't constantly bickering with everyone else.

EDIT: @ Flashing: I can't remember seeing any, at least in the Texas tournament area. And that's a fairly large one. Even so, they will get a quasy sticky if they are truly that popular due to a constant stream of posts. It's not like there will be 50 stickies above their tournament.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Fix'd that for you. It's simply another level of organization.

It took me five minutes to figure out how to respond and I still can't figure out a response because of how STUPID this sounded.

Another level of organization? Really?
Oh yeah I am sure you can say it is when you look at it this way.

Tournaments from the 5 TO's (automatic sticky)
Tournaments from other TO's (better have the same ruleset for a sticky!)
-b]Tournaments from TO's who dont have the same ruleset but have a large number of players[/b] (no sticky for you)
Tiny tournaments involving 20 members who don't get anything ANYWAY.

So yeah, your right, it does create another level of organization.
It adds a pre-requisite for those tournaments large enough to warrant a sticky.
If you have a tournament large enough to apply for a sticky, you won't get one if you don't have the same national ruleset. Sexy stuff.

Don't fix things, its just stupidly obnoxious.


AWESOME SAUCE!

The tournaments that normally got the stickies are still getting them. The ones that don't normally get the stickies still won't be getting them, even if they use this rule set. Just because you're using this set up doesn't mean your 20 man tournament will get a sticky suddenly.

Um no.
Apparently, you did not read what was said.
If your tournament is large enough to be applicable for a tournament, you have a pre-requisite to fulfill before you get a sticky, which means adopting the national ruleset.

So no, it is not the same at all and to even declare such a thing is flat out ignorant.

@unable: Same reason people said "GO BACK TO JAPAN" when the Japanese were guest players 8D

Okay that was a terrible comparison, but why flat out IGNORE the possibility of getting this ruleset to be even more influential?
We have the largest smash scene, why not make use of such incredible weight?

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Um no.
Apparently, you did not read what was said.
If your tournament is large enough to be applicable for a tournament, you have a pre-requisite to fulfill before you get a sticky, which means adopting the national ruleset.

And before you had pre-requisites to meet, except you didn't even fully know what they were. If anything, I suspect more tournaments will get a sticky through this if anything. I really don't have a problem with this set up at all.

 

[Flashing]

That's their choice. Obviously, they did so before this list came out. Let them decide how they want to sort things out. It's only affecting them after all. As long as there is some consistency for national tournaments, and they aren't constantly bickering with everyone else.

EDIT: @ Flashing: I can't remember seeing any, at least in the Texas tournament area. And that's a fairly large one. Even so, they will get a quasy sticky if they are truly that popular due to a constant stream of posts. It's not like there will be 50 stickies above their tournament.

Well if that's true then they need to be more clear on the sticky policy because right now there saying you have to use the ruleset or no sticky regardless of posts or hype.

 

[theunabletable]

He's probably either the biggest or second biggest TO in Canada if I had to guess. *shrugs*

A part of Canada that has no good players and is rarely ever exposed to the US metagame (you know, the metagame that these rules are for). That's pretty unimportant to our metagame lol.

@unable: Perhaps I've been lurking the Melee boards too much?

Maybe haha. Most Melee players don't seem to get that Brawl is hella depthy (maybe not quite as depthy as Melee, but pretty depthy), and just think it's bad because it's boring as **** to watch lol.

 

[Life]

That's their choice. Obviously, they did so before this list came out. Let them decide how they want to sort things out. It's only affecting them after all. As long as there is some consistency for national tournaments, and they aren't constantly bickering with everyone else.

Nope.
1. I was using Japes as an example. What if it's three months from now and one of them decides LM is fine? Or Pipes (completely nonrandom BTW)? Or even Norfair, which was in T2 under 3.1 but absent here?

2. It affects anyone who wants to counterpick Japes (which as I understand is Falco, Lucas, and Susa, although I could be wrong) or any of these other stages (Olimar would love Pipes/LM legal, Sonic and Wario are great on Norfair).

@unable: It's the difference between professional sports (in the traditional sense*) and professional chess. One is flashy and fast-paced, one is slow and methodical with occasional flashes of brilliance. Both are deep. Guess which one attracts the hype.
*I'd argue that any game played competitively by a large quantity of people is a sport regardless of physical exertion, but that's offtopic.

 

[ShadowLink84]

And before you had pre-requisites to meet, except you didn't even fully know what they were. If anything, I suspect more tournaments will get a sticky through this if anything. I really don't have a problem with this set up at all.

Yeah, the pre-requisite of being large enough. As it stands though, this pre-requisite flat out says "it does not matter how much hype or big you are, you dont get that sticky for not conforming to this ruleset".

It's a very good way of pressuring people.

 

[SuSa]

Um no.
Apparently, you did not read what was said.
If your tournament is large enough to be applicable for a tournament, you have a pre-requisite to fulfill before you get a sticky, which means adopting the national ruleset.

If your tournament is large enough, I would assume it's a regional or national.
In which case you should be adopting this ruleset.
This is in place to try and make sure you DO JUST THAT.

If we had a ton of paintings. Many different wonderful paintings. Some monochrome - some rainbows, some using only secondary colors.... such beautiful pieces of art.

The master-of-the-rainbows displays specific artworks in his gallery.

But the master-of-the-rainbows chose only to select those that contained red to be stickied, because red is a popular color. Those were the only ones displayed..

He later changes his mind and says that the painting must contain red and blue. So now any paintings that had red, but not blue - are no longer hung up on the walls. The artists are free to paint some blue on there if they wish to be displayed. But it's their choice.

 

[ShadowLink84]

If your tournament is large enough, I would assume it's a regional or national.
In which case you should be adopting this ruleset.
This is in place to try and make sure you DO JUST THAT.

We finally come to exactly what i was pointing out IN THE FIRST PLACE!
*facepalm*

Regionals provide incredible amounts of data because of the higher level of play that is encountered in comparison to locals. So if a regional uses a ruleset that is liberal, it provides a large amount of information as to how the stages affected the game.

Saying "if you stray from our ruleset you get no sticky" only makes it MORE difficult to change things than they already are at a regional to national level!
This not only lessens the amount of information we gain as to how much the stages have an effect on the game, it also makes it MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO CHANGE THINGS!

Understand now? Or do I have to go through aslew of posts with you before we reach the actual subject at hand?

If we had a ton of paintings. Many different wonderful paintings. Some monochrome - some rainbows, some using only secondary colors.... such beautiful pieces of art.

The master-of-the-rainbows displays specific artworks in his gallery.

But the master-of-the-rainbows chose only to select those that contained red to be stickied, because red is a popular color. Those were the only ones displayed..

He later changes his mind and says that the painting must contain red and blue. So now any paintings that had red, but not blue - are no longer hung up on the walls. The artists are free to paint some blue on there if they wish to be displayed. But it's their choice.

Thank you for proving my point.
Perhaps if you read what I said, and then read your own example, you would see why this is very problematic.

Why stifle the creativity of the artists? Why deny something that may do the world good?
Anyone remember the painting of Jesus and Mary in the Garden of Eden? How it was HEAVILY edited because the Church that commissioned it freaked? Same thing here, though at least they were direct about it.

Why make it more difficult to experiment? Why make it even more difficult to change anything at a nation level? Or are people so damn excited about the whole "UNIFIED RULESET" that they completely ignore the fact that the means by which this is being done is going to have an effect that is probably the opposite of what was desired?

Regardless, we both understand each other's points no? It is simply a matter of opinion on this point and really, any attempt to argue what happens in the end would be speculation correct?

By the way, I am still waiting on the title change AZ, even more so considering Xyro's inflammatory posts.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Yeah, the pre-requisite of being large enough. As it stands though, this pre-requisite flat out says "it does not matter how much hype or big you are, you dont get that sticky for not conforming to this ruleset".

It's a very good way of pressuring people.

They said there were other prerequisists, hence why that one large tournament didn't get pinned and later turned out to be a good thing.

Nope.
1. I was using Japes as an example. What if it's three months from now and one of them decides LM is fine? Or Pipes (completely nonrandom BTW)? Or even Norfair, which was in T2 under 3.1 but absent here?

2. It affects anyone who wants to counterpick Japes (which as I understand is Falco, Lucas, and Susa, although I could be wrong) or any of these other stages (Olimar would love Pipes/LM legal, Sonic and Wario are great on Norfair).

If we constantly go by "what if"s, nothing will ever get done. Currently they are all in agreement. Let's see how it turns out before calling foul.

 

[Life]

If your tournament is large enough, I would assume it's a regional or national.
In which case you should be adopting this ruleset.
This is in place to try and make sure you DO JUST THAT.

Again, I ask, WHY should you be adopting this ruleset? Because AZ said so? Because the only logic used was "we're the most experienced people here"? Because five people now decide how we play Brawl? Because its stagelist inhibits characters like Wario, Jigglypuff, Olimar, and possibly others who want to counterpick stages that are banned under these rules? Yet still leaving MK his best two stages, so you can't even call "greater character viability" the reasoning behind the ruleset?

If we had a ton of paintings. Many different wonderful paintings. Some monochrome - some rainbows, some using only secondary colors.... such beautiful pieces of art.

The master-of-the-rainbows displays specific artworks in his gallery.

But the master-of-the-rainbows chose only to select those that contained red to be stickied, because red is a popular color. Those were the only ones displayed..

He later changes his mind and says that the painting must contain red and blue. So now any paintings that had red, but not blue - are no longer hung up on the walls. The artists are free to paint some blue on there if they wish to be displayed. But it's their choice.

And potentially ruin what is otherwise a masterpiece because it did not contain blue?

Yay ninjas. @niddo: humans are fickle. It doesn't even have to be a stage. What if it's a LGL, suicide rule, timer change, etc.? Heck, what if it even goes the other way and one of them wants to ban Picto? Basically, if ANY ruleset change is to take place, for better or for worse, AT ALL, the TO who comes up with the change must either convince two of the other four TO's (and based on what we've seen of them so far...), or go pound sand. Change is not a matter of "if". Only _which_ changes are "ifs".

 

[ShadowLink84]

They said there were other prerequisists, hence why that one large tournament didn't get pinned and later turned out to be a good thing.

Which one? Please be a bit more specific.

 

[Raziek]

I like how people continually bring up my region's location as a means of discrediting my opinions.

Never mind the fact that I'm probably one of the most knowledgeable players about stages on this board. Nah, that's not important. Let's just leave this decision in the hands of people immune to logic (Xyro), and some of whom don't know very much about stages at all.

They are businessmen who are taking the jobs of researchers. This is the problem here.

 

[Nidtendofreak]

Which one? Please be a bit more specific.

I don't wanna dig through this topic to try to find it again. ;_;

 

[swordgard]

I mean, Canada doesn't have the same type of TOs america does. Each region has like 1-2 TO, and thats it. You can't have a super TO because nationals can't exist in canada due to low population density. Raziek probably did as much for his scene as I did for mine, or as gichan or tinman did for theirs. I dunnow enough about WC, heard they don't play brawl that much. And I don't know who's alberta's TO, would have to ask T-Block/alphicans.

Namesearch bait +1.

 

[ShadowLink84]

I don't wanna dig through this topic to try to find it again. ;_;

Hmm, can you explain what happened then? If you know the region area I can dig for it myself.

 

[Life]

@sword: Nonsense. Perhaps I'm speaking from ignorance, but you can have a national tournament in Canada. Just expect a lot of Americans to show up to it.

 

[theunabletable]

I like how people continually bring up my region's location as a means of discrediting my opinions.

I wasn't descrediting your opinions because of your location, I was discrediting your actual relevance to the US scene. You don't really know what players want, or find agreeable because your location is so unconnected to the US (the area that these rules are for).

 

[Raziek]

@sword: Nonsense. Perhaps I'm speaking from ignorance, but you can have a national tournament in Canada. Just expect a lot of Americans to show up to it.

Hey, man, I thought I should let you know.... your ignorance is showing a little bit.

Table, really, I shouldn't have to tell you this again. Canada is the 52nd state. We attend your nationals, because we do not have the population to host our own, and Americans aren't going to drive to Ontario from far away.

 

[Xyro77]

Never mind the fact that I'm probably one of the most knowledgeable players about stages on this board. Nah, that's not important. Let's just leave this decision in the hands of people immune to logic (Xyro), and some of whom don't know very much about stages at all.

They are businessmen who are taking the jobs of researchers. This is the problem here.

100% opinion.

 

[Life]

52nd?... guess we're all ignorant around here

(Unless you mean Mexico, but American relations with Canada are probably better than those with Mexico)

And you can still technically have a national in Canada. Now having a successful national...

Xyro: Considering he's seen far more competitive play on these stages than any other due to the fact that he hosts tournaments with them legal? (If you don't accept this, then you cannot accept your own logic for your stagelist. /ackbar)

 

[Spelt]

100% opinion.

100% opinion.

 

[theunabletable]

I'm not talking about Canada, some of them seem to be fairly connected to the US scene, and might be alright for making a US ruleset, I'm talking about Nova Scotia specifically. You haven't done anything that's really relevant to the metagame of the country that the ruleset is for.

 

[Xyro77]

100% opinion.

WHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

i like you

 

[TheTantalus]

37 pages!? This moves way too fast.

I'm glad you all are making so much noise about this. As Dale Earnhardt would say "I don't care if they are booing or cheering, as long as they are making noise"

I'm glad so many of you have a strong opinion on this matter. I encourage you to be vocal of your concerns as you have been. However. I would ask that you give us some trust, whether you agree with it or not.

I have a pretty hype event coming up using this stageset and the pound ruleset.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=289336

Think it won't work? Then let's see how this event turns out and what the thoughts of the players and organizers is after the event.