[Discussion] - An Anti-ban rule-set committee?

[JTsm]

Hello, let me first say that this is my 1st ever thread on SWF. So please forgive me if I make a mistake. I'm all new to this and kind of scared tbh. lol. I also want to point out that I have nothing against the URC. It just bothers me however, that everything is based around URC and it shouldn't be. So this is basically a response to the URC in general.

Some questions to keep in mind:

1. Is this even a good idea to set up a rule-set committee based around Mk?

2. Who will support Pro-Mk tournaments?

3. Which TO will be able to run Pro MK tournaments after Apex 2012?

4. What Rule-set should we base the Pro-mk tournaments on?

This is the post I made that opened up the idea:

I think there should be two rule set committees: One that bans Mk and the other that obviously doesn't. So each ruleset committee will have their own rules, tier lists, mu's and people can choose one or the other. Like Gimpyfish said in his latest video, a T.O. can do whatever the hell he/she wants. So T.O.'s can base their rules on MK banned(and vice versa). The URC is a group of T.O's and the other group(that likes MK unbanned) are another set of T.O's.

I think this should be a compromise because it allows both sides of the community to chose one or the other (or both!). And the best part about this idea(that I just came up seconds ago) is that you can compare the two and see what's different about the ban/unban groups.

There's too much controversy in this community and we need to come up with solutions FOR EVERYONE. Not just for the URC, not just for the BBR, not just for the unban MK group.

Things to note:
-Basically anyone has a say. All opinions are welcome.
-This committtee will be focused on Canada, the United States and Mexico (North American Continent obv).
-Please keep arguments civil.
-If things get out of hand, and heads to a wrong direction, please lock.

So what do you guys think?

 

[-ShadowPhoenix-]

I think it would be a good idea to set up an Anti ban ruleset committee
Not everyone likes the Unity ruleset and this would allow all MK users to unite and form their own tourneys/rules

 

[-DR3W-]

I think it would make everything even more complicated internally and would make the community overall look even more like babies than we already do.

 

[Mew2King]

^ you guys should have thought about that before you decided you could ban MK and try to force everyone to do the same. Lots of west coast doesn't like it I know that already, most of Europe doesn't, and Japan doesn't. You expect everybody to just follow it if so many people do not like it? That is dumb.

 

[Ripple]

Why do we care what japan and EU think? our scenes don't interact at all with them except for APEX and genesis

and a majority of people support the ban. don't just throw around stuff like "lots of people don't like it". while that could be true, more people like it

 

[Ussi]

You biggest concern should be question 2, who will support pro-MK tourneys.

 

[JTsm]

Yeah, that's what I'm wondering about too the most, Ussi. If we can't have people support it, then it just becomes meaningless. M2K is right in the fact that you can't force everyone to just accept this ban, but if people just do nothing, then we can just stand by and let the URC do all the work. I know there are people out there who want to support this idea, but the feedback is kind of lack luster...

 

[Eddie G]

That's because people are lazy, and as such, will just sit back and take it. I say don't fight the inevitable and just practice for the new metagame that will be sweeping the nation.

 

[UltiMario]

There is no reason to not have an anti ban committee.

If 25% of the US and the rest of the Damn world is anti ban, then I think that's enough qualified people for an anti ban committee.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

This is a great idea. Now everyone will be happy

 

[JTsm]

This is a great idea. Now everyone will be happy

yayyyyyyyy <3

 

[Metro_Knight]

I'm not sure this would work. It's a great idea, and it could possibly work, but there a few problems that I can think of other than what has already been posted.

#1. If tournaments/rulesets are divided like this, the percentage of players who do not main MK who would play in unbanned tournaments would go way down.

Now, I'm sure there will still be a large amount of players who main characters other than MK that would play in these tournaments.. but if right now the Meta-Knight population at tournaments is already high, think of what it would be like if even half of the non-MK players switched exclusively to the banned ruleset. I just think that a Meta-game like that isn't even worth playing in a continent-wide tournament setting.

#2. The Unity Ruleset is there to provide a unified basis for all NA competitive play. It was created to prevent disparity between tournaments.

We could make separate rulesets for lots of different things, items on, stages like Pictochat and Norfair back in counterpicks, but the purpose of a ruleset is to keep things congruent, and I think that having two separate (official) rulesets would harm the community more than it would help it.

Now keep in mind, I think that the community in general is too focused on the official competitive rules anyway, and I strongly encourage all things of this type being experimented with, or tournaments held with things like that, items, all stages, low tier only, etc, but I think all things like this, including MK allowed rulesets, should be worked on from a non-official standpoint. I don't see any reason that an MK included ruleset couldn't be included in a way similar to the way that "All Brawl" has been.

[EDIT]

There is no reason to not have an anti ban committee.

If 25% of the US and the rest of the Damn world is anti ban, then I think that's enough qualified people for an anti ban committee.

I think this is a very good point. It also contests my point of multiple rulesets very well, because things like items and stages have never had a following as large as the anti-ban group. But I think this is an equally good point to why MK shouldn't have been banned in the first place.

[/EDIT]



On a final note, I'm not precisely pro or anti ban, but I think that nothing can be said for sure, or even properly discussed (including whether or not MK should have been banned in the first place), until after Apex 2012, and after more data from MK banned tournaments have been taken into account.

 

[Sorto]

This is a good idea. I actually talked about a similar idea in the urc players discussion. I know the urc and proban will say that these tournies will have no showing, but I feel that they are wrong. It depends on the calibur of player we have making and backing the ruleset that will determine the tourny turnout. If we have top players and tos backing this ruleset then these tournies will probably end up having a decent turnout. If top players back a ruleset with mk, it means a lot more then some mediocre players CREATING a ruleset with mk banned.

 

[AlphaZealot]

If you are implying only mediocre players support banning MK you are wrong.

 

[Sorto]

If you are implying only mediocre players support banning MK you are wrong.

Hey sorry. Fixed. The word I wanted was creating.

 

[Mew2King]

40% of top players are a lot wtf. Why should everyone in the minority (A VERY LARGE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE STILL) just have to submit to Unity because you guys (with your self-proclaimed "power" that is 100% undeserved just because you are TOs and can get away with it) decided THIS IS HOW THINGS WILL BE, and use a majority backing to make sure you stay in power. A VERY large amount of people dislike it, and should be allowed to do as they want.

 

[Sorto]

So instead of arguing, perhaps it is time for discussing. I think we should try to develop the outlines for a ruleset or start to create a committee and detemine what players are willing to back an mk legal metagame if they had say on stages, lgl, timer, perhaps anti tripping rules, and other arguable rules in the ruleset.

 

[Sorto]

I leave this open to the people for starters:

If you would agree to an MK legal metagame, then what changes would you wish to see to the following criteria (if any)?

Legal Stages:
Ledge Grab Limits:
Timers:
Time-out Rules:
Tripping Codes:
Number of Stocks:
Other Ideas for Ruleset changes:

*Starting with the URC ruleset as a base.

Please also put your experience in terms of top level play, tournament hosting, or other experience you may have. It does not need to be descriptive, but more to explain your general involvement in the game and the community.

 

[Metro_Knight]

40% of top players are a lot wtf. Why should everyone in the minority (A VERY LARGE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE STILL)...

According to this, which may not be exactly a 100% accurate picture of the best players, 43 of the top 100 ranked players have ranked with Meta-Knight, mains and secondaries included.

...just have to submit to Unity because you guys (with your self-proclaimed "power" that is 100% undeserved just because you are TOs and can get away with it) decided THIS IS HOW THINGS WILL BE, and use a majority backing to make sure you stay in power...

It's not exactly self-proclaimed power. The fact that it's being backed by a majority seems to me to prove that. Plus, they're not exactly stating THIS IS HOW THINGS WILL BE, they're just stating that "any tournaments that do not follow this ruleset will not be eligible for stickies on SWF or featured coverage on AllisBrawl". However, I understand the opinion that something that only has a 60% majority shouldn't be able to take effect as law.

...A VERY large amount of people dislike it, and should be allowed to do as they want.

The Unity Ruleset isn't end-all law. People can still do whatever they want, even within the Unity Ruleset (to a small degree). That's why things like this were created.

 

[Sorto]

According to this, which may not be exactly a 100% accurate picture of the best players, 43 of the top 100 ranked players have ranked with Meta-Knight, mains and secondaries included.




It's not exactly self-proclaimed power. The fact that it's being backed by a majority seems to me to prove that. Plus, they're not exactly stating THIS IS HOW THINGS WILL BE, they're just stating that "any tournaments that do not follow this ruleset will not be eligible for stickies on SWF or featured coverage on AllisBrawl". However, I understand the opinion that something that only has a 60% majority shouldn't be able to take effect as law.



The Unity Ruleset isn't end-all law. People can still do whatever they want, even within the Unity Ruleset (to a small degree). That's why things like this were created.

This anti-ban ruleset is just another system for rule creation. And it will most likely not be a strict ruleset but a guideline system as well. And thank you for your input. I feel like this rulset could have a large following, if done correctly. As well, I think the arguments and discussions of should an anti ban ruleset be created should cease and rule ideas and comittee ideas should begin.

 

[Sorto]

I leave this open to the people for starters:

If you would agree to an MK legal metagame, then what changes would you wish to see to the following criteria (if any)?

Legal Stages:
Ledge Grab Limits:
Timers:
Time-out Rules:
Tripping Codes:
Number of Stocks:
Other Ideas for Ruleset changes:

*Starting with the URC ruleset as a base.

Please also put your experience in terms of top level play, tournament hosting, or other experience you may have. It does not need to be descriptive, but more to explain your general involvement in the game and the community.

 

[Sorto]

Post metaknight legal ruleset ideas here:

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=312904

 

[JTsm]

So, since Sorta is working on the actual rule-set in a different thread, it seems that there doesn't need to be a committee, but:

Just a group with experienced players, TO's, and etc to discuss and test out some rules that are being considered for Pro mk tournaments. And when I mean testing, I mean actual tournament results before and after Apex 2012 with the Official URC banning mk. These rules won't be definite, but just mere suggestions for TO's to run Pro MK tournaments. Glad Sorta has good feedback coming from his thread. lol.

 

[-Jumpman-]

Why do we care what japan and EU think? our scenes don't interact at all with them except for APEX and genesis

and a majority of people support the ban. don't just throw around stuff like "lots of people don't like it". while that could be true, more people like it

Your scene barely interacts internally. If the argument for the ban is based on concensus, I'd recommend not only looking at the current state of the community, but consider future options. The MK ban was made without much consideration, and needs to be reflected upon.

Edit: Just read M2k's post. How was this ban justified without a two-thirds supermajority among the top players? Has anyone ever heard of the tyranny of the masses?

 

[Mr-R]

Not to mention the incredibly bad ruleset you guys are using

 

[Sorto]

I agree with both you guys. Helpful ruleset ideas would be greatly appreciated if you have a minute. The link to an mk legal ruleset is in my last post above.

 

[Ripple]

Edit: Just read M2k's post. How was this ban justified without a two-thirds supermajority among the top players? Has anyone ever heard of the tyranny of the masses?

why should we have a super majority of top level players to determine rulesets?

 

[Mew2King]

better than a group of TOs deciding

 

[MysteryRevengerson]

Yeah, Tournament Organizers shouldn't come up with rules for the tournaments they host.

Not at all.

Really, if this is such a big deal, then host your own tournaments? I mean, if so many people want MK in still, then shouldn't that mean there are TOs willing to host tourneys that allow him?

 

[AlphaZealot]

Just read M2k's post. How was this ban justified without a two-thirds supermajority among the top players? Has anyone ever heard of the tyranny of the masses

7/10 of the top 10 players, so 70%, a "super majority of the top players", are pro-ban.

better than a group of TOs deciding

Glad you agree with the super-majority of top 10 players being pro-ban.

---

Sometimes you guys make this really too easy.

 

[SaveMeJebus]

7/10 of the top 10 players, so 70%, a "super majority of the top players", are pro-ban.



Glad you agree with the super-majority of top 10 players being pro-ban.

---

Sometimes you guys make this really too easy.

Ally said that the only reason why he voted pro ban was because he thought the game would be more fun that way.

 

[WindMajor]

Wasn't it you that said that we should be listening to top players in the first place? And now we shouldn't listen to Ally's opinion?

 

[SaveMeJebus]

Wasn't it you that said that we should be listening to top players in the first place? And now we shouldn't listen to Ally's opinion?

Maybe you guys shouldn't have asked if MK should be banned but instead if he really deserved to be banned

 

[Jiffyboob]

I miss Jebus's old avatar

 

[Juushichi]

I personally think this is a good idea. If enough people get together that want to host MK legal or all-MK tournaments, they can. Their turnouts will likely be small (not saying this will universally be the case though) but that hasn't stopped likeminded people from putting together **** before.

The URC wants a unified Ruleset that most people are willing to accept or agree to adhere to (mind that these two things ARE different). If people don't consent, you get to do what you would do anyway, which is run your own tournaments. Congrats.

At, M2K in particular... I have to wonder why you don't put in the effort to run or cohost your own tournament or series of them. Your personal sway in the highest competitive parts of the community and how (for lack of an tactful way to say it) many weaker players ride your nuts should guarentee people coming to your side.

Tournaments get more notoriety when you're involved (for better or for worse) so why not use that to help the community that agrees with you? You clearly seem to have the money or could feasibly get it (at any tournament you chose to attend). Venues aren't that expensive.

 

[Mew2King]

No way man, I may have a lot of fans but I have even MORE haters. Maining MK gained me a lot of haters, winning a lot gained me a lot of haters, and my outspokenness gave me even more since I disagree with "majorities" a lot. D1 is gonna host monthlies after Apex and he's not banning him, so I might just go to them. And sometimes Jtails events, and any big tourney OOS/OOC with him legal

Unity is an example of why democracy sucks. Catering to a majority and deciding things by votes does not provide a fair system. Of course most people will vote to ban MK even if he doesn't deserve to be because it gives a better chance of them ranking higher. TOs will do it because 1) most TOs don't play MK and 2) the TOs think more newbs will think they "have a chance" because they see it as an opportunity, so they might make more money for a period of time. Those are the only 2 things this is REALLY about. It's terrible, and it's even worse that most of these people try to cover up their REAL reasons with bull**** like infinite dimension cape or some other excuses when it has nothing to do with it at all. It's painfully obvious.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hey M2K, Holland has legal weed, a pretty strong smash community, and absolutely no interest in banning MK. Just sayin'. ^^

 

[Mew2King]

AZ continuously showing his bias. Top 100 was 40:60 ratio, but he'll use in his argument a rankings that will benefit him so he'll say 7/10 of the top 10. But guess what AZ? Ally isn't even pro-ban, he told me he was going to vote that way because he wants me to concentrate on my life and not smash, and I have AIM logs that can prove it. He doesn't care what happens either way. So that's not 7/10, since one of them isn't pro.

Atomsk doesn't think MK is good/broken enough to be banned. His vote isn't based on that.

Oh here is something else you might find interesting, DEHF only thinks MK is broken with the CURRENT STAGELIST. BBR's fault. Take a hint from Japan and start doing 10 min with less stages. So yeah, you can take DEHF's pro ban vote out of that too.

But oh wait, I'm talking to someone who WANTS DELPHINO A NEUTRAL. Basically that means me telling you this has no meaning.

Votes aren't even a good way to do this, AT ALL, because of everyone's personal bias, but if you're going to do it that way then maybe you should get to know more in-depth of WHY PEOPLE DO THINGS than your little spreadsheets of false facts give you, and get off your high-horse. Wait nvm I'm talking to the great and all powerful Alphazealot, please forgive my rudeness my lord and master.

 

[Zekeishere]

^ you guys should have thought about that before you decided you could ban MK and try to force everyone to do the same. Lots of west coast doesn't like it I know that already, most of Europe doesn't, and Japan doesn't. You expect everybody to just follow it if so many people do not like it? That is dumb.

Lol what? who from WC have you talked to? I just know about 1/2 of PNW is Anti-ban but past that The majority of SoCal, NorCal, and Vegas is pro-ban.

Stop lying please.

 

[Mew2King]

Was there not a blog on aib saying that vegas was not banning MK? I am not lying, that was DEFINTIELY said on allisbrawl. So I do not see how you can say that when there was a blog made about it. Do you know which I am talking about?