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

[DavemanCozy]

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.

If we do things like Smogon, popular scrub opinion would have already banned Diddy. Hell no.

 

[DeLux]

NBA

I counter your assessment with MLB.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

Back rooms had a place, and I get why they were set-up as they were. To limit where and who the input came from.

At the same time, I think here in comp discussion of limits the field good for the bad users, I think this room has stricter rules than the general discussions.

I do think we need to find unity at some point but right now when it is early and a lot of what ifs going around, customs stages etc.

It's early but I think given the previous backlash and other issues, maybe it's not as needed over this public one which works more or less like it.

 

[thehard]

I think a BR is fine, as long as you consider the opinions of all types of players, and are willing to explain the rationale behind the decision making. ("Stage X is banned for Y and Z, here's insurmountable evidence supporting this ban, words and videos, etc.") I can't stress the importance behind this enough, all reasoning should be publicly available, it satisfies new (and old!) players that might think you're some illuminati restricting all their favorite things, and, really, it's just professional. I come from a background of competitive TF2 and its communities had a REALLY bad problem with arbitrary, private decision making, which is part of the reason I gave up on it.

It would be a good thing to check in on the Smash community at large and let them know what you've been discussing, ask for their thoughts on it, poll them and whatnot, and to consider those results alongside what the BR thinks.

But if the BR would falter in these guidelines even a little, I'd rather it just be kept open to the public as a whole yeah

Also, members enacted into the BR should have an outstanding history of intelligent posts + be decent at the game

Edit: Also: periodically going over the current ruleset and seeing if it can be improved in some way

 

[LiteralGrill]

"A little less conversation a little more action please!"

If someone in here can come up with a good sounding name, I'll make a social group here on Smashboards so anyone really interested can join and the conversation can begin. Then all we have to do is get all the "thinkers" and the TOs and get them in there. The more people supporting the project the better it will be, the more TOs hosting events with the ruleset the more it will become standard. Evo is coming, and if you wanna see certain changes happen the work has to be put in and start happening now. Why wait around for it?

So come on people, show you want it to happen and I'll even help take the first step for you :O

 

[Coffee™]

If we do things like Smogon, popular scrub opinion would have
already banned Diddy. Hell no.

This is a pretty shallow viewpoint. The people that vote aren't "scrubs". Either way it's not like it's necessary to follow their methods "to a tee" but they are definitely more on the right track as far as this topic goes.

 

[thehard]

"A little less conversation a little more action please!"

If someone in here can come up with a good sounding name, I'll make a social group here on Smashboards so anyone really interested can join and the conversation can begin. Then all we have to do is get all the "thinkers" and the TOs and get them in there. The more people supporting the project the better it will be, the more TOs hosting events with the ruleset the more it will become standard. Evo is coming, and if you wanna see certain changes happen the work has to be put in and start happening now. Why wait around for it?

So come on people, show you want it to happen and I'll even help take the first step for you :O

SmUsh Ado About Nothing

Not only is it a bad pun but it's also humbling!

 

[DavemanCozy]

The difference here is that people use a community made ruleset for Smash tourneys, whereas Pokemon already has a standard VGC ruleset for tourneys.

There is no reason to take anything Smogon does seriously when their own metas aren't worth using in tournaments. Most members there whine about vgc being too hard to play, which is essentially not playing with the standard ruleset. Last I heard, Greninja and Aegislash got banned, which wouldn't have happened if what kept them in check hadn't been banned. The whole OU meta is a joke, it's why I only play VGC.

Smash requires the community to have some sort of organization because we do not get the same benefit of having a standard ruleset from the developers. Smogon has no excuse.

 

[DeLux]

A lot of you are underestimating what years of scrubbily applying a scrubby ban criteria to generations of bad games has done to the general public perception on what is/isn't competitive if you're calling for some sort of acceptable rationale on why things are banned.

 

[Coffee™]

The difference here is that people use a community made ruleset for Smash tourneys, whereas Pokemon already has a standard VGC ruleset for tourneys.

There is no reason to take anything Smogon does seriously when their own metas aren't worth using in tournaments. Most members there whine about vgc being too hard to play, which is essentially not playing with the standard ruleset. Last I heard, Greninja and Aegislash got banned, which wouldn't have happened if what kept them in check hadn't been banned. The whole OU meta is a joke, it's why I only play VGC.

Smash requires the community to have some sort of organization because we do not get the same benefit of having a standard ruleset from the developers. Smogon has no excuse.

Smogon doesn't consider the VGC meta when it comes to it's standard ruleset and tiers which are all generally based on the OU metagame. The standard is community made and has just generally been adapted from older versions of itself before VCG was even a thing. A lot of VCG rules are actually pretty arbitrary as well.

Also as far as Smash and standard rulesets go For Glory is comparable to VCG and you can already see how many complaints that caused as far as coming up with a ruleset.

 

[Amiibo Doctor]

A backroom is necessary. Mass amounts of tournaments strictly following the backroom is not.

 

[RoachCake]

"A little less conversation a little more action please!"

If someone in here can come up with a good sounding name, I'll make a social group here on Smashboards so anyone really interested can join and the conversation can begin. Then all we have to do is get all the "thinkers" and the TOs and get them in there. The more people supporting the project the better it will be, the more TOs hosting events with the ruleset the more it will become standard. Evo is coming, and if you wanna see certain changes happen the work has to be put in and start happening now. Why wait around for it?

So come on people, show you want it to happen and I'll even help take the first step for you :O

How about "The Sm4sh Think Tank"? (Sounds pretty good to me)

 

[Shaya]

Capps, you're you're right in the sense there's nothing stopping TOs grouping up together, but they have been, already, and it's naive to think they or no one else had had your idea before.
The people who will likely decide Evo's ruleset, as in those trusted community members with half a decade to a decade in experience, are in direct contact with every power broker that matters.

Also, what's stopping people having the conversation here already? The dynamic of theory-crafting between a significant majority of non-tournament/wifi attending players isn't going to change. Active high level players tend to keep quiet so they don't have to deal with the aforementioned, however they're mostly all the types to be warm and open to anyone who contacts them directly for advice.

I know I'm coming off as rude or whatever; if you think the idea of a backroom and how it could be improved hasn't been brooded around by innumerable amounts of "think tanks" for years can be resolved by an impulsive actions...


Now, everything I've said has been in relation to rule sets.
Keyboard warrior-ing isn't going to be remotely effective in this at all. I'm sorry. I was one for the majority of my Smash existence when it was all we had (i.e. when we were a semi-united GRASS ROOTS community and not legal entities/organisations which are generally contractually obligated and indifferent to things outside their scope [why would they be, this is their jobs/livelihoods]).
Speak with your wallets and stream viewership, support TOs and events with better ideas.

For when it comes to tier lists, match up charts and so forth.
There will be no problems for these in the future. Tallying standardised opinions isn't complicated. We already have successful systems for these that will be implemented/work similar to the past (DRAFTED PROJECT PARTICIPANTS). Look forward to them =)

 

[Piford]

Speak with your wallets and stream viewership, support TOs and events with better ideas.

That would be great, but almost every single event is using the Apex ruleset. Honestly the only streams and events that get attention are the ones that were popular before Smash 4 came out. They are getting view and entrants not because they have the best ruleset, but because they were popular before and popularity breeds more popularity. You aren't going to suddenly have everyone stop attending Xanadu because they want Skyloft legal, a few might complain but nothings going to get done. Most people will blindly follow their ruleset, and it doesn't help that people often get criticized for not accepting their ruleset. Apex has had a huge influence on the ruleset for Smash 4, and because its the biggest event for Smash, people are still going to go. It's hard to support what I want when everyone just uses what I think is a bad ruleset.

 

[T0MMY]

"A little less conversation a little more action please!"

If someone in here can come up with a good sounding name, I'll make a social group here on Smashboards so anyone really interested can join and the conversation can begin.

The name is actually very important. First impressions are lasting impressions for many people so I think a name that communicates the idea of competitive Smashers united in the same cause of bettering the community is imperative.
So here are some ideas I will throw out to work with and we'll see what we can take from there:

Competitive Smash Republic
Pro Smash Community
Smash Community Representatives <= This was actually a thing that was used for Brawl to some success
United Smash Community
National Smash Network
Competitive Smash Community

It'll start to be a mishmash of similar words from me at this point, so how's this to start?

Edit: I looked it over and am liking Smash Community Network.

 

[DavemanCozy]

Smogon doesn't consider the VGC meta when it comes to it's standard ruleset and tiers which are all generally based on the OU metagame. The standard is community made and has just generally been adapted from older versions of itself before VCG was even a thing. A lot of VCG rules are actually pretty arbitrary as well.

Also as far as Smash and standard rulesets go For Glory is comparable to VCG and you can already see how many complaints that caused as far as coming up with a ruleset.

This is exactly what is wrong with Smogon, focusing on OU and 1v1 in general. Singles was fine up until Gold and Silver, it became a terrible meta to play because it encouraged degenerate playstyles. For example, Stall can make matches last up to 50 turns, it is the equivalent of ledge camping in Brawl with Meta Knight (it's so bad they had to introduce ledge grab limits in Brawl). Sure, you can play offense, but only skilled players do that because it's just more safe to let the opponent lose to chip damage. If Smogon at least enforced an item clause, it would rid a stall team those three other Pokemon using Leftovers and make matches go much quicker, forcing other defensive playstyles that don't make matches last forever. Vgc eliminates these strategies with the "arbitrary" rules that they use. I would much rather play a meta where I lose from a good hit instead of losing because I got timed out.

The comparison to For Glory is not even good, vgc doubles has been the standard since Ruby and Sapphire, whereas Smash Bros was never supported by developers the same way, and even now it still isn't with tourneys. You don't see Apex using FD only or any other tournament for that matter, and you don't see Nintendo doing tournaments with For Glory rules, whereas both the developer (Gamefreak with Play Pokemon) and serious grass roots communities for Pokemon have been using VGC as the standard. It's for a reason, they realised how badly balanced Singles was (look at how many Pokemon have been banned in the past year). There's a reason why Brawl is dying competitively as well.

I'll repeat: Smogon can happily cater to their own metas while we ourselves can also cater to 1v1 and let the ones who like free for alls and items play happily. The difference is that the rulesets discussed here have competitive merit, whereas you'll never see a Smogon ruleset used in any serious competitive Pokemon community because no tourney wants to deal with matches going over the turn limit or close to it. There's a reason Brawl is dying and there's a reason Smogon is not taken seriously.

Perhaps we could look at their way of ruleset moderation more carefully and learn from it, I do believe that there might be something we could use, just beware of letting majority vote polls in, as we could end with stages and characters arbitrarily banned, like it's happening in Smogon because people refuse to adopt new strategies to evolve the meta and ban it to not deal with it instead.

 

[ぱみゅ]

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.

For the record, it wasn't the BBR. It was Apex and Apex alone.
The UCR had a fair list, though a bit restricting, and they decided to ban MK to keep many stages, but Apex said otherwise, kept like 5 stages and Meta Knight, and everything went downhill from there.

 

[warriorman222]

Smogon is not taken seriously for different reasons: the few idiots there being more vocal than all the Ridley detractors combined. The stupid elitist oligarchy jury that doesn't eve require elite status , just above -average status, meaning that any suspected Pokemon is getting banned, with little excpetions. Pokemon are getting banned like crazy because of a ridiculously flawed banning system. They have an item clause you know, and in OU and especially 1v1, stall is dead.

 

[Remzi]

I kind of like the idea of a BR in which EVERYONE can read, but only few can post.

 

[elmike]

who decides whether or not there will be a back room?

 

[popsofctown]

A Smash Backroom is something that made sense for Melee and the time period surrounding it. It didn't make sense for Brawl. It doesn't make sense for Smash 4. It doesn't make sense for Smash 64.

I think if the universe was created a year ago you don't start wondering why there isn't a backroom for Smash 4. At least not in the first year of its lifespan. Treating the games differently when they should be treated differently is very important.

A backroom seems like a solution in search of a problem. An exclusive group of private people doesn't seem like the way to make people crave ruleset uniformity.

 

[thehard]

I think I really like the idea of just a regular social group yeah. Let anyone with a passion for making Smash 4 the best it can be competitively post. Any trolls or non-serious users would get ousted quickly anyway...you just have to run a custom move poll and see who votes ban

 

[DeLux]

A backroom seems like a solution in search of a problem. An exclusive group of private people doesn't seem like the way to make people crave ruleset uniformity.

Ironically, the solution in search of a problem is known as the "garbage can decision making model", from what I understand from my policy analysis classes LOL

 

[Pazx]

"A little less conversation a little more action please!"

If someone in here can come up with a good sounding name, I'll make a social group here on Smashboards so anyone really interested can join and the conversation can begin. Then all we have to do is get all the "thinkers" and the TOs and get them in there. The more people supporting the project the better it will be, the more TOs hosting events with the ruleset the more it will become standard. Evo is coming, and if you wanna see certain changes happen the work has to be put in and start happening now. Why wait around for it?

So come on people, show you want it to happen and I'll even help take the first step for you :O

For the name I propose:
Sm4sh
Arbitrary
Decision-Making
Board
Of
Inaccurate
Statements

As much as I'd like this to happen I don't really think a social group is any better than the combined stage analysis + ruleset discussion threads. Frontroom idea is neat, transparent backroom is my cup of tea.

 

[revengeska]

Sm4sh has been out for almost 6 months now(3DS version came out in August), so I don't think it's too early to at least think about creating a tier list and discussion on rulesets. The benefit up to this point of having varied rulesets is that now if the community wants to organize a discussion on a unified ruleset, there's a fair amount of data to draw from to support various conclusions.

I don't know whether or not a Brawl-like Back Room is the best solution to creating a unified ruleset, but I wholly support and think it's time to create some type of organization. Even a public poll on Smashboards asking what stages should be legal will at least get the ball rolling in the right direction, as a TO could reference a wider opinion and tweak their local tournaments in that direction.

 

[Piford]

A backroom seems like a solution in search of a problem. An exclusive group of private people doesn't seem like the way to make people crave ruleset uniformity.

I'm pretty sure there's can exclusive group of private people making the ruleset ragardless of if there's a backroom or not. The difference is that it's either if it's a backroom made of active and knowledgeable smashboards members, or the Apex staff. Of course if you could think of a way to make a universal ruleset that is quality without excluding people that would be amazing. Also the backroom doesn't have to be private, and it could allow for community input.

 

[luke_atyeo]

The sad truth is that there are a lot of people on these boards who would contribute misinformed ignorant 'theory crafted' views without any real substance/experience to back them up, and then those users/views would be the start of arguments, then you'd have elitists who hate dumb people saying stupid things getting mad and causing trouble, and all manner of **** storms would start from there and no real work would get done.

The idea of having top level players contribute is because generally they have the most experience and thus are the least likely to say dumb things (not always the case however)

The whole point of a backroom for developing rules/meta/tiers/match-ups is that you can have only those people who have proven that they are worth listening to in it, it is a form of elitism because it is essentially only picking the best to listen to.
The backrooms still listened to the community and took notice of their discussions, but kept their own discussions private to prevent the things I mentioned in my first paragraph from happening.

People on here who are comparing this to government and saying we need democracy are taking their government metaphor past the point of relevance, this isn't a democratic government and it doesn't need to be, this is a ruling body that create templates that TO's can chose to use, or not use, at their (and their regions community's) own discretion.

 

[Nysyr]

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.

Smash and Pokemon are very different beasts and to compare them is not a good idea. Banning a pokemon from a tier isn't the same thing as banning a smash character from competitive play; one will see use in a higher tier, the other won't ever be used.

Also the way the OU tier has been handled as of gen 6 is a joke, so using that as a basis is a really, realllly bad idea. A better analogy would be The Policy Review on smogon, where only those who are proven to know wtf they are talking about vote on the issue.

Also the smogon hate in this thread is hilarious.

 

[Coffee™]

Smash and Pokemon are very different beasts and to compare them is not a good idea. Banning a pokemon from a tier isn't the same thing as banning a smash character from competitive play; one will see use in a higher tier, the other won't ever be used.

Also the way the OU tier has been handled as of gen 6 is a joke, so using that as a basis is a really, realllly bad idea. A better analogy would be The Policy Review on smogon, where only those who are proven to know wtf they are talking about vote on the issue.

Also the smogon hate in this thread is hilarious.

Not getting into a Pkmn vs Smash thing.... not what I was getting at and the games are not comparable really. Already know that.

What I was referring to is that something comparable to Inside Scoop and Policy Review in terms of how they work together might be beneficial in the case of a Sm4sh BR if it were established as it promotes more public clarity.

 

[DunnoBro]

The difference here is that people use a community made ruleset for Smash tourneys, whereas Pokemon already has a standard VGC ruleset for tourneys.

There is no reason to take anything Smogon does seriously when their own metas aren't worth using in tournaments. Most members there whine about vgc being too hard to play, which is essentially not playing with the standard ruleset. Last I heard, Greninja and Aegislash got banned, which wouldn't have happened if what kept them in check hadn't been banned. The whole OU meta is a joke, it's why I only play VGC.

Smash requires the community to have some sort of organization because we do not get the same benefit of having a standard ruleset from the developers. Smogon has no excuse.

I don't see how VGC not running Smogon's ruleset proves it isn't "worth using in tournaments"

Would Nintendo's official tournaments not using our ruleset make ours not worth running? They just have their own ruleset, that doesn't directly mean anything about the validity of others.

I'll agree smogon has issues but your reasoning is somewhat flawed.

 

[zpxociv]

"All men were created equal" -the biggest lie of all, just about! The point of elitism is the simple truth that we are not equal. So, to all the whiners about the backrooms: It's for the best, because the best isn't all of you.

 

[deepseadiva]

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.

This was beautiful.

Can we call the chief executive The Master Hand????

 

[erico9001]

I'm for having a back room. Having a few knowledgeable, logical people taking care of things is good for functionality. This prevents strife in the community. Having the back roomer forum closed allows the back roomers to be open, not having to worry much about people who would get upset at their ideas. Additionally, a smaller group can just simply move forward with a decision.

I believe the types of people that usually end up being made back-roomers are not the people who see the title as a rank that they want to earn and wear around. The system is probably more like when you become a back roomer you are put in a position of responsibility. You are going to be doing lots of thinking, testing, typing, and arguing (not the angry kind). The title "back roomer" just shows the work and contribution you've put into helping this meta. There's nothing elitist about it.

As for the people not in the back room, have just a little humility. You're not the super intelligent, special snowflake whose convictions carry the fate of the future of the community. Relax, they've got it covered. If you actually do have a very solid reasoning you have worked out that could help the people in the back room, post it in the right thread, and the reasoning should make its way into the back room. Back roomers have access to the boards just like the rest of us. They aren't blind to what people are saying around here.

 

[T0MMY]

This was beautiful.

Can we call the chief executive The Master Hand????

Haha, very clever.
Except the system I was proposing wouldn't have a single head. But I think having branches of Master Hand/Crazy Hand/Master Core to maintain checks and balances would be very apprapo. haha
Originally the binding documents for uniting the colonies in the beginning of U.S. history did not include having a president (nor did it have a federal government or taxation). Not only do my personal opinions lead me to favor a system more along the lines of the Articles of Confederacy over the Constitution, but a system that helps network and organize TO's and Smash tournaments may not need much of the features in a societal government system. I think people have had enough with taxes and authorities intervening with our personal lives enough, haha!

 

[Piford]

Haha, very clever.
Except the system I was proposing wouldn't have a single head. But I think having branches of Master Hand/Crazy Hand/Master Core to maintain checks and balances would be very apprapo. haha
Originally the binding documents for uniting the colonies in the beginning of U.S. history did not include having a president (nor did it have a federal government or taxation). Not only do my personal opinions lead me to favor a system more along the lines of the Articles of Confederacy over the Constitution, but a system that helps network and organize TO's and Smash tournaments may not need much of the features in a societal government system. I think people have had enough with taxes and authorities intervening with our personal lives enough, haha!

Articles of Confederation actually. And if you wanted a system that mocks the Articles of Confederation over the Constitution you'd need some serious improvements because the Articles of Confederation sucked.

 

[T0MMY]

Articles of Confederation actually. And if you wanted a system that mocks the Articles of Confederation over the Constitution you'd need some serious improvements because the Articles of Confederation sucked.

Thanks for catching that typo, was about ready for bed when typing that. If you're a nationalist that is propagating the idea that the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union "sucked" I'd leave shallow opinion to die by the roadside as mere opinion is simply defeated with another, contrary opinion.
Although If I had to choose between the two documents as a basis to describe natural rights so that they may be secured and protected I'd go with the one that didn't have a foothold for british crown agents to gain a foothold for corruption and introduce a centralized power which ultimately leads to socialism and then dictatorship. The idea is to get away from a backroom oligarchy or some kind of hidden monarchy in the Smash Community and introduce an open system where competitive players can okay their preferred way of competing on a national, regional, and local level.

 

[Piford]

Thanks for catching that typo, was about ready for bed when typing that. If you're a nationalist that is propagating the idea that the Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union "sucked" I'd leave shallow opinion to die by the roadside as mere opinion is simply defeated with another, contrary opinion.
Although If I had to choose between the two documents as a basis to describe natural rights so that they may be secured and protected I'd go with the one that didn't have a foothold for british crown agents to gain a foothold for corruption and introduce a centralized power which ultimately leads to socialism and then dictatorship. The idea is to get away from a backroom oligarchy or some kind of hidden monarchy in the Smash Community and introduce an open system where competitive players can okay their preferred way of competing on a national, regional, and local level.

The Articles of Confederation sucked not because the idea of Perpetual union but because the US likely wouldn't exist today with them. Commerce would've been a mess with every state having a different currency, with no military outside militias the US likely would've been conquered, major issues like Slavery would take even longer to get resolved, among other issues. There are clear downsides to both documents and ways of running things.

Also a completely open system is likely not going to work out, as it would result in a large number of unnecessary bans that could easily ruin the meta game. I've hear a lot of people wanting to ban things like Miis because you have to set them up, Lylat Cruise because they can't sweepspot the ledge, Diddy Kong because they can't deal with him (this is a ban that might be worth considering down the line if the entire meta game does end up revolving around him, but it's too early to tell), Town and City because the platforms can kill you, the list goes on. A lot of the time the community doesn't actually know what's best for the game and themselves. Community input is great, don't get me wrong, but like everyone they are likely to make bad decisions.

Also I wouldn't be pitching a completely open system in the same post as you say "I'd leave shallow opinion to die by the roadside as mere opinion is simply defeated with another, contrary opinion."

 

[T0MMY]

The Articles of Confederation sucked not because the idea of Perpetual union but because the US likely wouldn't exist today with them.

Do you mean the U.S. as we know it today wouldn't exist with them?
Could be a good thing.
Let's face it, the economy, the military [industrial complex], and pretty much every point you've made can be applied to today's nationalist's dream come true - Federally empowered, centralized, overreaching government.
It's everything about a backroom people have posted here saying they do NOT want.

An open system with proper representation and limited power is much more perfered. Frontroom > backroom.

Let's take a look at the AoC vs a more centralized government as found with today's government and see what we can learn from this as applied to the Smash Community.

Commerce would've been a mess with every state having a different currency, with no military outside militias the US likely would've been conquered, major issues like Slavery would take even longer to get resolved, among other issues. There are clear downsides to both documents and ways of running things.

Harsh criticism, or just speculation?

Market
Besides the complete subjectivity of the claim that it would become a "mess", I would rather just point to how the world has many different currencies - the not-messy, multi-currency market says hi.
If you've got some evidence for the claim now'd be a good time to show it.

Military
As much as I'd like to take everything you say as complete truth, regarding "no military outside militias" I found this in article 6:

Spoiler

No vessel of war shall be kept up in time of peace by any State, except such number only, as shall be deemed necessary by the United States in Congress assembled, for the defense of such State, or its trade; nor shall any body of forces be kept up by any State in time of peace, except such number only, as in the judgement of the United States in Congress assembled, shall be deemed requisite to garrison the forts necessary for the defense of such State; but every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of filed pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage.

So, it seems like you forgot to include "during peacetime" and that Congress determines how many is needed to be maintained for defense. Same goes with troops.
During the time of the Articles there was a lot of threats brewing, to make the claim that they couldn't have military is rather absurd if it were true and preposterous to assume such were the case. The actual text clarifies, and it appears such were not the case.

Also a completely open system is likely not going to work out, as it would result in a large number of unnecessary bans that could easily ruin the meta game.

The same not only could be said about a closed system like a backroom, but history has already showed that to be the case. Your worse case scenario is exactly what is happening AND there is no checks/balance to the closed system.

I've hear a lot of people wanting to ban things like Miis because you have to set them up, Lylat Cruise because they can't sweepspot the ledge, Diddy Kong because they can't deal with him (this is a ban that might be worth considering down the line if the entire meta game does end up revolving around him, but it's too early to tell), Town and City because the platforms can kill you, the list goes on.

Which takes us to the next part of my system that stresses a republic with representatives - NOT a democracy with majority rule banning everything simply because 99% of the people are undecided or don't speak up. Smart people make educated decisions, but they represent the community by and large and must weight what is wanted by their constituents versus a solid kind of "Constitution" as mentioned earlier (and how I actually like the Articles of Confederation da bess).

Also I wouldn't be pitching a completely open system in the same post as you say "I'd leave shallow opinion to die by the roadside as mere opinion is simply defeated with another, contrary opinion."

I would :^)

Open system welcomes free speech.
But weak opinions like "Pac Man should be banned because he's yellow" will be left to die by the proverbial roadside whether I'd want it to or not. Because strength of reason is based on its foundations, when something is mere opinion and very shallow there is not enough strength behind it to keep it going and the argument dies very quickly. I can't help that, so I (and likely everyone else involved) will simply move on and a stronger argument takes its place.
Kind of just the service of the universe at work there, which I welcome.

 

[thehard]

"A little less conversation a little more action please!"

If someone in here can come up with a good sounding name, I'll make a social group here on Smashboards so anyone really interested can join and the conversation can begin. Then all we have to do is get all the "thinkers" and the TOs and get them in there. The more people supporting the project the better it will be, the more TOs hosting events with the ruleset the more it will become standard. Evo is coming, and if you wanna see certain changes happen the work has to be put in and start happening now. Why wait around for it?

So come on people, show you want it to happen and I'll even help take the first step for you :O

Hey, news on this? APEX is done and it's about time we write the Smash 4 Bible.

 

[ParanoidDrone]

Hey, news on this? APEX is done and it's about time we write the Smash 4 Bible.

"And on the first day, he looked down and was displeased. So he pulled the fire alarm, and there was wailing and gnashing of teeth, but it all worked out in the end. And it was good."
"And on the second day, he looked down and said "Let there be APEX." And so it happened, and it was good."
"And on the third day, the crowd chanted "HOO-HA" in praise of him, and it was good."

Apex 7:1-3

IDK, I felt like being silly there.

Now that Apex is over, I've actually seen more people than usual speak out in support of custom moves whenever the topic comes up, which is a good sign I guess.