Backroom Reform: Current Topic -> Success?

-Ran · Aug 3, 2010

-Ran said:
I created this thread to get the thoughts of the community during a troubled time. I believe that due to the [mostly] intelligent discussion that took place here that certain things were pushed through quickly in the Back Room. Typically when someone states that they want a revolution, it's because they want to achieve accountability through compromise. I believe what occurred after the release of the rule set was that players and the Back Roomers held different definitions and ideals of how powerful the Back Room was.

The players viewed the Back Room as an organization that wielded power, and that their judgments and the composition of their posts should reflect the sway in the community that they had. The BR members however, constantly described themselves as a private club, that was merely posting their individual findings. Both sides understood the shortcomings [lack of activity], but the weight of it and the disconnect of the rules/findings varied gravely by the perceptions of each side. It did not help, that the Back Room seemed so ready to wield power during the Meta Knight polls and discussions. It created a view of perceived power.

~~Players~~ People yearn for a government body to structure their world. If it isn't from instinct, then it is beaten to us as children the moment we can talk. They don't want suggestions, but rather form and function. Unfortunately, the Back Room is neither a government body, nor would it have the capacity in its current incarnation to create any lasting impacts. Almost every Tournament Organizer follows their own rules at this point, regardless of what nation or state they hail from. The only way an oversight community would ever be constructed, is if the vast majority of it was constructed by Tournament Organizers, who would then invite top players to speak on issues. At the end of the day, the TOs have total power, but remain disjointed in both ideals and rule structure. Popular opinion rules Smash, rather than logic, results, and debate.

I'd like to thank everyone for their contributions though.

If anything, the latest snafu of the Rule List 3.0 has demonstrated to us as a community that the Backroom as it stands now is broken. Currently, there are over one hundred members in the BR, but if you look at the voting that has taken place, to even state that less than half of them have participated in the voting would be a joke. For stages that dramatically effect the outcome of a match to be suddenly legal with only twenty votes of a hundred being counted, it's just too much to ask for me, as a member of this community.

There is a general disconnect with our community and the BR, and it needs to be resolved. I have thought this for a long time, but unfortunately there was never a moment to capture the wave of similar feelings that others would have. The BR as it is structured now is flawed, and must be replaced with new members and new rules to promote activity with in. Having top players dictate the course of the Meta Game seems as if it would be a great idea, until you realize that top players often do not post on the forum enough to represent their ideas or thoughts.

This isn't the first time that the BR has had issues where they had lack of votes, yet still pushed policy out. This has been a problem from the ledge grab limit to Meta Knight being allowed in tournament, to even the very first stage bans. Isn't it time to resolve these issues? At the moment, I have seriously lost faith in the ability of the BR to watch over the metagame of Brawl. Until this is resolved, I will simply run my tournaments with the rules that my state has voted on prior to all of this. However, we run the risk of our entire community becoming fragmented due to the failure at the hands of the BR.

If you feel the same, join the social group. Post in this thread, and keep the idea alive.

http://www.smashboards.com/group.php?groupid=2321

Perhaps it is time that we put the onus of creating the rules for our community in the hands of an organization composed of Tournament Organizers. Choose the main TO from every state, and have them create the rules with a slight blend of the top players for every region. As it stands now, the BR is broken.

napZzz · Aug 3, 2010

random ppl shouldn't be allowed in the bbr. It should be strictly left up to top placing players from each region and to's who can contribute. Not some "average joe" who doens't know what he's talking about.

The way I see it the BBR is similar to the government. Top officials who are supposed to help decide what rules over our country(community). They always take into consideration the vote of a COMMUNITY and then discuss it amongst themselves.

The current BBR appears to work on their own mind/will without taking anything else into factor.

What it needs are TOP OFFICIALS who can actually reach out with the community itself form a higher standpoint and help out everyone to make legit decisions

t!MmY · Aug 3, 2010

-Ran said:
Perhaps it is time that we put the onus of creating the rules for our community in the hands of an organization composed of Tournament Organizers. Choose the main TO from every state, and have them create the rules with a slight blend of the top players for every region.

This, sir, is an excellent idea.

It's the TO's that put together the events. It's the TO's who know their regions and what rules they use. It's the TO's voices that should be heard.

ADHD · Aug 3, 2010

The issue is that imo, they let too many individuals that are excellent at posting, but generally not at the game. Bad players are equally as biased as the best, so you need an even ground.

Spelt · Aug 3, 2010

the BBR wouldn't be so bad if they actually listened to the community once in awhile.

Seems like for the most part, the majority is against the new ruleset, but they're still gonna stand strong and defend this mess they've created.

sunshade · Aug 3, 2010

Wouldn't a simple one line rule be easier than completely remaking the BBR?

"if you do not vote you will be removed from the BBR"

z00ted · Aug 3, 2010

ADHD said:
The issue is that imo, they let too many individuals that are excellent at posting, but generally not at the game. Bad players are equally as biased as the best, so you need an even ground.

...You beat me to the post.

Messatsu! · Aug 3, 2010

ran the revolutionary

i can respect that

.AC. · Aug 3, 2010

to enter you need to have won at least 5 theory fighting tournaments

Kole · Aug 3, 2010

LMAO AC

I agree with this 100%

Vermanubis · Aug 3, 2010

I agree with the OP. The BBR is comprised of, as the OP said, over 100 members, but around 30 of them are active and rarely excel in both theorycraft AND practice. Usually one or the other. I'm all for it. Brawl is dying because of the BBR's inability to make sensible decisions.

BSP · Aug 3, 2010

Good idea -Ran. Make having a purple name actually mean something.

Flayl · Aug 3, 2010

Before being a BBR member meant you were one of these things (Or so I thought):
- A player that places in the money at a lot of tournaments
- Tournament hosts that organize large tournaments - regionals and nationals
- One of the absolutely best players of your character (mostly applicable to characters that can't really place in the money)

Now I don't know what it means.

edit: As already mentioned, voting on important issues should be mandatory to remain in the BBR.

TheMike · Aug 3, 2010

There are 91 people with acces to the BBR. A few were recently(yesterday) removed due to low/no activity, and there will soon be new admissions.

BTW, good thread.

rPSIvysaur · Aug 3, 2010

I totally agree.

-Ran · Aug 3, 2010

Thanks for the support guys. The Backroom only has power because we allow them to. We, as a community must set forth standards that we want for the Backroom, and demand that they happen.

MythTrainerInfinity · Aug 3, 2010

It'd be very nice to get reviews of what each member does in the BBR.

Based on past things (like someone voting Spear Pillar as a neutral) it makes you realize that some people are there to troll it a bit, at least some of the time.

You do not only need to players and TOs, but you need to have people who are really good with each character. I doubt any Ganons are going to be top placing in each region, but even low tiers do need to be considered for rulesets.

I was also very disappointed with this http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=282137 thread, the discussion of Lucario by the BBR has many of the posts with horribly outdated information. Only one BBRer really seemed to know what they were talking about, sadly...

lordhelmet · Aug 3, 2010

It's sad that a thread like this needs to be made. But the fact of the matter is that the BBR is incapable of making tolerable rulesets.

Edit:

@Myth: Some low tier rep would be cool. Vermanubis for BBR member anyone?

Mikachiru · Aug 3, 2010

-Ran said:
Thanks for the support guys. The Backroom only has power because we allow them to. We, as a community must set forth standards that we want for the Backroom, and demand that they happen.

MetalMusicMan said:
We aren't the "Smash Police". We aren't forcing anyone to use this ruleset, and the BBR never forced anyone to use any other version of the rule set in the past. You are all freaking out over nothing to begin with, but if you really are that enraged, use whatever stage list you want.

The BBR has never had any authority in the past and they don't know. We RECOMMEND things. We don't dictate.

Read this. They don't have power. Never have, never will.

Ray Robo · Aug 3, 2010

Vermanubis said:
I agree with the OP. The BBR is comprised of, as the OP said, over 100 members, but around 30 of them are active and rarely excel in both theorycraft AND practice. Usually one or the other. I'm all for it. Brawl is dying because of the BBR's inability to make sensible decisions.

He knows whats up. And I totally agree Ran. I also think that to be in the BBR you must show great skill in the game and knowledge about it as well. Hope the community can do this and I'll help as best as I can.

EDIT: @ Mikachiru We know that but when most people look at the ruleset they'd want to go with the standards. But now that you mention it who the heck would put those rules for their tourney? It's a conflict between the BBR and the Smash Community itself. We have to take a stand ourselves and change this before brawl dies itself due to the fact of unreasonable rules.

Red Arremer · Aug 3, 2010

-Ran said:
I will simply run my tournaments with the rules that my state has voted on prior to all of this.

Good. This is exactly what the BBR wants you to do.

The ruleset is a guideline, or rather, a suggestion what rules to use at your tournament. If you want to use different rules, then go ahead, we are not going to stop you, as noone can force you about how to run your tournament.

If people are blindly following this ruleset, without thinking about it, then it's their own fault.

Edit:

MythTrainerInfinity said:
I was also very disappointed with this http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=282137 thread, the discussion of Lucario by the BBR has many of the posts with horribly outdated information. Only one BBRer really seemed to know what they were talking about, sadly...

We have one of the best Lucarios in the BBR - Lee Martin. He doesn't contribute a lot, though, even in regards to that character.

vVv Rapture · Aug 3, 2010

What's the point of making the ruleset if the BBR knows that no one will follow it?

Anything the BBR does should be productive, not just a suggestion or something to fall back on. A ruleset should be something that does end up being practical and productive so that the community can use it, not for it to be posted and say, "well if you don't like it, don't use it." What's the point of making it then?

We do need some sort of authority in our community, but one that has authority for a good reason - to cater to everyone else, not defend their own decisions with their lives. For the people, by the people, I say. If the BBR sees a backlash after doing something, instead of trying to justify it, they should try to, you know, try to fix what they think is wrong with it or, at the very least, try to understand it instead of pointlessly arguing.

lordhelmet · Aug 3, 2010

.joel that's not what Myth was getting at *facepalm*

He's saying that most of the current, active BBR members don't know what they're talking about. Plain and simple.

BSP · Aug 3, 2010

Just wondering, with our current BBR, do you just have to be in it to vote on stages, tier lists, etc., or do you have to prove your knowledge within the room?

Red Arremer · Aug 3, 2010

@lordhelmet:
I haven't really followed the thread about Lucario, but usually, most characters are well covered and there's at least one person to update the information should there be something outdated.
Most participants in discussions do have grounds of their knowledge, and while they might not be able to cover all little details, this is usually compensated by other members who do.
That's why there's a lot of people in the BBR. That 60% of them aren't active is not the fault of us; when admitting members, we actually were counting on them being active and contributing to discussions. You can't say it's my or any of the other members' fault that noone of the people who know much about, as in this case, Lucario are posting in a thread about him.

vVv Rapture said:
What's the point of making the ruleset if the BBR knows that no one will follow it?

Anything the BBR does should be productive, not just a suggestion or something to fall back on. A ruleset should be something that does end up being practical and productive so that the community can use it, not for it to be posted and say, "well if you don't like it, don't use it." What's the point of making it then?

The problem is that in the beginning of Brawl's metagame, many stages have been banned because people didn't like them and them being considered "gay", such as Distant Planet or Port Town. A lot of people also have misinformation about these stages, from what I've seen in other threads (the ruleset's being one of them).

Most people have settled with the minimalistic ruleset and are used to not have to deal with hazards on stages. Therefore, re-introducing stages featuring them is of course controversial.

This ruleset is what we recommend, what we felt allows Brawl to be a competitive game. If you don't agree with that and think you know it better, well, more power to you.

We do need some sort of authority in our community, but one that has authority for a good reason - to cater to everyone else, not defend their own decisions with their lives. For the people, by the people, I say. If the BBR sees a backlash after doing something, instead of trying to justify it, they should try to, you know, try to fix what they think is wrong with it or, at the very least, try to understand it instead of pointlessly arguing.

Look, it's not like I don't agree with you.

But: The BBR's purpose is not to lead. That just comes sort of automatically because the BBR has big TOs and top players in it.
Also, you will NEVER be able to satisfy everyone. This is just by simple logic impossible. There will always be someone who moans about it.
Look at how split the community is in pretty much every regard.
Meta Knight ban - pretty much evenly split.
Stagelist - pretty much evenly split between minimalistic and liberal list.
Character matchups - split, there are good players who state the complete opposite of what another good player said.

If we would've made a ruleset with a minimalistic stagelist, then the other half of the people would've complained.

Edit:

mariobrouser said:
Just wondering, with our current BBR, do you just have to be in it to vote on stages, tier lists, etc., or do you have to prove your knowledge within the room?

The stage threads were not simple polls.
In order for your vote to count in the stage threads, you had to give a reasoning as to why you believe a stage is starter/counter/banned.

As for the tier list, the voting process has been changed several times, so there's no absolute answer to your question, however, if someone made a controversial vote (say, Ganon being top tier), then it at least triggered discussion.
Many people also have amended their initial tier votings after discussion has been held.

Mikachiru · Aug 3, 2010

vVv Rapture said:
What's the point of making the ruleset if the BBR knows that no one will follow it?

It's not supposed to be a "copy and paste" ruleset. The TOs can modify the ruleset to whatever appeals to them and/or their community.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=230481 (yeah, sorry about you guys having to look for it. It's under "Notes". There's no quoting button...

)

It's a previous rule list, but the same thing should apply to the new one.

vVv Rapture said:
Anything the BBR does should be productive, not just a suggestion or something to fall back on. A ruleset should be something that does end up being practical and productive so that the community can use it, not for it to be posted and say, "well if you don't like it, don't use it." What's the point of making it then?

They have been productive. From what I've seen, they been testing things out and giving reasons why some things should be banned or not. I think someone from BBR was posting up reasons...

vVv Rapture said:
We do need some sort of authority in our community, but one that has authority for a good reason - to cater to everyone else, not defend their own decisions with their lives. For the people, by the people, I say.

Well, how do you suppose we determine our "authority"? Via voting?

vVv Rapture said:
If the BBR sees a backlash after doing something, instead of trying to justify it, they should try to, you know, try to fix what they think is wrong with it or, at the very least, try to understand it instead of pointlessly arguing.

Well, to be fair, no one has tried this yet. We haven't really seen if this will really screw up the game. On paper, it says "omg MK's getting catered to lololol". But, again, this hasn't been tested in a tourney.

I honestly think that this should be given at least a chance first. Just one. Then they can fix it up and whatnot....

lordhelmet said:
.joel that's not what Myth was getting at *facepalm*

He's saying that most of the current, active BBR members don't know what they're talking about. Plain and simple.

Are you even part of the BBR? No? Then where do you guys get off just criticizing them like this. Really, ever since the new rule set came out, no one's tried to fix it. AT ALL. Just a bunch of "BBR sux, they don't know what they're doing" and "lol idiots gtfo of here you MK catering ***s". I really REALLY wished you guys would help them out. If they are wrong, give arguements as to why they are wrong. Not insults. That doesn't solve anything.

LOL Joel beat me to it.

etecoon · Aug 3, 2010

I approve of this topic

lordhelmet · Aug 3, 2010

Mike, your post still doesn't change the fact that BBR members were posting "outdated information" in the Lucario boards, and my original point still stands.

Johnny Citrus · Aug 3, 2010

I just don't get the logic of reintroducing stages that can kill you at 30 % just because they haven't been legal before. Why not just make items legal if you're gonna experiment?

And yeah the BBR has no power so you guys are seriously bugging out by treating them like the US senate, though I do agree that if they are trying to set guidelines and have their own private forum they should be heavily criticized

vVv Rapture · Aug 3, 2010

I'm not gonna quote both you guys, just not gonna get nitpicky.

I understand what both of you are saying, etc etc, but I feel like the rulesets that the BBR should suggest should be worth suggesting, if that makes sense. No, they shouldn't be taken word-for-word, as it's a guideline, but that doesn't mean that the guide can't actually be productive.

I guess my problem with it is that both sides are very extreme about it. You have the BBR on one side that just took their ideas and put them forth and don't seem to care whether or not people accept them. That's sort of annoying, by the way.

Then you have everyone who is not in the BBR, or who do not agree with it, and hate the ruleset and find it stupid and want MK banned moar lulz.

Rarely is there a compromise or an even ground. I've barely seen anyone who has sort of agreed or is willing to debate the actual ruleset itself, not how to debate or logic or theorycraft and all of that bull****.

That's the problem with the BBR. It secludes itself and divides us up. Wouldn't it have been better for the BBR to make their suggestions, then have them tweaked by the rest of us, then further reviewed? Wouldn't it be nice to have some sort of standard ruleset rather than a suggestion or encouragement while the TOs do whatever they want?

So yeah, maybe my last comments were hasty, by the point still stands. There must be a way for the BBR and the community to be less divided so we avoid these problems.

Mikachiru · Aug 3, 2010

Johnny Citrus said:
I just don't get the logic of reintroducing stages that can kill you at 30 % just because they haven't been legal before. Why not just make items legal if you're gonna experiment?

And yeah the BBR has no power so you guys are seriously bugging out by treating them like the US senate, though I do agree that if they are trying to set guidelines and have their own private forum they should be heavily criticized

Could you list exactly what stages do this and how for me please?

And for the last comment... Yeah. Pretty much. However, the sort of criticisim that everyone gave them wasn't really helpful in pointing out what was wrong with the stages other than "MK raeps on dis stage wtf r u thinkin".

Johnny Citrus · Aug 3, 2010

Mikachiru said:
Could you list exactly what stages do this and how for me please?

And for the last comment... Yeah. Pretty much. However, the sort of criticisim that everyone gave them wasn't really helpful in pointing out what was wrong with the stages other than "MK raeps on dis stage wtf r u thinkin".

port town lol, those cars will drop your stocks like nothing. Even if you have good DI, they're greater than any obstacle we've seen on any other legal stages

Vyse · Aug 3, 2010

Johnny Citrus said:
port town lol, those cars will drop your stocks like nothing. Even if you have good DI, they're greater than any obstacle we've seen on any other legal stages

It takes five minutes to learn the stage and realise where standing on the platforms won't help you.

Running yourself off the ledge of battlefield can kill you at 0% - you know not to.
Cars kill you at 30-40% on PTAD - you know to learn when and where they come from and to watch out for them.

Flayl · Aug 3, 2010

Vyse said:
It takes five minutes to learn the stage and realise where standing on the platforms won't help you.

Running yourself off the ledge of battlefield can kill you at 0% - you know not to.
Cars kill you at 30-40% on PTAD - you know to learn when and where they come from and to watch out for them.

So why did BBR decide to give campy characters such a huge advantage?

Vyse · Aug 3, 2010

The justification for the stage has been put in the ruleset thread, so you should read/discuss it there so this one isn't derailed.

Flayl · Aug 3, 2010

It says there are safe zones, which a lot of us already knew about. It doesn't say why a character that outcamps the other should be given such a strong counterpick option.

napZzz · Aug 3, 2010

this isn't necessarily an argument about the stage list

this is against the bbr as a whole, the stage list is simply what caused this to be made. Ran stole the idea from me cuz he's a jerk

Vyse said:
It takes five minutes to learn the stage and realise where standing on the platforms won't help you.

Running yourself off the ledge of battlefield can kill you at 0% - you know not to.
Cars kill you at 30-40% on PTAD - you know to learn when and where they come from and to watch out for them.

this is like saying you're never gonna get hit by the lava on brinstar, which is even less rare to happen then the cars

and the fact that they will still kill you/do ******** amounts of damage is there. It isn't a factor that should be allowed into the matches, if it is we might as well use items. Cuz you know, we know how they work and how to avoid them, so why not.

kid craft 24/sonic master · Aug 3, 2010

I want final smashes legalized just set the items setting to the lowest margin and boom u got a fair match with the rare occasion of getting dat smash ball. All brokeness will be gone

Mikachiru · Aug 3, 2010

Johnny Citrus said:
port town lol, those cars will drop your stocks like nothing. Even if you have good DI, they're greater than any obstacle we've seen on any other legal stages

Oh, well from what BBR thinks, the car's aren't completely random and it's predictable or something. idk I haven't played on PTAD since Melee. O.o;;

For the most part, I think items are banned because they are completely random and on top of that, gives characters unfair advantages by spawning like right next to someone. Items is kinda tricky like that. I think if items had a set spawn point, then maybe MAYBE someone could come up with some discussion... Actually, I think Jack made a thread about something to this extent. If we did have items in competetive play, however, it'd have to spawn in a certain spot, at every certain time (like every 20 seconds or something), and some really broken items (Smash balls and starman come to mind) have to be banned. But then I'd be recreating the game. This is all imo, of course. Take this with a grain of salt because I'm not too good at theorycrafting stuff like this lol. :laugh:

But yeah, I see your point. It is kinda unfair that they can kill you that fast. Most people say "just learn the stage" (I know I have) but that still doesn't stop unfortunate things from happening that otherwise shouldn't of happened.

It's good to see that someone is actually talking without completely insulting BBR's ruleset.

vVv Rapture said:
I understand what both of you are saying, etc etc, but I feel like the rulesets that the BBR should suggest should be worth suggesting, if that makes sense. No, they shouldn't be taken word-for-word, as it's a guideline, but that doesn't mean that the guide can't actually be productive.

^ I agree with this completely. YMMV on the worth of the suggestion though... I think the huge amount of possible stages that could be used in a tournament could be good to discuss with your TO or whatever. imo, of course.

vVv Rapture said:
I guess my problem with it is that both sides are very extreme about it. You have the BBR on one side that just took their ideas and put them forth and don't seem to care whether or not people accept them. That's sort of annoying, by the way.

Then you have everyone who is not in the BBR, or who do not agree with it, and hate the ruleset and find it stupid and want MK banned moar lulz.

Yeah, I think the few of us who agree with the new ruleset understand where alot of you are coming from. MK is already has good cps, and now they've added more. But to be fair, some of the stages I hear got banned without a really good reason.

Like, obviously, WarioWare Inc. will always be banned. The rewards the minigames give are unfair and unpredictable. It's not fun when you always end up with a super mushroom and your opponent always gets a starman. That, and you'd have to stop fighting to do w/e task the level wants you to do which is anti competative. Sorta. ^^;

I think the BBR do care about everyone's input and opinion, which is why they made the discussion thread. But you have to understand where they are coming from. When you get like 20-30 pages of stupid comments regarding them not knowing what they are doing, they'd probably be more inclined to stop paying attention to what everyone is saying until stuff cools down. At least, I would.

Yeah, I'm not in the BBR, but I do agree with their list (for now). I honestly don't see one REALLY big issue with it (like say, allowing WW or stalling legal?). Yes, some stages seem unfair and not competatively reasonable, but unless someone can come up with reasons why it should completely be banned (for good), I don't think they are going anywhere...

vVv Rapture said:
Rarely is there a compromise or an even ground. I've barely seen anyone who has sort of agreed or is willing to debate the actual ruleset itself, not how to debate or logic or theorycraft and all of that bull****.

That's the problem with the BBR. It secludes itself and divides us up. Wouldn't it have been better for the BBR to make their suggestions, then have them tweaked by the rest of us, then further reviewed? Wouldn't it be nice to have some sort of standard ruleset rather than a suggestion or encouragement while the TOs do whatever they want?

So yeah, maybe my last comments were hasty, by the point still stands. There must be a way for the BBR and the community to be less divided so we avoid these problems.

Actually, I kinda like that suggestion. To post up a ruleset that isn't official and see if our (intelligent) input could help it out a bit. Then again, BBR has like 100 members or something...

I think the main reason why it might not work is because many people here don't know what they're talking about. I don't think they want to go through pages of unreasonable claims as to why so and so is a dumb idea.

idk, I just wish there was a way to solve this without flaming and stuff...

Johnny Citrus · Aug 3, 2010

Vyse said:
It takes five minutes to learn the stage and realise where standing on the platforms won't help you.

Running yourself off the ledge of battlefield can kill you at 0% - you know not to.
Cars kill you at 30-40% on PTAD - you know to learn when and where they come from and to watch out for them.

BF can't kill you, that would be an SD. Lol.

Ok, I'll watch out for the cars when im olimar and a mk (who only has to tap the y button to get away) is keeping me grounded at the center, or getting me in a tight spot when by chasing me to the edge when i run away from the cars

Backroom Reform: Current Topic -> Success?

Smash Master

Smash Hero

Smash Hero

Smash Hero

BRoomer

Smash Ace

The Assault of Laughter ﷼

Smash Journeyman

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

King of Evil

Smash Legend

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

[ɑɹsaɪ]

Smash Master

Smash Champion

Smash Master

Smash Ace

Smash Ace

Smash Legend

Smash Lord

Smash Master

Smash Legend

Smash Legend

Smash Ace

Smash Hero

Smash Master

Smash Apprentice

Smash Lord

Smash Ace

Smash Apprentice

Faith, Hope, Love, Luck

Smash Hero

Faith, Hope, Love, Luck

Smash Hero

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Smash Ace

Smash Apprentice

Information

Network