World Beyblade Organization by Fighting Spirits Inc.

Full Version: Legalise It: A Plastics Ruling Megathread
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Heyo, so I'm making a bulk post for rule updates for Plastics. Trying to cover everything so a single update can be done to the rulebook, or to aid with an addendum for more specialised rulings - which I think is a great idea and am, as ever, happy to provide thoughts on (for better or worse, whether asked or not ūüėČ).
In part I'm doing this because it's been bugging me for years - it was actually something I was working on right up to my departure and never really let go, and in part because the generation is unranked and I am hoping we can perhaps be a little more permissive - or at least, I'm hoping you can keep in mind that a big part of what makes Plastics unique and appealing is the broad range of bizarre customizations it allows for - it's the soul food of Beyblade. At least, I'd like to think so. Maybe I'm waxing lyrical.

Pictures or further detail can be provided as requested.
I will cover the following:
Hidden Spirits - Hayate AR/BB, Zeo AR/BB, Griffolyon/Salamalyon BB
SAR Inversion
WD Inversion
Interchangeable Shafts and Removable Tips
Gyro EG Launch Protocol
Gyro EG Stop Protocol
Gyro EG Bearings
Jumping Base/Neo SG (Double Bearing Version) Shaft Tip Swaps
Explicit Ruling on Hasbro Power Spirit Bit Chip
Parts with Removable Balls
General Part Stress Rule+Structural Integrity+Floor Damage
Storm Grip Base Tip Inversion
Intended Tips
Rebounds from Pockets

Added After Original Post:
Base Clip Interchangeability
Mold 1 Magne WD
Deck Format Is A Blight On Plastics
Remote Control Blade Bases
Kellogg's ARs
Launcher Shims and Lubrication
Explicit Legalisation of MFB LL1 Ripcord
Generic Parts (Balls and Bearings)
Misc. Part Specific Ruling Clarifications


One thing that is important to remember if you are coming to this as an MFB or Burst native is that Plastics in particular were a very different franchise to later formats. Based more perhaps in gunpla, Tomy cars and even RC hobby than simple spinning tops. They have always had huge part interchangeability and deep customisation. They come on runner frames with bearings and balls and shafts and tips separate, sometimes tools are required for assembly (generally a screwdriver). The series and its appeal is rooted in deep customisation that may be foreign to newer bladers. I hope this can be understood - and thus the differences in these rules.



Hidden Spirits

My first overarching point is that these were regular numbered releases, not B-Codes like side series such as the minimal tops, and there is no explicit ban on them per the 2003 rules or anything earlier. That alone should be enough to legalise them as unlike Bearing Gyros which was explicit about its rulings, these do not have any ban text and in fact the boxes encourage cross-use of parts with regular series stuff.

Here is a per-part breakdown.

Hayate AR:
There is no indication Hayate AR, or any other Hidden Spirit Part is supposed to be banned. The packaging literally shows it being used with a Dragoon base as well as with its own and says you can do so, and that it can be launched with the base it comes with, a copy of which can be seen here: https://web.archive.org/web/200306180414...index.html
I wholeheartedly believe the AR at least was meant to be legal, and very likely Weight Ring and Hayate Base. This one is the most important thing on this list because said AR is very, very powerful for left spin smash. It's right up the top alongside the biggest, meanest ARs out there, it's one of the most explosive ARs of the generation (I swear it knows it is banned and is mad as hell about it, and it's also quite affordable and works well on the similarly affordable Defense Grip Base (seaborg, dragoon s and one of the bakutenryŇę bros and you're swinging for the fences). As such, I would argue very, very aggresively in its favour from a game health perspective.

Hayate Weight Ring/BB:
In addition, there's no evidence that Weight Ring and the dumb as hell BB are meant to be banned either, and having used them, I don't believe it's harmful to have them legal - they're bad, but they do stay together well enough, and the assembly is honestly less jank than Auto Change Balancer. Yes, they're incredibly bad. But honestly the Hasbro one is not really any worse than Jumping Base (Trygle) Edit: it is better than Jumping Base (Trygle). There's little reason to ban usable parts, and there are actually worse legal setups than even the Takara version - there are technically things involving different SGcs in jumping base (trygle ver) and SG jumping base which are actually unusable yet technically legal, and there's no way to really rule this out because various bases operate with modes that cause their shafts to not touch the stadium floor, but instead their bases). The box does say "it can be used" - no further context is provided though.

Griffolyon and Salamalyon BB (ARs already legal):
Griffolyon and Salamalyon for their part were marketed as regular releases in all marketing material and the spin up guide books (see photos here: https://i.imgur.com/Z0Skllf.jpg | https://i.imgur.com/vjZEKEN.jpg ), there is absolutely no doubt in my mind they were intended to be legal. Griffolyon's base even has its own gimmick of a semi free spinning shaft. It sucks yeah but it's a legit part. They are also included in parts lists Takara released.

BakutenryŇę Zeo and Aveiron
Zeo and Aveiron are so late to the scene that there's no evidence either way, but their parts are interesting nonetheless and that point Takara wasn't doing goofy side lines that much - they also rereleased Griffolyon and Salamalyon in new colours as BakutenryŇę Etanzel and Donitrus - note, BakutenryŇę in the name which we generally consider means "banned per hidden spirits rulings", yet exactly like beys that were undoubtedly (IMO) legal. As such, I don't think these were banned either. uncommon, but not banned.
This again has competitive relevance - the Attack Ring is fantastic for Right Spin Smash, with relatively well controlled recoil and a tonne of power, easily good enough for the CC list.
The Blade Base is better than the shape suggests - the tip shape is very nice.

The counterargument for Hayate etc and Aveiron/Zeo is that they do not appear in a number of lists of Beyblade releases from Takara, and do not have parts lists and stats on the box (which even Bearing Gyros has). They do have their own storyline as well. However they were released with the Beyblade logo, branding, and were not explicitly banned by Takara that I can find from web archives, and function as regular tops for launching and battling. I suspect the confusion may have been with Hasbro's spinning spirits line (the figures on the top) or power spirits line, or their illegality with the figures attached. However, I Ask You: Let People Use Their Parts. We're unranked anyway.
My proposal is thus: Remove the hidden spirits ban rule entirely. #FreeHayate #FreeHiddenSpirits

It may be worth noting figure attachment is banned, wording:
You may not launch Hidden Spirits parts with figures attached.

A rule could be added to ban Weight Ring and Hayate Base but this in unnecessary IMO. If a rule is added to do such, a proposed wording:

The Weight Ring and Blade Base of BakutenryŇę Hayate, Zinrai, Raiden and Shin Hayate and their Hasbro counterparts are not legal for competitive play.
By the way, per the current ruling, we have banned 8 Balance (Griffolyon), 8 Wide (Salamalyon), Revolver Attack (Bakuten Henkei Gaia Dragoon), 10 Wide (Zeo), 10 Heavy (Aveiron), as they are technically "Parts of hidden spirits beyblades". Yes I realise I'm being a pedant here, but it's funny to me, and honestly based on at least one thread I've seen in this subforum I don't trust people not to rules lawyer it to hell. Even worse though - Dragoon V is listed as having a Hidden Spirits release by Hasbro, technically making it a power spirit beyblade and therefore banning its parts which include Neo Left SG Shells and Metal Weight Cores (ubiquitous) - Yikes!


We were actually looking at doing this before I left, to the point that Hayate AR is on the CC list and has been for years now. Oopsie!
Also, in a very intentionally pedantic note:


SAR Inversion:
Now, I'm honestly not sure if this is intended (while Great Tiger and SG Wing Base look to be the same SAR flipped, they're actually a little different). However, it also isn't technically illegal at the moment, not under Takaras rules, and could make for interesting use cases. We already flip WD's (though I am asking for clarification on this below), so why not? The game impact isn't huge, as War Bear doesn't stay in place in these orientations and Screw Zeus doesn't fit with anything larger than Heavy, though it does allow it to be a half decent force smash AR in left, and more useful albeit still a novelty on SG Wing Base - Screw Zeus is as usual a special case though.
May end up being better against circle survivor defense but I haven't tested that much.
Defensively it may let things like Galmans SAR find a little more use.
This would nonetheless benefit from a unified Part Stress rule as below, as that covers all Screw Zeus shenanigans.

There is a tenuous precedent for this: Hasbro's Guardian Driger box shows the SAR reversed. Note that the instructions show it the normal way. Here are images for reference:  http://imgur.com/a/gLdu3wQ

Wording (Edited from Attack Rings with Sub Attack Rings):
First off, change the Section Name to "Attack Rings and Blade Bases with Sub-Attack Rings" because SG Wing Base exists.
Attack Rings and Blade Bases with Sub-Attack Rings (Plastic)
You may not use an Attack Ring or Blade Base which has a slot for a Sub-AR without using a Sub-AR.
You may use the Sub-AR from one AR or BB with a different AR or BB.
You may invert the Sub-AR, as long as doing so does not cause undue stress on any part of the Beyblade.

Or (‚ėĻÔłŹ):

Attack Rings and Blade Bases with Sub-Attack Rings (Plastic)
You may not use an Attack Ring or Blade Base which has a slot for a Sub-AR without using a Sub-AR.
You may use the Sub-AR from one AR or BB with a different AR or BB.
You may not invert the Sub-AR.



Weight Disk Inversion:
This is generally accepted to be totally fine. It does affect how freely things spin and allows Twin Horn and other ARs to somewhat cover Wide Defense's protrusion and have it line up with other contact points. It might be nice to clarify this however.
Wording (Addendum to Weight Disk section):
You may place Weight Disks either side upwards.
Or (pls no):
You may only place Weight Disks concave side upwards.



Interchangeable Shafts and Removable Tips
The issue we have here is that we're not clear enough on what these are - for one thing, we need to clarify shafts alongside Tips. There are also a few tips that are classified with their Blade Base that have always been considered interchangeable (Customize Grip Base, SG Grip Base, Magne Flat Base), as well as SG Grip Change Base's tip. Not allowing this prevents the use of other tips in Customize Grip Base in particular, which is super important for Zombies and Defensive Zombies.
In addition, while laid out differently and much more limited in what it can be used with, the same physical design applies to Volcano Change Base - it does not have the same retention mechanism even for its own tip, but it does work with SG Grip Base tip (that's Wolborg 03 (Uriel), for those playing at home). The only reason I suggest that at all is that SG Grip Base's tip fits exactly the same and just as securely as the original - the shaft contacts the magnet in the SG. Keeping in mind Volcano Change Base's lower section is physically attached to the SG, not the BB - this is functionally identical to the stock setup. It's weird but it also has some merit, and is an okay attack setup without being tall (Uriel's tip is generally outclassed by CGB's but it's on par with like, Storm Grip and better than Fantom Grip IMO, so having more weird ways to use it is nice)

Here is a pic - it looks goofy, but so do a lot of legal things, and keep in mind - it is functionally 100% analogous to Volcano Change Base's standard configuration.
https://i.imgur.com/56vxezI.jpg
Keep in mind these two seem janky but the main thing is that Volcano Change Base is essentially the same as any of the other removable tip bases from a tip perspective, it just doesn't fit well and the base lacks a retention mechanism (even for its own tip), but design wise they're close enough that I've had to classify them as separate parts for weights.
As for the other ones, they're literally designed with their dimensions to be interchangeable, and the bases are all related.

Wording (should be quite modular, if you want to remove Dranzer V stuff for example):
Interchanging Blade Base Tips and Shafts (Plastic)
You may not interchange tips from Blade Bases in which the tip is considered to be the same part as the BB. Two examples of this are Driger S’s SG Metal Change and Dragoon S’s SG Storm Grip.
You may interchange tips and shafts when they are considered to be part of the Spin Gear, or an independent part, such the tips of Dragoon V2's Customize Grip Base, Dragoon V's Magne Flat Base, Uriel 2's SG Grip Change Base, Wolborg 03 (Uriel)'s SG Grip Base). In the case of SG Grip Change Base, the tip may be inserted into the Casings of Wolborg 2's (Bearing Version 2) to be used as a tip. In the case of SG Grip Base, the tip may be inserted into a Magnecore SG using Dranzer V's Volcano Change Base



Gyro EG Launch Protocol:
Gyro EG has three launch modes noted in its instructions: https://www.manualslib.com/download/5802...gasus.html. The first is to use only the Engine Gear and place the beyblade. This allows for left spin use without a launcher - the ruling for this would be the same as MAMS. I also clarified it has to be upright as you could use one of the gimmick but chips to place it upside down if you were an absolute buffoon.
The second is a regular launch (which can be done with or without the stopper switch engaged, though the latter is awful)
The third is a combination of the two, and this one requires its own ruling not linked to MAMS. For this, the winder can be inserted into the EG to rev it, and then the beyblade is launched as normal. This requires two ripcords. I would propose that the base launch be done at the start of the countdown and the regular launch at the end of the countdown as normal.
Wording:
Flame Pegasus' Gyro Engine Gear may be launched in one of three ways.
If using only a launcher, the Beyblade is to be launched in line with standard launch protocol.
If only using the Engine Gear to launch without a launcher, you must place the Beyblade at the Tornado Ridge of the BeyStadium in an upright position. If the BeyStadium does not have a Tornado Ridge, you must place it approximately 3cm from the edge of the BeyStadium wall.
If using both the Engine Gear and a launcher, the Engine Gear must be spun during the countdown, and the Beyblade launched during the word "shoot!" as normal.



Gyro EG Stop Protocol:
This needs basic clarification. Two options - when the bottom has stopped (probably intended) or when both parts have stopped. The top part generally stops first and will stop a few times during various matchups.
Proposed Wording: Gyro Engine Gear combinations are considered to have stopped spinning when the bulk of the Beyblade, that is, the Engine Gear, stops spinning.
Alternative Wording: Gyro Engine Gear combinations are considered to have stopped spinning when both the Engine Gear and Attack Ring/Gyro Stopper Section stop spinning.



Gyro EG Bearings:
The second Bearing of Gyro EG is behind a very hard to budge blue spacer. The shaft can be removed from the tip to allow access to this, however. While it is possible this is meant to prevent accessing the bearing, being able to exchange it makes the base much more usable. As such, while clarification would be nice, I do not think this should be explicitly banned. Technically this may fall foul in the same way MAMS bottom bearing does (though MAMS bans changes to both bearings), so despite my concern about unwittingly getting something cool banned, I am bringing it to the committee's attention. Here is a couple pictures of the positioning and parts (I have already replaced mine): https://i.imgur.com/rlCb8CE.jpg | https://i.imgur.com/hYCjrK8.jpg )
It is worth noting that this may have some competitive relevance in stadia with pockets, as the lower part - the bulk of the beyblade, can continue spinning even if the rest is stuck. I don't think this will break the game (and if it does it just shows why spinning in pockets is lame), but stopping it would have an impact on something potentially interesting!
Wording: Technically no change required here, unless a ban is required. In which case it can possibly be rolled into the MAMS section. Actually, may be worth allowing swapping the top bearing of MAMS i.e. only applying the ban to the bottom one. Don't hurt nothin'. But HMS is a very different generation to plastics.



Jumping Base tips on Neo SG (Double Bearing Version)

See This Picture for fit: https://i.imgur.com/J4ugQmT.jpg
The Tips of Jumping Base work perfectly with BK's SG and has some very interesting if not truly competitive results. BK's doesn't fit on straight on Jumping Base however, as it has a ridge inside of it, seen in the picture. Hasbro's BK releases are welded shut so this doesn't work with them (they also cut the edge off Seaborg and Dragoon S's tip though, so they clearly hate fun).
While I don't know if it was intended (it's an absolutely perfect fit though), it's quite interesting and a fun customization, and would be nice to have legalised - for Jumping Base they are considered interchangeable tips rather than part of the SG, so it mostly depends on interpretation of BK's SG Shaft. I know this is extremely dumb, but I love it dearly. There's a chance the flat tip could work for SSUA, too. As an update, the Ball Tip is quite viable in Customize Grip Base, it's a competitively relevant setup, so should be considered!
Wording (addendum to tip section):
The lower tip part of Burning Kerberous' Neo SG (Double Bearing Version) Shaft may also be swapped with the tips of Jumping Base.



Explicit Ruling on Bit Chip Figure/Power Spirit Bit Chip

This one: https://i.imgur.com/EF4Flis.jpg
While I don't own this part, there was a pretty curt discussion about it here, and I agree with Brad's sentiments
https://worldbeyblade.org/Thread-Bit-Chips
While the packaging doesn't specifically forbid it, the Bit Chip does not fit with launchers unless it is inverted and placed inside a Heavy Metal Core. It was very currently clearly not meant to be used.
Wording: The Bit Chip from Hasbro Power Spirits accessories was not intended for and is not legal for competitive play.


While I was initially under the impression this was not intended to be legal, this appears to not be the case. In short - packaging from Takara's version (Bit Chip Figures) and actual testing of both shows they can be used with regular SG's, and the packaging encourages this in its graphics. There is no specific ban on these currently and I think it's best we keep it that way, as they are more accessible than the Metal Bit Chip and do assist Attack possibly more than Defense (and certainly more than Stamina), including not being usable with Circle Survivor. They aren't broken by any means and having weight at the top centre of the Beyblade is a trade off to stability. They provide a more accessible alternative to the Metal Bit Chip (so technically, I am ceding advantage by proposing this, as I can personally just use that instead), and one which doesn't rely on the retention tabs being intact. I strongly feel they should be legal and as they are not banned currently I am treating them as such currently. This is relevant as both these and/or metal bit chips are in the hands of people who could feasibly make a plastics tournament happen now.

Wording: No Change Required, however clarification stating that these are legal at some point might be nice.



Parts with Removable Balls
Currently we have no clarification on the number of balls allowed in each base or part that supports removable metal balls. There are two types and this needs to be specified (1/4" and 3/16", both steel) These are as such:

Metal Ball Base 6 Ball Config:
For Reference: Balls. https://imgur.com/a/JRmtkHu
Metal Ball Base has two additional holes for balls at the bottom of the base, and balls can be removed from here by removing the SG, which provides holes to poke them out. As opposed to SG Metal Ball Base (more on that in a moment), Metal Ball Base holds these very securely, and this is detailed in spin up guide book vol 1 (admittedly, the one with all the jank stuff).
It's worth noting due to stamina impact of weight that centred, this doesn't directly outclass 4 Balls.

SG Metal Ball Base 4 Ball Maximum: While some metal balls will hold in the 4 holes on the underside of the base, some do not, and may become dislodged. This represents a significant safety hazard, thus needs to be explicitly banned.

Fortress Base: Fortress Base only fits 2 balls unmodified. It also has issues with using other SGs with Wide series weight disks which allow the balls to exit the SG, potentially escaping the Beyblade. Please see structural integrity ruling proposal below.

SG (Grease Ball Version): only fits 1 Ball maximum

G Special Base (Gaia Dragoon): Capable of holding 4 small metal balls (3/16"). Should either be used with all or none - the latter just to allow people who have lost the balls to use it. No additional Balls can be used safely. In addition, if not using SG (G Ball Version), no balls should be used as they can exit the Beyblade and fly out, possibly injuring an eye.

SG (G Ball Version): no harm in allowing it to be used without a ball. Only the one underneath though, as a small one in the top of it may fly out.

Wordings:

You may not insert metal balls into parts not designed to hold them. This includes the centre of a Heavy Metal Core.
For those parts which are designed to hold them, the following rulings apply:
Metal Ball Base (Draciel Metal Ball Defenser): You may use up to four 1/4" Steel Balls in the pockets, as well as an optional addition of up to two 1/4" Steel Balls in the holes on the underside of the Base.
SG Metal Ball Base (Draciel S): You may use up to four 1/4" Steel Balls in the pockets only. No additional Balls are permitted.
Fortress Base (Draciel F): You may use up to two 1/4" Steel Balls in the pockets only, no additional Balls are permitted.
G Special Base (Gaia Dragoon): You may use up to four 3/16" Steel Balls in the pockets. If not using SG (G Ball Version), you may not use Balls in the pockets.
SG (G Ball Version): You may use zero or one 3/16" Steel Balls in the holder underneath the SG Core Part.



General Part Stress and Structural Integrity Rule + Stadium Floor Damage:

One of the most important matters on here for covering bases and adding some important clarification but also probably the least controversial (as it is sort of already there), and one which I think could help simplify the rulebook somewhat if executed correctly.

The ruling about Screw Zeus and stress should be replaced by a general stress rule. This would cover things such as inverting Upper Attack SP (which can be done by forcing on a slightly small 6 Heavy WD, but even then bend outward slightly, stressing the BB, and use of Wolborg 2's shaft in Customize Bearing Base (which tears up the sides of the tip and puts stress on the BB while inside and during insertion), as well as putting metal balls in the SG Core or places they don't fit naturally.This would be a catch all with an inverted SAR rule as well, and cover any other SP inversion that isn't intended. I think this one is simple common sense.
While the System Incompatibility section touches on this, it's murky and I think this is a better way to clarify this specific matter.

In addition, a structural integrity rule is an overarching rule covering things like "don't just chuck metal balls in there" and tips being held on by magnetic force without a shaft. It basically is a catch-all to prevent any dangerous ideas. It also deals with a safety issue with Fortress Base - if using a Wide series Weight Disk, balls can exit the pockets quite easily.

Finally, a rule about not damaging stadium floor just covers us for anything whack that people may come up with - for example, it settles the discussion of inverting driger s's tip, for example.

Wording:
Combinations must not be put together in a way which places undue stress on their parts. Examples of this would be inverting Driger V2's Upper Attack SP and forcing on a weight disk, forcing Wolborg 2' SG (Bearing Version 2) tip into Burning Kerberous' Customize Bearing Base, or using White Gabriel G's version of Twin Horn with Zeus' Screw Zeus.
Combinations must also not pose significant risk of disassembly in their use - such as balls which can fly out of the base during the course of normal play, or parts only held on by force outside of normal design.

Combinations must not be assembled in a way which intentionally causes damage to the playing surface.

Remove "The same rule applies etcetc" from the System Incompatibility Section, as well as the Screw Zeus section - also, "Twin Horn G" isn't a part name. As far as we've ever found (and correct me if I'm wrong) it's just Twin Horn, and we generally append (Hasbro) for clarity. Hasbro generally don't acknowledge their own bizarre decisions like that.

You could also specify not using the small sized bit chips with ARs that have sustained damage keeping them in place, to prevent any silly ideas on using it as shrapnel in the stadium - crazy stuff but hey, could add it to the end there.



Storm Grip Base/SG Wing Base/G Special Base Tip Inversion
Storm Grip Tip Flip is a common mod and a common question, and is even in spin up guide book vol 1 (the jank one). Based on extensive investigation, it has been found that most of the original white Takara bases can retain tips from Takara and SonoKong releases, while SonoKong and Hasbro bases cannot retain tips and Hasbro tips cannot be retained. However, Hasbro often messed up tip inversions (see cutaways at the side of DGB tip), so no surprise there. This paints it in a bad light however - Takara tips on non plated parts generally have a very good rate of fitting and stay in well in use, and this has a truly massive beneficial effect on the format - it brings Traditional Upper Attack screaming back to competitive relevance. For those less familiar, Upper Attack is one of the most historically famous and popular competitive types but currently there are no suitable Blade Bases for it that move fast enough to make it work against the much meaner competitive combos we are using today. Inverted Storm Grip Base gives Traditional Upper Attack the shot in the arm it needs to become a competitively relevant type again. The fact this type is missing from our current format can be confronting to older players, so this helps a lot to make the game resemble what it has previously been, which is nice. It also gives us another viable Smash base, though it is noticeably harder to control than Defense Grip Base and often less reliable vs certain types. IMO this is historically important, and alongside Hidden Spirits and fixing deck, one of the most important things to update.

While this has previously been criticised due to some blade bases having issues retaining tips, this has changed - we have gotten to the bottom of the matter somewhat. There is some variation in width, but generally the Takara bases and tips will invert with each other most of the time. Critically, this is where Spin Up Boom Vol.1 comes into it - while there are a few strange mods in there alongside it, the important thing to note is that it shows inversion and in the description talks about simply inverting the tip - no adhesive or fillers. This to me indicates very strongly that it was designed with the friction required for inversion in mind. Most issues come from worn down or damaged tips... Or Hasbro and Sonokong - Hasbro always made inversion difficult (see seaborg tip cutaway) and here they have made the tip a bit too narrow and the BB hole a bit too wide to for either to retain a tip or be retained by a Base. SonoKong also has the wider hole, but the tip does fit in a Takara Tony Blade Base, and is slightly different rubber, really nice to use. Even Takara tips that don't fit can be compressed slightly to fit properly. As such, the main obstacle we had is largely resolved as some unfortunate decisions, and a little variance. With a tight tip, there is no greater chance of tip separation than there is with Uriel 2's tip in Wolborg 2 Casings. 

Given the historical importance of changing this ruling, and the new information, I am hopeful that it will be sincerely considered. 

Wordings:
Storm Grip Base (Dragoon S)
  • You may invert the rubber tip from Dragoon S‚Äô Storm Grip Base in order to use the wider flat rubber base as the tip, as long as it fits securely in line with the Integrity ruling.¬†
SG Wing Base (Gabriel, Cyber Dragoon Battle Spec.)
  • You may invert the plastic tip from Gabriel and Cyber Dragoon Battle Spec.‚Äôs SG Wing Base in order to use the wider flat plastic base as the tip, as long as it fits securely in line with the Integrity ruling.¬†
G Special Base (Gaia Dragoon)
  • You may invert the plastic tip from Gaia Dragoon‚Äôs G Special Base in order to use the wider flat plastic base as the tip, as long as it fits securely in line with the Integrity ruling.¬†


Intended Tip Rule
While not strictly necessary, this rule could help as an overarching indicator, covering inversion in general. It also rules out silly things like putting other shafts in trygle's base that don't touch the floor - basically tidying up some stuff! Awkwardly though, seaborg would need an exception (but honestly I still believe Takara did intend to invert that, there's no need for the molding it has otherwise).

Wording:
The primary contact point of a Beyblade with the stadium floor must be with a part of the Beyblade originally intended to be used as a tip.
For the purpose of this rule, the circular flat tip sections of Seaborg's Defense Grip Base Tip, Dragoon S' Storm Grip Base, Gabriel/Cyber Dragoon Battle Spec.'s SG Wing Base and Gaia Dragoon's G Special Base are considered a tip as well as their smaller tips.

The good thing about this ruling is it still allows spiral change base to be used without its own SG as the hole-flat at the bottom was an intended tip.



Rebounds:

I'm only posting this part quickly as I worry it's going to detract from the focus of the thread, but stadiums which allow rebounds mean the big boy attackers just pelt themselves with compacts. This is awful in the hasbro one. I would like to see a back-of-pocket-is-a-KO rule maintained for Plastics, as almost all original stadia were pocketless (barring Hasbro and some gimmick stadia). If elaboration is wanted I can provide more, I only have the hasbro burst pro stadium for reference, and it's horrendous, like, actually sickening to use attack in and watch a compact just knock it into a pit after flying out of one, because by design compacts don't lose much spin. Videos I've seen of Burst standard with plastics also make me uneasy. However, I also see this turning into a very difficult discussion and would rather focus on the rest of the aspects of this - call me selfish, but any time I play plastics it's going to be in Tornado Attack anyway, there's not a lot of motivation for me to argue this one.



So, that's everything. A lot, I know, but I'm trying to cover every last base I can think of so I don't have to bug anyone further. Hopefully. As above, more details and explanations are available by request :)


<3 ~ th!nk



I am adding a couple more things in here that have come to mind:

Explicit Legalisation of Base Clip Switching
This is super obvious, but in any addendum it should be listed that Base Clips are interchangeable with each other, and EG Blade Base Clips are interchangeable between each other.

Wording:
Base Clips: You may interchange Base Clips between Blade Bases. In addition, you may interchange Engine Gear Blade Base Clips between Engine Gear Blade Bases.


Mold 1 Magne WD
I was considering asking for legalisation of using Magne WD without the buffers, but given they are ferrous magnets, I suspect they may potentially be prone to shattering. And will now do so - I did testing specifically designed to shatter them if possible, using Wide Defense vs it, on dgba inverted and regular dgb with tiny ARs - basically smacking it with metal... It only scratched a little, no shattering. Given banning it massively impacts accessibility due to detachment ease... It should be legal. It's not very useful, mind.
However, due to how easily the surrounds of mold 1 magne wd's detach, and the fact they are held in place via adhesive, I think it would be fair to allow replacement of the adhesive, as long as it does not affect the performance of the part (which would be hard to do).

Wording: It is legal to use Magne Weight Disk without the Plastic Surrounds. It is legal to replace the adhesive holding the surrounds in place to reattach them.


Explicit Legalisation of SG Core Swaps

Again, a given, but may be worth clarifying in an addendum. It also should cover the Regular SG Weight Ring - I believe it is a part that has a slot thus must be used like a Sub-AR, especially as it adds to balance, but this is very debatable. Edit: the BBA series have regular SGs with no weight wrong, not compulsory. However, a general rule that you must fill all places for parts on an SG also covers Metal Driger's Right SG (Heavy Metal Core) without a core piece.

Wording: You must fill all slots on a Spin Gear, aside from a Metal Weight Ring with Regular SG Shells which is optional. It is legal to change Cores and Casings between Spin Gears as long as they fit correctly. 

This wording is a little rough and may need some revision for clarification - I may edit it later.



Further Updates

Given the time I have had to explore, and while writing PlasticsDB, I have more things to cover. These are likely to be more controversial for those unfamiliar with the generation, but they are in my eyes, absolutely vital.

Deck Format Is A Blight On Plastics

I'm going to detail two things here - firstly, why deck is horrid for Plastics, and second, how we can make a version which isn't horrible. Personally, I don't think deck is fair, but in areas where players do have enough to make decks... It might be nice to have something to work with. Anyway:

There are multiple reasons Deck Format is a horrible idea for plastics. Most obviously the format was not made with it in mind - Hasbro had a 3 Top format in their instructions, but there were no part-based restrictions. As such, we must consider Deck Format to be the anomaly here - it should adapt to Plastics, not the other way around, surely? This is not something we played, and it is fundamentally flawed for the format - Plastics has a very different flow of customisation than other formats, and individual parts can be much more important to making certain types work. There are also massive fairness concerns - most people can't get plastics as it is, let alone buying all alternative parts to play deck effectively... It makes an already finance-first format even more Pay To Win. 

Now, we acknowledge this tacitly by making it optional. I appreciate that, however something I have garnered in my lengthy consultation for the new rulebook is that newer players only know deck finals. They enjoy the strategy, and want to play it for every format. They don't like single bey finals. Some of them will host, and having a poor representation of PLA for finals is not what the format needs. So, while will rant about why deck sucks for plastics, I am also bringing you an alternative, produced from extensive consultation with the most active PLA discord users - a format our community has already agreed is the best way to make it work for the game we love. Given the general attitude towards deck in the chat is pretty negative, I am proud that we have come together with a workable solution, and am hopeful that staff can understand that this is something from our entire community - the people who may actually host and play this format. 

Onto the flaws. The big issue for me is that standard deck is actually hugely detrimental to variety in plastics finals - entirely counter to the goal. 
Plastics has three parts that appear constantly on the competitive combinations list - Customize Grip Base, Wide Defense, and Heavy Metal Core (and that's not to mention SG Casings, Metal Balls, Bearings, Base Clips etc), and Ten Heavy and Defense Ring could be seen as additional generics. These parts are hugely useful for many combination types, and some rely on them to work at all. 
This then becomes a huge issue when trying to put together 3 beys without reusing them. Circle Survivor, which has historically already seen fairly dominant use at plastics tournaments a decade ago, is the most "free" type, as it uses none of the big 3 (though it does use the 4th, Ten Heavy), while being very easy to win with. You can then run a Defensive Zombie or Zombie, usually using your Wide Defense and Customize Grip Base for another reliable option - Defensive Zombies are IMO the easiest type to win with in the game. You can round this out with perhaps an Attack combo with Ten Wide (which is inferior to Wide Defense but still usable) and use a Heavy Metal Core there, or maybe you run a zombie with Wide Survivor and then Driger V2 with Wide Defense and an HMC, but there are only a few variations on optimal decks with this. 
So yes, we can make decks (though... Not without repeated neo shells) - but what do we miss here? Well, Force Smash is a very underrated competitive type which holds up well against Circle Survivor, Driger V2 etc - it is a great moderating force on the format. One big problem though - it *needs* Wide Defense, Heavy Metal Core, and Customize Grip Base in one combo - all of the big three, as well as the popular Defense Ring. It is incredibly expensive to include in a deck, requiring massive, frankly foolish compromises to use. Is that... good? 

This may be hard to understand if you haven't played it much, but Plastics greatest attribute is the sheer variety of combinations and methods to win, and we're just kneecapping it with this deck format. I shudder to think how 2011 th!nk would have responded to this idea (it would be a "you thought I reacted to metal fury scythe badly, hey?) - and 2021 me has another problem. Most competitors can't actually make a deck now. Like, straight up, they can't. 1v1 gives them a fair chance to play. Now if I want to run plastics I have to lend everyone 3 combos? Ya sure? (On that note, Borrow and Announce would be hilarious at plastics tournaments, like some kinda skit). It is just totally inaccessible. Even if we fix it by allowing dupes, we ask people to buy multiples. We need to consider this too in terms of allowing reuse of individual parts.

I feel it's just fairer to everyone that I can't rock up with Generic Top Tier Plastics Deck Option 1/3 I want and just switch to an appropriate counter while some kid who is just trying to enjoy plastics for the first time sits there unable to do anything. Like, come on. I love plastics, you cut me and I bleed essays about why voltaic ape is the peak of human achievement! I just want people to be able to play it, and I want them to have fun. Surely we can recognise we're trying to put a square peg into a round hole here, and realise we can't impose this on plastics without thought. It's already hard enough to get into as it is! I realise it seems like a big decision, but remember we have different scoring systems for different formats in Burst - that is at least as fundamental a difference as at least adapting deck somewhat. 

Now, I guess I need to demonstrate why deck is so broken in plastics. Let's look at some combos. 

Here is a list of optimal combos for each type with duplicate parts bolded. For types that are derived from the same concept - that is, Standard Smash/Heavy Smash, SSUA Attack/SSUA Spin Steal and Circle Survivor Defense/Fixed Circle Survivor, I haven't bolded based on the other combo in the family. Though the first two may be doubled especially standard/heavy smash (and this is without including Traditional Upper Attack should storm grip tip flip be legalised). I have offered alternative parts where there are duplicates and an alternative can be used with minimal compromise - other parts usually trade off major efficacy against likely opponents. 

I am leaving out bit chips, while the power spirits bit chip helps a bunch, it isn't fully vital I guess. I am also excluding Bearings (and while they don't make an appearance here, metal balls) from being considered dupes - even though the ruling doesn't specify. 

I am not including left and right spin versions of the same combo type for the sake of making this more readable. I am also curious if we consider Right EG Circle Defenser and Right EG Mystery Cutter the same part, or the two different brands Flying Defense, or the rather different Twin Horns... Is an AR with a different Sub-AR a different part? I mean, War Lion and Great Tiger are different parts but share the same Core AR? If we are to have deck, someone needs to clarify these matters anyway, or the idea is a bit of a joke.

Standard Smash Attack
Attack Ring: Triple Wing
Weight Disk: Wide Defense > Ten Wide
SG Shells: Neo Right SG
SG Core/Casing: Heavy Metal Core/South Magnecore/North Magnecore
Blade Base: SG Metal Flat Base (Gaia Dragoon V Version)

Heavy Smash
Attack Ring: Square Edge
Weight Disk: Wide Defense > Ten Wide
SG Shells: Neo Right SG
SG Core/Casing: Heavy Metal Core
Blade Base: Defense Grip Base (Tip Inverted)

Spin Stealing Upper Attack (Attack Focus)
Attack Ring: Upper Dragoon
Weight Disk: Wide Defense
SG Shells: Neo Left SG
SG Core/Casing: SG (Free Shaft Version) Casings
SG Shaft/Tip: SG (Full Auto Clutch Version) Shaft
Blade Base: Defense Grip Base 2

Spin Stealing Upper Attack (Spin Stealing Focus)
Attack Ring: Gyro Defense
Weight Disk: Wide Defense
SG Shells: Left Spin Gear
SG Core/Casing: SG (Free Shaft Version) Casings
SG Shaft/Tip: SG (Full Auto Clutch Version) Shaft
Support Parts: Defense Ring
Blade Base: Customize Grip Base

Circle Survivor Defense
Attack Ring: Roller Defense Ring
Weight Disk: Ten Heavy
SG: Right Engine Gear (Circle Defenser)
Blade Base: Final Clutch Base (Desert Sphinxer Version)
CEW: Circle Survivor

Fixed Circle Survivor
Attack Ring: Roller Defense Ring
Weight Disk: Ten Heavy
SG: Right Engine Gear (Circle Defenser)
Blade Base: First Clutch Base (Zeus Version)
CEW: Circle Survivor

Defensive Zombie
Attack Ring: Twin Horn (Hasbro) / War Lion
Sub Attack Ring: Dragon Saucer
Weight Disk: Wide Defense
SG Shells: Neo Left SG / Left SG
SG Core/Casing: Double Bearing Core/SG (Bearing Version 2)
SG Shaft/Tip: SG (Bearing Version 2) Shaft
Support Parts: Defense Ring
Blade Base: Customize Grip Base

Grip Defense
Attack Ring: War Lion / Tiger Defenser
Sub Attack Ring: Dragon Saucer
Weight Disk: Wide Defense
SG Shells: Neo Right SG
SG Core/Casing: Heavy Metal Core
Blade Base: Defense Grip Base

Weight Based Defense
Attack Ring: Smash Turtle
Weight Disk: Ten Heavy
SG Shells: Neo Right SG
SG Core/Casing: Heavy Metal Core
Support Parts: Defense Ring
Blade Base: Customize Metal Change Base / SG Metal Ball Base

Zombie
Attack Ring: Twin Horn / Tiger Defenser / Reverse Wolf (Hasbro)
Weight Disk: Wide Survivor / Wide Defense
SG Shells: Neo Left SG
SG Core/Casing: Double Bearing Core
SG Shaft/Tip: Neo SG (Double Bearing Version) Shaft
Support Parts: Defense Ring
Blade Base: Customize Grip Base

Compact
Attack Ring: Tiger Defenser
Weight Disk: Ten Heavy
SG Shells: Neo Right SG
SG Core/Casing: Heavy Metal Core
Blade Base: Metal Change Base

Driger V2 Custom
Attack Ring: Upper Claw
Weight Disk: Wide Defense
SG Shells: Neo Right SG
SG Core/Casing: Heavy Metal Core
Support Parts: Upper Attack
Blade Base: Customize Metal Change Base

Force Smash
Attack Ring: Smash Turtle
Weight Disk: Wide Defense
SG Shells: Neo Right SG
SG Core/Casing: Heavy Metal Core
SG Shaft/Tip: SG Grip Base Tip
Support Parts: Defense Ring
Blade Base: Customize Grip Bass

You could also go through the competitive combo list and look at dupes, but these are the combos I use, those I consider optimal, and I hope it illustrates the issue with NSP in Plastics. In addition, while there are alternatives to some of the Attack Rings in particular, are we going to ask people to buy and maintain even more plastics than needed to have a chance? I feel like this is a big ask if we want to actually see tournaments.

As a community, the Plastics userbase on the discord has collaborated on the best way to make deck (which we generally dislike) work for the format we care so passionately for and see ourselves as stewards of. Big credit goes to everyone there for this - this is a product of the Plastics community, for the WBO. We hope our thoughts will be considered. 
For PLA, two things determine combination type primarily - AR and Tip. I have sought to define "Tip" in a clear and consistent manner. These are the parts which really separate combinations, so they encourage different types in deck without crushing the ability to use various types via being too "expensive" part wise. Deck must still be optional for accessibility, but this makes it fun, competitive and viable!

For the sake of accessibility, I am also advocating something a bit spicy - that players be allowed to reuse the same physical part used in two or three combos (eg one wide defense across two combos. With the sheer scarcity of parts, this will massively help players who don't have the money to really buy into the game hard hang with those who do. It is still a disadvantage in 3on3 Type as it gives away information, and I know it's going to be a bitter pill, but if we want to fit deck's square peg into plastics' round hole... we need to make this concession to make tournaments fun and fair. I again acknowledge this is a big ask, but please consider how hard it is to get plastics now when looking at this.

Lastly, I have also adapted HMS somewhat, as its small parts pool makes choosing separate ARs and WDs difficult, and many parts multirole. Combo type is almost entirely determined by RC, so if we restrict only that we still get plenty of variation.

WORDING:
Updated Deck Rules for PLA/HMS:
  • Combination Composition (Plastic):
    • Combinations in a deck must not share the same Attack Ring or Tip - a Tip being the part of the Beyblade which is intended as the main point of contact with the stadium floor when upright, be it part of a Blade Base or a standalone Shaft or Tip (eg SG (Bearing Version 2) Shaft, Customize Grip Base Tip). All other parts may be repeated.
    • It is legal to use the same physical part within multiple combinations in a deck, within the bounds of these restrictions. In this case, each full combination must be shown to the opponent and/or judge in line with the rules of the Tournament Type in use.
    • Tips with a Mode Change which do not require disassembly (either unscrewing the AR or unclipping the Blade Base), or which share the same Tip in at least one mode (eg Dranzer S‚Äô Spiral Change Base with and without SG (Free Shaft Version) Shaft) are considered the same Tip and may not be used on multiple customizations in the same Deck.
    • Tips which require disassembly for Mode Change may be used in their different modes in the same Deck.¬†
    • Both Core ARs and Sub ARs may not be repeated across combinations (eg, one cannot use War Lion with War Lion SAR and War Lion with War Monkey SAR in the same deck, but can use Bound Attack Ring and Bound Defense Ring in the same deck as they are each considered a whole part).
    • You may use any Sub-Ring on Gabriel and Cyber Dragoon Battle Spec.‚Äôs SG Wing Base, even if it is used as a Sub-AR on the same or another combination.
  • Combination Composition (HMS):
    • Combinations in the same deck may not share the same Running Core. All other parts may be repeated.
    • It is legal to use the same physical part within multiple combinations in a deck, within the bounds of these restrictions. In this case, each full combination must be shown to the opponent and/or judge in line with the rules of the Tournament Type in use.
The Organizer Guide may need to be updated in the deck area with "Special rules apply to Deck Format part restrictions in Plastic and HMS Formats. See ‚ÄúMultiple Beyblade Tournament Type Advanced Rulings‚ÄĚ in the Gameplay Appendix of the Plastic and HMS rulebook for additional information." Though, this is not done for deck being optional, so should be fine.¬†



Breakage During Play
As breakage is much more common, and replacement parts much rarer, the Breakage During Play rules need to take this into account. We need to be more flexible and not encourage people to use specific parts because they can break others for easy wins. As such, I am proposing that instead of a win, if a part cannot be replaced, we should restart the round - and to avoid any manipulation and disadvantaging the break-er, we should retain current points when doing so. This makes for a fairer game for all, and properly considers the realities of plastics.

Proposed Wording:

Breakage During Play
  • If a Beyblade part or launcher breaks during battle or while launching, the round is voided and the owner must produce an identical replacement to continue the match. If this is not possible due to lack of available parts, the selection phase begins again for both Bladers with the match continuing from the current score.

  • If both players‚Äô Beyblades break at the same time and they both cannot produce identical replacements to continue the match, the selection phase begins again for both Bladers with the match continuing from the current score.


Remote Control Blade Bases
Hear me out - due to the Three Kingdoms release, these are actually quite accessible at the moment. While with the RC function they're too strong (and the two Engine Gear RC releases from Hasbro - Draciel G and Driger G - are much too strong due to exceptional weight, decent balance and solid LAD), that can be quite easily banned - it's not a subtle activation even if you are lucky enough to have one left.
They vary between "garbage" (RC Super Semi-Flat Base)and "highly viable" (RC Super Flat Base). RC Driger V2/Lu Bu's RC Super Flat Base is a very healthy addition to the metagame, matching up well against the popular Circle Survivor (which is otherwise kind of annoying to beat with easily accessible parts) and Driger V2 (barring a lucky hit), while being fairly easy to take out with more aggressive combos, including more aggressive compacts and potentially unoptimised stuff ("tourney filler"), which encourages a more aggressive metagame and makes two otherwise rather safe options noticeably less safe. While one could be concerned about modification due to being accessible internally, we already have rules around Bearing Seasoning which require a similar understanding to police, and it would be pretty obvious if these were suddenly in possession of good balance or additional weight. Yes, these parts are heavy, but they are not terribly low recoil, and their LAD is only "OK" and they fail to catch the ridge well enough when hit even in Tornado Attack - they're very healthy in the metagame, and I think it's important that if we can make something accessible and fair legal, we consider it.

The RC Engine Gear Bases on the other hand are a bit too much - they are visually distinct, but they are the heaviest parts in plastics, being truly obnoxious at about 43g alone. They also have much better LAD and appear to be better balanced. They still beat the opponents the regular RC Blade Bases do, but are also capable defensively, to the point even SG Metal Flat Base (Gaia Dragoon V Version), the premier metal-tipped attack base and a traditional favoured attack base, cannot KO them while they have significant same spin stamina. They just win far too easily to be a fair inclusion, and even worse, they are vanishingly rare, being a very limited release - they are best left out, and if I had to decide between "no RCs" and "all RCs", I would cry a bit before opting for the former, because these are incredibly unhealthy.

I can provide testing for the above on request, but won't wear my parts unless it is specifically requested.

Further testing including 2 person testing has found these would likely do too much too well (specifically RC Super Flat and the aforementioned EG RC Beys). Combined with modification risks as well as concerns about internal battery corrosion in a couple I have opened up, I think it is best these remain banned.




Launcher Shims and Lubrication
Plastics Launchers are prone to wear behind the ripcord area which causes skipping. This has two big issues: First, as many new bladers might only get one heavily used launcher with their beyblade, they only have an unreliable launcher. Secondly, once launchers develop this issue, they are basically going to landfill. I have devised a method to use a shim to fix the issue, shown here: https://imgur.com/gallery/XuSai4p - this can actually be done more easily with some strong double sided adhesive (I use Sookwang brand tape) and a single flat sliver of metal (I use mfb beylauncher coil metal and sand the edges slightly to remove burs). In addition, lubrication with a silicone-based lubricant can extend the life of parts. These two things make launchers much more long lived and can breathe new life into dead launchers. As such, from both an accessibility AND an environmental perspective, I think this is a responsible matter to allow.
Wording: The addition of shims to repair skipping launchers and non-petroleum lubricants to extend the life of launcher internals is considered legal as long as it does not improve performance past that of an unmodified, fresh launcher of the same type.






Explicit Legalisation of MFB LL1 Ripcord
The MFB LL1 ripcord is the same length and specification as a Dragon Winder, and thus should be legal as it's a bit less break prone. To be honest, if there is a way for us to reproduce dragon winders that are sturdy, I think that is also something we should be looking at allowing as they're starting to become more annoying for new bladers to get.
Wording: The long winder from the Metal Fight Beyblade Light Launcher 1 is legal for use in place of a Dragon Winder.






Kellogg's Attack Rings
These are promotional items that came with Kellogg's cereal. I believe it was stated there that they were not legal. However, they are licensed Beyblade products and not at all a threat to the metagame. For the sake of maybe allowing people who have them lying around to make one extra combo, IMO they should be legal. I will have write-ups for the DB soon, but for reference they are right spin only like 4 layer system ARs, limiting zombie use. Generally meh for most things, but some are at least usable. 
Pic here: https://imgur.com/a/FJamarp






Generic Parts (Balls and Bearings)
Plastics are very different to other generations in that they are more like kits, somewhere between gunpla and RC. As part of this, some of the parts they use are generic parts not uniquely made for Beyblade or Takara. The Metal Balls (1/4" and 3/16") are generic steel balls, and the Shielded/NSK Ball Bearings are standard MR52ZZ shielded ball bearings used in many hobbies (the NSK ones are a bit nicer than the current Chinese generics, with a metal inner retainer and harder materials, but you can still get nsk ones in bulk). As such, while perhaps we cannot explicitly legalise these, this is an even more difficult case than midfakes in that there is quite literally no way to tell a difference unless say a bearing is particularly good (most of the ones you can find are not - being fresh rather than a little worn in, they tend to do a bit worse than originals) - the differences aren't on the degree of tuning/seasoning etc, but even if so, it would fall into reasonable suspicion of that. As such, this is something we need to understand, not necessarily a rule - whether said or not, people obtaining steel balls or mr52zz bearings instead of trying to find the 2 additional Draciel MBD/S/F required for a 6-ball MBB or another bearing for their BK SG (or missing one), is probably better for the game than trying to police something that cannot be policed. So, not a legalisation request, but maybe a "let's just turn a blind eye" request for the sake of pragmatism and me not doing my little "tell me which of these metal balls I can't use" bit :)






Bearing Tuning/Seasoning
While considered nefarious and scary... I've been doing some professionally-advised bearing tuning and seasoning, stirpping and replacing lubricants and using motors and... it doesn't seem like an issue - at this point the main difference comes from being spun around a motor and that... doesn't get you anywhere that years of use won't. If anything, this kinda levels the playing field a bit, especially if people are buying hard to identify high quality aftermarkets or whatever (which I know is its own problem, but still). At the end of the day the difference is fairly negligible, for non-mirrors LAD is gonna be more important, it doesn't make a huge difference defensively either. I am still waiting for some special sauce for the last step of tuning, but even going all out I haven't actually managed to exceed some of the bearings I've just used a hell of a lot over the years. After all you could even just sit there with 2 bearings in a bearing gyros and just rip the cord a bunch for the same tuning. I think it was only an issue because people were expecting zombies to be outspun by like... 10bBistool or something, I dunno. Doesn't seem to matter and the one part which might, lubricant swapping (and not mentioned, but shield removal), is already covered under foreign substance rules anyway, leaving running on a motor - equivalent to extensive use - as the only real thing here, and that's kinda minor and mostly just advantages people who can get old bearings (which we can't be sure haven't had this done). Best to just remove this famous rule, because it's broadly covered by other rulings and frankly, not really possible to tell apart from a particularly good sample that has been used constantly. 

Update: I have done further testing and have something even more interesting: in some cases, it's actually worse to have a better bearing. Here's a quote I wrote on discord
Quote:Oh btw interesting thing regarding SG (Bearing Version 2) Shaft. So, Sheev, if you remember I had talked to you about how with an MBC, SG (Bearing Version 2) casings outperformed the Double Bearing Core casings for Defensive Zombies vs Circle Survivor.
So interestingly, I was using my tuned bearing today to try to do solo spin comparisons (after trying my "probably tuned" bearing plus my "I did tune this" bearing in a DBC against CS and still losing). This is single bearing in SG BV2 casings:

Non tuned bearing: 1:05
Tuned Bearing: 0:45

So what happens... The tip is so free it stops spinning... And the top tilts because you know, SG bv2 shaft isn't super LAD friendly... And it topples. This is obviously also suicidal vs circle survivor.

The interesting follow on of this is that tuned and seasoned bearings aren't always better. Sometimes they are worse. Especially when Circle Survivor is notionally popular.





Part Specific Matters
Spark Attack Ring doesn't fit with other SARs properly (and isn't designed to be interchangeable, it predates that system) so may want to be specifically noted.

Bound Attack/Bound Defense sub-ring orientations: these SAR parts can be oriented numerous ways, and even Hasbro's box art shows one that actually puts stress on the parts I believe. This is ideally noted that "Bound Attack Ring and Bound Defense Ring's SAR parts may be oriented in any of the available positions and interchanged only between the shared Core AR part they both use, however all configurations must remain within the bounds of the General Part Stress Rule". Or the like.

Great Tiger SAR fits with Dual Dragon - again, make a note that dual dragon's core and frame part are considered one part, like the above two.

Driger V2 RC AR: the RC version of Driger V2 has a modified AR as they couldn't make it overhang the Blade Base. We do allow the ARs of all other RC releases as they are identical, so this should be okay - if we interpret the rule to refer to "remote control beyblades" as being any beyblade capable of using the remote control function (ie, it has to have an RC base) this is currently fine, and as it is a competitive part that is also fairly easy to access via the 3 Kingdoms release, it is important that we allow it IMO.


For Part Specific Matters or anything part related that is hard to put in the rulebook, I can update PlasticsDB to be used as a very large addendum - given we do now have a database covering every part, I am happy to use that to cover WBO specific rulings etc.
Dude... this is amazing
^ Thanks, I've had a long time to think about it.

I've just added two more things - one for an addendum, just to explicitly legalise base clip switching, and one about Mold 1 Magne WD, as the adhesive on all of them will eventually fail, but I also don't believe they should be legal without their surrounds due to their material presenting a risk of shattering. I also provided an example of the use of the structural integrity rule, around Fortress Base with balls and wide weight disks.

EDIT: I have just updated the notes to further emphasise how Volcano Change Base is analogous design-wise to the rest of them, as well as noting that Zeo Attack Ring is also competitive for Right Spin Smash (it's really, really good). I have also added a new section for explicit SG Core switching and using all available slots on an SG.
I have found an admittedly weak but nonetheless extant precedent for SAR flips. Hasbro's Guardian Driger box shows the unique SAR (it's a little different to SG wing base/great dragon's) reversed. Note that the instructions show it the normal way. I acknowledge this is on the tenuous side, but nonetheless I think it's worth mentioning.

Images in question: http://imgur.com/a/gLdu3wQ

I have edited this into the post.

I've also just noticed a few more pages of the spin up guide book vol 2 talking about Hayate and co, and there's no indication of any kind of competitive ban or the beys themselves being considered any different to a regular one - just the discussion of finding ways to attach a figure to a beyblade. The only difference noted is that they don't appear in the anime or manga.
I have updated the OP to fix an error on my part - steel ball bearings are measured by diameter. In this case they are 1/4" and 3/16" (which explains why my assumption the smaller ones were 0.5g didn't match the actual weights). My bad on that one, something I forgot over time.

Also, on another goofy note, I regret to inform you that our rules currently apparently ban all parts of Dragoon V, as Hasbro listed it as having a Hidden Spirits release. This means all bladers who have used Neo Left casings, myself included, have in fact technically cheated, I guess.

I also have a few other things I am working on ruling questions for as well, but they will require some additional work. Sorry to be piling some things on late, but as I've been going back through things, I've found more things I want to raise/think are worth raising explicitly.

Edit:
Some notes for myself and as a heads up, still writing them up:
Hasbro Power Spirit Bit Chip was released by Takara in products B-1 through B-4 which are standalone power spirits. B code is commonly thought to be kinda separate from standard-play items, however in this case the package does show it being inverted and inserted into a regular spin gear's hole, which does work. I am concerned that it doesn't often show up in old competitive beys on Y!JA etc. That said, it does fit better than assumed by brad and documentation from Takara literally shows the inversion - plus from a meta perspective it is somewhat easier to obtain than the metal bit chip while being only 1g lighter (and admittedly less versatile). It would very much be a healthy inclusion, especially as Attack types do benefit from it. As there are now MBCs in circulation, it would be nice to have a more accessible alternative. They are currently not specifically banned, though, so we can just keep it that way Wink

As a side note, the standard product coding on Shin-Hayate onwards as well as no specific rulings like Bearing Gyros have indicates that the bakutenryu parts were intended to be legal... All of them. Even the BB/WD. Heck, by my classification, Weight Ring has more unique releases (different mold or colour in a standard numbered release) than Wide does, and technically the base is exceptionally common...

Dragoon V had a hidden spirits release supposedly per Hasbro's site which has interesting legality implications and there's possibly a similar special set from Takara I am looking into...
However being the pedant I am, Takara's line were not called hidden spirits nor anything that translates to that (explosive dragon is probably the best translation of Bakutenryuu). Also, need to update BakutenryŇę here to Bakutenryu as that is Takara's romanisation.

Specific clarifications: Spark Attack Ring doesn't fit with other SARs properly so may want to be specifically noted

Bound Attack/Bound Defense sub-ring orientations need some specifics (this would be taken care of by a general part stress rule and statement that they must be used but can be oriented as desired.

Guardian Driger SAR fits with Dual Dragon, again, make a note that dual dragon is considered one part, like bound ATK/def and spark attack ring. It is worth noting though that Takara technical didn't allow swapping SARs or fixing them in place - before you start rethinking that though, they also didn't allow their own plated parts - we are our own organisation ūüôÉ

Also a further note that using wolborg 03 tip with vcb is very much analogous to the regular tip tbh, as vcb really is just the same thing - much like say Customize Bearing base has a narrow shaft that doesn't work with everything, vcb just has a very short shaft and very limited compatibility. But the connection is the same as noted above. It is also worth noting that it is a competitive setup - not enough recoil control for the big things like Square Edge, but Mountain Hammer works really well- it's actually a very compelling combo. Would be a shame if it weren't legal Wink

Jumping Base Ball Tip on BK Shaft also has competitive relevance as in CGB it is quite a good setup.

Driger V2 RC AR: we banned RC tops but we allow all the other ARs (as they are not differentiable generally). Driger V2 is modified to not overhang the WD however. I think as long as it is not on an RC base it is not an RC beyblade thus should be legal even under current rules but would like clarification.

RC Bases: Fair warning, I'm gonna ask you to unban these (just not the RC Function), because rc super flat base has a very healthy place in the meta. Pending some further testing of the EG RC Base, anyway.
Hello there I have been thinking of something for a long while which could a whole logistical nightmare in a tournament setting. I would like to know what could be if any rulings on the potential of having excess gate material on parts in plastic gen Beyblades?

Ok I will just give a brief summary of model kit terminology for context. The big piece of plastic that has all the parts together is called a sprue. The sprue is the path that the plastic has to travel down in order to have the parts made. It often looks like a sort of maze when all of the parts have been cut out and often gets discarded when all the parts are cut out. The gate is the little bit of plastic that connects between the part and the sprue. The gate has to be cut in order to get the part off of the sprue. If you you would like a visual example of what I am talking about look at any plastic gen instruction manual or Bandai brand model kit.

In the case of Beyblades there could be a lot of potential issues with excess gate material since these are game pieces not just a model. Firstly there is the potential for the advantage of adding more weight than there would normally be on the part. This may not seem like a lot of weight that could be added but it could be a competitive advantage. Secondly if you get a spin gear or a neo spin gear there is a gate located at the ends of where the weight disk gets placed on a spin gear. So in a potential situation someone could purposefully cut less gate material on the ends of the spin gears to allow for a tighter fitting weight disk on their Beyblade. In this case There could be players who try to find tightest fitting spin gears to help keep a sub attack ring from moving in their customizations. And finally If you look at a blade base clip most if not all of them have a gate located at the end of the clip facing straight out from the blade base. This would in theory affect the aerodynamics of the Beyblade depending on if the gate on the blade base clip was cut properly or not.

I know that in a completive sense this sort of issue may be considered very minor and extremely difficult to take advantage of. Since most plastic Beyblades are already assembled and trying to find a specific Bey that is unassembled to take advantage of this is near impossible now. This has been on my mind since I have been noticing more janky parts of plastic gen are being addressed now. I also wanted to note that plastic gen is the only Beyblade generation that was sold in model kit format. All the systems after the engine gear system were pre assembled or all the parts were pre cut before being sold. And even the engine gear system was starting to phase out sprues from their products due to how complex their parts were becoming.

I feel that this sort small even insignificant sort of thing is what makes plastic gen soo special. There will never be another Beyblade line that would have embraced the jank of mashing things together like in Spin Up Guide Volume 1. I am staring to feel that early Plastic Gen started to market itself more as model kits at that time which was more about freedom of expression and creativity. Then as it grew it veered away from the model kit mentality and more into a competitive games market with standardized pieces.

Ok I am just going on tangents now so in summary here is my question. Should Beyblade parts be inspected for excess gate material and should it be removed if that is the case?
(Jul. 16, 2021  1:17 AM)Kenshin Wrote: [ -> ]Hello there I have been thinking of something for a long while which could a whole logistical nightmare in a tournament setting. I would like to know what could be if any rulings on the potential of having excess gate material on parts in plastic gen Beyblades?

Ok I will just give a brief summary of model kit terminology for context.  The big piece of plastic that has all the parts together is called a sprue. The sprue is the path that the plastic has to travel down in order to have the parts  made. It often looks like a sort of maze when all of the parts have been cut out and often gets discarded when all the parts are cut out. The gate is the little bit of plastic that connects between the part and the sprue. The gate has to be cut in order to get the part off of the sprue. If you you would like a visual example of what I am talking about look at any plastic gen instruction manual or Bandai brand model kit.

In the case of Beyblades there could be a lot of potential issues with excess gate material since these are game pieces not just a model. Firstly there is the potential for the advantage of adding more weight than there would normally be on the part. This may not seem like a lot of weight that could be added but it could be a competitive advantage. Secondly if you get a spin gear or a neo spin gear there is a gate located at the ends of where the weight disk gets  placed on a spin gear.  So in a potential situation someone could purposefully cut less gate material on the ends of the spin gears to allow for a tighter fitting weight disk on their Beyblade. In this case There could be players who try to find tightest fitting  spin gears to help keep a sub attack ring from moving in their customizations. And finally  If you look at a blade base clip most if not all of them have a gate located at the end of the clip facing straight out from the blade base. This would in theory affect the aerodynamics of the Beyblade depending on if the gate on the blade base clip was cut properly or not.

I know that in a completive sense this sort of issue may be considered very minor and extremely difficult to take advantage of.  Since most plastic Beyblades are already assembled and trying to find a specific Bey that is unassembled to take advantage of this is  near impossible now.  This has been on my mind since I have been noticing more janky parts of plastic gen are being addressed now. I also wanted to note that plastic gen is the only Beyblade generation that was sold in model kit format. All the systems after the engine gear system were pre assembled or all the parts were pre cut before being sold. And even the engine gear system was starting to phase out sprues from their products due to how complex their parts were becoming.

I feel that this sort small even insignificant sort of thing is what makes plastic gen soo special. There will never be another Beyblade line that would have embraced the jank of mashing things together like in Spin Up Guide Volume 1. I am staring to feel that early Plastic Gen started to market itself more as model kits at that time which was more about freedom of expression and creativity. Then as it grew it veered away from the model kit mentality and more into a competitive games market with standardized pieces.

Ok I am just going on tangents now so in summary here is my question. Should Beyblade parts be inspected for excess gate material and should it be removed if that is the case?

I hate to give such a short reply to such a detailed and well thought out post. Generally any excess gate material on that would interact with an opposing beyblade will also wear or break off with even a little contact, so it's not a very viable or effective strategy - there's also few cases this would help.
I don't believe there are any SG gates though that are capable of interacting with Sub Attack Rings, they tend to be at WD height and on top of the SG, neither of which touch the SAR. WD stability is just as affected by the individual WD itself. Most are reasonably tight all in all anyhow. For the most part I would not like anyone to meddle with my Beyblades past mere inspection at a tournament, I guess, that said I do trim them on my competitive beys just for peace of mind. Also, molding variances would probably outweigh this anyhow...

All that said, there is probably little harm in adding a rule requiring no excess sprue material on at least the outer surface of the bey...

I agree on your assessment of early beyblades being seen as model kits encouraging more self expression - and suspect the designers who liked this went on to design the Bakutenryu beyblades and various similar side products Smile

Also coming soon - a mini essay on how No Shared Parts in deck literally does not work (or at least destroys the meta) for plastics in multiple ways and how whoever added it to the rules clearly didn't actually think about plastics when doing so.
I have updated the thread with pretty much everything I wanted to add. It's a little more brief than I wanted, and obviously I am available to discuss any of this at the drop of a hat. I am happy to video call staff to demonstrate things if need be, whatever. Let's just do this. I'll even write it myself if you want! Smile
Aaand here we are. I have produced a draft updated rulebook for PLA/HMS based on my recommendations above as well as a lot of community feedback. If you wish to compare changes you can download it and the original as PDFs and use any online pdf diff tool to see what has changed. 

Click Here to see the proposed rulebook.
(Dec. 27, 2021  4:33 AM)th!nk Wrote: [ -> ]Aaand here we are. I have produced a draft updated rulebook for PLA/HMS based on my recommendations above as well as a lot of community feedback. If you wish to compare changes you can download it and the original as PDFs and use any online pdf diff tool to see what has changed.¬†

Click Here to see the proposed rulebook.


As usual, good stuff. Major attention to detail. Thank you for making sure to ask a bunch of us what we thought about some of these rules. I think the rulebook as it is here is great. You've really gone out of your way to make this very simple but comprehensive. 

Definitely the standard for Pla/HMS events. Provided the interest/numbers are here, I do want to make sure we have an event for both formats in summer 2022 locally. This what we'll use, without a doubt. 

Thanks Th!nk.
(Dec. 27, 2021  4:33 AM)th!nk Wrote: [ -> ]Aaand here we are. I have produced a draft updated rulebook for PLA/HMS based on my recommendations above as well as a lot of community feedback. If you wish to compare changes you can download it and the original as PDFs and use any online pdf diff tool to see what has changed.¬†

Click Here to see the proposed rulebook.

As solely a plastics player myself, I appreciate someone as knowledgable about plastics as Th!nk is to update the rules that better fit with the plastics metagame. I support and agree with his rule edits, changes, updates, and additions. I want people who actually play plastic and understand the metagame to create the rules for it. I think the rules were outdated and needed some updates. So thank you for all your work Th!nk!
(Dec. 27, 2021  4:33 AM)th!nk Wrote: [ -> ]Aaand here we are. I have produced a draft updated rulebook for PLA/HMS based on my recommendations above as well as a lot of community feedback. If you wish to compare changes you can download it and the original as PDFs and use any online pdf diff tool to see what has changed.¬†

Click Here to see the proposed rulebook.

Thanks for this! Looking good, the allowing of SAR inversion will certainly be interesting, also good to see you added the recommendation for equal numbers of balls in SG Metal Ball Base. Will read through it again but I don't see any issues right now, very tight document.
Love it. Can’t wait to compete.
(Dec. 27, 2021  12:42 PM)SheevPalpatine Wrote: [ -> ]
(Dec. 27, 2021  4:33 AM)th!nk Wrote: [ -> ]Aaand here we are. I have produced a draft updated rulebook for PLA/HMS based on my recommendations above as well as a lot of community feedback. If you wish to compare changes you can download it and the original as PDFs and use any online pdf diff tool to see what has changed.¬†

Click Here to see the proposed rulebook.

Thanks for this! Looking good, the allowing of SAR inversion will certainly be interesting, also good to see you added the recommendation for equal numbers of balls in SG Metal Ball Base. Will read through it again but I don't see any issues right now, very tight document.

Yeah, thanks for reminding me about it, I didn't want to ban it (because I think it's fine for people to be dumb with their stuff) but the inclusion of a recommendation was a great suggestion from you.

I would also like to thank you all for your kind words, and should also give credit to Dan, SheevPalpatine, 4dfury, Shindog, Broyeeto and AngryFace, as well as all of the other discord regulars, for taking a look at it while it was in development and providing input and guidance, especially around the proposed deck format modifications which were a matter of some very deep discussion to find a setup that worked for us all - that is a real testament to our ability to collaborate. Hugely appreciated - it is truly incredible what we can do when we work together. We may be one of the smallest here on the WBO, but IMO the HMS/Plastics Community is one of the strongest there is.