• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

A rule is needed.

I actually agree with Sera. I was going to say we shouldn't have two highlighted threats at the same time, but I'd come across as a pompous jerk.
 
I'm sorry I know this is a staff only thread and you can delete this comment if you want, but shouldn't this be a case by case scenario? Like if one or two things are restricted that should be fair game. But if let's say 3-4 things are restricted then it shouldn't be added. Again you can delete this comment if you want, I just wanted to say this.
 
I think that the general consensus seems to be that restricting abilities that makes a character a higher tier or Type 4/8/9 immortality to be fair game, but restricting a random ability just because it's strong.
 
I believe we should have a clear position, not "some haxes yes", "some haxes not". Otherwise we end up in a situation like that thread.
 
Dragonmasterxyz said:
My opinion,

Resticting Haxesl:Shouldn't be allowed.

Restricting Higher Ap Skills: Allowed.
Click to expand...
When we choose a tier for a fight, isnt that an AP restriction by default?
 
No I mean moves that are notable higher tier than the character. For example let's say a character is 8-A, but has a blast of holy energy attack that is Low 2-C in power. Then that Holy attack shou;d be restricted.
 
Imo it should depend on how big the restriction is. Like if dimaria can't use her time stop that shouldn't count since that's like her main ability lol. Literally just a warrior without it
 
I only would allow restrict if the ability/skill/hax is conditioned to a weapon, artifact or similar; we are allowed to make those fights, but it shouldn't be added.
 
Sera Loveheart said:
Restrict nothing. Damn, we already restrict enough guys...seriously.
Click to expand...
People will restrict abilities. Im not saying that you are not wrong, but people should know that if they restrict something, the match is not valid.
 
If we're restricting an ability from a character in the match, isn't that like almost taking the ability that would've allowed them to win, thus removing the validity of the match? For example, I do a fight with my favorite series and I want them to beat one of my hated series, can I just restrict the ability of my hated series, just to let my favorite characters win and get added to the profiles?
 
Saikou The Lewd King said:
@Blue We already do that with Speed Equalization and Restricting Type 8. Nothing new.
Click to expand...
Thats restricting their stats, not an ability that pretty makes the character who they are.
 
I agree with the exception of what are pretty much just 'bar to entry powers.' Higher dimensional immorality and relient immortality are 2 examples, but let me give 3 other abilities that possibly should be considered for restriction if not able to be countered:

1) Stand Properties: sure they are usually eliminated under verse equalization but say that they weren't. "Stands can only be effected by another stand." No one can counter that without pushing a NLF, or very specific cocktails of energies

2) PIS inducement. Say that some Medaka Box characters can passively induce PIS which allows them to win against characters they have no business being able to defeat. Pretty much no one but high tier plot nullifiers can counter this

3) Achilles' (Fate) Invulnerability. Unless you hit his heel, all attacks and effects towards him are nullified unconditionally. Stats do not matter, as explicitly stated. Only the divinity of the nasuverse with its built in hax bypass can get around it, unless you got hax bypass, you are screwed


Powers like these should be able to be disabled if there is no way to counter them, just to allow any kind of fair fight with these people. What do y'all think?
 
Yeah I'm saying verse only NLF bar-to-entry powers should be restricted. Even if they can slip through the cracks on verse equalization, I just used those as examples
 
Personally, I think its a case by case kind of thing, but am fine with whatever you guys decide.

@PaChi I will be sending a PM to you later today. Its off-topic so I won't say much of it here, however, the topic is about your behavior in the thread you linked.
 
I don't know how I feel about this. Sometimes, restricting a power makes a battle fair. I don't think this should go beyond one restriction though. OR if the restricted power is what makes the character so OP. Stuff that's like restricting Dialga's timehax is a no go.
 
Nobody's stopping you from making battles fair, all they're saying is that matches with handicaps shouldn't be added to profiles which I agree with, it's not really a loss if a character doesn't use their real power.
 
I agree with this..I remember several month ago someone create Esdeath v Bang but with both Commander-In-Chief and her Time stop being restricted..like I can understand with Commander-In-Chief because its a prep heavy ability but time stop? really? what the reason to restricted this ability other than to nerf her so she can fight against weaker opponent? its stupid..cant f wait to created Reinhard match where he cant use Longinuslanze...
 
If you need to nerf a character so badly to make a match "fair", then it's not a good matchup in the first place.

It's more acceptable in the case of immortalities because a character is usually considered "dead" when killed normally, even if they do come back. Most verses would consider that as a loss anyway.
 
Dragonmasterxyz said:
My opinion,

Resticting Haxesl:Shouldn't be allowed.

Restricting Higher Ap Skills: Allowed.
Click to expand...
I see most people agree with this?
 
Saikou The Lewd King said:
If you need to nerf a character so badly to make a match "fair", then it's not a good matchup in the first place.
It's more acceptable in the case of immortalities because a character is usually considered "dead" when killed normally, even if they do come back. Most verses would consider that as a loss anyway.
Click to expand...
I didn't say "so badly". Even though this might've not been aimed at me. I think it should cap out at one ability reasonably restricted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System
12 13 14
Replies
530
Views
156K
Ultima_Reality
Ultima_Reality
FinePoint
  • Locked
High 1-A Description Overhaul: The Inaccessible Cardinal Debacle
Replies
23
Views
5K
IdiosyncraticLawyer
IdiosyncraticLawyer
IdiosyncraticLawyer
  • Locked
Franchise-specific discussion rules revamp
Replies
29
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
ByAsura
  • Locked
Making Doctor Who Great Again Part 1 - Cosmology/Tiering
6 7 8
Replies
285
Views
25K
ByAsura
ByAsura
FantaRin_The_First
  • Locked
(Super To Aru Revision) A Certain Magical Revision Genesis Testament
2
Replies
52
Views
5K
DontTalkDT
DontTalkDT
Back
Top