• 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.

About Stomp matches

those were two separate arguements

And the character being cocky isn't most of the time the reason

imagine a character with 10000 abilties and a chracter that resists all of those abilties but one and has an ista kill ability.

How is the first chracter supposed to know which of the 10 thousand abilties he has to use to not get killed ?
 
Overlord775 said:
those were two separate arguements
And the character being cocky isn't most of the time the reason

imagine a character with 10000 abilties and a chracter that resists all of those abilties but one and has an ista kill ability.

How is the first chracter supposed to know which of the 10 thousand abilties he has to use to not get killed ?
Click to expand...
An argument for what? You answered me with it, and it has nothing to do with what I said.

Also not what is you were arguing for before. I made it clear and told it to your face that it isn't a stomp if the character could win if they are bloodlusted.
 
If a character has more chances to win if he were bloodlusted then he should just be bloodlusted to make the match more fair
 
Overlord775 said:
If a character has more chances to win if he were bloodlusted then he should just be bloodlusted to make the match more fair
Click to expand...
You know what? That is not for you to decide. And you knwo, stuff like bloodlusting someone like maxwell would make an actual stomp.


Honestly, I already said what I think, not adding a match because a character can't use their moveset properly is not something agreed on, so you'll have to coinvince someone else.
 
Case by case scenario, not all matches should be treated the same way.

And CIS should be a factor in determining a stomp too, since if a character only has even the slightest chance of winning by using a move they will not ever pull, then the winning scenario isn't there

It's like asking batman to use a gun
 
Matches when a character doesn't win just because he doesn't play his cards well isn't a stomp. I don't see the point in bringing this. It's decisive at most because the character has a win con but it's unlikely he'd use it in-character.

For example, Goku has Power Nullification and he's fighting someone who's made of energy and as such he can't beat with physical strength alone. His opponent has soulhax, something that Goku doesn't resist but he has a wincon if he can "powernull" his opponent itself because it's made of energy and Goku has Power Null. He could win, but he doesn't lead with Power Null and he barely uses it in-character before the opponent soulhaxes him.
 
Wrong comparation because the chances of Goku power nulling said opponent are far more than 1%
 
Do you know how many times does Goku used Power Null? Once, against a Jiren's Ki blast. Do you know how many fights Goku had?
 
Overlord775 said:
He only has shown the power null in MUI
Click to expand...
Yes, but he doesn't use MUI because he cannot, he didn't spam powernull because he didn't, not because he couldn't.
 
i want you all to see what this "If it has a chance to win it's fair" policy causes

Thread:2658137

Ban (Nanatsu) vs Momo (Medaka Box)

Momo literally wins with a though and people still think is fair because Ban could Zero Sign and win, but he won't ever because him using Zero Sign at the start of the fight is an extremely OoC move for him to do.

So he actually has no way to win because the win condiction is too absurd
 
Goku's case was an example anyway. It's the only case that came to my mind.

You know what I think about that match. Ban has a win condition, so it's fine to me.
 
How does that make your argument any more appealing again?

He doesn't use something that would give him the win, and he would win if bloodlusted. Yes, it is fair, you can't dub anything where a characters faults make them loose something they could win a stomp.
 
Overlord775 said:
A WIN CONDICTION HE WON'T EVER PULL
Click to expand...
All caps really makes you more convincing.

"He doesn't use something that would give him the win, and he would win if bloodlusted. Yes, it is fair, you can't dub anything where a characters faults make them loose something they could win a stomp."
 
Then just bloodlust the character

because if you don't do that the match is a utter stomp as even if you run the battle 1000 times he will lose all 1000
 
Overlord775 said:
Then just goddam bloodlust the chracter
because if you don't do that the match is a utter stomp as even if you ren the battle 1000 times he will lose all 1000
Click to expand...
No, it is not a stomp. Your definition of stomp is literally wrong, and people don't need to, and most often won't, do whatever makes you feel better.

It is not a stomp by definition, and you didn't give one reason to count it as that beyond you thinking that it should be.

Your opinion doesn't have enough weight to change definitions just because you don't like them.
 
Overlord775 said:
your whole agument boils down to "You are wrong, deal with it"
Click to expand...
...

No.

That is litirally you. You are the one that wants to change the status quo, so you are the one that has to coinvince people to do so. We don't need to give reasonings to why you failed to change the definition of the word, tough we did do so regardless.


Lucky there, just came the notification when I unfollowed to boot!
 
An extremely OoC chracter winning condiction is NOT a possible winning condiction

as no matter what the chracter won't pull it

if the winning sceneratio is so unlikely that the opponent is more likely to get an heart attack and die then battle is a stomp
 
I think everybody made their point clear. The current definition of what counts as a stomp and what is simply decisive stands.

I'm gonna unfollow as well.
 
Starter Pack said:
I think everybody made their point clear. The current definition of what counts as a stomp and what is simply decisive stands.
I'm gonna unfollow as well.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure this topic has been discussed thoroughly a multitude of times & doesn't need to be brought up again.

Unfollowing, too.
 
1. The first one isn't fair, but it is valid and decisive.

2. The second would be a stomp, but only if the second person is physically unnable to fire first or at a comparable rate. If the person simply isn't going to shoot first or at a comparable rate due to character or something, then it isn't a stomp

Seems people are in agreement
 
No? Then most conclusive or decisive matches wouldn't be added

Being solidly in favour of one side can be a valid match. "Fair" is also incredibly subjective. A truly "fair" match would be 50/50, both in and out of character, and they would all end up inconclusive. A match will almost naturally favour one side for a victor to be reached.

Unless that is not what you meant by "fair"...?
 
Overlord775 said:
A match should need to be fair
Give me a reason why an unfair match should be added
Click to expand...
Give me a reason why it shouldn't be added based on your subjective definition on what is fair?

Actually, don't, I'll just unfollow like the others at this point.
 
@Iapitus 1. Most decisive matches are actualy stomp matches

2.by fair i mean that the opponent has a decent % of winning like at least 3%
 
@overlord

The fight doesn't have to be fair for both combatants there has to be a way for both to win however for it to not be a stomp

If it had to be fair then winning using any hax your opponent doesn't resist should be a stomp too as paralyzing someone or stopping time is unfair too same thing with precog

If a match had to be "fair" not only would many matches have to be removed but the amount of matches that could be made would be dropped

Fair is an arbitrary term who really decides what counts as fair in a versus match as in where is the line drawn

Is timestop unfair is precog unfair how about soul hax or mindhax
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Second22
Dandadan - Speed standard
2
Replies
54
Views
2K
Dalesean027
Dalesean027
Shiraito983
Valid Multiplier??
Replies
1
Views
520
DavidTPPM
DavidTPPM
DontTalkDT
Sakura Level Cap Tournament (8-B and lower)
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
MysticBrawler
Concerns about the new Tier 0
Replies
3
Views
2K
TheUltimateGod4
Question about Durability and Throwing
Replies
5
Views
406
Queen_Dasania
Back
Top