Additions to Versus Thread Rules

[Elizhaa]

This topic has been brought before, inspired by a conversation here on SBA discussion. It is about making a rule to expand on the OP controversial topic in Vs thread from this rule:

This board is for discussing character fights. Please avoid highly controversial topics.
	~ Versus Thread Board​

While this rule exists here, it is somewhat suggestive as things that are controversial varied from users.

The problem is in some threads, OP has set up rules that implicitly limit a characters' abilities in vs threads. I think Wokistant's point here mentioned these versus battle threads' main problem:

These matches aren't really fights, indirectly restrict a lot of things, and are biased by necessity. The super nonstandard format lends itself pretty well to win farming, isn't accounted for by the rules, and can pretty easily lead into weirdness with other matches too.I could give The Number Man a victory over some super high tier character because i set the only wincon to hacking into the opponent's bank account or something, which seems really stupid to have added to the profiles.
	~ Thread:3760346#22​

There was also a match that I remember was removed for this reason; Sonic at 5-B lost to Phoenix from a court debate where Sonic has no formed of knowledge of formal courtroom debate.

I am doubtful about making some winning conditions not being based around special abilities like superpower or tiering statistics. I also have seen some OP make some funky rules like one restrict Immortality Type 8 and another to restricted all deadly hax where most of the opponents' abilities became restricted as the manner that bypassed this rule below:

It is fine to restrict abilities in a versus matchup. However, matches that are arranged this way should not be added to the character profiles, as they don't involve their full potential, and are only intended for casual entertainment. An exception would be if the restricted ability/technique has a separate tier from the main one. In this case, the match can be added.
	~ Versus Thread Rules​

Moritzva did explain some characters are entirely not at their peak in fighting potential but in certain situations relating to these characters' expertise and so think some of these matches can occur within appropriated:

I think Moritzva's point here would work for a good rule as a solution:

• It's okay to give characters conditions that allow them to use their abilities properly, but not if they stop the others from being able to use theirs as well.

If it can't work, a rule like this can works:

• It is fine to make matches who victory conditions revolved around nonbattle conditions but these matches should not be added to the character profiles.

• An update to this rule, too:
  • It is not fine to restrict abilities in a versus matchup, implicitly or expressly. Matches that are arranged this way should not be added to the character profiles, as they don't involve their full potential, and are only intended for casual entertainment. An exception would be if the restricted ability/technique has a separate tier from the main one. In this case, the match can be added. The match can also be added if Optional Equipments such as optional power-ups and items are restricted.

^^^ (Credit to Prom and DontTalkDT with the rule, updated)

 

[Moritzva]

Everyone always forgets the V in my name, huh?

Give me a second to write up a small response.

 

[Moritzva]

Some matters, like putting Sonic in a court case against Phoenix, obviously isn't fair. Sonic has absolutely no court experience: if you were to replace Sonic with Mario, nothing really changes.

Compare that to Phoenix Wright versus King. King isn't much of a lawyer, sure... But he did manage to successfully fool the entire Hero World into thinking he's as strong as One Punch Man Himself, when he... is anything but, honestly. Phoenix's battle is disproving that. That's a legitimate debate. Replace King with Mario? Not the same fight at all.

Batman vs Light Yagami? More combat involved, but still a battle more focused on wit than combat abilities. Neither are really relying on their abilities, sure, but it's a battle of wits. Replace Batman with, say, Mario... and the battle is completely different.

The matter is, some kinds of these fights fundamentally don't care about what one character has to offer. What in the world could Sonic bring to the table to impact a court case? He's completely interchangeable. King, or Batman...? Sure, they aren't using the fullest extent of their combat capabilities, but a factor of their character, their personality, their meaning, matters and leaves an impact.

So I agree with the above, but I want to make a very clear distinction between the two different kinds of 'nontraditional' battles. One is fine, fun, (and there is a large part of the community that really loves the more r/whowouldwin styled battles, more lighthearted and unique), and another which is blatantly win farming, such as Wokistan mentioned above.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that Elizhaa seems to make sense.

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

I agree with Moritzva.

 

[Antvasima]

Moritzva also seems to make sense, yes.

 

[Elizhaa]

True

 

[Elizhaa]

So, everyone, what suggestions for the new rules you think work best?

 

[DontTalkDT]

I wouldn't restrict making matches with strange win conditions and restrictions, but I agree that anything too strange shouldn't be added to profiles. So something like the 3 bullet points at the bottom seems good.

A second exception to the one at the bottom would be restricting abilities that a character doesn't necessarily have. E.g. many game characters can collect optional power-ups throughout the game and keys are usually made for optimal builds. Making a fight were certain power-ups weren't collected should still be fair, though, as it is a possible canonical version of the character.

 

[Elizhaa]

True. Optional Equipments ranging from optional power-ups and items are fine if restricted; so, the match can be added in this case also. I will add an update in the last bullet point of the OP.

 

[Elizhaa]

Is the new update fine in your view, @DontTalkDT?

 

[Elizhaa]

bump

 

[Antvasima]

If he does not reply soon, you can politely remind him via his message wall.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Is the new update fine in your view, @DontTalkDT?

Sure.

 

[Moritzva]

If it can't work, a rule like this can works:

• It is fine to make matches who victory conditions revolved around nonbattle conditions but these matches should not be added to the character profiles.

I'm still of the opinion that nontraditional battles should be allowed to be added if they meet the criteria I explained above.

 

[Elizhaa]

Ok, DontTalkDT.

 

[Elizhaa]

Ok, @Moritzva, I will ask more staffs' inputs to their opinions on what options would work the best.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I think DT's suggestion sounds good

 

[Schnee_One]

Agreed with DT

 

[Moritzva]

What qualifies as "too strange"?

 

[Schnee_One]

Court cases

 

[Moritzva]

And why are they a problem if that's more fitting of what a character does?

We should define what 'too strange' is.

 

[The_Wright_Way]

In my opinion, court cases are fine so long as both characters have proven they can compete in such an area. For example, Phoenix vs Batman where Phoenix had to prove Bruce Wayne was Batman would be good, but Phoenix vs Sonic should get removed. Same reason we don't add stomp matches, if one character can't win under the listed conditions, it won't be added.

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

I agree with the points that are being proposed here

 

[The_Impress]

I agree to the OP's suggestion, but to counter Wright's point, we discuss battlefield experience here, first and foremost, our rules and regulations and profiles are made solely for that, so we can't really account for battles like Court Cases being added. We should focus on what we're good at and want to encourage here, and not random stuff like that

 

[00potato]

I agree to the OP's suggestion, but to counter Wright's point, we discuss battlefield experience here, first and foremost, our rules and regulations and profiles are made solely for that, so we can't really account for battles like Court Cases being added. We should focus on what we're good at and want to encourage here, and not random stuff like that

The rules would need to be that different though. The debates were fundamentally similar but with different win-conditions. There is not much reason to not add them unless it is something like Phoenix vs Sonic.

 

[Antvasima]

Zark makes a good point,

 

[Elizhaa]

I also believe so.

 

[Moritzva]

I agree to the OP's suggestion, but to counter Wright's point, we discuss battlefield experience here, first and foremost, our rules and regulations and profiles are made solely for that, so we can't really account for battles like Court Cases being added. We should focus on what we're good at and want to encourage here, and not random stuff like that

However, this site is an archiving and indexing site, foremost - and we have archived feats of intelligence even if they expand past what's typically applicable in battle. There are many non-combat verses on the wiki, after all - if we are a wiki solely for combat, why are non-combat verses here?

I see no harm in allowing more creative matches if they follow the rules given above, I feel. If both characters have purpose and are within their element, using features of themselves that we have archived... Why fix what isn't broken, y'know?

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

First i have heard about court cases being added to profile, and matches restricting abilities thus favoring one character, obviously shouldn't be added.

I do agree with the OP.

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody please remind me what we need to do here?

 

[Elizhaa]

Can somebody please remind me what we need to do here?

The first topic is whether or not nonbattle vs threads like those based around gambling, card games, court cases, winning a fighting video game should be added to profiles. I think Moritza,The Wright Way, Colonel Krukov among others agree that nonabatltle fights are fine in some cases but other staffs that I contacted like Celestial Pegasus, DontTalkDT, DarkDragonMedeus, Schnee One, and Zark2099 look to disagree that any of these fight would be fine I contacted more staffs such as Saikou, Dargoo, Wokistan, and Promestein to give their inputs recently. Somebody is neutral but leaning against nonbattle matches.

The second topic what on if abilities could be restricted in vs threads. I believed we, overall, agree abilities can't be restricted normally and if they are restricted, the vs threads won't be added to the profiles. The exception to these situations are if the abilities restricted have a different tiers from the battle key in the vs threads and if the abilities are from Optional Equipments such as optional power-ups and items in which case the Optional Equipment can be restricted; in these cases, the matches can be added to the profiles. So, the rule that would be added on this second point is:

• It is not fine to restrict abilities in a versus matchup, implicitly or expressly. Matches that are arranged this way should not be added to the character profiles, as they don't involve their full potential, and are only intended for casual entertainment. An exception would be if the restricted ability/technique has a separate tier from the main one. In this case, the match can be added. The match can also be added if Optional Equipments such as optional power-ups and items are restricted.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thanks. I am uncertain regarding the first issue, and agree with you about the second.

 

[SomebodyData]

Hmmm, put me as neutral for the first topic and agreement on the second too, though for the former I'm probably leaning against since actually competing intelligence and in your example, a court case, has way too many variables for a vs thread.

 

[Elizhaa]

I got it; I will make the update my prior message.

 

[Promestein]

I like nontraditional matches but they should only be used and listed for characters to which they're relevant, like Akagi or Kaiji gambling. If a character cannot compete in a match like that, such as Sonic losing in a court case, which of course he would lose, it should just be regarded as a stomp. Simple as that.

 

[Crabwhale]

Extremely niche subjects should be restricted if not outright banned and reduced to the Fun and Games board in my opinion. Sure, everything can technically qualify as a VS battle, but are we here to pit characters off in, say, cooking? Uno? Hide and seek?

That sounds ridiculous, but it's about the same level as the Sonic vs Phoenix match brought up, which honestly sounds like a meme and not a legitimate battle that was added to a actual character profiles.

Battles of wits are of course present and necessary, but they should preferably still stay within the victory conditions of any given match. Which the case above also breaks.

For example, how fast a virus could be eradicated by the human species and if we'd survive it is still a case of death, incapacitation or BFR, whereas the one above is not. And even if it was, it's a stomp. Which ties in nicely to PK's point, which I also agree with.

 

[Moritzva]

I like nontraditional matches but they should only be used and listed for characters to which they're relevant, like Akagi or Kaiji gambling. If a character cannot compete in a match like that, such as Sonic losing in a court case, which of course he would lose, it should just be regarded as a stomp. Simple as that.

This is my stance. Characters that very obviously belong or bring something to the table in their given match should be allowed. I believe absolutely nobody here really believes Phoenix Wright should be taking Sonic to court as a match.

 

[Antoniofer]

Kinda neutral about allowing nonbattle vsthreads to be added, whatever makes the users confortable I believe.

Agree with the restriction of abilities in an arbitrary is a no-go, and if its going to be restricted it have to be separated by tier/transformation, otherwise it shouldn't be added.

 

[Promestein]

Boiling it down to "death, incapacitation or BFR" is also dumb, because Akagi and Kaiji are characters who constantly get into gambles with their lives on the line, where they will die if they lose. It'd be super reasonable to make a match with them where that is the consequence for loss.

Hell, any gamble with older D'Arby is instantly a deathmatch - that can't be the deciding factor. It's a very easy one to meet if you're gonna disbar them otherwise.