-
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.
AP Gap Needed to Oneshot
- Thread starter WeeklyBattles
- Start date
- Status
- 312
- 43
In all honesty Sera, is it really that hard to understand yourself? The rule is already in place. It has been for years. It's a simple additional clause in order to better manage our varying tiers which our current ruling cannot properly manage. It is about being fair, what exactly bothers you so much about fairness?
- 15,332
- 7,563
@DMUA
Total Drama is a show focused around making everyone suffer to ridiculous scales for that $100,000. The plot revolves around that. That's why their insane feats aren't outliers.
Total Drama is a show focused around making everyone suffer to ridiculous scales for that $100,000. The plot revolves around that. That's why their insane feats aren't outliers.
- 32,358
- 20,298
You can't just ignore every single instance of higher durability showing as being "PIS". Fiction frequently doesn't care for conventions or what should be considered scientific. It's not a fallacy or a Schrodinger's Argument, it's just accepting that it isn't 1 to 1.
- 15,332
- 7,563
If you believe the character has shown higher durability feats then you should make a CRT to upgrade their dura, not act like they're 8-C but can somehow survive 7-B attacks because they have gotten stomped by 7-B characters before.
- 19,123
- 6,335
^ This is correct.Myriadofmemes said:
We already close threads for being AP stomps. The thing that we are trying to do here, is identifying the range where you should be wary of it.
No one is proposing "let's close each and every thread with an AP gap of ten times or more".
Simply "If the AP gap is more than ten times, keep in mind that a character can one shot"
- 6,104
- 5,106
The fact that it shouldn't...exist...in the first place. You think we haven't gotten rid of rules before? And you say that but according to some people it's not a rule, it's a rule of thumb (there's a difference).
Rule of Thumb: Matches between characters where one's AP is at least x-number amount of times greater than the others durability are considered outliers
Rule: Do not make matches between characters where where one's AP is at least x-number amount of times greater than the others durability
Violation of rules is punishable, duh, and too many freaking RV reports are "so and so is making a stomp match." Not a spite match, a stomp match, which again can be completely accidental.
You want fairness? Stop making so many damn rules that are situational and don't affect the wiki's content or the community itself as I've stated for the fifth time.
Rule of Thumb: Matches between characters where one's AP is at least x-number amount of times greater than the others durability are considered outliers
Rule: Do not make matches between characters where where one's AP is at least x-number amount of times greater than the others durability
Violation of rules is punishable, duh, and too many freaking RV reports are "so and so is making a stomp match." Not a spite match, a stomp match, which again can be completely accidental.
You want fairness? Stop making so many damn rules that are situational and don't affect the wiki's content or the community itself as I've stated for the fifth time.
- 32,358
- 20,298
This rule shouldn't exist, and a x10 gap should never be universal nor a one-shot.
- 15,332
- 7,563
Nobody agrees with the 2nd option other than Weekly here. Everyone agrees with the 1st one.
GoldenScorpions
He/Him- 3,093
- 1,265
If the point is to have people "keep in mind there's a x10 gap in AP", I believe they already do that
- 8,438
- 3,293
Has there been a surge of reports for stomp matches while I was gone? I don't remember people getting reported for making a single stomp match because of an AP gap.
- 33,408
- 8,430
I feel like the simplicity of this thread has been lost....
- 15,637
- 5,392
- 15,332
- 7,563
@Assalt
Not really, other than Sans. Reporting for stomp matches was always a thing, but it was never ban worthy anyway.
Not really, other than Sans. Reporting for stomp matches was always a thing, but it was never ban worthy anyway.
- 1,796
- 255
I already gave my opinion on the matter, however I like to add another thing, outside of possible Rule Violations etc.
With such a rule we severely limit the possible fights and interactions between characters, seeing that the first and foremost thing people will always do is checking if a given AP gap threshold is being met or not.
And then the discussion will immediately boil down in the direction of whether this is a stomp according to our rules or not, instead of how the fight would play out.
This can be very confusing and stopping people from making interesting matches. And especially for new people not so well suited with the things it may be even more a reason to refrain from becoming more active.
We already have that nonsensical "10 edit" rule because we cried to Fandom and they protect their brand (not us).
We dont need another rule to prevent new users even further.
With such a rule we severely limit the possible fights and interactions between characters, seeing that the first and foremost thing people will always do is checking if a given AP gap threshold is being met or not.
And then the discussion will immediately boil down in the direction of whether this is a stomp according to our rules or not, instead of how the fight would play out.
This can be very confusing and stopping people from making interesting matches. And especially for new people not so well suited with the things it may be even more a reason to refrain from becoming more active.
We already have that nonsensical "10 edit" rule because we cried to Fandom and they protect their brand (not us).
We dont need another rule to prevent new users even further.
- 19,123
- 6,335
And then the discussion will immediately boil down in the direction of whether this is a stomp according to our rules or not
Literally the only thing that would change by adding a threshold is that people would simply complain when it's actually close to it.
I do not know how often you are in vs threads that don't involve hax, but people start complaining even with a x3 AP gap
Literally the only thing that would change by adding a threshold is that people would simply complain when it's actually close to it.
I do not know how often you are in vs threads that don't involve hax, but people start complaining even with a x3 AP gap
- 312
- 43
@Raven
Quite on the contrary, we have people constantly worrying whether or not their threads are stomp matches. We have new users making stomp threads simply because they don't know any better. This will help clarify things for everyone as it will finally be a settled matter. It should logically reduce arguments about whether a match is a stomp or not, not increase them. The whole reasons for even discussing this in the first place is because we already have arguments pop up about AP stomps all the time, saying that there will be arguments is completely moot.
Quite on the contrary, we have people constantly worrying whether or not their threads are stomp matches. We have new users making stomp threads simply because they don't know any better. This will help clarify things for everyone as it will finally be a settled matter. It should logically reduce arguments about whether a match is a stomp or not, not increase them. The whole reasons for even discussing this in the first place is because we already have arguments pop up about AP stomps all the time, saying that there will be arguments is completely moot.
- 26,160
- 3,653
I'm kinda neutral. There is no way to not come into contradictions with verses.
After all, there are verses where someone can stomp the other with a X2 AP boost, and others where a X10 is still managable.
So what happens if we put one against the other? We can't use in-verse logic, as the two contradict the other, but we can't really give a numver without bending their rules.
After all, there are verses where someone can stomp the other with a X2 AP boost, and others where a X10 is still managable.
So what happens if we put one against the other? We can't use in-verse logic, as the two contradict the other, but we can't really give a numver without bending their rules.
- 10,758
- 6,491
I actually think this would encourage more possible match ups. for example if you can confirm that two characters in different tiers isn't a one shot you can feel more safe about creating a cross tier matchup for them.
- 15,637
- 5,392
It's very case-by-base, however, even if it's purely a physical match.
Making number crunching needlessly more important has people act oblivious to stuff like skill, abilities, and even hax sometimes, and makes debating very stale. It should be obvious when there is a stomp; if there is reason to doubt that it is a stomp there is reason to debate.
The way things are right now are fine. The One-Shot page as it stands is easy to understand, and people who accidentally make stomp matches don't exactly look up the AP gap to begin with.
Making number crunching needlessly more important has people act oblivious to stuff like skill, abilities, and even hax sometimes, and makes debating very stale. It should be obvious when there is a stomp; if there is reason to doubt that it is a stomp there is reason to debate.
The way things are right now are fine. The One-Shot page as it stands is easy to understand, and people who accidentally make stomp matches don't exactly look up the AP gap to begin with.
- 9,253
- 2,731
And others where 2 degrees of infinity aren't enough to one-shot someone.Ricsi-viragosi said:
- 40,459
- 12,940
Look, the page that I made and you all agreed on pretty much says what Sera says. It's not a rule on how much a one shot is.
- 26,160
- 3,653
We should also really discuss blades and small area attacks eventuallty.
Pretty sure mosquitos can affect some 9-Bs after all.
Pretty sure mosquitos can affect some 9-Bs after all.
- 8,229
- 1,487
- 15,637
- 5,392
Ricsi actually has a good point here, piercing attacks and slicing attacks can affect stuff that blunt attacks couldn't hope to damage.Ricsi-viragosi said:
- 9,978
- 2,015
Huh, so this is what my Garloyle's thread caused...
Anyway, I would agree with using real life example to determinate the gap, for instances, athletic people (such boxxers or westlers) are considerable stronger than average humans, but that do not means they are oneshoted or can't cause damage to the others (someone mentioned a gap of 7.5 above).
Stamina also helps, since sometimes people faints since they are unable to stand the pain, meanwhile other are able to stand more time.
Anyway, I would agree with using real life example to determinate the gap, for instances, athletic people (such boxxers or westlers) are considerable stronger than average humans, but that do not means they are oneshoted or can't cause damage to the others (someone mentioned a gap of 7.5 above).
Stamina also helps, since sometimes people faints since they are unable to stand the pain, meanwhile other are able to stand more time.
- 15,332
- 7,563
- 32,358
- 20,298
VBW is so obsessed with number crunching, rules, equalizations and standardizations that it frequently pushes for things that facilitate VsMatchups for the sake of getting through matches quicker and putting them on profile.
Almost like a production line.
Who wins? Just look at calcs and see which has more Bigattons. Or just look at MIND HAX(tm) and see who haxes more people at once. Speed difference? Let's equalize it! Character holds back and has morals? Both combatants are bloodlusted!
Now this. This is as bad as the time people wanted to allow Stat Equalization in matches.
Almost like a production line.
Who wins? Just look at calcs and see which has more Bigattons. Or just look at MIND HAX(tm) and see who haxes more people at once. Speed difference? Let's equalize it! Character holds back and has morals? Both combatants are bloodlusted!
Now this. This is as bad as the time people wanted to allow Stat Equalization in matches.
- 10,758
- 6,491
I think 7.5x should be used barring cases where the character has impossible levels of resilience (being able fight with their torso ripped out, nearly completely bleeding out etc)
- 9,978
- 2,015
Oh yeah, Stat Equal was disxussed time ago, although it was rejected in that same thread iirc.
That's way I tend to use more tier 9 and 8 characters, anything above then it becomes less interesting; people likes to threat most battles as DB battles, but that is just delairing.
That's way I tend to use more tier 9 and 8 characters, anything above then it becomes less interesting; people likes to threat most battles as DB battles, but that is just delairing.
- 63,529
- 8,506
So like.
Am I the only one that thinks Adding matches causes more trouble then it should?
Let's just go over this and I apologize for derailing
What does match addition do?
Gives people motivation to add matches
What happens because of it?
Spite Threads
Bias
FRA without substance
Flame Wars
Everything Matt mentioned
People calling "Stomp" after debating for a long time.
Adding matches to profiles....Generally causes more trouble then needed, and I don't see motivation to make them as good enough reasoning to deal with the BS that comes with it
Am I the only one that thinks Adding matches causes more trouble then it should?
Let's just go over this and I apologize for derailing
What does match addition do?
Gives people motivation to add matches
What happens because of it?
Spite Threads
Bias
FRA without substance
Flame Wars
Everything Matt mentioned
People calling "Stomp" after debating for a long time.
Adding matches to profiles....Generally causes more trouble then needed, and I don't see motivation to make them as good enough reasoning to deal with the BS that comes with it
- 19,123
- 6,335
Let's put it this way.
We have to close stomp threads. I think that we all agree on that point.
AP gap can turn threads into stomp threads. I think that we all agree on that as well.
In order to determine whether or not the AP is in favor of someone, we need to draw a line at one point where we say "this is one shot territory".
Would you rather have a ridiculously blurred line due to no standard existing, or a well drawn one that can help you judge the situation?
We have to close stomp threads. I think that we all agree on that point.
AP gap can turn threads into stomp threads. I think that we all agree on that as well.
In order to determine whether or not the AP is in favor of someone, we need to draw a line at one point where we say "this is one shot territory".
Would you rather have a ridiculously blurred line due to no standard existing, or a well drawn one that can help you judge the situation?
- 15,637
- 5,392
@Gargoyle
Replace "Adding Matches" with "Making Battles" and your argument is exactly the same.
Nevertheless this thread isn't about that.
Replace "Adding Matches" with "Making Battles" and your argument is exactly the same.
Nevertheless this thread isn't about that.
- 63,529
- 8,506
There are a lot of reasons why that's wrong.
But you're right on derailing
But you're right on derailing
- Status
Similar threads
