• 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.

Link vs. SCP-682

Status
Not open for further replies.
Everyone is treating it like he's leading with sealing.......

24 hours is more than enough time for 682 to break free
 
@Cal I gave up on the thread myself after noticing that the 1-B thing is being brought up even though it was generally agreed to be banned in like 10 threads by now.

To name a few who disagreed with it: Azathoth, Matthew, You, Darkanine, Kaltias, Me, Gargoyle One, etc, etc... And generally everyone else who was in the thread by the end of the discussion.
 
WeeklyBattles said:
@Fate If you dont like it, make it a rule, otherwise you just saying its restricted means jack
Click to expand...
Common sense.

You don't need someone to write to you that 2 + 2 equals 4. Everyone knows that by default.
 
FateAlbane said:
Common sense.

You don't need someone to write to you that 2 + 2 equals 4. Everyone knows that by default.
Click to expand...
Its not common sense to place a rstriction on a character with no written reasoning in the rules as to why its restricted
 
Games where Link beat a final boss with ways that would take out 682: Classic, ALTTP, OoT, OoS/OoA, FS, MC, FSA, TP, WW, and ALBW
 
The real cal howard said:
Games where Link beat a final boss with ways that would take out 682: Classic, ALTTP, OoT, OoS/OoA, FS, MC, FSA, TP, WW, and ALBW
Click to expand...
How would those take out 682? Please explain
 
WeeklyBattles said:
Its not common sense to place a rstriction on a character with no written reasoning in the rules as to why its restricted
Click to expand...
That's like saying in a Reinhard thread he is allowed to go 1-A.
 
First two are Silver Arrows, which outright kill Ganondorf (he had to be resurrected by external means). The rest are sealing. And I forgot Skyward Sword in that.

TP is the excpetion, as that was due to the Master Sword negating Ganondorf's TF based immortality and killing him for good until he needed to be resurrected.
 
The real cal howard said:
First two are Silver Arrows, which outright kill Ganondorf (he had to be resurrected by external means). The rest are sealing. And I forgot Skyward Sword in that.

TP is the excpetion, as that was due to the Master Sword negating Ganondorf's TF based immortality and killing him for good until he needed to be resurrected.
Click to expand...
He had to defeat them before he could seal them though
 
Classic: Negated Ganondorf's Regenerationn and killed him. Hasn't come back since.

ALTTP: Same, but had to be resurrected by his mom.

OoT: Sealed Ganon

OoS/OoA: Sealed Ganon

WW: Sealed Ganon

BoTW: Sealed Ganon

ALBW: Sealed Ganon (I think...)

MC: Sealed Vaati

FS: Sealed Vaati

FSA: Sealed Vaati

SS: Sealed Demise

TP: Killed Ganon
 
It's literally the exact same mechanic, Weekly. Only thing really changing as far as the match is concerned is the number on the profile. The reason higher dimensional 9 is not listed is pretty much because it was overlooked as type 9 was added later.

It works the same in this case, it has been discussed before an immense ammount of times in VS threads (I can atest to that since I was in a bunch of them) and everyone agreed (including here!) that it's banned. So it's naturally restricted.

Yet we are getting yet again everyone saying "It's not allowed" while you, and only you keep saying it isn't, which in turn ends up derailing the actual discussion of the thread.
 
Link hits 682 with his sword then. That's all he needs, as that alone defeats him long enough to seal. 682 at base has been temporarily incapacitated by far less, and unless the attack has giant AoE (both of the things that put him at 5/4-A did), which this doesn't, he won't instantly adapt.
 
That being said.

On the sealing point, 682's side is making some arguments that make me retract my vote for the moment until this discussion (sealing one being legit or not) has a resolution.
 
OOT: The seven sages sealed ganondorf, not link.

BoTW: Zelda sealed Ganon

TP: not gonna do much since he can regenerate

FSA: I'm pretty sure the maidens in the game were the ones that sealed him.

WW: that's not sealing, that's petrifying.
 
OoT: Shows that Link's no stranger to sealing, and has been introduced to it as a tactic

BoTW: Same

TP: So can Ganondorf

FSA: I don't think so, but still, se OoT

WW: Similar method. Link leaves his sword in 682, the sword does the rest.
 
Link appears to have the means of putting 682 away, and cal has presented enough that would suggest link wouldn't hesitate using sealing, and Weekly keeps bringing up 682's 1-B thingy? not quite sure. Im leaning towards Link at the moment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Hsharpe
SCP-2747 VS SCP-682
Replies
2
Views
2K
JustANormalLemon
JustANormalLemon
Undylan
Adam Sandler vs a Giant Freaking lizard (0-0-0)
Replies
2
Views
1K
Undylan
Undylan
Iiliminal
SCP-682 vs Void Shiki
Replies
7
Views
4K
Iiliminal
Iiliminal
RanaProGamer
  • Locked
Yhwach vs SCP-682
Replies
15
Views
4K
Colonel_Krukov
Colonel_Krukov
Comiphorous
  • Article
SCP-682 vs Sleepwalker Patients (SCP Foundation vs Madness Combat) (0-0-0)
Replies
22
Views
3K
DaReaperMan
DaReaperMan
Back
Top