• 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.

Resistance Page Revision Part 2 (Staff only)

Eficiente

He/Him
VS Battles
Thread Moderator
15,441
5,031

We applied a new rule/high suggestion of what to do in the Resistance page and this thread to modify the profiles that should be affected by it, and remove their resistance if doing so is uncontroversial in their case (say, if there wan't more context there than what the profiles points out).

"Instances where Character A defeats Character B, Character B fails to defeat a Character A, or the like, aren't enough for Character A to have resistances to all the powers Character B has. Multiple factors such as CIS, Plot-Induced Stupidity and/or a Speed Blitz can be at play if no further details are given. Cases like this may include complicated, long fights Character B may want to win due to significant reasons, even if the details of the battle weren't clearly detailed. Exceptions include instances where it's explicitly indicated that "all of Character B's powers won't work on Character A", or equivalents."

Here's a list so far of said profiles that should be affected:
Non-staff users can point out more profiles.

@Ogbunabali @Antoniofer @Damage3245 @Antvasima @Agnaa @AKM sama
 
Last edited:
I'm not aware of any profiles, but I should point out that I didn't get a notification for that mention when I normally would (my preferences are set to allow this). I thought all staff should be able to do that.
 
I noticed that that happened to me once. Must be a small bug.

Edit: I think it only happened to me once while in some many other few cases I did get a notification. Still a bug tho.
 
Last edited:
I did not get a notification either. Perhaps I need to ask our system administrator about fixing that.
 
Okay, to get this somewhere in the meantime, how exactly Molecule Man is affected?
 
Last edited:
Like this

>"Resistance to the abilities of Lifebringer Galactus (Galactus considers Molecule Man a being capable of ending him with a thought that he must tread carefully around."

The first sentence is already pointless.

>"He also was unable to find the space where Molecule Man went after being able to bear witness to Eternity indicating that he is a being outside of the multiverse entirely and as such beyond Galactus' sphere of influence."

Dishonest wording, Galactus didn't try to find him, nor does it matter as if he were to, and failed to do so, MM would only get a resistance to whatever Galactus used to try to find him. The other 2 links have nothing to do with what was said and the wording makes it seem as if Galactus was only able to affect things in the multiverse, with anything outside being beyond his powers and without needing any resistance.
 
Eficiente makes sense to me. You can edit the page if you wish.
 
would SMT characters fit. They have resistances for fighting characters
Depends, if it happened off-screen, then maybe they would fall on this, but if it's some in-game fight or the like, then they can remain as they are so long it's explicit enought.
 
Weird, I didn't get any notification either. But I agree with Eficiente on removing Molecule Man's resistances based on the new revision.

I can't recall any that would be affected by this from the top of my head right now, but I'll post them here if I do find some.
 
Okay. No problem. I was just helping Eficiente by repeating his notification commands in a working manner.
 
I know something that would have fallen into this category that was rejected recently (Deathwing resisting all powers of Warcraft players since they can beat him). Other than that, nothing comes to mind, though if I find something I'll drop it here.
 
I have unlocked the page. Tell me here when you are done.
 
The closest I can think of is Julius Belmont out of having most of his feats off-screen, but he can easily just scale to other Belmonts for the resistances he holds, and they are made blatant if we count the alternate endings where he's playable.
 
@Bob I don't understand, why would those be removed? This thread isn't for removing off-screen resistance feats, but specifically for resistances that only come from off-screen fights. I don't know why Julius would fall under this.
 
Well, the entire Dracula fight (And other demons in the castle) he had only was stated to happen, after that the most he does is go alongside Soma in the next games in some way, but this part was mostly off-screen, as said before, unless we count the alternate (non-canon) endings where he's playable from start to finish, which features clearly all of those resistances and even fights the new Dracula.
 
Last edited:
Can somebody remind me what is left to discuss and do here please?
 
Nothing in particular, this thread goes more for bringing up cases that may be questionable now by the new standards to fix accordingly.
Right now I'm waiting for input on the Castlevania case I brought up.
 
Do you need my help with this, or can I unsubscribe to this thread?
 
Back
Top