-
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.
Speed Blitzing and Time Manipulation
- Thread starter Dargoo_Faust
- Start date
- 61,134
- 14,513
^This is what we're arguing should be removed as it is extremely arbitrary^Kaltias said:
- 61,134
- 14,513
The rule that speed amps are banned because "the slower character wins via speed amps" when we dont ban "the weaker character wins because of AP amps" or "The slower character wins because of speed reduction" or "the weaker character wins because of durability reduction" makes the first rule seem pointlessly exclusive
- 29,983
- 31,115
If each of those are the sole reason, and it's to the extent that it's heavily one sided with character B having 0% chance to win. Then yes, none of that is allowed.
- 61,134
- 14,513
Except it is allowed, and its been used so many times
Same with the character winning via instantly paralyzing the opponent or instantly restraining them with TK
Same with the character winning via instantly paralyzing the opponent or instantly restraining them with TK
- 29,983
- 31,115
Bolded the highlighted part, if it's still not heavily one-sided regardless it's allowed still, but if it's stompy, it's not. Stomp threads aren't allowed.
- 61,134
- 14,513
As have i.
There are a LOT of threads that need to be removed if you really think that
There are a LOT of threads that need to be removed if you really think that
- 19,117
- 6,333
"The weaker character wins via AP amps" is not something that's restricted because AP equalization is not a thing.
And yeah, if the opponent thinks at you and you lose it's a stomp, but again, that's just common sense.
"Slow guy beats fast guy via being fast" is not allowed simply because it's dumb. Do I really have to explain where the problem is if my MHS character defeats your FTL+ character via a x10 speed amp?
And yeah, if the opponent thinks at you and you lose it's a stomp, but again, that's just common sense.
"Slow guy beats fast guy via being fast" is not allowed simply because it's dumb. Do I really have to explain where the problem is if my MHS character defeats your FTL+ character via a x10 speed amp?
- 8,497
- 8,893
I vehemently disagree with changing the rule regarding slower characters and speed amps. Its illogical to allow that and puting that with stat amps in general together is wrong. Speed is a far more game breaking stat compared to AP or Dura. Those stats dosnt protect you from hax, giving haxxed characters breathing room. Speed is never a fair stat.
- 61,134
- 14,513
Yes, you do, because "My MHS character defeats your FTL+ character via a x10 speed amp" and "My baseline 7-B beats your 7-B+ via a 10x AP amp" is the same with or without equalization
Its in the same vein as "My FTL+ character defeats your MHS character via a x10 speed reduction despite speed equalization"
Its in the same vein as "My FTL+ character defeats your MHS character via a x10 speed reduction despite speed equalization"
- 19,117
- 6,333
Except that MHS beating the FTL+ is only because speed was equal to begin with, and at this point it's "who is favored by the rules more".
If the 7-B guy amps himself tenfold, that's just something he does, not an advantage he never actually had that was granted to him by the rules.
And sure, include stat reduction if you want. The whole point of the rule is that slow people winning solely via speed advantage shouldn't be added
If the 7-B guy amps himself tenfold, that's just something he does, not an advantage he never actually had that was granted to him by the rules.
And sure, include stat reduction if you want. The whole point of the rule is that slow people winning solely via speed advantage shouldn't be added
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,533
- 18,885
I agree it should be considered a stomp if it means opponents have zero victory conditio. I am of the mind that too many things get called stomps, often prematurely, and that's just gonna make people not want to take part- if every damn thing they do gets called a stomp, why bother?
That qualm stated, though, we can't allow people to add a match where Character A has no possibility to do anything before something like Kumagawa's Infinite Speed Blitz kicks in. If in no universe a character can win under the conditions set- if there's not even a 0.001% chance, then that shit is a stomp.
- 16,606
- 1,787
Perhaps there can be a rule or option to have speed equalised post amps
- 19,117
- 6,333
I mean, i guess you could change the "speed amps are restricted" to something that gives more the idea "the slow character shouldn't win via speed advantage".
Then again "A speed equal match decided entirely by speed advantage was a bad match to begin with" should really be common sense more than an actual rule.
Then again "A speed equal match decided entirely by speed advantage was a bad match to begin with" should really be common sense more than an actual rule.
Mr. Bambu
Suffer-Not-Injustice Bambu
VS Battles
Joke Battles
Super Moderator
Administrator
Calculation Group
Silver Supporter
- 21,533
- 18,885
I don't mind if a character loses via being slower, I do mind if it is to such an absurd degree that Character B can re-enact the entirety of the Phantom of the Opera before Character A can twitch his eye a little bit.
- 16,606
- 1,787
SameMr. Bambu said:
- 165,117
- 72,036
@Kaltias
We cannot assume that everybody will automatically realise this.
Does somebody have a specific suggestion for how we should reword the current regulation text according to what Kaltias said in his posts?
We cannot assume that everybody will automatically realise this.
Does somebody have a specific suggestion for how we should reword the current regulation text according to what Kaltias said in his posts?
- 13,510
- 5,665
The rule is already pretty obvious/clear in its meaning. It literally says the slower character cannot speed blitz in a speed equal. Maybe we could add/specify "Speed amps cannot be the sole reason the otherwise slower character wins a speed equal match" to the rule.
As for stuff like Time Stop, common sense should tell the users if its a stomp or not, such as when A leads with it while B has no resistance at all.
As for stuff like Time Stop, common sense should tell the users if its a stomp or not, such as when A leads with it while B has no resistance at all.
- 14,869
- 12,376
No, not at all, that's far too general. This is specifically about time stops/time slows in speed equalized matches. I'd suggest changing the current "speed amplification techniques are allowed" to "speed amplification/reduction techniques are allowed", leaving the rest the same.
Wokistan
Bioluminescent African American Working At The CIA
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
Human Resources
- 16,860
- 7,321
I think temporal stuff is always fine for consideration, but yeah we shouldn't have slower characters winning solely due to mundane speed amplification as you get into the issue of "slower character wins because they're faster" which is silly. Ofc things can still be stomps either way but if a slower character wins due to time stop or something I think that's fine.
- 32,327
- 20,209
I am against making arbitrary restrictions to be added on top of the ones we already have.
As for the matter of the verses proper, it depends on how the match is and works.
As for the matter of the verses proper, it depends on how the match is and works.
- 15,407
- 5,717
It's not a speed blitz if you need to use an ability beforehand. Dio time stopping and then punching the shit out of an opponent isn't more of a blitz than say, Akron powernulling immediately. Both are reliant on the user's speed and can be outdone by attacking before the ability is used.
- 15,715
- 7,694
I agree on this point.Matthew Schroeder said:
I also think we should not restrict the ability and treat them like Hax, in general.
If characters lose, they lose. The speed boost can be restricted but it should not be added. Besides, we already have a rule about all abilities being allowed except some who are based on separate tiers, on the Versus Thread Rules. I think we should keep upholding the rule.
- 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.
- 19,117
- 6,333
@Ant
I honestly have no clue about how that rule should be worded.
Like, if a speed equal match is decided by speed, it's just a bad thread in general. The fact that the slower character wins via an amp that should have no business being useful just shows it even more.
Regarding time hax, it depends. Obviously a match where someone gets time stopped and killed a femtosecond in isn't "notable" and neither is one where one of the contenders accellerates its own time a million of times, killing the opponent immediately. But that's really just case by case. It depends from the opponent being able to retaliate, how soon/often time hax is used, etc
I honestly have no clue about how that rule should be worded.
Like, if a speed equal match is decided by speed, it's just a bad thread in general. The fact that the slower character wins via an amp that should have no business being useful just shows it even more.
Regarding time hax, it depends. Obviously a match where someone gets time stopped and killed a femtosecond in isn't "notable" and neither is one where one of the contenders accellerates its own time a million of times, killing the opponent immediately. But that's really just case by case. It depends from the opponent being able to retaliate, how soon/often time hax is used, etc
- 165,117
- 72,036
@Kaltias
Agreed. I also do not think that versus threads, wherein various speed amplification methods that heavily unbalance the fight are used, should be allowed, as they result in stomps, especially not if the losing character would have had an advantage without basic speed equalisation.
Agreed. I also do not think that versus threads, wherein various speed amplification methods that heavily unbalance the fight are used, should be allowed, as they result in stomps, especially not if the losing character would have had an advantage without basic speed equalisation.
- 15,636
- 5,391
- Thread starter
- #70
I feel like there can be matches where another character can beat the other before they amp, making it fair. Sure, they win through amplifying their speed, but sometimes that doesn't make it impossible for the opponent to win, as is described on our definition of a stomp. This is especially true of matches where both characters have the amps/time manip, like Dio Brando vs. Diego Brando from Another Universe.
Otherwise we can devolve that logic into hax in general, as similarly, when hax activates it tends to not let the opponent retaliate. A character who starts to mindhax another leaves the other character no chance to win if they don't resist it, however sometimes that character can win through other methods before said mindhax activates.
Placing a pre-emptive ban on victories through stat amps like speed will make enforcing our rules on stomps even more of a mess given how loose we've made the definition.
Otherwise we can devolve that logic into hax in general, as similarly, when hax activates it tends to not let the opponent retaliate. A character who starts to mindhax another leaves the other character no chance to win if they don't resist it, however sometimes that character can win through other methods before said mindhax activates.
Placing a pre-emptive ban on victories through stat amps like speed will make enforcing our rules on stomps even more of a mess given how loose we've made the definition.
- 8,438
- 3,292
@Weekly
If any ability grants a character a 100% chance of victory, regardless of what it is, it shouldn't be added. If matches are being added in which it's 100-0 odds, they need to be removed regardless of what ability is used to ensure absolute victory.
If any ability grants a character a 100% chance of victory, regardless of what it is, it shouldn't be added. If matches are being added in which it's 100-0 odds, they need to be removed regardless of what ability is used to ensure absolute victory.
- 15,636
- 5,391
- Thread starter
- #74
If a character can feasibly win before the stat amps come into play, then by definition it isn't a stomp. Just because it ensures 100% victory when the amps come into play doesn't mean that it means the character wins 100% of the time in the match as a whole.Assaltwaffle said:
- 19,330
- 9,919
I'm with Kal on this one.
- 40,446
- 12,914
If anything, I feel like we should remove some of our rules. Like our rule against restricting abilities to make a match fairer.
- 19,117
- 6,333
Being a stomp is not the point (As far as the "The slower character shouldn't win via a speed amp" rule is concerned). The point is that it's dumb and shouldn't be added for that reason.
I'm Mach 200, and i have an amp that make me Mach 1000.
X is Mach 20000.
In a speed equal match, i win via becoming five times faster than X.
I, the Mach 200 guy win via outspeeding the Mach 20000 guy via an amp that makes me Mach 1000. That's what's wrong. That's what tells you that the matchup is poor.
If the amp makes the match a stomp it doesn't get added simply because it's a stomp, indipendently from the previous situation.
I'm Mach 200, and i have an amp that make me Mach 1000.
X is Mach 20000.
In a speed equal match, i win via becoming five times faster than X.
I, the Mach 200 guy win via outspeeding the Mach 20000 guy via an amp that makes me Mach 1000. That's what's wrong. That's what tells you that the matchup is poor.
If the amp makes the match a stomp it doesn't get added simply because it's a stomp, indipendently from the previous situation.
- 40,446
- 12,914
One of the reasons why I say speed equalized is used too much.
- 15,636
- 5,391
- Thread starter
- #79
In which case, victory by Time Stop, Time Slow, Statistics Reduction, Paralysis, and similar motion amplifying/inhibiting powers should also be banned in speed equal matches, going under that logic, as they can amp or reduce speed to the level you just described or infinitly more.
Similar threads
