The Definition Of A Stomp - Clarified

[Firephoenixearl]

@Mr king

Those 2 would fit stomp rules. Mask vs Johnny for example is just those 2 doing stuff until eventually Johnny just wins. There is literally 0 things mask can do in that fight except try to at best postpone his loss. It's like putting me vs a dude with a gun and saying it's fair cus you can run away. Well yes I can but I really can't do anything outside of that, it's just postponing my loss.

The first thing of "it's only the regen that makes him win". That's a stomp. Medaka vs goku is literally just goku destroying 3 billion times then medaka killing him. Goku outmatches in everything but he can't beat her regen which means he can just fight senslessly as the result will still be the same.

About ipman. I didn't say skill stomp isn't a stomp, I say it's a ton more fair than the regen cases.

 

[Moritzva]

@Mr king
Those 2 would fit stomp rules. Mask vs Johnny for example is just those 2 doing stuff until eventually Johnny just wins. There is literally 0 things mask can do in that fight except try to at best postpone his loss. It's like putting me vs a dude with a gun and saying it's fair cus you can run away. Well yes I can but I really can't do anything outside of that, it's just postponing my loss.

The first thing of "it's only the regen that makes him win". That's a stomp. Medaka vs goku is literally just goku destroying 3 billion times then medaka killing him. Goku outmatches in everything but he can't beat her regen which means he can just fight senslessly as the result will still be the same.

About ipman. I didn't say skill stomp isn't a stomp, I say it's a ton more fair than the regen cases.

As I said, a lot of this is about revisiting the rules and defining what a stomp is. I am willing to note, regarding Regenerationn, that it's usually decisive when the Regenerationn is not easily surmountable.

And as noted above-

The "stomp matches very rarely leave any room for debate, with their outcomes coming across as predictable to anyone with even cursory knowledge of the combatants and their abilities." is really the most important bit in my opinion. At least for the practicle purpose.

How close a match is is less relevant than whether it is debate worthy.

If two characters are incredibly evenly matched, but are stonewalled due to defensive capabilities, but one has a trump card in the matter, I would be inclined to (under most circumstances) not call it a stomp.

 

[AnonymousBlank]

Why are we questioning if 0% chance of winning is a stomp? Just because it takes a while shouldn't change jack about the end result, X can't win, Y can.

Edit: @Moritzva

For the regen thing, if it can be surmounted then that still leaves a chance for the opposition to win. If he can't surmount it due to not being strong or skilled enough, not having the right ability etc then that would be perfectly fine as its just the other characters power set as a whole not letting him surmount it in most situations rather than just the one negging his chance at winning.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

@mori

Not easily surmountable is ok as it still means it can be bypassed just not all that easily. That's ok cus it still leaves room for debate. Mr king is who I don't agree with. I don't see how 2 characters are evenly matched but only one can end the fight has room for debate.

The 2nd case only works if both can deal with the defense, but one can deal with it more effectively.

 

[Moritzva]

@mori
Not easily surmountable is ok as it still means it can be bypassed just not all that easily. That's ok cus it still leaves room for debate. Mr king is who I don't agree with. I don't see how 2 characters are evenly matched but only one can end the fight has room for debate.

It depends on the matter. Some characters have extremely large profiles, which will end up parrying eachother a lot, until one character has the silver bullet that's needed to win. Chances are, there's still debate to be had, there.

But yes, I'll edit OP.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Why are we questioning if 0% chance of winning is a stomp? Just because it takes a while shouldn't change jack about the end result, X can't win, Y can.

Basically my point. It doesn't leave room for debate if only one side can end the fight in the first place.

 

[Agnaa]

@Moritzva Might it be best to say, that if two characters have kits that consistently counter each other, with one eventually reaching an ability that gives them an upper hand, that it's not a stomp?

Because I think Earl's more envisioning something like "Character A has low-godly regen and no other abilities, Character B has low-godly regen and can neg low-godly regen", while you're more thinking of both having many abilities that they each can resist, bypass, counter, etc.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

It depends on the matter. Some characters have extremely large profiles, which will end up parrying eachother a lot, until one character has the silver bullet that's needed to win. Chances are, there's still debate to be had, there.

The debate being "both parry each other until x pulls up the game changer and y can do absolutely nothing about it". That's not fair cus you're putting y against someone he cannot win against, no matter what he does.

Skill is not a 0% chance scenario as it still leaves win conditions. Saying skill is a stomp but lack of win conditions isn't is something i take huge issue with.

 

[KLOL506]

Proposals look good.

 

[AnonymousBlank]

Both parties having multiple powers that let them counter or resist the other's power set doesn't change the fact if only one has a silver bullet to stumble across in the first place.

 

[Moritzva]

@Moritzva Might it be best to say, that if two characters have kits that consistently counter each other, with one eventually reaching an ability that gives them an upper hand, that it's not a stomp?
Because I think Earl's more envisioning something like "Character A has low-godly regen and no other abilities, Character B has low-godly regen and can neg low-godly regen", while you're more thinking of both having many abilities that they each can resist, bypass, counter, etc.

What about-

"Both characters are evenly matched and have regenerative and defensive abilities that prevent the other from killing them, but one character has moves that allow for them to gain the upper hand."

To clarify, battles like these are certaintly ones that will vary heavily and be extremely case-by-case, but it's a general rule to note that this doesn't instantly mean it's a stomp without other context.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

@Moritzva Might it be best to say, that if two characters have kits that consistently counter each other, with one eventually reaching an ability that gives them an upper hand, that it's not a stomp?

Because I think Earl's more envisioning something like "Character A has low-godly regen and no other abilities, Character B has low-godly regen and can neg low-godly regen", while you're more thinking of both having many abilities that they each can resist, bypass, counter, etc.

No matter the case what mr king was proposing is even if only one side can end the match it's fair. No matter how long or hard it is, if only one side can win it's not a debate as you can't debate "well y could win if he does this" cus he literally can't do anything

 

[Oblivion_Of_The_Endless]

So, if character A starts with a thought based ability, and B doesnt have any thought based ability nor resistances, would it be a stomp since...well, B cant do anything?

 

[AnonymousBlank]

@Oblivion

Yes

 

[Firephoenixearl]

@Mori

Still bad. It should be "if both are evenly matched and have defensive traits that make it hard to kill each other but one character has an effective way to get past it quicker/easier"

A case of "x needs to shoot 3 bullets while y only needs to shoot one" is what im saying.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

So, if character A starts with a thought based ability, and B doesnt have any thought based ability nor resistances, would it be a stomp since...well, B cant do anything?

Should be judged case by case

 

[MrKingOfNegativity]

So, if character A starts with a thought based ability, and B doesnt have any thought based ability nor resistances, would it be a stomp since...well, B cant do anything?

Depends on what the abilities are and how strong they are.

If Character B's abilities outright murder Character A without mercy and are activated with something like a handwave or a snap of the fingers, but Character A only wins because they have an ability that's thought-based, then I wouldn't call that a stomp. That's something people argue a lot, and it's one of the few things we (in the general sense) keep coming to the same conclusion on multiple times.

 

[Moritzva]

So, if character A starts with a thought based ability, and B doesnt have any thought based ability nor resistances, would it be a stomp since...well, B cant do anything?

This will likely fall under "stomp/not notable due to this result being beyond predictable and involving absolutely zero semblance of debate" though I'm willing to discuss the point.

 

[Overlord775]

@King

But aren't the chances of Character B ever winning 0 because he will NEVER be able to use his abilties in any case scenario to win and thus a stomp ?

 

[Saikou_The_Lewd_King]

?

I think the description is still hella vague. "Completely outmatched" doesn't tell us any specifics, and is heavily subject to interpretation.

 

[AnonymousBlank]

To use the Low Godly that was mentioned earlier. CH vs a guy with gun and they start with CH with his hands around the guy's throat ..... but that guy has Low Godly. CH is obviously going to clap at first but seeing as he can't incap and certainly can't kill whereas the guy just needs to pull a composite tree and outlast him. This is clearly a stomp but by King's definition, since the rando with a gun spent a day or two getting the shit kicked out of him, its fair.

 

[Moritzva]

?
I think the description is still hella vague. "Completely outmatched" doesn't tell us any specifics, and is heavily subject to interpretation.

It proceeds to then go into heavy detail on what that may entail, along with several situations both ways.

 

[Firephoenixearl]

@King

But aren't the chances of Character B ever winning 0 because he will NEVER be able to use his abilties in any case scenario to win and thus a stomp ?

It's a case by case. A doesn't have a 100% chance of opening with that one move giving B a chance. It really needs to be judged with specific cases to say whether it's a stomp or not as many factors are to be accounted for.

 

[Oblivion_Of_The_Endless]

Yeah, I see many people saying "but there is a chance that X character wont start with [insert thought based ability], so its not a stomp"

Is that really correct tho?

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Yeah, I see many people saying "but there is a chance that X character wont start with [insert thought based ability], so its not a stomp"

Is that really correct tho?

It is. There is no 100% opening move unless it's passive. If B can really end the fight should A not start with it it's just decisive or inconc depending on how likely A is to start with that move

 

[Moritzva]

Yeah, I see many people saying "but there is a chance that X character wont start with [insert thought based ability], so its not a stomp"
Is that really correct tho?

I'm more on the side of calling that a stomp, honestly.

Unfortunately, doing so would be even more controversial than the rest of these changes combined, and would remove just as many threads.

So, I'm okay with discussing the matter, since it's quite important.

 

[Oblivion_Of_The_Endless]

I mean, a lot of star war watches were removed because of that iirc. People mindhaxing right off the bat with the opponent having no real way to counter attack

 

[Firephoenixearl]

Again it depends on how likely.

If the opening move has been used 95 out of 100 total openings in canon it would be a stomp.

If it's just "it's likely he'll start with this" it would be fair

 

[Overlord775]

do not derail This is not a meme thread

 

[C2_of_Omegon]

I agree with the proposals.

Our current page is too limited as is and it, at least to me, seems to make some users out there believe that if a character has any way to win, then it's not a stomp.

I believe this will go a long way in helping things, especially for newer members and visitors.

 

[DarkGrath]

Honestly, I've been a bit confused about what does and does not constitute a stomp for a long time, and it seems like there's been plenty of disagreement over it due to the lacklustre definition. Even if not this proposal, I definitely think that a heavy overhaul to the stomp page should be handled, and this proposal seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[KnightOfSunlight]

Agree with Grath

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Mr King's draft looks great.

 

[Lorenzo.r.2nd]

im not really voicing my imo here, but how do we deal with something wherein a character can one shot the other, or well, stomp him (lol), but the weaker character has a hax that other cannot bypass. what would that be?

 

[AshenCrow777]

Feels like in the end SBA is what determines what is a stomp and what is not a stomp.

 

[Overlord775]

im not really voicing my imo here, but how do we deal with something wherein a character can one shot the other, or well, stomp him (lol), but the weaker character has a hax that other cannot bypass. what would that be?

if the "weaker character" has stuff that makes him impossble to be beated by the "stronger character", wouldn't the former just be the "stronger" of the two ?

 

[Starter_Pack]

im not really voicing my imo here, but how do we deal with something wherein a character can one shot the other, or well, stomp him (lol), but the weaker character has a hax that other cannot bypass. what would that be?

So...basically every Thunder McQuee match ever, then?

Regardless, I have no reason to really object, especially since "case-by-case" is emphasized heavily here.

I'll approve of this.

 

[I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die]

I got a question, is my match of putting Buzz from Kingdom Hearts against complete gauntlet Thanos (MCU) a stomp

 

[Andytrenom]

I probably don't have much more than semantical issues with this (stomp implies something different than an unfair or ultimately unwinnable matchup, but that doesn't matter in the end)

As for the "win con they'll never use" matter; I think if it's something the character will literally die before resorting to, then it's fair to count a match as a stomp, but if it's debateable that they will use it when the chips are down, but just haven't been pushed that far in canon, then I think the match would be fine

 

[Moritzva]

I agree with Andy. It's a good standard.