- 12,085
- 2,098
- Thread starter
- #121
This seems like something that should be in a new thread specifically about inconclusives
As for now, can we remove his losses
As for now, can we remove his losses
-
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.
Thunder McQueen matches
- Thread starter I'm_Blue_daba_dee_daba_die
- Start date
- Status
- 15,637
- 5,392
> Also, since everyone at least agreed on the listed losses to be removed, can I least remove those before we talk about the incons???
If there's a general consensus, sure.
> Again, matches being funny or being made as "memes" doesn't invalidate then inherently, unless the match would usually violate rules which are not applied to joke battles.
Alright, so since we're being sticklers for picking at my wording about this, let me rephrase "the battles were obviously made as jokes should be removed" to "battles where Thunder has no capacity to win that are functionally AP stomps were made as jokes and should be removed".
I believe that's a fine excuse for nuking the battles.
If there's a general consensus, sure.
> Again, matches being funny or being made as "memes" doesn't invalidate then inherently, unless the match would usually violate rules which are not applied to joke battles.
Alright, so since we're being sticklers for picking at my wording about this, let me rephrase "the battles were obviously made as jokes should be removed" to "battles where Thunder has no capacity to win that are functionally AP stomps were made as jokes and should be removed".
I believe that's a fine excuse for nuking the battles.
- 16,606
- 1,791
Let me ask you this:
What makes a match where a star level fighter slaps a street level fighter into a red mist coating the grass of central park, but doing so makes the star level fighter a second layer of mist, different from a planet level fighter slapping a building level with enough force that they would have taken the same fate as the first 2 if it wasnt for his hax making it so that someone else on the other side of the planet is vaporized instead, and the only way they could actually take out enough people that their opponent can't reflect anymore is blowing up the planet along with himself? On paper of course, unless you have an arbitrary difference between how exactly the lack of win conditions for either side is produced
What makes a match where a star level fighter slaps a street level fighter into a red mist coating the grass of central park, but doing so makes the star level fighter a second layer of mist, different from a planet level fighter slapping a building level with enough force that they would have taken the same fate as the first 2 if it wasnt for his hax making it so that someone else on the other side of the planet is vaporized instead, and the only way they could actually take out enough people that their opponent can't reflect anymore is blowing up the planet along with himself? On paper of course, unless you have an arbitrary difference between how exactly the lack of win conditions for either side is produced
- 15,637
- 5,392
> What ... himself?
Both of those matchups are pretty terrible and shouldn't exist, if you ask me.
Both of those matchups are pretty terrible and shouldn't exist, if you ask me.
- 12,085
- 2,098
- Thread starter
- #125
I don't get what you are saying, at all.Iapitus The Impaler said:
Also, can I just remove the losses before we discuss the incons
- 16,606
- 1,791
Oh, don't get me wrong. There can be boring matches that are still viable to be added to the profiles. I don't think anyone is gonna say that a user of type 8 immortality against a user of type 9 immortality with the 2 of them just killing eachother for eternity, is a terribly interesting match. However, it is still a viable match under the current rule set, written or unwritten.Dargoo Faust said:
- 16,606
- 1,791
I'm giving other scenarios that are allowed to be added and kept on profiles under the current rule set which are the same on paper as many of McQueen's inconclusives.I'm Blue daba dee daba die said:
Oh yes, you are free to do so. Make sure you dont remove the losses where McQueen has proper win conditions tho
- 12,085
- 2,098
- Thread starter
- #128
I'll remove the matches in the OP
- 15,637
- 5,392
> However, it is still a viable match under the current rule set, written or unwritten.
So I don't think you understood me.
It's bad outside the context of the rules and inside of the context of the rules.
A match where a character has no capacity to win but just doesn't lose based off of SBA is still an AP stomp. I also reccomend reading the Stomp page over, which also explains that "all potential stomps should be judged case by case", which I'm doing here.
So I don't think you understood me.
It's bad outside the context of the rules and inside of the context of the rules.
A match where a character has no capacity to win but just doesn't lose based off of SBA is still an AP stomp. I also reccomend reading the Stomp page over, which also explains that "all potential stomps should be judged case by case", which I'm doing here.
- 16,606
- 1,791
It's bad, but it isn't illegal according to the currently established rules.
But neither character has the capacity to win, and the stomp page, which I did read, said that these things only apply based on the winning character, and since there is no winner, they do not fall into "potential stomps." No one has the potential to stomp here, as neither have win conditions, which as the page you had told me to read says, the rules dictate that a stomp naturally must have a winner.
But neither character has the capacity to win, and the stomp page, which I did read, said that these things only apply based on the winning character, and since there is no winner, they do not fall into "potential stomps." No one has the potential to stomp here, as neither have win conditions, which as the page you had told me to read says, the rules dictate that a stomp naturally must have a winner.
- 15,637
- 5,392
> only apply based on the winning character
Not sure where you're getting that from. The page makes references to a 'winner' and 'loser', although the basic definiton that starts off the page only mentions "for all intents and purposes, one of the characters is unreasonably outmatched by their opponent". This is true for Thunder in AP, Durability, and a variety of other statistics, the only difference is that the outcome isn't a 'win' for him but mutual death for both characters. He has no capacity to win and his "outcomes [come] across as predictable to anyone with even cursory knowledge of the combatants and their abilities" for 90% of his battles.
Although since we're getting into minutae here, the page, again, says that stomps are judged in a case-by-case basis with flexibility in judgement. I'm saying they're stomps, I'm telling you why I think they're stomps. You can contact other users or staff members to weigh in on this if you'd like.
Not sure where you're getting that from. The page makes references to a 'winner' and 'loser', although the basic definiton that starts off the page only mentions "for all intents and purposes, one of the characters is unreasonably outmatched by their opponent". This is true for Thunder in AP, Durability, and a variety of other statistics, the only difference is that the outcome isn't a 'win' for him but mutual death for both characters. He has no capacity to win and his "outcomes [come] across as predictable to anyone with even cursory knowledge of the combatants and their abilities" for 90% of his battles.
Although since we're getting into minutae here, the page, again, says that stomps are judged in a case-by-case basis with flexibility in judgement. I'm saying they're stomps, I'm telling you why I think they're stomps. You can contact other users or staff members to weigh in on this if you'd like.
- 16,606
- 1,791
Dargoo, if you take a hax based fighter and then put them against an AP based fighter, of course you will be able to interpret almost any hax based fight as an AP stomp, if you intentionally remove their primary means of combat. This is like taking (if you haven't read Record of Ragnarok, it's really ******* good) the at least planet level Poseiden who is FTL vs Sasaki Kojiro who is a wall level skill based fighter who has a blade that let's him bypass durability give or take, and then take away the hax and skill. The point is, taking away the hax of the hax based fighter isn't a reliable nor reasonable interpretation.
If your interpretation comes down to removing the hax of a hax based fighter, then I guess you have successfully come up with a perfectly viable way that we don't apply to any other jojo characters or hax based fighters. Case-by-case has its limits, before something just straight up becomes a double standard. I'll contact some folks in the morning probably
If your interpretation comes down to removing the hax of a hax based fighter, then I guess you have successfully come up with a perfectly viable way that we don't apply to any other jojo characters or hax based fighters. Case-by-case has its limits, before something just straight up becomes a double standard. I'll contact some folks in the morning probably
- 15,637
- 5,392
> Dargoo, if you take a hax based fighter and then put them against an AP based fighter, of course you will be able to interpret almost any hax based fight as an AP stomp, if you intentionally remove their primary means of combat.
Who said I wasn't considering hax? Or removing hax? It's just that Thunder's hax can't be used in a single possible way to give him a conventional victory. I'm also pointing out that Thunder can't use his AP to win, or literally anything else he has.
In which case whatever example you made doesn't really apply.
> If your interpretation comes down to removing the hax of a hax based fighter, then I guess you have successfully come up with a perfectly viable way that we don't apply to any other jojo characters or hax based fighters. Case-by-case has its limits, before something just straight up becomes a double standard.
I mean, of course you're going to find double standards when you're making up somone else's points, but sure.
It has every single attribute that we define stomps under, attributes that made us ban adding stomps to profiles, except there isn't a winner, and I don't recall anything that says we can't have a stomp-inconclusive. The whole reason stomps are an issue to begin with is that we don't need a million different threads establishing a tier difference, or in this case, that Thunder has an ability certain people have no chance of countering. Go contact whoever you want, those are my two cents.
Who said I wasn't considering hax? Or removing hax? It's just that Thunder's hax can't be used in a single possible way to give him a conventional victory. I'm also pointing out that Thunder can't use his AP to win, or literally anything else he has.
In which case whatever example you made doesn't really apply.
> If your interpretation comes down to removing the hax of a hax based fighter, then I guess you have successfully come up with a perfectly viable way that we don't apply to any other jojo characters or hax based fighters. Case-by-case has its limits, before something just straight up becomes a double standard.
I mean, of course you're going to find double standards when you're making up somone else's points, but sure.
It has every single attribute that we define stomps under, attributes that made us ban adding stomps to profiles, except there isn't a winner, and I don't recall anything that says we can't have a stomp-inconclusive. The whole reason stomps are an issue to begin with is that we don't need a million different threads establishing a tier difference, or in this case, that Thunder has an ability certain people have no chance of countering. Go contact whoever you want, those are my two cents.
- 16,606
- 1,791
"...although the basic definiton that starts off the page only mentions "for all intents and purposes, one of the characters is unreasonably outmatched by their opponent". This is true for Thunder in AP, Durability, and a variety of other statistics..." this is what you said in the pervious comment. You are only looking at AP to determine that they are unreasonably out matched. McQueen is equally likely to win as his opponent, so that is as fair as it gets, unless you remove the way that McQueen fights from the equation. If I have misunderstood your points, then please correct me, because it looks like you did exactly what I described in my previous comment
I take that by your comment I have misunderstood what you said. What is your actual point? Because determining that thunder is out matched purely because he is physically disadvantaged despite that his opponent is as equally likely to win as he is due to his hax, sounds like what I thought you were trying to say.
The page says that one side must be out matched, which McQueen isn't. We define a stomp by the win conditions, and on paper, both sides are equally likely to win. This is the fundamental missing piece of the puzzle that makes it undoubtedly not a stomp. Stomps are innately unfair, which these are not
I take that by your comment I have misunderstood what you said. What is your actual point? Because determining that thunder is out matched purely because he is physically disadvantaged despite that his opponent is as equally likely to win as he is due to his hax, sounds like what I thought you were trying to say.
The page says that one side must be out matched, which McQueen isn't. We define a stomp by the win conditions, and on paper, both sides are equally likely to win. This is the fundamental missing piece of the puzzle that makes it undoubtedly not a stomp. Stomps are innately unfair, which these are not
- 15,637
- 5,392
> McQueen is equally likely to win as his opponent, so that is as fair as it gets, unless you remove the way that McQueen fights from the equation.
That's sort of misrepresenting the situation, honestly. Neither character has any chances of winning, sure, but the inconclusive outcome is such a no-brainer not worth even bringing up that it falls under all our criteria for a stomp.
> If I have misunderstood your points, then please correct me, because it looks like you did exactly what I described in my previous comment
You did, clearly. "The only difference is that the outcome isn't a 'win' for him but mutual death for both characters" is talking about his hax.
This seems more an attempt to point out that I didn't specifically list it in that sentence than it is me not considering something everyone here is aware Thunder has in my argument.
> What is your actual point?
The matches are stomps, as they fall under our criteria for being stomps.
> Because determining that thunder is out matched purely because he is physically disadvantaged despite that his opponent is as equally likely to win as he is due to his hax, sounds like what I thought you were trying to say.
I can get you being mistaken about my argument once, but after I made it abundantly clear that the AP difference is only a part of what makes the matches bad I really have no clue why you're still pursuing this point.
> The page says that one side must be out matched, which McQueen isn't. We define a stomp by the win conditions, and on paper, both sides are equally likely to win.
Sure he is. He's outmatched in practically every statistic. His opponent is outmatched in regards to his hax. Neither have answers to the other, it's just that instead of a character winning 10/10 times it's mutual death 10/10 times.
Quote specifically where the page says that stomp criteria only applies to the winning character, since you're so keen on saying this repeatedly.
> Stomps are innately unfair, which these are not
This doesn't make sense particularly. Thunder's matches aren't fair for both characters involved, and I'll point out again that the defining characteristic of a stomp is the blatantly obvious outcome.
"Outcomes [come] across as predictable to anyone with even cursory knowledge of the combatants and their abilities"
Honestly, though, if you're so concerned about the page's specfic wording about these matches, I can make a seperate thread to update the page. You've already expressed you think the matches are in bad taste, so I'm sure you'd be fine with some tweaking on the page to make this more obvious.
That's sort of misrepresenting the situation, honestly. Neither character has any chances of winning, sure, but the inconclusive outcome is such a no-brainer not worth even bringing up that it falls under all our criteria for a stomp.
> If I have misunderstood your points, then please correct me, because it looks like you did exactly what I described in my previous comment
You did, clearly. "The only difference is that the outcome isn't a 'win' for him but mutual death for both characters" is talking about his hax.
This seems more an attempt to point out that I didn't specifically list it in that sentence than it is me not considering something everyone here is aware Thunder has in my argument.
> What is your actual point?
The matches are stomps, as they fall under our criteria for being stomps.
> Because determining that thunder is out matched purely because he is physically disadvantaged despite that his opponent is as equally likely to win as he is due to his hax, sounds like what I thought you were trying to say.
I can get you being mistaken about my argument once, but after I made it abundantly clear that the AP difference is only a part of what makes the matches bad I really have no clue why you're still pursuing this point.
> The page says that one side must be out matched, which McQueen isn't. We define a stomp by the win conditions, and on paper, both sides are equally likely to win.
Sure he is. He's outmatched in practically every statistic. His opponent is outmatched in regards to his hax. Neither have answers to the other, it's just that instead of a character winning 10/10 times it's mutual death 10/10 times.
Quote specifically where the page says that stomp criteria only applies to the winning character, since you're so keen on saying this repeatedly.
> Stomps are innately unfair, which these are not
This doesn't make sense particularly. Thunder's matches aren't fair for both characters involved, and I'll point out again that the defining characteristic of a stomp is the blatantly obvious outcome.
"Outcomes [come] across as predictable to anyone with even cursory knowledge of the combatants and their abilities"
Honestly, though, if you're so concerned about the page's specfic wording about these matches, I can make a seperate thread to update the page. You've already expressed you think the matches are in bad taste, so I'm sure you'd be fine with some tweaking on the page to make this more obvious.
- 2,616
- 166
Yeah agreeing with Dargoo here
- 13,321
- 629
Gonna bump
- 3,641
- 898
While yes McQueen's matches may be considered a stomp by our definitions I think he may be one of the only times I think it's acceptable. Considering that the whole point of his character is him forcing all of these inconclusives against characters he doesn't have a chance to beat, is basically pulling a win for McQueen.
Like you don't make a McQueen thread and expect him to win unless you think really hard about the extremely specific set of abilities required for him to ever pull a win in an actuall 'fair' fight, at least by our definitions of it.
Doesn't this basically mean all McQueen threads from now on are automatically considered a stomp?
Like you don't make a McQueen thread and expect him to win unless you think really hard about the extremely specific set of abilities required for him to ever pull a win in an actuall 'fair' fight, at least by our definitions of it.
Doesn't this basically mean all McQueen threads from now on are automatically considered a stomp?
- 13,321
- 629
I don't wanna match ban him cause I don't like that concept, and have had characters I like get matchban for reasons which I don't agree with. But McQueen needs to be used more responsibly. We should have a possible note that must request don't do fights like Goku, where there's obviously no chance McQueen could win, and where Goku kills himself obviously in the process. It's a meme that's tired out. If he fights people, at least him having a chance to win by facing someone on his actual level. Heck. He has won against 2 others before. As in won the fight entirely. I don't think we have to stop using him. Just stop the Haha Funny tie meme that's been happening. Ok, we get it. Thor, Goku, Superman, Hulk, and other gods tie with him. Funny. But let's keep these fights to his level now please. People like say Arthur Fleck, Ethan, Ect. Just people he can actually fight and win against.
And no. There have been a few fair McQueen fights he lost. There are street levels who won through hacks. It's just that, characters who fight him should at least be within level and reason that McQueen could logically win a fight with
And no. There have been a few fair McQueen fights he lost. There are street levels who won through hacks. It's just that, characters who fight him should at least be within level and reason that McQueen could logically win a fight with
- 12,085
- 2,098
- Thread starter
- #140
He shouldn't be matchbanned, but he needs actual matches where it's actually desicive and not "Guy with trillions AP difference breathes, McQueen dies, HtH"
- 13,321
- 629
Yea. That basically. He has fought with street levelers and both won and loss before. Those are the kinds of matches he should have. Even Sad Larry is decent enough. Just. No more haha, god tied with street level
- 1,776
- 73
Agree With the losses and incons goinG
- 15,637
- 5,392
In case there was some confusion, I'm not supporting match-banning him, just removing a lot of the mindless incons he has.
- 13,321
- 629
Oh. I'm not supporting that either. I wasn't meaning it like that. I was just saying I wouldn't want to go as so far to match ban him. But, McQueen fights should be made more responsibly to the rules. So, people stop putting him up against Goku and such. Keep him within his tier and same rules that apply to most other characters.
- 13,321
- 629
So. Can the fights be yeeted then
- 15,637
- 5,392
I'd rather have another staff member weigh in, as it seems to have boiled down to a matter of rules interpretation.
- 12,085
- 2,098
- Thread starter
- #147
I'll ask some of the new discussion mods
- 14,575
- 5,877
I'm all for yeeting his unfair matches in any of the three categories.
What are fair? That's up to you.
What are fair? That's up to you.
- 12,085
- 2,098
- Thread starter
- #149
Thanks for the input
- 16,606
- 1,791
I've considered upgrading McQueen for a while, but I didn't want to due to the matches. I may go through with it, I'm not sure
- 12,638
- 414
The matches should be removed and redone if that is the case.
- 13,321
- 629
Well they are gonna likely be yeeted regardless. So upgrading him would be the time to do it
- 10,311
- 2,779
- 10,311
- 2,779
I support McQueen's Re-organization.
- 14,689
- 4,583
If he gets upgraded, no matter what, I believe a match I intend to do with him may be fair to the point he can actually have a chance to win rather than have no chance of winning to the point its either his opponent or an inconclusive that takes it.
- 15,637
- 5,392
I will throw in that I'm tenatively fine with incons and losses where there was actually a substantial amount of debate as to what outcome happens, by the way.
So the main matches that would be removed are primarily the turbo-AP difference meme matches where it's kind of obvious what's going to happen, while a lot of the more nuanced threads should be acceptable.
So the main matches that would be removed are primarily the turbo-AP difference meme matches where it's kind of obvious what's going to happen, while a lot of the more nuanced threads should be acceptable.
- 5,184
- 3,071
Does that mean I can request my Thunder vs Authority match to be closed due to being a mismatch?
That aside, I can undestand what Iapitus is trying to say in terms of how incons work, but as Dargoo pointed out, what's the point in an incon if there's not really a way we can elaborate on how it would be an incon. Thunder McQueen's stand is literally Destiny Bond from Pokemon.
That aside, I can undestand what Iapitus is trying to say in terms of how incons work, but as Dargoo pointed out, what's the point in an incon if there's not really a way we can elaborate on how it would be an incon. Thunder McQueen's stand is literally Destiny Bond from Pokemon.
- 12,638
- 414
Bump?
- 2,616
- 166
I think it's clear on where this is heading. Since I've been for the removal of these matches for awhile I'll vote on keeping em off too.
- 13,321
- 629
I think we should leave a note on McQueens Page to request people not to do fights such as Goku vs Thunder McQueen and others such joke fights. So we can prevent (or help prevent) such fights from happening down the line
- Status
Similar threads
