-
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.
Why do we count a character killing the opponent first as a win, when the ‘winner’ promptly dies from something the opponent did?
- Thread starter Keeweed
- Start date
-
- Tags
- inconclusive
H3110l12345I20
He/Him- 4,855
- 2,452
Last time I remember, that's one of the OP's intended/implied points.
Since winning a fight means "last man standing" or something related in IRL (like living to tell the tale or not dying), that's probably one of Keeweed's premises. Though if the OP's still willing to correct me if they have the time, feel free to do so.
- 7,355
- 2,063
- Thread starter
- #43
Hey, I was gone from this site for a while due to work, school, and life related reasons. Seeing 20 notifications made me nervous the whole time, but finally clicking on it and seeing 17 of them just being made me feel a bit dumb in hindsight because those notifications were making me nervous.
But I’m back now.
Versus battles aren’t a race, they are a fight to the death (or defeat). If you both get wrecked, or both just straight die, then you are both absolutely losers here. The goal is not get your shit kicked in or die, both characters got their shit kicked in. Even for slow deaths, did you really win a duel if you are bleeding out on the pavement, or dying from poison, or half your body has exploded and your going to die literal seconds afterwards.
By this logic a suicide bomber like a creeper couldn’t even get an inconclusive, because despite blowing you up to kingdom come, completely it’s objective, you died microseconds after him so I guess you won somehow.
Edit: Also characters like Thunder McQueen and Notorious Big just stop functioning properly, for our completely arbitrary reasons. Many characters exist around taking you with them, I don’t know why this goofy rule exist to have it that those abilities just don’t get to work for no reason at all.
But I’m back now.
Versus battles aren’t a race, they are a fight to the death (or defeat). If you both get wrecked, or both just straight die, then you are both absolutely losers here. The goal is not get your shit kicked in or die, both characters got their shit kicked in. Even for slow deaths, did you really win a duel if you are bleeding out on the pavement, or dying from poison, or half your body has exploded and your going to die literal seconds afterwards.
By this logic a suicide bomber like a creeper couldn’t even get an inconclusive, because despite blowing you up to kingdom come, completely it’s objective, you died microseconds after him so I guess you won somehow.
Edit: Also characters like Thunder McQueen and Notorious Big just stop functioning properly, for our completely arbitrary reasons. Many characters exist around taking you with them, I don’t know why this goofy rule exist to have it that those abilities just don’t get to work for no reason at all.
Last edited:
H3110l12345I20
He/Him- 4,855
- 2,452
The rules in SBA technically don't say that the common sense goal in real fights is a (required) wincon. It's apparently a doublethink thing on this forum into common sense (& other settings if you can list it).
Like why did a mod say that a discussion thread was more worthy than a CRT or questions & answers thread again? This should be discussed in a CRT or questions & answers thread since it's the equivalent of unknowingly equating surviving injuries as durability. Why are the rules for the wincons there?
Like why did a mod say that a discussion thread was more worthy than a CRT or questions & answers thread again? This should be discussed in a CRT or questions & answers thread since it's the equivalent of unknowingly equating surviving injuries as durability. Why are the rules for the wincons there?
- 7,355
- 2,063
- Thread starter
- #45
On my god, this does not need to be a CRT, the people who determine which threads should be which said the thread was perfectly fine as is. No CRT was needed last time, there is no rule to change, just how the rule is interpreted. I don’t know why you guys keep wanting me to change the thread type.
The rules on SBA also don’t say that the fight ends upon a win condition being met. Plus, again, the rules seemed to have thought of winning, and losing, but clearly didn’t take one of the most clear cut forms of inconclusive into account. I see no reason as to why both opponents dying would be a win for one versus the other when they both succeed at the same win condition. Like if both BFR each other, and both fail to get back in a week, why would the first person to be BFR’d be the loser when both are teleported away and are stuck/lost. They suffered the same exact fate yet one’s the winner for literally no reason.
Edit: I find it funny that you follow the barebones and vague SBA to the dot, but when the staff literally tell me directly to keep this thread as is, that’s when you have a problem with it. SBA tells me nothing on this scenario, the staff told me directly I made the correct type of thread.
The rules on SBA also don’t say that the fight ends upon a win condition being met. Plus, again, the rules seemed to have thought of winning, and losing, but clearly didn’t take one of the most clear cut forms of inconclusive into account. I see no reason as to why both opponents dying would be a win for one versus the other when they both succeed at the same win condition. Like if both BFR each other, and both fail to get back in a week, why would the first person to be BFR’d be the loser when both are teleported away and are stuck/lost. They suffered the same exact fate yet one’s the winner for literally no reason.
Edit: I find it funny that you follow the barebones and vague SBA to the dot, but when the staff literally tell me directly to keep this thread as is, that’s when you have a problem with it. SBA tells me nothing on this scenario, the staff told me directly I made the correct type of thread.
- 7,355
- 2,063
- Thread starter
- #46
Actually let me clarify. Everyone keeps pointing back to SBA and saying, that’s apparently what it means. The point of the thread is to ask why is that what it means. Why is one person dying first a loss when both die. Why do we have this dumb binary interpretation of rules that make no sense on both accounts (the rules and the interpretation) rather than going off what every person in real life would go off of. Both died, they both lost, you didn’t win a fight to the death if you died, plain and simple.
H3110l12345I20
He/Him- 4,855
- 2,452
Sorry for err... annoying you. The reason why I think this should be discussed is that as the OP points.
Treating versus threads like a race to the finish to get to the wincons first as you said is against traditional common sense. That's why I asked why staff says it's ok as a discussion thread.
You should ask someone on-site that's been here for a long time, been there at the times of the versus rule changes &/or is knowledgeable on the versus rules.
I've only been here for like, 2 years? The best explanation you can get from me is misinterpretation & following bad examples. Even then, you need the full picture/context or a simple answer from someone else.
Like, we literally have a Seamoth at 9-A "durability" for surviving a 9-A attack with heavy damage. I've seen real world pages that have regeneration for regenerating limbs when they're not specified if they're at an accelerated rate. The official regeneration page literally says that it's at an accelerated rate.
The fact that it's "whoever gets the first wincon" should tell you or imply at least something about the original reasoning behind this nonsense. Determining whoever has the reason to infer this in the first place & the history behind this reasoning requires heavy digging or educated guesses. You could do the history digging (which may be a challenge considering your personal life), or ask someone else on this history digging issue. I'm busy with my life & IRL animals too.
"Whoever gets the first wincon is like trying to get first place in a race" is technically a possible answer...by analogy. This is because fallacies & fallacious conclusions are based off of premises that seem true...at first. They can be made by anyone (even the most logical & intelligent individuals). If you want to continue questioning, be my guest.
Treating versus threads like a race to the finish to get to the wincons first as you said is against traditional common sense. That's why I asked why staff says it's ok as a discussion thread.
You should ask someone on-site that's been here for a long time, been there at the times of the versus rule changes &/or is knowledgeable on the versus rules.
I've only been here for like, 2 years? The best explanation you can get from me is misinterpretation & following bad examples. Even then, you need the full picture/context or a simple answer from someone else.
Like, we literally have a Seamoth at 9-A "durability" for surviving a 9-A attack with heavy damage. I've seen real world pages that have regeneration for regenerating limbs when they're not specified if they're at an accelerated rate. The official regeneration page literally says that it's at an accelerated rate.
The fact that it's "whoever gets the first wincon" should tell you or imply at least something about the original reasoning behind this nonsense. Determining whoever has the reason to infer this in the first place & the history behind this reasoning requires heavy digging or educated guesses. You could do the history digging (which may be a challenge considering your personal life), or ask someone else on this history digging issue. I'm busy with my life & IRL animals too.
"Whoever gets the first wincon is like trying to get first place in a race" is technically a possible answer...by analogy. This is because fallacies & fallacious conclusions are based off of premises that seem true...at first. They can be made by anyone (even the most logical & intelligent individuals). If you want to continue questioning, be my guest.
Last edited:
- 7,355
- 2,063
- Thread starter
- #48
It’s not really your fault I’m annoyed by that. The other guy in the thread earlier dragged it out for like a day straight despite me already asking staff. That’s why it annoyed me so much. You’re good.
I’ll read the rest of your post tomorrow. It’s 12 am where I live and I’m struggling when I tied to read it.
I’ll read the rest of your post tomorrow. It’s 12 am where I live and I’m struggling when I tied to read it.
Similar threads
