• 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.

Some Vs Match Rules (Nothing too major)

The_real_cal_howard

The_real_cal_howard

Read my comic
VS Battles
Retired
40,469
12,953
These are things I thought I'd make a small thread about in the meantime. If you want to highlight it, go ahead. Not entirely sure it's necessary, hence why I didn't do it, but it very well may be. And if you think they should be reworded/worded better, be my guest. But I digress. Here they are:

  • If a match is past the grace period, then response can't be given regardless if its still open or hasn't been added.
After the Tifa vs TARDIS thing, this should be clarified. I still take the blame for that...

  • A match that's unanimous can be added right away.
This was sort of an unwritten rule. Let's make it written. Though I think if it's one or two, then it can still be added as well. But no more than that.

  • If a match is old enough that necro'ing becomes disallowed (basically a dead match), then if the match has more than five votes for a character with a difference of two, it can be added.
This one may be a bit controversial. One thing that gets under my skin are matches that are almost done, but never truly reach seven votes. Not gonna lie, I thought seven was a little much back then. The three difference is fine, but seven seems just a bit too high. Anyway, the reason(s) I chose those numbers are that they're not too low for it to just be some fanboy(s) and frontrunners creating a bs reason, and I feel like a difference of two would have happened by that point that the thread is dead. Three might not have happened.

Anyway, I hope you take this into consideration. Have a great day! :)

EDIT--Other rules came up that we should also discuss about. I'm not giving a summary of them like above, as I haven't thought of it yet. Here they are:

  • "For reasons above" and "via (insert two small advantages or powers)" will be seen as a case-by-case scenario, as there are times when the points made are good ones, but there are also times when it's used simply out of sloth, wank, or spite. For example, if someone said that Goku would win off of combat experience alone and someone said "via reasons above", those votes will be taken with a grain of salt. But if someone said that Goku would win because since he fought all his life against enemies with a similar powerset of the opponent, while the opponent is just learning to use his powerset, and someone agreed with that, then the vote(s) will be taken with legitimacy.
  • Discussion Mods, Admins, Bureaucrats, etc. have the authority to change around a match to make fair and not worthy of being closed (like (un)equalizing speed, changing one (and only one) opponent to a better one as long as it's from the same franchise, etc.)
  • Debunked votes will be discounted, along with those agreeing with them, though this is also a case-by-case basis, as the one against the argument can be wrong (given that this is a debate), opinionated, biased, or otherwise. This is especially the case if the one many agree with change his or her mind.
 
I certainly agree with you on the first two points (and apologies about that thread ^^;)

I want to see other opinions on the third subject.

I also want to bring up the issue of "via reasons above". It's the the worst thing in vs debating aside from wanking and downplay. I get in some situations that no additional points can be covered, but it can allow people to vote for their favourite character without even paying attention to the opposition.
 
Yeah, we should create a rule on cases on whether that should be accepted or not. I'll make another post below with that as a rule among others, as I forgot one.
 
  • "For reasons above" and "via (insert two small advantages or powers)" will be seen as a case-by-case scenario, as there are times when the points made are good ones, but there are also times when it's used simply out of sloth, wank, or spite. For example, if someone said that Goku would win off of combat experience alone and someone said "via reasons above", those votes will be taken with a grain of salt. But if someone said that Goku would win because since he fought all his life against enemies with a similar powerset of the opponent, while the opponent is just learning to use his powerset, and someone agreed with that, then the vote(s) will be taken with legitimacy.
  • Discussion Mods, Admins, Bureaucrats, etc. have the authority to change around a match to make fair and not worthy of being closed (like (un)equalizing speed, changing an opponent, etc.)
  • Debunked votes will be discounted, along with those agreeing with them, though this is also a case-by-case basis, as the one against the argument can be wrong, given that it is a debate.
 
Yeah I definitely I agree with you here cal on the first two rule.

I oppose CK's reasoning about "via reasons above" though. One thing why people just use that since one, if people already have said enough reasons why character 1 should win, then they can go saying they agree with it. Two if you have no reasoning but think that character should win, then you have no choice but to read other people's reasoning and agree with it.
 
@Bya. I made a post above elaborating on how it would be case-by-case and why that would be so.
 
How can we tell if someone is voting for their favourite character though?
 
TBF...Kavpeny or whowever was the reason why we have this whole "need 7 votes" and "difference of 3 votes" thing.

Also, a thing about CK's reasoning as Byak put it is that, while it is poor to use such reasoning in Vs debates, it just would look rather repetitive if like four or five said the same thing for why a character would win against another.

I still get what Colonel means, but unless people are fine with seeing more or less the same reasons being said, idk as to what other way people can debate about like that. Unless people can go into detail like I TRY TO one time along with others like Reppuzan, then go for it.
 
I figured that I just ninja'd you. I also edited it a bit to give details/explanations. Also, how do you feel about the other new rules though?
 
I think Versus Matches should be more about arguments rather than number, otherwise any match could theoretically be rigged if 7 people showed up and say "This character via X reasons" or "Via reasons above", regardless of arguments.

But i agree with your points, Howard.
 
I'm pretty sure the former is already not allowed in the official rules. Not sure what you mean by the latter though.

You think this should be highlighted or no?
 
I don't mind doing arguments like when people do debates in classes if they have the mental-energy to bother...
 
So basically, if people are lazy with reasoning, we discard them?
 
I'd prefer that we only have constructed arguments only, but I'm not in control here
 
Yeah, I agree with Matt and Cal's points here.
 
Depends on how lazy. Like Cross said, there are people who respond in between classes, and I'm guilty of that myself occasionally (currently on summer break). I mean, it can at least be said how Mewtwo would win via mind hax, like via erasing memory, nullifying powers, petrifying the opponent, etc, instead of "Mewtwo via mind hax". And you could say "Mewtwo for Saik's (just an example) reasons. Mewtwo would ______" instead of "Mewtwo for reasons above"
 
One thing is like Cross said that if multiple reasons are being said then it just gets repetitive and not sure they should still count at that rate. I mean as long as you have valid reasons, not a wankery one then you should be good.
 
Yeah. If, for example, Prom, Saik, Ryu, Fate, Fil, and Azzy all give good reasons for say, Mega Man X to beat Midora (I should do that match, now that I think about it), then "for reasons above" would work. Obviously it doesn't have to be that many people. Just used that many for exaggerated effect.
 
Off-topic on that, Cal, i'm honestly not good with making arguments in class discussions (I one time had a class discussion about, pardon me, of "supporting slavery" vs opposing it...i really did not know nor how to debate of it so it kind of stuck me as just being the "unless i know how to make of it well and sound convincing, don't ever bother making an opinion about it even if it was just a class discussion activity).

On-topic, i can see that being done if people can get into more detail, even if a little, on why one character wins against that character. Though, and this is just a slight nitpick, it would be good if they at least give a sort of reasoning if the other opponent has some sort of thing that can keep them in the fight (assuming said character has something that, while they may lose, can make it a legitimate fight for the winning character). That why, as you noted on the case-by-case thing from earlier on your comment above, can the "this character for reasons above" can even be fine to use the reasoning for.
 
Just like my English teacher taught me, I think a valid reasoning should be at least a paragraph. It should contain reasoning that covers: Hax, speed (if not equal), AP, feats, durability, experience, equipment, and a fair argument covering both sides.

Then people are able to vote via "X's" reasons.
 
@Cross. All your points are really good ones that should definitely be taken into consideration before a decision is made. I'm not even entirely sure how to answer them yet.

@CK. A paragraph seems a bit to much for this, as it's not a persuasive essay. All those seem too much for just a small answer. For example, "Lavos wins because his casual blasts steal souls, which the opponent has no resistance to", or even "inconclusive, as Time Devourer and Zeed can't kill each other" work just well. You may have a point on "vote via X's reasons" though, but still, case-by-case.

I think this is highlight worthy now. And I'll edit my other rules into the OP.
 
@CK Okay but the thing is this is not English class. You can give any info you want doesn't matter if it's bits and pieces or a huge paragraph. Even huge paragraph can still get opposed if you have great argument to counter.
 
Well, there's plenty of things to cover when debating.
 
Colonel's not that wrong on that, really.

A few sentences or a paragraph covering at least the major things of the winning characters side could suffice, hmm?
 
A few sentences or a small paragraph could work quite well, especially to get others to agree with you. Even one fairly long sentence can work wonders, given that it's detailed. Though the matter becomes different if you're going back and forth with someone...

Also, forgot to mention, "^this", despite being far less words, would still be perfectly legitimate, as you're explicitly calling out a point/argument/topic that you fully agree with.

Shoot. Forgot to highlight...
 
@Byak: I know that. And no, i wasn't saying something huge like i would probably get into (I watch too much Mini Ladd's that got me into doing that more than i should).
 
Sorry for commenting when I'm not staff, but if you are changing/specifying the rules for how/when VS match-ups should be added, should this not go on the Wiki Management or General Discussion board so the non-staff community can have some input?
 
Byakuya "Senbonzakura" Kuchiki said:
Look I'm just stating my opinion here. Like cause I don't want somebody to make a huge paragraph only for other people to agree with them eventually.
Click to expand...
As I said above, a huge paragraph seems too much unless you're going back and forward, are really trying to get your point across, or other extremes. Things like "Mewtwo wipes Character X's memory, as he leads with that, and carpet bomb with Shadow Ball afterward." would work just fine, even with people saying "for reasons above", and you could even trim stuff off from responses like my example.
 
Monarch Laciel said:
Sorry for commenting when I'm not staff, but if you are changing/specifying the rules for how VS match-ups should be added, should this not go on the Wiki Management or General Discussion board so the non-staff community can have some input?
Click to expand...
You're ok, given the help you've given while being a blue member. You can still comment, along with other respected blue members like Fate or Kalitas. Maybe General Discussion, as this doesn't have to be purely staff, but Wiki Management is for Rule Violations or Match Additions, or Calcuation Evaluations. Not for the equivalent of a vs battles board meeting.
 
For reasons above is completely fine, why repeat the same words that already been said? Scrolling up doesn't require much work yes? And we don't need paragraphs just for a reason why someone win. It can be as simple as "He has better hax blah blah".
 
"Via better hax" needs to be explained more. For example, take Luke vs Link. Luke's subatomic hax is incredibly difficult to use, he won't lead with mind hax in character, and even then, time stop is better, which Link has, Link has more abilities along with resistances and the abilities Luke has, and Link's character has him using the best strategy to most efficiently take the opponent down, which would likely just be time stop to ancient arrow. Yet Luke won from "via mind hax" or "via better hax"

This obviously isn't an attempt to get it removed (Though it should be. The arguments were terrible, and when the real arguments came in, they were on my side). Just an example.
 
I'm with Cal on the better hax part. Like said from before, detailing what a person meant by "better hax", even if it was for just two sentences only, would at least make it more easier for people to understand what they mean.
 
Well here's the thing Cal, as you said before this whole thing is case by case basis right? People judge fights by what they think, if you expect those people to elaborate you'll get a longer explanation, and you'll probably still not agree with them. If you disagree with someone like always, you debate with them which is the entire point of versus threads in the first place and if they can't elaborate you don't have to count their vote.. I just find this thread mostly pointless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Discussion Rules lil Revision
Replies
39
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
YmTheSuper
Location dependent abilities
Replies
2
Views
199
Homie890
AThe1412
Can you restrict a character's Standard Equipment if it gives them a different tier?
Replies
2
Views
480
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
Clarification Of Sentence Phrasings And Addition Of Expected Punishments For Each Type Of Rule Breach For All Rules Pages
Replies
19
Views
2K
GarrixianXD
GarrixianXD
Antvasima
  • Locked
Slightly adjusting our rules for bolded "powers and abilities" links
Replies
32
Views
2K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top