Stomp threads?

[Antvasima]

Note: Staff only please

Continued from here:

https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/842238

It has been suggested that any versus thread featuring a character with abilities that the other cannot overcome almost no matter what it does, time stop in particular, should be considered as a stomp thread, and that we should change our Versus Thread Rules accordingly.

What do you think about this?

 

[Soldier_Blue]

Disregarding Time Stop in particular, I have seen a lot of versus threads (here and other forums) where you have two characters in the same AP tier but one character can stomp the other due to overwhelming hax.

Any Super Saiyan 2 or 3 vs Silver Surfer is a good example. They're both in the same AP tier but Surfer would stomp (even with speed equalized) due to his crazy regen and large collection of hax abilities.

I'm not against having a rule regarding hax stomps (and Time Stop in particular). But I'm not sure how it should be worded. I'll follow this thread. See what others have to say.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

I think there is a thin line between a decisive match up, where one character has an edge in hax, and a stomp where one character has an overwhelming advantage due to hax. Some people are quick to call a stomp when the character they favor losses, sometimes it's not that it's a stomp, it's just decisive.

If you have two characters and their stats are similar but one has a sword which can split molecules, i don't think that's necessarily a stomp. Maybe the other character has ranged weapons while other only has that sword, it doesn't necessarily mean the match up is a stomp, there is standard battle assumptions which would give the guy with range weapons an advantage.

If you have two characters and both hax hax like being able to cut through space, but the other just happens to have in addition to what the other character has, soul manipulation, i don't think that's a stomp just decisive.

However if you two characters and one has hax i already mentioned like spatial manipulation and soul manipulation, but the other can with just words warp reality and turn the other into an egg or something, that's a clear stomp.

 

[Lina_Shields]

So I wanted to post this in the Time Stop thread that was there earlier, but my general thoughts are that if...

• said character (A) is able to stop time without hassle/casually
• said opponent (B) has no resistance/immunity to time being stopped
• said opponent (B) does not have sufficient Regenerationn capabilities to survive an incoming attack/attacks from that character (A).

It would be considered a hax stomp that would be leaning towards (A).

Basically, if Character (B) has absolutely no way of defending against a specific ability/abilities that Character (A) has, and that specific ability is capable of giving Character (A) a major advantage, it should be considered a stomp on A's part, yes.

 

[ScarletFirefly]

Yes, there's a very thin line between a decisive win and a stomp thread. I'm also interested in this, so for now I'm just listening to what others have to say.

Basically, if Character (B) has absolutely no way of defending against a specific ability/abilities that Character (A) has, and that specific ability is capable of giving Character (A) a major advantage, it should be considered a stomp on A's part, yes.

This looks like a start.

 

[Antvasima]

So, does anybody have a suggestion for how to properly word a potential rule about overwhelming hax matchups?

 

[ScarletFirefly]

I feel like this is a case by case scenario and we can't have a general rule regarding this (at least I can't think of one right now). But then again, a case by case judgement would encourage personal bias.

 

[Antvasima]

That might be a problem, yes.

 

[ScarletFirefly]

We already have a rule for this.

Kindly do not create spite or stomp threads, whether by tier, speed or an absurd difference in hax proficiency (that is, a very hax character vs one with little to no hax) unless the other character possesses abilities that compensate for this advantage.

The bolded part is the one that people generally tend to abuse and interpret to fit their own interest.

 

[Monarch_Laciel]

The way I see it, a stomp match is one where character A can do absolutely nothing to character B, breaks their arms trying to punch them, and then gets flicked (AP stomp) or blinked (hax) out of existence.

A fight where a character simply has one ability that their opponent has no counter for would not be a stomp. IMO.

I think Kaltias said something along the lines of "a character does not require a counter to everything their opponent can do to win" once, and I'm in agreement there.

 

[ScarletFirefly]

A fight where a character simply has one ability that their opponent has no counter for would not be a stomp. IMO.

This is highly situational. What if this one ability is high level reality warping?

 

[Kaltias]

High level reality warping is hardly "one ability". It's more like an entire list

 

[ScarletFirefly]

@Kaltias It's still under one ability. But fine, say he has soul manipulation or atomization hax. These are very powerful hax abilities that severely outbalance the matchup if the other fighter has nothing to compensate.

 

[Lina_Shields]

A fight where a character simply has one ability that their opponent has no counter for would not be a stomp. IMO.

Unless said ability in question is able to end the fight in that character's favor immediately.

 

[Kaltias]

It depends. In my opinion, the fight isn't a stomp if that single ability is what gives to the character the victory. For example, every Ryüko thread where she wins is because the opponent can't bypass her regen. This doesn't mean that she stomps though.

 

[Monarch_Laciel]

To use the example of time stop, see "can do absolutely nothing to the opponent" in my response.

@Scarlet, depends on the type of Soul Manipulation and Atomization. If they can just blink and their their opponent has their soul ripped out of their body or molecules dissassembled, sure I'd say that's a stomp. If they need to hit them with their sword/fists, which can be dodged/parried/blocked, not so much. It's a case by case basis.

I think the misconception here is the idea that the character must be able to overcome all of their opponents abilities to win (that's what I'm getting from "a character with abilities that the other cannot overcome almost no matter what it does"). I don't think that the opponent needs to be able to do this.

 

[Lina_Shields]

I was leaning more towards the example of Intangibility for a combatant...

• Where A cannot hurt B under any circumstances due to A having the lack of methods to do so

But then, it looks like this statement

"The way I see it, a stomp match is one where character A can do absolutely nothing to character B, breaks their arms trying to punch them, and then gets flicked (AP stomp) or blinked (hax) out of existence." seems acceptable.
Basically, a stomp boils down to Character A having no method of dealing damage to Character B, while Character B is able to immediately turn the fight towards his/her favor, securing a victory.

Monarch Laciel seems to make sense.

 

[Monarch_Laciel]

However, I would say that both of those conditions need to be fulfilled for it to be a stomp. To use the intangibility example, just because the character can't hit his intangible opponent doesn't mean they get auto stomped. It could be inconclusive due to another reason, or they could simply outlast the stamina of their intangible opponent if that is a factor.

What I'm arguing against is the idea that if a character has a powerful ability their opponent has no counter for, it is automatically a stomp. I think that these things need to be decided as the threads come up.

 

[ScarletFirefly]

I think as long as the other character has to work for the win (not just activate one ability and instawin), it's not a stomp.

Also both characters, theoretically, must have a chance to win if they play their cards right.

 

[Antvasima]

We already have a rule for this.

Okay. Thank you for the information. Perhaps this topic is redundant and should be closed then?

 

[Lina_Shields]

I think it is better off closed, yes.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. My apologies about the bothering you with something unnecessary.