Team Tournament Information and Discussion Thread

Originally posted by newjak86
Umm I beilve that the ruling was made for everyone in the tourny not just about those three stupid Golems and who said the Golem were the strongest anyone could have no one said anything about limiting the Constructs power.

Secondly it isn't like we gave Superman Kyle's power and skill these Daxamite GL are basically only midtier to rookie GLs and since when would anyone say a GL or 4 could beat a herald level being like SS or Majestic 😕

When the ruling was made all that was suggested was the very weak golems. Now that we know that it is being used to allow in additional Herald level characters, I think the decision warrants a review and reversal by the judges to ensure a fair tourney.

Personally, I don't see how any judge could think allowing one team to add 5 Superman GLs to one team is in any way fair or in accordance to the spirit of the rules. That is precisely why the "no loophole" clause exists. Now the competetors could argue about this until we are blue in the face but what really matters is what the judges and Digi think.

Originally posted by newjak86
Just want to add something to this so everyone here is basically saying that anyone of these Daxamites are beating SS one on one or Majestic One on one if you believe that then maybe I have overestimated your guys intellgence in this tourny 😉

Originally posted by Khellendros
Stop trying to be clever, it really doesn't work for you. No, a Daxamite likely wouldn't beat Majestic on his own. And, no, a Mid-level GL might not beat Majestic (though he'd have a chance), but a Daxamite who was good enough with a GL ring likely would.

So SIlver Surfer is loosing to a Daxmite who was created by Kyle who doesn't have half the feats that Superman and Kyle have and your saying that he beats Silver Surfer and Majestic one on one I think I may have just lost some respect for you Khell

hmmmm...I have to think about this issue some more

Originally posted by newjak86
So SIlver Surfer is loosing to a Daxmite who was created by Kyle who doesn't have [b]half the feats[/B]

EDIT: Hell, in our fight, you had the Daxamites creating nuclear explosions, based on scans of Kyle SAYING he could do it (God, hindsight really is 20/20).

so long as willpower is greater, and the person would locically come to the conclusion of doing the same thing....then yes they feats are interchangable....

Originally posted by TheKahn
When the ruling was made all that was suggested was the very weak golems. Now that we know that it is being used to allow in additional Herald level characters, I think the decision warrants a review and reversal by the judges to ensure a fair tourney.

Personally, I don't see how any judge could think allowing one team to add 5 Superman GLs to one team is in any way fair or in accordance to the spirit of the rules. That is precisely why the "no loophole" clause exists. Now the competetors could argue about this until we are blue in the face but what really matters is what the judges and Digi think.

Now THAT is HILARIOUS coming from the team who says ANY GL feat is interchangeable

I'm seriously asking this give me an answer.

Originally posted by Blair Wind
so long as willpower is greater, and the person would locically come to the conclusion of doing the same thing....then yes they feats are interchangable....

Originally posted by newjak86
So SIlver Surfer is loosing to a Daxmite who was created by Kyle who doesn't have [b]half the feats that Superman and Kyle have[/B]

Originally posted by Khellendros
Okay, but that renders this: incorrect, by your own logic.

And yet you were using Kyle scans as proof that Daxamites could pull off something.

Originally posted by newjak86
The no Lopphole Clause exists so that things can not be brought in that absolutly can not be overcome by anyone liek Zatanna being able to speak everyone in to loosing no matter what. Yes these Daxamite Constructs add a tactical advatage to us but they aren't the be all end all in these matches are they. They are not unbeatable the only thing going on here is that you guys don't a have a good way to counter them so your gonna cry unfair just because me and BW staying within the defined rules out smarted you a little bit with something that offers us an advatage.

And I think adding 5 Superman-level Green Lanterns comes dangerously close to being insurmountable for any of the teams in the touney given the limits that were placed on who we could draft. They are far more than a mere "tactical advantage" and are exactly what the "no loophole" clause was meant to prevent in my mind.

😂

Originally posted by TheKahn
And I think adding 5 Superman-level Green Lanterns comes dangerously close to being insurmountable for any of the teams in the touney given the limits that were placed on who we could draft. They are far more than a mere "tactical advantage" and are exactly what the "no loophole" clause was meant to prevent in my mind.

A) Not Superman they are decribed as being roughly Superman they don't have the feats or exprience with his powers.
B) Not Kyle Kilowog or even lower GLs in skill they have nothing to put them into this so called uneabtable stature you think. They are tough to overcome but then again so is any kind of attack if used on the right people am I wrong.

I mean Khell's Spartan teleport into your brain trick would have been nigh unstoppable for quite a lot of teams in this tourny your possible being one as well I didn't see any large outcry to have it banned did I. Heck many people that it was close enough because it was such a hard attack to overcome even with the Daxamites.

The point is though they are not tougher than Majestic they are not stronger then Silver Surfer they are very beatable. They break no rules they offer a tactical advantage to us that is going to tough for some to overcome but not any worse then Khell's attack.

They way I see it is basically the only time a person decides something is unfair is because they themselves have no idea how they are gonna counter and when they do they often let it slide don't they Khan/Leo. You guys are scared you guys don't see an easy way to beat them so your gonna complain and blow things out of proportion about them to get them banned which is quite childish seeing as even me and BW don't think they are going to singlehandidly beat anyone here with the exception of Magneto but thats a given. Heck me and BW haven't even argued them as such.

Just because something is harder to overcome doesn't mean it should be banned honestly if that was the case then why not argue against shields as some people have very hard shields to destroy and effect making them hard to beat for some people

Originally posted by newjak86
Really so your telling me that these things are beyond anyone in this tourny....

I understand that you and Blair Wind disagree with Leo, Khell, Batdude123, and I that they are unfair and should be banned. However, I'd hoped we could have this discussion with a level of civility and avoid senseless name calling. Sadly, this doesn't seem to be the case.

I think several people have made the case that these constructs should be banned thanks to several reasons including their Daxamite physiology and their skills/abilities as a Green Lantern (which they would have thanks to Kyle giving them full memories). Fundamentally they violate the limit on the number of characters each team has as they are far closer to being actual characters than mere constructs. But again I leave this issue up to the judges to decide.

so basically your banning them for.....

power level....no they fall under the limit

being independent constructs...no yet against 5 was the number ANYONE can make

hmmm.....I do dare say that if you guys had a problem with them before then you should have spoken up when we were facing Khell....hell you even congratulated me on them Kahn. 😬

I seem to recall something along the lines of " that was a clever move. Me and leo wouldnt have a defense against that if we faced you...."

so my assesment of you being at least midly scared and that being the motivation as to why your doing this isnt too far off the dot.

Originally posted by TheKahn
I understand that you and Blair Wind disagree with Leo, Khell, Batdude123, and I that they are unfair and should be banned. However, I'd hoped we could have this discussion with a level of civility and avoid senseless name calling. Sadly, this doesn't seem to be the case.

I think several people have made the case that these constructs should be banned thanks to several reasons including their Daxamite physiology and their skills/abilities as a Green Lantern (which they would have thanks to Kyle giving them full memories). Fundamentally they violate the limit on the number of characters each team has as they are far closer to being actual characters than mere constructs. But again I leave this issue up to the judges to decide.

How are you going to say that these things are going to be Superman in his abilities and their uses and the same goes Kyle. There is nothing to place them on there. They are not the high class that Superman Majestic and Silver Surfer is.

While the are stronger than typical construsct would be 😛
they aren't breaking any rules that have been set up.
They are no worse than Khell's brain teleport attack in arguements. They offer a tactical adavntage that is hard to overcome but not impossible just because something was smart doesn't mean it should be banned.
Honestly what rules are they breaking that have been made.

Originally posted by Blair Wind
so basically your banning them for.....

power level....no they fall under the limit

being independent constructs...no yet against 5 was the number ANYONE can make

hmmm.....I do dare say that if you guys had a problem with them before then you should have spoken up when we were facing Khell....hell you even congratulated me on them Kahn. 😬

I seem to recall something along the lines of " that was a clever move. Me and leo wouldnt have a defense against that if we faced you...."

so my assesment of you being at least midly scared and that being the motivation as to why your doing this isnt too far off the dot.

Once again NO ONE ever ok'ed the existance of independant constructs that are Herald level in and of themselves. That is why I believe that the judges should review this issue to see if the "no loophole" clause needs to be used to ensure a fair fight.

I indeed congradulated you and Newjack on getting them in as I thought that they'd surely be deemed illegal then and there. However that issue was not raised to the point it should have been.

And I honestly think any team would be hardpressed to find an adequate defense against this tactic which is yet another reason it should be reviewed. Leo and I have legitimate objections to allowing them and have made our points clearly to the judges.

The constructs are legal. Sorry. You just need to use proper and clever tactics to beat them. Khells was on the right track in round 1 but it didn't pan out and he didn't have team support. I see no reason to ban them at this juncture. They break none of the established rules (though they do admittedly stretch the loophole clause).

Originally posted by TheKahn
Once again [b]NO ONE ever ok'ed the existance of independant constructs that are Herald level in and of themselves. That is why I believe that the judges should review this issue to see if the "no loophole" clause needs to be used to ensure a fair fight.

I indeed congradulated you and Newjack on getting them in as I thought that they'd surely be deemed illegal then and there. However that issue was not raised to the point it should have been.

And I honestly think any team would be hardpressed to find an adequate defense against this tactic which is yet another reason it should be reviewed. Leo and I have legitimate objections to allowing them and have made our points clearly to the judges. [/B]

Originally posted by illadelph12
The constructs are legal. Sorry. You just need use proper and clever tactics to beat them. Khells was on the right track in round 1 but it didn't pan out and he didn't have team support. I see no reason to ban them at this juncture. They break none of the established rules (though they do admittedly stretch the loophole clause).

I can respect that point of view although I disagree with it. I look forward to hearing what the other judges say. 🙂