Off Topic Circle Jerk

Originally posted by Robtard
Incorrect, you're scripting and saying there will be a scenario where the Immortals will both discover that Superman has a weakness and be able to find it. Scripting and giving unlimited prep, it's the only way the Immortals have a chance, you inadvertently said as much and are now trying to backpedal.

Incorrect again. I've not only seen Immortals, I own it and can look into it for reference purposes anytime I want; all for free. While you paid to go see the shitty movie twice; why you're so bitter with life. Condolences.

Again, if you paid attention you'd have noticed that he was weakened enough to be beaten down by thugs because he was literally surrounded by kryptonite; the Immortals won't be able to get that much kyptonite (if any). Superman with a shard of kryptonite in him was still able to lift an island(made in part of kryptonite) from sea-level to orbit in about a minute and still durable enough to survive a drop from outer atmospheric heights. ie the Immortals can't even harm a weakened Superman; they would need an island of kryptoniteto have a chance.

Once again you're ignoring greatest feats for Superman and going with his worst showings while maxing out the Immortals. Try to have a little objectivity, you're embarrassing yourself again.

Yet you're unable to prove one of your points; just fanboy the Immortals and downplay Superman. See above concerning objectivity. Go make the Immortals Vs Superman thread, this is not the proper place; stop crying FFS.

So now you're bragging about cheating the movie industry and insulting a paying customer. I believe in law and order not just doing whatever I want because you're a criminal.

Yes, I get it k-nite weakens him. I get the fact he can completely be depowered and have to be rescued in a hospital due to the injuries he received. I'm a very intelligent poster, tard. K-nite exists in his fictional world. Sorry you want to ignore a movie item just because you are biased. I allow everything which is why I am a pretty cool and fair guy.

I look at all his showings. Superman went max speed after he failed to save Lois. If he gains momentum he can go at that speed not in combat. I understand the portrayal of what he's capable of you don't.

You really do live up to your name.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I don't see how this strictly disagrees with me on the subject of Ozymandius. Not letting him have prep does not take away all of his intelligence or something. He can still use his brain in a fight. You seem to agree with me that he is hardly crippled without prep.

Sure, if you want to gimp Ozy's biggest asset and primary MO: remove his ability to prep.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Eh, I don't recall him predicting what an opponent would do in H2H. He just outfought them.

That's my interpretation of his awesome H2H. Mostly because I get further insight from having read the comic books. My movie interpretation is not contradicted by what is seen on film, however, it is not directly supported, either. This is up to the thread starter on how they interpret some events.

Originally posted by Nephthys
What do you mean, how everyone would fit into the team?

Team...."The Watchmen minus Ozy" team.

Originally posted by Nephthys
That is planning, not prep. He never utilised prep to defeat anyone. That is, he didn't actually [b]prepare anything to deal with his opponents except against Manhatten. He didn't for example, poison the Comedian. He just kicked in his door and kicked the shit out of him. He didn't use any preperation to defeat Rorscach and Nite Owl, he just beat them up. He didn't use prep against Silk Spectre, he caught a bullet. The only one that he actually used prep against was Manhatten, which failed, and was reliant on the fact that Ozy had years to study Manhatten.[/B]

Spoiler:
I hope you know I resisted posting things I found funny that would have made you angry. You have no idea how much I had to pull back on my reply to this.

That's a meaningless word game.

Planning is part of prep when you take actions based upon that planning. When your preparation is executed as planned, you are now taking action.

Prepare : to put in proper condition or readiness

Plan : to arrange a method or scheme beforehand

Or as the Deming Cycle calls for: Plan, do, check, act.

"Do and check" are preparation. ALL prep requires planning. Act is what you do after planning and preparing.

And please stop making this about Ozy. I did not want to talk for pages and pages about various fan interpretations of The Watchmen: that's a lame conversation and I'm sure you can agree. After this post, I'll ignore all direct Ozy references. I promise not to bring it up in this thread, anymore. We can talk about it via PMs if you want.

Ozy prepared and planned against The Comedian. For one, you're forgetting that Ozy was devastated about his only loss against The Comedian so he wanted to get him back for his loss in a H2H fight: something he planned for thoroughly and calculated he could win (the cops said that the Comedian was still in supreme condition...so it was almost a fair fight). On top of that, getting rid of The Comedian was all part of his grand preparation. He planned for his preparation for this grand scheme. Part of his preparation was discovered by The Comedian. The Comedian had to be eliminated to allow the plan to go forward. Ozy also prepared for that (preparation within preparation...you have just been incepted) confrontation as well: only attacked when The Comedian was alone, wore his secret ninja costume, ensured that the law enforcement would not be able to get back to him but allowed for enough room for his pals to trace it back to him (part of his grand scheme because he was an egomaniac: he wanted his whole plan to be revealed to his buddies).

He used preparation against Night Owl and Rorschach: he dressed in his old armored clothes. Also, his years of H2H training and Mingling with his comrades functioned as prep as well: don't underestimate the mind of a scheming genius because what happens 20+ years ago with that person can some how come back to haunt you if you become enemies when they are preparing for you to sit down and STFU. He prepared against SS as well: worse his armor costume. Tell me something, if he didn't plan to confront anyone, why wear his armored fighting suit? Makes no sense unless..dun dun dunnnnn....he prepared to meet them (read that last sentence with an overally dramatic voice and pretend I just turned around and quickly took my shades off for the big reveal).

And, no if you think his preparation against Manhattan failed, you actually missed one of the greatest things about the film: his prep succeeded. The desired outcome was to keep the humans from fighting to fight the incoming aliens. Success. Can we say for a surety that Dr. Manhattan agreeing with Ozy was part of his prep? Yes. We can also say that it wasn't with the same amount of surety. So there's no telling. Since this is my idea, and my topic, I'll say yes. 🙂 However, Rorschach go the last laugh by turning in his Journal BEFORE going to icy hole.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Captain was a captain, right? He could give them orders if he wanted, at least the division who fought Hydra with him.

No...he wasn't a captain. I think he made it to PFC in the film...maybe just a Private (E-1).

Originally posted by Nephthys
Because its completely against the reason we have these versus fights.

That's the wrong answer. Removing a "commander" who literally has zombie mind control people at his disposal is literally removing the tools of such a character. Gimp away: I'll point out your gimping in your threads about you gimping literal tools from the characters if you do it. Thankfully, most people usually do the "deatheaters" vs. x in the MVF. There was a Yoda vs. Voldemort thing, wasn't there?

Anyway, if you gimp, make sure you remove something like that from the other side to make it fair. For instance, if you remove all of Voldemort's tools except his want (that includes horcruxes), then remove all of Sauron's tools except his magic mace. That would be a symmetric gimp, imo.

Originally posted by Nephthys
The thread says 'Voldemort vs', not 'Voldemort and the Death Eaters vs'. It would be against the rules about maximum combatants allowed in a thread, unless the other side is also a group/army. But if its just Voldemort vs another person (i.e. Gandalf or something) then it would be blatantly against the rules to allow him to summon his Death Eaters.

Where is this thread you speak of? I don't see it. (Yes, that's a joke).

But removing Voldemort's ability to get his tools when he can literally function as a jumper is gimping. No matter how many times you rephrase the same argument, I will always consider it gimping.

Do you want to know how strict I am about allowing ALL tools used? I said the Jedi should get their Clone Wars star-destroyer type ships for the Wizards vs. Jedi Temple thread. I was that adamant about not taking away the tools characters are clearly seen using on screen. Tools include people under your command. If the OP does not an exclusive clause, then bring it up.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Well for one thing it would be spite. Unless the thread was specifically tailored with Voldemort having all of his Death Eaters on his side, or Sauron and all his orcs, then it would just be ridiculous to actually allow him to use them and expect the thread to continue.

Secondly, it is not gimping him. Last time I checked armies do not count as standard gear. We wouldn't be arguing about Sauron and his forces, but rather Sauron himself. Unless actually an army thread, this forum isn't for deciding which character's army is better. The threads are for the characters themselves.

Well, I was talking about Sauron, in general...not necessarily against Voldemort. But it's awesome that we are on the same page?

Also, there's no official "armies under a magical commander's control" exclusion rule, so I don't know where you checked. This is where I almost backpeddle and say that I already indicated that it is up to the threadstarter to create well-thought out and clandestine opening posts.

I'll probably just start reverting to this point:

"No matter how many times you rephrase the same argument, I will always consider it gimping. "

Originally posted by Nephthys
It was an example. Giving Hitler his Third reich would not prove that he can beat Spiderman. It would prove that the Third Reich can beat Spiderman. It would be completely against the point of making that thread in the first place.

Not necessarily. Hitler has to prove that he can use his tool to beat Spiderman. Kind of like giving Mr. Bean a real hand gun: he probably would not be able to beat a weaponless McClane standing in an empty warehouse because Mr. Bean wouldn't be able to shoot McClane: he'd miss. Just because the tool you bring up is much bigger than others, does not mean that I will somehow change my opinion: tools are tools are tools. If you can't use them to win, you still lose.

"No matter how many times you rephrase the same argument, I will always consider it gimping. "

Originally posted by Nephthys
Again, this is merely an example. This applies to every case. Having a Voldemort vs Gandalf fight and allowing Voldemort to call his Death Eaters doesn't demonstrate that Voldemort is the superior combatant in anyway. What would even be the point of that thread?

What would be the point of a thread which does not remove ANY tools from either side and allows full access to all tools, powers, and intelligence in a thread?

Lemme rephrase the question: what's the point of purely ungimped thread? To use your example: Hitler is NOTHING to any decently in shape modern male human. He was out of shape...spent hours in bunkers, and drank a lot. But his biggest tool was his ability to get people to follow him. His second biggest tool was the people that followed him. Third biggest was his resources. And so forth.

I think the problem is you don't want to separate the "army versus" concept from "tools" concept. Not every character's bag of tools contains an army. Not every character will have to grab their army out of their bag of tools.

Also this:

"No matter how many times you rephrase the same argument, I will always consider it gimping. "

Originally posted by Nephthys
My point is that you need to get over this absurd idea about 'gimping'. Not giving a character an army is not a gimp. Not giving them time to prepare is not a gimp. Get over it.

Not giving a magical commander control of an army that he magically controls is bona fide gimping. That's direct gimping. Not indirect, but direct.

Also, I want you to understand my point instead of focusing on armies being tools: I have always been complaining about poor OPs not making their thread conditions clandestine and or doing unfair gimps (intentionally or unintentionally). Granted,this doesn't happen nearly as much. And I fully expect you to make passive agressive derpy statements about my position (such as "derp, didn't include Voldy's death eaters. GIMP! lol" I still hear about the "limits fallacy"😉

Originally posted by Nephthys
I agree. Some people behaved like children in threads regarding him. I regret that I can't confidently say that I was not one of them. However he was not some martyr who was above such things. Remember the Hall of Prophecy? God that was annoying.

Oh no, you will never hear me say RJ was innocent: he certainly dished it out, too...and there were some laughs...And, it was my fault that the hall of prophecies went on for as long as they did: it was my original idea. I was actually put in my place by RJ himself when he reminded me that the prophecies were vague and nebulous. Go figure, right?

But, I think we are on the same page again: I am not saying that every OP should say "and all tools are at each character's disposal which includes human and non-human tools". I'm saying that OPs should say, "the characters only get x and y tools" and then for them to design the gimp to be even for each side (without gimping one side more than the other just to create an even matchup...like I said...remove Voldy's army and Sauron's army...that's what I call a symmetric gimp and as long as the OP outlined explicit tools and excluded all others, it wouldn't whine about it, at all).

Originally posted by Nephthys
I don't think there are such things as indirect gimps. In the case we were originally talking about, I don't feel that it was a gimp not to allow the Gods access to prep time or their followers. The actual hypothetical fight was spite, obviously, but I had no problem with them simply being there and not having access to such thing.

That's just differing definitions, then. I know I indirectly gimped because I did not intend to exclude a often used weapon for one of my characters (it might have been McClane and his berretta...I know, stupid...but I gave him the missile launcher and the automatics he used in the Nakatomi Complex damnit!)

I cannot comment on whether or not their access to their oracles and seers is legit: I have not seen the movie. I do not know if they consult their seers/oracles like sometimes happens in Greek Mythology.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I do not think that they would be gimped by not giving them access to such things.

I'll rephrase: if and only if the gods are seen consulting them before taking action against an enemy, then and only then will I think that it is gimping.

Originally posted by Nephthys
And I would say bullshit. Firstly that assumes that they have foreknowledge of the fight, aka, that they had prep. And secondly that assumes they could actually get their hands on kryptonite.

No, they had planning time (not prep), remember (lol)? If we assume that they are in a universe with Krypto then they can get krypto: Hermes goes super duper speed, gets it, brings it back to the gods. OR...Hermes uses his super speed in combination with the Sword of Peleus for the insta-win against Kel (lame, I know)...

Originally posted by Nephthys
When you are playing devils advocate it means that you don't necessarily believe the argument that you're using and that you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. No offense, but this took a while to write up, so if you're just arguing to kill some time, kill someone elses.

I agree wit your definition:

": to put forward arguments against or objections to a proposition-which one may actually agree with-purely to test the validity of the proposition. "

However, I don't wholly disagree with them, either. I can still play devil's advocate, believe partially in my message, and still agree with portions of the others side. How? Because I still think people should be able to gimp in certain ways: fairly. From my observation, Impediment will not close a fairly gimped thread....even though we are not supposed to gimp.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Well I don't agree with your concept of 'gimping'. I think its just whining and making threads needlessly annoying and complicated.

You're entitled to your opinion. And I already called what I do whining. So nya nya. uhuh

Originally posted by Nephthys
Really? I can't seem to find that rule in the Movie Versus Forum rules anywhere. Care to point it out? Kekekeke.

You dare question the mighty mind powers of dadudemon?

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=12105210&forumid&#post12105210

I am disappoint, son.

It's pretty easy.

If you don't like the conditions of the topic:

1. Don't participate.
2. Start your own.

E.g

Voldemort vs Sidious conditions where they cannot leave Battlefield and get outside help.

DDM, you don't like the conditions, have issues with "gimping", then start your own topic. I'm pretty sure not many people will want to discuss Voldemort (+ Army) vs Sidious, but some might.

I'll repeat this because I know people have a tendency to miss this:

If you don't like the conditions of the topic:

1. Don't participate.
2. Start your own.

Originally posted by dadudemon
"No matter how many times you rephrase the same argument, I will always consider it gimping. "

To cut a long story short:

1: Ozy never prepared anything ahead of time that he used to defeat anyone. That is the point of prep-time after all. To prepare something ahead of time to help you win a fight. If the extent to his 'prep' that you can come up with is that he wore a balaclava and put on his armor (which he would have in a thread anyway) then I thin you've severely overestimated Ozy's prep skill. Also against Manhatten his plan succeeded, his prep did not. Its not a meaningless word game. He simply convinced Manhatten to support him after he'd lost.

2: People are not tools. People cannot be part of standard equipment or anything and as such including armies in non-army threads directly breaks the maximum combatants rule (as well likely the spite rule).

3: As I said, if there are ways in which people other than the poeple fighting would get involved such as if one of their powers relied upon there being people present (I specifically mentioned zombies, like you did) then obviously that would factor in.

4: I disagreed with you about those Star Destroyers then and i still do now. That was a retarded thread.

5: Voldemort does not magically control his followers. Sauron does not magically control his followers. Hitler does not magically control his followers. The Gods do not magically control their followers. What was your point again? 😬

6: Imp said 'spite/gimp (as some people put it)' which clearly means that he saw the two as the same things with gimp meaning spite. He was talking about spite threads, not 'gimped' characters.

Originally posted by Nephthys
To cut a long story short:

1: Ozy never prepared anything ahead of time that he used to defeat anyone. That is the point of prep-time after all. To prepare something ahead of time to help you win a fight. If the extent to his 'prep' that you can come up with is that he wore a balaclava and put on his armor (which he would have in a thread anyway) then I thin you've [b]severely overestimated Ozy's prep skill. Also against Manhatten his plan succeeded, his prep did not. Its not a meaningless word game. He simply convinced Manhatten to support him after he'd lost.[/B]

I said I wouldn't cover this anymore. PM'd my answer to this. 🙂

Originally posted by Nephthys
2: People are not tools. People cannot be part of standard equipment or anything and as such including armies in non-army threads directly breaks the maximum combatants rule (as well likely the spite rule).

Could have fooled me. We just covered this in my enterprise management class: people are tools and using them properly is part of business management 101. Like it or not, people are used as tools to accomplish a strategic goal. They can be measured and assigned a value to the organization just like any other asset.

Originally posted by Nephthys
3: As I said, if there are ways in which people other than the poeple fighting would get involved such as if one of their powers relied upon there being people present (I specifically mentioned zombies, like you did) then obviously that would factor in.

Impediment did clarify the "more people" rule at one point: you can't call your friends into the thread to make it an instant-team battle. He used Han Solo calling Chewie to do a canon blast run against his enemy to win a thread. I agee: Chewie is not one of Han Solo's minions and Han Solo is not a magicaly overload over Chewie.

Originally posted by Nephthys
4: I disagreed with you about those Star Destroyers then and i still do now. That was a retarded thread.

Of course. 🙂

Originally posted by Nephthys
5: Voldemort does not magically control his followers.

Yes he did for some: Imperius curse. Then there's the virtual slavery (forced to work for him via threat of life or family). Then there's the reanimated dead (zombies).

Originally posted by Nephthys
Sauron does not magically control his followers.

Covered this already: he does. But I believe we decided that was books only. Still, he still controls his army magically because he uses magic to give them orders and oversee them with his magical visision forcing them to have to obey (that's a cop-out, I know...but it still works to satisfy this part of your post).

Originally posted by Nephthys
Hitler does not magically control his followers.

It is not necessary that he do so for reasons I outlined already.

Originally posted by Nephthys
The Gods do not magically control their followers.

In the movies? Maybe. In mythology? That's not really a definitive "they don't use magic to control their followers".

Originally posted by Nephthys
What was your point again? 😬

I outlined it directly for you multiple times.

"I have always been complaining about poor OPs not making their thread conditions clandestine and or doing unfair gimps (intentionally or unintentionally)."

Originally posted by Nephthys
6: Imp said 'spite/gimp (as some people put it)' which clearly means that he saw the two as the same things with gimp meaning spite. He was talking about spite threads, not 'gimped' characters.

And if you make Hitler face Spiderman without giving him his army, that's a massive gimp against Hitler.

If you give Voldemort no wand but his armies and make him go up against full armor and mace Sauron with his armies, that's a gimp, but it is close enough to not be unfair. That matchup could work and avoid getting closed: Voldemort can still call on his death eaters to help.

The Scenario that Quan is suggesting requires Superman to sit around and jerk off while the gods go complete a series of retarded and off-direction tasks so that they can beat Superman, totally sidestepping that Superman is vastly more powerful by giving them an advantage they typically would not have.

Quan, being the under-developed manchild he is ("Tattletale"? Grow up. 🙄 I didn't even report you), in response to my, obviously joking assertion that I would debate Superman from Superman Returns against Immortals (Do note that I made this post before the Balrog vs. Titans thread), proceeded to script a ridiculous scenario where the gods get an assload of prep and time to make good of this prep, when the premise was originally "Gods and Superman fight", because he knew very well Superman would hand the gods their asses.

And some amount of gimping could be fine. For instance, making thread with Jedi against another swordsman, but allowing the normal swords to block the lightsaber, or making a thread pitting two characters against eachother, both being equal in all ways except one having a signifigant speed advantage, and making speed equal. That's not what Quan did, he grew butthurt and started scripting up a scenario to give the gods every advantage, to sidestep the fact that Superman would beat their immortal asses.

tl;dr, some amount of gimping is acceptable, but gimping to make an inferior character or characters automatically win against a vastly superior character is retarded.

No shit the gods would beat Superman with a shitload of Kryptonite, no one is going to argue that.

Originally posted by NemeBro
The Scenario that Quan is suggesting requires Superman to sit around and jerk off while the gods go complete a series of retarded and off-direction tasks so that they can beat Superman, totally sidestepping that Superman is vastly more powerful by giving them an advantage they typically would not have.

Then make your own thread. People aren't going to post in that one since no one likes discussing prep stuff anyway.

Originally posted by Placidity
Then make your own thread. People aren't going to post in that one since no one likes discussing prep stuff anyway.

I had no real intention of arguing Superman vs. the gods. Nor did I anticipate that me making a mild joke would spark an actual argument on whether or not gimping can make for a good thread (Personally though, I only like using the term "gimping" when it is done in a way to spite the gimped character).

Why would I make an intentional spite thread?

Without giving the gods a barrel of prep that gives them every advantage, they are chanceless.

Nor do I intend to argue against Quan in a thread which gives the gods an assload of prep because Quan is too bashful to admit Superman can beat up his new toy.

Originally posted by NemeBro
The Scenario that Quan is suggesting requires Superman to sit around and jerk off while the gods go complete a series of retarded and off-direction tasks so that they can beat Superman, totally sidestepping that Superman is vastly more powerful by giving them an advantage they typically would not have.

Quan, being the under-developed manchild he is ("Tattletale"? Grow up. 🙄 I didn't even report you), in response to my, obviously joking assertion that I would debate Superman from Superman Returns against Immortals (Do note that I made this post before the Balrog vs. Titans thread), proceeded to script a ridiculous scenario where the gods get an assload of prep and time to make good of this prep, when the premise was originally "Gods and Superman fight", because he knew very well Superman would hand the gods their asses.

And some amount of gimping could be fine. For instance, making thread with Jedi against another swordsman, but allowing the normal swords to block the lightsaber, or making a thread pitting two characters against eachother, both being equal in all ways except one having a signifigant speed advantage, and making speed equal. That's not what Quan did, he grew butthurt and started scripting up a scenario to give the gods every advantage, to sidestep the fact that Superman would beat their immortal asses.

tl;dr, some amount of gimping is acceptable, but gimping to make an inferior character or characters automatically win against a vastly superior character is retarded.

No shit the gods would beat Superman with a shitload of Kryptonite, no one is going to argue that.

Thanks.

Originally posted by NemeBro
I had no real intention of arguing Superman vs. the gods. Nor did I anticipate that me making a mild joke would spark an actual argument on whether or not gimping can make for a good thread (Personally though, I only like using the term "gimping" when it is done in a way to spite the gimped character).

Why would I make an intentional spite thread?

Without giving the gods a barrel of prep that gives them every advantage, they are chanceless.

Nor do I intend to argue against Quan in a thread which gives the gods an assload of prep because Quan is too bashful to admit Superman can beat up his new toy.

You already conceded so just let it go. I sometimes forget what it must be like for you to go up against someone so beyond your level.

Go drink a dr. pepper or something, kid.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I didn't say unlimited prep I said it's in their nature to go behind the scenes and fully understand the entire situation. I am saying in a movie vs. movie thread it's a war not just one small room and both sides. Think, tard think.

So now you're bragging about cheating the movie industry and insulting a paying customer. I believe in law and order not just doing whatever I want because you're a criminal.

Yes, I get it k-nite weakens him. I get the fact he can completely be depowered and have to be rescued in a hospital due to the injuries he received. I'm a very intelligent poster, tard. K-nite exists in his fictional world. Sorry you want to ignore a movie item just because you are biased. I allow everything which is why I am a pretty cool and fair guy.

I look at all his showings. Superman went max speed after he failed to save Lois. If he gains momentum he can go at that speed not in combat. I understand the portrayal of what he's capable of you don't.

You really do live up to your name.

Yet your doing it with your clown-shoe scenario.

LoL, still bitter.

Incorrect yet again; you're making a nasty habit of being wrong, dude. He wasn't "completely depowered" in Returns from having kryptonite in him, a "completely depowered" Superman wouldn't have been able to lift an island and survive that super-massive fall. Think, better yet, watch the film and then post.

So you're picking and choosing for Superman; not going by max feats again.

LoL, butt-hurt fueled personal insults. Good, now I know you know you've lost yet again.

Originally posted by NemeBro
The Scenario that Quan is suggesting requires Superman to sit around and jerk off while the gods go complete a series of retarded and off-direction tasks so that they can beat Superman, totally sidestepping that Superman is vastly more powerful by giving them an advantage they typically would not have.

Quan, being the under-developed manchild he is ("Tattletale"? Grow up. 🙄 I didn't even report you), in response to my, obviously joking assertion that I would debate Superman from Superman Returns against Immortals (Do note that I made this post before the Balrog vs. Titans thread), proceeded to script a ridiculous scenario where the gods get an assload of prep and time to make good of this prep, when the premise was originally "Gods and Superman fight", because he knew very well Superman would hand the gods their asses.

And some amount of gimping could be fine. For instance, making thread with Jedi against another swordsman, but allowing the normal swords to block the lightsaber, or making a thread pitting two characters against eachother, both being equal in all ways except one having a signifigant speed advantage, and making speed equal. That's not what Quan did, he grew butthurt and started scripting up a scenario to give the gods every advantage, to sidestep the fact that Superman would beat their immortal asses.

tl;dr, some amount of gimping is acceptable, but gimping to make an inferior character or characters automatically win against a vastly superior character is retarded.

No shit the gods would beat Superman with a shitload of Kryptonite, no one is going to argue that.

I would also add (which I have been holding out the entire present discussion) that Roth Superman lifted up and threw a giant island made from Kryptonite. He was literally right on the Krypto. Krypto ain't SHIT to Roth Superman after a very very brief sun bathe.

So the idea that Krypto does anything to the SR Superman is moot: he still chucks big islands into space.

Keep in mind that I hold the following:

Allowing the gods 3 hours of prep and superman none
is not a gimp for anyone.

Superman still has his awesome power
while immortals take a triple hour.

All powers are preserved
and nothing is deterred.

No gimps
You wimps

Originally posted by Robtard
Yet your doing it with your clown-shoe scenario.

LoL, still bitter.

Incorrect yet again; you're making a nasty habit of being wrong, dude. He wasn't "completely depowered" in Returns from having kryptonite in him, a "completely depowered" Superman wouldn't have been able to lift an island and survive that super-massive fall. Think, better yet, watch the film and then post.

So you're picking and choosing for Superman; not going by max feats again.

LoL, butt-hurt fueled personal insults. Good, now I know you know you've lost yet again.

Even proves my point more. He was depowered enough for regular men to crush him in combat. The Titans would split him open in seconds if Lex Luthor can kick his ass. Thanks for agreeing.

I am going by all feats. Superman when gathering momentum and upset over the fact his gf just died because he was too slow to react can turn back time at max travel speed not combat speed.

🙂

Originally posted by quanchi112
I am going by all feats. Superman when gathering momentum and upset over the fact his gf just died because he was too slow to react can turn back time at max travel speed not combat speed.

🙂

In versus discussion, we sometimes use "bloodlusted" versions of good characters. Generally, "PIS and CIS" are turned off, as well. For this reason, only people similar Pre-Crisis Supes can fight Pre-Crisis Supes...which is what Reeves Superman was largely based on. So when creating threads, we will specify "Superman is in character" or "morals are on". We decided on this as a group a long time ago with Impediments blessing. The "in character morals" argument came up about 2 or 3 years ago. RJ, Robtard, and Sadako were arguing about it. lolololololol

Originally posted by dadudemon
In versus discussion, we sometimes use "bloodlusted" versions of good characters. Generally, "PIS and CIS" are turned off, as well. For this reason, only people similar Pre-Crisis Supes can fight Pre-Crisis Supes...which is what Reeves Superman was largely based on. So when creating threads, we will specify "Superman is in character" or "morals are on". We decided on this as a group a long time ago with Impediments blessing. The "in character morals" argument came up about 2 or 3 years ago. RJ, Robtard, and Sadako were arguing about it. lolololololol

From what I know about precrisis Superman he had just as many lows as highs and was written all over the place.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Why I am bitter I won the debate. Even nemebro conceded I won.

Even proves my point more. He was depowered enough for regular men to crush him in combat. The Titans would split him open in seconds if Lex Luthor can kick his ass. Thanks for agreeing.

I am going by all feats. Superman when gathering momentum and upset over the fact his gf just died because he was too slow to react can turn back time at max travel speed not combat speed.

🙂

So bitter, might as well call you Lemon from now on.

"Even proves" what? Make sense, man. Still ignoring that in that particular scene he was literally surrounded by kryptonite; the Immortals won't be able to make an island's worth of it, let alone get their hands on a piece. Even with a shard of kryptonite in Superman, the Immortals couldn't likely harm him considering the damage he can take while weakened. EG free-fall from outer atmospheric heights.

So you agreed that it would take an island worth of kryptonite for all the Immortals combined to have a chance against one opponent like Superman. Good, moving on.

No, you pick and choose and try your best to use the worst showings for who you want to lose, try and be objective here, it's just a MVF fight, Lemon.

Originally posted by Robtard
So bitter, might as well call you Lemon from now on.

"Even proves" what? Make sense, man. Still ignoring that in that particular scene he was literally surrounded by kryptonite; the Immortals won't be able to make an island's worth of it, let alone get their hands on a piece. Even with a shard of kryptonite in Superman, the Immortals couldn't likely harm him considering the damage he can take while weakened. EG free-fall from outer atmospheric heights.

So you agreed that it would take an island worth of kryptonite for all the Immortals combined to have a chance against one opponent like Superman. Good, moving on.

No, you pick and choose and try your best to use the worst showings for who you want to lose, try and be objective here, it's just a MVF fight, Lemon.

That with k-nite he's too weak. Just a tiny piece around Luthor's neck had him on his knees, guy. I mean did you see the other films ? Poor guy. Look watch the films and get back to me my guess is you caught the previews the other night and were feeling cocky.

Once again with a tiny piece he falls to his knees and is susceptible. Titans crush him hell Theseus' mother could crush him in that girly rob like state.

I let all showings count and don't take the feats out of context like you have been known to do.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I've always argued the what's in character type of argument I never understood the powerset type debate. Basically to me it's arguing who you think wins based off their powers and feats which isn't how I roll.

From what I know about precrisis Superman he had just as many lows as highs and was written all over the place.

What's "in character" is definitely a doable way to argue. But it also makes for much more individual interpretation and much less objective arguments. That's what leads to silly discussions.

Take the Voldemort vs. Gandalf thread: in character, Gandalf just talks to Voldemort. A battle enraged Gandalf, in character, just uses TK against a fellow wizard. Lame matchup. Gandalf obviously quickly loses. We don't want that version of Gandalf in a verses debate: we want his best feats used by the best minds of KMC. That makes for the best possible scenario for our chosen character.

However, at the end of the day, your way is also quite fun and interesting: only stay in character. Some of the best threads have been that way and they were fun.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Quit being a pansy and so emotional robbie it's just make believe.

TBH, we could replace Robtard's name in this quote and put in just about anyone's name. I know I am bias towards certain characters....cause I love them. 🙁 Meow.

Originally posted by dadudemon
What's "in character" is definitely a doable way to argue. But it also makes for much more individual interpretation and much less objective arguments. That's what leads to silly discussions.

Take the Voldemort vs. Gandalf thread: in character, Gandalf just talks to Voldemort. A battle enraged Gandalf, in character, just uses TK against a fellow wizard. Lame matchup. Gandalf obviously quickly loses. We don't want that version of Gandalf in a verses debate: we want his best feats used by the best minds of KMC. That makes for the best possible scenario for our chosen character.

However, at the end of the day, your way is also quite fun and interesting: only stay in character. Some of the best threads have been that way and they were fun.

TBH, we could replace Robtard's name in this quote and put in just about anyone's name. I know I am bias towards certain characters....cause I love them. 🙁 Meow.

We just disagree here is all.

Rob is very emotional and needs all the help I can give him. In 2012 I will return him to prominence if he lets me help him.

I thought this was a social section of the VS Forum.

Make a thread if you wanna fight. With logical rules so I can kill ya'll there.