/tnt/ - Tournaments & Events

So what are your mains?
Your expectations for them?

>>58559
I expect her to win

>>58554
just about a week to go, you all ready?

>>58562
Don’t worry, Mothra is my main this year

https://itsalmo.st/ms-co-2023-n3za

>>58559
my main was fang so now i'm just kinda along for the ride. it's nice to not have any fears/expectations and to be able to see how it unfolds.

>>58659
This is how I feel mostly, I’m still supporting Mothra and want her to win but in terms of strong emotions they aren’t there like they were with Fang

>>58557
>>58562
>>58596
>>58597
Feral beasts will suffer a debuff this year I'm afraid.

>>58621
Lol lowest seed in the villains tournament with four votes total

>>58684
Legs sweep*



*(in the bottom tourney)

>>58667
Paper tiger.
In fact let's get a list of paper tigers:
>Loona
>FARTS post-2019
>DTVA (especially Anne and Eda)
>"traps will ruin the tourney"
Reminder the controversy tends to come from someone no one would think about.

>>58559
I have extremely high hopes for her, but I don't wanna jinx her. She could still lose early if she's super unlucky. I hope to God that's not the case, but you never know with these tournaments.

Will johanna make a fang-esque comeback or will she fade into obscurity?

>>58753
>fang-eque comeback
Fang's comeback was a combination of being a funny pick, possibly being the most campaigned character in a /co/ tournament yet, and hype for her show's ending. Johanna doesn't really have any of that with her show's final season's airdate not even being announced yet and she has to deal with her 2021 controversy. She has fans given her high seeds and despite huge backlash, only losing to Betty by ten votes.

>>58753
Johanna seems a lot more contentious and her run's success is undermined a bit by the spite campaign that was going on that year. I don't think she'll make the E8 this year, especially with the other girls that are also eligible this year.

>>58763
>>58761
>>58753
>>58754
JWNBAF

(Johanna will never be a fang)

>>58767
KWAWNBAFB

>>58768
Translation

>>58768
TMA

>>58771
Emma is going to get destroyed
>show no one really cares about
>character is actively called ugly

>>58772
she already won 2021 too

>>58772
really? did i miss something about her and the show in certain threads?

>>58774
Threads died so quickly and only like 10 people cared about the show. Lots of people were calling the characters fucking ugly

>>58775
oh that's why. now i'm running out of newcomers then..
i guess Annie Bramley from It's Pony?

>>58773
I hate Emma but if people use that reason to vote against her it’ll be one of the dumbest things imaginable

>>58775
Lol don't overblown it. UWE hasn't caught the same hype Primal did on /co/ but to say only 10 cared about it is exagerating it.

>>58778
You’re downplaying it, no one gave a shit about the show except waifu/husbandofags with bad taste. Primal and UWE were in different leagues

Post your random predictions.

>>58780
Mothra will either do amazing or horrible, no in between

>>58782
The brackets are (If I’m not mistaken) randomized this time around correct?

>>58783
Yeah

>>58780
Propane vs. Johanna

>>58784
Excellent. This could go either way since Mothra could be pitted against relatively weak opponents

>>58784
Still the worst rule that has ever been applied to these tournaments
Only people into that are the roleplayers like Tourneyanon who think they'll be in round 2

>>58853
>Still the worst rule that has ever been applied to these tournaments
Nah, it's still series character limit.

>>58853
Only the first round is randomized but yeah I anticipate it eventually backfiring in a really ugly way

>>58853
Every round should be randomized.

>>58853
It kinds of screws with the purpose of seeding and the 3-way matches makes it even more pointless, but I at least like the unpredictably. I would like to be able to work on OC in round 1 ahead of time instead of waiting for the thread to be posted, but that's a me problem.
>>58903
No.
>>58917
We should keep the 3 rule as it means more room for other series and prevents that from causing issues. How did this happen?

>>58929
>no
Give me a good reason why not.

>>58929
>How did this happen?
It didn't happen. All those Touhou characters were 3-ruled and one made it to E8.

>>58933
It gets to the point of defeating the purpose of the bracket when everything is random rather than actually showing a character's strength against the odds. I could see a very lackluster E8 coming out of it.
>>58934
I know. I meant how did so many Touhous get up there? I get the series is popular on /v/, but I don't think any other series has gotten that many 3 ruled before. Even Pokemon right there doesn't have that many.

>>58917
There isn't really a series on /co/ where the case would be as bad as touhou. But I argued before: if it's that much of an issue make a stipulation for a specific series, or just call it the touhou rule for /v/.
>>58929
>as it means more room for other series
This has been my issue with the rule. It's quite forwardly and openly a throttle on popularity; literally screwing over certain characters for being from a popular series. And the people who supported it had basically openly admitted that. Tourney's no stated goal's but the rule clearly pity's less popular or liked characters and properties for a sense of variety and what's more "interesting." The randomization rule does this too but not as blatantly.

>>58939
Yeah, exactly why it doesn't show a character's strength against the odds. I hate match autism, but randomizing will lead to more harm than good and will only potentially help out a few literal whos while potentially screwing over popular picks by increasing the chances of making them face each other early.
>>58940
Here are some of the 3 digit seeds of last Mr. /co/.
>The Riddler
>Bane
>Spongebob
>Max
>Superman
>Sam
>Dexter
>Zuko
>Xavier
>Doctor Doom
>Frylock
>Jafar
Say what you will about their tournament history, all of them are pretty loved on the board. Even with the 3 rule, some popular characters still struggle to get in. Why would you loosen it?

>>58942
>show a character's strength against the odds
Again, what? This sounds incredibly autistic, "thou must defeat top seeds by thine hand or thee is not worthy".
Randomizing prevents match autism and that's it, it's not going to suddenly fill the tournament with literal whos no one cares about because those are filtered by the Qualifiers.

>>58853
>>58929
Randomized brackets and three-way matches are both great rules.
The purpose of seeding is to determine the 128 most popular contestants. It's not to give the popular picks any more of an advantage than they already have. The justification that seeded pairing and resolving ties by seed "are meant to reward higher seeds" always felt like bull to me. Being a high seed is a reward within of itself, that means the character is popular and is a good position. Why would they need MORE boons?

>>58942
You know that's not the spirit in which the rule was created. But regardless all non-banned characters should have their shot. The only measurement the tourney's formally go by to advance is votes. If that means a character who is seemingly loved doesn't get enough votes... well then they didn't get enough votes. The one's who did get the actual high enough votes should go on.

>>58943
>it's not going to suddenly fill the tournament with literal whos no one cares about because those are filtered by the Qualifiers.
No, but they make it in anyway, sometimes under sketchy circumstances (see: Shirley, the Dutch girls from that wojak series, Livesey, John Silver) and unfairly gives them an advantage with known lower seeds but against other lower seeds
Later rounds are filled with literal whos when we get powerhouses facing off in round 1 and already having the stigma of a "seed" but without the easier matchups to justify it, it's bullshit and only fans of those roleplay characters are into it because it "gives them more time"

>>58944
NTA but randomized brackets removes any concrete reward or advantage of being a high seed. Personally I favor higher seed moving on in a tie because it indicates the character had more pulling power and specific fans from the outset and is not just in a case of being tied with someone the more lukewarm voterbase (the one's that voted neither in qualifier) decides they prefer.

>>58948
>removes any concrete reward or advantage of being a high seed
Why does there have to be some extra reward for that in the first place?
> the more lukewarm voterbase (the one's that voted neither in qualifier) decides they prefer.
Those people are part of the tournament too, this is just their input into the overall performance of a character. If anything not having a higher seed automatically proceed in a tie actually puts a character's popularity with their fanbase into perspective of their popularity in the overall tournament and truly puts that to a test.

>>58946
If memes get in and are able to get far with their meme power, I don't see what's wrong with that. The later rounds will not be filled with "literal whos" because actual literal whos don't qualify.

>>58949
>Why does there have to be some extra reward for that in the first place?
I'm not saying there should there, just that you're statement "Being a high seed is a reward within of itself" is wrong under the current rule-set and one you support. Why I think there actually should be though is explained right after that.
>Those people are part of the tournament too...
Some characters got strong fanbases and lesser attention in a general sense, some the opposite. It's a matter of rewarding concentrated fandom over a lighter partiality. It should be that way in my opinion at least.

>>58943
Proving you're actually a popular character in a tournament and not being carried by a completely randomized bracket every round is autistic?
>>58944
That is not what a seed is. This is the exact definition. "A seed is a competitor or team in a sport or other tournament who is given a preliminary ranking for the purposes of the draw. Players/teams are "planted" into the bracket in a manner that is typically intended so that the best do not meet until later in the competition, usually based on regular season." I like the round 1 randomizations, but doing it every round would be overkill. Being a high seed should be rewarded because it's not something easy to pull off and doing it in a nomination list of hundreds of characters is crazy.

>>58944
deciding ties by seed is a good policy. you've already demonstrated you're more popular than your opponent by having a higher seed.
>>58949
your popularity with your fanbase, and the size of that fanbase, is your popularity in the overall tournament. the only aguable exception are controversial high seeds with an equal number of passionate fans and haters, but those rarely tie.

>>58955
I guess we should just stop the tournament after the Qualifiers and crown the top seed as the winner because they are the most popular of all the characters clearly.
Qualifying at all means you are at least somewhat popular, getting lucky because of the randomizing every round is no different than getting a lucky bracket because of Round 1 randomization, the former just prevents people for voting for future matches.

>>58943
>>58951
The term literal who is not actually literally. It basically just means far less popular characters in the way some use it. I don't really think actual literal whos qualify either. It's an easy term to use but I'll avoid using it next time since it's just a buzzword. My point is we are giving handicaps to less popular characters when the tournaments are partly based around popularity and seeding. It's becoming less of an achievement to make it far.

>>58953
>It's a matter of rewarding concentrated fandom over a lighter partiality.
Every time a character has a large concentrated fandom they're pretty much guaranteed to go far in a tournament either way, they don't need things to be made even easier for them.
>>58955
> Being a high seed should be rewarded because it's not something easy to pull off and doing it in a nomination list of hundreds of characters is crazy.
Not exactly crazy when most of those hundreds of characters are varying degrees of literally who.
>>58956
>you've already demonstrated you're more popular than your opponent by having a higher seed.
The logical endpoint of this is not having a tournament after qualifiers in the first place.
>your popularity with your fanbase, and the size of that fanbase, is your popularity in the overall tournament.
And since you tied, that means that popularity is closely comparable to the popularity of the other character among tourneygoers and more deliberation may be needed.

>>58958
No because first seeds can also be cursed. Randomizing every round can make making it far less of an accomplishment and getting a lucky bracket in a round 1 randomization is still hard.

>>58960
3 ways are not a good way to handle a tiebreaker as they don't settle it, they instead lead to 2 characters gangbanging another.

Series-limit rule should be far more a concern than bracketing considering how concrete of a value-favor it represents. It doesn't get debated enough. There has never been an adequate argument for it on /co/ beyond basically "well we should take pity on the less popular and have more variety". Why exactly? Is there a stated purpose to tourney's that would justify this?
and it's not necessarily a matter of popularity vs. meta values. Tourney's in their original form advocate no stance. Votes are the only driving factor it recognizes. Continually instituting rules for pure interest, hate of franchises, or pity participation constricts the open nature of it to something more value-aligned.
Randomized brackets are somewhat the same issue, but it's not overtly barring any character, rather it's just mixing them up once the process is already underway.
FOTM rule also can carry some of the same reservations but there's much more of a case to be made on the direct unfair bias that results from not having it. But time is an unfairness that can't really be eliminated, just hopefully reduced. I don't think it's really something that matters anyways except in specific cases of wildly popular funpost fuel like SU. Otherwise new stuff tends to be disadvantaged cause of /co/'s older userbase and attitude towards the industry.

>>58960
>The logical endpoint of this is not having a tournament after qualifiers in the first place.
no, that's stupid.
considering how rarely ties happen, it's better to have a quick and easy way to resolve them so we can move on. and basing it off seeding makes more sense than whatever other arbitrary measure you can come up with because getting a higher seed indicates that a character is more popular in a vacuum.

>>58958
>I guess we should just stop the tournament after the Qualifiers and crown the top seed as the winner because they are the most popular of all the characters clearly.
Old ass argument that's been debunked already. Tourney format will obviously yield more a result of general likability over concentrated likability, which is what people really mean when they argue about tourney's as a popularity contest. The tie breaker going to higher seed is just a quick formality that gives a nod to passion over compromise.

>>58964
As say this as someone who loved 2022 to death, round 1 should be the only one randomized and ties should be decided by high seeds. That year would have been completely different if every round was randomized and not necessarily for the better.

>>58964
>Being random means you can give those lesser ones an actual fighting chance
Again, it must be asked: Why should this be strived for anyways?

>>58971
okay Gwenpoolschizo.

This year will see new blood and I could see them making strong runs

>>58959
>It basically just means far less popular characters in the way some use it
That's like calling a dog a giraffe because it's not a cat, what? Also no, I think a lot of people use "literal who" because they themselves do not know the character making them a "literal who", which is not right either.
With thousands of characters and thousands of votes, the amount of "lesser popular" characters are very few. Randomizing does not give an advantage to them because it's random, they can still easily get fucked immediately.
>less of an achievement to make it far
By that logic, a top seed getting far is also not an achievement because they just went against less popular characters.

>>58961
Even with randomizing each round, extremely popular characters are still much more likely to win because of their inherent popularity. Winning with randomized brackets is not less of an accomplishment than a top seed cruising through a non-randomized bracket.

>>58968
Yes, that argument is stupid, in the same vein as saying that randomized brackets mean that popular characters are now at a disadvantage.

>>58974
You see the problem is this is basically asking the tourney be changed to accommodate and pity you. It leads to the issue described in >>58966
Really I think people trying to change rules to allow lesser characters should just, well, suck it up. But it's not hopeless anyways, cause like was described earlier a lot of characters get in on concentrated fandom and lose early to general preference of their opponent.

randomized brackets are bad because it might force two popular candidates to face each other in round 2 or so instead of letting them shitstomp half the bracket first

All rule debates really just go back to "I want my lesser characters to have a better chance cause that's funner".

>>58977
it's not about pitying less popular characters, it's that there's no reason to care about a match when it's already a foregone conclusion.
randomized brackets make the early rounds more unpredictable and interesting, but the more popular characters are still going to go the farthest. in the words of Randy Savage, "The cream always rises to the top."

>>58979
Personally I don't want the top seeds to do well because I'm contrarian.
Also, I'm a big fan of luck, that's why I want full randomization and I think ties should be decided on a coin flip.

>>58980
It reduces the tournament representing something of real achievement (i.e. the exempalr representative of the board or most0liked), or more pushes it further to a particular, very ambiguous and mutable meaning ("fun"). If it really came down to that it's fair game to giga-rig cause it's fun.

>>58970
Was I defending complete randomization? Nah. That shit sounds stupid. Randomizing Round 1 is good enough for me.
>ties should be decided by high seeds.
This one just sorta depends on who you ask. I like three-ways more but letting the higher seed win is also an understandable opinion

>>58983
why do you keep acting like the best characters aren't going to eventually win regardless? it really sounds like you're pissy over characters you don't like doing well because they're not "popular" enough.

>>58981
So basically you just want a more exciting early tourney, but your law shows that it should be pointless anyways, or contradictory.
>"The cream always rises to the top."
Low seeds have won over high seeds and won the whole tourney before. So you know that law isn't iron. Randomization actually further undermines it, or at least tries to in essence. Seeing as randomization could fuck over a popular character in the start, the one's who's rising to the top would more likely be a middling character that got momentum.

>>58976
A top seed still has to deal with the stigma of being a threat and people rooting for the underdog.
>>58985
The best characters are subjective. If you asked me, I would say they don't normally win as I prefer the runner-ups in the majority of tournaments or someone who lost earlier.

>>58987
yeah you're just pissy over characters you don't like winning. go suck a fat one.

>>58985
>why do you keep acting like the best characters aren't going to eventually win regardless?
What makes you sure the 'best" whoever you think they are, will? It can't be told how much they get screwed in by various factors, or how long the tourney's will last.
Really it's just a matter of having solid principle about the whole thing though to define what the tourney's should be about, who deserves what and whatnot.

>>58988
>A top seed still has to deal with the stigma of being a threat and people rooting for the underdog
People will vote for who they like most, people will vote for the "underdogs" like how people vote for the extremely popular characters, because they just prefer them.

>>58989
I'm just pointing out the issue in what you say, fag. I think you ultimately want a pity chance, or with what's "fun" regardless of implications it has about the tourney. At least admit to that. No one really knows what they're about or cares.

>>58991
Not always how it goes. I see people voting for less popular characters all the time especially late game just because they think they won't ever get the chance again rather than because they really like them more.

This entire conversation is hurting my brain
These aren't popularity contests because the bracket tournament aspect + campaigning completely destroys that but it also can't be an election-esce campaign race because you still need to be popular with the board to even have a chance of participating.

>>58987
>Seeing as randomization could fuck over a popular character in the start
Randomization can fuck over any character at the start.

>>58994
My own issue is that certain rule-changes come to favor one aspect or the other. It shifts the base nature of the tournament by varying degrees.
>>58995
Yes, the point is the idea that "the cream always rises to the top" is not correct with randomization in place (at least in the sense it's implemented).

>>58982
>I'm a big fan of luck
Then there's zero point of main board tournaments and we might as well end them

>>58993
Clearly, those people don't prefer the powerhouses and are voting for who they prefer, just in a different wording.

>>58994
Tourneys are like a combination of both.

>>58998
I didn't say the entire tournament had to be decided by luck. That's what the Murder Games do, anyway.

>>58998
Or just follow post-tourney hunger games exclusively.

>>58997
by your logic it's not correct without randomization either. all the things you are blaming on randomized brackets were already happening when we had seeded brackets. they're "issues" inherent to a multi-round voting bracket.
again, it sounds like you're pissy that characters you don't like are winning and are blaming it on the format.

>>59001
Some of the same things may have been happening, arguably to a lesser extent. The point is the rule favors one value system over another. Randomized brackets is clearly meant to encourage these things.
Again, it's about trying to clear up principles, like was the purpose of the tourney /phil/osophy thread.

>>59002
And I want to add I don't actually care about the randomizing that much. Character limit is the biggest issue.

I don't think randomizing every round is enough nor are tiebreaker 3 matchups. The best choice is to completely abolish the bracket system and only have the top 128, top 64, top 32, top 16, top 8, top 4, and top 2 of all the nominated characters be voted on to make it to the next round. Make every round like qualifiers on a smaller scale.

>popular characters doing well in a popularity contest is unfair
I don't get this logic lol

>>59007
literally who said that

>>59005
Interesting concept. Highly doubt the base form of the tournament will ever be changed though.

>>59008
people arguing that we need to give the "little guys" a fighting chance, basically.

The biggest drawback of a randomized first round for me it's that as a campaigner, I feel discouraged from supporting my pick before and during the qualifier round because now gaining a high seed becomes absolutely meaningless and the RNG might end up fucking over my character anyway. People always make this a debate between the top seeds and triple digit underdogs but forget about everyone in-between.

>>59022
Campaigning still has a purpose in qualifiers, as you still need to attract more votes than 900+ other characters and maybe even remind people that your character is in the poll at all. Randomization can save your character's bacon if they just barely make the cut. Middle seeds are potentially in a bit more peril at the very beginning, yeah. Overall popularity, roughly represented by seed, still counts though.

Speaking of campaigning, how much should you campaign for your character? Too little and not enough people will notice. Too much and it'll be looked at as spamming and annoying.

>>59040
My golden rule is to show as much support as the tournament can allow you to, meaning that once your character is out of the tournament you should stop the presses. Anything past that enters the "annoying intrusive campaigning" territory. Like, RPers are allowed to chime in occasionaly after their loss and it's cool to see other characters referenced in OC for lore reasons from time to time, but you can't spend the entire tourney acting like a sore loser.

>>58937
>I know. I meant how did so many Touhous get up there?
2021 was the most activate set of tournaments to date, so what happened was probably that people who liked 2hus just voted for all the 2hus.
They also won 2020, so you could assume they were enthusiastic.

>>58994
That's because they are popularity contests. It's just that meta elements happen to influence some voters.

I think the best compromise with randomized brackets would be to protect the top 8 seeds and shuffle everyone else around them. That way the lower seeds still get more of a chance, and we avoid shitty randomization scenarios like number 1. vs number 2. in the first two rounds, or having a really weak portion of the bracket since there's at least one top seed in each section.

>>58975
What's the new blood between last year's tournament and now? The only new IPs I can think of are Unicorn Warriors, Ruby Gillman, and that Hailey disney cartoon, none of which seem like strong threats. Doesn't help that Hazbin Hotel has straight up vanished. It was supposed to drop this summer and I was looking forward to the chaos.

>>58971
Gwenpool is cursed by association with the Gwen + Zone-tan schizo.
Comicsfags best shot is probably Lois Lane. If you guys can co-operate with MAWS tomboy-Lois fans you have puncher's chance. If you guys start gatekeeping and bickering with the tomboy fans she's dead in the water. She'll already be fighting recency bias arguments so you'll need all the help you can get.

>>59056
>I think the best compromise with randomized brackets would be to protect the top 8 seeds and shuffle everyone else around them.
No, it has to either be completely randomized or we go back to the traditional seeding.

>>58963
This has never happened.
>>58968
>Old ass argument that's been debunked already. Tourney format will obviously yield more a result of general likability over concentrated likability, which is what people really mean when they argue about tourney's as a popularity contest.
You're not debunking it, you're providing a reason for 3-way matches yourself. If it's about general likability, then have the tied characters proceed and compete against a third party, a natural scenario in which another tie is extremely unlikely.
>>58972
>>58983
Because balanced matches tend to be more fun for the majority of people. Why do you think these rules gained traction in the first place?

You may think the tournament should be about your 12th seed main and a bunch of other high seeds competing, while the lower half of the bracket is just there to job and hype up the higher seeds for the first few rounds, and that it's fair because popularity contest and majority rules. But even by majority rules, this isn't fun for a lot of people. Here's the thing:

Paradoxically, the majority's opinion is not always in accord with the procedure of a straight popularity contest. The majority of people want to have fun, rather than adhere to strict formalities for principle's sake. And a straight popularity contest is not always fun. If anything, it will often be fairly predictable once the qualifiers tell you who's more popular.

Stretching a boring obvious match like Tyr'ahnee vs. Sticks The Badger to 24 hours is just a formality. A lot of people would rather have balanced matches that aren't as predictable. And there's also the fact that just because people prefer a certain character, that doesn't mean they dislike or don't care about all the lower-seed characters and want to see them eat shit in round 1. That's what randomization does. It allows for matches that are, at least generally, more fair and enjoyable for more people.

I don't disagree with the anon above me but I too think randomized are bound to backfire and cause a shitstorm sooner or later, and then we will be back to square one.

>>59063
Also it's not like triple digit seeds haven't managed to go far and beat the odds while using traditional seeding.

>>59064
A handful of times, maybe.

>>59067
who is this

>>59068
Cirno, I think?

>>59070
That's weird, why is she in the Ms. /co/ thread? At least post an actual winner like Koishi or something.

>>59068
Madotsuki from Yu Me Neko

>>59072
That's weird, she should've won or something.

I expect a bunch of Owl House noms to get in. The number of them that make it past the first round will be the judge of whether /co/ still holds the show in high esteem after that disaster of a conclusion.

>>58780
A waifu that gets posted here is gonna cheat.

>>59067
This is actually a secret message. It means that this year will be the first time Ms. /co/ has a winner with a solo campaigner.

>>59077
>disaster of a conclusion.
Owl House final was good though? Arguably the best of nu-dtva.

>>59077
If a show is well liked enough the finale doesn’t matter, spear did the best he ever did in mr /co/ in spite of a hated finale the week before

>>59085
Or a three digit seed winning. Or both things.

>>59056
>>59058
Just keep round 1 randomization. That's all we need if we do randomization.

>>59060
Of course, the majority rule decides what's driving the tournament. I think people just tent to vote on rules with no real understanding of the implications. "fun" again is subjective and in this case basically comes down to less predictability (essentially character variety) or, more often perhaps, the vested interest in wanting their smaller favorites to have a chance. Pretty much what it means is making it less and less a popularity contest and more a shifting game of sorts. It's reflected in tourney's being less a formal event and more a sub-culture of its own over the years.

>perifag absolutely losing it right now on /co/
He's gonna giga-rig isn't he?

>>59092
When the fuck isn't he absolutely losing it?

https://boards.4channel.org/co/thread/139044022

>>59096
>dethroned
I thought they never lost it?

>>59100
Kek

But yeah, this year, I'm campaigning for dragonesses and Disney animal waifus

>>59110
No problem! Hoping Maleficent and Ludmilla make it far as well

I’ll vote for beasts and scalies

Welp, thread turned to shit and 404'd.

>>59096
Bruh

Holy shit jannies are finally getting smarter.

Honestly fuck all rule-fagging. Tourney’s should have as least restrictions as reasonably possible. Rule-bending for whiner’s had always gone against the spirit of the competition. If your character is weak they’re weak.

>404'd with the actual tourney right around the corner
Its gonna be hosted on here isn't it?

>>59122
Not quite no, this has been common since 2021, there's been times even a day before they get removed but not the actual one
Not worried

>>59122
You guys get panicky real easy, despite the fact that this has been pretty consistent for years now.

>>59124
Agreed, this happened even in 2022 since mods only allowed official threads and not hype threads. Besides I believe Nightshift even told mods ahead for the September first date. And I agree with >>59127 as well, some anon’s have the tendency to panic a lot and at points give up easily.

>>59096
>I have a good feeling about this year. I’m thinking a deserving girl will win. Just a hunch.
I'll trust that random anon. We're gonna have a good winner this year guys.

Predict who's gonna be top seed.

>>59131
Lois Lane

>>59122
Pretty sure that one was taken down cause it descended into bickering and mods were on extra alert cause of the wave of perispam at the same time.

>>59104
What happened to Blaue so that she can't be in anymore?

Boy, these last 11 months seem to have flown by, but now the wait seems longer the closer we get to September

>>59187
It's just less than a week

>>59204
How much longer?

>>59230
September first
6 days

>>59131
Goku again.

>>59131
Koichi

Will the Toph curse get broken this year or is she still recovering from Fang’s bites?

>>59280
It's not the Toph curse, it's the FARTS curse
Until she can disassociate from FARTS she is getting nowhere

>NSA implements new tourney method that counts ip's
>voters count drops to 500-600 basically confirming several hundred accounts in previous years were alts
How much you wanna bet?

>>59294
95%+

>>59294
The voting site doesn't work for me so I couldn't vote anyway

>>59301
Hotel Mario - No HD

>>59291
I think FARTS can be generalized to a lot of characters besides those 5. I unfortunately foresee it next year with Tyr'ahnee. I think Chel would suffer from it too, but the fuckery from last year might give her a boost for unarguably being robbed.

>>59187
Kinda scary, I still clearly remember last year.

>>59319
I was high as a kite when fang won, I never thought she’d win even back in 2020. I campaigned in both of her tournaments so goddamn much.

>>59322
Shit, RIP. I'd be happy if she got into the Elite 8.

>>59322
It’s certainly possible, that is unless anon’s use the Quinn show version as character representation

>>59294
If anything they would increase because it's easy to change IPs

>>59252
Wait, doesn't it start on Saturday?

>>59361
Imagine the smell

>>59360
The first of September is on a Friday, so no.

>>59325
Yeah, she'd have to be associated exclusively with her original version, and maybe others that stick closely to that. Post-Joker Harley is much more polarizing. Her show is part of that but it's also in the movies and comics too.

>>59365
I miss her being able to de-clown.

>>59366
I miss her from this time period overall. Tara is a terrible Harley Quinn and is like nails on a chalkboard to me

>>59362
Plenty more where that came from

>>59369
Please use the NSFW tag for that, thanks.

>>59373
Sorry about that, haven't used this site in a long time

>>59131
Harley Quinn

>>59086
No it wasn't. It didn't address anything I found to be actually interesting, and the second episode of the finale season was especially a giant waste of time. Star Vs remains the best Disney show in the past decade.

>>59382
Gravity Falls was the best Disney show in the pa-
>Gravity Falls released in 2012
... I feel old.

>>59383
GF is better, but I feel like it could've been better still.
Star Vs gets a lot of bonus points for sating my shipping fix and for all the /co/ OC and jokes made in 2017.

>>59382
Star Vs has the shittiest ending out of all of them

>>59382
This seems like an extremely unpopular opinion

Star Vs was by far the worst show /co/ hyperfixated on during this last decade, even worse than SU.

>>59382
Star vs. had a garbage finish and final season. So notorious Star Hitler still gets memes on today. Owl House was the best for simply not being controversial at all. The biggest controversy was there was nothing to really complain about cause it was a straightforward hence somewhat “boring” end, while every other show had some kind of shitstorm at the end.
That being said GF is probably the best overall. There’s a case to be made for Amphibia and even OH (which has gotten massively overhated by /co/ for de-facto reasons). Definitely not Star vs.

>there will be little to no fang oc this year
Damn

>>59393
Shame, she's a fun character