I think the following Looks blocks should be removed:

next costume

next backdrop
(backdrop #)
(backdrop name)
(size)

The reason is, they all have extremely easy workarounds. The commonly suggested block

previous costume::looks

is usually non-supported because of the workaround

switch costume to ((costume #) - (1))

but then there's the existing block

next costume

which can be workarounded just as easy:

switch costume to ((costume #) + (1))

so I think it should be removed. It's even easier to workaround

next backdrop

like this:

switch backdrop to [next backdrop v]

This block:

(backdrop #)

is only available in the Stage but I don't think it is even necessary because of this:

([backdrop # v] of [Stage v])

The other reporters could be replaced with a new option for the above block:

([ v] of [myself v])

(I don't think that would make the above workaround for the next costume block much harder, since all you would have to do would be set the two dropdowns.)(Edit: I got rid of the costume reporter. It makes the workaround easier.)

EDIT: Since the reporters have not been getting support, I might delete that part.

EDIT-2: I support KingOfAwesome58219's idea:

KingOfAwesome58219 wrote:

The switch backdrop block already has this figured out

Why not just add those options to the

switch costume to [ v]

block?
except you replace ‘backdrop’ with ‘costume’, obviously

No support. It's fine as it is, and removing these could break MANY projects. It would also be more confusing.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

jromagnoli wrote:

No support. It's fine as it is, and removing these could break MANY projects. It would also be more confusing.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I guess you're right about it breaking projects, but how would it be confusing?

monstermash3 wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

No support. It's fine as it is, and removing these could break MANY projects. It would also be more confusing.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I guess you're right about it breaking projects, but how would it be confusing?

I naturally go to the looks tab. I would have to retrain myself to use the sensing tab and use the blocks that I don't normally use.

jromagnoli wrote:

monstermash3 wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

No support. It's fine as it is, and removing these could break MANY projects. It would also be more confusing.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I guess you're right about it breaking projects, but how would it be confusing?

I naturally go to the looks tab. I would have to retrain myself to use the sensing tab and use the blocks that I don't normally use.

Maybe that block could be moved to the Looks tab, since it's related to the Looks blocks.

monstermash3 wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

monstermash3 wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

No support. It's fine as it is, and removing these could break MANY projects. It would also be more confusing.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I guess you're right about it breaking projects, but how would it be confusing?

I naturally go to the looks tab. I would have to retrain myself to use the sensing tab and use the blocks that I don't normally use.

Maybe that block could be moved to the Looks tab, since it's related to the Looks blocks.

But it can't as it is a sensing block.

Support for removing the blocks.
The reporters?
No thanks.

oh look it's a cute bug.

I'm pretty sure you may deem them pointless, but in reality they help a ton since most people would expect those things to be in Looks and not Sensing.

I think only next costume should be removed since there's no point in having it if people don't want previous costume.

I dont support this.
so what, they have a workaround and they are already in scratch.
If it ain't broke, dont fix it.
Plus, this could break many and i mean MANY projects.
Someone could finish making a game with a whole bunch of those scripts. could be a vital element…
Then all of the sudden their game won't work right due to what you suggested.

BY147258369 wrote:

monstermash3 wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

monstermash3 wrote:

jromagnoli wrote:

No support. It's fine as it is, and removing these could break MANY projects. It would also be more confusing.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I guess you're right about it breaking projects, but how would it be confusing?

I naturally go to the looks tab. I would have to retrain myself to use the sensing tab and use the blocks that I don't normally use.

Maybe that block could be moved to the Looks tab, since it's related to the Looks blocks.

But it can't as it is a sensing block.

Still, it's related to Looks.

gems89 wrote:

I dont support this.
so what, they have a workaround and they are already in scratch.
If it ain't broke, dont fix it.
Plus, this could break many and i mean MANY projects.
Someone could finish making a game with a whole bunch of those scripts. could be a vital element…
Then all of the sudden their game won't work right due to what you suggested.

But then what happened to projects with the previously removed blocks? I am suggesting to remove these blocks because of easy workarounds, and the forever if block probably was removed because of an easy workaround.

monstermash3 wrote:

Still, it's related to Looks.

Only as much as it's related to motion, sound or data. Putting it in looks is pretty much arbitrary.

Anyway, no support as per everyone else here.

stickfiregames wrote:

monstermash3 wrote:

Still, it's related to Looks.

Only as much as it's related to motion, sound or data. Putting it in looks is pretty much arbitrary.

Anyway, no support as per everyone else here.

Oh, yeah, I forgot about the motion, sound, and data options. But either way, I think it would be much easier. One block with a dropdown is better than tons of unnecessary blocks (in my opinion).

I support for removing the first two blocks. The others are fine, and would be difficult to work-around.

What about the New Scratchers?

I feel like the first two could be removed, if only just to reserve space in case they need more in the future. The workarounds are extremely easy. If removing them, I do feel as though these…

switch costume to [next costume v]

switch costume to [previous costume v]

…though already obtainable (and functional) by renaming a costume that, dragging the block out and setting it to that, then deleting the costume, should be actual options for that block to save space.

WolfCat67 wrote:

I feel like the first two could be removed, if only just to reserve space in case they need more in the future. The workarounds are extremely easy. If removing them, I do feel as though these…

switch costume to [next costume v]

switch costume to [previous costume v]

…though already obtainable (and functional) by renaming a costume that, dragging the block out and setting it to that, then deleting the costume, should be actual options for that block to save space.

Support for the “next costume” and “previous costume”.

da-maker wrote:

What about the New Scratchers?

What?

WolfCat67 wrote:

I feel like the first two could be removed, if only just to reserve space in case they need more in the future. The workarounds are extremely easy. If removing them, I do feel as though these…

switch costume to [next costume v]

switch costume to [previous costume v]

…though already obtainable (and functional) by renaming a costume that, dragging the block out and setting it to that, then deleting the costume, should be actual options for that block to save space.

Yeah, that makes sense since that is already available for backdrops.

No support. These blocks are very useful in animations (Especially speed draws) and projects with clones.

Just realized there's a huge contradiction. If you plan to remove

next costume

and

(costume #)

How can you do the workaround of

switch costume to<(costume #) + (1)>

They would do;

switch costume to (([costume # v] of [Sprite1 v]) + (1))//current sprite

But I only agree with the blocks, not the reporters anyway.