That actually falls under personal preference. A long time ago, when we were first getting real exposition on the Dressrosa arc, many commended the similarities between Alabasta and Dressrosa. You consider it a rip off and cliche, I consider it parallelism. You may dislike it if it were to happen, while I will enjoy the way Oda can have so many similarities, following a backbone that connects the two arcs, and yet still manage to tell two separate stories about it. And we both have others that are also on our side.... You make no sense. Oda isn't a cliche idoit.
Oh you know that thing that we do every other arc now, ancient weapons, lets make that the ancient weapon.
Plus we already saw that idoit
Shichibukai takes over island [X]
Straw hats help helpless princess take it back [X]
Evil plan and underworld [X]
Powerful Girl that helps his plans [X]
A family that is a actually a world noble appears [X]
Rebelion [X]
Ancient weapon [..]
If the secret was a weapon we could just chalk this up as a rip off Alabasta.
Super cliche. Super Predictable. Chances are if you use your brain. Its not a Weapon like that.
Just because you consider it bad won't make it bad, and just because I consider it good won't make it good. Also, I'd like you to tell me how it's cliche. Point out the specific cliche that Oda would be doing if he uses the literary device(and please tell me you know the difference between this and cliche) of parallelism. Otherwise, you're just one of the many who throw around the word cliche because it sounds fancy, when there is none. I could also site several differences between this and Alabasta:
1. Dressrosa had the introduction of a new species, Alabasta had none
2. Dressrosa had the first pirate alliance Luffy has made, Alabasta didn't
3. Dressrosa has included an Admiral, Alabasta hasn't
4. Dressrosa has included a Yonko, Alabasta hasn't.
5. Luffy was a match for Alabasta's villain, but isn't for Dressrosa
6. Alabasta had no tournament, Dressrosa doesn't.
I find it funny how in "One Piece sucks!" threads, people love to cite that Oda's ability to connect information in arcs to each other, past and future, Oda's ability to take information in the past and continue and expand it while presenting new information, is one of the series strongest traits, but then in discussions within the fandom, it's gonna be cliche, and bad, and predictable.
Everyone has predicted Luffy will fight Teach.
I predict Oda will have further exposition on Devil Fruits.
I predict Oda will reveal the information on Ancient Weapons.
We all predict Luffy will become King of the Pirates, Zoro will be WSM, Usopp will be brave
I predict Luffy wlll meet Shanks again
If these things happen, will you say "These things were predictable, this writing sucks"?
Just because you know the information will be revealed doesn't mean it was predictable. Just because you say "Yeah it was predicted the National Treasure has a connection with the ancient weapons" doesn't mean the actual connection was predictable. Notice how, so far, people have predicted the treasure may have a connection with the weapons, but no one has been able to actually post an in-depth connection? That's why if a connection is revealed, it won't be bad writing.
Oh, by the way, the next time you want to call someone an idiot just to spice up your argument, try not to misspell such a basic word. Twice. Makes you look like a pot talking to a kettle.