Establishing combat skill requirements

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that @DaReaperMan 's example link above seems like a good format to apply for our character pages. Thank you for helping out.

@AKM sama @DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr. Bambu @Just_a_Random_Butler @Agnaa @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @GrathOfLux @Dereck03 @Planck69 @LephyrTheRevanchist

This is a very important issue for our wiki, so your help would be very appreciated here.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

I think that @DaReaperMan 's example link above seems like a good format to apply for our character pages. Thank you for helping out.

@DontTalkDT @IdiosyncraticLawyer @FinePoint @Qawsedf234 @DarkDragonMedeus @Vzearr @Armorchompy

What do you think?

We already use it on certain profiles so making it standard is fine by me. Whether we should keep labeling/give ratings to combat intelligence tho, I am completely neutral.

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT @IdiosyncraticLawyer @Qawsedf234 @DarkDragonMedeus @Armorchompy @Planck69 @Dalesean027 @Mr._Propeller_Hat @Mr. Bambu

As I mentioned earlier, I think that the following example link seems like a good solution for revising our intelligence standards, but we still need further input here before we can apply any changes to our rules.

DaReaperMan/Thrall

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Looks good to me.

 

[KLOL506]

Bump

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

Looks good

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody summarise the respective staff opinions here so far in a single post please?

 

[DontTalkDT]

@DontTalkDT @IdiosyncraticLawyer @Qawsedf234 @DarkDragonMedeus @Armorchompy @Planck69 @Dalesean027 @Mr._Propeller_Hat @Mr. Bambu

As I mentioned earlier, I think that the following example link seems like a good solution for revising our intelligence standards, but we still need further input here before we can apply any changes to our rules.

DaReaperMan/Thrall

vsbattles.fandom.com

You mean to have a section in the intelligence section to describe what the characters skill is, but without just slapping a keyword onto it? Yes, that's fine with me.
I think tabbers in particular should probably be an optional element.

 

[Armorchompy]

I consider that acceptable, I did something similar with my Samus rework and I think it works well, though I'm open to opinions. I am personally more of a bullet point guy than a tabber guy in this case though

 

[Antvasima]

You mean to have a section in the intelligence section to describe what the characters skill is, but without just slapping a keyword onto it? Yes, that's fine with me.
I think tabbers in particular should probably be an optional element.

Yes. That is correct, and I agree. Thank you for helping out.

 

[Antvasima]

I consider that acceptable, I did something similar with my Samus rework and I think it works well, though I'm open to opinions. I am personally more of a bullet point guy than a tabber guy in this case though

Thank you for helping out to you as well.

So what are our staff vote results here so far?

 

[Qawsedf234]

As I mentioned earlier, I think that the following example link seems like a good solution for revising our intelligence standards, but we still need further input here before we can apply any changes to our rules

Personally, I'm fine with the suggested tabbers. Like I said before, I think it's not really possible to give someone like "Supergenius with Karate" as a rating; it should just list their karate feats.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

I think that we seem to have sufficient staff approval to apply this change in our rules then.

Would you be willing to handle it please, @DontTalkDT ?

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT @Qawsedf234 @LephyrTheRevanchist @DarkDragonMedeus @Colonel_Krukov @Vzearr @Armorchompy @FinePoint @IdiosyncraticLawyer @Planck69 @Dalesean027 @Mr._Propeller_Hat

 

[Antvasima]

So should we finally apply what has been accepted in this thread?

 

[Armorchompy]

I don't think it should be enforced to always belong in a different tabber. I feel like the specific way in which it's presented should be mainly up to the profile- smaller sections probably won't need a tabber.

 

[Antvasima]

Yes. I agree about that.

 

[Dalesean027]

I think this is fine but do agree it doesn't necessarily always have to be another tabber unless it calls for it and they enough content that it needs to be separated

 

[FinePoint]

I agree that it should be allowed but not mandatory depending on the profile.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

I think that we seem to have sufficient staff approval to apply this change in our rules then.

So should we finally apply what has been accepted in this thread?

I don't think it should be enforced to always belong in a different tabber. I feel like the specific way in which it's presented should be mainly up to the profile- smaller sections probably won't need a tabber.

Yes. I agree about that.

@DontTalkDT @Qawsedf234 @LephyrTheRevanchist @DarkDragonMedeus @Colonel_Krukov @Vzearr @IdiosyncraticLawyer @Planck69 @Mr._Propeller_Hat

We still need your help here, so we can finally conclude this thread.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Tracking down my pages is probably a good start, I'd recommend making a CRT to reformat Son Goku's intelligence section though, since his intelligence section sort of is based on listing skill feats.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

@DontTalkDT @Qawsedf234 @LephyrTheRevanchist @DarkDragonMedeus @Colonel_Krukov @Vzearr @IdiosyncraticLawyer @Planck69 @Mr._Propeller_Hat

We still need your help here, so we can finally conclude this thread.

We already use it on certain profiles so making it standard is fine by me. Whether we should keep labeling/give ratings to combat intelligence tho, I am completely neutral.

Edit: In regards to Armor's comment, I guess is fine

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I agree with Armorchompy regarding tabbers.

@DontTalkDT @Qawsedf234 @LephyrTheRevanchist @DarkDragonMedeus @Colonel_Krukov @Vzearr @IdiosyncraticLawyer @Planck69 @Mr._Propeller_Hat

We still need your help here, so we can finally conclude this thread.

What is left to be done here, though?

I guess a note needs to be written for the intelligence page? If so, do we have a suggestion for the text already?
If not, as a reminder, I suggested this text for a combat intelligence section to be added to the intelligence section:

Combat skill encompasses a range of factors that together describe how well a person can fight. This includes not only how effectively they use their abilities, but also whether they can apply them in ways that usually require special training or practice, as seen in martial arts. It covers aspects such as knowledge of fighting techniques, variety in combat styles, precision, experience, strategy, prediction, information processing, learning ability, and more.
These factors can also influence a character's general intelligence rating. For example, skills like strategy, rapid learning or the ability to predict an opponent's moves could contribute to a high intelligence rating. However, for many characters, it's useful to separate combat skill from general intelligence. This distinction is particularly important when a character is highly skilled in combat but lacks academic or intellectual prowess.
Unlike general intelligence, combat skill is not ranked on a scale with labels like "Genius" or "Supergenius." Due to the many factors involved, a simple rating system would fail to accurately capture a character's combat proficiency. For instance, it wouldn’t make sense to say someone who can learn any real-world martial art by watching it for a minute is necessarily superior to someone who has mastered a single martial art to a superhuman level. These are different types of skill that can’t be easily compared.
Using one-word ratings for combat skill could lead to misunderstandings, as a higher rating wouldn’t always mean that a character is objectively more skilled than someone with a lower rating. To avoid this confusion and better represent a character's abilities, we omit such ratings.
Instead, if a character profile includes a section on combat skill, it should only feature specific feats or statements that demonstrate their proficiency. This approach allows readers to directly compare characters based on their actual achievements.

This could be reworked when the other thread regarding information about combat skill reaches its conclusion, or we just move the debate on what exactly to put there to that thread entirely. I think the sentiment of the draft is agreed upon by now i.e. that we don't do ratings, so probably no need to ask about that. This is just a matter of how to explain and word it.

As for removing ratings that do exist: If we do that as a centralised project, instead of gradually phasing them out, I suppose creating another thread to debate that would be better than doing it here. I can create that if needed.

 

[Antvasima]

I vaguely recall that @DaReaperMan also wrote a version of our new rule text. If that is the case, can somebody inform us about the differences between that and DontTalk's version please?

 

[DaReaperMan]

I vaguely recall that @DaReaperMan also wrote a version of our new rule text. If that is the case, can somebody inform us about the differences between that and DontTalk's version please?

Uh, no? I didn't.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. My apologies. I seem to have misremembered then.

In that case I am fine with if @DontTalkDT 's new rule text is applied now.

 

[DontTalkDT]

I have applied it. Let me know if I overlooked anything.

 

[Armorchompy]

Seems good to me. I'd add something like "to an incredibly superhuman level" to the skill comparison thing though, since it sounds fairly decisive as written.

 

[Antvasima]

It looks great tl me. Thanks a massive lot for helping out.

We probably need a highlighted new thread to inform our community about that they need to gradually remove all definitive combat skill intelligence statistics though. If you are willing to write and post the thread, I can highlight it for you afterwards.

 

[Antvasima]

It looks great tl me. Thanks a massive lot for helping out.

We probably need a highlighted new thread to inform our community about that they need to gradually remove all definitive combat skill intelligence statistics though. If you are willing to write and post the thread, I can highlight it for you afterwards.

@DontTalkDT

 

[Dalesean027]

What's the consensus here because like every profile still has combat intelligence ratings?

 

[DaReaperMan]

What's the consensus here because like every profile still has combat intelligence ratings?

I've had to remind people to not put intelligence on Combat Ratings several times, so yeh.

Some profiles, like most Son Gokus, need to have their intelligence section reworked, while others only need a 20 byte patch to properly format them.

 

[Dalesean027]

I've had to remind people to not put intelligence on Combat Ratings several times, so yeh.

Some profiles, like most Son Gokus, need to have their intelligence section reworked, while others only need a 20 byte patch to properly format them.

So then reading this

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Intelligence?diff=9003472&oldid=8891109

Are we adding a entirely new combat skill section to profiles now or what? Where will we justify combat skill now?

 

[DaReaperMan]

So then reading this

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Intelligence?diff=9003472&oldid=8891109

Are we adding a entirely new combat skill section to profiles now or what? Where will we justify combat skill now?

Thrall (World of Warcraft)

Thrall (birthname Go'el), son of Durotan and Draka, the former Warchief of the restored shamanistic Horde, founder and current ruler of the Nation of Durotar in Kalimdor and one of the second wave of shaman.[5] His parents killed by Gul'dan's assassins shortly after his birth in the beginning of...

vsbattles.fandom.com

Essentially, just list feats and scaling until you feel comfy with your section, hopefully tabber'd

 

[Dalesean027]

Btw since this is all accepted shouldn't we be making an effort to let people know about the new standard or make like an announcement about it since this is accepted and requires people change the way they hande intelligence sections and prompts the creation of seperate skill boxes

 

[DaReaperMan]

Btw since this is all accepted shouldn't we be making an effort to let people know about the new standard or make like an announcement about it since this is accepted and requires people change the way they hande intelligence sections and prompts the creation of seperate skill boxes

Probably, but I'm in no way qualified to make that sort of thread. Not exactly staff over here.

 

[Dalesean027]

Probably, but I'm in no way qualified to make that sort of thread. Not exactly staff over here.

Yeah it'd have to be staff made anyways since im proposing they make it an actual announcement thread just explaining that these are the new accepted standards

 

[Antvasima]

So then reading this

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Intelligence?diff=9003472&oldid=8891109

Are we adding a entirely new combat skill section to profiles now or what? Where will we justify combat skill now?

The way I remember this, our members are supposed to still write combat skill explanations within the intelligence sections if they wish, just without any definitive intelligence statistics assigned to them. So explanations without statistics basically.

Is that correct, @DontTalkDT ?