Marvel and DC Policy - Cross-Scaling Revision Proposal

[Armorchompy]

For DC there is a heavy level of consistency. We go through the multiverse and we see like 40 different batman clones all fighting at the same level. We see every martial artist Batman learns from or that he fights all capable of fighting people he fights (Ra's, Shiva, Karate Kid, even his own kids).

No offense but Karate Kid is from like 1000 years in the future and fights like, one other person outside of him ever, and it's not even the same KK, he's not a good example

 

[KingTempest]

No offense but Karate Kid is from like 1000 years in the future and fights like, one other person outside of him ever, and it's not even the same KK, he's not a good example

leavemealoneeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[Damage3245]

I agree with the OP.

 

[Saqphire]

I think this policy should also extend to the Invincible comics, since they have a similar situation with crossover scaling (Nolan scaling to Supreme or one of the Invincible variants low diffing Spawn or Invincible being canon to Marvel/DC somehow lmao) that their scalers argue and may or may not have pushed on this site

Thankfully, they’re not nearly as inconsistent as Marvel and DC though

 

[M3X_2.0]

Sorry, I think this sounds good but I'm not convinced it's very achievable. Ultimately when it comes to Marvel characters very decisively exist in a greater whole and people aren't going to understand the intent of this when it comes to just scaling whoever they're looking at at the moment. If they're making a profile they'll just look at whoever the character is scaling to and say "scales to these stats". In particular it's going to cause a big headache for B-lister villains who are all over the place in fighting to different people. Kingpin was a Spider-Man rogue for a decade+ before passing over to Daredevil, Crossbones has thrown hands with literally every street tier, Dracula's been an Avengers, Blade, Dr. Strange villain and more... There's also significant issues in that sometimes scaling to other characters genuinely should take priority over one's own feats. This kind of "scale to your own portrayal" treatment is good in a vacuum but I struggle to believe it's doable.

The fact that people will continue to scale incorrectly isn’t an argument against the proposal, it’s an argument for better enforcement. People already scale incorrectly under the current system, that’s literally the problem this thread exists to address. Rejecting a better methodology because it might be misapplied is just choosing to stay with a worse one out of convenience.

And those B-lister examples actually illustrate the problem perfectly. Kingpin, Crossbones, Dracula, these characters are already stuck in scaling chains that may not reflect what they actually are. That’s not a reason to keep the current system, that’s a reason to fix it, which is why I made this thread.

As for “sometimes scaling to other characters should take priority over own feats,” I’d genuinely like to see examples of that, because I’m not sure what situation would justify external scaling overriding what a character consistently demonstrates in their own stories.

Fix: See Luke Cage.

I'm not convinced you fully acknowledge the ramifications of this kind of thing, and furthermore since you're offering a series-wise scaling revision I can't accept something like this unless you can give tangible examples of how it's going to affect various characters' tiers

Examples have already been mentioned in the thread, but to address it directly:

Tomfer already mentioned that Moon Knight was removed from a dubious scaling chain precisely because he now scales to his own feats and his own rogues gallery. That’s the proposal being applied in practice. Daredevil isn’t being bumped to High 8-C just because of one specific interaction with Moon Knight.

Other characters this would benefit: Luke Cage is currently sitting at Spider-Man tier despite consistently fighting Namor and having beaten She-Hulk, those are his crossovers and that should be his tier. Wolverine can finally sit above baseline street-level humans because he’s physically stronger than all of them and has decades of X-Men feats supporting that. Captain America and his associated characters like Bucky can have their own well-defined tier built around the super soldier framework that’s been consistent for decades, and a single fight between Daredevil and Bucky shouldn’t give Daredevil access to that entire scaling chain.

The proposal is already being applied in some cases. This thread is just asking to formalize it.

Very well done. On "Contextual consistency over numbers", I would throw in the word "anti-feats" somewhere. Because characters whose solo runs consistently portrays them on a certain level could be stronger if they lack the anti-feats to prove otherwise, hypothetically. It's kind of a given but it points out the real issue by name.

Good point, I’ll add anti-feats explicitly to the contextual consistency criteria. A character’s consistent portrayal includes both their positive feats and their anti-feats, and both should be weighed when determining what tier actually represents them accurately.

Honestly... I might give a big ask right now, but can you like, show off any of the proposed tiers these rules might bring up, and the file changes? Doesn't have to be particularly elaborate or entirely accurate, just the list of characters you think are currently in the violation, and what your system might approximate them to, for Marvel? Because I think we're arguing hypotheticals right now and I just don't feel comfortable saying yes to a proposal which might drastically alter the verse without idk, seeing some representation or draft for the changes it'll bring.

I can’t give fully accurate tier revisions right now because that would require reading through each character’s appearances, understanding their scaling context, calculating feats and so on. That’s not something I can do on the spot. But I can give a rough approximation based on the concept of the proposal to illustrate the idea.

The basic principle is that each character scales within their own narrative context. Daredevil and his rogues gallery are consistently street level, so they sit together. Captain America and his associated characters are super soldiers and scale within that framework. Spider-Man and his rogues sit at their own level, with villains like Goblin and Lizard being physically enhanced but below Spider-Man himself.

Daredevil Cosmology

• Daredevil 9-B
• Elektra 9-B
• Kingpin 9-B
• Bullseye 9-B

Captain America Cosmology

• Cap 8-C
• Bucky 8-C
• Sam Wilson 8-C
• US Agent 8-C

Spider-Man Cosmology

• Spider-Man High 8-C
• Miles High 8-C
• Goblin 8-C
• Lizard 8-C

The key point here is that Daredevil doesn’t get bumped to 8-C just because he interacted with Captain America once or twice or fought alongside Avengers once. He stays where his own consistent portrayal places him. Same logic applies across the board.

 

[M3X_2.0]

Sorry for the late response, formatting on mobile is kinda a pain in the ass most of the times.

 

[The_Impress]

he basic principle is that each character scales within their own narrative context.

So how would you go about placing Iron Fist, or Blade, or Luke Cage for instance? I understand the concept for broad strokes I just want to follow it for people who are 50% their own rogues 50% everyone rogues

 

[M3X_2.0]

So how would you go about placing Iron Fist, or Blade, or Luke Cage for instance? I understand the concept for broad strokes I just want to follow it for people who are 50% their own rogues 50% everyone rogues

Iron Fist is a good example of how this works in practice. He has his own feats and his own rogues gallery, and he doesn’t stray far from Daredevil’s level in his solo material. The exceptions are when he uses his Chi, which is a specific mechanic that justifies a higher tier in those moments, similar to how Moon Knight’s power fluctuations are tied to Khonshu. So he’d have a standard tier based on his own consistent portrayal and a higher rating for Chi usage.

Luke Cage is actually a case where the proposal’s exception clause applies naturally. A significant portion of his feats come from crossovers, and those crossovers consistently show him trading blows with Namor, Colossus, She-Hulk. That’s not incidental, that’s his actual portrayal across his history, and somehow and ignore it. So he should scale to that. The question worth asking is why he’s currently sitting at Spider-Man tier when his consistent portrayal across both solo and crossover material places him significantly above that.

Blade is pretty straightforward. He has his own rogues gallery, his own consistent feats, and if a crossover appearance is narratively significant and treats him as comparable to someone, that scales. He doesn’t have the same problem as characters who are entirely defined by chain scaling.

 

[Armorchompy]

And those B-lister examples actually illustrate the problem perfectly. Kingpin, Crossbones, Dracula, these characters are already stuck in scaling chains that may not reflect what they actually are. That’s not a reason to keep the current system, that’s a reason to fix it, which is why I made this thread.

I don't think that's true, though. Hell I made Crossbones' profile and I know for a fact his rating is about right (in that his most consistent showings are fighting Rogers evenly). If you rate him by his own feats he ends up at like low 9-B because he doesn't have much material, which puts him lower than people he's canonically shitstomped like Daredevil.

Tomfer already mentioned that Moon Knight was removed from a dubious scaling chain precisely because he now scales to his own feats and his own rogues gallery. That’s the proposal being applied in practice. Daredevil isn’t being bumped to High 8-C just because of one specific interaction with Moon Knight.

This isn't a change from how we currently scale stuff. We already ignore outlier interactions.

Other characters this would benefit: Luke Cage is currently sitting at Spider-Man tier despite consistently fighting Namor and having beaten She-Hulk, those are his crossovers and that should be his tier.

I don't think you can make a "consistently" claim without the character having been properly researched, and Luke's profile is fairly poor. Either way if one went and proved he was consistently sub-herald then we'd upgrade him to that tier, I don't see how your proposal affects things.

Wolverine can finally sit above baseline street-level humans

... Which he does.

Captain America and his associated characters like Bucky can have their own well-defined tier

... Which they do.

and a single fight between Daredevil and Bucky shouldn’t give Daredevil access to that entire scaling chain.

... Which it doesn't.

The key point here is that Daredevil doesn’t get bumped to 8-C just because he interacted with Captain America once or twice or fought alongside Avengers once. He stays where his own consistent portrayal places him. Same logic applies across the board.

We do this already. Daredevil isn't 8-C, Spider-Man isn't 3-C and it's not like we're not aware of those bits of scaling to higher tiers existing, we've just decided they shouldn't be used. If you're just trying to formalize that outlier showings should be ignored in favor of consistency, and the creation of "bubble tiers" where certain characters and their cast hovers then I agree with that but it's functionally how we've handled scaling already.

 

[M3X_2.0]

I don't think that's true, though. Hell I made Crossbones' profile and I know for a fact his rating is about right (in that his most consistent showings are fighting Rogers evenly). If you rate him by his own feats he ends up at like low 9-B because he doesn't have much material, which puts him lower than people he's canonically shitstomped like Daredevil.

Crossbones scaling to Rogers is exactly what the proposal allows. Their relationship is narratively central and consistent across decades of material. The proposal doesn't say "ignore everything except solo feats", it says characters scale within their own narrative context, which includes their core relationships. Crossbones and Rogers is a core relationship. Daredevil and Crossbones meeting once is not.

This isn't a change from how we currently scale stuff. We already ignore outlier interactions.

Then formalize it. If this is already how things work in practice, writing it into the policy costs nothing and protects it from being reversed the next time staff changes, which has already happened in this exact wiki as others have pointed out earlier in this thread. "We already do it" is not an argument against codifying it, it's the strongest argument for it.

I don't think you can make a "consistently" claim without the character having been properly researched, and Luke's profile is fairly poor. Either way if one went and proved he was consistently sub-herald then we'd upgrade him to that tier, I don't see how your proposal affects things.

His profile being poor is the problem. The current system doesn't have clear enough criteria to push for accurate representations of characters like Luke Cage. That's what this proposal fixes, it gives a concrete methodological basis to research and upgrade characters like him instead of leaving them stuck in whatever tier they landed in through chain scaling.

... Which he does?

... Which they do?

... Which it doesn't?

If Wolverine already sits above baseline street level, Cap and Bucky already have their own well defined tier, and a single Daredevil and Bucky fight already doesn't give Daredevil access to that chain, then you agree with the proposal. So what exactly are we disagreeing about?

We do this already. Daredevil isn't 8-C, and it's not like we're not aware of those bits of scaling to higher tiers existing. If you're just trying to formalize that outlier showings should be ignored in favor of consistency, and the creation of "bubble tiers" where certain characters and their cast hovers then I agree with that but it's functionally how we've handled scaling already.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm proposing. And if you agree with it, then the discussion is about whether to formalize it or leave it as an unwritten practice that can be ignored or reversed whenever someone feels like it. Given the wiki's own history of scaling going off the rails the moment staff stops paying attention, I'd rather have it written down.

And these are exceptions. Until recently Moon Knight himself was stuck in exactly the kind of scaling chain this proposal addresses. The fact that we're slowly correcting individual cases doesn't mean the system works, it means we're patching holes one character at a time instead of fixing the underlying problem.

 

[Antvasima]

Just a note that Luke Cage/Power Man has been incredibly inconsistent in power level throughout his career, and that Bendis loves Luke to extremes and tends to humiliate She-Hulk any chance he gets (not to the degree of Chris Claremont, but nevertheless).

 

[M3X_2.0]

IIRC he lost the last fight he had with She-Hulk. But he's on that Tier.

 

[ObberGobb]

Well, regardless of what decision is made I think some rephrasing is in order since a lot of people don't understand the proposal. I think if requests for elaboration are necessary there needs to be better phrasing with more elaboration in the proposed rule. Like what specifically does "cross-scaling" mean in this situation? What kinds of feats are we talking about prioritizing? Would someone who only has Tier 8 feats but is consitently shown to be stronger than a character who is Tier 5 be allowed to scale to them? Is "Character A explicitly says that Character B is stronger than Character C in a team book" enough to scale from? If this new rule is accepted, I think all of this needs to be obvious to anyone who reads the rule, not just people who were present for this thread. "Cross-scaling" in particular is not a word frequently used, and before reading the post I thought you were referring to scaling crossovers like JLA/Avengers.

 

[Armorchompy]

So what exactly are we disagreeing about?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm proposing. And if you agree with it, then the discussion is about whether to formalize it or leave it as an unwritten practice that can be ignored or reversed whenever someone feels like it.

My problem is that your proposal is confusing and it took two pages of explanation for me to even get what you were trying to say. And that it doesn't actually make things clearer because our Marvel/DC powerscaling rules already contain a long diatribe about consistency.

And these are exceptions. Until recently Moon Knight himself was stuck in exactly the kind of scaling chain this proposal addresses. The fact that we're slowly correcting individual cases doesn't mean the system works, it means we're patching holes one character at a time instead of fixing the underlying problem.

I think it does, though. Like, this is not going to make things any more case by case than they are already, you still ultimately just have to make a judgment call

 

[The_Impress]

The question worth asking is why he’s currently sitting at Spider-Man tier when his consistent portrayal across both solo and crossover material places him significantly above that.

Mostly because his higher showcase is against characters who hold back or are missing mechanics on the wiki to an egregious degree.

Namor, Colossus, She-Hulk.

Namor and She-Hulk vary and frankly I think it's not entirely unreasonable to say Hulk/Thor low end can drop to High 8-C+.

I dunno, presently a decent chunk of characters either use Luke Cage as supporting or primary feat for their abilities. Take Lucia Von Bardas, she is presently scaled to Luke and Ironheart, so by proxy if Luke gets upgraded, so does Ironheart, and a fair amount of characters scale to Ironheart too.

I think the solution there is to maybe try and map out his consistency into a Modern/Classic scenario, or just render him unscalable: recently if a character is genuinely having multiple showcases I just give instances of these inconsistencies to illustrate a trend and list them unscalable

Graviton (Marvel Comics)

Dr. Franklin Hall was a scientist working at a private physics research facility called Research City in the Canadian Rockies on a practical teleportation device. In the midst of an experiment, Hall attempted to align a set of matrices and induce teleportation, but only succeeded in overloading...

vsbattles.fandom.com

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Fancy_Dan_(Marvel_Comics)

I think we can simply just add notes to the relevant pages that certain characters have alternate consistencies or repeated showcase that seems big, but the wiki for the purposes of verse cohesion or having genuinely exhausted the character's feat pool has gotten to a consistency that represents them best in most scenarios, either way these characters are not to be used for primary scaling unless there is simply nothing else.

I assume this is fairly close to the logic you're proposing? Just done via indexing as opposed to policy pages. Admittedly I am guessing because I don't wanna be difficult, but I still don't think I follow what is said entirely

 

[M3X_2.0]

My problem is that your proposal is confusing and it took two pages of explanation for me to even get what you were trying to say. And that it doesn't actually make things clearer because our Marvel/DC powerscaling rules already contain a long diatribe about consistency.

I'm not sure the proposal is as confusing as you're suggesting, given that most people in this thread understood it without issue and engaged with the specifics directly. If anything the discussion that followed helped refine and clarify the criteria, which is exactly what a thread is for. As for the existing consistency rules, the whole point is that they aren't specific enough to actually be applied consistently, which is why we're here.

I think it does, though. Like, this is not going to make things any more case by case than they are already, you still ultimately just have to make a judgment call

Fair, it's still going to be case by case. But having written criteria changes what counts as a valid justification in those judgment calls. Right now someone can point to a single interaction and call it scaling. With this proposal that argument doesn't hold up on its own anymore, you need narrative centrality and consistency to back it. That's not eliminating judgment calls, that's giving them a clearer framework to work within

Mostly because his higher showcase is against characters who hold back or are missing mechanics on the wiki to an egregious degree.

I've never seen She-Hulk holding back against someone that can trade blows with her, in this case, Luke can. Neither does Namor.

Namor and She-Hulk vary and frankly I think it's not entirely unreasonable to say Hulk/Thor low end can drop to High 8-C+.

Agreed. I just think Luke Cage is on the same level as Namor and She-Hulk as opposed to being Spider-Man Tier. That's actually what this thread aims for. Luke Cage has no business scaling to Spider-Man cosmology feats and ratings. They barely interact, anyway.

I dunno, presently a decent chunk of characters either use Luke Cage as supporting or primary feat for their abilities. Take Lucia Von Bardas, she is presently scaled to Luke and Ironheart, so by proxy if Luke gets upgraded, so does Ironheart, and a fair amount of characters scale to Ironheart too.

That's.... exactly why I made this thread. Are we sure these "fair amount of characters" scale to Ironheart? Does it make sense or are these based on isolated scaling? Also, not fair to lock Cage up because someone else scales to him and it would contaminate the scaling.

I think the solution there is to maybe try and map out his consistency into a Modern/Classic scenario, or just render him unscalable: recently if a character is genuinely having multiple showcases I just give instances of these inconsistencies to illustrate a trend and list them unscalable

I don't really care that much to be honest, I just made a complaint about what I think he should scale to. It doesn't matter to the thread that much. Whatever we do with him is fine to me.

I think we can simply just add notes to the relevant pages that certain characters have alternate consistencies or repeated showcase that seems big, but the wiki for the purposes of verse cohesion or having genuinely exhausted the character's feat pool has gotten to a consistency that represents them best in most scenarios, either way these characters are not to be used for primary scaling unless there is simply nothing else.

I assume this is fairly close to the logic you're proposing? Just done via indexing as opposed to policy pages

That's fairly close to the logic, yeah. The difference is that notes on individual pages are much easier to ignore, overlook or remove than a formal policy, and we've already seen what happens when scaling practices exist only as unwritten conventions in this wiki. The whole point of formalizing this is to make it harder to circumvent, not easier.

Really, honest question: Do you personally see issues with letting characters scales to their own feats and scaling within their own cosmology of characters (such as Captain America with Bucky, US Agent, etc) and not using random feats from crossovers with X-Man or the Fantastic Four, to then make everyone scale to the same ratings? Cause it's that simple, and I'm pretty sure you and everyone else got it. Would it create a disjunction? Probably, we gotta calc feats. But it already happens, anyway. Cap is 8-C and while he does interact with 9-B characters, they don't scale to him. I want to make it official, and I want to make it easier for people to scale characters.

There wouldn't be a general scaling that everyone should adhere, but rather a Spider-Man Scaling that only affects certain characters like himself, Spider-People like Miles, Ben and villains such as Goblin, Lizard, etc. While yes, he does share some of his villains like Shocker, he's kinda fodder even to Spidey, so I don't see issues.

 

[M3X_2.0]

Really, honest question: Do you personally see issues with letting characters scales to their own feats and scaling within their own cosmology of characters (such as Captain America with Bucky, US Agent, etc) and not using random feats from crossovers with X-Man or the Fantastic Four, to then make everyone scale to the same ratings? Cause it's that simple, and I'm pretty sure you and everyone else got it. Would it create a disjunction? Probably, we gotta calc feats. But it already happens, anyway. Cap is 8-C and while he does interact with 9-B characters, they don't scale to him. I want to make it official, and I want to make it easier for people to scale characters.

There wouldn't be a general scaling that everyone should adhere, but rather a Spider-Man Scaling that only affects certain characters like himself, Spider-People like Miles, Ben and villains such as Goblin, Lizard, etc. While yes, he does share some of his villains like Shocker, he's kinda fodder even to Spidey, so I don't see issues.

@Antvasima it's really this simple. We already do it, I wanna make it official and make scaling easier. Who else should I tag to see this?

 

[Antvasima]

@Antvasima it's really this simple. We already do it, I wanna make it official and make scaling easier. Who else should I tag to see this?

Well, I have already tagged quite a lot of knowledgeable members, and Impress usually has very good common sense regarding Marvel Comics scaling.

 

[The_Impress]

Do you personally see issues with letting characters scales to their own feats and scaling within their own cosmology of characters (such as Captain America with Bucky, US Agent, etc) and not using random feats from crossovers with X-Man or the Fantastic Four, to then make everyone scale to the same ratings?

Kinda? I think this is the whole "Batman in solo series vs. Batman in Justice League" type dissonance, and I think going solo showcase supremacy is meh for Marvel. There are just characters who are simply more memorable for their event appearances, or sorta just fight everyone: What consistency would you even put, say, someone like Wolverine at? Or Nova? Nova's showcase in his solo series/New Warrior tends to be pitiful compared to his showcase in events like Annihilation or the Cancerverse stuff. Guys like Sentry, Magik and Adam Warlock also are just far more memorable for event stuff and special appearances when compared to their far lamer team book or solo series showcases.

And I kinda rattled on about the Luke Cage thing and I probably shouldn't have, but I think it just illustrates that the problem you feel is moreso subjective and depending on the interpretation. I just simply think the problem isn't really our scaling standards it's just sucky research I guess.

Idk I follow what you're saying but I think the standards should be more like guidelines to staff as opposed to rigid rules here, and they should note that it's case-by-case still and not a channel dug through stone.

I have proposed like, "draconian" rigid standards before for Marvel pages too, but they're mostly relating to the formatting of the pages, I think we should have flexibility in our evaluations and proposals when it comes to scaling and the actual stats on the file

 

[The_Impress]

Well, I have already tagged quite a lot of knowledgeable members, and Impress usually has very good common sense regarding Marvel Comics scaling.

's lotta pressure I don't wanna make this like "the thread ain't goin' through coz ******' zark is hoarding it"

 

[DaReaperMan]

Impress does have a point on the sucky research, but it sort of goes both ways. Main problem is our comic profiles are woefully outdated and many are researched off of a respect thread from a decade ago. But at the same time, reading thousands upon thousands of issues is just an unreasonable assumption. That's the same kind of issue I had with Warcraft until it sort of clicked.

 

[Armorchompy]

Really, honest question: Do you personally see issues with letting characters scales to their own feats and scaling within their own cosmology of characters (such as Captain America with Bucky, US Agent, etc) and not using random feats from crossovers with X-Man or the Fantastic Four, to then make everyone scale to the same ratings? Cause it's that simple, and I'm pretty sure you and everyone else got it. Would it create a disjunction? Probably, we gotta calc feats. But it already happens, anyway. Cap is 8-C and while he does interact with 9-B characters, they don't scale to him. I want to make it official, and I want to make it easier for people to scale characters.

There wouldn't be a general scaling that everyone should adhere, but rather a Spider-Man Scaling that only affects certain characters like himself, Spider-People like Miles, Ben and villains such as Goblin, Lizard, etc. While yes, he does share some of his villains like Shocker, he's kinda fodder even to Spidey, so I don't see issues.

I think it's really easy to say "we should do this" but it's not actually going to pan out. You can't easily draw distinctions of who belongs in what bubble and inevitably there's going to be some really arbitrary lines you have to draw in the sand to make this work.

Hell, Shocker is a good example. he's fodder because he's an idiot but he hits really hard. He's knocked out Spider-Man with single blasts, we're saying he's x10 under his AP just to make things fit? Even though he's a Spider-Man villain?

That's.... exactly why I made this thread. Are we sure these "fair amount of characters" scale to Ironheart? Does it make sense or are these based on isolated scaling? Also, not fair to lock Cage up because someone else scales to him and it would contaminate the scaling.

Do you know that they don't? Do you know that it doesn't? Without evidence this is just arbitrary skepticism. If in the wider picture Cage is more consistently Tier 8 then he's Tier 8. You haven't researched him, you're just going off a few crossover appearances. He could very well be Tier 6 but what's more correct for him isn't decided by these standards.

 

[M3X_2.0]

There are just characters who are simply more memorable for their event appearances, or sorta just fight everyone: What consistency would you even put, say, someone like Wolverine at?

The way he is scaling now mostly.

Or Nova? Nova's showcase in his solo series/New Warrior tends to be pitiful compared to his showcase in events like Annihilation or the Cancerverse stuff. Guys like Sentry, Magik and Adam Warlock also are just far more memorable for event stuff and special appearances when compared to their far lamer team book or solo series showcases.

Like this:

An exception applies to characters who exist exclusively or primarily within crossover narratives, events, or team books, and have no meaningful solo history to draw from. In these cases, cross-scaling from their appearances remains valid as it constitutes their primary source of feats.

We can tweak the “who exist exclusively or primarily within crossovers” to whatever you feel like, really. Again, I want crossover scaling to be consistent, and not override the characters’ feats from their solo runs. That’s all I want. I want Daredevil to scale to 9-B Hypersonic while not affecting characters that shouldn’t scale to him, like he was doing with Moon Knight.

I just simply think the problem isn't really our scaling standards it's just sucky research I guess.

I think it’s both. I also think we’ve allowed too much “sucky research”, and that’s one of the reasons some profiles suck.

Idk I follow what you're saying but I think the standards should be more like guidelines to staff as opposed to rigid rules here, and they should note that it's case-by-case still and not a channel dug through stone.

The core criteria need to be firm enough that they can’t just be handwaved away when someone wants to push a scaling chain, but there has to be room for case by case judgment within that framework. What we have right now is too loose, which is why we keep ending up in the same situations. The goal isn’t to make scaling a rigid formula, it’s to give the judgment calls a clear enough foundation that they’re actually consistent.

Impress does have a point on the sucky research, but it sort of goes both ways. Main problem is our comic profiles are woefully outdated and many are researched off of a respect thread from a decade ago. But at the same time, reading thousands upon thousands of issues is just an unreasonable assumption. That's the same kind of issue I had with Warcraft until it sort of clicked.

Agreed, I think reading comics is the first thing we should do. Yeah, you read that.

We can’t base our profiles from Reddit Respect Threads forever, reading is important and gives you context of most feats.

 

[Tllmbrg]

I'm just confused why this thread even exists, it seems like the main point is just "If a character usually doesn't do impressive stuff in their own runs, don't suddenly scale them way above their own tier due to crossover stuff" which like, I think most modern pages already do...?
Frankly I don't see the sanctity of someone's own runs over appearances in crossovers in the context of comics, you can get different depictions in the same run when it swaps writers (Just look at all the depictions of Spider-Man over the decades, I'm sure you can find an incredible amount of variance).
Plus as noted, some characters have iconic moments that are outside their run like say Nova in Annihilation. I don't think his own runs should supersede that because frankly his solo runs tend to be short, miss the appeal, and just do disservice to his concept.

 

[M3X_2.0]

At this point you gotta keep up with the discussion. We’re only two pages in.

 

[Tllmbrg]

At this point you gotta keep up with the discussion. We’re only two pages in.

I have, I'm saying the proposal is kinda pointless as is.

 

[M3X_2.0]

I have, I'm saying the proposal is kinda pointless as is.

We wouldn’t be discussing it if it was pointless. Feel free to disagree if you want. We will still discuss about it cause there are things to be done here.

 

[M3X_2.0]

@The_Impress I’m going offline now to play Crimson Desert, and since the game is huge, my replies will be less frequent from now on, but I would still like to reach a conclusion where we both agree and are satisfied.

 

[ShakeResounding]

(I really meant to comment sooner, oops)

Since M3X clarified that non-staff are allowed to comment, I think this is a fantastic idea as I've expressed to him prior. It would be a great step in dismantling a lot of the things that plague Marvel scaling on this site, and allow characters to let their comic series' feats dictate their scaling instead of restricting them because of who could potentially scale. For DC I'm a little more neutral since I don't read as many of their comics.

While it'll take effort to sort out certain characters and make calcs for those who are reliant on other characters, it would take arguably more effort in the long run to continue down the path we are anyways.

 

[Osemere]

While it'll take effort to sort out certain characters and make calcs for those who are reliant on other characters, it would take arguably more effort in the long run to continue down the path we are anyways.

It would not, especially given that there’s no obligation for anyone to try to unmuck the already garbage scaling chains we already have, and the fact that the amount of people working on DC profiles right now rounds down to zero. The modal scenario I’m imagining right now is that this is accepted and then maybe 2-3 more sets of characters are changed for the Marvel side than the DC side, and then this is just left to rot on the wiki without any upkeep since there’s no one left with the time to keep this going while the ones which are changed just have grossly exaggerated tiers handwaved due to a new ability to “compartmentalize” characters.

Like, the only reason why we have this weird stalemate on someone like Doctor Doom’s profile where he’s planet level to 1-A and hypersonic to immeasurable is because we already accept a scaled down version of this where he’s split between the sub-cosmological “cosmic wanked magic stuff” side and the “wait this doesn’t make sense since he’s a F4 villain and we think they’re quasi-street tiers” side (also, as Empress brought up, Batman.) This is an interesting proposal ideally, but I’d need to see more practical applications before thinking we should go forward with this.

 

[Saqphire]

It would not, especially given that there’s no obligation for anyone to try to unmuck the already garbage scaling chains we already have, and the fact that the amount of people working on DC profiles right now rounds down to zero. The modal scenario I’m imagining right now is that this is accepted and then maybe 2-3 more sets of characters are changed for the Marvel side than the DC side, and then this is just left to rot on the wiki without any upkeep since there’s no one left with the time to keep this going while the ones which are changed just have grossly exaggerated tiers handwaved due to a new ability to “compartmentalize” characters.

Like, the only reason why we have this weird stalemate on someone like Doctor Doom’s profile where he’s planet level to 1-A and hypersonic to immeasurable is because we already accept a scaled down version of this where he’s split between the sub-cosmological “cosmic wanked magic stuff” side and the “wait this doesn’t make sense since he’s a F4 villain and we think they’re quasi-street tiers” side (also, as Empress brought up, Batman.) This is an interesting proposal ideally, but I’d need to see more practical applications before thinking we should go forward with this.

If this is the mentality over these verses, why not just completely nuke them and start from scratch (with this policy) like what Nasuverse did? Clearly this is something that seems to be too much work and too little people who are motivated enough to do this because of said work. Starting again would actually get gears moving on this too

 

[The_Impress]

If this is the mentality over these verses, why not just completely nuke them and start from scratch (with this policy) like what Nasuverse did?

You should check your mailbox I sent a lil gift

Clearly this is something that seems to be too much work and too little people who are motivated enough to do this because of said work. Starting again would actually get gears moving on this too

In all seriousness have you been reading the thread? It's not any real work we just think it's pointless, possibly leads to jank rep and VSBW wouldn't do shit with it because the site has utterly ass staff examiners as seen by precedent. In general I do not want my 200 pages for the verse that I made and researched nuked because some randos want to try out a scaling element yes'd by admins who I KNOW have jackshit knowledge about the verse, and I don't think any staff including even M3X wants the whole verse wiped lol. This ain't Nasuverse this is ******* Marvel Comics, it'd be embarassing as shit to wipe out that much site relevant crap for any proposal.

 

[KingTempest]

Marvel got more than 1% of the site's profiles we not nuking ts

 

[Saqphire]

You should check your mailbox I sent a lil gift

In all seriousness have you been reading the thread? It's not any real work we just think it's pointless, possibly leads to jank rep and VSBW wouldn't do shit with it because the site has utterly ass staff examiners as seen by precedent. In general I do not want my 200 pages for the verse that I made and researched nuked because some randos want to try out a scaling element yes'd by admins who I KNOW have jackshit knowledge about the verse, and I don't think any staff including even M3X wants the whole verse wiped lol. This ain't Nasuverse this is ******* Marvel Comics, it'd be embarassing as shit to wipe out that much site relevant crap for any proposal.

It was merely a suggestion because of the fatigued mentality I saw above about these quote-on-quote "already garbage scaling chains we already have", but sure sure

 

[DaReaperMan]

Also, Nasuverse was deleted because the entire verse was in such a deep state of disrepair that tearing it down was the only option, and even now things are barely getting done for Cosmology. Marvel is not in that state of disrepair.

 

[Osemere]

Also, Nasuverse was deleted because the entire verse was in such a deep state of disrepair that tearing it down was the only option, and even now things are barely getting done for Cosmology. Marvel is not in that state of disrepair.

DC maybe is though

It was merely a suggestion because of the fatigued mentality I saw above about these quote-on-quote "already garbage scaling chains we already have", but sure sure

It wasn’t meant as “venting” although it could have been seen that way, just as a rather emphatic way of getting across Empress’ point about the general relevance of the proposal. Most people involved here who just shortly agreed aren’t even involved that deeply in verse maintenance, anyway.

 

[M3X_2.0]

I wouldn’t mind nuking some profiles.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I don't think that we should delete Marvel Comics profile pages, but it is definitely no secret that I think that "everybody scales from and to everybody" just doesn't logically work for Marvel Comics because of how ridiculously inconsistent the characters are, and since everybody would end up at 1-A or higher due to how much they all constantly fight each other, with their comparative power levels being ignored nearly completely, which we may be dangerously close to approaching.

Basically, it is not at all uncommon for the Marvel characters to go up and down like yo-yos between tiers 9-B and 1-A at the drop of a hat, and their comparative power levels in relation to each other are almost as inconsistent.

For example, officially Wolverine is supposed to barely be physically stronger than Captain America, and yet he can somehow consistently muster sufficient force to slice Thanos, Thor, or the Hulk purely due to "rule of cool"/popularity power, each of whom should be many degree of infinity beyond that in terms of durability, and can also destroy pure adamantium through physical strength.

The only solution I can figure out to the dilemma is to scale the Marvel characters more from their own personal feats than from who they have fought, but that is likely unrealistic.

However, I still think that Impress usually tends to have very good common sense regarding Marvel Comics, so maybe she can figure something out, even if she feels some social pressure due to this.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Well, I don't think that we should delete Marvel Comics profile pages, but it is definitely no secret that I think that "everybody scales from and to everybody" just doesn't logically work for Marvel Comics because of how ridiculously inconsistent the characters are, and since everybody would end up at 1-A or higher due to how much they all constantly fight each other, with their comparative power levels being ignored nearly completely, which we may be dangerously close to approaching.

Basically, it is not at all uncommon for the Marvel characters to go up and down like yo-yos between tiers 9-B and 1-A at the drop of a hat, and their comparative power levels in relation to each other are almost as inconsistent.

For example, officially Wolverine is supposed to barely be physically stronger than Captain America, and yet he can somehow consistently muster sufficient force to slice Thanos, Thor, or the Hulk purely due to "rule of cool"/popularity power, each of whom should be many degree of infinity beyond that in terms of durability, and can also destroy pure adamantium through physical strength.

The only solution I can figure out to the dilemma is to scale the Marvel characters more from their own personal feats than from who they have fought, but that is likely unrealistic.

However, I still think that Impress usually tends to have very good common sense regarding Marvel Comics, so maybe she can figure something out, even if she feels some social pressure due to this.

I mean if Wolvie's claws have anti-feats like Impress says, frankly he should be downgraded to the next most consistent level for those claws. But that's neither here nor there. This sort of revision is one we're going to be watching M3X and Impress debate on for awhile, that's the nature of the beast in this case.

 

[The_Impress]

For characters with extensive solo history, cross-scaling is preferred as a secondary form of evidence. A character's own consistently demonstrated feats within their own narrative context take priority in these cases. Furthermore, cross-scaling between these characters is only applicable when the narrative explicitly frames the characters as comparable, not merely because they interact, appear together or they simply managed to survive a few hits without dying. Incidental interactions, team appearances, and event crossovers do not constitute sufficient grounds for scaling without additional support from the characters' own feats.

(Sub-Point) An exception applies to characters who exist exclusively or primarily within crossover narratives, events, or team books, and have no meaningful solo history to draw from. In these cases, cross-scaling from their appearances remains valid as it constitutes their primary source of feats. Additionally, if a character's solo history is determined as less important compared to their showcase in team books by the community, or if it relevant for only a specific era, then cross-scaling would also be valid for these characters, and the relevant era would be keyed separately. A list of these characters is:

(Sub-Point) (I still need you to give me an explanation on how you intend to scale characters such as Dracula, Dr. Doom, Paladin or your general roamer supervillains and heroes.)

@M3X_2.0
This is the version of the rule I currently would accept for Marvel, for reference. I think the ruleset for DC would be entirely different and again, DC should have a separate thread altogether for a version to apply there.

This is all while I have to admit I think a rule change is unnecessary and we should just try to fix the files through actual research rather than "just slap a calc off a respect thread on it and call it a day", which is kinda the whole energy I am feeling off of this. I think a consideration should still be given to making the cross scaling work by giving the characters more accomodating tiers and recognising their mechanics, and I think the culture getting promoted from this is not... conductive to that? Like, these characters don't live in a bubble, exactly. Iron Man and Luke Cage DID fight a lot of Spider-Man villains, and acting like that's now randomly invalid because "they aren't a part of the Iron Man cosmology" or something is weirdly obtuse and I think is more of a jank rep.

I can follow this logic for DC MAYBE, Pre-Flashpoint, because the crossovers were very rare compared to now, but I think this is a weirdass proposal for Marvel when every other villain in the verse is a roamer supervillain/hero and most people's "rogues gallery" is just rewrapped Captain America/Spider-Man/Daredevil rogues gallery. (Also a more avid DC supporter than me can correct me there ig)

Otherwise this is just conservative Death Battles powerscaling logic, which fine I guess you might prefer your G1 blogs or whatever there, but I think that's a fundamentally different concept than Vs. Indexing, which is what our site is. If we just HAVE every character on display to be referenced at any time, we HAVE a verse page, they SHOULD be cohesive with each other if they are the same verse. That's to me is the whole appeal and distinction for our system, that we CAN do elaborate cross-scaling, which is something a respect thread or a Death Battle blog is just not able to do to the same extent. NO ONE is doing this format of powerscaling, we are. So idk why we need to get rid of the crap that makes us unique to be conductive to the same ol' crap you hear everywhere else.

At this point I just think this is an entirely subjective debate, personally. What flavour of vs. debating you like and what works for the verse.