A New Type of Profile - Locations

[Antvasima]

@Antvasima @Promestein @AKM sama

This is a pretty big subject so I feel like I should ask you here. How do you feel about this?

I am uncertain, as this has very little to do with indexing statistics, which is our objective, and we would likely have to largely almost wholesale copy information from the related wikis in order to provide useful information.

Also, these types of wiki policy and/or structural revisions threads should always be placed in our staff forum from the start. I should probably move this thread and then ask our staff members to help out here.

 

[KieranH10]

I am uncertain, as this has very little to do with indexing statistics, which is our objective, and we would likely have to largely almost wholesale copy information from the related wikis in order to provide useful information.

It has quite a lot to do with indexing our other profiles, helping with battles and stats, and overall improving verses. Whilst also making them easier to understand for newcomers or even regulars.

I have tried to keep the profile layout moreso to do with our needs, to avoid this problem. I believe that saying that this would simply be taking information from other wikis would be just as valid a point for Characters or Weapons, we're indexing features and statistics of these things, of course there will be similar information on two different profiles for the same thing.

Also, these types of wiki policy and/or structural revisions threads should always be placed in our staff forum from the start. I should probably move this thread and then ask our staff members to help out here.

My apologies, I didn't know this would need to be a staff thread first. Feel free to move it if you wish.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will move this thread then.

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @SomebodyData @The_real_cal_howard @Dragonmasterxyz @Celestial_Pegasus @Soldier_Blue @Saikou_The_Lewd_King @Andytrenom @DarkDragonMedeus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Ogbunabali @Abstractions

WHat do you think about this?

 

[Damage3245]

Personally I don't object to the concept of the page type, but its usefulness depends on its format. How would the page be structured? What kind of information do we need for all types of locations? If a location is frequently used by or ran by a certain character, do we note that down?

Also, if a match-up happens in a certain location, do we link to that match-up on the location page after it is done? I think we'd need scrollboxes for some of them eventually because popular locations will get a lot of match-ups.

Preventing overlap in some of the pages would be important to me. I don't want to see twenty different New York pages from different verses.

 

[KieranH10]

How would the page be structured? What kind of information do we need for all types of locations? If a location is frequently used by or ran by a certain character, do we note that down?

Many of those questions are answered in the OP.

Also, if a match-up happens in a certain location, do we link to that match-up on the location page after it is done? I think we'd need scrollboxes for some of them eventually because popular locations will get a lot of match-ups.

That is a good question and a valid problem. I don't believe we should leave this information on the Location Profiles, and simply leave it on the actual characters who fought. Along the lines of "Character A (Verse) (Fight took place in New York City)" with New York City linking to a New York Profile.

Preventing overlap in some of the pages would be important to me. I don't want to see twenty different New York pages from different verses.

That would not happen, if we were to make a New York page, it would be the real world's version. Any New Yorks that differ in fiction only seemingly differ with the likes of an extra notable building or so, so those buildings would warrant Profiles, and their location would link to the Real World New York.

If there is a "New York" that is completely different from our real world equivalent, like incomparable, I see no reason why it wouldn't warrant another Profile of its own personally.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Yeah, I agree with Damage that we really should think of a proper format before making profiles like this.

 

[Lou_change]

From the first post

I have created a potential Template for such a profile Here, with a few examples of what an actual Location Profile would look like Here.

 

[Ogbunabali]

It's an interesting idea. The template looks good too. Seems rather harmless, we could already do different locations and settings and whatnot, and having a more centralized and controlled version of them could be good. They're also not something that's mandatory or something so, I'm fine with this.

 

[Tllmbrg]

This idea seems okay, and I'm more in favor of Abstraction's version of the rule in regards to the arenas being used

 

[Soldier_Blue]

I am mostly neutral on this. OP made a good post, but I am mostly neutral. I will read through other responses and see.

 

[InfiniteDay]

Mathiverse here we come. I agree fully.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

Question. Would this include active abilities that create pocket realities? Also, what about locations of being inside a characters "mind" or "mental scape" Instead of a physical location? My question is how do these translate into verus threads.

 

[Lou_change]

Question. Would this include active abilities that create pocket realities? Also, what about locations of being inside a characters "mind" or "mental scape" Instead of a physical location? My question is how do these translate into verus threads.

I would assume Reality Equalization or they would act as shown in verse.

 

[KieranH10]

The Profiles would help any character who makes a notable Pocket Reality or something similar as it would list the effects and scope, etc, of the created area. Which can help determine how a battle may go.

I see no reason why a Location inside a mind or similarly, in a Program of such. As long as these still have tangible scale in-verse, then they should be fine. I believe it would fall under Reality Equalization.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

What about locations where it's specified that only souls can exist there and the verse goes into extreme detail about it? (The soul is separated from the physical body (resulting in death of the individual) to reach that location.)

 

[Armorchompy]

I like this idea, count me as an agreement, I also agree with Abs' comment

 

[KieranH10]

What about locations where it's specified that only souls can exist there and the verse goes into extreme detail about it? (The soul os separated from the physical body to reach that location.)

That seems like a pretty specific example. The Location would have Soul Manipulation specified on its profile, but I'd assume that Reality Equalization would kick in anyway? If not, I would also assume a Soul would likely have similar powers to its host anyway.

I like this idea, count me as an agreement, I also agree with Abs' comment

Okie dokie.

I'm gonna make a note of suggestions in the OP, so they can be remembered and discussed.

 

[Lou_change]

What about locations where it's specified that only souls can exist there and the verse goes into extreme detail about it? (The soul is separated from the physical body (resulting in death of the individual) to reach that location.)

Then it would likely be banned from matches with this hazard active unless it's equipment or location a character the create or summon. But reality equalization might work as said above however souls having the powers of their host varies from verse to verse I recommend verses without an explanation for souls will use their opponent's definition as needed.

 

[Armorchompy]

I mean it's clearly a case by case thing, if an environment makes a fight unfair then it's not allowed, otherwise it is. Obviously putting DIO on Namek isn't gonna be allowed

 

[Antvasima]

I suppose that the draft seems quite good from what I can see:

KieranH10/ArenaTemplate

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Armorchompy]

seems good- i'm sure someone could come up with some stuff to change so we should wait for some opinions but it is a great template

 

[KieranH10]

I suppose that the draft seems quite good from what I can see:

Thank you! I put some work into balancing ideas I had for it.

i'm sure someone could come up with some stuff to change so we should wait for some opinions

I completely agree.


I would also like to bring up this point again:

I'd suggest maybe attempting to create a few sandboxes for these merged profiles to see how they turn out before actually going forward and implementing them as actual pages.

As I have made an example of what merging the different types of profiles would look like. One with Ego, a relatively basic example of interlocking profiles, and one with Hell, a relatively extreme example, which merges 3 types of profile (Since it already merges 2).

I personally think that this works, but I can see others thinking its relatively messy, at least in Hell's case. So I would like some opinions.

 

[Bobsican]

Also, some regulations will be needed to avoid allowing any kind of location whatsoever, otherwise users will start indexing quite irrelevant places for our purposes that would be better suited in their respective wiki.
For example, indexing the yard of the Backyardigans.

 

[Armorchompy]

seems good to me, even if the Hell profile might be messy in theory it's perfectly comprehensible when reading it, and it's an extreme case as you said

 

[KieranH10]

Also, some regulations will be needed to avoid allowing any kind of location whatsoever, otherwise users will start indexing quite irrelevant places for our purposes that would be better suited in their respective wiki.

I agree that any random house that appears in a series should not warrant a profile for obvious reasons. I'm working on actually writing out standards and rules for the pages and will likely have a sandbox/blog ready soon.

 

[Lou_change]

We could add a part for notable weapons and vehicles but they can probably go under hazards or stay hidden in features.

 

[KieranH10]

We could add a part for notable weapons and vehicles but they can probably go under hazards or stay hidden in features.

Do you mean separating the Notable weapons/etc option from the "Other Notable Features" section?

 

[Lou_change]

Yes

 

[KieranH10]

That might work. I'll add it to the suggestions so that it can be discussed.

 

[Antvasima]

@AKM sama @Promestein

You input would also be appreciated here.

 

[Armorchompy]

Here's an idea I just had, how about using the location for a match? Not as an arena, as the primary antagonist in a match. Take the X-Men Danger Room or the prison they held Tai Lung from Kung Fu panda in. I understand it might be complex but I think "person vs location" would be a pretty fun brand of matches.

 

[KieranH10]

Here's an idea I just had, how about using the location for a match? Not as an arena, as the primary antagonist in a match. Take the X-Men Danger Room or the prison they held Tai Lung from Kung Fu panda in. I understand it might be complex but I think "person vs location" would be a pretty fun brand of matches.

I actually had this idea myself. I believe that would be absolutely fine for a Fun and Games thread. But it would be difficult to properly note on profiles, since in a way it wouldn't really be a battle. More "Will it survive".

I will leave it in the suggestions since I think it is a really good idea, but am unsure how we could properly handle it.

 

[Promestein]

I'm not against arena pages.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the reply.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Hmmm.... I remember rejecting location profiles before. Does anyone else remember that thread? I'm not sure why anymore, though. Might have been because the profiles had weird stuff like Tiers and AP, which doesn't apply to this. Or just because we had no such structure in place at the time.

What's the exact difference between location and classification? Both mention "City" for example.

Maybe calling P&A's "Passive Effects" or something instead would make sense? Feels weird to say that a place has an ability.

We definitely would need rules on relevance. Being popular or story relevant for a verse should not factor into that. More so being unique. They should also have some "theme" to them. What I mean is, for example, that there is probably no point doing a location profile for the Earth as a whole given that, depending on where on earth you start, the conditions of the battlefield would vastly differ. So just the information that it's on Earth wouldn't tell you much.

Maybe there should be something like "Composition"? How much, if any, water, sand, stone, air, wood, snow or animals are available can be relevant for many characters.

 

[Antvasima]

DontTalk makes good points as usual.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Was shocked to see this was Kieran's thread given myself and Zark were discussing this over Discord in the past weeks. Perhaps this is a natural conclusion that everyone was reaching at once.

I agree with their existence, now regarding DT: I don't think "passive" is a good phrase to shoehorn in with "effects" (though I do agree with the name). A location may need an effect to be activated somehow. Just a thought.

Other than that I guess I agree with his points though Composition may leave many pages left with a somewhat barebones section.

 

[Armorchompy]

maybe make Composition optional?

 

[Promestein]

I don't think that's necessary, every area will have plenty of materials just by virtue of existing. Dirt, stone underneath, trees, whatever makes up the buildings, etc.