-
This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here. -
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page. -
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
About One-Shots
- Thread starter The_Wright_Way
- Start date
- 10,758
- 6,482
I too think a standard one shot gap is required, since not all cases of one shots will be as obvious as a 5-C fighting a 5-B. We should have a standard in place to identify more ambiguous situations of a one shot.
- 166,078
- 73,870
I personally agree with Sera, and think that a specific random value is a bad idea that will get endlessly repeatedly debated. It will also put too great restrictions on versus discussions, which drains the fun out of them and makes it very hard to find suitable opponents.
- 24,835
- 6,164
Random value is a bad idea, but, Andy's suggestion of 7.5x seems good.
Which, is a really stinking wide gap that hax, speed and techique can close pretty well. I don't see any fun really getting drained here, I think you're kinda overexaggerating how much this would effect matchmaking. After all, we can make threads just fine with the value.
Which, is a really stinking wide gap that hax, speed and techique can close pretty well. I don't see any fun really getting drained here, I think you're kinda overexaggerating how much this would effect matchmaking. After all, we can make threads just fine with the value.
- 24,835
- 6,164
I mean, our last discussion on this was months ago, it's not like this is often to problematic degree.
And we only have it now because Weekly ended up bringing it up because Bambu said "no u" to it.
It's not hard, you have to get get people with things to close the gap. I mean, to no offense to you, but do you really have room to talk about matchmaking when you explicitly state on your profile the lack of interest you have on the matter? In fact, from my understanding this is the only time you've talked about it in like, years.
And we only have it now because Weekly ended up bringing it up because Bambu said "no u" to it.
It's not hard, you have to get get people with things to close the gap. I mean, to no offense to you, but do you really have room to talk about matchmaking when you explicitly state on your profile the lack of interest you have on the matter? In fact, from my understanding this is the only time you've talked about it in like, years.
- 24,835
- 6,164
It's hardly the practical if you don't get your hands dirty. Sure, you can look at it and make predictions, but, in reality, this hardly confines matchups. There are many many possibilities even if we're strict about at what point AP Advantages get unfair. There's Hax and speed and many other things that can come into play.
I mean, for one, Annabeth Chase vs Madoka Kaname, 6-C. Annabeth nearly AP stomps, but Madoka's arrows having a chance of instakill and her soul gem give her a real good shot.
In irony, people who say we're too focused on AP are themselves too focused on making AP looser for matchups to see that we're already doing fine.
I mean, for one, Annabeth Chase vs Madoka Kaname, 6-C. Annabeth nearly AP stomps, but Madoka's arrows having a chance of instakill and her soul gem give her a real good shot.
In irony, people who say we're too focused on AP are themselves too focused on making AP looser for matchups to see that we're already doing fine.
- 19,123
- 6,335
I don't know where you are getting 7.5x being restrictive to the point where finding opponents is hard.
For tiers like 7-B, literally any AP value is fine as long as you aren't putting a baseline against someone borderline 7-A.
Also, a fixed value could lead to threads arguing against it? Maybe. But without it, you simply move the debate to every vs thread.
In one it will be concluded that 3x is a one shot, in another one it will be concluded that x10 isn't one, and others will keep using x5 due to lack of an alternative.
Saying "case by case" is just ignoring the problem. Also because that's not even case by case.
"Case by case" means that I have an established guideline and apply it considering the situation.
So if for example sake, the gap needed is x5, case by case is:
A is 5 times stronger than B.
A's rating comes from a feat that almost killed them due to the effort.
B's rating comes from a feat performed by walking.
This obviously isn't a one shot.
Saying that the x5 or whatever guideline doesn't exist is not case by case. It's "the wiki has no guidelines regarding this issue"
For tiers like 7-B, literally any AP value is fine as long as you aren't putting a baseline against someone borderline 7-A.
Also, a fixed value could lead to threads arguing against it? Maybe. But without it, you simply move the debate to every vs thread.
In one it will be concluded that 3x is a one shot, in another one it will be concluded that x10 isn't one, and others will keep using x5 due to lack of an alternative.
Saying "case by case" is just ignoring the problem. Also because that's not even case by case.
"Case by case" means that I have an established guideline and apply it considering the situation.
So if for example sake, the gap needed is x5, case by case is:
A is 5 times stronger than B.
A's rating comes from a feat that almost killed them due to the effort.
B's rating comes from a feat performed by walking.
This obviously isn't a one shot.
Saying that the x5 or whatever guideline doesn't exist is not case by case. It's "the wiki has no guidelines regarding this issue"
- 10,758
- 6,482
Kal is right
Also, I want to suggest that the one shot value be based on the assumption that the target is being hit in the torso, gut or head.
This is because you need to assume where the target is hit before deciding a value needed to oneshot, and these regions I believe are where one can most expect a person to be hit during a brawl, barring regions where a significant AP advantage isn't usually needed to KO the opponent
Also, I want to suggest that the one shot value be based on the assumption that the target is being hit in the torso, gut or head.
This is because you need to assume where the target is hit before deciding a value needed to oneshot, and these regions I believe are where one can most expect a person to be hit during a brawl, barring regions where a significant AP advantage isn't usually needed to KO the opponent
- 19,123
- 6,335
@Andy
I'd say the torso personally
@Ant
That's not a factor though. If their feats are orders of magnitude apart, you simply make a hax based fight instead of an AP based one.
No one in the world would call an AP fight between a baseline and a GigaFoe character a "notable victory"
I'd say the torso personally
@Ant
That's not a factor though. If their feats are orders of magnitude apart, you simply make a hax based fight instead of an AP based one.
No one in the world would call an AP fight between a baseline and a GigaFoe character a "notable victory"
- 19,123
- 6,335
The alternative means having double standards though.
My favorite character is losing due to a x6 gap? That's totally a one shot, this thread is a stomp.
My favorite character is winning thanks to a x6 gap? Nah, that's a notable victory and should be added.
Without a guideline, this can totally happen, and it will.
My favorite character is losing due to a x6 gap? That's totally a one shot, this thread is a stomp.
My favorite character is winning thanks to a x6 gap? Nah, that's a notable victory and should be added.
Without a guideline, this can totally happen, and it will.
- 6,104
- 5,102
If this was always about "overcoming someone else's durability in one shot", which I'm sure we both believe isn't a stomp, why are people causing an uproar as if it is indeed a stomp? I'm completely fine with it if it doesn't automatically make matches stomps.
- 10,758
- 6,482
Exactly what I want to know.Sera EX said:
- 11,074
- 13,903
The problem with that is different verses have different characters with different AP gap who one-shot each other. Selecting a fixed number for that will be very difficult as it may not be in conjunction with a lot of verses. Plus, finding suitable match-ups will become more difficult.
What is the basis of 7.5x?
What is the basis of 7.5x?
- 10,758
- 6,482
@AKM It's the gap between a 10-B and a 9-C
- 12,524
- 3,491
^That's what I've been saying.
Wokistan
Bioluminescent African American Working At The CIA
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
Human Resources
- 16,898
- 7,347
You can one shot people while comparable to or even weaker than them though. I'm fine with 7.5x as a general guideline, but people need to take into the account the specifics of the durability and AP feats of the characters.
- 10,758
- 6,482
So can this be mentioned on the one shot page then? If so, how to word it?
Also on a related note, I want to suggest that we mention two new factors in determining a one shot on the page:
1. Where the target was hit. It has been pointed out that where a target was hit matters in deciding how much of an AP advantage is needed for a one shot. This should be acknowledged on the page.
2.The physiology of a character. Another thing I believe should be mentioned is that the physiology of a character can affect how much of an AP advantage is needed to oneshot. For example a robot or a slime monster may not be as easy to oneshot as someone who has the physiology of a human.
Also on a related note, I want to suggest that we mention two new factors in determining a one shot on the page:
1. Where the target was hit. It has been pointed out that where a target was hit matters in deciding how much of an AP advantage is needed for a one shot. This should be acknowledged on the page.
2.The physiology of a character. Another thing I believe should be mentioned is that the physiology of a character can affect how much of an AP advantage is needed to oneshot. For example a robot or a slime monster may not be as easy to oneshot as someone who has the physiology of a human.
- 15,436
- 7,856
- Thread starter
- #197
Wok and Andy seem to be making sense.
- 32,835
- 38,061
Shouldn't we just rename the thread to "How many times needed to be stronger than the opponent to one-shot if you're literally equal in everything else?"
I mean, this part about one-shotting is about using physical strength only, not any other hax.
I mean, this part about one-shotting is about using physical strength only, not any other hax.
- 10,758
- 6,482
@KL You don't need to make thread titles so specific. That name honestly sounded silly to me.
