- 10,958
- 19,133
I agree with Damage, an "at least" rating would address that; we can just explain in the actual rating itself that she's holding back when doing the feat.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AgreedThat seems unnecessary.
And "At least" in front of the 4-A would cover that.
I had planned on putting At least 4-A in there from the start but nice for the official okay ig
Basically you've got nothing substantial to offer and are just speaking based on feelings?I disagree with any tier 2 rating, even "possibly". I think it should be more "at least 5-B possibly 4-A"
The 5-B rating comes from nowhereI disagree with any tier 2 rating, even "possibly". I think it should be more "at least 5-B possibly 4-A"
The calculation assuming planets is 5-B hence 4-A being only a possiblyThe 5-B rating comes from nowhere
We aren't using the calculation linked in Arc's blog as that's a calculation which completely ignores the context of the statement. We're using the calculation linked in the actual OP, which is the one that's supported by the statement.The calculation assuming planets is 5-B hence 4-A being only a possibly
The argumentation in the OP is explicitly proposing the 5-B calc is blatantly incorrectThe calculation assuming planets is 5-B hence 4-A being only a possibly
what is your basis for agreeing with 5-B more, when what's stated goes against this BLATANTLY....I...know it. I'm saying I agree with the 5-B scaling more lol. Well anyway I'm aware the 4-A works by this wiki standard I'm just voicing my opinion rather than making an opposition