- 10,748
- 6,475
If you look at the Attack Potency page you can see how we define tiers, talking particularly about the stuff below tier 2 and above 11 they are defined by a range of numbers which corresponds to a type of object that is destroyed, 0.25 tons to 2 tons representing building destruction, 11 tons to 100 tons representing City Block destruction, 5.8 kilotons to 100 kilotons representing town destruction etc. A natural conclusion from this type of classification will be that all these values have a logical reasoning for being used and perhaps, they were determined to be the standard energy output that can be associated with feats corresponding to different objects? Unfortunately this isn't entirely the case.
The Problem
I won't dance around the problem any further, the truth is a good chunk of our attack potency borders come from nowhere. 5-C and above come from destroying real life celestial objects chosen on basis of what best represented each tier, as well as what mode of destruction was appropriate and all of this is explained by blogs and articles linked on the page (You all probably remember the celestial revisions); 10-A, 9-C and 9-B are similar. However, between 9-B and 5-C there is a noticeable lack of explanation for how the tiers are obtained and why they are what they are. Let me stress this last point, one of our absolute most important pages in the wiki that we expect everyone contributing to the wiki to be acquainted with, doesn't have citations for a substantial portion of its information, the most basic thing to take care of when presenting information in general. To make things worse, it's not the only problem, there is something else which I'll get into shortly
Regarding the lack of citations, as I was told a while ago, most of our borders are supposed to come from this article on narutoforums. And going through it, it appears at least some of the tiers such as 7-C, 7-B and 6-B do come from this source since their figures exactly line up with ours. At the same time, a lot of the other calculations don't seem to. Linking this article or maybe creating a blog adapting parts of the article, in case the entire thing isn't legit, should be one step in solving the issue
But leaving aside the values that do seem to have sources, there are also values that are straight up, how do say this, made up. Yes, ever noticed how a lot of baseline values listed in the AP chart are oddly round numbers? Examples include 8-A being exactly 100 tons, Low 7-C being exactly 1 kiloton, High 7-C being exactly 100 kilotons etc. This is no coincidence, the reason there are so many conveniently round figures in the chart is because certain tiers were added without any logical basis and had their borders chosen arbitrarily. Basically, a select number of tiers are only named a certain way with no genuine correlation to the type of feats you would assume they are representing
Measures
What should be done about this? Well, the most ideal solution would be to change the borders to something more sensible but, it doesn't seem that little idea would ever take off so I'll propose a different solution. Any tier whose borders are without sources should only be assigned if there is a calculation putting a feat within that tier's border. This shouldn't need much explanation, if we cannot prove that a type of feat should typically belong within a certain energy range, then we shouldn't assume it is fine to put it within that energy range, just basic logic. Statements and estimations should be fine in case of tiers that do come from somewhere, let me make that clear, it is only the ones that don't that should receive this treatment
Here are the tiers that face the problems explained above
Now, what will need to be done if this revision is accepted? Well first of all The Tiering System page would need to be edited. Currently it explicitly mentions that the aforementioned tiers are based on destroying certain objects when in reality this is either false or lack the proof to be taken as truth, so while I won't ask for the individual descriptions to be modified since it will likely end up looking ugly, I would suggest that a note be added which clarifies that tiers without any sources are not to be given out without calculations. Maybe something along these lines?
"Contrary to the individual explanations, various tiers don't correspond to the destruction of their namesake in any provable manner. What this means is that certain tiers require proper calculations to be used rather than rough approximation. Any tier range which hasn't been sourced or explained in the Attack Potency page would fall under this and users should take care that only characters whose energy output is confirmed to fall within a certain range are listed as belonging to that tier" (Open to suggestions)
We also either need to link the Narutoforums article or a blog based on the article in the Attack Potency page as mentioned above
As for what changes it would bring to the profiles, any character that get their tier via uncalced feats or statements of destroying mountains, small/large <insert geographical area> and whatever else is included in the revision; will have to be re-examined and tiered off of a different feat, or a calculation of the original feat if that's possible. Instances of rating characters as building level via being building sized, which is very common, will also probably have to be looked into. It will also affect several creation and pocket dimension feats because a lot of them do fall under "it is as large as this object so it will be this tier" which, as the thread has showcased, being as large as an object will not automatically correspond to a tier in quite a few cases now. The last one is what I'm most worried about since I haven't figured out a good alternative method to evaluate creation feats in those cases and while I don't want to create any trouble, I also feel this revision is too important to back down on because of this complication
I think that about sums it up.
The Problem
I won't dance around the problem any further, the truth is a good chunk of our attack potency borders come from nowhere. 5-C and above come from destroying real life celestial objects chosen on basis of what best represented each tier, as well as what mode of destruction was appropriate and all of this is explained by blogs and articles linked on the page (You all probably remember the celestial revisions); 10-A, 9-C and 9-B are similar. However, between 9-B and 5-C there is a noticeable lack of explanation for how the tiers are obtained and why they are what they are. Let me stress this last point, one of our absolute most important pages in the wiki that we expect everyone contributing to the wiki to be acquainted with, doesn't have citations for a substantial portion of its information, the most basic thing to take care of when presenting information in general. To make things worse, it's not the only problem, there is something else which I'll get into shortly
Regarding the lack of citations, as I was told a while ago, most of our borders are supposed to come from this article on narutoforums. And going through it, it appears at least some of the tiers such as 7-C, 7-B and 6-B do come from this source since their figures exactly line up with ours. At the same time, a lot of the other calculations don't seem to. Linking this article or maybe creating a blog adapting parts of the article, in case the entire thing isn't legit, should be one step in solving the issue
But leaving aside the values that do seem to have sources, there are also values that are straight up, how do say this, made up. Yes, ever noticed how a lot of baseline values listed in the AP chart are oddly round numbers? Examples include 8-A being exactly 100 tons, Low 7-C being exactly 1 kiloton, High 7-C being exactly 100 kilotons etc. This is no coincidence, the reason there are so many conveniently round figures in the chart is because certain tiers were added without any logical basis and had their borders chosen arbitrarily. Basically, a select number of tiers are only named a certain way with no genuine correlation to the type of feats you would assume they are representing
Measures
What should be done about this? Well, the most ideal solution would be to change the borders to something more sensible but, it doesn't seem that little idea would ever take off so I'll propose a different solution. Any tier whose borders are without sources should only be assigned if there is a calculation putting a feat within that tier's border. This shouldn't need much explanation, if we cannot prove that a type of feat should typically belong within a certain energy range, then we shouldn't assume it is fine to put it within that energy range, just basic logic. Statements and estimations should be fine in case of tiers that do come from somewhere, let me make that clear, it is only the ones that don't that should receive this treatment
Here are the tiers that face the problems explained above
| Table |
|---|
|
"Contrary to the individual explanations, various tiers don't correspond to the destruction of their namesake in any provable manner. What this means is that certain tiers require proper calculations to be used rather than rough approximation. Any tier range which hasn't been sourced or explained in the Attack Potency page would fall under this and users should take care that only characters whose energy output is confirmed to fall within a certain range are listed as belonging to that tier" (Open to suggestions)
We also either need to link the Narutoforums article or a blog based on the article in the Attack Potency page as mentioned above
As for what changes it would bring to the profiles, any character that get their tier via uncalced feats or statements of destroying mountains, small/large <insert geographical area> and whatever else is included in the revision; will have to be re-examined and tiered off of a different feat, or a calculation of the original feat if that's possible. Instances of rating characters as building level via being building sized, which is very common, will also probably have to be looked into. It will also affect several creation and pocket dimension feats because a lot of them do fall under "it is as large as this object so it will be this tier" which, as the thread has showcased, being as large as an object will not automatically correspond to a tier in quite a few cases now. The last one is what I'm most worried about since I haven't figured out a good alternative method to evaluate creation feats in those cases and while I don't want to create any trouble, I also feel this revision is too important to back down on because of this complication
I think that about sums it up.
