• 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.

Calculations: Priority and Necessity

Once this is implemented should we make the new version of the Calc Request/Evaluation page?
 
I'm for both tbh. If we do a highlight some won't read it and use the wrong format. If we make a new one and highlight the reason for the early new thread it will be far more likely that the most people will read it.
 
I could make additions to the first posts in the threads, and highlight them again.
 
Here is the current text for the calculation evaluations thread. It needs to be modified by incorporating the new information:

"This thread is intended for users to link to new blog post calculations, to relay them to the community, and have them evaluated by the calculation group, without contacting the members individually.

To evaluate important off-site calculations, kindly create a separate thread in the content revision forum section, and then post a link to it here.

In the event that this fails to garner attention, users may politely remind the calculation group members to take a look.

Any further discussion should not continue here, but rather strictly take place in the linked blog posts or content revision threads, with the exception that calc group members should note which calculation blogs that they have responded to. Also, users should preferably post the name of the verse that a calculation refers to, in order to generate interest.

All members of the calculation group are requested to follow, bookmark, and regularly inspect this thread.

If a calculation has been performed and accepted, please add it to this page.

Also, when writing a calculation blog, always inform about the exact episode/chapter that the feat occurs in, as well as the time when the feat occurs, if it happens within a video segment. This makes it easier for the calc group members to verify if the calculation has been done correctly."

Here is the current text for the calculation requests thread. It also needs to be modified accordingly:

"This is the official thread for requesting calcs to be done by the members of the Calc Group and other senior editors.

However, this help is entirely optional, and the people who do the requesting cannot expect that anybody will somehow be automatically interested in doing the requested calcs.

It is not allowed to complain about delays in producing calcs. It is also strictly prohibited to spam the message walls of Admins and the members of the Calc group to have a look at the thread.

The calc group will have a final say as to whether a calc is feasible or not, and will discuss internally who is to do the calc.

If a calculation has been performed and accepted, please add it to this page.

IMPORTANT NOTE:

This thread is only for posting requests, and for the calculation group to respond to said requests. Off-topic discussion is absolutely not allowed, and will result in the posts being deleted, and the ones responsible possibly receiving a block. However, you are allowed to answer questions from the calculation group members."
 
Here are the conclusions from the other thread:

Assaltwaffle said:
So, to summarize what we have discussed thus far.

We have agreed to make a standard format for Requests and Evaluations, but NOT the calculations themselves. The Request format is as follows.

Importance/Priority:

Verse/Character Name:

Feat Brief Description:

------Actual calc blog------

Feat Video/Picture When Applicable:

Feat Description and Context:

Evaluations would leave off the bottom two, as they should both be present in the calculation itself.

We have also agreed on a tiering system based off of UMR and my suggestions. In its current state, it reads as follows:

Tier 1: Verse dependent. Affects the majority of the standing cast within the verse.

Tier 2: Scales to a decent number of characters. Can put characters into different tiers within the verse (mid to high, low to mid, ect.), but does not affect the majority of the characters within the verse.

Tier 3: Gives an important rating that will be commonly used in battles (Durability, Attack Potency, Speed) to a single character.

Tier 4: Gives an unimportant or supportive rating to a character or verse; recreational and un-needed calcs.

Does this sound good so far, any opposition to the current suggestions?
Click to expand...
 
"This thread is intended for users to link to new blog post calculations, to relay them to the community, and have them evaluated by the calculation group, without contacting the members individually.

To evaluate important off-site calculations, kindly create a separate thread in the content revision forum section, and then post a link to it here. (I'm thinking post it to the calc discussion forum instead. Thoughts?)

In the event that this fails to garner attention, users may politely remind the calculation group members to take a look.

Any further discussion should not continue here, but rather strictly take place in the linked blog posts or content revision threads, with the exception that calc group members should note which calculation blogs that they have responded to. Also, users should preferably post the name of the verse that a calculation refers to, in order to generate interest.

All members of the calculation group are requested to follow, bookmark, and regularly inspect this thread. If a calculation has been performed and accepted, please add it to this page. (This should start being followed, I'd like to see a general index of calcs moving forward, so everything is in a central location.)

Also, when writing a calculation blog, always inform about the exact episode/chapter that the feat occurs in, as well as the time when the feat occurs, if it happens within a video segment. This makes it easier for the calc group members to verify if the calculation has been done correctly.

As our calc group members are people too, we realize that performing thorough calculations is time consuming. Given the daily volume of calculations the team is tasked with evaluating, it is important that you detail your post with the proper classifications, as shown here "

Bold is what I added and/or a suggestion/comment.

I'm thinking for the tier stuff, we can just make a new page for it, as not to consume more page space than necessary, as we did with Standard Format for Character Profiles.


This would be similar for the request post.
 
I am fine with posting external calculation links into threads in the calc group forum instead.

I am also fine with if you and Assaltwaffle (for example) are willing to write a separate "Calculation Evaluations and Requests Instructions" page that we can link to in the threads.
 
Okay. Thank you for the help.
 
Query: Would it be ok to ask for small groups of calcs, so long as results are expected to be in the same range? I ask because I have some feats that would put the defense of Half-Life's Gordon Freeman, whose defense is currently in the Tier 9 range, well into Tier 8. Would the proper protocol be to ask for one calc for a single feat to be done, then provide more feats of expectedly similar magnitude if the result is considered outlierish, or just go ahead and link a bunch of feats so that others can see the consistency?

My apologies is this is off the topic of this thread, but I think this fits well enough.
 
I'm of the mind of requesting one and going from there. It would get pretty messy pretty fast if we have a post with a cluster of calcs all using the format. I'd recommend requesting the probably strongest feat and moving from there.
 
We can copy the blog contents to a regular page (and then link to that in the request and evaluation threads) after you have received some input from other calc group members.
 
Just one thing, but why the tier 3 has a stat used in battle as a requirement? We are an indexing wiki first of all. And speed doesn't fall under the category of "commonly used in battles" at all.
 
We are an indexing wiki mostly, but what are people going to primarily look at? The fact that a guy can blow up a planet of lift an elephant? The former is also usable in battles much more than the latter, and thus has more value as a whole.

Unless Speed is equalized speed can be the determining factor for battles. But, as you said, we are an indexing wiki, and being able to move quickly is going to be more noticeable than punching something hard.
 
I participated to like, 8 threads with speed unequal since I joined. For the purpose of vs threads, it's about as relevant as lifting strength.

I'm not against the tiering system proposed, but it shouldn't be related to vs threads.
 
Why should it not? If we are an indexing wiki all stats should be equal. We also have battles as an integral and constant discussion here, however, so the stats that are commonly used to determine these battles should get priority since they not only serve the indexing purpose, but also the battles purpose as well.
 
And speed is as used as lifting strength due to equalization. So both or neither, if it's based on vs threads. Because the purpose of the speed stat in 99,99% of the vs matches is either the OP equalizing it or people complaining about a blitz.
 
I am afraid that I agree with Kaltias. We should preferably not mention versus threads within the standard format instructions. Whether or not a character is well-know/part of a notable prominent series is considerably more relevant.
 
Also, now that i think about it, does this mean that blog posts with multiple calcs aren't allowed anymore? Or you just need to list the importance of each calc individually?
 
I think that the importances of all of the calcs simply have to be listed individually.
 
No problem.
 
So now that we have a revised format and some people are already using it, should we remake the requests/evaluations and highlight the change?
 
Well, I will copy the blog contents to a regular page first.
 
I can't edit it now, but maybe someone should add bullet points to the priorities so it matches the top box. Also, I'll post the final version of the little introductory post Ant does for eval/request threads.

From the looks of it, I've been ninja'd, but I'll look at them anyway.
 
It looks good :^)

Though what will we do with the Accepted Calcs page being locked now?
 
I have updated the introduction posts for the calculation evaluations and requests threads.
 
I have also added bullet points to the priorities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Anonymous_Learner
Niffty Travel Speed calc CRT
Replies
11
Views
2K
DarkLock92
DarkLock92
Vzearr
  • Locked
Dear Me, Will this go well?
Replies
14
Views
2K
KLOL506
KLOL506
M3X_2.0
  • Locked
Marvel Comics Calculations Removal
2 3 4
Replies
144
Views
9K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Flashlight237
Cratering and Crater Calculations: An Infographic
Replies
3
Views
270
Flashlight237
Flashlight237
Lilybitdun
Naruto: Shuriken & Kunai Dodging Recalcs
Replies
16
Views
2K
Lilybitdun
Lilybitdun
Back
Top