• 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.

Consideration For A New Tier 11

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well that example is actaully wrong and needs to be revised as it wa made by an ametuer

You example is void due to the rules in place by making profiles. There is no reason for the Tier, AP, and Striking strength to be different. They must all line up

EDIT/UPDATE: SCP-085 has been redefined and fixed until a knowledgeable user inputs on the profile. They tried making some assumption 2D characters can interact with the 3D world due to have 0 energy/speed. It is nigh-impossible to calculate something when it lacks a dimension that is need for the space to exist for speed itself.
 
AP and Tier are directly related however. Their striking strength as I am aware, is a class in which the character meets criteria for the AP using that. It is also related to lifting strength.

Besides, a 2D being cannot be given Below human or above. It is not physically possible.
 
Only physical:

"Striking Strength is the amount of physical force an individual can deal out. In other words, it is the physical Attack Potency of an individual. It may or may not depend on Lifting Strength.

Striking strength describes the power behind the character's physical blows. Generally, anything that has to do with the character's actions instead of passively holding up weights is about this category. While lifting strength is a static value which can be measured in units of weight or mass, striking strength is different. It relies more on "action" which is a combination of speed and mass. As such, striking strength requires a whole different classification system. "
 
It refers to physical output of a chracter. If a character that's say, 5-B, and a magic user, they're set to Class XJ because their power is capable of destroying a planet.

It has to do with that, but its usually set to default the highest attacks they can output, regardless of how they did it, as far as I know.

It still needs to directly relate to any power output they have. Lower dimensional charactrers cannot do this

"In other words, it is the physical Attack Potency of an individual"

Also you're veering off topic. Please make a thread if you wish to coninue this discussion, Juscaslucas. And also please compose all of your thoughts into a single post, as it clogs up the page greatly.
 
Energy attacks are considred physical, as physical attacks are not just with the body. if aren't physical then explain how they interact with a physical being. Please make a seperate thread about this, as we are veering off topic, and as these replies WILL be deleted by a moderator or admin for being so far off topic.
 
Alright. I'll bite. There arent that many animals on earth who can even be at a level beyon 9-b. Elephants are up there. But i dont think this is enough of an issue to be pushing for so hard. Hell. I can barely see what issue you're trying to present. You seem to be offering an argument on a problem and downshooting everyone elses arguments without trying to find a solution of your own. I've already pointed out that these cases can be taken on a page by page basis and that tiering isnt so much of an issue but you only want to point out that some animals are stronger than humans. Okay. They can be elevated. But a sizeable chunk of the animal population is not. So they should be relagated to the bottom of the list. You argue that AP and tiering are a direct link. So we have Elephants and gorillas at higher than human. What else?
 
@SoyHop Striking Strength is only considered to be the physical attack power. Hence, for characters that can use energy blasts, but are physically weak, it is not the same as the attack potency value.

@LordXcano Thank you very much for the help.

@All So, would it be a good idea to create a Tier 11-D for subatomic characters, or is that redundant?
 
Antvasima said:
@All So, would it be a good idea to create a Tier 11-D for subatomic characters, or is that redundant?
Click to expand...
I... i think it should be fine. Certain animals like Elephants, Tigers, etc, would be placed higher up in the tiering system. Since we deal with fantasy/sci-fi, it's good to have for archiving purposes, for viruses like the T, G, etc and other things.

Support.
 
Do note that as the bureacurat of one of VS's affiliate's FC/OC, i don't really mind weather this passes through here or not.

If it does get implemented here, then sure alright. If not, then meh it's alright then either way. *shrugs*

Just to throw that out there...
 
Well, we should preferably hammer out clear definitions for the energy borders of each tier, if this is going to pass. The problem with this is that each category is so far apart from each other in terms of scale.
 
I suppose that might be an idea, yes.
 
Not sure how the discussion is going, but I made some KE calcs for small animals incase you guys need to use it.


Link
 
Yea, a bit problem is that these things are very far apart and three categories won't cut it. We might need to separate into "high" and "low" for some, as well change around names. Let me take a look at some reasonable scales.
 
@Aldrecht

Hmm? I was never arguing anything about any animals. I am well aware most are >Human, and the few who aren't can already apply to higher tiers, no disagreement there, that I can see.

And the reason you can "barely see the point" is because I wasn't really trying to make one. I think you jumepd to some conclusoin without reading further into what I wrote. And you tried to form what I was saying without backing up to take in the whole picture. i'm guilt of this too some times, but there is no reason for you to be sorry or anything.
 
@Ant

I don't know if we need a Tier 11-D.

If we did, lets see... If I were to think of this new system, the order would go:

11-D Atoms and Sub-atomic particles

11-C Cellular/microscopic

11-B Insect/plants

11-A Small animal (high and low of this version maybe?)

10-C to 10-A: human and large animal

9-C to 9-A: Peak Human, low superhuman, large animals
 
Alakabamm said:
Yea, a bit problem is that these things are very far apart and three categories won't cut it. We might need to separate into "high" and "low" for some, as well change around names. Let me take a look at some reasonable scales.
Click to expand...
I really like you idea. Maybe for mice and insects, they can be Low 11-A, and small animals like cats, raccoons and birds can be High 11-A

That would remove the need for more than 3 sub-tiers.
 
Well, I don't think there is a huge problem with those tiers...I think going from cells to full blown large multi cellular organisms is a huge jump. There need to be tiers in there, not tiers below or above.
 
@Alakabamm So, what do you suggest as a solution?
 
If Hop could interject, Hop thinks mixing insects and petty animals together could help allot.

11-C atomic

11-B cellular/microscopic

11-A Organisms (lLow 11-A is insects, 11-A is rabbits, squirrels and raccoons, and High 11-A is below human animals like dogs and foxes)
 
@SoyHop I think that an 11-D for atomic level might work better, while keeping the initial suggestions.
 
Seems like 11-C stomps alot of the 11-B and 11-A unless it has resistance to viruses and such it'd even take down a good portion of non-superhumans
 
Nibbler3100 said:
Seems like 11-C stomps alot of the 11-B and 11-A unless it has resistance to viruses and such it'd even take down a good portion of non-superhumans
Click to expand...
11-B and up DO have resistance. In the form of immune systems, cures and of course hax.
 
Well there are just as much orders of magnitude below the human level, if not more, than there are above. Compare to the whole 7 tiers we got here for the macro world it just seems inconsistent. To reduce or compact the micro world to just a tier downplays or at least tells how much we know about it. Going off by here warrents at least 2 tiers and this is just our 3D universe, although some versions of string theory posits differently the further down you go.
 
Well, I think that we likely have to keep things somewhat manageable. Too many tiers that we will barely use seem unnecessary. 11-A to 11-D should likely be sufficient.
 
Ok but dogs are not below the lowest of human level, or I would call it "base human" (i.e. a baby), or even a pre-adolescent (which would constitute a Low 10-B). afaik a physically impaired, terminally ill, or even small animals like a cat can still solo a human newborn, which all lies in the 10-C. With that small fish/amphibians/reptiles would probably be more appropriate for the higher end of the below the human category, or which is actually "high sub-humans to base humans".
 
I think this is a good idea, but i think is good adding a tier 12 like this:

Tier 12: Lower-Dimensional

12-C: Point Level

0-dimensional characters

12-B: Line Level

1-dimensional characters

12-A: Plane Level

2-dimensional characters

Tier 11: Below Regular

'11-C:'11-C: Microbe level (reserved for plagues, viruses, parasites and the like)

Examples: Ebola, helminths, the Black Death

11-B: Insect level (These could stomp 11-C via immune systems. These are the weakest of animals period, like poisonious bugs, tiny lizards, ants and the like)

Examples: Grasshopper, Spiders, Ants, Beetles, minnows, baby mice, and the Venus fly trap (since it can kill insects, or be killed by them it fits within their range)

11-A: Small Animal level (These can stomp 11-C & 11-B, it's orginally named 'Small Mammal', but fish and birds can apply to this as well)
 
So are we going to call this new tier "Fodder Tier" or what?

Regardless of what we do, there's always going to be a huge jump in power level between ranks. That's why I suggest this:

11-A = Small Animal

Low 11-A = Bugs

11-B = Microscopic

Low 11-B = Cellular

11-C = Atomic

Low 11-C = Subatomic

I also think it's worth noting that if we were to create this new tier, we'd have to start another discussion about different KE outputs on the Attack Potency chart.
 
@ArbitraryNumbers I suppose that your suggestions seem reasonable, although it depends on what the rest of the staff think.

Also, on second thought, I would rather simply label this tier "Minor" as a whole.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

demonwarrior2266
  • Locked
Tier 11 Needs a Revamp
Replies
23
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Laxxius
  • Locked
Tiering System Revision (Tier 4-C and up)
Replies
19
Views
2K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
NucleerChaos1922
Questions About the Tier System
Replies
3
Views
609
The_2nd_Existential_Seed
The_2nd_Existential_Seed
Lloydblitzed
Ninjago Star Tiering and Possible New Value
3 4 5
Replies
183
Views
5K
Lloydblitzed
Lloydblitzed
About the Lodges (Twin Peaks) and their Tier with the new Tiering System
Replies
2
Views
515
Onirouge
Back
Top