• 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.

Degrees of Infinity - Being More Specific

FinePoint

He/Him
VS Battles
Thread Moderator
Image Helper
3,633
2,504
After some discussion here, it was determined that we need to draft an editing rule regarding that the degree of infinity for tiers Low 1-C and above should be clarified whenever it is known.



My Proposal:
In addition to this issue, I think many people can agree that in general finding the specific power level of characters can be extremely difficult. Many profiles are based on calculations which aren't linked either on that profile nor the verse page, and many profiles are part of massive scaling chains which can become very confusing when you attempt to follow them without a blog. This is an example of how complicated scaling chains can be. Without a blog like this, certain verses become almost impossible to determine the power of properly to people who are not avid supporters on this Wiki.

Even if the verse page contains a comprehensive blog or easy to understand explanation (and I stress if), then a very large number of visitors the wiki have no idea this is where they should look. Off-site, a primary complaint I see constantly is that people have no idea where we get our values from. Going to the verse page simply isn't intuitive, countless people can surely testify to not even knowing about this until considerable time on the Wiki.

My proposal for the rule is something all-inclusive, which accounts for both the degree of infinity issue and the lower tiers at once. I'm not attached to the exact wording, this is just a draft:
If practical, profiles should link directly to the calculations which they scale from. If a profile does not scale to a calculation, then it should contain or link to an explanation of the scaling chain it is a part of, or explain the exact degree of infinity that it scales to in either the attack potency section, bottom explanation section, or via a linked blog post.
A few quick examples of this rule in action would be: "Stronger than [X], who is superior to the 6-dimensional [Y]," or "Held his own against [X], who is capable of [this feat]," or "Superior to [X], see [here] for an explanation of the full scaling chain."

Note that it says "if practical", which means this won't be so strictly enforced that characters whose powers are vague to begin with will be affected. In short, one will be required to include or link to an explanation only if it's available to us. If it exists somewhere on the Wiki, it should be linked to right on the profile. If it exists in a CRT thread, and if someone knows about it, then that explanation should be adapted for the profile.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, if people would just avoid building circles into their scaling chains they wouldn't be a problem. But I suppose that's too much to ask.

Rule in itself is mostly fine in spirit. I'm not sure whether we should encourage blog posts for scaling chains. Blog posts aren't publicly editable and scaling chains change frequently. It seems like a bad idea to put explanations like that there.

I only wonder whether it is best as a rule or something we put on the standard format. Or, better yet, something we put into a style-guide we should make at some point.
I don't think we would in practice enforce the rule...
 
Last edited:
The blog posts part was referring to degrees of infinity. I am obviously open for somebody rewording the draft for the rule text above.
 
Thank you for the responses.

So does anybody have suggestions for how we should improve on the rule text draft above?
 
Is somebody willing to improve on the following rule text draft?

"If practical, profiles should link directly to the calculations which they scale from. If a profile does not scale to a calculation, then it should contain or link to an explanation of the scaling chain it is a part of, or explain the exact degree of infinity that it scales to in either the attack potency section, bottom explanation section, or via a linked blog post."
 
Is somebody willing to improve on the following rule text draft?

"If practical, profiles should link directly to the calculations which they scale from. If a profile does not scale to a calculation, then it should contain or link to an explanation of the scaling chain it is a part of, or explain the exact degree of infinity that it scales to in either the attack potency section, bottom explanation section, or via a linked blog post."
Maybe something like?
If possible, profiles should link directly to calculations they scale from and explain the scaling chains they are part of. For Tier 11, 1 and 0 profiles the exact level of infinity they have should be explained briefly in the Attack Potency section, in more detail in the bottom explanation section or via a linked explanation page.
I don't think we (should) support official explanations in blog posts so I changed it to explanation page instead.
 
Regarding the blog post point, if a scaling chain could be made, I think it is better if there is a specific official page since a scaling chain tends to evolve, especially for long-running verses or complex verses; only the thread moderator, administrator, and blog creator could edit blog posts which can be impractical. I am okay with the other topic in principles.
If possible, profiles should link directly to calculations they scale from and explain the scaling chains they are part of. For Tier 11, 1 and 0 profiles the exact level of infinity they have should be explained briefly in the Attack Potency section, in more detail in the bottom explanation section or via a linked explanation page.
It seems fine.
 
Last edited:
I also think that DontTalk's version of the rule text is good. Thank you for helping out.

Is it fine if I add it to our Editing Rules page now?
Regarding the blog post point, if a scaling chain could be made, I think it is better if there is a specific official page since a scaling chain tends to evolve, especially for long-running verses or complex verses; only the thread moderator, administrator, and blog creator could edit blog posts which can be impractical. I am okay with the other topic in principles.
I also think that we should use official cosmology explanation pages instead of blog posts. Didn't I ask you to take a look at handling a project for that a while ago btw?

However, complex scaling chains should probably be explained in a specific section in the related verse pages, probably right beneath the calculations section.

Perhaps adding such a section to our standard format for verse pages page would be a good idea?
 
Bump.

Further evaluations would be appreciated here.
 
Sorry for intruding a staff thread, but this is just a rule so verse from Low 1-C onward need a scaling chain blog right???
 
I also think that we should use official cosmology explanation pages instead of blog posts. Didn't I ask you to take a look at handling a project for that a while ago btw?
Like I said before, for many cosmology blogs or other blogs explaining the tiers, it may not be such a good idea to put them as actual official explanation pages since they include comments from forum threads (Or linking to forum threads that may not be existent anymore due to the forum move) for analysis and debunking and may even include mild profanity and may not exactly be written in the most formal of speech. And the problem is, a lot of them link to the verse pages. Remember, these blogs were made years ago back when the old forum was still around.
 
Last edited:
Well, the officially endorsed important ones should preferably be moved to regular wiki pages and, if necessary, cleaned up to use formal language and have their links updated then. It is not good for our purposes in the long run to use pages that cannot be properly edited by any knowledgeable member if unlocked.
 
Well, the officially endorsed important ones should preferably be moved to regular wiki pages and, if necessary, cleaned up to use formal language and have their links updated then. It is not good for our purposes in the long run to use pages that cannot be properly edited by any knowledgeable member if unlocked.
Kinda feels degrading to leave out the name of the users who posted the arguments for the blog tho.
 
I do not think so, any more than leaving out every contributor to a regular wiki page.

A link to the original blogs can also be mentioned in the small edit summary boxes when creating the regular pages based on them.
 
I kind of forgot what's being asked here in further detail. All I recall it's a mostly case by case practice and that both DontTalkDT and Celestial Pegasus both made sense to me.
 
Thank you for the reply. This is not a very long thread though, so would you be willing to reread it please?
 
It's been a minute, but I still think this is something worth considering.
 
Back
Top