Establishing combat skill requirements

[Antvasima]

So what should we do here? If we decide against set fighting skill statistics, we need to update our official standards in that regard.

 

[Antvasima]

So what should we do here? If we decide against set fighting skill statistics, we need to update our official standards in that regard.

@DontTalkDT

It is very important that you and other staff members here help us to resolve this issue.

 

[Mahek_The_Assassin_Silent_Killer]

No, because what you mentioned are objective linear stats. Someone with Building level AP is always stronger than someone with Wall level AP. There is a single objective measure of AP (energy) and that will clearly sort characters in categories where the higher category always has more of said objective measure (i.e. has more energy).
So you don't need to compare feats and statements to figure out whose attacks are stronger, because the person with the higher AP rating is guaranteed to win that competition regardless of which feats and statements got them there. (Hax not considered, as they are not really strength in common sense)
Same with speed. A supersonic character is never faster than a Hypersonic one.

The whole problem with splitting up the level as you suggested is the lack of a single objective measure of skill that separates characters as cleanly as energy does for AP. Skill is made up of a lot of capabilities which makes it impossible to say that someone that would have the higher rating would actually always come out on top in a skill comparison.
If you have a Superhuman Skill 1 rating and a superior Superhuman Skill 2 rating, you would need to define them such that the characters in the latter are always superior in skill to those in the former, because people will assume they are without comparing feats and statements. And I don't see that being possible at all. Hence it's better to have them in the same rating, because then people can't just say "mine has higher rating so mine are better" and actually have to look at details. It overall creates a much more healthy and accurate debate.


The issue isn't them arguing that their character wins against reason, skill is only a small part in that to begin with and, yeah, people will consider factors other than skill.
The problem is that people will argue that their character is better in specifically the skill department due to specifically the reason of having a higher rating written on the page instead of comparing the reasons for those ratings. As pointed out, some replies in this thread already demonstrated people's tendencies to wish to do exactly that and it's not something we should encourage.
Furthermore, with nebulous distinctions between two superhuman categories that don't properly consider all factors involved in skill, I think it will be far more than just a few exceptions once we get lots of ratings and lots of comparisons are made... well, assuming people would then consistently make the comparisons propely, which I doubt would be the case.

Well, assuming that option is what gets accepted, we could put a "Combat Skill" section on the Intelligence page that reads something like

For the announcement, I take it that is for after the decision is officially passed and the Intelligence page is edited? If so, maybe something like:

@DontTalkDT

It is very important that you and other staff members here help us to resolve this issue.

This is still unresolved so far:

Intelligence

Intelligence is a word that is incredibly difficult to define, as it has been used to refer to many things, such as one's ability to process information, or their capacity for logic, self-awareness, creativity, reasoning, and/or problem solving, or their knowledge and memory. In its fullest...

vsbattles.fandom.com

And just for the record as to where I stand on this:

Self-evident intelligence revisions thread

What about teaching animals a style tailored just for them? That also involves the animals level of intelligence, so, not as high as it seems.

vsbattles.com

Sorry, I'm reposting what I linked above with minor edits in this thread as well:
We should be taking any character's intelligence, regardless of how said intelligence is applied, and analysing it as a whole (so not just focusing on how it can be used for fighting, but essentially what they are capable of with their intelligence in general, since overall intelligence can determine what a character is likely to do and be capable of, and not likely to do or be capable of, within various contexts).
Indeed, most military special force and commando units are often required to be well-versed in both combat skill and intelligence in various academic fields, and perhaps as a correlation, there are quite a few examples of people who are notable for both general intelligence and combat skill, and instances where said general intelligence contributes to combat skill.

Please corroborate the following (the real life example sections/pages) with Wikipedia or other reputable valid and reliable/accurate and precise sources, and yes there will be quite a few familiar names:

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/RenaissanceMan/RealLife

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/JackOfAllTrades

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/JackOfAllStats

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/GeniusBruiser/RealLife

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/BadassBookworm/RealLife

I'd generally prefer to keep the default layout, but also make clear distinctions within the intelligence section for any profile as to the different areas they have different degrees of ability/skill in, again as we already do now but with a better structure (combat, creation and destruction, conversion, usage, etc, basically different aspects and fields of knowledge), again mostly cause of the usual overlap in general intelligence and combat skill.

I do acknowledge outliers exist, like the one you mentioned, Reaper, but I would still prefer the current layout with a bit of tweaking as stated prior to the quote so as to encompass all forms of intelligence and related abilities and skills that are notable for characters ^.

So yeah I would like a strategy like that described in the second last sentence (with specification/categorisation/classification being done within any profile's Intelligence section):

^

Self-evident intelligence revisions thread

What about teaching animals a style tailored just for them? That also involves the animals level of intelligence, so, not as high as it seems.

vsbattles.com

My stance in the other thread (essentially the same as here) ^
And speaking of which

Self-evident intelligence revisions thread

What about teaching animals a style tailored just for them? That also involves the animals level of intelligence, so, not as high as it seems.

vsbattles.com

Said other thread also has not been fully resolved either.

Hopefully you all have time to settle both threads.

 

[Antvasima]

I have asked DontTalk to prioritise this thread.

 

[DaReaperMan]

I have asked DontTalk to prioritise this thread.

By the way Ant, since the main argument here is that combat skill is too subjective, wouldn't the intelligence page as it currently stands be in favor of having it's ratings nuked? It's focused on primarily science and engineering, literally hard requiring it for the higher tiers.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I'd rather we not nuke the differences between the multiple intelligence ratings; such as the difference between Animalistic Vs High Animalistic, or differentiating Genius Vs Extraordinary Genius Vs Supergenius.

Also, technically. It is worth acknowledging that Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma are three different things; combat intelligence has more to do with Wisdom and/or Charisma rather than intelligence. Though I do think there is some degree worth indexing.

 

[DaReaperMan]

I'd rather we not nuke the differences between the multiple intelligence ratings; such as the difference between Animalistic Vs High Animalistic, or differentiating Genius Vs Extraordinary Genius Vs Supergenius.

Also, technically. It is worth acknowledging that Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma are three different things; combat intelligence has more to do with Wisdom and/or Charisma rather than intelligence. Though I do think there is some degree worth indexing.

The point was that, for the reasons that Skill is considered niche, so would the scientific and engineering intelligence so heavily prioritized in the current intelligence page. But to be fair, rewriting that entire thing isn't exactly the point of this thread.

 

[Armorchompy]

I don't really think we need to concern ourselves with the Intelligence ratings as a whole here

 

[DontTalkDT]

@DontTalkDT

It is very important that you and other staff members here help us to resolve this issue.

Well, my proposals are here (towards the end of the comment).
I believe we said that we just wanted to get more staff votes at this point, to see if the existing proposal is viable.

 

[Antvasima]

By the way Ant, since the main argument here is that combat skill is too subjective, wouldn't the intelligence page as it currently stands be in favor of having it's ratings nuked? It's focused on primarily science and engineering, literally hard requiring it for the higher tiers.

It is intended to be focused on reasoning feats in general, and it is possible to, for example, reach "Supergenius" without engineering feats.

I spent a lot of effort on those definitions and think that they work well, so I definitely do not think that they should be removed, but expanding on them a bit more beyond pure engineering is probably a good idea, if the suggestions are reasonable enough.

 

[Antvasima]

It is very important that you and other staff members here help us to resolve this issue.

Well, my proposals are here (towards the end of the comment).
I believe we said that we just wanted to get more staff votes at this point, to see if the existing proposal is viable.

DontTalk's quoted suggestion:

"Well, assuming that option is what gets accepted, we could put a "Combat Skill" section on the Intelligence page that reads something like

"Combat skill encompasses a range of factors that together describe how well a person can fight. This includes not only how effectively they use their abilities, but also whether they can apply them in ways that usually require special training or practice, as seen in martial arts. It covers aspects such as knowledge of fighting techniques, variety in combat styles, precision, experience, strategy, prediction, information processing, learning ability, and more.

These factors can also influence a character's general intelligence rating. For example, skills like strategy, rapid learning or the ability to predict an opponent's moves could contribute to a high intelligence rating. However, for many characters, it's useful to separate combat skill from general intelligence. This distinction is particularly important when a character is highly skilled in combat but lacks academic or intellectual prowess.

Unlike general intelligence, combat skill is not ranked on a scale with labels like "Genius" or "Supergenius." Due to the many factors involved, a simple rating system would fail to accurately capture a character's combat proficiency. For instance, it wouldn’t make sense to say someone who can learn any real-world martial art by watching it for a minute is necessarily superior to someone who has mastered a single martial art to a superhuman level. These are different types of skill that can’t be easily compared.

Using one-word ratings for combat skill could lead to misunderstandings, as a higher rating wouldn’t always mean that a character is objectively more skilled than someone with a lower rating. To avoid this confusion and better represent a character's abilities, we omit such ratings.

Instead, if a character profile includes a section on combat skill, it should only feature specific feats or statements that demonstrate their proficiency. This approach allows readers to directly compare characters based on their actual achievements, rather than relying on a potentially misleading rating system."

For the announcement, I take it that is for after the decision is officially passed and the Intelligence page is edited? If so, maybe something like:

"Following the recent discussion here, we've decided to no longer use ratings (like "Genius" or "Supergenius") to describe combat skill on character profiles. We have added a section laying out this decision to the Intelligence page.

The reasoning behind this is that combat skill involves a wide range of factors—technique, strategy, experience, adaptability, and more. A simple rating doesn’t do justice to these unique differences and can lead to confusion when comparing them.

Instead, we'll just list the feats and statements that would serve as the justification for ranking. We hope that it encourages readers to compare characters directly using these, rather than by relying on a much too simplified ranking.

As we move forward, if you come across any remaining combat skill ratings on character pages, we kindly ask that you remove them or report them in this thread so our staff can take care of it. Your help in this process is greatly appreciated!" "

@AKM sama @DarkDragonMedeus @Mr. Bambu @Just_a_Random_Butler @Agnaa @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X @Crabwhale @GrathOfLux @Dereck03 @Planck69

It is very important that we receive further evaluations here.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I still sort of prefer using Genius rating at least for more extreme levels of combat intelligence, though I can see how Extraordinary Genius or Supergenius could go overboard. And I do at least acknowledge DontTalkDT is bringing up solid points however.

 

[Vzearr]

Bump.