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.