Inconsistency with characters embodying landmasses and tier-ing.

[Antvasima]

The changes accepted by Darkanine can probably be applied, but they must be properly explained within the pages.

 

[Pepper14832]

Yes, but as it stands this isnt properly explained.

A low 6b character who Is possibly high 6b leaves a large undefined AP gap.

For example, what exactly could we use to explain this without Swizterlands original calced feat?

It's best to make everyone either At Least 6b, Simply 6b, or High 6b possibly higher.

 

[Antvasima]

It is not uncommon that we use "At least ..., at most ..." for uncertain cases.

I am not the right person to evaluate this though.

 

[Pepper14832]

I guess it could work for 2 "keys" ?

 

[Antvasima]

What do you think Darkanine?

 

[Pepper14832]

While we wait for his response, I am going to edit their pages. Not tier, just basic wording

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Pepper14832]

Bump.

Low 6b to Possibly High 6b means for these characters "between 2 teratons to 63 tereatons"

Might as well make them all 6b with only higher tiers "High 6b possibly higher"

 

[Antvasima]

You can ask Darkanine to comment here again via his message wall.

 

[Pepper14832]

bump

 

[Antvasima]

You can ask Darkanine to comment here again via his message wall.

You can also ask a few other VS Battles Staff members.

 

[Agnaa]

I've asked Darkanine to comment here.

@Pepper You should seriously just ask the involved people like Darkanine to comment again instead of just bumping the thread.

 

[Amelia_Lonelyheart]

I stand by the high tiers being "At least Low 6-B, possibly High 6-B" while everyone else is either "At least Low 6-B, possibly higher" while the low iers are "Likely Low 6-B".

Low 6-B is the highest calculated, non-prep feat while the higher stats are based on fairly vague mythos.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. It seems like that is all that will be accepted then.

 

[Pepper14832]

concluded

 

[Antvasima]

So should I close this thread?

 

[Pepper14832]

Yes

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.