• 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.

Indexing scaling chains and calc values

Status
Not open for further replies.
A brief information notice about this is likely a good idea. I am not sure where we should properly place that information in our wiki's front page though, especially as around 70% of our visitors use mobile phones to view our wiki, and the mobile front page layout format does not allow us to add text segments as far as I am aware.
Yes, that seems to indeed be a problem.
 
Well, we had some new mobile viewing formatting opportunities added recently, so it seems like we can add some text description near the top of the screen now.


I am not sure if it is appropriate to add a brief description about this in particular though.
 
Never mind. I forgot that Ursuul set up a customised mobile wiki front page layout that is a tweaked version of our desktop layout, so we can probably place a brief information text somewhere in it without too much trouble.
 
I am not sure, but if we apply something like that it would have to be optional.

Also, do not experiment on our actual pages for unapproved possible new page structures. Copy the page contents to sandbox draft pages instead.

That goes for this page as well:

 
I am not sure, but if we apply something like that it would have to be optional.

Also, do not experiment on our actual pages for unapproved possible new page structures. Copy the page contents to sandbox draft pages instead.

That goes for this page as well:

Fixed it
 
Besides the fact that not every reader outside the site will know that one has to look at the verse page to know the value of a single character
That's kind of the gist isn't it?

That readers should first be able to figure out what the verse is and what it's about before going into the profiles willy nilly.

If anything, this should be a recommendation at this point for those new to the site if it isn't already a rule.
A brief information notice about this is likely a good idea. I am not sure where we should properly place that information in our wiki's front page though, especially as around 70% of our visitors use mobile phones to view our wiki, and the mobile front page layout format does not allow us to add text segments as far as I am aware.
Yes, that seems to indeed be a problem.
Well, we had some new mobile viewing formatting opportunities added recently, so it seems like we can add some text description near the top of the screen now.


I am not sure if it is appropriate to add a brief description about this in particular though.
Never mind. I forgot that Ursuul set up a customised mobile wiki front page layout that is a tweaked version of our desktop layout, so we can probably place a brief information text somewhere in it without too much trouble.
@KLOL506

I added a new brief "Scaling" information section to the front page of our wiki regarding this issue.


If somebody has suggestions for how the text should be reworded in an improved manner, please feel free to mention it.
 
I added a new brief "Scaling" information section to the front page of our wiki regarding this issue.


If somebody has suggestions for how the text should be reworded in an improved manner, please feel free to mention it.
@KLOL506 @Damage3245
 
This feels like an issue that not everybody is going to have with it, I can’t really take your word for it.
Obviously not everyone is going to have that issue with it, but a number of people will. Putting the numerical values in the Explanations section of profiles avoids possibility of people having this problem entirely.

Not to mention for editing, it's more convenient to create a new space add information to, rather than wedge it between existing text.
 
Obviously not everyone is going to have that issue with it, but a number of people will. Putting the numerical values in the Explanations section of profiles avoids possibility of people having this problem entirely.

Not to mention for editing, it's more convenient to create a new space add information to, rather than wedge it between existing text.
We literally wedge shit in between text all the time
“Attack Potency: City Level (insert a buncha shit) possibly higher (more shit) Mountain level with X (more shit)”
It’s literally what we’ve always done, the only difference is that it’s numbers instead of words.
 
What currently remains to be done here, and what were my old conclusions here in that regard?
 
You made this edit.

@KLOL506

I added a new brief "Scaling" information section to the front page of our wiki regarding this issue.


If somebody has suggestions for how the text should be reworded in an improved manner, please feel free to mention it.

And it was more or less agreed upon by most that the scaling and indexing values were to be put in the Verse page.
 
Despite our conclusions here, it has become quite common for our members to add "[9.7 Petatons]" or "[6.4 GigaJoules]" notes to the right of attack potency level, so we probably need to either allow this practice or make our rules regarding the issue considerably clearer and easier to notice.
 
If it’s an optional thing, then I personally see no detriment
I vaguely remember a Naruto profile using the format, and it made things much easier for me.
 
It should probably be undone then. The majority consensus was to handle it using Scaling Chain explanation pages and using approved calculations then placed in the Verse page, or in the Optional Explanations section in the profile, not to go about adding values like in the example above.
 
I think it looks better to have the values in there, but at least a mention in a notes section would be tolerable.

If not "Large Mountain level [2.2 Gigatons]" then maybe just leave the tier, and say smth like "The High 7-A keys all scale to [x]"

I just like working with numbers and I can't count the number of times on my hands I've had to open like 10+ tabs of characters just to create a coherent scaling chain. ESPECIALLY if there's multipliers involved, like X > Y (amped by 3x) > Y > Z.
 
To be honest I don't like the appearance of having the AP values displayed like that inside the AP sections. Whether it be in reference notes, or a detailed scaling breakdown elsewhere seems like the better solution to me.
 
It should probably be undone then. The majority consensus was to handle it using Scaling Chain explanation pages and using approved calculations then placed in the Verse page, or in the Optional Explanations section in the profile, not to go about adding values like in the example above.
Hell no, adding values to the profiles make everything more easy. Some times people just want the value and thats it, nothing more.

Also, it's not as if scaling chain explanation blogs are easy to create, they are way harder to write and elaborate
 
Hell no, adding values to the profiles make everything more easy. Some times people just want the value and thats it, nothing more.
We already disagreed on this, in case y'all just forgot.

Also, it's not as if scaling chain explanation blogs are easy to create, they are way harder to write and elaborate.
Not "blogs". Pages. We stopped doing the "blog" routine ages ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top