- 15,467
- 22,550
Alrighty.
-
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.
Low 2-C Mario: In The Final
- Thread starter DatOneWeeb
- Start date
- Status
- 40,470
- 12,953
So what, varies from island to uni? I can...stomach that. I'd prefer "x, possibly/likely y" but I'll take what I can get. Rosie should (likely) be solid uni tho.
- 2,031
- 989
I'm not sure tbh. I just thinking of a three tier thing that Ant suggested but we'll cross that bridge later.
Last edited:
- 40,470
- 12,953
Peak of 4-A completely invalidates every aspect of this thread.
- 31,461
- 34,321
I believe Tier 6 low end, Tier 4 mid end, Tier 2 high end or something like that. But no more than three tiers on one key. Even three keys is arguably cluttered, but more than that all the more so. But I think some over time discussions and process before we finally decide. And possibly best if we refrain from bombarding Mario revisions until the final tally.
- 40,470
- 12,953
If we're forced to do the three things, I'd prefer it would be worded like this:
At minimum 6-C, most likely 4-A, at most Low 2-C.
At minimum 6-C, most likely 4-A, at most Low 2-C.
- 6,075
- 8,800
Anyway it's good to see the CRT actually make some headway.
- 3,270
- 1,096
Yeah, fine with that. Honestly have no problem with just Low 2-C, but I'm honestly be happy even with that.
- 15,467
- 22,550
Was Low 2-C feats were actually agreed upon? Or is that a discussion for later?
- 31,461
- 34,321
It wasn't agreed upon here, but there's some notable plot armors.
- 16,120
- 12,618
I'm glad we got to the three-tier solution.
- 692
- 561
So what's going to happen next
- 167,861
- 76,476
Dino will likely work on a 3 tier solution as others showed above, and we might need to ask calc group members to help us out with recalculating some feats. Dino and other staff can send notifications to the calc group about this if they wish.
Udlmaster
They/Them- 6,925
- 2,128
- 3,270
- 1,096
Guys, the more you write about complaining the thread is long, the longer it is
- 11,135
- 14,120
Tfw there was so much contention on the tier 2 rating among numerous members and staff but we are still making a compromise and proposing a 3 tier rating because people are being stubborn. Is that how things are gonna go around here? We are going to rate characters as their lowest and highest tiers because one side thinks one thing and the other side thinks the other thing? Might as well start rating Buu saga Goku as "At least 5-B, likely 4-C, possibly 4-B" now and literally every character in existence because people can't settle on a single rating. Sorry but this is becoming a trend where no matter how many people and knowledgeable staff disagree with something, the supporters and fans drown them and force their opinions because it is basically not a debate that hinges on facts, just a debate to see who has more time and can go on debating their notion until the other side gives up, and obviously it will be the fans because they have a greater drive. The fact that after 1000 comments of vehement disagreements it is still passing because we have to "compromise" is saddening.
Last edited:
- 32,359
- 20,298
I agree with AKM actually. I obviously don't support any Tier 2 even as a compromise, and neither does Ryukama or other people. It's just that when supporters drown out staff for hundreds of posts on end they are able to get whatever they want regardless of accuracy.
- 4,299
- 2,800
Matthew, your post is purposefully misleading. Your side does it just as much as ours. Staff are here to moderate discussion, and other than that their opinion is as good a regular users is, unless they are knowledge of the verse. Your side and ours are inaccurate in some aspects, and your statements puts our side in a bad light when your side is guilty of the same things.
But yes, I do agree with AKM, it was well put.
But yes, I do agree with AKM, it was well put.
- 16,120
- 12,618
I would like to give a reminder that, even if Low 2-C is completely rejected, that shouldn't lead us to automatically put away "At least (Whatever tier 7/6/5 we were gonna end up with), likely 4-A" or whatever it would be like.
- 167,861
- 76,476
Well, given Mario's sheer inconsistency, I don't personally mind a variable tier in this particular case, but the greater issue is that staff authority is being systematically undermined, and needs to be restored, or we will enter an ongoing situation of pure unmanageable chaos with hordes of upgrade-hungry fans constantly pushing the statistics for all of their favorite verses to turn completely unreliable, which would turn the wiki as a whole into a pointless mess, and that runs completely contrary to all the enormous effort that I have put into building it to become as reliable as possible.
- 16,120
- 12,618
I just wanted to give a reminder of that- if we ditch Low 2-C, that's no reason to automatically ditch that thing too.
- 3,270
- 1,096
Well, because Matthew debunked like one feat out of 9 and acts like the discussion is over
- 3,270
- 1,096
this
- 40,470
- 12,953
This is exactly what I meant by “staff saying no and shutting down discussion.” Three feats should be enough for a solid tiering, but because of worse stonewalling (again, surface area in tier 2 and playable status meaning game mechanics and literally just incredulity are large arguments and the same people are saying that we’re grasping at straws), but we’re the ones compromising with not only a possibly tiering instead of a solid one, but a lower tier as well. So you being the person saying that we’re being antagonistic by stonewalling and being stubborn is not only wrong, but insulting.
This. So much this. People latch onto the color of his name, plus the others, rather than the arguments at hand.
- 15,467
- 22,550
^It's probably best to just close this thread at this point. Low 2-C clearly isn't happening and we don't have all the feats calced for properly insert the lower values of the Variable Tier yet.
Seriously it's just endless back and forth now.
- 32,359
- 20,298
Just because in your eyes the other feats weren't "debunked" doesn't mean I didn't debunk them.
- 32,359
- 20,298
The Strawman Version of me which you systematically portray in your posts and then criticize instead of actually engaging with my arguments must be incapable of recovering by now...
And no, "Three Feats" (Of which only one is truly legitimate) is not enough to upgrade a character who has more than 300 games over 4 decades.
- 3,270
- 1,096
- 40,470
- 12,953
Again, let’s look at all three feats that are very hard to argue against that you decided to argue against.
Sammer’s Kingdom? You all conceded on this one.
Black Jewel? You say that universe creation doesn’t scale to magical prowess. Too bad our standards allow that to be the case 99% of the time. You want to debunk it, change the standards. Otherwise, shut up.
Rosalina? You say she used shields. I say show me where it said she shielded herself when the text only mentioned two people. Not only that, but you’re implying she shielded herself each time she saw the universe reset. Then there’s her status as a playable character in 3D World. You arguing her being hurt by Bowser, the final boss, is the same as her being hurt by fodder enemies, and I don't know why I have to justify that being a dumb argument.
But no, this side is stonewalling, grasping at straws, and seeing what sticks to the wall, being stubborn.
Sammer’s Kingdom? You all conceded on this one.
Black Jewel? You say that universe creation doesn’t scale to magical prowess. Too bad our standards allow that to be the case 99% of the time. You want to debunk it, change the standards. Otherwise, shut up.
Rosalina? You say she used shields. I say show me where it said she shielded herself when the text only mentioned two people. Not only that, but you’re implying she shielded herself each time she saw the universe reset. Then there’s her status as a playable character in 3D World. You arguing her being hurt by Bowser, the final boss, is the same as her being hurt by fodder enemies, and I don't know why I have to justify that being a dumb argument.
But no, this side is stonewalling, grasping at straws, and seeing what sticks to the wall, being stubborn.
- 3,270
- 1,096
The only one you truly debunked was 64
- 167,861
- 76,476
As I mentioned to Cal in our private conversation, I think that AKM just means what I said in the following post. Staff are meant to act as a bulwark against unreliable statistics and other content, so the profile pages turn as accurate as possible. Systematically allowing massive throngs of relentless fans to swarm them and set whatever exaggerated ratings they want would be very destructive for the wiki as a whole.
The ideal system is to have staff that are as responsible, rational, and reliable as possible try their best to evaluate the arguments of the regular members and gauge if what they are saying seems to make sense or not, and if that is not the case, have their judgements respected. Otherwise we will enter the territory of that the most fanatically dedicated side with the greatest throng of supporters, recurrently gathered via Discord beforehand, can push through whatever statistics that they feel like, and turn the wiki completely pointless and unreliable.
The ideal system is to have staff that are as responsible, rational, and reliable as possible try their best to evaluate the arguments of the regular members and gauge if what they are saying seems to make sense or not, and if that is not the case, have their judgements respected. Otherwise we will enter the territory of that the most fanatically dedicated side with the greatest throng of supporters, recurrently gathered via Discord beforehand, can push through whatever statistics that they feel like, and turn the wiki completely pointless and unreliable.
Last edited:
- 32,359
- 20,298
It's not. There's literally multiple Staff Threads going on where the consensus is that it doesn't!!! Just because you think it scales 99% of the time (Nonsense) doesn't change the reality of the situation.
I get that you think it scales 100% of the time but your opinion doesn't dictate the entire wiki. In fact it's wild that people act like this thread is dictated solely by staff opinion when there's a Staff who's vehemently supporting everything and that hasn't decided the thread.
1. Rosalina's "feat" is entirely off-screen and incapable of drawing any real conclusion from it. Rosalina using shields is consistent with how she blocks other people from the explosion and also Rosalina didn't even appear to be physically present when she appeared before Mario and Peach, rather it was a projection of herself.
2. Rosalina being playable in 3D World is not a feat because it means Goombas can kill her. Her being vulnerable in her gameplay (Where she never uses her shields which do have the feat to begin with)
3. It's not a dumb argument. There's no cutscenes or canon story in playing as Rosalina. There is fundamentally no difference in getting hurt by Bowser or a Goomba in gameplay.
- 3,270
- 1,096
Goombas can also kill Mario. Try again.
- 1,580
- 486
- 40,470
- 12,953
Mhm. Yeah, because it’s not like every 4-A feat that’s not Sonic or Dragon Ball is a starry sky dimension that scales to magical prowess, and continues on upwards. So clearly you’re presenting a falsehood.
Offscreen changes nothing. Who cares if it’s offscreen when it’s confirmed that she survived it. And again, show it where it says she used shields on herself. Otherwise, I win the Occam’s Razor here.
Again, I don’t need to debunk the argument of “Just because you can select the character doesn’t mean they’re there.” Yes. It is a dumb argument. I can’t see a single way it couldn’t be a dumb argument. You’re arguing for fodders being a debunk when compared to a final boss, which can be used to debunk literally every video game franchise if we decide to side with you.
- 3,270
- 1,096
Look Ant, I really, really don't want to sound disrespectful, but staff votes just shouldn't be that much more valuable. You say staff are unbiased, and I can get that, but there's no reason to assume their arguments are suddenly better.
- 167,861
- 76,476
To clarify my previous post, I just want our staff members to be able to carry out their work with evaluating content revision threads in peace and have their judgements respected, or the entire functioning structure of this community starts to unravel.
It definitely doesn't help if a few of them are being biased or confrontational though. That undermines public trust in the entire process.
It definitely doesn't help if a few of them are being biased or confrontational though. That undermines public trust in the entire process.
- Status
Similar threads
