• 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.

Man, Minecraft Tiers Suck Right Now

Moritzva

The Blood Goddess
Joke Battles
Content Moderator
Thread Moderator
8,927
3,439


... So, why is it like this?

Currently, we have two weapons - an early game wooden axe, and a late game diamond sword - at High 8-C, and 8-B, possibly Low 7-C respectively. Simply put, this doesn't actually make sense given that the two weapons quite literally have the same output.

So, I'll make this simple.

Silverfish have a 9-A calculation for violently fragmenting stone. Equally, they are also the weakest mob in the game capable of dealing damage, with a measly 1/2 a heart of damage. I equally used my lovely test subject, Saikou, for this, putting him in the middle of a swarm of Silverfish with full iron armor. Even after nearly a minute of them chasing him around, he took a measly 2 hearts of damage. So, I'll be using Silverfish as the very baseline for tiering - enemies that deal 1/2 a heart of damage should be 9-A. This includes The Player with no weapons, and, well, Silverfish.

Snow Golems can't do any damage at all with their attacks, but can knock back enemies they hit, though seeing as they can knock back or stagger enemies far larger than humans, they should be 9-B, possibly 9-A. They can mildly annoy players and mobs, but cannot do actual damage to them, so this tiering would make sense.

So, that's the baseline. What's above that, then?

Well, that's where things get tricky. The calculation and decision between The Ender Dragon being 8-B or Low 7-C has not been decided. However, Steve can seriously hurt and content with The Ender Dragon with weapons such as a wooden axe - which, as shown, is both an early game weapon and identical to a diamond sword in damage. Lots of enemies can deal similar amounts of damage, enough to hurt Steve, and enough to somewhat hurt The Ender Dragon. Heck, some mobs such as The Vindicator actually deal more damage than The Ender Dragon. The Ender Dragon deals 7 and 1/2 hearts in damage in melee, while The Vindicator deals a whopping 9 and 3/4ths. There's no reason that The Vindicator should be below The Ender Dragon when it in fact deals more damage. Some mobs may deal less damage than The Ender Dragon, but they can still damage Steve well enough, who can tank hits from The Ender Dragon before going down with even basic armor - or, heck, little to no armor at all. This is enough to say that they downscale.

So, AP-wise, every enemy that deals above 1/2 a heart in damage should scale to 8-B, possibly Low 7-C AP (or whatever we change it to) seeing as they can hurt Steve who can hurt The Ender Dragon.

Equally, just about every enemy in the game can tank a wooden axe swing decently well, with some exceptions. Let's go back to Silverfish. Silverfish have 4 hearts of health, while a wooden axe and diamond sword both deal 3 and 1/2, capable of doing more with a critical hit. So, seeing as Silverfish can nearly be one-shot, or are one-shot with a critical hit, we can safely say Silverfish do not scale to a wooden axe, and instead would have 9-A Durability. However, all mobs with above 4 hearts in health can take a hit from a diamond sword and still survive with a fair bit of health remaining, in which case, they should scale to have 8-B, possibly Low 7-C Durability for surviving hits from Steve.

So, essentially;
If a mob does 1/2 a heart in damage: 9-A AP.
If a mob does above 1/2 a heart in damage: 8-B, possibly Low 7-C AP.
If a mob has 4 hearts or less in HP: 9-A Durability.
If a mob has more than 4 hearts in HP: 8-B, possibly Low 7-C Durability.

Two special cases are Snow Golems, and The Ender Dragon's body. Snow Golems can knock back enemies far larger than humans, but deal no damage, so I'd give them 9-B, possibly 9-A as they can at least mildly annoy and knock back actual 9-A entities. The Ender Dragon's body is currently given a x4 multiplier via taking 1/4th the damage as the head; however, the body can still take fair damage from better weapons, so I would like to mostly dismiss this notion as game mechanics and simply note that The Ender Dragon's head takes more damage than the rest of the body in the Weaknesses section. It makes sense, as the head is often a weak point in any creature's anatomy.

And Steve? We're removing his gameplay progression keys entirely. He is 9-A physically, 8-B, possibly Low 7-C with equipment. His durability, being above 4 hearts, is 8-B, possibly Low 7-C, higher with equipment. All his abilities and capabilities are also via equipment, and will be included in his singular key. Seriously, Frost Walker isn't a "late game gear item", not sure who thought of that.

That's all from me. Feel free to debate the legitimacy of 8-B and Low 7-C below, and if we swap to either tiering, we'll just change the above numbers and tiers to match.

Oh, also remove Blindness Resistance from all applicable profiles since it's not possible to throw Blindness potions in-game without Creative Mode.

Agree: InfiniteDay, Saikou, Tllmbrg, 00potato, Crabwhale, The Divine Phoenix, Starter Pack, Phoenks, YmTheSuper, ReallyBroken, SOULOFCINDER, Schnee, Edward, Wokistan, Rikimarox, Daddybrawl (unclear), Abstractions (unclear), Matthew (unclear), The_Smashor (unclear)

Disagree: Agnaa, Gyronutz, Deathstroke, Theuser, Lord_JJJ, ican'tthink
 
Last edited:
The big takeaway is, as I've said countless times in the past, not scaling mobs to the player on the basis that they don't have a fancy health bar like the Dragon or the Wither is extremely stupid. I agree with the above.
 
I agree with this

(Also give us back moon level Minecraft you coward)
 
This seems fine. Why hasn't the calc been decided upon though?
 
People disagree over values or something. This is moreso a scaling CRT anyways.
 
Fair enough but I'm guessing it can be currently applied then?
 
I disagree with this, actually.

We don't tend to scale video games based on damage numbers unless they're deified as being canon, and these ones aren't, as this often yields ludicrous results based entirely on game mechanics.

We also tend to avoid scaling the literal end-game boss to the earliest-game mobs, even if it can be damaged/tanked with starting level/equipment characters, as that often yields ludicrous results based entirely on game mechanics. (You can see a start-of-game character beating the game's superboss using only physical attacks here).

You're trying to reinstate all the pitfalls that are usually avoided with verses like this.
 
Agnaa, we do all the crap you say because games tend to have lore that contradicts gameplay. Except there is absolutely no such thing here. Quite the opposite. What little lore we have, like the Mobestiary, very much acknowledges these so-called "early game enemies" being threats to even strong players.

There is absolutely no in-verse reason, no lore, that would justify a zombie with a sword being hundreds of times weaker than a human with a sword. Trying to force this logic on this verse is essentially making up nonexistent lore reasons to forbid scaling solely to match up with verses that do have lore reasons for this.
 
I'm 99% sure we don't stop doing those things just because a game is light on lore.

If that's your issue (which seems like a fair one, imo), why don't you upgrade zombies with a sword?

Also, do you have that Mobestiary stuff? That'd push my opinion on things.
 
@Agnaa Minecraft has basically 0 lore in terms of what's relevant to us so wouldn't game mechanics be the only thing to go of off?
 
You don't need lore to tell you "Don't scale the first weapon you can equip to the final boss".
 
Why not?
Like we only have game mechanics to go of and they show us that this can be done
 
Because almost no games outright say that you can't fight the final boss with the start of game characters???? Like it's not something that comes from the lore.

There's no lore saying "btw, you can't beat Ruby weapon with a start of game Tifa", we can just tell that it being possible is a function of game mechanics and video games not making enemies immune to early-game weapons, just having them be weaker.
 
We disagree with game mechanics on virtues more akin to multipliers, not ignoring basic common sense. There is absolutely no reason to rate a mob that deals more damage than another, as weaker, and that is not an argument of game mechanics, but common sense.

Equally, the same logic is used here for scaling. Minecraft lacks proper progression, and our methods for sorting things have been quite incorrect and poorly defined. (We put Frost Walker in End Game for... what reason, again?).

You say, "Don't scale the first weapon you can equip to the final boss", but... they're the same. As I absolutely proved, they do the same damage. You can call that game mechanics, but I call that common sense that two weapons that do the same damage in a game with no concrete progression or powerscaling unlike Terraria or similar games, should be compared similarly. Axes are overpowered, oh well.

You say I'm trying to reinstate pitfalls. I say that we are already in the pitfall, and I'm bringing us out of it.
 
Yes you do, Agnaa. Yes you do. Assuming a ridiculous power gap between two entities when gameplay contradicts this needs proof or at the very least implications. Not every game has intense power leveling between early and late game. Not every game is a goddamn shonen. That's not something that should be a default assumption to apply to literally every game.

The page for the Enderman is an example. In the top right paragraph here, it states that Endermen are a threat to players fighting the Ender Dragon. And it is written from an in-universe perspective. Meaning this "early game enemy" can totally punch out the player even at their peak as they're literally fighting the final boss. And the Enderman certainly isn't strong enough to fodderize other normal enemies it appears with.

minecraft-guide-mobestiary-hc.jpg
 
@Moritzva Do you not remember that it's considered invalid to scale video game characters based on their stats? What the absolute unholy **** is this. Can't wait for the incoming 2-B Mega Rayquaza upgrade.

@Saikou_The_Lewd_King The implication is that one of them is an enemy you face at the start of the game, and one of them is the final boss that can only be accessed after tearing through many earlier-game areas. Almost every game has the final boss as more powerful than the first thing you can punch to death.

That scan is pretty convincing tho, it does feel weird to consider those dozens of Endermen to each be equally powerful to the boss they're with, but whatever. I retract my objection.
 
Defeating an early game area does not imply that you are strong enough to vaporize every enemy on contact. Power gaps can exist without being entire tier jumps. Which is exactly what happens here. Hardly any enemy is actually as strong as the Dragon, but almost none of them are weak enough as to not be able to harm it at all.
 
Agnaa, the reason that rule exists is to prevent contradictions that don’t exist here. Unlike with Pokémon, no lore or logic prevents this scaling.

The final boss can be more powerful while not being tiers ahead. Same goes for Enderman Minecraft and the Dragon, the dragon is probably a lot stronger, but not immune to them.
 
@Agnaa First off, chill out. Second off, that's a fallacy for a whole bunch of different reasons - Pokemon is a completely different game with very different rules and scalings that are all over the place as it is. Comparing it to Minecraft is the weirdest slippery slope ever when the two aren't remotely comparable, with how Pokemon scaling is already so odd and carefully maintained by whatever lore or tidbits connect different Mons.

Second off, if you read what I said, common sense has to be used in situations like these. In Minecraft, where there is a lack of proper progression and the math is more simple, it's absolutely egregious to say "The weaker enemy is stronger than the stronger enemy because I deny anything that has relation to the code in the game".

You're comparing "speedrunning pros or incredibly skilled players killing with punches" to "two weapons that have literally the exact same values and can both be used as viable weapons". The comparison, again, is completely off and has no foundation here.

Finally, to double down on what Saikou says, lore itself backs up my statements and cements mobs as legitimate threats - not as much as The Ender Dragon, of course, but enough to downscale from her.
 
Jesus Christ, I already said I retracted my objection, why are y'all still arguing with me?

I mean I do still disagree with a lot of your arguments but it seems unproductive to keep discussing that here when I'm fine with the CRT at the end of the day.
 
Well, if you redact your argument in full, I will drop the argument equally.

Are there any more objections?
 
Why is that an objection? Do you not want them to be downgraded for hating them so much?
 
Starter_Pack has convinced me, and I'll be deleting this thread and re-making it into a 10-B downgrade via being able to kill all mobs with punches, because **** Minecraft.
 
Oh, it's not an objection to the CRT. I already agreed with it.

It's simply an objection to Minecraft.
 
You mean Pokémon? Remind me how many Minecraft characters there are in Smash again.

Check and mate.
 
Back
Top