• 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

That doesn’t answer my question, though. If an enemy is stronger than another enemy, are they stronger than that enemy, and can we use that for scaling?

Because you disagree, and I want to know why.
 
Are y'all sure it makes sense to scale characters that deal less damage than the Ender Dragon to the Ender Dragon's feats?
 
Well from the OP, everyone above half a heart of damage is scaling. When on normal it deals 5 hearts with melees, and 2 and a half hearts with wings.

I don't really understand the cutoff that was agreed on.
 
People don't like the idea of The Silverfish, a mob who does basically no damage, being very high tier. When proposing the scaling, a big thing I heard a lot was that Tier 7 Silverfish was a ridiculous idea - given that they have the (very dubious) stone breaking feat and do essentially the lowest possible damage one can deal, comparable only to Steve's fisticuffs (an absolutely horrible and desperate combat maneuver only used as a way to push enemies away, at best), it's safe to say enemies akin to Silverfish in offense probably shouldn't scale.

Overall, this argument is more of the same - subjective views on how to judge the verse. If people disagree, that's fine, though I feel as if enough time has passed that we can apply this over our current standards.
 
Moritzva said:
That doesn’t answer my question, though. If an enemy is stronger than another enemy, are they stronger than that enemy, and can we use that for scaling?

Because you disagree, and I want to know why.
Click to expand...
Oh, I worded that poorly on that regard, but yes, if there's reasonable proof for it that isn't based on game mechanics and "intuition", as that borders into headcanon as said before. I'm fine if this approach is taken, but i wouldn't like to see this affecting other cases for users to exaggerate stats by abusing game mechanics scaling, standards are standards, after all, and there's nothing to support for this being the exception beyond there being no better options, and in such cases verses being removed isn't unheard of.
 
Last edited:
Silverfish shouldn't scale, but for a similar reason I don't think other mobs like Zombies should scale.

Are these scaling choices literally just based on intuition of how many people thought it was dumb?
 
@Bob

I've explained the basis of Steve scaling to The Ender Dragon and other mobs scaling to Steve. In fact, the only truly game mechanics category is defining a line between Silverfish and everyone else.

@Agnaa

A Zombie can actually hurt and be a danger to The Player. The Silverfish is only harmful in very large swarms (which is how they spawn, with lots around) and via chip damage.
 
That is extremely weird to me.

Silverfish have 4 hearts of health, but they're considered 9-A.

Anything that can do 1 heart of damage is considered 8-B, possibly Low 7-C.

I think it's really ******* weird to build your entire scaling chain off of just damage numbers and treat them so inconsistently/incoherently.

Also, you sure that lone silverfish aren't dangerous to an ungeared player? You sure that zombies are dangerous to a fully diamond-enchanted-geared player?

EDIT: To give some examples, treating 1 heart as 8-B, possibly Low 7-C would make:
  • Endermites.
  • Foxes.
  • Phantoms.
  • Pufferfish.
  • Medium slimes.
  • Spiders.
All that tier.
 
I am sure a silverfish is not a danger to an unarmored player, the damage output is so incredibly low you're liable to out-recover the damage it deals.

By the time you get to top-end netherrite gear, you are simply much higher on upscaling - heck, once you get to well-enchanted diamond armor and above, even The Ender Dragon's damage starts to look bad, so that's not a good point of comparison to judge other mobs by.

If you think a jump from 9-A to Low 7-C is weird, take that up with the people who decided on the legitimacy of Low 7-C. They aren't me, and whatever they decide doesn't change my opinion and proposal. It has nothing to do with the logic behind the scaling chain and I personally do not care - people simply told me that The Silverfish was a weak mob even by mob standards, so I considered it and added the differential as proposed above.
 
You don't completely out-recover the damage Silverfish deals.

Even with basic diamond armor Spiders almost don't damage you.

It's not because of the Low 7-C calc. It's because of there not really being a reason for Silverfish being the only mobs that don't scale. It feels to me like that has the exact same issue as you're saying that the current scaling has.

Like you're going "We should do things by the actual damage numbers instead of intuition, so let's decide which damage numbers scale to which feats by intuition!"

The cutoff for dura is also extremely weird. Why is a wooden axe the thing you go off of as scaling to the Ender Dragon? Why is 4 hearts the cutoff and not 5 hearts, or 3 hearts?
 
Before I continue, I must ask - do you want all mobs, regardless of what they are?

The only thing the game mechanics argument brings into question is Silverfish discrepancies. Ender Dragon scaling to most mobs is legit - you can survive Ender Dragon hits, and other mobs are still downscaling via being a threat.

The only part where hearts truly matters most is regarding the pitiful Silverfish.
 
Well I think the best route would be either to stick with that intuition which everyone is just barely tapping into with the Silverfish stuff, and keep scaling similar.

Or go fully down your route and actually make it consistent by scaling damage numbers properly. Damage numbers of Ender Dragon and above scale, health numbers half a heart above Ender Dragon's damage scale to dura.

I would also suggest doing this for other feats, but the Ghast's explosion actually deals more damage than the Ender Dragon, so it won't be applicable.

I also find it really hard to understand how you think the Silverfish is the one issue here, when endermites, foxes, phantoms, pufferfish, medium slimes, and spiders all only deal half a heart more damage, and some of those intuitively sound like really fodder enemies. I guess they're not as iconic as silverfish, particularly to older players, but still.
 
All of the mobs you mentioned above are, at least to a beginning Steve, more dangerous than a Silverfish by a pretty large margin for one reason or another.

Could you clarify on your first suggestion? Our current scaling, no matter what, is absolutely not okay as we're basing it off of nothing at all. Even if you disagree with what I propose, you must admit that at least I'm basing it off of something.
 
No shit they're more dangerous since they deal more damage, but I do not comprehend why that's the cutoff point between scaling to the Ender Dragon and not. I already explained that you don't actually out-recover the damage Silverfish deal.

It is definitely based off something going by the profiles. Your scaling is based off of something, but that something isn't based off of anything, having a consistent basis doesn't matter if that consistent basis is unfounded. You could create a consistent scaling chain based off of mob size, doesn't mean that we should do that.
 
Agnaa said:
It is definitely based off something going by the profiles. Your scaling is based off of something, but that something isn't based off of anything, having a consistent basis doesn't matter if that consistent basis is unfounded. You could create a consistent scaling chain based off of mob size, doesn't mean that we should do that.
Click to expand...
Like what though

I'm fine with Silverfish scaling to Low 7-C but the current profiles have just no basis for scaling to anything. Considering Iron and Diamond are generally not always stronger than Wood (axes and bows for example) and Minecraft unironically has no progression system. So the scaling for the current profiles are just scaling off of absolutely nothing.
 
It's not based on anything, and the few vague reasons for cutoffs are definitely based on nothing.

Why do we separate certain enchantments and gears into certain tiers? I still don't know. We just do.

My scaling takes the premise that the Silverfish and Steve's regular punches are really not good damage dealers and can't hurt people well. You can disagree, and that's fine, but saying it's based on nothing is false, and comparing it to mob size is also false.

I want to end this debate, as it has been dragged on for weeks now and the matter is still subjective. To do that, I must ask - do you agree with universal Ender Dragon scaling? Steve can hurt The Ender Dragon, other mobs can survive Steve's hits, so they downscale. Steve can survive hits from The Ender Dragon and enemies can hurt him so they up/downscale based on strength.

That's a core pillar of my argument, and is unrelated to 1/2 a Heart shenanigans.
 
Like what though

I'm fine with Silverfish scaling to Low 7-C but the current profiles have just no basis for scaling to anything

I didn't make them and I'm not intimately familiar with them. But after a look they seemed to have justifications on the profiles.

I have no clue how you can say they're based off of absolutely nothing.

Considering Iron and Diamond are generally not always stronger than Wood (axes and bows for example)

Iron and Diamond are always stronger than wood. It's just that sometimes different tools are better for different things, so sometimes a more fitting tool from a lower tier can do better at one task than a less-fitting tool from a higher tier.

Minecraft unironically has no progression system

We disagree on this.

So the scaling for the current profiles are just scaling off of absolutely nothing

"I disagree with it so it's based on nothing" is not how reality works. It's based on something you disagree with.

It's not based on anything, and the few vague reasons for cutoffs are definitely based on nothing.

Why do we separate certain enchantments and gears into certain tiers? I still don't know. We just do.

It's loosely based on progression and what the comparable mobs are. That is definitely something.

My scaling takes the premise that the Silverfish and Steve's regular punches are really not good damage dealers and can't hurt people well. You can disagree, and that's fine, but saying it's based on nothing is false, and comparing it to mob size is also false.

Okay sure, they're not good damage. But if they aren't good damage, why are endermites good damage? There is no reason for this cutoff.

I wasn't comparing it to mob size. I was using mob size as an example of how a consistent way of scaling could be ludicrous. Your scaling isn't nearly that bad, but just being consistent isn't enough.

I want to end this debate, as it has been dragged on for weeks now and the matter is still subjective. To do that, I must ask - do you agree with universal Ender Dragon scaling? Steve can hurt The Ender Dragon, other mobs can survive Steve's hits, so they downscale. Steve can survive hits from The Ender Dragon and enemies can hurt him so they up/downscale based on strength.

I think it's dumb and that progression scaling is much better.
 
Last edited:
Minecraft doesn't have an 'midgame' or 'early game' though. You can get full enchanted diamond by just trading wood with villagers at the start of the game. Are diamonds considered 'early-game' now?

This all works on the assumption that you get diamonds relatively late into the game's life when you don't always have to. Minecraft works like that.
 
When I say universal Ender Dragon I meant universal verse scaling not tier 2---
 
As an aside I edited some stuff into my last post since I didn't realize I'd already posted it.

Minecraft doesn't have an 'midgame' or 'early game' though.

It has tools that are direct upgrades over each other. It has areas that you can't reach until you've gotten those tools.

You can get full enchanted diamond by just trading wood with villagers at the start of the game. Are diamonds considered 'early-game' now?

lol

"I can do an obscure thing to get the strongest material early on, does that make it early game now??????"

This all works on the assumption that you get diamonds relatively late into the game's life when you don't always have to. Minecraft works like that.

Your problem now seems to be over with the name of it being "late-game". What a ******* inane reason to disagree with some scaling. I cannot imagine wanting to collapse keys together because I think one of their names is misleading.
 
Anyways let me count down why our current separation makes no sense.

Frost Walker - Late game. No reason why. It can be found in regular chest loot and fishing.

Totem of Undying - Late game. Enemies that drop it are High 8-C, except the drop is only for the 8-B key?

Potions - Mid Game. No reason why. Requires Nether materials to brew these potions.

Literally Going To The Nether - Late Game. So you can get potions before you get the materials necessary to make potions.

Enchantments like Fortune - Mid Game. Despite Frost Walker being Late Game.

Hrmm.

Equally, it seems we separate Mid and Late Game by The Nether, seeing as Nether Portals are late game? Except all the mobs within there are High 8-C? That makes no sense.

So, why do we separate End and Mid-Game based on The Nether? No idea.

Why are Nether mobs and Illager mobs High 8-C despite being associated with End Game loot and places? No idea.

Why are Evokers "High 8-C, 8-B in large groups" despite the fact that that really doesn't make sense, and we accept they can hurt and beat Iron Golems? No idea.

Why are Endermen High 8-C despite being in The End and being a sizable danger to you during the Ender Dragon fight? No idea.

Why are potion effects Mid-Game while the materials to make potentials are Late-Game? No idea.

Why are enchantment effects both Mid-Game and Late-Game? No idea.

Agnaa, can you truly say that our current system is "based off of something" and "has good justification"?
 
There's not much of a mid or late game when this is a sandbox game with such inconsistent progression. Trading wood to get diamonds early on isn't really obscure either. Inclined to side with Mori.
 
Anyways let me count down why our current separation makes no sense.

Cool, there's some things you disagree with. They can be revised.

Agnaa, can you truly say that our current system is "based off of something" and "has good justification"?

I can say it's based off of something because it obviously is. I can't say the latter because there seems to be flaws.

Also, I'd just like to remind you where this discussion started from again. I pointed out that scaling mobs that deal 1 heart of damage to the Ender Dragon is completely unfounded. Your response to this hasn't been to actually fix your own scaling (despite me pointing out resolutions that would actually fix it), it's been to continually attack the scaling as it currently is on the profiles.

You are setting up a false equivalence between your flawed scaling, and the flawed current scaling. When in reality, both of those can be fixed.

There's not much of a mid or late game when this is a sandbox game with such inconsistent progression.

If you want to call the keys something else, fine.

But I have no clue how you can call the progression inconsistent. It is MANDATORY to go to the nether before you go to the end, and it is MANDATORY to get either an iron bucket or a diamond pick before you go to the nether. And netherite tools are always better than diamond ones, which are always better than iron ones, which are always better than stone ones, which are always better than wood ones.

There is a lot of consistent progression.
 
You just ignored every point I made that proved our current scaling is based on nothing, progression is inconsistent, and tiering it on progression is bad.

You said that I simply "disagreed" then proceeded to use the argument that there is consistent progression?

Well, then I'll return the favor. I've proved why our current system is awful, and any Minecraft player can affirm a majority of my points. Equally, I've given my thesis on why my system is more reasonable and takes into respect what actually happens and how the game actually plays, i.e., no true progression and clear scaling.

The debate has reached a standstill. Currently, the votes still side with me, but we can give it time to see if that changes. I do not believe there is any point in continuing debate if it has come down to "I disagree." on subjective judgment.

So, let's not drag this out any further and let the hammer fall.
 
I'm going to dip out for a while for schoolwork and my job, don't expect big arguments from me.
 
Jesus Christ Mori this is so frustrating.

Your points against the current scaling are accurate.

I have no clue why the **** you are so hung up on me simply saying "The current scaling is based on something even though it has flaws". Why is me not saying "It's based on literally nothing" causing such an uproar?

I have pointed out a flaw in your system, AND given a resolution to it. So why the **** are you not resolving it?

This is not just "I disagree" on subjective judgement. I have pointed out a flaw in your system, given you the tools to resolve it within your own system, and your response was just "Well our old system was based on nothing!"

Even if you don't want to switch systems, for the love of god, at least fix yours.
 
I've answered that too, Agnaa, and your insistence is equally frustrating. My system proposes two options - up/downscaling from The Ender Dragon to ALL mobs, or to all mobs except for the ones mentioned in the OP.

If you want, let us first decide on keeping my system over the current system, then we can debate over which version of my system to use.

Before deciding on which version of my system we are to use, we must first decide on if we are replacing the original system at all. The majority says yes
 
Why can you not conceive of only scaling the Ender Dragon to mobs with damage/HP values equal to or above the Ender Dragon's damage? I'm just making the damage/HP values listed in the OP non-arbitrary and based on the same thing you're basing the rest of your scaling on.
 
Agnaa, relax.

Second of all, I answered your point above.

To reiterate,

The Ender Dragon can be hurt by Steve. Other mobs can survive Steve's attacks.

The Ender Dragon can hurt Steve. Other mobs can hurt Steve.

Signing out, for real this time. Let's let the votes decide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

azontr
  • Locked
OMORI if it was good and didn't suck (OMORI Revisions)
2
Replies
76
Views
4K
azontr
azontr
Monsters_fight
Undertale Stats Upgrade
Replies
27
Views
646
Monsters_fight
Monsters_fight
Flashlight237
Minecraft CRT: Silverfish Abilities
Replies
27
Views
2K
Sparx_gaming
Sparx_gaming
Ednaxel2
  • Locked
Plants vs. Zombies Revisions Part 1: Attack Potency/Zomboss Upgrade
Replies
18
Views
990
FinePoint
FinePoint
StoneKillerz12
The Problems With Kingdom Heart's high-tier scaling (Part 1: True Kingdom Hearts Scaling)
Replies
13
Views
2K
Eseseso
Eseseso
Back
Top