• 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.

Mario AP Downgrade

Status
Not open for further replies.
StretchSebe said:
Which is kind of the problem beyond anti-feast often excluding or disregarding context: Anti-feats aren't used for tiering or scaling. They just aren't: Not even on this wiki. Every fiction is going to have some detail(s) you could technically use to scrutinize any one of it's character (in more ways than just strength), but every fiction has context for its plot points. Even in fictions where things occur (or can occur) non-causally, context is respected. 'Anti-feats' aren't legitimate reflections of the characters, being so specific, and isolated from context. For example: Comics. Nobody seriously tiers Darkseid based on that one time he fell down stairs. The wiki uses what he's actually capable of, what he does, and his lore status as a New God. His context. So do other battleboard wiki's. Specific instances of Darkseid, or any character just not being where they are in terms of strength most of the time - anti-feats - don't really tell us anything about the characters, fictions, or and especially how to go about scaling/tiering them.

For the reasons I explained, they never seem to be used or brought up to actually bring about more accurate tiering and scaling for characters or fictions, but only ever to downplay them. There isn't another reason to consider these almost always out-of-context instances for tiering/scaling, and again, not even this wiki considers them.

If there is information, a feat, or evidence that one can find is not as impressive as it was originally thought, that's fine. That actually gets us closer to an accurate tiering for a character; re-confirming information, recalculating with more accurate method or measure, and re-establishing actual evidence provided. But anti-feats don't serve any purpose other than to detract.
Click to expand...
This is very very wrong. Anti-feats are vital for establishing a character's tier. They are not something we ignore.

Drawing from some examples that I know...
  • If a character's one feat is slightly damaging a 9-B character, we should probably put them at 9-B.
  • If a character's high feats are slightly damaging a 9-A character three times, but they also have 15 feats and statements of being extremely frail, we should probably put them at 10-C.
  • If a character has 6 statements saying that they're as frail as an ordinary human, but they have 12 feats and statements of being 9-A, we should probably put them at 9-A.
They're not something to be ignored, they're a vital piece of understanding a character's consistent tier.

If you only want to look at a character's highest feats, ignoring anti-feats, some of our staff members have made a separate wiki for that.
Foxthefox1000 said:
Or maybe y'all are being super ignorant and dismissing everything without much consideration at all.

Treating a verse by the merit of it's "anti feats" (most of these being super bad mind you), is a horrible precedent for the future of this wiki and shouldn't be the go-to at all.

What makes Tier 7 any better? I can scrutinize all of them as well. Bye bye Cannon is actually just not a feat since it works even in buildings so they aren't going around the world at all. How does the cast scale to city casually when OP has so many examples of them being harmed and almost killed by things lesser than that? How far are we willing to go? Why is tier 7 the stopping point?
Click to expand...
Hmm I'm not sure what the best point is. Could you suggest one that's better?
 
Foxthefox1000 said:
Or maybe y'all are being super ignorant and dismissing everything without much consideration at all.

Treating a verse by the merit of it's "anti feats" (most of these being super bad mind you), is a horrible precedent for the future of this wiki and shouldn't be the go-to at all.

What makes Tier 7 any better? I can scrutinize all of them as well. Bye bye Cannon is actually just not a feat since it works even in buildings so they aren't going around the world at all. How does the cast scale to city casually when OP has so many examples of them being harmed and almost killed by things lesser than that? How far are we willing to go? Why is tier 7 the stopping point?
Click to expand...
This is exactly the direction the wiki should be going in. All of the what-about arguments demonstrate this beautifully: We have tons of profiles that are tiered based on extreme outlier feats with no regard to the limitations and abilities of the characters being indexed. It's simply a contest between fandoms to see who can get their character the highest. The end result is that many of our profiles would be unrecognizable to any fan of the series, which is a failure on our part, not a success.
 
Dust_Collector said:
again, all well and good to bring up how other verses should be scrutinized to the same degree as Mario is in this thread if these downgrades go through, but take that ANYWHERE ELSE

"Oh but Superman once failed to destroy a plan-" DC general discussion thread, go there.

"Oh but kirby has more tier 5 feats than tie-" Kirby discussion thread, go there.

"Oh but Link is multi-contintal but threatened of being killed by a collapsing castl-" Zelda general discussion, go there.

This is a Mario thread, not a Mario "and 10 other verses" thread. If you wanna argue against these downgrades use arguments solely from Mario games.
Click to expand...
The point is that no verse should be treated in this way, or really is.
Agnaa said:
This is very very wrong. Anti-feats are vital for establishing a character's tier. They are not something we ignore.

They're not something to be ignored, they're a vital piece of understanding a character's consistent tier.
Click to expand...
Nope.
 
Deagonx said:
The argument for keeping the tier can't stand on it's own merits, so it needs to be justified by pointing out other bad tiers on profiles from different verses. Of course, no other verses matter here at all, so that approach is just a waste of time.
Click to expand...
Shit, I deleted my comment

Yeah, other verses shouldn't be brought into the mix. If their tiers are inaccurate, they should be handled in a thread actually related to the verse

I don't see why anything Marvel and DC Comics-related need to be brought up when there's a whole page related to their horribly inconsistent powerscaling
 
Last edited:
Foxthefox1000 said:
By all means it isn't consistent at all! OP has provided so much material to show they don't scale to 6-C consistently
Click to expand...
Then, in your opinion, what is the most consistent tier that they scale to? Of course nothing will be perfectly consistent, but what is the most consistent here?
 
Dust_Collector said:
Cool but take that up with other verses lol
Click to expand...
Ok, real quick:

Other verses are only being brought up for examples of anti-feats themselves being bunk. The examples are not being used to discredit or downplay the characters/verses they involve, but to highlight the problem with anti-feats themselves.
 
StretchSebe said:
Other verses are only being brought up for examples of anti-feats themselves being bunk. The examples are not being used to discredit or downplay the characters/verses they involve, but to highlight the problem with anti-feats themselves.
Click to expand...
And yet all you accomplish is telling us that you personally believe other verses have bunk anti-feats, just like you believe this verse's anti-feats are bunk. This does not demonstrate anything argumentatively, it simply attempt to reinforce your personal opinions with... more of your personal opinions.
 
Foxthefox1000 said:
The whole point is that no one tier is going to be better than the others.
Click to expand...
The tier that is the most consistent would be best, of course.

Foxthefox1000 said:
You want the most truly consistent tier? Then we'd have to accept Tier 9 unironically.
Click to expand...
Then feel free to make a thread to that effect, if you believe it is the most consistent. We should always seek to have consistent profiles.
 
Well, if you're saying that site policy is significantly different, there's one main way to resolve that; create a staff-only thread on the topic, seeking clarity and perhaps amending our rules if necessary.

To get to that, we'd need to nail down the interpreted site policy between the two camps in this thread.

So, what would y'all say that is?

It seems like Stretch's claim is "Anti-feats shouldn't be considered relevant for indexing at all", but just running with that would almost feel like a strawman.
 
Agnaa said:
It seems like Stretch's claim is "Anti-feats shouldn't be considered relevant for indexing at all", but I feel like just running with that would almost feel like a strawman.
Click to expand...
You'd think so, but that is indeed precisely what he said.
 
Deagonx said:
And yet all you accomplish is telling us that you personally believe other verses have bunk anti-feats, just like you believe this verses anti-feats are bunk. This does not demonstrate anything argumentatively, it simply attempt to rebuff your personal opinions with... more of your personal opinions.
Click to expand...
I laid it out in a post of mine, and Smashor laid out examples. You can choose to actually engage with these explanations and examples on why anti-feats are almost never accurate reflections of characters or verses, and aren't even used by this wiki seriously, or you can choose to be belligerent.

Anyways, if we are serious about accuracy in this thread, then at the least, we could make separate keys for the calculations from various, individual games and mini-series. For example, a SMW key with Mario's castle feats, a Galaxy key for the actual tier 4/3 stuff, etc.
 
I don't believe that because it's ridiculous. Much like Tier 7 is ridiculous.

Y'all say "make a thread" but the issue with that is it won't have half the people in it as this one does. You wanna actually keep to your word and show up in other threads? Cause most of you have only shown up here. I wonder why..
 
Foxthefox1000 said:
Y'all say "make a thread" but the issue with that is it won't have half the people in it as this one does. You wanna actually keep to your word and show up in other threads? Cause most of you have only shown up here. I wonder why..
Click to expand...
Yeah, wonder why a thread currently swamped with discussion about anti feats and consistently as a whole and not just Mario has people showing up.

A real mystery right there.
 
Agnaa said:
It seems like Stretch's claim is "Anti-feats shouldn't be considered relevant for indexing at all", but just running with that would almost feel like a strawman.
Click to expand...
That's certainly an uncharitable, reductionist summation of the literal paragraphs I typed, but yes: Anti-feats aren't, and shouldn't be 'considered relevant.'

It's fine though. People can go back in the thread to see the actual points and arguments I made. Not the first time I got straw manned, and doesn't change that.
 
Dust_Collector said:
Yeah, wonder why a thread currently swamped with discussion about anti feats and consistently as a whole and not just Mario has people showing up.

A real mystery right there.
Click to expand...
You were the one saying keep anything not Mario out of this. You seem to be implying other verses would be affected by this.
 
StretchSebe said:
You can choose to actually engage with these explanations and examples on why anti-feats are almost never accurate reflections of characters or verses, and aren't even used by this wiki seriously, or you can choose to be belligerent.
Click to expand...
What your examples fail to understand is that the term "outlier" does not exclusively refer to extremely high feats that are not accurate portrayals of a characters power, they can apply to anti-feats as well.

Foxthefox1000 said:
I don't believe that because it's ridiculous. Much like Tier 7 is ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Very convincing argument. You just said it's the most consistent tier in your opinion, so what about it is ridiculous?

Foxthefox1000 said:
Y'all say "make a thread" but the issue with that is it won't have half the people in it as this one does. You wanna actually keep to your word and show up in other threads? Cause most of you have only shown up here. I wonder why..
Click to expand...
I show up in plenty of threads.

StretchSebe said:
Not the first time I got straw manned, and doesn't change that.
Click to expand...
He caveated his impression as "seeming" and gave you the opportunity to clarify. What about it is uncharitable and reductionist when you in fact agree with that summary and literally said that?
 
Foxthefox1000 said:
I don't believe that because it's ridiculous. Much like Tier 7 is ridiculous.

Y'all say "make a thread" but the issue with that is it won't have half the people in it as this one does. You wanna actually keep to your word and show up in other threads? Cause most of you have only shown up here. I wonder why..
Click to expand...
I promise to show up in any threads made by anyone in the next three months about what our site's general policy on anti-feats and finding consistency should be, as long as it's brought to my attention.

If you're talking about making a different downgrade/upgrade thread for this verse, or a different one, that accepts these standards I proclaim, I wouldn't really feel much need to contribute. I've asked Armor not to count me as voting here, since I frankly don't know enough about Mario to say which tier is ideal. I just know about site standards, and want to argue towards them being maintained. What tier those standards would lead to is unclear to me.
StretchSebe said:
That's certainly an uncharitable, reductionist summation of the literal paragraphs I typed, but yes: Anti-feats aren't, and shouldn't be 'considered relevant.'

It's fine though. People can go back in the thread to see the actual points and arguments I made. Not the first time I got straw manned, and doesn't change that.
Click to expand...
Yeah I could link those, or wait for you to type up a paragraph better summarising your point. Whichever you think is best.

As long as others opposing the downgrade would also endorse that view; there's no point making a staff-only thread repudiating your view if that won't convince anyone else.
 
No offense but have you read? It's ridiculous because the OP has, in effect of posting all their findings of anti-feats, provided the necessary material to make their proposed tiering of Tier 7-6 seems inconsistent. That's the issue.
 
Foxthefox1000 said:
No offense but have you read? It's ridiculous because the OP has, in effect of posting all their findings of anti-feats, provided the necessary material to make their proposed tiering of Tier 7-6 seems inconsistent. That's the issue.
Click to expand...
That doesn't answer my question at all. I asked you what tier would be most consistent, you said Tier 9, and when I asked you why not make a thread proposing that you said that Tier 9 is ridiculous. If Tier 9 is the most consistent one for this character in your view, what exactly makes it ridiculous for him to be Tiered like that?
 
Agnaa said:
Yeah I could link those, or wait for you to type up a paragraph better summarising your point. Whichever you think is best.

As long as others opposing the downgrade would also endorse that view; there's no point making a staff-only thread repudiating your view if that won't convince anyone else.
Click to expand...
Already linked in my response! No need to antagonize further, Agnaa.
 
StretchSebe said:
Already linked in my response! No need to antagonize further, Agnaa.
Click to expand...
Nothing he said was antagonistic.

Foxthefox1000 said:
I don't need to make a separate thread. It's relevant to this one and it's proposals
Click to expand...
Okay, you've still haven't answered my primary question: How do you hold the stance that Tier 9 is both (a) the most consistent for this character and (b) "ridiculous?"
 
Magicomethkuon said:
Not that any of this concerns me, but crazy how the side in favor of Mario's tiering staying has recently spent more replies bringing up different franchises than defending the context of the verse being questioned.
Click to expand...
That is... literally not what was said? Smashor actually brought up other verses to point out this is not fair to any verses, especially those.

Actually sry, I misread. Still, other verses were brought up simply to highlight the problem with anti-feats
 
All right, so here's the scoop

Tiering ain't about consistency, it's about consistency in-context. You can have 500 Tier 9 feats but if 95% of those feats are casual and you have some strewn about Tier 6 feats, chances are you should be rated at Tier 6, not Tier 9.

HOWEVER, we also cannot ignore lower feats if they are non-casual or especially in regards to Durability, listen people, Mario has his consistency in tiers 9 and 8, but we need to take a good look at the context of Mario as a franchise to figure out where we should put these characters...

But instead, we're screaming and crying about other verses, whining about which Tier we're gonna use, and arguing over stupid shit.

Here's my little devil's whisper "At least 9-A, likely 8-A, possibly (highest tier 7 feat) at most 6-C"

We have four entire tiers to work with, use em people!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Omnificence
  • Locked
The Super Mario Bros Movie Revised (Potential Buffs and Upgrades) (ACCEPTED)
Replies
37
Views
2K
Omnificence
Omnificence
UltraExcalibur14
Should Super Mario Galaxy Mario be at least Galaxy Level?
Replies
2
Views
356
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
DimeUhDozen
Princess Peach Small Addition
Replies
4
Views
386
Minion_of_Pigsaw
Minion_of_Pigsaw
ZespeonGalaxy
  • Locked
DK downgrade, again. (Removals of items)
Replies
3
Views
1K
ZespeonGalaxy
ZespeonGalaxy
Omnificence
  • Locked
Super Revision Bros 2.0 (Mario and the Power Stars)
2 3
Replies
116
Views
7K
Omnificence
Omnificence
Back
Top