Marvel "Upgrades"

[AKM sama]

The problem is that we almost have to give the characters some kind of variable power levels, since that is how Marvel itself consistently treats them. Otherwise we end up with too much chain scaling from fighting objectively far more powerful characters.

I mean, that's true but wouldn't my suggestion kind of solve the issue. You can't expect a solution that will work with 100% efficiency in a verse like Marvel, but it at least takes care of some of the issues.

 

[Antvasima]

I mean we shouldn't; tons of verses that go on for long periods of time like Star Wars and Mortal Kombat also treat everyone as being able to fight anyone even when it makes no sense for the power scaling. Now look, I get that DC and Marvel are much longer running and much more inconsistent then most verses out there but still; we shouldn't be slapping a varies onto everything in complete contrast to every other verse we have.

Marvel and DC take the inconsistency to much greater extremes than any other fictions that I can think of though, although maybe we can add footnotes about the differences in their portrayed power levels instead?

 

[Hellbeast]

Marvel and DC take the inconsistency to much greater extremes than any other fictions that I can think of though, although maybe we can add footnotes about the differences in their portrayed power levels instead?

That's the thing tho, we already account for this with our powerscaling rules and the scaling linearly based on holding back is ridiculous

 

[Antvasima]

I know this sounds like a leap...

But if scaling is a major problem with the verse, can't we just disregard it to a degree. If characters are so inconsistent with one another that it's a large problem for the verse, then the proper scaling chains should be applied.

Whether that means not many characters genuinely scale to one another or not, if we're scaling characters in general, then we arguably should scale them to most of the feats they perform.

If it's to the point where, for example, Spiderman tiers are somewhat consistently shown as contending with tier 5s, then obviously something needs to be done for both parties, but that should affect the entire verses rules equally, not just groups of heroes that generally compare, because that's all of Marvel, as you say.

Tl:dr
Basically I personally think we should separate most character from their scaling chains, or at least make their chains wider tier-wise (tier 5s may vary from moon to planet level for example, but a note on their profiles to help stop confusion)

This would allow us to use genuine feats that characters achieve on their own more commonly, which is where writers definitely intend for characters to be placed, and still have them at very least, somewhat comparable to each other, while still showing differences in power.

The problem is much greater than that for Marvel in particular. It is perfectly possible, and quite easy, to scale Aunt May to 1-A entities.

What did you think about my idea above about using footnotes sections to mention the extremes that characters have differed between, while using some sort of "this makes the most sense" tiers for their regular statistics, based on their own explicit feats? For example, Thor has been knocked out by a handgun shot to the head, but also harmed the Chaos King, a Low 1-A entity.

 

[Antvasima]

I mean, that's true but wouldn't my suggestion kind of solve the issue. You can't expect a solution that will work with 100% efficiency in a verse like Marvel, but it at least takes care of some of the issues.

What did you suggest?

 

[Antvasima]

That's the thing tho, we already account for this with our powerscaling rules and the scaling linearly based on holding back is ridiculous

What do you think that we should do @The_Impress ?

 

[KieranH10]

The problem is much greater than that for Marvel in particular. It is perfectly possible, and quite easy, to scale Aunt May to 1-A entities.

What did you think about my idea above about using footnotes sections to mention the extremes that characters have differed between, while using some sort of "this makes the most sense" tiers for their regular statistics, based on their own explicit feats? For example, Thor has been knocked out by a handgun shot to the head, but also harmed the Chaos King, a Low 1-A entity.

I feel I didn't explain myself well in my post as it was kinda all over the place lol.

My proposal was similar to what yours is honestly, basically, characters own explicit feats should be a major priority over scaling, and scaling should only ever actually be considered if it's considered consistent (which I believe a select few characters would be)

With this, many characters will likely fall out of our current scaling chain, which would require a note on their profiles, explaining why they aren't scaled to certain characters (something along the lines of "due to the long inconsistent history of Marvel, we generally don't scale characters together")

If a character is scaling to their own direct feats (in such I mean planet busting and such, not powerscaling feats), then it can't be argued inconsistent for them, and shows at very least what writers believe the character is genuinely capable of.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That makes sense to me, but most characters do not have impressive feats of their own.

 

[The_Impress]

A character can hold back to any level in fear of killing a mere human, we don't and shouldn't rate them when they are actively suppressing them. My suggestion is that we should just put a note on these characters' pages (like Thor and Hulk for example) saying that they regularly hold back and fodder don't scale to them, rather than giving them a tier "while holding back" (basically whatever justification is used to give them a tier, should be moved to a note at the end of the page).

And for other characters who are solely dependent on these held-back characters, since the amount of power they are holding back is unquantifiable and inconsistent, we should just use justifications like this:

(Fought a held-back Thor who did [this feat] during the fight)

And if there is no feat performed during the fight, then we simply shouldn't scale based on that fight.

Fffine

In fairness we treat Post-Crisis DC this way but that's because Zark pushed for it iirc

Meh, I have inputted on the thread but no, I didn't push for it exact.

Okay. That makes sense to me, but most characters do not have impressive feats of their own.

This exact, I genuinely feel this will just make characters drop VERY unfairly off to like, tier 8 or something.

 

[KieranH10]

Okay. That makes sense to me, but most characters do not have impressive feats of their own.

I see. Perhaps characters with no feats of their own should get a "likely (scaling tier)" as their tier, which would keep into account that they haven't shown direct feats of their own, but still manage to give them a tier,?

 

[Antvasima]

I see. Perhaps characters with no feats of their own should get a "likely (scaling tier)" as their tier, which would keep into account that they haven't shown direct feats of their own, but still manage to give them a tier,?

I suppose that using "likely" or "possibly" could be an idea, yes.

 

[The_Impress]

No I'm pointing out that them being vaguely "enhanced" isn't remotely good enough reasoning to justify Tier 4 firearms.

There's a an exponentially more massive gap for 9-C (typically) weapons harming Tier 6 characters and that's ignoring the 9-A characters having objective feats to help put them in that range rather then solely scaling

...this is actually wrong because there are ALOT of characters listed 9-A currently off of solely scaling

Again stuff like Fury's gamma bullets are fine but stuff like the Dynamo busting RPG seemingly has no reason to be remotely that strong and it's textbook PIS that, if taken seriously, implies S.H.I.E.L.D just has Herald level standard weaponry which makes no sense at all.

I don't see why it doesn't? S.H.I.E.L.D. is S.H.I.E.L.D., it's not a random dude with a 4-B gun, it is the foremost international Intelligence organization

Unlock the page and I will

Discussion Mods can't unlock pages, ask someone else :v

Also you need more input lol

This mostly reads like "I wouldn't have had to hurt you" if you just asked me to surrendur and not "I'm currently holding back by several magnitudes just to beat the shit out of you"

...no, he notes he would've purposely stalled to beat the shit out of Dragon Man to have a challenge, but he plans to be objective and oneshot him

This is just Hercules not going for killshots; something that is a massive trope in comics because of the Comics Code Authority and if we're seriously using this as reasoning for split statistics then we'd have to do the same for all manner of heroes, even relative street tiers like Captain America and Spider-Man

For the record CCA isn't a thing for Marvel since the 70s iirc

 

[Antvasima]

For the record CCA isn't a thing for Marvel since the 70s iirc

I think that they kept it until the late 1990s/early 2000s actually. They just mostly ignored it towards the end.

 

[Hellbeast]

Meh, I have inputted on the thread but no, I didn't push for it exact.

Didn't you outright say it was a better option compared to the "era split" idea.

Looking back yeah; it was Amelia not you who made the thread

...this is actually wrong because there are ALOT of characters listed 9-A currently off of solely scaling

My point is the 9-A ratings in general come from characters doing calcs (Kingpin for instance)

I don't see why it doesn't? S.H.I.E.L.D. is S.H.I.E.L.D., it's not a random dude with a 4-B gun, it is the foremost international Intelligence organization

You don't see the problem with a government agency having Tier 6 standard weaponry that would imply even the weakest soldiers can harm characters miles above normal levels?

Discussion Mods can't unlock pages, ask someone else :v

Ok know anyone?

Also you need more input lol

So why say I can add that outright?

For the record CCA isn't a thing for Marvel since the 70s iirc

I'm aware I'm pointing out that's how the trope originated and that's why it's a thing

 

[Antvasima]

Which pages do you wish unlocked and for what purpose?

 

[The_Impress]

Didn't you outright say it was a better option compared to the "era split" idea.

It is, yeah. Era split is dumb. Correlation?

My point is the 9-A ratings in general come from characters doing calcs (Kingpin for instance)

You don't see the problem with a government agency having Tier 6 standard weaponry

...yes I don't think a government agency in a superhuman setting like Marvel, when AIM exists in contrast on infamously shitty funding, having tier 6 weapons, when real life equivalent can very well possess shit a few tiers off.

Nobody claimed standard weaponry however???

Ok know anyone?

Can you see around the Bureaucrat?

So why say I can add that outright?

...because it's my input? I never say "Add it RIGHT NOW DO IT",

Do you need to like, take a walk?

I'm aware I'm pointing out that's how the trope originated and that's why it's a thing

You're kinda wrong here too but ok

 

[Mr. Bambu]

For the record, I also agree with AKM. Even if Marvel is a verse where a measuring stick is hard to find, the current one is hardly serviceable. I am against scaling to "held back" characters.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. We need to find some other workable solution in that case though.

 

[Antvasima]

Also, if we get rid of all the held back tiers, what should we do with the characters that were just downgraded, such as the Champion and She-Hulk?

 

[AKM sama]

Okay. We need to find some other workable solution in that case though.

Say a fodder fights a held-back Hulk or Thor, there can be multiple scenarios:

Scenario 1: If they perform an impressive feat during the fight, like blowing up a mountain or something, the fodder should be scaled from that.

Scenario 2: If they don't perform any feat and we don't know how much held-back the stronger character was, the fodder should be rated based on some of his other showings or scaling chains.

Scenario 3: If the fodder doesn't even have any other thing to go off of besides fighting a held-back Thor/Hulk, we would have to rate him as unknown.

 

[Antvasima]

Say a fodder fights a held-back Hulk or Thor, there can be multiple scenarios:

Scenario 1: If they perform an impressive feat during the fight, like blowing up a mountain or something, the fodder should be scaled from that.

Scenario 2: If they don't perform any feat and we don't know how much held-back the stronger character was, the fodder should be rated based on some of his other showings or scaling chains.

Scenario 3: If the fodder doesn't even have any other thing to go off of besides fighting a held-back Thor/Hulk, we would have to rate him as unknown.

Thank you for the evaluation. I suppose that could be an idea.

What do the rest of you think?

 

[Saksham_Gopal]

Thank you for the evaluation. I suppose that could be an idea.

What do the rest of you think?

To me, what AKM mentioned seemed to be the most reasonable. If we're looking for consistency in power scaling, we can look at a certain author's run on a character and analyze the feats through that, as it's usually the most consistent with a power level as we'll get, and assign that precise tier to the character. We can use the above three situations provided by AKM to scale with different characters who happen to fight.

Plus, the context and timeframe of those accomplishments, as well as who is writing the story, are important, therefore I don't think we should place too much emphasis on the classic age of Marvel Comics because it is a little skewed. I mean, most of our Spiderman outlier feats came from the age when Spidey could be seen fighting Hulk and Firelord, and just for the sake of consistency and logic, we ranked Hulk as MHS+ by scaling him with Spidey, despite the fact that Hulk can hold his own against MTFL+ characters very effectively. In terms of power scaling, the modern era of Spiderman isn't that high, and Peter tends to fight beings of his power levels. For example, Nick Spencer's run is very consistent, so every Spiderman foe and character should be scaled from here to have a proper consistent rating, so heavy hitters aren't juggled down severely and the same can be used for other characters.

Characters that battle Thor and have no other feat to scale should not be given a 4-B rating. Thor himself holds back to some extent, but we don't know how much. In that scenario, going with the unknown can be the best option. When we consider the traditional statement that Thor's divinity lowers every time he journeys to Midgard, we can understand how true this is. We never know how powerful Thor is at any given time. He might be more or less powerful than the last time we saw him before he left for Asgard, and power scaling someone based on their 4-B appearances isn't a good idea.

(It would be very helpful if anyone knows about that scan where it was mentioned that Asgardian's divinity fluctuates when they travel to a mustard/different realm. I'm doing my best to track down that scan, and if we can get our hands on it, it might be useful here once we figure out what's going on with that statement)

 

[Ehnkr2beboh]

It would be very helpful if anyone knows about that scan where it was mentioned that Asgardian's divinity fluctuates when they travel to a mustard/different realm.

I'm not sure if this is the exact can you're looking for, but this might be it and is the closest scan I recall. It's from Thor #11.

 

[Saksham_Gopal]

I'm not sure if this is exact can you're looking for, but this might be it and is the closest scan I recall. It's from Thor #11.

Yeah, this is one of the scans but the one I am talking about has Thor in it. And the statement itself is presented in the form of narration and Thor was flying through space. I did ask all the Thor scalers on Instagram and Discord and if they happen to find it I will share it here.

 

[Thelastmlg]

Looks good to me, and I wanted to say that I remember that amadeus feat on reddit in a joke post because, well, mag 123 would be universal level

 

[Teezar]

I agree with everyone suggestions above.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. We need to find some other workable solution in that case though.

Also, if we get rid of all the held back tiers, what should we do with the characters that were just downgraded, such as the Champion and She-Hulk?

So about this...

Also, what do the rest of you think about AKM's suggestions?

 

[The_Impress]

Okay so, I think going "independent feats" isn't a great idea, but what I can buy is, if you're scaling to Thor and say, Hercules, alone, you should at least warrant a POSSIBLY High 6-C.

We should consider that "Holding Back" is done towards inclusion of feats, even by the writers themselves, and most writers do mean to imply at the absolute least, Thing tier when a severe amount of damage is inflicted onto them.

This is a subjective proposal, I recognize, but Marvel's catalogue of feats rarely presents an objective standpoint not contradicted.

Also in regards to Champion of the Universe, I think it's poor to assume he scales to like, Silver Surfer in any relevant way, again Surfer was pretty bluntly holding back there, and honestly for the record, tier 6 isn't weak in any way, iirc at that tier you can relevantly destroy the planet by most definitions.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay then regarding the Champion. The Thing also broke his ribs during his first appearance.

 

[LordTracer]

iirc at that tier you can relevantly destroy the planet by most definitions.

Ehh, I’m pretty sure it would be extremely difficult to destroy the planet in an efficient way with just High 6-C strength.

Although on that note, Thor has stated that the Champion of the Universe has the power to shatter worlds.

 

[The_Impress]

What's the exact quote :v

 

[LordTracer]

Boop

From Marvel Two-In-One Annual #7 btw

 

[The_Impress]

Meh, looks hella sus

I'll read the issue rq

 

[The_Impress]

Boop

From Marvel Two-In-One Annual #7 btw

Thor is just repeating Champion's vague threat here hyperbolically, so I don't think this is valid in the slightest.

In general this issue has claims like "Champion >>>> Galactus" yet he gets his ribs caved in by the Thing and can't oneshot Colossus in the slightest, so... not the best issue to draw tiering

 

[Eficiente]

This should be quickly to be fixed: Human Torch is Small Country level based on reasons that are invalid, when he should be Large Island level at the same level as the Thing, Doctor Doom, the Super Skrull and Namor.

 

[The_Impress]

So High 6-C as well

K.

In general are Eficiente's Doom proposals good to apply? @Antvasima

 

[Antvasima]

That is probably fine, yes.

 

[Antvasima]

So should we undo the recent High 6-C revisions for herald level characters, and if so, is somebody here willing to handle it and able to edit them properly?

 

[The_Impress]

..we're only undoing it for non-variables. Not heralds in general.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Say a fodder fights a held-back Hulk or Thor, there can be multiple scenarios:

Scenario 1: If they perform an impressive feat during the fight, like blowing up a mountain or something, the fodder should be scaled from that.

Scenario 2: If they don't perform any feat and we don't know how much held-back the stronger character was, the fodder should be rated based on some of his other showings or scaling chains.

Scenario 3: If the fodder doesn't even have any other thing to go off of besides fighting a held-back Thor/Hulk, we would have to rate him as unknown.

We should abide by this.