• 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.

Saikou_The_Lewd_King

The King of all Things Lewd
VS Battles
Retired
15,407
5,717
Currently, our profiles mostly forbid scaling to the Player and the two bosses, on the basis that this is game mechanics. Indeed we consistently excuse players in games being hurt by basic enemies as such, due to how it would make little sense lore-wise for a fodder character to be even remotely comparable to a high tier one.

But, while this is a sound logic to apply in most cases, it should not be mindlessly applied on every verse, especially those with little to no lore.

Minecraft is such a game with little to no lore. Thus very little basis on the logic that Bosses >>> everything else in the verse to such a degree. But this isn't all. Even with what little we know about the "lore" of the verse, treating the bosses as 20,000+ times stronger than anything else is downright contradictory.

Steve (Playable character scaled to the bosses) is, for all intents and purposes, a regular human within the verse. No special powers or ability or anything. He is comparable physically to the villagers (Hell, even weaker in some aspects). This is supported by the Mobestiary, who treats feats done by Steve as possible for regular, albeit skilled adventurers. Thus, monsters who are supposedly rather large threats to adventurers shouldn't be thousands of times weaker than them. This includes Zombies, who are literally (stated so too) to be zombified versions of the player.

Once again, supported by the Mobestiary, who often mentions how dangerous monsters are and outright says that adventurers surviving an encounter with an Enderman to be rare.

One could say, however, that this would only apply to Steve with lower tier equipment and that high tier equipment helps Steve make the jump to 7-C. However, even that is false, as regular monsters can commonly spawn wearing the exact same armor as Steve. This can include armor up to fully enchanted Diamond.

In short, there are absolutely no reasons for monsters shown to be comparable to the player in gameplay, stated to be comparable to the player and who should logically be comparable to the player to be 20 000 times weaker than the player.

Of course, not everyone should get full 7-C scaling. Even in gameplay, monsters are weaker than the bosses in general. As our 7-C rating mainly comes from the Dragon's charge attack, we should base our scaling from this.

Those who deal damage lower than the dragon/would be one-shot by the dragon's attack should be rated Low 7-C from slight backward scaling. Those who deal damage comparable the dragon/would be able to take a hit from the dragon should be rated 7-C. Those who can deal damage significantly higher than the dragon/should be able to take countless blows from the dragon should be At least 7-C (If not outright High 7-C).

Only two who would not get any upgrade would be the Tiny Slimes and the Snow Golem's AP. However, the Snow Golem should have Low 7-C durability.
 
This makes sense to me. Not sure about 7-C Silver Fish though, unless you mean that they wouldn't be upgraded
 
Silverfishes have no reasons to be so much below anything else in the verse. By themselves they already have vastly superhuman feats, so the argument that they're "just bugs" doesn't work.
 
Sorry Saik, but I seriously disagree. Under no circumstances should fodder ever scale to a main character unless the fodder is the one with feats (as is the case with Tsunderplane and Knuckle Joe), no matter how little lore. Steve is supposed to be a normal human, but so is say, Mario, or Link. Simple case of writers not knowing their own character's power.

Diamond Zombies should be alright though.
 
And how do you define those guys as fodder other than the fact that they're non-boss enemies? My problem is with that leap in logic that enemies in a game = immediately meaningless fodder that's clearly being mindlessly applied to everything.

Link is still a chosen hero and Mario is a star child and all. Whereas Steve is literally a regular guy with armor.

I'm not saying there is no lore = no reasons to treat these guys are inferior. I'm saying that on top of the already existing lore depicting these beings as comparable to the player there is nothing resembling a proof of them being weaker than the player in a significant manner anywhere else.
 
"Regular guy with armor"

And this is relevant how? His feats demonstrate that he can take on the Enderdragon. No other character in the series demonstrates this feat, as Steve is the only one who fights the Enderdragon in-canon, and the game ends immediately following this.

If we used this "regular guy with armor" authorial intent concept wherever it applied in fiction, we'd have nonsense like Large Star level hollows from Dark Souls. It's hardly mindless to assume that basic enemies in a game do not scale to the bosses, that's how it has always worked.

We always, always used actual feats over both gameplay mechanics and authorial intent, when the two are in direct conflict, which is all the Mobestiary amounts to based on your own/online descriptions of it. Until we get some kind of specific statement to the tune of "Endermen are as strong as the Enderdragon", no, I'm not approving of this.

Without some stated percentage of power that is held by the lower tier characters in the verse (ex. "this medallion holds 1 percent of my power, youngling, use it wisely!"), I can't approve of backwards scaling to a slightly lower tier, either.

Edit: On a side note, Steve's Regenerationn hsould be downgraded to High-Low... Low-Mid at best. Surviving arrows through the skull is something real-life people are capable of doing- it's certainly not remotely as consequential for the body as Decapitation, which Mid-level regen would allow one to regenerate from.
 
Huh. Neat. Eh, 7-C mobs are fine by me, though they would be closer to baseline or even low 7-C outright since they are DEFINITELY weaker then the regular player. I mean really, even with iron gear it's not hard to go on monster killing sprees.
 
If you mean "needed to finish the game" by in-canon, then the Endermen taking hits from the dragon (In the middle of doing its 7-C feat too) is guaranteed to happen during the fight.

Unless a random warrior beating these High 4-C beings on their own is stated to happen often, then it isn't a legit comparison. Applying this logic to most verses isn't mindless. But applying it to literally any video game despite the contradictions it creates is. Which is what is happening here. The whole basis of this practice is based on the fact that most enemies are treated as fodder in most games. Which isn't the case here (As monsters are physically stronger than the player for most of the game).

Beating the Ender Dragon is a feat possible by regular (if skilled) adventurers, which in turn has been stated to be threatened by Endermen. Hell the same paragraphs that talk about warriors defeating the Ender Dragon also talk about the Endermen being a danger during this fight to said warriors. All that from an in-universe perspective. That's as straightforward as you can get unless you want some ridiculously precise statement.

It's less backward scaling and more like can slightly damage people who can survive the Dragon's attacks.
 
I personally agree with Cal's idea that Zombies/skeletons/other mobs capable of equipping diamond armor/weaponry (and in my viewpoint, armor/weapons with enchantments that make them comparable to such, which should work identically, too) scaling to 7-C given that they are technically undead variants of the player that have very identical physical capabilities to Steve.


For anyone that opposes it, mobs that scale to it by damaging entities which are capable of taking hits from the dragon albeit receiving very heavy damage would be a lower end of 7-C. So, I think it should be "At most 7-C". For any mob weaker than that it should be around Low 7-C or so, as Saikou said.
 
I agree with the idea that Zombies/skeletons/wither skeletons should get an 'armoured' key since they're pretty much the same, if not superior, to the late-game player in terms of AP and durability. Only the skeleton and zombie though, and by extension the spider jockey, as they're the only ones able to naturally spawn with enchanted armour and weapons. I'm 50/50 on the zombie pigman though, as it can spawn with an enchanted golden sword and golden armour. This theoretically should let it live a charged creeper explosion at minimum bumping it to High 8-C at a minimum?
 
But in general, I don't think it's fair to give stuff like Blazes 7-C just because they can deal that much damage. It would be unfair to make the WIther Boss and Ender Dragon 20,000x stronger than normal mobs in terms of gameplay.
 
I have no choicd but to oppose tbis, but first I'd like to use this thread to apply a downgrade to Steve, which should scale to any attempts of buffing fodder to Steve's level.

My argument is one of size and how size ans durability/AP interact. It cannot be dismissed as stupid without denying real life.

I would like to ask of you, as the beginning of my analogy: what is the AP of an axe and durability of a tree? If I remember well, axes are 9-C, but a tree can range all the way from a quite high 9-B all the way through 8-C and still get taken down by a lumber axe.

What is the AP of individual explosives used on taking down a building? 9-Bish, 9-A at best.

Now, why am I doing this? Because while Enderdragon is 7-C, much of that is reliant on his sheer size. Even his capacity to destroy blocks on his body's volume depends on exactly his body's volume. This means Steve did never need to be 7-C to cause him damage. He needed only to have high enough AP for his blows to cause visible damage, and then acumulate damage Òâ╝ and Enderdragon is pretty much only beatable by piercing and cutting weapons, nothing like blunt force which could scale to 7-C like one-punching an 8-C tree down scales to 8-C Òâ╝ thus we should never believe it required as much AP as Enderdragon has in durability.

Dealing Enderdragon damage can currently be nerfed down to 8-B. Characters capable of powerscaling to that can be kept where they are and don't anybody worry: I plan on recalcing many things from Minecraft this week and deliver it all on a single blog post. The franchise bas beem overrated way too mucb.

Humans are not instakilled by MOABs. Don't automatically scale being able to survive to or progressively damage something over time into its same tier.
 
I am completely neutral on the fodder thing.

I am AGAINST downgrading the Ender Dragon and everyone who scales.
 
First off, Steve is NOT going to be downgraded to 8-B, the difference between the Dragon's AP and 8-B is 1046000000000x, at worst Steve is gonna be Low 7-C with 7-C dura, but even then he can fight the Wither who is also 7-C.

Second, the Dragon is 7-C not because of sheer size but because of being able to vaporize a good chunk of iron.
 
Edwardtruong2006 said:
First off, Steve is NOT going to be downgraded to 8-B, the difference between the Dragon's AP and 8-B is 1046000000000x, at worst Steve is gonna be Low 7-C with 7-C dura, but even then he can fight the Wither who is also 7-C.

Second, the Dragon is 7-C not because of sheer size but because of being able to vaporize a good chunk of iron.
The capacity to vaporize such chunk of iron is ultimately based on the dragon's size in blocks in the calc itself, y'know. Anyone in theory capable of vaporizing a single block of iron would thus be capable of comparing to the damage caused by one of Enderdragon's blocks. This gives anyone 8-C or High 8-C a shot.

But then there's another point: nothing except game mechanics (no remainders collectable by the player) indicates vaporization. Given Stone becomes Cobblestone when broken, we could easily consider the game simply doesn't show remainders for violent fragmentation and beyond. There's no reason to believe "no remainders" isn't mere game mechanics and I plan on using that argument to nerf the Ender Dragon herself down to Tier 8. 7-C should from the beginning have been used as a highball, not as the standard value with no alternatives nor questioning, especially in a game where game mechanics based on blocks put a lot of destruction possiblities into question.
 
Again.

First off yeah it's indicated by it's hitbox, also 8-C is like so much weaker than 7-C it's not funny.

Huh? The dragon not only leaves behind no remainders, it also destroys water. You can't really pulverize, violently fragment, or just fragment water.
 
Edwardtruong2006 said:
Again.

First off yeah it's indicated by it's hitbox, also 8-C is like so much weaker than 7-C it's not funny.

Huh? The dragon not only leaves behind no remainders, it also destroys water. You can't really pulverize, violently fragment, or just fragment water.
The same energy output that violently fragments steel or diamond will likely vaporize water. It's not like AP is qualitative.

Edit: plus I said tier 8, not 8-C. Haven't calced yet but should get no lower than 8-B.
 
No.

The energy output for violently fragmenting Iron is 42.43 j/cc

Vaporization value for water is 2575 j/cc or somewhere near that.

Is it close? No.
 
Edwardtruong2006 said:
No.

The energy output for violently fragmenting Iron is 42.43 j/cc

Vaporization value for water is 2575 j/cc or somewhere near that.

Is it close? No.
I concede that's a good argument, but then that on itself serves as a lower end for the calc that used several times higher steel or iron vaporization.
 
I wouldn't mind if the verse became 8-B, likely 7-C.

It makes em more flexible for VS Matches.
 
Edwardtruong2006 said:
I wouldn't mind if the verse became 8-B, likely 7-C.

It makes em more flexible for VS Matches.
Tbh me neither, though your arguments lead me to believing it's probably gonna be "8-A" instead. This was a good exchange.
 
Back
Top