Minecraft Key dividers and tier inaccuracies

[KGiffoni]

bump

 

[Idazmi]

I think it can be concluded from this that the current tiers need to change. Scaling durability and AP from The Player instead of the Ender Dragon feat - which is questionable at best - should make for far more consistent results since the game literally revolves around them.

 

[KGiffoni]

Agreed.

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

It being in the game means nothing to everything said above.

 

[Davidgumazon]

Oh sorry what do you mean "it"? I just confused.

I just provide info about Ender Dragon and the fact of Player's Dura or ED's Dura was above their own AP.

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

I mean that it's "feat" being in-game for a long time changes nothing of what was discussed above.

 

[Davidgumazon]

Ooh that's what you mean. My mistake. It seems I rush before I reply again. I forgot most of the conversation so I gonna re-read the entire thread. Boi my bad luck never ends sheesh. Wait for... err me.

 

[Antvasima]

What are the TL;DR conclusions here, and which staff members agree with them?

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

I'm not completely sure..?

My and others' main problem is that the ender dragon is assumed to vaporize all things it strikes with the sheer force of it's flying speed when

• Water vaporization has an in-game animation that is not used during the dragon's attack.
• It can do so while stationary.
• Pretty much every mob can survive it.
• The pulverization and vaporization of solid blocks in Minecraft (like stone) has very specific physics which the Ender Dragon doesn't use.
• The Ender Dragon is completely unaffected by contact with any block: it just flies through them.
• The blocks are completely nonexistent after the Ender Dragon touches them.

Simply put, this needs to cherry pick what is and isn't a game mechanic.

I mean, you guys realize that the main weapon used to beat the ender dragon, arrow and bow, is used by skeleton's and can be looted to use against said dragon? That's just game mechanics.

The dragon passing through blocks it can destroy..? Now that's a legit ability.


Thereif agreed and Saikou disagreed with the downgrade, but both kind of just stopped responding. I have no idea what David's points are supposed to be, because their structure is kind of too bad to understand well, especially with all the unneeded walls of text.

 

[GyroNutz]

• It can do so while stationary.

Cherrypicking, but this point here isn't true. I've already shown a video where sand passes through a stationary Ender Dragon without being destroyed.

Zany/Edward calced the Wither's explosion at 8-B up above, which a Player in full diamond can tank at point blank, so everyone should probably go from 7-C to that.

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

Mb

 

[Antvasima]

I suppose that Ricsi seems to make sense.

 

[Davidgumazon]

Now this what I think about previous replies:

"Scaling durability and AP from The Player instead of the Ender Dragon feat"

As far as I know not every mob scale to Ender Dragon. For tiers each characters scale to approximate degree on each other which far most consistent.

"inverse square law should be used to calculate the amount of energy the player is impacted with at a distance"

Hold on @Zanny I don't think it's accurate to use inverse-square law seriously bcz I'm pretty sure it'll defy Minecraft physics. You should read again the Minecraft's gamepedia Explosion page and realized that Minecraft has very specific explosion formula. When you use inverse-square law logic to calculate explosion through tier you get inevitable inconsistent result because inverse square law in explosion yield calculation isn't even close to typical damage radius of Minecraft. Especially inverse square law is NOT square as Minecraft. That's why I make Minecraft joke here#253 previously because it's freaking CIRCLE not CUBE. Meanwhile Minecraft explosion does explode as CUBE.

"as the Ender Dragon hasn't been shown using hax of sorts to destroy blocks in the first place"

@Zanny Is your statement's being contradiction to the game or your interpretation of ED's feat being contradiction because you said "Ender Dragon hasn't been shown using hax of sorts to destroy blocks" which is contradict the fact in the game Ender Dragon does destroys blocks (And everyone knows that), from my point you or Occams Razor take ED's feat a lot of guesses. Though when one dismissing the fact that ED destroy the blocks (technically it's blocks' terrain) as an AP, "Ender Dragon can't destroy blocks or gamemechanics" logic still inevitable inconsistency result on scaling when Ender Dragon's AP scale to Player's AP instead of Player's AP scale to Ender Dragon's AP. Why? People will dismissed Ender Dragon's ramming damage and people telling lies about Ender Dragon can't destroy blocks for being gamemechanics while in WoG: Notch said on tweeter that there's a dragon won't destroy terrain and can land unlike Ender Dragon it can destroy blocks and ED can't land, it meant or I mean Ender Dragon can destroys blocks. Of course Ender Dragon's DC has limits because it clearly suggest being physical capability for not destroying End-related blocks and can pass through blocks which is also the reason @Saikou suggested Ender Dragon has intangible ever since Vexes was added into the game.

"then we simply add the ratings for the consistent feats we have determined for a replacement for the 7-C rating and a "possibly" rating for the 7-C thing (E.G, 8-B, possibly 7-C) OR the ratings for the consistent feats with a "possibly higher" rating that lists the Ender Dragon's potential destruction feat, but mention that there is evidence that suggests that there is a possibility of it being simply hax"

@Zanny No "possibly 7-C" rating, @Edwardtruong2006 calculate it's DC feat up to 8-B casually and in extension I calculate it's DC in order to justify the amount of energy to destroy Obsidian has result of 8-A and High 8-A casually for AP. Since most characters in Minecraft usually have Durability above their own AP, then their tier is based on Durability 7-C not AP. Also just saying: Ender Dragon is not weaker than Wither explosion. Player and Wither and Ender Dragon can one-shot each other was nonsense. Wither can't beat Ender Dragon due the Ender Dragon has mobility advantage.

"Water has a specific particle effect for vaporization, and this effect doesn't occur when the Dragon (or Wither) destroys water blocks. The pulverization and vaporization of solid blocks in Minecraft (like stone) has very specific physics which the Ender Dragon just ignores."

@Idazmi I really think particles and special effect doesn't matter. However, your OP's suggested video shown Ender Dragon has created 1 block radius explosion particles/special effect/explosion particle effect immediately after Ender Dragon have made a contact with the blocks. Seriously my eyes don't lie and you should take a look at it again carefully. It has special effects, it's just simple and easily understood but why in the world people making a big out of this details (TBH This issue is as worse as when I have an debate on someone about to which one is gamemechanics between the blocks hardness and blocks blast resistance via explosion physics, this is obviously unnecessary analysis and just a game function about specific interaction of explosion and breaking). Now it can concluded from Ender Dragon can produced effects from contact it destroys blocks from outdated Minecraft version which later removed feature in the update which is the same case when the Creeper can kick in outdated Minecraft version before it become removed feature in the update. So Ender Dragon's profile shouldn't have double standards compare to the rest of other Minecraft characters profile.

"The Ender Dragon is completely unaffected by contact with any block: it just flies through them."

It's a feature not a gamemechanics. You should ask @Saikou "Why in Ender Dragon's profile has history of intangibility" because he's the one suggested it. Ender Dragon's DC has limits because it clearly suggest being physical capability for not destroying End-related blocks and can pass through blocks which is also the reason @Saikou suggested Ender Dragon has intangible ever since Vexes was added into the game. The game has specified mechanics for specific interection on every action in the gameplay tho.

Cherrypicking, but this point here isn't true. I've already shown a video where sand passes through a stationary Ender Dragon without being destroyed.

What @GyroNutz had said was also true. I at least know the differences of blocks and how they interact in the game. I'm pretty sure falling blocks and mob entities doesn't mix and as far as I know falling blocks does amazing stuff upon contact with the fence (block) or slime block or non-solid blocks or tile blocks: Shulker box blocks was even more complicated tile block can interact with many tile blocks including falling blocks (I couldn't find the video but I remember someone uniquely use Shulker mobs as a wave machine with concrete powder blocks).

 

[Ricsi-viragosi]

Jeez... can you stop writing walls of texts when uneeded? I'll just rewrite what you wrote for the sake of people actually being able to keep up with this discussion. I don't want to tell you what to do and not to do, but at least try to stop and read your comment and see if you actually understand it. I am the last person that can be a grammar nazi, but there is no grammar in that text to be a nazi to be about.

"Inverse Square law for explosions ignores the in-game mechanics of explosions."

"@Zanny, you're interpretation of the ender dragon's feat takes a lot of assumptions, Notch said on twitter that there'll be a dragon that doesn't destroy terrain in this manner (link this, because baseless claims about author statements don't mean much of anything), and the ender dragon has shown limits in being unable to destroy ender related materials."

"I don't think small effects like that should matter, but it's ramming attack does create an explosion effect. It also has Intangibility because it passing through blocks it can't destroy is a feature, not a game mechanic."


This all honestly seems just cherry picking when something is a game mechanic and when isn't. Then again, that's bound to happen when you try and apply physics when they obviously don't mix with a game.

 

[Davidgumazon]

Sorry guys the other CAFE in my neighbor doesn't have internet so I can't reply much longer than this. I had very limited access on internet right now. So I'd only write my reaction:

"link this, because baseless claims about author statements don't mean much of anything"

Geez I thought you've already read every content inside of Ender Dragon's page in gamepedia wiki. Why would I lie? TBH I wouldn't especially Notch's twitter related. Read Ender Dragon's history, pretty please, read it carefully before people get the wrong idea. WE are obviously LAZY that's why you haven't read it all and I didn't add Notch's twitter's link.

"Then again, that's bound to happen when you try and apply physics when they obviously don't mix with a game."

To me this is obviously common sense. I'm sorry that YOU don't believe me. Idzami's side was also a cherry picking because of tiers and rating about Ender Dragon and THO he don't even believe a single thing about mine. Of course I have bunch of information.

"Jeez... can you stop writing walls of texts when uneeded? I'll just rewrite what you wrote for the sake of people actually being able to keep up with this discussion. I don't want to tell you what to do and not to do, but at least try to stop and read your comment and see if you actually understand it."

Ah well I'm really sorry and yes I understand of what I wrote. Really REALLY sorry about that I'm not accustom to that style of writing like yours.

 

[Antvasima]

So should we apply the suggestions that Ricsi mentioned earlier?

 

[Idazmi]

So should we apply the suggestions that Ricsi mentioned earlier?

I should say yes.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That is probably fine then.

 

[Idazmi]

Okay then.

This will amount to a massive tier-change for the entire Minecraft verse, since almost everything from The Player to Diamond swords is based on the flawed Ender Dragon calc.

I suggest we base the new tier calculations on The Player's unarmored durability at Hardcore difficulty, using TNT's and the Creeper's respective amounts of explosion damage as a universal baseline - then we work our way from there.

-REFERENCES-

https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Player

https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Explosio

-DAMAGE CALCULATIONS-

• Creeper Explosio
  • Power: 3
  • Can pulverize 15 m^3 of rock (0.77 tons of TNT)
  • Does 24.5 hearts of damage against unarmored Player.

• TNT explosio (values assumed based on Creeper and Charged Creeper calcs)
  • Power 4
  • Can pulverize 19.95 m^3 of rock (1.0241 tons of TNT)
  • Does 32.5 hearts of damage against unarmored Player.

• Charged Creeper Explosio
  • Power 6
  • Can pulverize 33 m^3 of rock (1.69 tons of TNT)
  • Does 48.5 hearts of damage against unarmored Player.

All of these explosions are Building Level (between 0.25 Tons and 2 Tons) and would certainly kill an unarmored player at point-blank. Assuming the player can (barely) survive a blast just under 0.25 tons gives us a baseline durability of 9-B for the unarmored player.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I suppose that seems like a good idea.

 

[DeathstroketheHedgehog]

Skimming through this thread, no conclusion to the Enderdragon argument ever came. With arguments constantly brought up and countered back and forth, the farthest downgrade that has ever seemed to come to an agreement upon was the "Possibly 7-C" rating. Nothing else otherwise.

I have yet to see any sort of refutation to the defensive arguments for the Enderdragon's AP to be of sheer strength. I've seen people say it's environmental destruction-only, only to be countered that it damages both mobs and the terrain. I've seen people say it only works on non-organic objects, but there was no refute to the counterargument that Steve's equipment doesn't get destroyed, and neither do arrows shot at the enderdragon nor mobs such as Iron Golems get disintegrated. I've seen arguments FOR enderdragon by stating that the ideas against it are massive Occam's Razor fallacies, and there hasn't been a refute to this. I've even seen arguments brought up about the enderdragon only doing it for an alternative for collision coding, only to be countered by "it was still intentional", and "it is not a glitch or bug in the game". And frankly, to argue for it, the only game mechanic I see in that is the fact that it doesn't destroy endstone and obsidian... Because then the boss fight would have an unreasonably small battlefield that will easily be griefed far beyond repair, making gameplay nearly impossible. Why can't the enderdragon just phase through every other block, why does it HAVE to destroy other blocks? Y'see where I'm getting at here? In the process of the offensive arguments saying the defensive arguments try to use game mechanics to exploit high tiers, they use it to exploit lower ones while ignoring higher feats.

Frankly, my only problem with the enderdragin calc is the wrong vaporization values and the face that it used the entire block-volume of the enderdragon rather than just the front area of its charge, because those two factors inflate the calc, but otherwise, no legitimate argument has been made and not refuted for the enderdragon feat.

And on top of that, I have seen no one refute the fact that the Wither can destroy obsidian blocks with blue skulls, a block that no-sells building level explosions. A block that has magical properties for dimensional teleportation and items enhancements. A block that has massive column structures in the End that can be recreated by Ender Crystals, which the Player can survive explosions from when destroying it. And get this: a block that is far above the mining tier of iron, but is much more efficiently, as well as possibly, mineable by diamond. That alone implies that diamonds are notably far superior to iron, and that doesn't even account for stacking enchantments to it, which is what the Late-Game player would have. Honestly, if there was a nonenchanted and enchanted key for some sort of compromise, I'd be fine with that. Just because one finds diamonds doesn't mean they necessarily HAVE to go make an enchantment table right off the bat, so nonenchanted diamond could possibly count for midgame while potions and enchantments can come lategame.

To try to nerf Minecraft to explosions and fall damage alone would be the same as nerfing Terraria to explosions and fall damage, in which it would be likely that no one in terraria would be able to surpass large building level. As well as all other similar games to those two series. It makes no sense to nerf one like this and not nerf the others for the same reason.

TL;DR My stance is that the Late Game Player still scales to the feats of the Wither and Enderdragon. However, the enderdragon's feat needs a proper recalc, and a calc for destroying obsidian would be required as well. If my guess is correct (not going off of any calcs, mind you), that would nerf the top tiers to a range of Multi-City Block to Small Town Level.

 

[Idazmi]

Skimming through this thread, no conclusion to the Enderdragon argument ever came. With arguments constantly brought up and countered back and forth, the farthest downgrade that has ever seemed to come to an agreement upon was the "Possibly 7-C" rating. Nothing else otherwise.

We have concluded that the Enderdragon's entire 7-C "feat" - it's ability to pass through blocks like air, making them literally vanish in the process - is a game mechanic that objectively exists outside the demonstrated physics of Minecraft. It's actual attacks are all far smaller in scope and do damage entire tiers lower than 7-C. The Wither also has no feats approaching 7-C despite being an objectively stronger Mob.

I have yet to see any sort of refutation to the defensive arguments for the Enderdragon's AP to be of sheer strength. I've seen people say it's environmental destruction-only, only to be countered that it damages both mobs and the terrain. I've seen people say it only works on non-organic objects, but there was no refute to the counterargument that Steve's equipment doesn't get destroyed, and neither do arrows shot at the enderdragon nor mobs such as Iron Golems get disintegrated.

You just refuted the sheer strength argument yourself: Steve's equipment is made of wood and stone, steel, or diamond, so it should get shattered at least. All attacks in Minecraft that damage environments follow specific physics, including the Wither charge. The Enderdragon "feat" you are trying to defend ignores those physics entirely, as shown above in this thread and your own post. Thus it is game mechanics.

To try to nerf Minecraft to explosions and fall damage alone would be the same as nerfing Terraria to explosions and fall damage, in which it would be likely that no one in terraria would be able to surpass large building level. As well as all other similar games to those two series. It makes no sense to nerf one like this and not nerf the others for the same reason.

First off, this is only the baseline for the unarmored player, not his full strength. Diamond armor will definitely be far tougher. Also, this thread is solely about Minecraft, not Terraria. Any inconsistencies in the Terraria profiles are for another thread.

TL;DR My stance is that the Late Game Player still scales to the feats of the Wither and Enderdragon. However, the enderdragon's feat needs a proper recalc, and a calc for destroying obsidian would be required as well. If my guess is correct (not going off of any calcs, mind you), that would nerf the top tiers to a range of Multi-City Block to Small Town Level.

Of course he scales to the feats of the Wither and Enderdragon. The issue is the single outlier "feat" of the Ender Dragon "vaporizing" city-level amounts of steel when vaporization just plain ain't happening: that's given us 7-C diamond swords, and made literally every single baseline mob in the game 8-C just to be consistent with that calc. Apparently you must blow up a building to kill a single sheep.

In fact, the blocks are disappearing without sound or trace, and thus cannot be calculated: there's nothing left to calculate. So, we are ignoring that "feat" and recalculating the profiles using more consistent data instead of unfounded and unsupportable assertions based on Game Mechanics.

 

[Antvasima]

Idazmi seems to make sense to me.

 

[Kringaling]

Hey I know everyone is agruing about whether the ender dragone vaporizing blocks is game mechanics, but I have another question when could the enderdragon vaporize blocks? I understand in the original ender dragon calc sakiou said he could vaperoize water, but didn't show anything. I actually tested it myself and couldn't get him to affect the water in the slightest. Heres a clip for proof https://youtu.be/CuSD33OG2W8. If it's to short I will upload a longer one. So can we atleast agree the enderdragon is just doing pulverzation.

 

[Kringaling]

If you check my content revision thread I already recalced ender dragon vaperoization to pulverzation on one of my replys. It came out to City Block+.

 

[Idazmi]

Hey I know everyone is agruing about whether the ender dragone vaporizing blocks is game mechanics, but I have another question when could the enderdragon vaporize blocks? I understand in the original ender dragon calc sakiou said he could vaperoize water, but didn't show anything. I actually tested it myself and couldn't get him to affect the water in the slightest. Heres a clip for proof https://youtu.be/CuSD33OG2W8. If it's to short I will upload a longer one. So can we atleast agree the enderdragon is just doing pulverzation.

The Enderdragon's normal attacks pulverize stone, as do the Wither's attacks. Right now though, I'm recalculating the entire Mincraft verse, starting with the unarmored Player and working my way up through the tiers until I get to the Enderdragon and Wither.

 

[Idazmi]

I'm now calculating the approximate AP of several mobs, arranged weakest to strongest. All calculations assume Hardcore difficulty, and that the unarmored player is 9-B as per these calculations. The player has 10 hearts.

-REFERENCES-

https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Silverfish

https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Wolf

https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Enderma

https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Iron_Golem

-MOB TIERS-

• Silverfish
  • Has 4 hearts.
  • Does 0.5 hearts of damage against unarmored player with a single attack. (0.012 tons of tnt, same as The Player's fist, which is the weakest attack in the game)
  • Tier: 9-B

• Wolf (Wild)
  • Has 4 hearts.
  • Does 3 hearts of damage against unarmored player with a single attack. (since the wolf uses sharp teeth to fight, this need not indicate greater actual strength than a Silverfish)
  • Tier: 9-B

• Enderma
  • Has 20 hearts compared to the Player's 10.
  • Does 5 hearts of damage against unarmored player with a single attack. (approximately 0.12 tons of TNT).
  • Tier: 8-C

• Iron Golem
  • Has 50 hearts compared to the Player's 10. (would likely survive 1.25 tons of TNT)
  • Does up to 15.5 hearts of damage against unarmored player with a single attack. (approximately 0.48 tons of TNT).
  • Tier: 8-C

 

[Kringaling]

But the silver fish feat is debatable. It doesn't actually defragment a cubic meter of stone, it actually defragments structurally altered infested stone. This indicated by the different name and different mining speed. Also we shouldn't downright dismiss the enderdragons pulverzation feat, we should probably just downgrade,progression isnt always perfect in games and relying on in game statistics for calcs we may end up with another undertale situation. Also even though you have the silverfish with small building level ap he's listed at 9-b. Finally your relaying on one feat to scale pretty much the whole verse. For instance did you know that if we use the pulverzation of glass and then had a creeper explode I calculated that at city block. Now the entire verse is atleast large building to cityblock with the top tiers being multi cityblock. Now thats likely not accurate, because I denied the relevance of every single feat in the game. Kinda like yours does to a lesser extent.

 

[The_man_with_the_Midas_touch]

isnt calcing the other mobs AP based on the how much steve can tank considered calc stacking?

Calc Stacking

 

[Idazmi]

But the silver fish feat is debatable. It doesn't actually defragment a cubic meter of stone, it actually defragments structurally altered infested stone. This indicated by the different name and different mining speed. Also we shouldn't downright dismiss the enderdragons pulverzation feat, we should probably just downgrade,progression isnt always perfect in games and relying on in game statistics for calcs we may end up with another undertale situation. Also even though you have the silverfish with small building level ap he's listed at 9-b. Finally your relaying on one feat to scale pretty much the whole verse. For instance did you know that if we use the pulverzation of glass and then had a creeper explode I calculated that at city block. Now the entire verse is atleast large building to cityblock with the top tiers being multi cityblock. Now thats likely not accurate, because I denied the relevance of every single feat in the game. Kinda like yours does to a lesser extent.

The Ender Dragon's flight is not a pulverization feat. Minecraft shows fragmentation and pulverization in a totally different way, and you can see that here:

https://minecraft.gamepedia.com/Explosio

When I said the Ender Dragon was pulverising rock, I was referring to it's actual attacks: not the disappearing act it pulls on blocks it merely touches. The blocks cease to exist entirely, leaving nothing behind: that mechanic is just too inconsistent to calculate with any honesty. Also, Undertale is more of an interactive story than it is a game: Minecraft is purely a game, with no stats inflated for narrative purposes (like Asriel supposedly being infinitely powerful).

As for the Silverfish, it is less durable than the Player by quite a bit, and his AP is assumed based on how much damage TNT does to the player as an explosion: I admit that calc may be somewhat off as a result. However, there's no way a silverfish is a tier above the base Player, and there's no way the unarmored Player is a higher tier when any point-blank explosion easily overkills him.

isnt calcing the other mobs AP based on the how much steve can tank considered calc stacking?

Calc Stacking

Minecraft is a videogame that literally revolves entirely around it's main character, The Player. It's in-game stats don't change according to the plot, because there isn't any plot. What the character can and cannot withstand at any moment is coded directly into the game, and everything in the game directly interacts with him, specifically. If we can't calc the power the Mobs bring against Steve, you're literally leaving nothing to work with at all, because that's basically all they are there to do.

 

[Davidgumazon]

Hey I know everyone is agruing about whether the ender dragone vaporizing blocks is game mechanics, but I have another question when could the enderdragon vaporize blocks? I understand in the original ender dragon calc sakiou said he could vaperoize water, but didn't show anything. I actually tested it myself and couldn't get him to affect the water in the slightest. Heres a clip for proof https://youtu.be/CuSD33OG2W8. If it's to short I will upload a longer one. So can we atleast agree the enderdragon is just doing pulverzation.

https://youtu.be/CuSD33OG2W8

That's GAMEMECHANIC bcz it's simply same logic as Ender Dragon can't interact Falling Sand and Prime TNT. Ender Dragon DOESN'T erased Water Flow because Water Flow is relay of Water Source BUT Ender Dragon CAN erase Water Source. Which is same for Ender Dragon DOESN'T erased Prime TNT because TNT's in intangible state of gamemechanic BUT TNT block and Ender Dragon DOESN'T erased Falling Sand because Falling Sand's in intangible state of gamemechanic BUT Ender Dragon CAN erase Sand. And Water Flows in intangible state of gamemechanic.

What I'm trying to say. You can't use "ED can't remove Water Flow" logic as a proof ED can't vaporize Water. Destruction of Water Flow, Falling Sand and Prime TNT doesn't fit the category destruction though. Water Flow do lack interaction for Minecraft physics sake while Water Source is the real block y'know. In gamepedia standard the Water Flow is Flowing Water and Water Source is Still Water.

 

[Antvasima]

Idazmi still makes sense. We should apply these revisions and then close the thread.

 

[Davidgumazon]

Though I agree to everything @DeathstroketheHedgehog had said since he made more sense than anything @Idzami's suggestion. I'm probably lazy and @DeathstroketheHedgehog noticed more things than I did.

Oh well I'm gonna wait until someone would point out inaccuracies on @Idzami's AP suggestion.

 

[Davidgumazon]

-skip-
TL;DR My stance is that the Late Game Player still scales to the feats of the Wither and Enderdragon. However, the enderdragon's feat needs a proper recalc, and a calc for destroying obsidian would be required as well.

You can watch this video bcz someone already did calc blowing up Obsidian.

 

[DeathstroketheHedgehog]

Rushed phone response to Idazmi's refute. Forgive my spelling errors.

1. No. No one EVER concluded the Enderdragon argument. That's literally what I pointed out in my opening comment. I literally said the closest sort of conclusion that EVER came was "possibly 7-C". So don't claim that what you said was the conclusion; you literally just restated your side of the argument, as well as the same arguments already refuted (AP and DC are different, for example). Also, when was the Wither EVER considered stronger than the enderdragon? There is no objection. With hostility mods, the wither can't beat the dragon, vsbattle wiki's vs thread literally has the Enderdragon beat the wither, and the Enderdragon is literally the ultimate final antagonist of the game, as well as delivering far more XP. What are you basing your argument on? Damage points and HP? Isn't that a direct "no" on the Game Mechanics page?

Edit: well whadya know, a few comments later and I find out you actually were.

2. Except Steve's armor and weapons DO get damaged and eventually destroyed, even ingame. They take damage protecting the player. How does that disprove my point? What, do you want a street level Enderdragon since a wooden sword can damage it?

3. You corrections literally do scaling to surviving explosions, which is why every top tier is 8-B. I literally read your explanation. This is not just about baseline Diamond Armor player.

4. I brought it up as a hypocrisy comparison, not something actually needs to be done. You're avoiding the main point.

5. Except you completely bulldozed over the fact that I myself said the calc was very flawed which was why the AP was really high. But rather than point that out, you'd shut down the entire calc to nerf the characters far more than necessary. You say it's an outlier despite me pointed out consistent differences between diamond and iron. Heck, Iron Atmor only can't even survive a direction Wither summon explosion, unlike diamond.

You're also being hypocritical. By your same logic, we still have to blow up a wall several times over to kill a sheep regardless. Your argument revolves around not one-shotting every fodder character in the game, when even a diamond sword wouldn't kill a cow in one hit. I guess by your logic cows are building level?

You need to accept that this id a blocky buulding world and not a world built SOLELY for powerscaling. Just like any other work of fiction, this is going to have some inconsistencies. But to go by the lowball outliers does not fix the situation. I literally said the enderdragon feat was flawed by using the ender dragon's entire volume instead of solely the front of the dragon, as well as vaporizing steel instead of something like just water or lava, the only things that could possibly be vaporized. I've even admitted the top tiers might possibly not even be 7-C because of it, yet you cling hard that I still am sure that the EnderDragon is 166 kilotons.

 

[DeathstroketheHedgehog]

Idazmi still makes sense. We should apply these revisions and then close the thread.

How and why are you so quick to close the thread when the wiki page Game Mechanics straight up calls out Idazmi's flawed calcs because he's using Health Points unironically?

If you want Idazmi's points to go through so bad, you need to make some sort of staff thread changing the rules of game mechanics.

 

[DeathstroketheHedgehog]

"Game Mechanics refers to the abilities shown in games (usually video games) that are determined by the rules of the game (examples include hit points, levels, stats, world map crossing in seconds outside cinematics, etcetera) and are not necessarily indicative of a character/entity's actual abilities."

"Game mechanics are considered non-canon, and using them in an argument is considered fallacious."

And what are Idazmi's "calcs"? Literally scaling the ingame hitpoints to TNT ingame. I guess falling 100 feet in minecraft can blow up a small building, am I right? Let's get to gravity calculating and wank that lifting strength.

 

[DeathstroketheHedgehog]

Due to financial issues, I'll be offline in less than 90 minutes. Can you guys actually try to think about what you're doing rather than rushing to the nerfing rule-breaking conclusion of building level?

And please, if you're going to be against the ender dragon calc, at the very least stop ignoring obsidian.

Edit: C'mon Ant, you were the first comment on this thread and you questioned if his argument was game mechanics, what happened?

 

[Ayewale]

From what I've seen, the majority of Minecraft tiers and scaling seem to be mostly just cherrypicking game mechanics and saying that they're actual 'feats' within the verse. I think this has been said before, but the majority of the verse should be redone at this point.

 

[Ayewale]

For example, nearly every mob scales to the Silverfish because the Silverfish can violently fragment stone, and it has a very low amount of attack points, and most points have a higher amount of attack points.