• 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.

(NEW CALCULATION) Changing Baseline 10-B and 10-A (TIERING SYSTEM CHANGE)

Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m looking at the “average human” tabber.

It falls into the border, but it’s still different than the current borders. If we re-calculated one of the feats we use for our borders in the stellar tiers, and the new figure was different to the current baseline, but still within the tier, we wouldn’t just keep the baseline the same, because it’s based on an inaccurate figure.
The problem was, I actually did attempt to re-do the borders for 5-A, Tier 4 and 3 (I say re-do, more like a tiny re-adjustment), when I did that section myself (With some slight change in the values of mass since those got updated with the wikipedia values but the difference was way too negligent to matter), the final values were basically borderline unchanged from our current values for Tiers 5, 4 and 3. Executor eventually told me that such a small change that wouldn't even result in the baseline or the top-end values being changed wasn't worth fussing over. And I'll admit, the slight difference in the gravitational constant value we use (6.674e-11 to the more thorough 6.6743015e-11) isn't even worth wasting the extra effort to re-do the entire thing if the final values remain more or less the same with a tiny margin of error depending on where you round it off, and nobody changes tiers over it.

Our 40 and 100 Joules figures are taken from an article than doesn’t even mention those numbers, surely this is better?
Didn't know those were from an article. I guess we could just replace that article with this blog then.
 
Didn't know those were from an article.
Yeah it’s from this one


Issue is it would be better used for Athlete Level, and doesn’t ever mention 40 or 100 Joule figures anyways, that’s why I made this thread in the first place
 
the final values remain more or less the same with a tiny margin of error depending on where you round it off, and nobody changes tiers over it.
Yeah but this would reduce the size of 10-B by 35.24%. Relative to the size of the tier we are talking about, and especially considering the massive shift in method of finding the number, this isn’t a tiny change in the slightest
 
Yeah it’s from this one


Issue is it would be better used for Athlete Level, and doesn’t ever mention 40 or 100 Joule figures anyways, that’s why I made this thread in the first place
That's Athlete level tho, pretty sure this was never used for Human level.
 
Yeah but this would reduce the size of 10-B by 35.24%. Relative to the size of the tier we are talking about, and especially considering the massive shift in method of finding the number, this isn’t a tiny change in the slightest
40 to 45 J is an increase of like, 12.5%.
 
That's Athlete level tho, pretty sure this was never used for Human level.
I know the numbers in the article are athlete level, but we approximate the Human Level number off of it also for some very odd reason
 
I’m talking about the 64.7699 Joule figure, which is the lowest figure on the “Average Human” tabber
Oh.

Should've told me then.

Given that we don't use chops as the standard method for punching, I guess you could say I have a slight lean on agreeing, but I'd see what the other calc members think.

@DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Mr._Bambu @Therefir @DMUA @Damage3245 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Jasonsith @Wokistan @Migue79 @Armorchompy @Psychomaster35 @CloverDragon03 @Dark-Carioca @Aguywhodoesthings @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Agnaa

What do you guys think on changing the Human level baseline to 65 J based on this calc?
 
Another one of these, eh.

I admit I can begrudge this particular suggestion less than the other one you guys are trying to push, but I feel it is still ultimately worthless (as in, adds no worth) aside from a small, perhaps unnoticeable amount of "accuracy". I'll remain neutral on this for now, leaning disagree.
 
Shouldn’t we strive to be as accurate as possible? It’s an absolutely harmless change, and just because something is of trivial importance doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be implemented if it still ultimately has some kind of benefit, which this does
 
Shouldn’t we strive to be as accurate as possible? It’s an absolutely harmless change, and just because something is of trivial importance doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be implemented if it still ultimately has some kind of benefit, which this does
We should, in areas where it matters. I don't feel adjusting tiers by small handfuls does matter, given we're all aware that they are more or less arbitrarily named. The tiers are just... categories for certain ranges of strength.

So I am neutral, as I find the reasoning at least a smidge better than the Tier 2 changes people have been pushing, but I still feel it isn't a necessary change at all.
 
It’s a little effort for a little reward, and thus balanced out and is worth doing, or at least that’s my take on the matter
 
Extremely fair. As I said, it's reasonable enough that I'm just stayin' neutral, especially since I think the (potential) downsides are vastly less noteworthy compared to the Tier 2 changes suggested.
 
I have added a vote count. Does anyone know how to change the font colour of an @?
 
Yes, unlike the tier 2 changes, I think that this revision simply seems to make our stated tiering borders more accurate, and as such be rather beneficial.
 
Well, our calc group members also all have a vote when it comes to issues that concern calculations.

Speaking of which, if somebody writes an explanation post for everything that needs to be evaluated here, I can call for them afterwards.
 
Well, our calc group members also all have a vote when it comes to issues that concern calculations.

Speaking of which, if somebody writes an explanation post for everything that needs to be evaluated here, I can call for them afterwards.
Simple.

Now that we have a calc, just increase the baseline cap of Human level to 65 J based on that. That's it.
@DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Therefir @DMUA @Damage3245 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Jasonsith @Wokistan @Armorchompy @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @CloverDragon03 @Dark-Carioca @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Aguywhodoesthings

Does this seem acceptable to you?
 
I see a low-end for 60 J for the men's side as well.

Perhaps we could lessen the 10-B baseline a tiny bit to 60 J to accommodate easier access to said tier? We've done so for Tier 10 and 9 in the past before.
 
I see a low-end for 60 J for the men's side as well.

Perhaps we could lessen the 10-B baseline a tiny bit to 60 J to accommodate easier access to said tier? We've done so for Tier 10 and 9 in the past before.
I mean, aren’t most 10-Bs just featless anyways? I’m not opposed to 60 Joules, but wouldn’t it just be better to go with the lowest figure in the “Average Human” tabber? Accommodating easier access isn’t a great motive for the most simply accessed tier in the wiki
 
I recall, that we aren't effecting baseline required to be 10-B too much since it was agreed it should still be fairly easy for women and older children (Especially teenagers) to get that high. But the baseline for 10-A might need something to upgrade it.
 
I mean, aren’t most 10-Bs just featless anyways? I’m not opposed to 60 Joules, but wouldn’t it just be better to go with the lowest figure in the “Average Human” tabber? Accommodating easier access isn’t a great motive for the most simply accessed tier in the wiki
That's kind of because most people can easily reach that tier with their punches if they put in a bit of effort into them. It's not that hard of a tier to get to in the first place.
 
Can somebody remind me regarding what the 60 Joule and 65 Joule borders represent please?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top