- 16,084
- 12,561
I'm also fine with 1.33x or whatever, I just think 1.1x is too low.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
1.33x seems too high to me.I'm also fine with 1.33x or whatever, I just think 1.1x is too low.
Would 1.25 be an acceptable compromise for the rest of you?I can agree with the + method being inconsistent. I'm still against anything below 1.25x though
Personally I'd still prefer 1.5x or 1.33x tbhWould 1.25 be an acceptable compromise for the rest of you?
Does Rhino seriously not have any feats of his own? He needs to rely on multiplying Spider-Man's rating by a random figure in order to have an accurate rating?However, I am concerned about that such a low multiplier might not even allow us to upscale characters such as The Rhino from Spider-Man, despite that he is canonically several times stronger.
Yeah, he is. Batman's feat is a stone's throw away from 8-C.Isn't Post-Crisis Bane 8-C via upscaling?
Does Rhino seriously not have any feats of his own? He needs to rely on multiplying Spider-Man's rating by a random figure in order to have an accurate rating?
I am not sure if The Rhino has any significant feats of his own, unless he has caused minor earthquakes at some point.Rhino is comparable to Mettle who has his own 7.2 ton feat, which Spiderman does not scale too
And this is exactly the problem with this method. We all want the limit to be high or low enough to make the scaling of the characters we are familiar with more accurate. And due to fiction's inconsistent nature and our different interpretations, we will never settle for a fixed multiplier. Some will feel it's too high, some would feel it's too low.However, I am concerned about that such a low multiplier might not even allow us to upscale characters such as The Rhino from Spider-Man, despite that he is canonically several times stronger.
Do you mind telling me what those figures are based on?Yeah, I'm still of the opinion there shouldn't be one, I just stated that if there must be, it should be between 1.5 and 1.25
Well, I do remember reading 150 joules to the head will kill the average dude 90% of the time, if that helps. But no, they're arbitrary, which is why I wouldn't want there to be a set limit at all.Do you mind telling me what those figures are based on?
What makes 1.25 valid and not 1.24? What makes 1.5 valid and not 1.6?
Does anybody here have any suggestions for how we could word a rule regarding the second option?Either just be consistent and remove upscaling altogether, rating everyone as "higher", or just look at everything on a case-by-case basis while being strict about it.
I think 1.33x is strict enough, I see no problem with upscaling and don’t even find it something that needs to be strictI'd like to know what situations would be made worse on the profiles if we were either very strict with upscaling or made upscaling virtually non-existent. I'm struggling to think of any.
One-shotting and clear feats or statements of great superiority in specifically power would all be valid upscaling situationsI feel like I need to ask this again, what should be allowed for upscaling? Strictly one shotting?
Do you have any examples where we currently have to upscale someone for a casual feat?Personally I think that, with this being case-by-case, a feat being incredibly casual could be considered upscaling material
None currently, but I don't see how that's an argument. Statistically speaking there's a good chance we'll either eventually have one or already have one, and these rules shouldn't be made solely to deal with pre-existing problems, but to prevent future similar problems from existingDo you have any examples where we currently have to upscale someone for a casual feat?
I also agree.I agree with Mitch and Armorchompy.
Ye.Or we could try a staff vote to see which one people actually want.
Good point, and I'm pretty sure the majority have already agreed that getting rid of upscaling is not gonna happen, so basically we're left to decide which form of upscaling we need to go with.I haven't read the entire thread, and I know I'm late to the discussion.
It shouldn't be black and white. For example, if character A pushes to their absolute limit to lift an object that's 5 kg away from baseline Class 5 and character B effortlessly overpowers them, I'd say there's more than a reasonable enough case for upscaling B to Class 5. If character B is just vaguely stronger, then I'd say we rate them 'Class 1, possibly Class 5'.
This is the reason why Frieza is Small Star level+, despite falling short of that rating by ~7%, as Goku is far superior to a feat First Form Frieza performed with relatively little effort. However, scaling someone like Frieza to something like Star level is another matter, as there's no concrete numbers to support Goku being almost twice the strength of First Form Frieza, despite the massive amount of evidence in its favour.
Basically, it should be case-by-case. All or none just seems illogical here, and it seems everyone agrees currently.