Regarding Upscaling

[Antvasima]

Anyway, what do the rest of you think about what Armorchompy said?

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

We use "likely" as a measure of uncertainty regarding where exactly a character should be placed. In fiction it is possible to be one-shot, but still survive, attacks from a character several tiers above after all.

Meaning, the above tier is not a definitive certainty. It could be even higher.

Well of course, but it's completely reasonable to fully scale to Baseline of the next tier if you are within 3/4's of the next tier

 

[Damage3245]

Anyway, what do the rest of you think about what Armorchompy said?

I think that basing it off of a hit to head, which somebody mentioned earlier in the thread is one of those situations where upscaling wouldn't be viable because you're targeting a specific weak point, is not a good basis for the upscaling overall.

Well of course, but it's completely reasonable to fully scale to Baseline of the next tier if you are within 3/4's of the next tier

For the sake of having some standards on it, I agree. If we have to draw the line somewhere, then 3/4's of the way to the next tier is a good place.

 

[Antvasima]

Well of course, but it's completely reasonable to fully scale to Baseline of the next tier if you are within 3/4's of the next tier

Yes, of course. My point is just that "likely" can also mean that something could be more than that, but I suppose that we do not tend to use the word that way.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that basing it off of a hit to head, which somebody mentioned earlier in the thread is one of those situations where upscaling wouldn't be viable because you're targeting a specific weak point, is not a good basis for the upscaling overall.

Agreed.

 

[ByAsura]

I'm not, there are a lot of cases where that is unnecesarry, especially when the gap is 1.1x of lower

I should have been more specific. I didn't mean in all cases, just where the gap is particularly large.

If someone is 900 gigatons, then yes, scale higher characters up to 1 teraton. It's different with someone who's only 650, though. Even 750 gigatons is substantially different from 1 teraton and pretty much unprovable unless concrete numbers are applied.

Honestly, why, logically, is 3/4ths any better? It's just more specific, and that's it. We should just as much focus on what degree of dominance, such as one-shotting and fighting multiple characters.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I should have been more specific. I didn't mean in all cases, just where the gap is particularly large.

If someone is 900 gigatons, then yes, scale higher characters up to 1 teraton. It's different with someone who's only 650, though. Even 750 gigatons is substantially different from 1 teraton and pretty much unprovable unless concrete numbers are applied.

Honestly, why, logically, is 3/4ths any better? It's just more specific, and that's it. We should just as much focus on what degree of dominance, such as one-shotting and fighting multiple characters.

People are asking for specific guidelines for when it can be used, that's why

 

[ByAsura]

And I’m saying it’s kind of illogical. I guess I can agree to 3/4th, though, as long as we mention how much it depends on superiority.

 

[Damage3245]

And I’m saying it’s kind of illogical. I guess I can agree to 3/4th, though, as long as we mention how much it depends on superiority.

We're going to put a lot of emphasis on a great deal of superiority being required for upscaling to be applicable.

 

[ByAsura]

That's good then.

 

[Antvasima]

So are the rest of you fine with if we use Damage's compromise solution?

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

So are the rest of you fine with if we use Damage's compromise solution?

I do, 3/4’s method is fine to me

 

[Damage3245]

I'll let a few more people comment before I move on, but most people who have responded after my suggestion have been in favor of it from what I've seen.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I am assuming the 3/4’s applies to the “+” as well, meaning you have to be 3/4’s of the mean average to upscale to said “+”

 

[Antvasima]

Can somebody write a list of the staff members who have responded earlier in this thread, so I can send notifications to them? this is a major change, so we need to take extra precautions.

 

[Agnaa]

So are the rest of you fine with if we use Damage's compromise solution?

Which solution are we talking about? Even in this last page of the thread, Damage has given 3 compromise solutions:

My suggestion is to go with what DDM suggested. Which I believe is to do it case-by-case like we currently do, but only upscaling when it is very close such 1.1x difference to the next tier.

That reduces inflation of ratings and limits usage of upscaling overall without being too restrictive for cases when calcs are really near to the next tier.

Maybe we could also look into other avenues, like giving characters possibly/likely ratings depending on how much stronger characters are than specific ratings/how close they are to these tiers.

That's not my primary solution now.

My primary solution is the 3/4ths of the way towards the next tier.

I'm fine with the first two but would prefer listed multipliers. I'm strongly against the third one.

I'll let a few more people comment before I move on, but most people who have responded after my suggestion have been in favor of it from what I've seen.

If you're talking about the 3/4ths one, then you need to get your eyes checked. Most of this page has been people arguing with you about it,

 

[Damage3245]

@Agnaa; obviously the latest one. The one that I wrote the example guideline of.

If you're talking about the 3/4ths one, then you need to get your eyes checked. Most of this page has been people arguing with you about it,

Very sassy.

I've seen M3X, DemonGodMitchAubin, Antvasima, Qawsedf234, DarkDragonMedeus and ByAsura agree to it. (Albeit, M3X isn't staff)

Only you and ArmorChompy have been the major opposition to it.

 

[Agnaa]

Qawsed doesn't actually agree with the 3/4 part, just with the rest of the guideline. And many of those have expressed issues with it, or other options they'd prefer, but they jumped on it as a compromise. I don't think it's fair to put them down as people who are unilaterally rejecting every other option; I'm not sure how many of them would be against using, say, 1.33x instead.

That isn't to mention the earlier pages of this thread, where we've had many staff members putting themselves down against upscaling, or against giving a specific value, who seem to have left the thread since it's turned into discussing what specific multiplier to choose (it'd be kind of irrelevant for them to keep on posting that they're still against setting a value at that point). I don't want y'all to get carried away and only include people who are posting right now.

 

[Damage3245]

where we've had many staff members putting themselves down against upscaling

I'm one of those too, but Antvasima has said we need to work guidelines for upscaling.

If they want to come back and give their thoughts, we can invite them to do so but plenty of people still posting here have expressed that they're tired & annoyed at how this thread has been going in circles.

I certainly don't want us to rush into anything, but I do want us to be making some progress.

 

[Agnaa]

I'm one of those too, but Antvasima has said we need to work guidelines for upscaling.

I just don't really see the point if the votes are gonna be tallied up and we find out that the guideline we've made is worthless since it doesn't conform to the staff consensus.

And it does feel like you've brushed over the many staff members who don't want to give a specific value. Even though I disagree with them, they were the vast majority in the previous thread, and the guidelines you've been writing up have focused on giving a specific value, which again, may not be what the staff actually want.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

I just want this to be settled so I can know whether or not I need to slightly change a bunch of profiles or not...

At this point I just want to properly settle on what we do, whether that be saying no guidelines are needed and it's purely case by case or putting a specific number down, I like the 3/4's idea, but if the majority disagree with it, there's not much I can do, what I refuse to do is nuke upscaling all together

 

[ByAsura]

Getting rid of upscaling is a terrible idea. But Agnaa is right, to a degree, about multipliers.

 

[Schnee_One]

I'm honestly on the verge of just straight up doing "At least X possibly Y" if we can't come to a conclusion, because this thread has been borderline impossible to bring to a proper conclusion

 

[Agnaa]

I think a good first step would be counting everyone's positions so far, but I don't have the energy to do that myself.

 

[Damage3245]

I'm honestly on the verge of just straight up doing "At least X possibly Y" if we can't come to a conclusion, because this thread has been borderline impossible to bring to a proper conclusion

I take it you don't agree with the 3/4ths of the way toward the next tier being valid for upscaling?

 

[Schnee_One]

No I agree with it, but if we can’t come to a conclusion and I honestly doubt we can at this rate, I think that they may have to be our last resort

 

[Antvasima]

My main issue is that getting rid of upscaling altogether just isn't remotely practical or realistic. It gives us far too limited flexibility and would require us to revise too many verses, so we either need to use a "common sense case-by-case" practice, as currently or use a number, and a 3/4ths of a higher tier (i.e. roughly a 1.33 multiplier) upscaling limit seems like an easy to remember middle ground between different suggested extremes earlier in this thread.

 

[Schnee_One]

There aren't many verses to revise with this actually, not that many use upscaling

 

[Antvasima]

I think that there are quite a lot, and that we simply haven't memorised them, which makes the problem greater.

 

[ByAsura]

There definitely are a bunch. DB scaling is almost entirely up and downscaling.

 

[Schnee_One]

Ouch

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

It's mostly Anime/Manga verses as far as I know; notably Dragon Ball and from what I heard Touhou.

 

[KLOL506]

It's mostly Anime/Manga verses as far as I know; notably Dragon Ball and from what I heard Touhou.

IIRC, Frieza's High 5-A value isn't a + anymore due to the GBE revisions that took place when Assalt was around. I also don't remember any calcs for DB that are high enough to qualify for upscaling to the next tier. Most of DB is solely reliant on its explicit in-verse-stated multipliers.

 

[ByAsura]

Everything between 4-B and Low 4-C+ (a product of upscaling itself) is up and downscaling.

 

[KLOL506]

Everything between 4-B and Low 4-C+ (a product of upscaling itself) is up and downscaling.

Ah. I see. But I do remember something about Shin's creation feats and the SSJ multipliers and whatnot, but that's prolly best reserved for another thread.

 

[ByAsura]

Small Star level is from multipliers.

You're right. Shin does have a Large Star level feat, but there's also Star level and Large Star level characters without him.

 

[Antvasima]

My main issue is that getting rid of upscaling altogether just isn't remotely practical or realistic. It gives us far too limited flexibility and would require us to revise too many verses, so we either need to use a "common sense case-by-case" practice, as currently or use a number, and a 3/4ths of a higher tier (i.e. roughly a 1.33 multiplier) upscaling limit seems like an easy to remember middle ground between different suggested extremes earlier in this thread.

Anyway, shouldn't we return to the main topic?

 

[Damage3245]

The exact wording of the guideline I doubt I'll be able to get right the first, but something like:

1) Regarding Upscaling: In cases where characters are presented to be significantly superior to a calced value whether through repeated statements of superiority in terms of power or through self-evident feats of one-shotting another character using AP advantage alone, then if the value they are scaling to is more than three-quarters of the way towards the next tier, they can upscale to the baseline value of that tier.

*Note about making sure they aren't exploiting weak points or using durability-negating hax.

*Note about the values used for each tier.

Etc.

Something like this?

Yeah. I'd like some assistance on developing this guideline and creating a list of examples of viable feats for upscaling.

 

[Antvasima]

I would also appreciate help and input regarding this.

 

[Shadowbokunohero]

Yeah. I'd like some assistance on developing this guideline and creating a list of examples of viable feats for upscaling.

Asta One shotting Sekke comes to mind.