• 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.

Request To Specify Intelligence Criteria

Status
Not open for further replies.
As a recent VS Battles wiki editor and lurker, I tend to have trouble differentiating how certain characters should be ranked according to intelligence. I feel like the Intelligence page can specify more on how the criteria separate certain characters' intelligence better, notably the difference between gifted and genius. This is my solution on how to improve the intelligence page:

Clarify that intelligence will scale PRIMARILY on logical-mathematic and linguistic intelligence. Secondary intelligence would be artistic, bodily-kinesthetic, emotional intelligence, etc. For example, even if a fictional character is a genius in martial arts, if he/she doesn't have the primary intelligence to back it up, he/she will not have a genius category on their page. However, that character's secondary intelligence will still be mentioned on the page regardless.

Gifted:
The character that demonstrates high reasoning ability, can master concepts with few repetitions, and display high-performance capability in intellectual, creative, or specific academic fields. They would be far ahead of their peers, but they wouldn't have a god-sent talent to make them qualify as a genius. In other words, they aren't world-class (genius-level).

Note: Maybe give some examples like what you guys did to the genius category to let people understand better what standards qualify a gifted person. Example: Sakura Haruno, Karma Akabane, Izuku Midoriya

Genius:
Individuals with an exceptional capacity for knowledge and intelligence, generally in one logical-mathematical area of world-class depth, often possessed by famous fictional scientists and strategists. They are usually known to make little to no strategical/scientific mistakes (this applies more frequently to realistic fiction verses, although other genres will also follow the same trend: to a lesser degree). This level of intelligence is the level of actual geniuses and famous intellectuals in the real world and, in lieu of better feats, should be the default intelligence category for fictional characters treated as if they have exceptional or superhuman intelligence.

Thanks for reading my suggestion, I know some of my suggestions were already done to some degree, but I think it would be better if it could be clarified even better. if you have any thoughts and criticism directed towards my suggestion, feel free to mention it! Otherwise, have a wonderful day!👍
 
Actually, this hasn't been touched in a while from what I recall.
The main reason this hasn't been standarized much further is because intelligence is a concept too broad to summarize in a simple "tier list", hence why it's encouraged to describe it in the respective profile instead for the most part.
That being said, I can agree on pushing for the intelligence to focus on a particular aspect to remain more consistent in the classifications used, but it shouldn't be strictly enforced as it compromises a good chunk of the wiki for little gain.
 
Last edited:
I disagree with adding this, since intelligence isn't really linear in the same way as other stats are. You would end up exacerbating certain issues that are already present, for example the weirdly specific pseudo-guideline of reality warping technology for supergenius ratings. Sure, some verses may have that as some pinnacle feat that's super impressive, but certain others don't elevate it in such a way, which would either result in different ratings for the same feat or a rating that's contextually misleading.

In general with this sort of thing, putting what the feats actually are is a lot more important than just slapping a category on a file and calling it a day.
 
Well, I personally think that our current standards are fine, and that they are not particularly hard to understand.

The exception is that is harder for them to quantify characters that are superhumanly intelligent in magical prowess, but that is hard to do something about, as this area is much harder to compare and evaluate.
 
To be honest I feel like intelligence is rather pointless statistic in terms of a fight as realistically the only part that matters is tactics, which not every supergenius is instantly a master at, which can be covered by the optional stat of Standard Battle tactics, anything else could be covered in an ability like we have for Preparation

in the end, just because you make reality warping device doesn’t mean you can out skill and use advance tactics in a fist fight in a bar
 
Last edited:
Again, the fights are just there as a fun distraction for our members. Our main purpose is to index character statistics in a reliable manner for our currently 606,000 visitors in a month.
 
I disagree with this. Limiting intelligence to such categories is not really workable for such a wide variety of characters.

I disagree with adding this, since intelligence isn't really linear in the same way as other stats are. You would end up exacerbating certain issues that are already present, for example the weirdly specific pseudo-guideline of reality warping technology for supergenius ratings. Sure, some verses may have that as some pinnacle feat that's super impressive, but certain others don't elevate it in such a way, which would either result in different ratings for the same feat or a rating that's contextually misleading.

I'm really glad to see that I wasn't the only person who saw this as really, really weird.
 
Is it fine if we close this thread then?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top