The tiering system page sub-tiers

[Antvasima]

Hello.

As you can see in our Tiering System page, it does not include various sub-tiers such as High 7-A, Low 5-B, etcetera, which are rather mentioned in the Attack Potency, Striking Strength, and Durability pages.

Do you think that we should add them to the tiering system list, or would it turn too cluttered, repetitive, and redundant?

NOTE: STAFF ONLY

 

[Kaltias]

They should be added imo

 

[Sera_EX]

For consistency purposes, yes they should be added. I mean, other sub tiers are listed such as High 3-A, Low 2-C, High 2-A, Low 1-C, High 1-C, Low 1-B, and High 1-A. Arguably some of them are more "important", but I still think High 7-A, Low 5-B, and the like should also be included. Would "Small Planet level" only have been used for Striking Strength than it would be fine to exclude it, but it's used to describe attack potency and durability which are both tier based.

 

[Sera_EX]

@Bambu

No. He's saying High 7-A and the like arent listed on the Tier System page.

 

[Kaltias]

@Bambu

Actually it's about adding sub tiers to the Tiering System page.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

In that case put me down for neutral.

 

[PaChi2]

They should be added imo

^

 

[Sera_EX]

Bambu only accepts nealry impossible revisions. Truly not an ordinary human being...or human at all ovo

 

[TISSG7Redgrave]

They should be added imo

this tbh

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

I agree they should be added.

 

[Sera_EX]

I just had a conversation with a few admins about that the other day, Udlmaster. Considering both Low 1-C and Low 1-B existed for different reasons than they do now... Low 1-C is fine however but Low 1-B is so rare it should just be baseline 1-B.

The reason Low 1-B existed was to differentiate beings that transcend M-Theory (High 1-C) multiverses from being true hyperversal beings. However the only example of that is MSPA and formerly DC where the Endless used to be ranked as such. There's practically no such characters. 12D should just be Hyperverse level. That however is a discussion for another time.

 

[Dragonmasterxyz]

Also, does Low 1-B need to exist? It's rather specific, for a 12-D being. Is there a reason for Low 1-B to exist?

^This. Low 1-B seems to be the most irrelevant tiers and honestly should just be 1-B.

 

[Sera_EX]

Guys, read my post about that above. Also it's probably not a good idea to openly discuss this. I've been keeping this convo between admins for the time being and then we'll make a staff discussion for Ant. For now let's stay on topic.

 

[Sera_EX]

Basically, Low 1-C existed to differentiate beings that transcended multiverses with actual complex multiversal beings, however we now have High 2-A for that as before, 2-A was 5-D. Low 1-B was likewise the same for 11D multiverses but again, it's outdated when Hyperverse means any dimensional level above the proposed size of our universe (yes universe, not multiverse) by M-Theory and the Multiverse by String Theory.

And Magi, 1-B doesn't stop at 26D. It goes up to transfinite numbers.

 

[Sera_EX]

Yeah there's ridiculous stuff like that, if you dig deep enough, especially in Russian fiction.

However, let's stay on topic for now.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I don't mind getting rid of Low 1-B, but somebody would need to update the affected pages.

Also, that is not what this discussion is supposed to be about.

 

[Antvasima]

Speaking of which, would some other experienced administrator be willing to update the Tiering System page with the new sub-tiers? I am already rather tired and busy.

 

[Gemmysaur]

I'm rather lukewarm with the whole thing. I mean, sure it's nice to have it there, and sure, it's not too much hassle to edit a single page, but is it really needed?

It's not rocket science to understand that High 7-A is just on the higher end of tier 7, and Low 5-B are above moon busters but not quite planet busters.

 

[Antvasima]

@Gemmysaur

I am also neutral about the issue.

 

[Andytrenom]

I think they should be added for consistency's sake as well

 

[Magi_Hussie]

@Sera Before I leave for now due to it being Staff Discussion, here's my last response to that: "And Magi, 1-B doesn't stop at 26D. It goes up to transfinite numbers."

I wasn't referring to 1-B, I was referring to Low 1-B and I suggest that it should have a requirement change soon in a different thread that it should be 12-dimensions to 26-dimensions as the dimension-related theories goes up to 26 due to the Bosonic string theory abd it goes with the explanation of the Low 1-B tier explanation.

Other than that, you can go on with what you guys are doing for this thread.

 

[Sera_EX]

While that's a good idea due to Bosonic String Theory and another one I can't recall at the moment, it would cause too much of a hassle/revision that I'm sure no one wants to undertake.

 

[Andytrenom]

@Jason Don't think you read the thread properly....

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

I'm more neutral about this, but to play a bit of a devil's advocate here, adding various sub-tiers to a lot of the tiers that exist on the page might make it a bit more clunky and hard to pick up for new users, whereas it seems pretty easy-to-understand now. A lot of the subtiers mostly only come into play when feats are calced (Save for High 8-C, IMO), at which point users would see more intricate pages such as Attack Potency that has the sub-tiers.

I turn face when it comes to dimensional stuff so I don't have that much of an opinion there.

 

[Dino_Ranger_Black]

We do have a significant number of characters who are in the highs and lows of their tiers. We may need to add them for those unfamilar with our rating system.

 

[Antvasima]

@Dargoo

Yes, that is the main reason why we currently don't feature all of the sub-categories.

 

[Antvasima]

Staff and retired staff only please.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Adding sub tiers to categories would make it much easier to find good match ups; though, at the same time, it is seemingly a lot of extra work. I'm fairly neutral on this though, but having to move all the sub-tiers at the bottom of the categories list is even more work than the main tier.

 

[Antvasima]

We are definitely not going to add actual new categories to the bottom of over 16500 pages.

I am talking about the tiering system page alone.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Ah, I see. The Title of the OP was what confused me; and yeah, that was my point about that. Anyway, I agree with adding a 4th bullet point for the sub-tiers of those that do have those.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

Think they should be added for consistency's sake.

 

[Kepekley23]

We're looking at this with the point of view of someone who is experienced with the system. The vast majority of those who visit it casually don't understand it all that well.

It's pretty much a no-brainer to include the other subtiers. Our pages are made to inform the visitors and not the ones who already understand how the system works.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I am tired and busy though, so is somebody else (who knows what he or she is doing) willing to update the tiering system page?

 

[Kepekley23]

I have done it.

 

[Peter1129]

You missed High 4-C

 

[Kepekley23]

Done.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

What Kep says makes sense.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Uh, for 7-A:

Characters/Weapons who can destroy a , or those who can easily harm characters with mountain level durability.

Should be fixed

 

[Antvasima]

@Kepekley23

Thank you for the help.

@Dargoo

I handled that and did some other cleanup: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/index.php?title=Tiering_System&diff=3323748&oldid=3321628

@All

Since this topic seems fo have been handled, I will un-highlight this thread.