Tiering system change?

[Konaguna]

There is one thing I noticed in the wiki's tiers, that is, that they are all based solely on Attack Potency, meaning that no ridiculous Hax or Insane speed can put them higher, unless these abilities are tied to the AP itself, which I feel isn't precisely correct.

For Example, lets take Soul of Cinder, who is supposed to be Large star to Solar system and Rel+, and now lets take Midora who also Large Star level, but is MFTL+ and Has a lot more Hax and would effortlessly stomp Soul of Cinder.

I highly doubt Soul of Cinder is capable of beating many characters on the same tier, because he only got there via his AP, while he lacks on other fields.

All I am saying is, that I believe AP alone shouldn't guarantee someone a tier where he would get stomped by most of the characters in the same tier. Characters that could/couldn't beat others from the same tier becase of his other inferior/superior abilities should be put in a their respective tiers where they could match other characters based on their entirety.

 

[Megamangohan]

I think AP takes striking speed into consideration

 

[Promestein]

There's no way to conclusively judge a tier based on all of those factors combined, and this would be a waste of time anyways. It's not important, either. If someone can't judge that a character would lose to another character in the same tier, that's not the system's fault, but their own. We're not going to go add a sub-system just for the sake of versus battles when that's not even the point of the wiki.

 

[Megamangohan]

there could also be Rock, Paper, Scissor type matchups

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

?Have no idea what you're proposing, a seperate tier for hax? Or more so a tiering system which takes it into account i assume? I think that's entirely pointless and not worth the time it would take to implent among 14000+ pages, quantifying hax in general, or other factors besides ap would lead to too varied a tiering.

The entire point of hax is that it makes durability irrelavant, people simply have to explain the extent to which the haxes work on their profiles, no need for an entire tiering dealing with them, and we do do stuff like rating characters certain tiers via hax anyway.

Too many factors that would go into expanding the tiers based off other factors than just ap, don't think worth the trouble, to further simply it.

 

[Reppuzan]

I don't think this is worth it.

The point of hax is that it lets characters win by unconventional means aside from simply bashing their foes into submission with overwhelmingly powerful attacks.

Quantifying hax is incredibly arbitrary since there are no mathematical values we can possibly rate them by and there's too many pages here to run a full-on revision.

 

[Konaguna]

There's no way to conclusively judge a tier based on all of those factors combined, and this would be a waste of time anyways. It's not important, either. If someone can't judge that a character would lose to another character in the same tier, that's not the system's fault, but their own. We're not going to go add a sub-system just for the sake of versus battles when that's not even the point of the wiki.

We're not going to go add a sub-system just for the sake of versus battles when that's not even the point of the wiki.

It literally says VS BATTLES WIKI, its pretty self explanatory, It's a fandom that pits fictional characters against each other, this is why battles are constantly equalizing speed and restricting certain abilities, because the gaps in overall abilities are too big.

I also never said that a sub system should be added, what I was talking about was the main tier system being changed so that it would fit the characters. All that could be done is to simply evaluate how many characters on the same tier a character could beat or match and based on that he should be put on it's tier.

Its for the sake of battles being fair and as least restricted as possible.

 

[Promestein]

"The purpose of this wiki is to index the statistics of characters from a wide variety of different fictional franchises."

We're not changing the tiering system for something so unimportant. There are already plenty of fair matches, because people have the capability to use their brains to figure out what is fair by judging things for themselves.

 

[Konaguna]

?Have no idea what you're proposing, a seperate tier for hax? Or more so a tiering system which takes it into account i assume? I think that's entirely pointless and not worth the time it would take to implent among 14000+ pages, quantifying hax in general, or other factors besides ap would lead to too varied a tiering.

The entire point of hax is that it makes durability irrelavant, people simply have to explain the extent to which the haxes work on their profiles, no need for an entire tiering dealing with them, and we do do stuff like rating characters certain tiers via hax anyway.

Too many factors that would go into expanding the tiers based off other factors than just ap, don't think worth the trouble, to further simply it.

A change of the main tier, one that would fit the characters into a tier where they can match other characters.

And no, Hax can give a lot of different ways to avoid being killed by a higher tier. for example Clairvoyance, Resurrection, Power Null and BFR don't always have to be related to durability negation, since these abilities could prove to be essential in a VS battle, they shouldn't be treated inferior to AP.

I agree it is time consuming, but for the most balanced way to make battles as fair as possible I don't see any other options as of now.

 

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

Hax, by their nature, breaks the tiering system. The tiering system itself is an index, it does not decide victory. Hax is what makes lowerntier characters win against higher ones, that's just how it works. If you want some kind of hax tiers thing, then it would only work with some types of hax.

 

[Yobo_Blue]

Hax has hundreds of different possible uses in a match, compared to AP's standard 1. Even a charcter with far greater hax than another could still lose if they have something they can't counter, so this would be a worthless addition anyway.

 

[Konaguna]

"The purpose of this wiki is to index the statistics of characters from a wide variety of different fictional franchises."

We're not changing the tiering system for something so unimportant. There are already plenty of fair matches, because people have the capability to use their brains to figure out what is fair by judging things for themselves.

And yet Battle debates are common and happen every day.

Saying that it is not relevant enough to be considered into the tiering is not a very convincing answer. There are certainly far more battles that require to cripple one character in order to match another. Why should AC be the main factor, when Hax is usually the prevailing component of a character?

restricting characters to lower one or raise one to a level is not really something that should be on a site that uses precise information, it only tries to convince that a character could beat another one when it is crippled to an extent.

 

[Konaguna]

Hax has hundreds of different possible uses in a match, compared to AP's standard 1. Even a charcter with far greater hax than another could still lose if they have something they can't counter, so this would be a worthless addition anyway.

I was talking about majority, just because a character with greater hax would lose to someone that has something that would specifically beat another character doesn't mean his tier is not befitting. I said a character should be judged based on how well he can fare with characters on his tier with all of his capabilities.

 

[Jinsye]

First of all, restricting hax and abilities are banned now, well for serious matches at least.

Battle debates are for fun, this is a character indexing site first.

 

[Promestein]

It's not the main factor. There are plenty of battles of hax, but we cannot quantify it in the same way, because hax is way too varied to do so, and to make a composite system that takes speed, hax, AP, and Regenerationn and blah blah blah all into account? Near impossible and pointless. We're not going to do it.

 

[Konaguna]

It's not the main factor. There are plenty of battles of hax, but we cannot quantify it in the same way, because hax is way too varied to do so, and to make a composite system that takes speed, hax, AP, and Regenerationn and blah blah blah all into account? Near impossible and pointless. We're not going to do it.

Near impossible? All you need to do is evaluate how potent a hax or speed is, and Put a character on a tier where characters can match each other fairy based on their compelete set of abilities. It's not like haxes and speed are so hard to label, there are simply characters that can utilize haxes better and characters that can't.

Also, another random question, I haven't really figured out where to ask, but why don't characters have links to the scans of their abilites? Like when their abilites are counted in powers and stats, why isn'y there a link or at least an explanation as to where these abilites come from instead of wondering when did a character use an ability that you can't seem to recall?

 

[Promestein]

Hax is hard to label. You don't seem to understand how complex it is, and how very few characters have answers to all kinds of hax. How would we even deal with higher-dimensional characters based on this system? Our current system is fine. Hax remains relevant. To scale tiers based off of it will only make everything a clusterfuck and isn't worth the absurd amount of work it will take, especially when, again, this is a statistics indexing wiki first and a versus debating site second. I know that there are admins who think we shouldn't even have victories and losses listed on pages because it distracts from the main point of the wiki.

Because a lot of people don't add them. They really should be on every page.

I'm closing this.

Attempts to completely remake our Tiering System like this are against the rules.