-
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.
Usage of "higher" for character statistics
- Thread starter Antvasima
- Start date
- Status
- 29,971
- 31,091
Higher should just mean higher in general, and not automatically assumed to be a higher tier jump.
- 11,063
- 13,760
Based on Saikou's points I think something like this can be added to the attack potency page. It's a bit long and not very well put together so feel free to make necessary alterations:
Higher
Should be used when a different state of power, that isn't major enough to get a key, is superior to an unknown extent than the character's base attack potency.
Note that if the extent of the superiority is known precisely enough to warrant a tier, then said tier should be used instead.
Example: If a character with base attack potency of Wall level can one-shot several characters with durability equal to the character's own base attack potency with the help of a certain weapon or buff, then said character will be listed as "Wall level, higher with weapon/buff".
But if said weapon/buff has shown the ability to hurt or kill characters with known durability of a particular higher tier, say Building level, then the character will be listed as "Wall level, Building level with weapon/buff".
Higher
Should be used when a different state of power, that isn't major enough to get a key, is superior to an unknown extent than the character's base attack potency.
Note that if the extent of the superiority is known precisely enough to warrant a tier, then said tier should be used instead.
Example: If a character with base attack potency of Wall level can one-shot several characters with durability equal to the character's own base attack potency with the help of a certain weapon or buff, then said character will be listed as "Wall level, higher with weapon/buff".
But if said weapon/buff has shown the ability to hurt or kill characters with known durability of a particular higher tier, say Building level, then the character will be listed as "Wall level, Building level with weapon/buff".
- 14,865
- 12,372
Again, what should be done in cases like the one I mentioned earlier? Where it's not that there's a new weapon/power that would put a character higher, but that their current rating's based on casual feats and is probably lower than their true power?
I've given it to this character since she has exactly 0 non-casual feats, except against another character who was so far above their baseline that they had 0 non-casual feats. Is something like that okay and something that should be written into the guidelines?Agnaa said:
- 10,748
- 6,476
@Agnaa I don't think just being casual should warrant a "Likely higher" btw.
It should be reserved for cases where it is hinted that the character is on a higher scale of power than his current feats, or there is reason to believe his current stats are a huge lowball which may change depending on future information.
For example, a low 2-C character who was regarded as a threat to a multiverse, or a superpowered individual who is currently scaled to being far above some 9-B "normal human" high schoolers. Although that's just my take on it.
It should be reserved for cases where it is hinted that the character is on a higher scale of power than his current feats, or there is reason to believe his current stats are a huge lowball which may change depending on future information.
For example, a low 2-C character who was regarded as a threat to a multiverse, or a superpowered individual who is currently scaled to being far above some 9-B "normal human" high schoolers. Although that's just my take on it.
- 14,865
- 12,372
All of that character's feats have been casually one-shotting things with a single (albeit enlarged through body control) finger, aside from one lost off-screen fight with a weaker form of the strongest character in the series (the form in question being somewhere between 9-A and Low 6-B).
Would this satisfy that criteria?
Would this satisfy that criteria?
- 10,748
- 6,476
You can add it if you think it's fine. I don't really want to be too strict with what gets the rating and what doesn't.
- 6,104
- 5,102
Is this for the Attack Potency page?
Hmm. How about something like:
"Higher
Should be used to denote a character's weapons, techniques, or attributes that are much stronger than their base level, but still within the same tier. For instance, a character that is Solar System level but has an attack that multiplies their power by 100 times, as in versus matches this can give said character an advantage in attack potency. In this instance it should be writt m as "Solar System level, higher with that ability or technique".
Furthermore, higher may also be used to denote a case where the character is possibly or likely a higher tier, but to what degree is not specified. This is specifically referring to cases such as "At least 4-B, likely higher" or "At least Solar System level, likely higher".
Hmm. How about something like:
"Higher
Should be used to denote a character's weapons, techniques, or attributes that are much stronger than their base level, but still within the same tier. For instance, a character that is Solar System level but has an attack that multiplies their power by 100 times, as in versus matches this can give said character an advantage in attack potency. In this instance it should be writt m as "Solar System level, higher with that ability or technique".
Furthermore, higher may also be used to denote a case where the character is possibly or likely a higher tier, but to what degree is not specified. This is specifically referring to cases such as "At least 4-B, likely higher" or "At least Solar System level, likely higher".
- 6,104
- 5,102
Possibly/likely higher is a combination Possibly/likely and higher respectively. The only difference is that 6-B, higher by Moonwalking is saying the character is higher in 6-B with Moonwalking than they are normally. At least 6-B, likely higher on the other hand is saying the chatacter is likely higher than 6-B but to what degree we do not know.Ugarik said:
- 15,407
- 5,717
What Sera said.
- 10,748
- 6,476
6-B, higher by Moonwalking is saying the character is higher in 6-B with Moonwalking than they are normally.
A subtle hint at the Michael Jackson profile Sera has planned.
A subtle hint at the Michael Jackson profile Sera has planned.
- 29,971
- 31,091
Which version of MJ; the one from the Genesis Moonwalker game? Anyway, I agree that likely or possibly higher means a possible higher tier, but to an unknown extent, where as higher with something should clarify that it simply means higher than normal and nothing to do with tier jumps.
- 15,713
- 7,692
Possibly/likely higher were usually used for way higher tier suggestion.Ugarik said:
Most of the time, outliers or non-calculated feats are used as evidence. I think it give extra work to fix profiles in the future.
So,I think Possibly/likely higher case should be Unknown instead.
Higher, from Sera's suggestion, works better since it denote, the related rating is within the same tier and thus saving us from guess work.
- 10,748
- 6,476
I was no joke, wondering if there was a game Michael Jackson i could work on recently. Give me more details DDM >_> On my wall. I don't want to derail too bad
- 6,104
- 5,102
@Ant
Yes, I'll edit the message.
@Ugarik
Depends on what it's used for. "At least 9-A, likely far higher" suggests the character is at least 9-A, but is likely a much higher tier like 8-B, 7-C, or even 7-A just for an example. We just don't know. If it's "9-A, far higher with the Super Axe", the far higher suggests that said character may be a higher tier with the Super Axe, we just don't t what degree so it's not like we can automatically suggest 8-C, it could be 8-C it could be 7-A similar to the previous case.
Yes, I'll edit the message.
@Ugarik
Depends on what it's used for. "At least 9-A, likely far higher" suggests the character is at least 9-A, but is likely a much higher tier like 8-B, 7-C, or even 7-A just for an example. We just don't know. If it's "9-A, far higher with the Super Axe", the far higher suggests that said character may be a higher tier with the Super Axe, we just don't t what degree so it's not like we can automatically suggest 8-C, it could be 8-C it could be 7-A similar to the previous case.
- 15,713
- 7,692
I agree with Sera's point on Far Higher
I will be honest the extra wording from Likely higher, Posssiby, Far higher can waste time on profile editing- it is better to use Unknown or Higher.
Also, where does Unknown Tier come from because I did not see it in the Tiering System nor Attack Potency page and I think it should be mentioned at least with in the Tiers or Attack Potency?
I will be honest the extra wording from Likely higher, Posssiby, Far higher can waste time on profile editing- it is better to use Unknown or Higher.
Also, where does Unknown Tier come from because I did not see it in the Tiering System nor Attack Potency page and I think it should be mentioned at least with in the Tiers or Attack Potency?
- 15,407
- 5,717
If we had a multiplier we wouldn't be putting a vague "higher".
- 15,713
- 7,692
It is listed as Tier Category and Protected like a Tier Category. though: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Unknown_TierSera EX said:
- It pretty part of the Tiering System anyway.
- 6,104
- 5,102
Which usage of higher? If it's "At least X, likely higher" then like Saikou said, we wouldn't use it if we had a multiplier.
If it's "X, higher with Root Beer", it depends on the tier. For 3-A, even a 10,000x multiplier wouldn't grant a higher tier, and thus we would say they are "higher" with root beer as it would grant a significant AP advantage increase nonetheless.
If it's "X, higher with Root Beer", it depends on the tier. For 3-A, even a 10,000x multiplier wouldn't grant a higher tier, and thus we would say they are "higher" with root beer as it would grant a significant AP advantage increase nonetheless.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
