Allow the + next to the tier when there is one (6 pros, 6 cons, 3 don't know)

[CuddleFox]

That's why I said I would be ready to do it all myself. You won't have a lot to do in the end, I would just need someone from time to time to edit a locked profile I don't have access to, there aren't a lot (likely 1-2 hundreds in total based on proportions I just took), and I will do it day per day during about 40-50 days for a little more than 1 hour each time. (Based on the fact I tested with 50 and it took me 8 minutes)

So, about 3 locked profiles checked by me per day and likely way less to edit by anyone in the staff as not all locked profiles have a + in their stats.
That's not even to be considered a project for staff members and it's just a routine for me. ^^
Whether it's little gain or not or a waste of iime of any sort is my problem, I'm the one who proposed it. Rather than discussing whether the workload is possible for me or not, we should rather discuss whether it is a good thing to do it at all, the majority seemed to think so until now. But mistakenly through it would imply a big input from the staff.

As time passes the workload will get bigger, it's better to do it now rather than having this problem forever.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I think it looks cleaner as it is, and as mentioned I don't think this is worth even a little bit of man power. The point mentioned where "well what if we want to do it later, there'll just be more"... I don't want to do it ever. It's a pointless change that, in my own opinion, just makes a profile slightly uglier than it was.

 

[CuddleFox]

No, the point is that the profile are unprecise and that's an actual problem when there is a lot of them in a single verse as some character may appear stronger than others if you only look at the tier. And then if forces you to learn the verse to know the actual tier while the reason to be of the tier section is to get things clear fast for the user. It's counterintuitive and that's a problem since a very long time.

And that's not uglier but a question of habit.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

...I'm sorry, I must be missing something. How is it not precise? If every character's tier does not include the +, how does it make one character appear stronger than the other? What? I don't need to "learn the verse" to find the source for a calc. Good lord.

 

[CuddleFox]

A character at 9-A+ who is stronger than a At least 9-A one will appear weaker if you look only at the tiers.
It happened multiple times that I through two keys of a same characters were equals because I didn't paid enough attention to the AP. While the tier part is supposed to give a synthetic look. Etc.
However I don't see where is the problem to change it and why you seem so reluctant to let me do it as it will get the profiles more precise anyway. Even if you don't think there is a problem, that's an improvement from before and that's good to take.

Again, this will require almost no involvement from the staff and in a month and a half, it will be done.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

...we don't use 9-A+, though. We use 9-A for both. And then in the AP, if they're both Small Building level+, they're listed as such. What are you talking about?

It isn't an improvement and I certainly don't trust any old individual to go through and start enacting mass changes.

 

[CuddleFox]

What are you talking about?

Tier : 9-A | At least 9-A
AP : Small Building level+ | At least Small Building level
While the first is stronger than the second. I don't think I can be more clear. I think you can see that there is clearly a problem.

I certainly don't trust any old individual to go through and start enacting mass changes.

I understand that. But all I want is to make the wiki better, more clear and more comprehensible because I love it and spend a lot of time on it. And I have already contributed in other ways than just profile changes.
I propose you something to do so, that's all. Don't take it as an attack.
As of now it's pretty equal between the people who are for and against. While some of those who are against such as Ogbunabali may have throught at first that I asked the staff to do the job, which is false.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Is there? The Attack Potency section, in a universe where users made pages correctly, should explain both ratings fully. What is the problem, precisely?

I am strongly opposed. That's my statement.

 

[CuddleFox]

What is the problem, precisely?

The tier section is supposed to give a quick look and doesn't do it properly and shows an eroded power balance when there are +.

The Attack Potency section, in a universe where users made pages correctly, should explain both ratings fully.

It does, but it would be better if the tier did too. You see the tier before the AP. I don't see a reason to be "strongly" against it.

However if you just choose to deny that there is a problem, that's none of my business, I will just note you vote, thanks.

 

[Ogbunabali]

The tier section does its job perfectly fine by showing what tier the character is. The "+" isn't a different tier, it's a minor convenience for calc values.

This is also a vs match thread exclusive problem, but you will always scroll down to the AP section anyway because you will still need to compare specific calcs and values between the characters. Just because one character is 9-A+ and the other one is 9-A, doesn't make the match a stomp in either favour because you can still have a difference smaller than 7x.

So changing this will be a lot of work for literally nothing in the end.

 

[CuddleFox]

The tier section does its job perfectly fine by showing what tier the character is. The "+" isn't a different tier, it's a minor convenience for calc values.

This is also a vs match thread exclusive problem, but you will always scroll down to the AP section anyway because you will still need to compare specific calcs and values between the characters. Just because one character is 9-A+ and the other one is 9-A, doesn't make the match a stomp in either favour because you can still have a difference smaller than 7x.

The plus is a tool to indicate that a character is higher or lower than another and therefore implicitly works in the same tier list as all other tiers even if you choose not to see it that way. If you don't want to show it in the tier section because in the end you can know the strength of the characters without it, there is no point in having it there at all.

This is not a problem exclusive to vs match but to all those who are interested in knowing the power of a character at all in order to situate it in relation to others of the same verse.

And it's not true, I almost never go to the AP of the characters, precisely because the tier section already tells me their tier in a simplified way, I only go to the AP if I find a tiering strange or if I want to know more.

This is especially a problem because pages with a lot of keys and very long APs are more prone to this problem because they are more likely to have + And are the ones where you're least likely to look at the AP because of their length.

This is also a problem for verses like Kengan Asura or Baki where there are a lot of characters located in one tier that need to be visibly separated immediately because they don't have the same strength in the end. In Baki there are 80 characters and more than 100 keys spread over 3 different tiers, and nobody dares to make a character go to 9-A+ when it could be done by upscaling some calculations and we end up using At least 9-A, likely higher, higher post-xxx, all over the place because everybody knows that the page wouldn't make any sense visually, and it makes some pages like Katsumi's or Baki's himself so overloaded in the tier section that we don't know what corresponds to which key anymore. Katsumi only has 3 keys and his tier section is three lines long and absolutely not intuitive at all, and we can't do otherwise.

Because you can imagine how weird it would be if from one key to another you went for example from At least 9-A, likely higher to flat 9-A when a character is supposed to be stronger. And that would be solved by having 9-A+ instead. At least the first person won't mistakenly think at the beginning that the character has become weaker. And even if he realizes the reality later by going to the AP, that's not the problem. The problem is the wrong first impression. That's what I want to remove. And when there isn't a first wrong impression, it takes a while to actually understand the profile, and it would be better and more confortable if it was immediate.

 

[Ogbunabali]

there is no point in having it there at all

I don't actually disagree. If it were up to me, I'd have it removed. But it's ingrained in the system so much that it's not worth touching it anymore.

This is not a problem exclusive to vs match but to all those who are interested in knowing the power of a character at all in order to situate it in relation to others of the same verse.

And you do that by going in the Attack Potency section and reading the (hopefully) detailed explanation set there by the creator of the page. You know it is possible to have 10 characters at "9-A+" and all of them to be of varying degrees strong than each other based on their scaling, right? You still wouldn't know where any of them stand in relation to the other characters of the same verse, unless you scroll down to the Attack Potency section and check.

Or let's just remove tier values altogether and just have their joule value there, no?

And it's not true, I almost never go to the AP of the characters, precisely because the tier section already tells me their tier in a simplified way, I only go to the AP if I find a tiering strange or if I want to know more.

Then you're doing it wrong.

This is especially a problem because pages with a lot of keys and very long APs are more prone to this problem because they are more likely to have + And are the ones where you're least likely to look at the AP because of their length.

Again, you will have to scroll there, either way, to check their specific calc/joule value in this scenario regardless of whether they had the "+" there or not. So again, no difference.

You can imagine how weird it would be if from one key to another you went from At least 9-A, likely higher to flat 9-A when a character is supposed to be stronger. And that would be solved by having 9-A+ instead. At least the first person won't mistakenly think at the beginning that the character has become weaker. And even if he realizes the reality later by going to the AP, that's not the problem. The problem is the wrong first impression. That's what I want to remove.

It's not weird at all no. You can still go from "At least 9-A, likely higher to flat 9-A" without a "+" and still be stronger in the same tier.


None of the premises of your arguments make much sense unless you're actually going to try and replace the tier section with a flat joule value and a scaling chain.

 

[CuddleFox]

You know it is possible to have 10 characters at "9-A+" and all of them to be of varying degrees strong than each other based on their scaling, right?

Yes, but everyone use At least and likely higher to scale the characters between them.
If you go on a CRT with many characters at the same tier, you will see that everybody tend to consider At least, likely higher and such as entire levels on their own. And that everyone considers this character to be stronger than that character. Because we only have a few tiers to use while having to represent the whole tier list of a verse, and representing the whole tier list of a verse isn't something you can get rid of, it's the fun of tiering characters.
When you can't have fun because of the rules while talking about fictional characters, it's probably that they need to be adjusted.

If it doesn't mean anything and a character at 9-A can be stronger than a character at at least 9-A, likely higher, then remove them and only let the tier. At least it won't be confusing.

It's not weird at all no. You can still go from "At least 9-A, likely higher to flat 9-A" without a "+" and still be stronger in the same tier.

So you openly refuse to see a problem that is obvious. It seems logical to you because you have been here for a long time and you have well integrated the specific functioning of the tier list, but for everyone, At least 1 is better than 1 and it will inevitably give a wrong image of powers to someone who doesn't know the verse. If the tier list says otherwise, it needs to be changed.

Then you're doing it wrong.

"AP is when you want more precision the tier doesn't give"
"Ok, proceed to look at it when I want more precisions"
"The f*ck you're doin?"

I'm not doing it wrong, I'm a user, I look at the infos I need the quickest way and then, I close the page.

None of the premises of your arguments make much sense unless you're actually going to try and replace the tier section with a flat joule value and a scaling chain.

You're not at all trying to make me say things I didn't say.
I never said that there should be the joules values and a scaling chain. I said that showing the + in the tier make things clearer for verses centered around a few tiers with a lot of different power levels.

 

[Colonel_Krukov]

I think you're pushing this a bit too much...

 

[CuddleFox]

I'm trying to put out a fire with water in the midst of people who allow themselves to explain to me that fire doesn't exist and to be sarcastic.

 

[Armorchompy]

It's not that the fire doesn't exist, but the fire is literally just a lit lighter someone dropped on a concrete floor with no flammable objects in the room. I don't really think this is worth it anymore

 

[CuddleFox]

If it doesn't matter and won't change that much for you, let me do it then. I think it is.

 

[The_Impress]

'S just too much work with fuckall benefits, how many staff members reached that conclusion?

We will not give a random user this one task, it's dickish of us, and honestly you don't want this either, month and a half is too long anyhow.

Also in general I agree that it'll just look ugly.

 

[Antvasima]

It seems like there is far too strong staff opposition to this project, and as Impress said, it would be very inconsiderate of us to push over such massive amounts of work to a single regular member, even though he can most likely handle it properly.

 

[Bobsican]

Should this thread be closed then?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Aye, given nothing new's been said for a couple days. I'll do the honors.