- 16,927
- 4,844
I said I would be remaking this thread, and I am. You can look at the previous thread for context. And because of the lack of staff present in the previous one, I'd like this to be done again, with more staff preferably this time.
Okay. So, to summarize my entire proposal here from before.
Using speed of characters or attacks calculated at other instances can't be used, as characters and attacks can vary in speed. This is the case regardless of whether the character is seriously trying to do his best or anything similar.
Like I said in the beginning, the general idea of this is still fine with me for us to use here. My proposal is not to remove this rule. My proposal, however, is for us to change the way we apply this rule to the site. Here is why this is a problem.
THE ONLY reason why our site considers using calced speed for other feats calc stacking for high results, is because of this idea that a character and their attacks can have varying speeds. Or in other words, character's magically move slower than they normally move at, even when they are serious. Not only was this never given a proper explanation of why this would happen, this literally makes no sense and is inherently flawed logic to an extreme.
Statistics like speed are not assumed to be at distinctly different levels across instances here, under normal circumstances. In other words, when a character is serious in the middle of battle, doesn't lack a power-up, doesn't purposely lower themselves, doesn't have their stats altered, and has otherwise no reason to be moving at slower speeds, we take them to move at the same levels of speed they always move at. Speed isn't something disproportionate like this.
Because speed isn't disproportionate like this, and will not normally change across different instances a character is involved with in their series, there is no legitimate reason to say a character's calculated speed from one instance couldn't ever apply to the character in another instance. How we generally treat a character's speed completely goes against what the calc stacking page says, and gives no real justification to ban the use of calced speed for characters. This is why I advocate for this rule to not be removed, but changed.
If the Character who has a calced speed is getting blitzed, reacted to, or dodged has a justified reason to be using their normal speed, that character should be allowed to have there calced speed applied, as they won't be moving slower in this instance to make us think it can't be applied.
At the same time, we can still ban their calced speed from being used if the character has a justified reason to NOT be using their normal speed. Such as, are they fatigued? Are they purposely moving slower? Did they lack a power-up? Did they have their stats altered? Reasons like this would still allow us to restrict calced speed from being used.
Hence forth, we make this rule case by case.
To prevent someone making chains of calc stacking when using a character's calced speed, we can give calc stacking exactly the same scrutiny we give Multipliers. We give parameters that need to be met for a character's calced speed to be applied, and then, we increase the burden of proof the higher someone tries calc stacking feats. @Agnaa summed this up in a great way higher above:
"How would you feel if the standards were essentially just "Give calc-stacked results the same scrutiny as Multipliers"? Substituting "It has to be a statement from a reliable source" with "There cannot be anything indicating they're slower (holding back, being fatigued, lacking a powerup, etc.)
Low increases won't require much scrutiny except for the character with the higher result actually being shown as stronger/faster. While higher increases (over 100x) will start requiring supporting feats on that level not achieved through calc-stacking."
For this reasoning, the solutions given and the parameters set to still safely keep it under control, calc stacking should be able to be accepted on a case by case basis.
And because this was frequently brought up, im going to hammer in my counters against the points brought up from the last thread from the disagreeing side.
This has been the most brought up counter against my thread and why calc stacking is supposedly bad. This is an inherently flawed argument.
It is not your call to decide a result is inflated for a verse that could very well support the results being legit for them. Which is why a case by case suggestion logistically works better for this. If the verse supports it, it should be acceptable. If not, then we can reject it. This is not that hard.
Giving Calc-Stacking the same exact scrutiny as we currently give Multipliers already puts a stop to this from happening. We already have the burden of proof of proving a character's true speed was used in the scenario that other characters blitzed, dodged, or reacted to them, and then have the requirement of proving the feats are not outliers for their series. After this, the rest is taken care of by the same process of how to treat multipliers. New feats with similar results without calc stacking would be needed to be gathered in order to legitimize higher results being legit. Not to mention, since these are calculations, verses on this site will already be required to be evaluated before they can be accepted here. No matter how popular or unpopular the given series is.
We have strong suggested parameters here to make acceptable calc stacking be kept on a leash without being abused. What more is needed to make this acceptable? And if more is supposedly needed, suggestions are helpful.
And at the bare bare minimum here, we would still need to actually change the calc stacking page regardless. As long as the rule specifies that "speeds can vary" is the reason we prohibit calc stacking, it is already alluding to the fact that non-varied speeds that don't change are able to be used. So either we completely change the reason why we restrict calced speeds to something else, or we make calc-stacking acceptable to some degree under what is said on it. It has to be one or the other.
Okay. So, to summarize my entire proposal here from before.
The Issue With Our Calc Stacking Rule
As written on the calc-stacking page currently, this is the reason why we don't allow the use of calced speed for other feats:Using speed of characters or attacks calculated at other instances can't be used, as characters and attacks can vary in speed. This is the case regardless of whether the character is seriously trying to do his best or anything similar.
Like I said in the beginning, the general idea of this is still fine with me for us to use here. My proposal is not to remove this rule. My proposal, however, is for us to change the way we apply this rule to the site. Here is why this is a problem.
THE ONLY reason why our site considers using calced speed for other feats calc stacking for high results, is because of this idea that a character and their attacks can have varying speeds. Or in other words, character's magically move slower than they normally move at, even when they are serious. Not only was this never given a proper explanation of why this would happen, this literally makes no sense and is inherently flawed logic to an extreme.
Statistics like speed are not assumed to be at distinctly different levels across instances here, under normal circumstances. In other words, when a character is serious in the middle of battle, doesn't lack a power-up, doesn't purposely lower themselves, doesn't have their stats altered, and has otherwise no reason to be moving at slower speeds, we take them to move at the same levels of speed they always move at. Speed isn't something disproportionate like this.
Because speed isn't disproportionate like this, and will not normally change across different instances a character is involved with in their series, there is no legitimate reason to say a character's calculated speed from one instance couldn't ever apply to the character in another instance. How we generally treat a character's speed completely goes against what the calc stacking page says, and gives no real justification to ban the use of calced speed for characters. This is why I advocate for this rule to not be removed, but changed.
My Proposal To Fix This Issue
My proposal is simple. To fix this, we should allow the use of a character's calculated speed, on a CASE BY CASE basis.If the Character who has a calced speed is getting blitzed, reacted to, or dodged has a justified reason to be using their normal speed, that character should be allowed to have there calced speed applied, as they won't be moving slower in this instance to make us think it can't be applied.
At the same time, we can still ban their calced speed from being used if the character has a justified reason to NOT be using their normal speed. Such as, are they fatigued? Are they purposely moving slower? Did they lack a power-up? Did they have their stats altered? Reasons like this would still allow us to restrict calced speed from being used.
Hence forth, we make this rule case by case.
How We Can Restrict Calc-Stacking Under These New Conditions (PLEASE READ!!!)
On top of making this case by case, I also have a proposal on how to restrict the use of accepted calc stacking. PLEASE READ THIS, as this was said earlier but has only now been noticed.To prevent someone making chains of calc stacking when using a character's calced speed, we can give calc stacking exactly the same scrutiny we give Multipliers. We give parameters that need to be met for a character's calced speed to be applied, and then, we increase the burden of proof the higher someone tries calc stacking feats. @Agnaa summed this up in a great way higher above:
"How would you feel if the standards were essentially just "Give calc-stacked results the same scrutiny as Multipliers"? Substituting "It has to be a statement from a reliable source" with "There cannot be anything indicating they're slower (holding back, being fatigued, lacking a powerup, etc.)
Low increases won't require much scrutiny except for the character with the higher result actually being shown as stronger/faster. While higher increases (over 100x) will start requiring supporting feats on that level not achieved through calc-stacking."
For this reasoning, the solutions given and the parameters set to still safely keep it under control, calc stacking should be able to be accepted on a case by case basis.
And because this was frequently brought up, im going to hammer in my counters against the points brought up from the last thread from the disagreeing side.
Counter 1: "Calc Stacking Brings Up "Inflated" Results"
This has been the most brought up counter against my thread and why calc stacking is supposedly bad. This is an inherently flawed argument.
It is not your call to decide a result is inflated for a verse that could very well support the results being legit for them. Which is why a case by case suggestion logistically works better for this. If the verse supports it, it should be acceptable. If not, then we can reject it. This is not that hard.
Counter 2: "This proposal will, in effect, cause many of our profiles to get mass upgrades without restriction"
This is another point thats been brought up a lot, and while understandable, this is also something that isn't problematic. Or should not be problematic under these conditions.Giving Calc-Stacking the same exact scrutiny as we currently give Multipliers already puts a stop to this from happening. We already have the burden of proof of proving a character's true speed was used in the scenario that other characters blitzed, dodged, or reacted to them, and then have the requirement of proving the feats are not outliers for their series. After this, the rest is taken care of by the same process of how to treat multipliers. New feats with similar results without calc stacking would be needed to be gathered in order to legitimize higher results being legit. Not to mention, since these are calculations, verses on this site will already be required to be evaluated before they can be accepted here. No matter how popular or unpopular the given series is.
We have strong suggested parameters here to make acceptable calc stacking be kept on a leash without being abused. What more is needed to make this acceptable? And if more is supposedly needed, suggestions are helpful.
And at the bare bare minimum here, we would still need to actually change the calc stacking page regardless. As long as the rule specifies that "speeds can vary" is the reason we prohibit calc stacking, it is already alluding to the fact that non-varied speeds that don't change are able to be used. So either we completely change the reason why we restrict calced speeds to something else, or we make calc-stacking acceptable to some degree under what is said on it. It has to be one or the other.
