Calculations: Priority and Necessity

[Assaltwaffle]

This may need to be moved into the calc group forum, but this is a general issue that I have noticed that could use input.

As many of you know, calculations are instrumental to the site. We need them to give numerous characters their statistics and base many verses off their results. That said, calcs take awhile and the vast majority of the calc members have other more pressing matters in real life or within other communities. The current calc group has to constantly work to both evaluate and do calcs that could change the course and ranking of a verse. That said, we DON'T need to be given requests or evaluations for feats that are obviously below the power curve of the verse.

There isn't much worse of a feeling than spending upwards of an hour on a calc just to realize that the character has a better feat that has already been calced. I know it is cool to see how powerful feats are, but if they can't, or are unlikely to, change a character's stats, they shouldn't be a focus.

At the moment the only way to say that a calc is necessary is to say that the calcs are "needed" or something of the like. But sadly sometimes calcs are bumped or pushed ad infinitum which leads to more important calcs being overlooked or just outright forgotten. Calcs that are needed for a verse's revision should come before all else, and calcs that can give a rating to a character should come before un-needed, supportive, or recreational calcs.

This doesn't only include Calc Requests; it extends to Evaluations as well. Many calcs in the evaluation thread are either very detailed, incorrect and in need of revision, or incoherent. Some evaluations can take as long as, if not longer than, outright calc requests (which, once again, can take an hour or more depending on length and complexity).

While this may not affect the vast majority of members, the calc group bears a heavy burden with the number of calcs rolling in on the daily. While I understand the frustration of not having your feat calced or calc evaluated, the group's time and expertise only extends so far. We don't need to have the clutter of unnecessary calcs as well.

TLDR: The Calc Request and Evaluation threads do not need the extra clutter of calcs that will not lead to upgrades or revisions.

 

[Amelia_Lonelyheart]

I completely and utterly agree.

People forget that calcs take time and effort to make sure it's right, readable, comprehensive and accurate. I get that some people may want to calc every single instance of a character reacting to gunfire or destroying mountains, but that isn't practical, not only that but it's stressful. We're people, not machines.

I also feel like people who make requests should make more of an effort to detail the feat in question, instead of posting links to some random manga site and expecting others to know the context.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

This, so much this. Ive been needing calcs done for Angel Beats for about two months now and theyre constantly overshadowed and burried under bit feats that 90% of the time arent even added to the pages...

 

[Monarch_Laciel]

I agree, but there is the problem of sometime not knowing whether or not a calc is below the power curve of the verse. Obviously there are certain feats which are very clearly below, but some are more difficult to tell at a glance.

Though I'm not a calc group, so I don't know if you guys just develop and eye for this kind of thing.

 

[Arigarmy]

I agree, but there is the problem of sometime not knowing whether or not a calc is below the power curve of the verse. Obviously there are certain feats which are below, but some are more difficult to tell at a glance.

Yeah, I'm up with this. I can see where in instances you can tell the situation, but in most I've seen, people don't know or aren't aware of how strong something is. You can never be too sure if you think it has potential. I think what's being said here can only apply to things you can eyeball at and say "Yeah this is weak".

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I completely agree with the OP, and both Darkanine and Weekly.

 

[KinkiestSins]

I have three calcs I posted. One of which got approved, the other two have no comments to my knowledge.

I am honestly trying to learn more about calcing in general and I find it frustrating from my perspective that my calcs I make arent being followed through.

In favor for things I can answer myself

City sized explosion? City level.

Destroying a skyscraper? Large Building Level

I just want constructive criticism on calcs on verses without them and not have to trek through like, 20 other requests.

/rant over.

I agree btw with op, darkanine and weekly btw since i think change is needed.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree about this, and am also worried about the calc group, as it is so important for the site to work properly.

Perhaps we should add a mention of this to the initial posts of the request and evaluation threads?

In addition, I have noticed that the discussions between calc group members when evaluating calculation blogs is not running smoothly, as they do not receive notifications for replies to their posts. As such, I am considering if it might be a good idea to ask our members to start posting calculations in either the calc group forum, or another new forum instead. However, that is better evaluated in a separate thread by the staff alone.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I think it is important for people to realize that Calculators are normal people, with lives, interests and occupations other than calculating.

ViviOrtonier / ClassicGameGuys / ProtoDude retire calculating at the OBD because he couldn't handle the sheer number of requests that kept being flooded at him.

 

[Arigarmy]

I think it is important for people to realize that Calculators are normal people, with lives, interests and occupations other than calculating.

That's more an issue of over-requesting, not being asked to do calcs that do nothing at all.

 

[Assaltwaffle]

@ Ant

I am 100% for discussing evaluations on the calc group forum.

Maybe we can establish a format for calcs similar to how our pages have their standard format? That alongside filtering priority and unnecessary calcs will greatly speed up proficency and effectiveness.

We are a growing Wiki. As we grow we need to improve our methods our else we will not be able to accommodate that growing population. Our last addition of calc group members helped, but we have now seen that things still aren't getting done and throwing more people at the problem isn't the answer.

 

[Antvasima]

@Assaltwaffle

I think that a standard format page for calculations seems like a good idea.

However, somebody would have to write the page, and Lina (who used to handle such tasks), just sent me a PM that his account has been disabled globally, likely by request of himself.

 

[Golden_Void]

I think the system should be modified IMO.

I think there should be something like a 3 tier system.

Tier 1- Verse dependent, immediate and important calcs that affects the standing of the majority or a good portion of a verse (e.g Yhwach elevating the Vandenreich, Soul Society size, a good bit of the Pain Arc)

Tier 2- Calcs that affect a portion of the top and mid tiers of a verse, or ask for the revision of a particular statistic (ex. speed), that scales to a few characters.

Tier 3- Affects a single character, or otherwise doesn't contribute in a significant way to any standing pages at all.

Then whoever is posting just drops a 1,2, or 3 next to their link(s), and calculations get evaluated accordingly.

Then there's the people that make incomplete calc blogs (leaving info out, not posting feat links/scans or linking to a manga site (ugh), using some foreign concepts which aren't explained), which takes time from my evaluation, and then I need to wait for them to reply (which if they aren't online for the remainder of the day, that's a good way to get pushed down the list).

As it stands, we've had Calc Request thread 6 since 8/24, and Calc Eval 3 since 9/17

Request: 276 - the first 6 posts = 270 posts

Evaluation: 229-1 = 228 posts

Today inclusive (and assuming all posts are a request), it's been 39 days since the creation of the request thread, meaning there's about 6.9 requests per day.

For the eval thread, its been 15 days since its creation, meaning we get about 15.2 evals per day, which is over twice as much requests as we get daily, and I'm almost certain that it's due to old eval requests piling up, and people not prioritizing evaluations first, given the disproportionate number.

Maybe if we divide the calc team up into people who only do evaluations, people who only do requests, and calc members who are most efficient in their calcs can do both, if the other members aren't overwhelmed with the current volume.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I think that this is rather convoluted and hard to follow. Just listing if the calc is important or not next to it, explaining why it should be calcec, etc. would be good.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Stop derailing this thread. Take this discussion elsewhere if you wish.

 

[Antvasima]

I think that UMR makes sense, although it should be noted that most of the posts in the calculation threads are not requests.

Also, I am extremely overworked from constantly attempting to take care of this community, so I would appreciate help with writing additions to the standard text for the initial posts of the calculation evaluations thread.

@LordXcano

Please avoid derailing this thread. It is important.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

@Assaltwaffle

Do you think you can help Antvasima is that, since you made the thread and proposed the changes?

 

[Ryukama]

With all due respect I kinda agree with Xcano. Though I also agree this thread shouldn't get derailed.

Anyways I'm with everyone else that organization in regards to dealing with calcs would be greatly beneficial. And to me Rice's method is a pretty solid one. Implementing it in some way would be a good idea.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, we need somebody to write a summary text for Assaltwaffle initial suggestion, preferably a standard format for calculations instruction page, and likely UMR's suggestion as well.

 

[Assaltwaffle]

I don't want to overwork Ant. I would gladly work alongside admins and calc members to make a standard format for both requests and the calculations themselves, that said.

 

[Antvasima]

For the record, I also think that LordXcano makes sense, but this is the wrong place to have the discussion.

 

[Antvasima]

@Assaltwaffle

Thank you for the assistance.

 

[Golden_Void]

What about designating some members to either requests or evals?

 

[Antvasima]

I think that it seems better to let them do as they wish, but to suggest prioritising evaluations in general, as these usually take less time.

 

[Assaltwaffle]

I agree with some sort of tiering of request/evaluation importance and a standard calc format, but I don't agree with putting calcers on teams. We are all on at different times and have different skills. Some of the members are fine with pixel scaling planet busts, others are good at more statement-based energy calculations (and some are good at pretty much anything handed to them).

Dividing the group feels like it is a step in the wrong direction.

 

[Antvasima]

I agree with Assaltwaffle.

 

[Assaltwaffle]

So, in regards to a standard format and priority tiering, where do we go from here? We agree something needs to be done, but rushing into such a large change would be inadvisable. Who should design and carry out this implementation? I don't know much about the inner workings of the Wiki staff since I am just a calc member, so I am unsure of who would need to put input into this and how to effectively put it into place.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, you could create a thread in the calc group forum regarding the standard format page, and invite all of the current members to participate.

The priority tiering simply needs somebody to write a summary of the new rules that can be added to the first posts of the calculation request and calculation evaluations threads.

You can mention text suggestions here.

 

[Assaltwaffle]

I have created the format page.

https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/990242

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you. Now you can invite all of the active calc group members to participate in the discussion for how the standard format page should be written.

 

[Assaltwaffle]

Done. I will start posting ideas for the priority system and format page tomorrow. I have stayed up far too late as is. Good luck discussing if anything occurs while I am gone.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thanks again for the help.

 

[Kaltias]

I generally agree, but the problem is that as Monarch pointed out, it's difficult to realize the extent of a feat just eyeballing it.

For example, this feat is 8-B, while this feat is 8-A to Low 7-C.

Both are from the same verse, and the second one was calced to scale weaker characters, because it doesn't look impressive. I obviously agree that calcing every single time that a character punches a hole in a wall isn't important, but sometimes it's just hard to determine if a feat is below the average

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I think that the intention is to at least attempt to use some measure of common sense.

 

[Kaltias]

Yes, which is why I said that calculating the feats that are clearly low ends isn't important (Goku catching a bullet, for example). It's just that more often than not it isn't that obvious

 

[Amelia_Lonelyheart]

Yeah, like Ant said. There's no problems if someone requested a feat that looks to be on the same general level of another one, maybe slightly lower or higher. It becomes an issue when someone requests a calc of, say, Superman destroying a building when he has feats many times higher.

 

[Kaltias]

Yes, I agree with this. I just meant that there is always that feat that looks impressive but is weak (surviving the core of the Sun is a classic example) and that feat that looks unimpressive but is OP (Surface busting yielding 5-A in Spore, for example)

That's the main reason why sometimes it isn't that obvious

 

[Imaginym]

I'm curious. Since we're discussing how some things aren't worth calc-ing when they're below the usual power level for a character, group of characters, or a setting....

What about Lifting Strength calcs for characters with higher AP/SS? In theory, lifting strength can be a relevant stat in a VsBattle, but for many characters, it can easily end up at Unknown despite the presence of feats for it. Is giving a solid LS value to a character with Unknown in it not technically an upgrade?

I will admit though, I can easily imagine that, often times, LS feats may not influence character scaling much, if at all, so I can see why this would be neglected on the basis of being a low priority calc.

Apologies if this is off-topic.

 

[Antvasima]

It is probably too off-topic, yes. Sorry.

 

[FanofRPGs]

^

Keep in mind our wiki's primary focus is that we index the statistics of characters, and not list who they may win or lose to in a thread, so lifting strength is relevant in that it is still information

Also I agree in that a lot of feats being calced are obvious low ends. However, calculations are unpredictable and may much larger results than expected, so we should still have an open mind. I think that if a feat is more than two tiers or speed-levels or the like above/below what is normally seen on his key, the feat should not be posted on the request thread, rather done by the user himself or PM'd to a willing calc staff member.