• 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.

"Lower" ratings (Staff Only)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Armorchompy said:

Lower​

Similarly to the "Higher" term, "Lower" should be used to denote a character's weapons, techniques, or attributes that are significantly weaker than their base level, but still within the same tier.


This work?
Click to expand...
It seems fine to me at least, but it is best if we receive some more staff input first.
 
So does somebody here have the willingness and ability to properly apply this? I am very overworked at the moment.
 
Armorchompy said:

Lower​

Similarly to the "Higher" term, "Lower" should be used to denote a character's weapons, techniques, or attributes that are significantly weaker than their base level, but still within the same tier.


This work?
Click to expand...
This is kinda missing out on the second part of the definition for Higher. Is that intentional?

Also, I agree with AKM that characters getting weaker over the course of a fight is just stamina.
 
AKM disagreed with translating the second part of Higher to this since it promoted downscaling. Personally I don't really have an opinion.
 
I find it hard to understand why using the second part would promote downscaling. I thought "promoting downscaling" would just be an issue that comes with creating a "lower" keyword in the first place.

And without that second part the new keyword becomes almost meaningless. It can only be used when we know that it's in the same tier, so only stated multipliers that reduce a stat would be allowed to be used, which seems so niche that it'd be pointless.
 
Agnaa said:
I thought "promoting downscaling" would just be an issue that comes with creating a "lower" keyword in the first place.
Click to expand...
That's right.

Agnaa said:
so only stated multipliers that reduce a stat would be allowed to be used, which seems so niche that it'd be pointless.
Click to expand...
I mean, it still is kind of like that. I asked for examples where this could be correctly used and not even half a dozen popped up. It's only meant for transformations and stuff that reduces a stat.
 
Who cares if it's niche? It's a way to cover a blind spot that our pages currently have. There is no easy way to express a form being weaker but still comparable right now, and it's not like it's gonna do any harm.

Plus it's not true that just multipliers would be allowed. First off, calculated feats also would (Say a character has 10^6 J SS but his gun outputs 9x10^4 J, that would be expressed as something like "9-B physically, lower with guns". Not only that but something that is still clearly relative to a character would still qualify, like a form or move that's stated to be weaker than average but is still used to harm enemies that scale to the feat.
 
Yeah I guess that wouldn't be too uncommon then.
 
Like I said before, some pages already have this. We even tried to put it on an old Dalek revision before I forgot to include it. It's definitely not uncommon.
 
Last edited:
So is it fine if we apply this revision then, and if so, how should we word it?
 
Since it seems like the second part was removed due to a misunderstanding, something along the lines of Armor's wording with the second part included sounds fine.
 
Okay. Thank you for the replies.

Is some experienced staff member willing to apply the change then, or should we wait a bit further in order to make certain?
 
Last edited:
Bump

Ant could you just paste the text under the "higher" section? It doesn't seem like anyone's interested in doing that and it shouldn't take much time
 
I am tired and distracted, but will briefly unlock the page for you, so you can handle it. Tell me here when you are done.
 
Thank you. Is there anything left to do here, or should we close this thread?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Why can't characters be assigned a 5-C tier without calculations?
Replies
32
Views
3K
Antvasima
Antvasima
ArachDusa
Would destroying Jupiter be a 5-A+ feat?
Replies
1
Views
923
KLOL506
KLOL506
LordGriffin1000
  • Locked
Human Statistics Scaling Standards in Fiction (Staff Only)
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
LordGriffin1000
LordGriffin1000
Furudo_Erika
Can there be multiple degrees of Type 5 Acausality?
Replies
24
Views
2K
KLOL506
KLOL506
Can Characters have a certain level of Attack Potency just from Lifting Strength?
Replies
2
Views
1K
Spilxson2
Back
Top