Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I dont know about you guys but I think we need a new rule about showings. Every character has high showings and low showings but it seems in debates that people either concentrate on a characters high showings and ignore the low showings, or they focus on a characters low showings and ignore the high.

Even if a character has high showings that doesnt mean they will be ale to fight like that all that all the time. Shouldnt there be a rule in which we can gather a characters showings and make some sort of average?

Lets say somebody gets these scores in a test 100, 50, 60, 85, 40, 65. The problem I see with debates is that because a character scores a hundred that means he gets a hundred all the time while ignoring the fact that he has quite a few mediocre ones. The logical things is to gather the scores and make an average. I dont know how we would do this in comic debates but in principle it seems like a good idea if we could create some sort of rule.

What do guys think?

You're insane it'll never work!

Approxamite mode scores would be much better IMO. And easier to use.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You're insane it'll never work!

Approxamite mode scores would be much better IMO. And easier to use.

Yeah it probably would what if a character has about the same amount of low showings and high showings and another character has lots of high showings...well anyway a character who has lots of high showings should be better than a character who has lots of high and low showings.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Yeah it probably would what if a character has about the same amount of low showings and high showings?

Then their horribly inconsistent and debates will get way out of hand. You can try averaging showings like that, of course, but people are most likely to just focus on the showings they want.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Then their horribly inconsistent and debates will get way out of hand. You can try averaging showings like that, of course, but people are most likely to just focus on the showings they want.

Thats the problem! There should be a way in which debates can be more objective. Obvoulsy people have their own intepretations of scans but there should be some rule which enables debators to look at all feats as a whole instead of just picking the ones they want.

The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Thats the problem! There should be a way in which debates can be more objective. Obvoulsy people have their own intepretations of scans but there should be some rule which enables debators to look at all feats as a whole instead of just picking the ones they want.

Impossible.

Originally posted by Apolloknight
Impossible.

Well ok heres a suggestion. Lets assume that both parties agree that a feat is legitimate, they could I dunno assign some sort of score depending on how good the feat was. Yeah you could have feat tiers.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

You can say that again.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Well ok heres a suggestion. Lets assume that both parties agree that a feat is legitimate, they could I dunno assign some sort of score depending on how good the feat was.



And how often does anybody agree on any scan? And if people do agree, they may still interpret it differently.

People will choose to accept and deny what they want, and make excuses for what they don't like, or pretend like they know a character so well, they can be inside their head and say stuff like "he didn't want to fight" or "he just didn't feel like fighting!"

I think personally we tend to look to deep into things, although interpreting scans can be a painstakingly frustrating process, I believe the writers actually intended to keep it simple.

This is what happened....nothing more, nothing less.

But we cant live with simple explanations, we have to break it down and get to the core, when the entire answer is simply on the page.

Now don't get me wrong, PIS/CIS still play a major role, but those words are too often tossed around when a feat doesn't suit the opposing sides view.

Meh, like I said, impossible.

Originally posted by Apolloknight
And how often does anybody agree on any scan? And if people do agree, they may still interpret it differently.

People will choose to accept and deny what they want, and make excuses for what they don't like, or pretend like they know a character so well, they can be inside their head and say stuff like "he didn't want to fight" or "he just didn't feel like fighting!"

I think personally we tend to look to deep into things, although interpreting scans can be a painstakingly frustrating process, I believe the writers actually intended to keep it simple.

This is what happened....nothing more, nothing less.

But we cant live with simple explanations, we have to break it down and get to the core, when the entire answer is simply on the page.

Now don't get me wrong, PIS/CIS still play a major role, but those words are too often tossed around when a feat doesn't suit the opposing sides view.

Meh, like I said, impossible.

well.....yeah.....I guess it could work if we would get people to agree because sometimes it does happen.

Originally posted by Alfheim
well.....yeah.....I guess it could work if we would get people to agree because sometimes it does happen.

Don't get me wrong, its a nice thought, even if we did somehow implement it, people will still disagree on the scores.

Originally posted by Apolloknight
Don't get me wrong, its a nice thought, even if we did somehow implement it, people will still disagree on the scores.

Yeah. I guess its one of those things that are nice in principle but are impossible to create....like world peace.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.



Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.
Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You can say that again.

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

Agreed. 131

Originally posted by Evil_Ash
Agreed. 131

You can say that again.


yes

Originally posted by Magee
The majority of people on the vs forum don't debate they just insult each other and express there bias views.

All part of the charm.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You're insane it'll never work!

Approxamite mode scores would be much better IMO. And easier to use.

Agreed.

Superman taking fifty supernovas doesn't average well with getting knocked out by a gas station explosion.

Likewise, the Hulk wading through Lava and breaking Colossus' arms doesn't average well with getting knocked out by Captain America.

True averages aren't a very good measure, as outlying scores, or showings in this case, can heavily skew the results.

A mode, as mentioned, would be far more effective, though, also as mentioned, people are just gonna use the showings they want and ignore the others anyways.

The nature of comics is that it's an inherently subjective medium as it pertains to power levels. Any "rule" we make concerning power levels is just as arbitrary as any other, and is easily overruled by someone who simply says "well, I disagree, and here's why..."

So closing.