Originally posted by Battlehammer
maybe we should have better guide lines for tiers.I mean it seems like we just make it up depending from character to character which seems wrong.
Maybe we should have a sort of point system
In a word, no. Any system that tries to create a strictly objective criteria will fall on its face because of exceptions to rules and/or the vast amount of minutia we'd have to process and apply in order to maintain the system. The best way to determine a tier is to look at who is in it, or who is among the tier's "defining" characters (Iron Man, Spider-Man, Surfer, etc.). That isn't going to change.
Think of it like this: try to come up with a point system for the vs. forum to determine winners. See the problem? It's much the same here.
I appreciate the thought, but it wouldn't work.
Originally posted by Raoul
Tactical genius is a factor now? f*ck.
😂
Should we just ignore it though? Think of it as a tiebreaker for "on the border" characters if it makes it easier for you to stomach.
Originally posted by DigiShould we just ignore it though? Think of it as a tiebreaker for "on the border" characters if it makes it easier for you to stomach.
If it's just a tie breaker,then why is Adam several tiers above where he should be....because no way is he high or mid based on a rocket pack and a gun.
Originally posted by Martian_mind
If it's just a tie breaker,then why is Adam several tiers above where he should be....because no way is he high or mid based on a rocket pack and a gun.
I was never part of the Strange discussion. I know very little about him. I was explaining the "prep/intelligence" thing because it came up in relation to him, but wasn't using that to place a vote for or against his placement. Others can discuss him and vote if they want.
Others for or against Kang?