Trust and sourcing

Sources & Methodology

How we turn a changing public game board into useful answers without presenting guesses as official facts.

Direct answer

How should you read this site?

Treat rarity labels, move descriptions, cooldowns and published rates as official facts only when a page links them to the developer's public data. Treat mode ratings, best-Stand recommendations and keep-or-reroll verdicts as editorial analysis. Unknown values stay marked unknown.

UpdatedNovember 15, 2026EvidenceOfficial data + editorial analysis
Source order

Evidence hierarchy

02

Transparent calculations

Cumulative odds and time estimates are derived from published inputs. The formula and assumptions are shown beside the result.

03

Editorial recommendations

Mode fit, learning curve and keep-or-reroll advice interpret the documented kit. They are labeled as recommendations, not developer rankings.

04

Unknown or disputed values

If an exact chip chance, damage value or per-Stand weight is not published, the page says so instead of filling the gap.

Freshness

Dates, patches and corrections

Every volatile page should show

  • A visible “data checked” date
  • The source snapshot used
  • Relevant dated update notes
  • A distinction between current and historical rules

When the game changes

  • Update the underlying data first
  • Review every recommendation that depends on it
  • Do not change the date without reviewing the content
  • Keep unknowns explicit until verified
Editorial policy

What “best” means on this site

Stand Out has no official universal power ranking. “Best” always means “best fit for a stated goal under the documented kit and the assumptions shown on the page.” A PvP recommendation may be wrong for a beginner who only wants to finish the story, and rarity alone never proves combat strength.

Automation disclosure

How pages are produced

Structured data and calculations may be assembled with software, but claims are checked against the cited source set before publication. AI-assisted drafting is reviewed for factual consistency, unsupported certainty and source separation. The useful contribution of this site is the decision layer, tools and transparent assumptions—not mass-produced restatements of the Trello.

Corrections

A correction-friendly standard

Because the game is live, a page can become outdated after a patch. A correction should identify the affected claim, update the checked date only after review, and revise any tool or recommendation that used the old input. Until a public contact channel is added, the official source hub is the fastest way for readers to verify a volatile claim.