• 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.

The differences between 3A and low 2C

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gargoyle_1

Gargoyle_1

Messages
2,323
Reaction score
84
As pointed out by the "Why is bomberman only 3A" thread. Mamy of the pages point to feats such as creating a universe as 3A(Mundus, One Being, Aesir) while others point to it being a low 2C(Tabuu and master hand) even have The Living Tribunal1 trying to find and suggest a change.


So tell me, what are the differences between low 2C and 3A in your mind?
 
3-A is creating a universe in already established space-time.

Low 2-C is creating a universe with it's own space-time.
 
We do not have the time to search through the wiki right now, and in addition, as you mentioned, there is a possible revision project planned in a while, so it would likely be a wasted effort.
 
It's something we happen to come across and clean up, with the amount of profiles it would be hard to revise them all. And it's already been established by the way.
 
It's not just that we would waste time, possibly weeks with said revision and the editing of all profiles, but that it would also break the perfect and functional equilibrium we currently have between 3-A, High 3-A and Low 2-C.

Should there be effectively no difference between Universal and Universal+, then it becomes impossible to determine High 3-A, and differentiate between universes of different sizes, and it will also lead to people trying to calculate Multiverse Busting and 2-B feats based on physical size, and to people arguing that the destruction of a single universe of infinite size is in fact a 2-A feat, equal to the destruction of infinite space-times, due to the reason that there will no longer be a distinction between Physical Matter of a universe and its space-time.

In short, all it will accomplish is wasting everyone's times, and destruction a functional system that has held up logically for years, and leading to a new flooding of inaccurate ratings, abuses, double standards and inconsistencies.

Plus, TLT1 himself has made it clear that he is against our entire Tiering System on principle of it not matching real life science, which leaves me baffled that anyone would ever listen to what he has to say. His entire argument revolves around something which isn't what out Tiering System is about, a Tiering System he is also 100% against due to reasons that also have nothing to do with it.

Furthermore, most of the people that support the revision do so because they want 2-C Dragon Ball Super, and nothing more.
 
Gotta say the same as Dark and Prom. Getting tired of all these "We don't need to discuss this tiering because a revision is coming".-
 
Worth pointing out that Ventus, Sera, CrossverseCrisis and The Everlasting are all also firmly against it.
 
In addition, messing with our Tiering System without an extremely good reason is explicitly against our rules and is worthy of an immediate and permanent ban.

This should not go through since it would send the Wiki into chaos as there would be no distinction between 3-D power and higher-dimensional power.
 
@AnonyouXOtakuX

Regardless, we cannot stoke flames of war amongst the fanbases so we have to avoid making statements like that.
 
i know, i've had a handfull with a lot of people. in any case, back to my first question, what is the point in making goku 2-C?
 
@AnonymouXOtakuX

Because people like to feel superior by rubbing their favorite character's power level in everyone's faces (I know I do some times).
 
@Reppu I agree. We all love to do that. But anyway let's continue this on a message wall or something else.
 
Well I believe this discussion would be better off without the personal attacks and accusations.

One with these whole "this is meant just to wank Dragon Ball" claims, the reality is that's close to the opposite of what would come of the revision.

If Goku destroys space-time or busts a timeline, with the current system he'd be rated as having 2 degrees of infinite power. With the proposed system, he will be rated as literally beyond infinitely less. If anything, such a change would potentially majorly downgrade Dragon Ball.

I mean, if we're going to personally attack others, make accusations and villify a fanbase to dismiss arguments. Saying that those for this change are in it just to wank Dragon Ball. Then one could easily just say people against this are Saint Seiya fanboys who want the characters to stay at 2 degrees of infinite power. But such a thing is extremely uncalled for, unproductive and unrelated to the discussion at hand.

Of course scientific accuracy isn't everything in this site. That fact is extremely obvious. However it does mean something, which is why we make calcs and have energy charts in the first place. If this revision is more scientifically accurate, I believe it is worth at least some small consideration.

Also LT is more than free to correct me if I misinterpreted our PMs. But from the talks we had, he seems to be fine with composite hiearchies, layers/cardinals of infinity, higher realms, etc. that are essential to our Tiering System and is fine with people such as Demonbane's ratings.

What he isn't a fan of is the idea of a character getting rated to massive extents despite showing nowhere close to that power just cause they were stated to be higher dimensional. An belief Matthew seems to also agree with, given that he vouched for this guy to not be rated as High 2-A or these guys to not be rated as Tier 1 despite being said to be higher dimensional.

Given the various seemingly sensical arguments from both sides and my lack of complete knowledge on the matter, I am not supporting or opposing the change. I am simply giving some of my opinions and speaking against some of the personal attacks and falsehoods about it that I perceive. Whatever ultimate decision staff comes to I am completely fine with. Thank you.
 
It doesn't matter if Low 2-C continues to be, or ceases to be two degrees of infinity beyond 3-A, what it matters is that I've seen this "revision" being brought up numerous times in relation to Dragon Ball characters, with people saying that it will be what "finally makes Beerus / Goku 2-C".

So yes, a bunch of the people I've seen are supporting it for the sake of upgrading Dragon Ball.

I also haven't seen TheLivingTribunal1 say a single word in favor of our Higher-Dimensions Based Tiering System once, and one time I spoken to him he said he would prefer it be replaced with a system based on Infinity Cardinals.

Nobody ever brought up Saint Seiya in relation to this ever, but I have seen this being brought up to Dragon Ball numerous times already.

Saying that scientific knowledge matters because of calcs is one thing, saying that physics matters to something that is build upon fictional projective geometry isn't. It is no secre to anyone with minimal understanding of Superstring Theory that Higher-Dimensional in real life =/= in fiction. The former are considered to be present only in a plank-length, and don't work as literal higher realms / universes like they're depicted in fiction.

The problems related to this revision don't even have anything to do with DBS, or this or that Verse, but with how they will completely ruin and crumble our Tiering System, and break a found equilibrium between 3-A, High 3-A and Low 2-C, which will lead to double standards, abuses, wanks and utter nonsense appearing. People will start treating all Infinite-sized locations as being 2-A, and consider busting a single infinite universe as > busting infinite finite universes.

And we don't want that, do we? We want this wikia to remain logical, unbiased and reasonable, unplagued by fanboys of any kind and double standards, and maintained by a sound Tiering System that has proven to work over the years and be continuously reliable.
 
I agree with Mat and strongly oppose the revision. The distinction between 3-A, high 3-A and low 2-C is well functional at the moment. The change would create unnecessary mess and mass confusion among casual users like me.
 
I'm not saying some people aren't fixiated on getting a Tier 2 Goku. But what I mean is dismissing this based upon accusing people of only wanting to wank Goku, is both uncalled for and is the exact opposite of what would come from this change. When in reality an accusation of this being an attempt to wank current Tier 2s is far more in line with the actual implications of this change. Not that I would be actually be accusing anyone of doing so or dismiss their argument based on that.

And again LT can correct me if I am wrong, but based upon the way we have talked he does not seem entirely opposed to all aspects of the Tiering System. And in regards to higher dimensions, holds opinions that you yourself seem to agree with.

However I do see the potential issue between busting an infinite universe = busting infinite universes. Along with other potential concerns with this. Which is why as I said I am neither entirely supporting nor opposing the revision for now.
 
im neutral on the revision, considering im ok with the Tiering System, i'd rather not change it as it would really make a huge mess and confusion, but if it were to change i'd still be cool with it
 
to everyone: plz dont talk about a revision as of now, i still have to sort a few things out first, when I am done, we can get started, but I am not giving any deadline for this yet
 
Well, I think that Matthew makes some good points, but it might be best to close this thread, given the heated discussion.
 
There seems to be some confusion regarding the matter, so allow me to clarify:

As things stand, there will be no revision of the Tiering System.

I agree with most of the points made by Matthew.


To summarize:

The currently existing system, specifically the 3-A/Low 2-C distinction is both functional and well-understood by most members. Revising it would be cumbersome, since it would require everyone to re-learn from scratch the means to distinguish between the two Tiers. I'll have to see the proposed change to take an incontrovertible stance, but unless there is convincing proof that the current system is hopelessly inaccurate, I am leaning towards keeping the current system.

Arguing that our tiering system is not scientifically accurate is a rather superfluous argument, given that it has been well established that there are already multiple assumptions regarding the system, none of which occur in real life, and are not scientifically accurate, such as the assumptions made regarding the specification of Multi-Solar System level, Multi-Galaxy level, etcetera.

It has been stated, multiple times, and is consensus, that with the tiering system, we are creating categories/tiers on the basis of commonly observed patterns in fiction, and attempting to standardize them by assimilating current scientific theories.

The 3-A/Low 2-C distinction is one such standardization. There are fictional instances where the mass of a universe has been destroyed, without the destruction of its space-time continuum, hence our tiering system's current distinction is required to evaluate such scenarios.

Hell, the entire M-Theory is just that; a theory. It's not scientifically accurate by any stretch, merely scientifically probable. There is absolutely no scientific accuracy regarding Tier 1 (the Outerverse level), and the less said about Tier 0 the better.

I see no reason to throw the wiki into chaos needlessly, and introduce a possible tier revision on the premise of speculative/theoretical scientific accuracy alone.
 
I think that Kavpeny makes sense. We talked about it in private earlier.
 
I didn't really see it as getting heated, however, this thread should be closed, partially glad I brought this up for some clarification.
 
It might still be an idea to close this in order to avoid conflict, yes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Mbpoops
  • Locked
How emanators fooled the internet (hsr emanator downgrade) (mods needed)
13 14 15
Replies
587
Views
31K
Mbpoops
Mbpoops
Igneel
Why is Chaos not low 2C?
Replies
6
Views
955
Demon_Lord18
Demon_Lord18
Agnaa
  • Locked
Differences in Power in 2-A and Above
Replies
37
Views
6K
Antvasima
Antvasima
ArachDusa
What's the difference between Low 2-C and 2-C?
Replies
6
Views
1K
StrymULTRA
StrymULTRA
The_2nd_Existential_Seed
The commoners thread: Discussing the Staff Threads concerning "Logic Manipulation" and the Changes to the Tiering System
Replies
18
Views
2K
FriendOfTheTeaParty
FriendOfTheTeaParty
Back
Top