Minor Wasp Downgrade

[LordTracer]

Pretty simple changes here, Janet seems to have been forgotten during the 5-A/4-B revisions, and her stingers should be downgraded to 5-A due to scaling to Thor on Earth.

Also, it’s implied here and here that she can control the power of her stingers, so their AP should probably be something like ‘Varies, up to 5-A.’

 

[Confluctor]

She could hurt dss too with her stingers, so likely or possibly 4B should be added to her profile imo

 

[LordTracer]

I actually thought about that (she could also harm Challenger, who scales to enraged Hulk), but I didn’t know if it should be ‘up to 4-B’ or ‘up to 5-A, possibly 4-B.’

 

[Confluctor]

up to 5-A, possibly 4-B

Personally I think this is more fitting

 

[The_Impress]

I mean... the 4-B could just be an outlier.

In general iirc aren't her stingers duraneg? Bio-electric or whatever

 

[Confluctor]

Actually we could do something like this "5A to 4B with Stingers". That would be more fitting now that I think about it

 

[LordTracer]

I mean... the 4-B could just be an outlier.

In general iirc aren't her stingers duraneg? Bio-electric or whatever

That is also a possibility, but she’s damaged 4-Bs more than once (Sentry, on two different occasions, as well as Challenger and Ultron Pym).

I don’t think so, since her blasts did draw blood from The Controller’s eyes and they also burned Sentry’s skin off.

 

[The_Impress]

That is also a possibility, but she’s damaged 4-Bs more than once (Sentry, on two different occasions, as well as Challenger and Ultron Pym).

Sentry can be 5-A, and I genuinely don't think Pymtron is a 4-B (and like, we don't list him so). Challenger's the only legitimate 4-B feat, and that could be an outlier.

I don’t think so, since her blasts did draw blood from The Controller’s eyes and they also burned Sentry’s skin off.

I mean this could just be wonky writing outliers given her sheer number of appearances, most of the time I do remember them working like duraneg and I do remember their statements sounding that way.

 

[LordTracer]

Sentry can be 5-A, and I genuinely don't think Pymtron is a 4-B (and like, we don't list him so). Challenger's the only legitimate 4-B feat, and that could be an outlier.

We have the Ultronbuster, which was used against Ultron Pym, at ‘5-A, possibly 4-B.’ And ik Sentry can also be 5-A, haven’t we put the majority of people that fight him at ‘5-A, possibly 4-B’? I am fine with her just being ‘up to 5-A’ though.

I mean this could just be wonky writing outliers given her sheer number of appearances, most of the time I do remember them working like duraneg and I do remember their statements sounding that way.

Mmm, but there’s also her stating that she could splatter the X-Men with her stingers and Beetle and Hank could survive being hit by her stingers, so them being entirely dura neg with no actual force seems kinda strange.

 

[Confluctor]

Sentry can be 5-A, and I genuinely don't think Pymtron is a 4-B

Death Seed Sentry was 4B

 

[The_Impress]

haven’t we put the majority of people that fight him at ‘5-A, possibly 4-B’? I am fine with her just being ‘up to 5-A’ though.

No? I know we have put Anti-Man as that, but that was because Sentry states Anti-Man was the strongest thing he ever fought.

..can you actually show me which other files do that? That's a TERRIBLE thing to have on files.

Mmm, but there’s also her stating that she could splatter the X-Men with her stingers

This is a dumb hyperbolic statement.

and Beetle and Hank could survive being hit by her stingers, so them being entirely dura neg with no actual force seems kinda strange.

...relevance?

I am honestly kinda having a hard time believing right now that 4-B Wasp isn't wanked to shit, these just sound like outliers you're masking under a Variable tier.

 

[LordTracer]

No? I know we have put Anti-Man as that, but that was because Sentry states Anti-Man was the strongest thing he ever fought.

..can you actually show me which other files do that? That's a TERRIBLE thing to have on files.

Binary.

...relevance?

If it’s dura neg, how would they be able to just tank it?

I am honestly kinda having a hard time believing right now that 4-B Wasp isn't wanked to shit, these just sound like outliers you're masking under a Variable tier.

I mean, I literally said I was fine with her just being ‘up to 5-A.’

 

[The_Impress]

Binary.

Meh, Binary has feats with Thanos

If it’s dura neg, how would they be able to just tank it?

It's bioelectricity right? The notion from what I understand was, it doesn't interact with conventional durability at all, so it's even damage regardless what the opponent's durability is. In hindsight I think this is moreso bypassing conventional durability than negating it.

I mean, I literally said I was fine with her just being ‘up to 5-A.’

...Tracer currently if you note, you're the guy arguing FOR 4-B Wasp. If you're wanting to just exclude the 4-B rating you wouldn't be arguing against my assertions, so doesn't really.. matter what your initial proposals were.

 

[LordTracer]

It's bioelectricity right? The notion from what I understand was, it doesn't interact with conventional durability at all, so it's even damage regardless what the opponent's durability is. In hindsight I think this is moreso bypassing conventional durability than negating it.

Okay, but again, if Beetle and Hank can straight up tank the stingers and not take damage from them… then how is it bypassing their durability?

...Tracer currently if you note, you're the guy arguing FOR 4-B Wasp. If you're wanting to just exclude the 4-B rating you wouldn't be arguing against my assertions, so doesn't really.. matter what your initial proposals were.

I though I made it pretty clear that I wasn’t sure if she should just be ‘up to 5-A’ or ‘up to 5-A, possibly 4-B.’ Note how I never once said that she 100% should be a 4-B. I was mainly questioning the notion of just going “lol outlier”

 

[The_Impress]

Okay, but again, if Beetle and Hank can straight up tank the stingers and not take damage from them… then how is it bypassing their durability?

Because it isn't interacting with their durability, Beetle and Hank should likely have resistances for it.

I though I made it pretty clear that I wasn’t sure if she should just be ‘up to 5-A’ or ‘up to 5-A, possibly 4-B.’ Note how I never once said that she 100% should be a 4-B.

...and I am arguing against the 4-B?

???

 

[LordTracer]

Because it isn't interacting with their durability

How is this and this not interacting with their durability, especially when it’s drawn to show an impact? Plus the aforementioned showings of her stingers drawing blood from Controller and burning off Sentry’s skin, which also imply that it doesn’t bypass durability.

...and I am arguing against the 4-B?

???

Your argument is just “outlier lol” which, as I just said, is what I’m questioning.

Whatever, it’s too late at night for this. My original proposal was ‘up to 5-A,’ that’s what I’m going with.

 

[The_Impress]

How is this

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Pym have a forcefield on in that fight?

and this not interacting with their durability, especially when it’s drawn to show an impact?

...Miles' Venom Blast show impacts too, Tracer, they're also duraneg. In general I just... don't get this point at all.

Plus the aforementioned showings of her stingers drawing blood from Controller and burning off Sentry’s skin, which also imply that it doesn’t bypass durability.

I don't think you should invalidate your questionable 4-B feats further, as a debate tactic for the future lol.

Your argument is just “outlier lol” which, as I just said, is what I’m questioning.

To favour the 4-B? Dude I'm not 5, if you're proposing something at least stick to it.

Whatever, it’s too late at night for this. My original proposal was ‘up to 5-A,’ that’s what I’m going with.

I mean we can just continue this tomorrow but ok

 

[LordTracer]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Pym have a forcefield on in that fight?

You’re the one that added that scan to his page, you tell me

I don't think you should invalidate your questionable 4-B feats further, as a debate tactic for the future lol.

This doesn’t relate to the point I was making at all, and I already said I’m going with just 5-A so like-

To favour the 4-B? Dude I'm not 5, if you're proposing something at least stick to it.

I have made it abudantly clear that I was neutral whether it’s 5-A or 5-A, possibly 4-B, can you not act like I’m gunning for straight 4-B, especially after I literally just said that I’m going with 5-A-

 

[The_Impress]

You’re the one that added that scan to his page, you tell me

It was forcefield to my knowledge, yeah.

This doesn’t relate to the point I was making at all

The point is invalidated because the feat is already questionable.

I have made it abudantly clear that I was neutral whether it’s 5-A or 5-A, possibly 4-B, can you not act like I’m gunning for straight 4-B, especially after I literally just said that I’m going with 5-A-

...Firstly calm down, dude, nothing said so far should get this response.

 

[LordTracer]

The point is invalidated because the feat is already questionable.

Mmmm, no. That’s not how it works. The Sentry feat being questionably 4-B does not invalidate the fact that she burnt his skin off, that’s completely illogical. Also the Controller feat wasn’t even considered as possibly 4-B, so…

 

[The_Impress]

Mmmm, no. That’s not how it works. The Sentry feat being questionably 4-B does not invalidate the fact that she burnt his skin off, that’s completely illogical. Also the Controller feat wasn’t even considered as possibly 4-B, so…

Sentry feat is questionable because the core concept of Wasp harming a 4-B is being questioned. Them not even getting the mechanics of its interaction right is further insinuating they didn't research them.

That's the logic.

 

[LordTracer]

But as you said yourself, Sentry can be a 5-A, so that already ruins the premise of your idea. Also the idea that one thing is wrong, therefore everything else is wrong, is extremely faulty (and an association fallacy).

Also Controller-

 

[The_Impress]

But as you said yourself, Sentry can be a 5-A

Confluctor states it's the 4-B Sentry

Also the idea that one thing is wrong, therefore everything else is wrong, is extremely faulty (and an association fallacy).

The primary idea of the logic is centered around the writer not knowing the capability of the Wasp's stinger as a whole, there aren't two different evidences being obtained here, it's that both the features lead to the idea that the writer has a bad understanding of the mechanic and thus the feat shouldn't be used altogether, as these properties aren't consistent.

So no, not an association fallacy, there is no B, both the scenarios as you imply, work as evidence to illustrate the uneducated description of the power.

 

[LordTracer]

You’ve been saying it’s not how her stingers work, yet I’ve provided two different examples of them causing external damage and as of right now, you’ve provided a grand total of zero scans to support your stance.

Oh, and have another example where it’s basically stated that Janet’s stingers pierce things and they’re directly shown to pierce through Banshee’s throat.

 

[The_Impress]

You’ve been saying it’s not how her stingers work, yet I’ve provided two different examples of them causing external damage and as of right now, you’ve provided a grand total of zero scans to support your stance.

Because my stance is literally how her P&A work?

Every source I can find states they're bioelectric, wiki doesn't treat electrical resist to translate 1-to-1 to KE resist (because that isn't how electricity works)

Oh, and have another example where it’s basically stated that Janet’s stingers pierce things and they’re directly shown to pierce through Banshee’s throat.

...yet they leave a blatant lightning streak? Are you checking your own scans?

 

[LordTracer]

Because my stance is literally how her P&A work?

Every source I can find states they're bioelectric, wiki doesn't treat electrical resist to translate 1-to-1 to KE resist (because that isn't how electricity works)

Hm, I recall you saying that databooks shouldn’t be used for P&A before, why are you using them now-

Btw the first two scans you linked says that the stingers can deliver concussive force. Which, y’know, isn’t dura bypassing. The last one says she can blast through solid concrete, which also doesn’t sound like durability bypassing.

...yet they leave a blatant lightning streak? Are you checking your own scans?

Yes, and? It’s stated to be a piercing effect (one that Banshee’s armor could tank from the outside) and it explodes his throat. That’s AP.

When she blasts Sentry, it burns off his skin and hair. That’s AP.

When she blasts Controller at full power, it draws blood from him. That is AP.

Like, maybe the stingers can have different effects depending on how much power Janet is putting behind them, because they usually cause actual damage when she’s at full power (i.e. Controller and Sentry) or when she specifically needs to destroy something (i.e. Banshee). But to say that they’re always durability bypassing is clearly untrue.

 

[The_Impress]

Hm, I recall you saying that databooks shouldn’t be used for P&A before, why are you using them now-

I mean comic statements exist too, but meh too lazy to get them rn.

Btw the first two scans you linked says that the stingers can deliver concussive force.

The 60s Wasp could, yes, not the modern Wasp. Make a key for 60s Wasp if you care so hard.

Yes, and? It’s stated to be a piercing effect

By random narration

(one that Banshee’s armor could tank from the outside) and it explodes his throat.

Yes electricity very famously doesn't interact with the human body at all and leaves no traces.

Are you trying to play stupid or something?

When she blasts Sentry, it burns off his skin and hair. That’s AP.

Also an outlier as stated before, but you choose to ignore it to force a narrative of false consistency

When she blasts Controller at full power, it draws blood from him. That is AP.

See above.

Also straight up I don't think we have a Controller profile, and his consistency from what I remember, is 5-A, not 4-B

Deadass stop trying to repeat points previously stated as invalid to raise any validity to them, this is annoying as ****.

 

[LordTracer]

The 60s Wasp could, yes, not the modern Wasp. Make a key for 60s Wasp if you care so hard.

Where is the evidence that it’s different between those eras though?

By random narration

And your reasoning and evidence for it to not be taken into account is…?

Yes electricity very famously doesn't interact with the human body at all and leaves no traces.

Are you trying to play stupid or something?

It clearly isn’t bypassing durability if it’s causing actual damage.

Also straight up I don't think we have a Controller profile, and his consistency from what I remember, is 5-A, not 4-B

I’m sorry, why are you bringing up 4-B right now? Nothing I said has anything to do with a 4-B rating, this is about Janet’s stingers being AP and not durability bypassing.

Deadass stop trying to repeat points previously stated as invalid to raise any validity to them, this is annoying as ****.

No offense, but you just saying they’re invalid means literally nothing. You actually have not provided any scans from the comics to support your claims, and the handbook scans you gave support the idea that Janet’s stingers can be AP.

 

[The_Impress]

Where is the evidence that it’s different between those eras though?

...it's literally stated that Pym upgraded them

And your reasoning and evidence for it to not be taken into account is…?

Trend of narration often time contradicting stats and P&A when taken face value, and that it visually and with its source, it isn't aligning with the mechanics of the beams

It clearly isn’t bypassing durability if it’s causing actual damage.

...Tracer do you think AP is the only way to cause "actual damage" to a person? That's something which doesn't even work in real life.

I’m sorry, why are you bringing up 4-B right now?

...because that's one of the point in your "Possibly 4-B" proposal? Hello?

Unless you want to be very clear right now that you aren't proposing that, and no, going "im neutral uwu" doesn't count when you have very clearly been arguing for them on multiple occasions.

You either propose the damn changes or you shut up, you can't be a neutral party and then argue for a side regardless.

No offense, but you just saying they’re invalid means literally nothing. You actually have not provided any scans from the comics to support your claims, and the handbook scans you gave support the idea that Janet’s stingers can be AP.

...no, they haven't, you're twisting them by excluding info very bluntly stated in them.

 

[LordTracer]

...it's literally stated that Pym upgraded them

And the statements of them having concussive force and being able to blast through concrete come after Pym altered them soooooooooooo

Trend of narration often time contradicting stats and P&A when taken face value, and that it visually and with its source, it isn't aligning with the mechanics of the beams

”trend” “often” Association fallacy, first off. There is no contradiction here. Especially when two out of the three handbook scans that you provided say that the stingers can fire in different ways.

...Tracer do you think AP is the only way to cause "actual damage" to a person? That's something which doesn't even work in real life.

Is exploding someone’s throat durability bypassing? Is blasting through solid concrete durability bypassing? Is drawing blood durability bypassing? The answer is no to all of these. Show me actual evidence of her stingers bypassing durability, because so far, you have consistently failed to do so.

...because that's one of the point in your "Possibly 4-B" proposal? Hello?

Unless you want to be very clear right now that you aren't proposing that, and no, going "im neutral uwu" doesn't count when you have very clearly been arguing for them on multiple occasions.

You either propose the damn changes or you shut up, you can't be a neutral party and then argue for a side regardless.

Zark. I already said twice now that I’m going with 5-A. Or do I need to quote both times that I’ve said that so you can see?

...no, they haven't, you're twisting them by excluding info very bluntly stated in them.

I’m not excluding anything, every single handbook scan that you have given say that Janet’s stings, post being altered by Pym, can fire concussive force and blast through solid concrete, both of which are AP-based.

These are from the scans you provided, and you have yet to provide literally anything that goes against this.

Let me ask a question. Can you provide evidence from an actual comic to support your claims? Because if not, you have nothing supporting you. Meanwhile, I’ve provided several examples of her stingers being AP, and the handbook scans you gave also support that.

 

[Antvasima]

I mean... the 4-B could just be an outlier.

In general iirc aren't her stingers duraneg? Bio-electric or whatever

Agreed. Also, officially, her stingers are supposed to be much weaker than Cyclops' optic blasts, for example. Writers just don't want to present her as entirely useless against powerful opponents.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, what are the conclusions here so far?

 

[LordTracer]

There aren’t really any conclusions so far, but I am proposing for Janet’s stingers to be changed to ‘Varies, up to 5-A’ because she can control their output (for example, when she lowered their output so they wouldn’t kill the members of the X-Men), and at their maximum power, they’ve been able to harm people like Thor on Earth and Ultron.

 

[Antvasima]

I suppose that might work, in lack of better options. What do the rest of you think?

 

[Starbrand_Fan]

I agree with Tracer

 

[Antvasima]

What about you, @The_Impress and @Confluctor ?

 

[Confluctor]

Varies, up to 5-A

Guess this is the best possible tier for her ATM.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That is probably fine to apply then.

 

[LordTracer]

I’ll go ahead and take care of that then

 

[LordTracer]

Edits are done, and I removed the feats of her harming 4-Bs from her AP justification. This can be closed now.