- 10,484
- 4,693
I mean the last argument was targeting whether the power given by the statement was valid. Not the statement itself, FYI. I still need to fully support it too.
-
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.
Ben 10 - Alien X Ability Downgrade
- Thread starter Confluctor
- Start date
- Status
- 3,563
- 882
Alien x profile is just getting worse tbh
Last edited:
- 3,563
- 882
If 2 Ben's can't turn into Alien x then this pretty much proves that there is only one version of Alien x that is available across the timeline
- 31,701
- 5,479
^essentially this. It’s wild that 90% of major revisions are AP when we have a system specifically set up to minimize the existence of AP through tiers. Being top of 8-A is usually better than lowest of 7-C because people make matches based on tier
speedster352
He/Him- 17,885
- 1,878
I agree
- 15,745
- 5,345
Is this a reply that aims to say that he doesn't exist in the past and future?
- 3,563
- 882
Yes
- 15,745
- 5,345
2 Bens in the present trying to turn into 1 Alien X in the present does not prove that Alien X doesn't exist in the past or the future, just that there is only 1 Alien X to turn into per present, it's redundant information. Now, if kid Ben was in the past, and old Ben in the future, they were somehow talking to each other, and only 1 could turn into Alien X due to being "in the present" while Alien X was unable to be in the past/future from that perspective, then there you would have something special. Not the Acausality he has but something fancy to write no less.
- 3,563
- 882
The creator is literally talking about Ben from the present and the one the future (Ben 10K) read the statement again you are literally taking everything out of context
Last edited:
- 10,484
- 4,693
Yeah it never says they are in the same moment in time in the statement.
- 2,316
- 1,084
Poor Alien XThe profile currently says;
Alien X
Alien X is the Omnitrix's DNA sample of a Celestialsapien from the Forge of Creation. Tier: 1-B Name: Alien X, his personalities include Serena, Bellicus, and Ben Tennyson Origin: Ben 10 Gender: Male Age: Inapplicable (Was born in a realm that is out of sync with time, implied to have existed...vsbattles.fandom.com
No justification. A true gigachad moment. Unfathomably based.
Anyway, do the supporters have scans or justifications for this? If not, it should be nuked to Oblivion.
- 177,474
- 90,422
Wait a minute. I thought that we are just supposed to remove acausality from the profile page, not delete it entirely.
@Confluctor @Eficiente @LordGriffin1000 @Maverick_Zero_X @Zamasu_Chan
What do you think that we should do here exactly?
@Confluctor @Eficiente @LordGriffin1000 @Maverick_Zero_X @Zamasu_Chan
What do you think that we should do here exactly?
Rez
He/Him- 4,870
- 1,998
Yeah the profile is not supposed to be deleted only acausilty and the other abilities that got added because of twitter statements needs to be removed
- 10,484
- 4,693
I’m pretty sure no-one mentioned nuking the page Ant.
- 16,454
- 13,357
We're only talking about removing Acausality.
As I said before, we don't use author statements without supporting evidence in verse. The statement doesn't go into detail, it simply says one Ben can't turn into another Alien X if another Ben is already using it.
As I said before, we don't use author statements without supporting evidence in verse. The statement doesn't go into detail, it simply says one Ben can't turn into another Alien X if another Ben is already using it.
But it also doesn't say they are in different points in time. Remember that Ben 10 and Ben 10000 have met before and been in the same place.
Jibz
He/Him- 3,111
- 2,507
They mentioned nuking acasuality type 2 to oblivion, but due to them being on seperate lines i can see why Ant would get confused
- 177,474
- 90,422
Okay. Thank you for the replies.
So is somebody willing to apply what we have decided here to all of the relevant pages then? (The two Alien X profile pages, Galactic Gladiator, Starbeard, Celestialsapiens, and possibly reboot Vilgax as Alien V.)
So is somebody willing to apply what we have decided here to all of the relevant pages then? (The two Alien X profile pages, Galactic Gladiator, Starbeard, Celestialsapiens, and possibly reboot Vilgax as Alien V.)
- 10,484
- 4,693
That is correct, now prove that the statement is talking about those specific instances rather than literally any other “time” when they are apart.
- 10,484
- 4,693
Actually yk what, I can see how you’d come to that conclusion based on “depends on who activates first”. Like that could reference some threat that is present across time but could also simply be a reference to when they worked together before. Couple this with the pretty big amount of work I’d need to do to support it + my stance on WoG in general + not being able to find the OG question + Duncan’s answer being pretty weird I can agree to acausality getting nuked.
You’ll need a replacement for the examples on the acausality page though. I suggest Hunter Zolomon, even though he doesn’t have the power on his page yet.
You’ll need a replacement for the examples on the acausality page though. I suggest Hunter Zolomon, even though he doesn’t have the power on his page yet.
- 12,686
- 9,653
- Thread starter
- #61
Yeah none of the reason makes sense for acausality.
And agreed with the image change. I will find something.Hunter isn't good enough
And agreed with the image change. I will find something.
- 16,265
- 24,951
Profiles affected:
- 16,265
- 24,951
It looks like they don’t have it (it would be strange if they were scaled considering how different Reboot Celestialsapiens are, so that’s good).
- 16,265
- 24,951
- 9,404
- 6,723
- 16,265
- 24,951
All done.
- 15,745
- 5,345
It's not clear, and nor should you be sure of it when the question that made that answer isn't even there.
- 177,474
- 90,422
Thank you. A footnote explanation regarding why we do not accept the author Twitter reply as sufficiently good evidence would also be useful, if somebody here is willing to write it.
- 177,474
- 90,422
No, but we have the following stated in our Site Rules and Editing Rules pages, respectively:
"Do not pester or harass the authors of various works on social media about versus debating or character statistics. They are often bombarded by numerous questions from fans, and thus are rarely interested in giving a serious response. In addition, the statements they give to appease users are often contradictory to the feats in the stories of the works they have written. Thus, it is frowned upon to bother them over these topics."
"Regarding direct information from the author/creator of a character: We do not use statements from them that are phrased in an uncertain, uncaring, and/or unspecific manner, such as "Could be", "Maybe", "Probably", "Possibly" etcetera. Brief or vague answers to fan-questions via social media are also generally disregarded, whereas more elaborate explanations in serious interviews are usually considered more reliable.
When a statement from a character, guidebook, or even word of god contradicts what occurs in the series, they won't be used. For example, if an author says that a character from his work is incapable of shattering planets, even though it has destroyed galaxies on-screen, we will always go with the latter, rather than the former. The statement need to be consistent with what has been revealed within the fictional franchise itself. Otherwise, it will be considered invalid.
Author statements will only be accepted when they clarify what has been shown or implied in the series itself, and will be rejected when they contradict what has been shown to the audience. Statements that technically do not contradict anything shown in the series will still be rejected if there is no evidence that they are accurate."
- 9,404
- 6,723
ohhh okay
thank you
thank you
- 177,474
- 90,422
No problem.
So, about this then...
- 10,484
- 4,693
I mean I doubt we need a footnote explaining this when not all Twitter statements are not allowed on the site and the rules already explain what is allowed and what isn’t so.
- 5,879
- 1,075
Just remove it already
- 10,484
- 4,693
Sure
- Status
Similar threads
