All Purpose Dragon Ball Thread

[StarShooter80]

Actually enduring the surface heat of the sun is around small building lvl

Nah the sun is just High 3-A at the very least

 

[Mbpoops]

goku solos

 

[Huesito88]

Nah the sun is just High 3-A at the very least

Complete Downplay we know for a fact The Sun (Toei) Killed Baby, along with Nova imitating the Sun power and also has a confirmed heat value that's lower than the sun and could've killed Syn Shenron (With 6 Balls absorbed) with one of his heat techniques (If he didn't use Nova's body innate heat resistance as a heat proof body armor).

 

[Mbpoops]

Complete Downplay we know for a fact The Sun (Toei) Killed Baby, along with Nova imitating the Sun power and also has a confirmed heat value that's lower than the sun and could've killed Syn Shenron (With 6 Balls absorbed) with one of his heat techniques (If he didn't use Nova's body innate heat resistance as a heat proof body armor).

baby > base gt goku base gt goku destroyed an infinite space sun > baby, sun = uni+

 

[Azertyhuuh]

I want to ask an important question here.
Frieza in Dragon Ball Z is classified as Large Star level, while in tier systems the Solar System level is ranked higher than the Star level. But don’t the staff here know that a star is larger than the Solar System by many, many times? There are stars whose size exceeds that of the Solar System by enormous multiples.
Goku himself stated that Frieza is capable of destroying stars and planets, so isn’t it logical that Large Star level should be greater and higher than Solar System level? Honestly, I don’t understand how some people think.

 

[StarShooter80]

But don’t the staff here know that a star is larger than the Solar System by many, many times?

 

[Shadow7001]

I want to ask an important question here.
Frieza in Dragon Ball Z is classified as Large Star level, while in tier systems the Solar System level is ranked higher than the Star level. But don’t the staff here know that a star is larger than the Solar System by many, many times? There are stars whose size exceeds that of the Solar System by enormous multiples.
Goku himself stated that Frieza is capable of destroying stars and planets, so isn’t it logical that Large Star level should be greater and higher than Solar System level? Honestly, I don’t understand how some people think.

Dude.... I say this as politely as I can, please read the tiering system and attack potency pages. I get you're new and everything but all of this is already explained. To summarize it for you, the GBE of even the most massive stars is smaller than the energy it takes to destroy a solar system. Also Dragon Ball's solar system feat is unique because the explosion starts from earth and expands outward to destroy the sun granting it a much higher value that standard solar system busting which itself is way higher than what you'd get to busting any star in the universe.

 

[Emerald]

I want to ask an important question here.
Frieza in Dragon Ball Z is classified as Large Star level, while in tier systems the Solar System level is ranked higher than the Star level. But don’t the staff here know that a star is larger than the Solar System by many, many times? There are stars whose size exceeds that of the Solar System by enormous multiples.
Goku himself stated that Frieza is capable of destroying stars and planets, so isn’t it logical that Large Star level should be greater and higher than Solar System level? Honestly, I don’t understand how some people think.

Large Star level is defined through the GBE of Rigel whereas Solar System level is defined by the Inverse Square Law and how much energy it would be needed to make a blast that encompasses everything

 

[Shadow7001]

Huh. Nice.

Vegeta currently scales higher than 289.68 Yottatons, so the Galick Gun calculation is only supporting evidence; but the math of the Supernova calculation was accepted, so if I can get the GBE of Planet Vegeta I used for it accepted, then Frieza gets upgraded from 14.825 Quettatons to 229.379 Quettatons. If my moon-bust calculation is accepted, then the Raditz Saga high-tiers are finally upgraded to 1.8317434c, as well.

You can also utilize the fact that Planet Vegeta is called a big planet and that means it would be at least as big as he currently accepted size of Namek which is pretty large. Having a larger radius but 10x the gravity gives it a much greater mass but equivalent density to earth.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

Dude.... I say this as politely as I can, please read the tiering system and attack potency pages. I get you're new and everything but all of this is already explained. To summarize it for you, the GBE of even the most massive stars is smaller than the energy it takes to destroy a solar system. Also Dragon Ball's solar system feat is unique because the explosion starts from earth and expands outward to destroy the sun granting it a much higher value that standard solar system busting which itself is way higher than what you'd get to busting any star in the universe.

Thank you for this information. I also have many years of experience with the Tier system.

I am thinking about opening a thread regarding re-upgrading Goku and everyone at Goku’s level or higher to Low 1-C, once again through the Super Dimensional structure shown in the Broly and Gogeta arc.

When I previously brought this up to experienced staff members on this forum, they told me that we do not require proof of the size of such a dimension (whether it is cosmic or not), as long as the work does not state that the dimension is small or non-cosmic. In that case, the lack of an explicitly stated size does not invalidate the tier. If there is nothing indicating that it is small, it is treated as cosmic by default.

However, some newer moderators and members who lack sufficient experience have asked me to prove the size of this dimension, which is a fallacy, since staff policy on this forum does not require size proof unless the work implies that the dimension is smaller than cosmic. Otherwise, it is directly considered cosmic.

For this reason, I will reopen this topic, and with full respect, I ask the moderators and members who previously commented and requested size proof to review these important points and avoid causing issues for other members. Thank you.

 

[Robo432343]

I am thinking about opening a thread regarding re-upgrading Goku and everyone at Goku’s level or higher to Low 1-C, once again through the Super Dimensional structure shown in the Broly and Gogeta arc..

@Vietthai96 @TiltedFN @Killerdrone123 @Shar122 @Ednaxel2 @CelestialVortex01

 

[Shadow7001]

Thank you for this information. I also have many years of experience with the Tier system.

I am thinking about opening a thread regarding re-upgrading Goku and everyone at Goku’s level or higher to Low 1-C, once again through the Super Dimensional structure shown in the Broly and Gogeta arc.

When I previously brought this up to experienced staff members on this forum, they told me that we do not require proof of the size of such a dimension (whether it is cosmic or not), as long as the work does not state that the dimension is small or non-cosmic. In that case, the lack of an explicitly stated size does not invalidate the tier. If there is nothing indicating that it is small, it is treated as cosmic by default.

However, some newer moderators and members who lack sufficient experience have asked me to prove the size of this dimension, which is a fallacy, since staff policy on this forum does not require size proof unless the work implies that the dimension is smaller than cosmic. Otherwise, it is directly considered cosmic.

For this reason, I will reopen this topic, and with full respect, I ask the moderators and members who previously commented and requested size proof to review these important points and avoid causing issues for other members. Thank you.

Can you please stop spamming low quality threads and just listen to what others with far more experience tell you?? You realize you can get topic banned or worse too if you keep this up right? Just because you think you know something or that you have "experience" with the tiering system doesn't mean you actually do, otherwise you'd realize why the Dimension of Swirling Lights is NOT going to qualify for a Low 1-C rating; not to mention you CONSTANTLY disregard other supporters telling you to stop spamming massive, verse-wide revisions in general regardless of how correct or incorrect it is. Do you really think others who have been here for far longer haven't tried exactly what you're suggesting many times before? Why else do you think everyone's telling you to stop because it won't work? They're not mind-readers; it's because they've played this game before, these exact arguments too. You were previously reported exactly for this behavior and were given an informal warning. Do you really want to keep pushing it?

You're not bringing any new information, you're not bringing new evidence or anything different from past such attempts, this can also lead to a discussion rule. Did you know that? Do you want a topic to be permanently closed and never explored again because of your clumsily attempted CRTs that you refuse to listen to anyone before doing?

 

[Nullflowerblush]

You can also utilize the fact that Planet Vegeta is called a big planet and that means it would be at least as big as he currently accepted size of Namek which is pretty large.

Not only do I personally hate the currently accepted size for Namek—which is 7,882,682 km, despite the average planet having a diameter of 37,196.2204 km and Dodoria claiming Namek "isn't such a big planet"—and how said size was "calculated", but comparing Planet Vegeta's size to that of an estimation of Namek's, rather than an official measurement, is calc stacking. Even claiming Planet Vegeta has a similar density to Earth, which is the only reason why I could even use the formula I did, is highly speculative.

Having a larger radius but 10x the gravity gives it a much greater mass but equivalent density to earth.

Yes? The diameter and the planetary mass used in the calculation are 10x and 1,000x greater than Earth's, respectively, because of estimations based on the idea that they have an equivalent (or similar) density.

 

[Mbpoops]

@Vietthai96 @TiltedFN @Killerdrone123 @Shar122 @Ednaxel2 @CelestialVortex01

1C xeno goku

 

[Killerdrone123]

Thank you for this information. I also have many years of experience with the Tier system.

I am thinking about opening a thread regarding re-upgrading Goku and everyone at Goku’s level or higher to Low 1-C, once again through the Super Dimensional structure shown in the Broly and Gogeta arc.

When I previously brought this up to experienced staff members on this forum, they told me that we do not require proof of the size of such a dimension (whether it is cosmic or not), as long as the work does not state that the dimension is small or non-cosmic. In that case, the lack of an explicitly stated size does not invalidate the tier. If there is nothing indicating that it is small, it is treated as cosmic by default.

However, some newer moderators and members who lack sufficient experience have asked me to prove the size of this dimension, which is a fallacy, since staff policy on this forum does not require size proof unless the work implies that the dimension is smaller than cosmic. Otherwise, it is directly considered cosmic.

For this reason, I will reopen this topic, and with full respect, I ask the moderators and members who previously commented and requested size proof to review these important points and avoid causing issues for other members. Thank you.

At this point, you are just going to introduce a discussion rule for the topic, which would prevent anyone from revisiting it again.

I would advise you to wait, as there is a group of supporters in touch with knowledgeable members who are reviewing the arguments for the verse. I understand that you want to help, but since you are new to this site, there are certain things you need to be patient about.

 

[Shadow7001]

i win

Nope. Being a spherical structure doesn't disqualify you because universes both in Toei and in DBH are shown to be spherical numerous times but they're accepted as infinite because there is stronger evidence in those continuities. Authors also can't realistically depict an infinite structure that's why it's not a dealbreaker on this site. Cheap bait.

 

[StarShooter80]

Thank you for this information. I also have many years of experience with the Tier system.

I am thinking about opening a thread regarding re-upgrading Goku and everyone at Goku’s level or higher to Low 1-C, once again through the Super Dimensional structure shown in the Broly and Gogeta arc.

When I previously brought this up to experienced staff members on this forum, they told me that we do not require proof of the size of such a dimension (whether it is cosmic or not), as long as the work does not state that the dimension is small or non-cosmic. In that case, the lack of an explicitly stated size does not invalidate the tier. If there is nothing indicating that it is small, it is treated as cosmic by default.

However, some newer moderators and members who lack sufficient experience have asked me to prove the size of this dimension, which is a fallacy, since staff policy on this forum does not require size proof unless the work implies that the dimension is smaller than cosmic. Otherwise, it is directly considered cosmic.

For this reason, I will reopen this topic, and with full respect, I ask the moderators and members who previously commented and requested size proof to review these important points and avoid causing issues for other members. Thank you.

Higher dimensional structures requiring proof for being significant enough in size has been a thing on the wiki for the longest time, this isn't a new thing that new moderators are demanding. Also the argument that "I don't need to prove it's significant, because you don't have proof it's insignificant" is just text book burden of proof.

And stop dragging this argument, and other cosmology-related ones for the millionth time.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

Can you please stop spamming low quality threads and just listen to what others with far more experience tell you?? You realize you can get topic banned or worse too if you keep this up right? Just because you think you know something or that you have "experience" with the tiering system doesn't mean you actually do, otherwise you'd realize why the Dimension of Swirling Lights is NOT going to qualify for a Low 1-C rating; not to mention you CONSTANTLY disregard other supporters telling you to stop spamming massive, verse-wide revisions in general regardless of how correct or incorrect it is. Do you really think others who have been here for far longer haven't tried exactly what you're suggesting many times before? Why else do you think everyone's telling you to stop because it won't work? They're not mind-readers; it's because they've played this game before, these exact arguments too. You were previously reported exactly for this behavior and were given an informal warning. Do you really want to keep pushing it?

You're not bringing any new information, you're not bringing new evidence or anything different from past such attempts, this can also lead to a discussion rule. Did you know that? Do you want a topic to be permanently closed and never explored again because of your clumsily attempted CRTs that you refuse to listen to anyone before doing?

I have many years of experience with the Tier system, and I do not understand why you are saying all of this now, as if just saying that means I am lying or that you want me to say I do not know. In any case, that does not matter at all.

First, why do you not understand what I am saying? I already told you that the Strange Lights Whirlpool dimension is a five-dimensional realm, and this is something everyone agrees on. The issue is that some moderators and staff members only asked me to prove that the size of this dimension is at least cosmic in order for the tier to be accepted. However, this request is a fallacy.

I went to staff members who have more experience with tiering than those who commented on my thread, and they told me clearly that we do not require proof of a dimension’s size as long as the work does not state that it is small or less than cosmic. Otherwise, it is treated as cosmic by default. This is exactly what I am telling you now.

So when some moderators and staff asked me to prove its size, that was a fallacy, because the work never stated that the dimension is non-cosmic or smaller than cosmic. Therefore, it is directly considered cosmic in size, and that request has no meaning at all. As such, the dimension is cosmic in size because the work never said otherwise.

I also know that many people have tried to do this before, but not like me. I reviewed those threads, and they were all incomplete and incorrect. This does not depend on “people” in general, but on the individual and their experience. Not everyone who opens a thread about something will perform the same as someone else; it depends on the person’s expertise.

I mentioned this here first to discuss the matter before opening the thread directly. As for the report that was filed against me, that was just a problem and a misunderstanding, and it has already been resolved. Right now, I am simply clarifying the issue regarding the dimension’s size and the request for proof that was made.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

At this point, you are just going to introduce a discussion rule for the topic, which would prevent anyone from revisiting it again.

I would advise you to wait, as there is a group of supporters in touch with knowledgeable members who are reviewing the arguments for the verse. I understand that you want to help, but since you are new to this site, there are certain things you need to be patient about.

Alright, if that is the case, I will not open a thread now, and I never said that I would open it right now. I only explained the reason and clarified the points here, and you can consider this a response to every moderator, staff member, and user who asked me to prove its size. Otherwise, the thread would have already been approved and the upgrades applied.
I do not understand why people are attacking me like this now. All I did was clarify the matter for them, so there is no need for all this commotion here.

 

[Shadow7001]

bro using other continuities, not an argument

You're being dense on purpose. I'm not using other continuities I'm telling you that being a spherical is not a defeating argument, you know you're just baiting here to there's no need to waste further time, this is mostly for other people who'll read this who might be misinformed because of you; so I brought up those cases from the same verse that have infinite universes accepted despite the universes being similarly spherical. Only difference, which is the only thing that matters, is the quality and the quantity of evidence available to accept them as infinite. This is why DBS isn't infinite but Toei and DBH are.

 

[Azertyhuuh]

Higher dimensional structures requiring proof for being significant enough in size has been a thing on the wiki for the longest time, this isn't a new thing that new moderators are demanding. Also the argument that "I don't need to prove it's significant, because you don't have proof it's insignificant" is just text book burden of proof.

And stop dragging this argument, and other cosmology-related ones for the millionth time.

I told you, if the work does not mention that the dimension is not universal and does not provide any information about it, we consider it universal in size directly, and no proof of its size is required here. This is what the experienced staff have said, so please keep your advice to yourself.

 

[StarShooter80]

I told you, if the work does not mention that the dimension is not universal and does not provide any information about it, we consider it universal in size directly, and no proof of its size is required here. This is what the experienced staff have said, so please keep your advice to yourself.

No real staff has said this and the wiki's regulations very blatantly goes against this notion, I don't see what's so difficult in seeing the blatant flaw in the argument

 

[Azertyhuuh]

No real staff has said this and the wiki's regulations very blatantly goes against this notion, I don't see what's so difficult in seeing the blatant flaw in the argument

What’s your opinion now? Do you have any other objections? Or are you even contradicting the moderator? If the work doesn’t mention that the dimension is small or not cosmic, then we consider it to be cosmic in size directly, and it doesn’t require verification.

Agnaa: If there's anything implying that it's small/limited, no. But otherwise, we generally don't apply much scrutiny

Me: So in the absence of such evidence, we take it was normal? Alr. That's all.

Agnaa: Yeah

 

[Shadow7001]

I have many years of experience with the Tier system, and I do not understand why you are saying all of this now, as if just saying that means I am lying or that you want me to say I do not know. In any case, that does not matter at all.

Because you don't have experience with it. You're new here, you've been asking questions which on its own is a good thing, but these questions aren't the mark of someone who's "experienced" with this stuff and your insufficient understanding of why this wouldn't work also proves that you have no experience here

First, why do you not understand what I am saying? I already told you that the Strange Lights Whirlpool dimension is a five-dimensional realm, and this is something everyone agrees on.

No, literally no one agrees with this and even if some people do, it's not currently accepted on the site. Do you even know the difference between 5D and Low 1-C? They're not the same, do you know why? Let's see if you're really experienced.

The issue is that some moderators and staff members only asked me to prove that the size of this dimension is at least cosmic in order for the tier to be accepted. However, this request is a fallacy.

It's not a fallacy this is literally a standard that has been in place for years. This is how I know you have no experience; I don't know why you claim that you do when you're expressing outright incredulity at a standard that has existed for years and is otherwise known to everyone else here and agreed upon to. Seriously, please stop and think about this. Who's right here? Dozens of people who've been here far longer than you saying one thing, or you who is clearly new and inexperienced talking about the exact opposite? Who do you think is correct here?

I went to staff members who have more experience with tiering than those who commented on my thread, and they told me clearly that we do not require proof of a dimension’s size as long as the work does not state that it is small or less than cosmic.

No, that is NOT what they said. Go ahead and quote them or call them here, I guarantee they didn't say what you're saying they did and instead you're misinterpreting them BECAUSE you're inexperienced with the standards and didn't know what they were talking about.

Otherwise, it is treated as cosmic by default. This is exactly what I am telling you now.

No, no it's not. By that logic, every random "dimension" in any verse would be cosmic by default and thus at least Low 2-C by default too but that's clearly not the case and we always require strong evidence to prove that it is cosmic sized. What makes you think this is an exception?

So when some moderators and staff asked me to prove its size, that was a fallacy, because the work never stated that the dimension is non-cosmic or smaller than cosmic.

It was not a fallacy, they were asking you to prove a claim and satisfy a very key standard that applies universally. You failed to do that and that's why it got rejected but you still didn't learn. You're placing the burden of proof on them, that is a classic fallacy right there. They're not required to prove that it's non-cosmic or compact, you're supposed to prove that it non-compact or cosmic.

Therefore, it is directly considered cosmic in size, and that request has no meaning at all. As such, the dimension is cosmic in size because the work never said otherwise.

No, not how it works. Already explained everything above. Go ahead and quote whatever those staff told you, we'll see right here what they said and what you're claiming they said.

I also know that many people have tried to do this before, but not like me.

Ah there it is! The classical "everyone is wrong but me!" nonsense. Seriously dude, stop this.

I reviewed those threads, and they were all incomplete and incorrect.

No, most of them were exactly the same as yours (I'd argue some were even better) because we only have a limited amount of information to work with and EVERYONE has seen that movie anyway, it's not some hidden obscure thing nor is it possible to just "twist" existing, non-qualifying information into suddenly, magically qualifying for it. That's not how this site works and you're just gonna mess everything up for other supporters and develop a bad reputation for it too.

This does not depend on “people” in general, but on the individual and their experience.

Of which you clearly have none, but no, it does depend on people. The entire idea behind this site is a bunch of people coming together to scale and index their favorite verses, no individual person or their expertise alone is ever enough and massive CRTs like these are almost always a joint effort between everyone. You really don't understand how this site works. Every sentence you type; your sheer inexperience keeps becoming more and more obvious.

Not everyone who opens a thread about something will perform the same as someone else; it depends on the person’s expertise.

Not the point. It's not about you, it's about the information that's available.

I mentioned this here first to discuss the matter before opening the thread directly.

And we're telling you that it's not gonna work and actively discouraging you from it. You got your answer, so will you finally listen?

As for the report that was filed against me, that was just a problem and a misunderstanding, and it has already been resolved.

That's not how reports work. If you keep up similar behavior and spam low quality threads, you can get an actual formal warning, and if you continue after that even an actual topic ban or worse a discussion rule for the verse. You really do not know anything do you dude?

Right now, I am simply clarifying the issue regarding the dimension’s size and the request for proof that was made.

You're not clarifying anything, you're misinterpreting whatever you were told by staff (again, post whatever you were told, quote them, and then we can discuss that) and blatantly ignoring a very obvious and easy-to-understand standard.

 

[Shadow7001]

dude if you're so confident then go ahead and make a CRT, it'll just get rejected like the other 5 times it was discussed
even i tried to argue for it and it didn't work

Holy non-sequitur dude. I said that your argument of a spherical structure being a disqualification isn't true and I proved that with multiple examples, and I said that the difference is the quality and quantity of evidence available with Toei and DBH having more of those compared to DBS. Selective reading much?

 

[Azertyhuuh]

Because you don't have experience with it. You're new here, you've been asking questions which on its own is a good thing, but these questions aren't the mark of someone who's "experienced" with this stuff and your insufficient understanding of why this wouldn't work also proves that you have no experience here

No, literally no one agrees with this and even if some people do, it's not currently accepted on the site. Do you even know the difference between 5D and Low 1-C? They're not the same, do you know why? Let's see if you're really experienced.

It's not a fallacy this is literally a standard that has been in place for years. This is how I know you have no experience; I don't know why you claim that you do when you're expressing outright incredulity at a standard that has existed for years and is otherwise known to everyone else here and agreed upon to. Seriously, please stop and think about this. Who's right here? Dozens of people who've been here far longer than you saying one thing, or you who is clearly new and inexperienced talking about the exact opposite? Who do you think is correct here?

No, that is NOT what they said. Go ahead and quote them or call them here, I guarantee they didn't say what you're saying they did and instead you're misinterpreting them BECAUSE you're inexperienced with the standards and didn't know what they were talking about.

No, no it's not. By that logic, every random "dimension" in any verse would be cosmic by default and thus at least Low 2-C by default too but that's clearly not the case and we always require strong evidence to prove that it is cosmic sized. What makes you think this is an exception?

It was not a fallacy, they were asking you to prove a claim and satisfy a very key standard that applies universally. You failed to do that and that's why it got rejected but you still didn't learn. You're placing the burden of proof on them, that is a classic fallacy right there. They're not required to prove that it's non-cosmic or compact, you're supposed to prove that it non-compact or cosmic.

No, not how it works. Already explained everything above. Go ahead and quote whatever those staff told you, we'll see right here what they said and what you're claiming they said.

Ah there it is! The classical "everyone is wrong but me!" nonsense. Seriously dude, stop this.

No, most of them were exactly the same as yours (I'd argue some were even better) because we only have a limited amount of information to work with and EVERYONE has seen that movie anyway, it's not some hidden obscure thing nor is it possible to just "twist" existing, non-qualifying information into suddenly, magically qualifying for it. That's not how this site works and you're just gonna mess everything up for other supporters and develop a bad reputation for it too.

Of which you clearly have none, but no, it does depend on people. The entire idea behind this site is a bunch of people coming together to scale and index their favorite verses, no individual person or their expertise alone is ever enough and massive CRTs like these are almost always a joint effort between everyone. You really don't understand how this site works. Every sentence you type; your sheer inexperience keeps becoming more and more obvious.

Not the point. It's not about you, it's about the information that's available.

And we're telling you that it's not gonna work and actively discouraging you from it. You got your answer, so will you finally listen?

That's not how reports work. If you keep up similar behavior and spam low quality threads, you can get an actual formal warning, and if you continue after that even an actual topic ban or worse a discussion rule for the verse. You really do not know anything do you dude?

You're not clarifying anything, you're misinterpreting whatever you were told by staff (again, post whatever you were told, quote them, and then we can discuss that) and blatantly ignoring a very obvious and easy-to-understand standard.

All of what you’re saying won’t change anything, and honestly, after reading everything, I didn’t find anything correct in it except that you’re trying to criticize me here and belittle my position. Honestly, I regret talking to you; I should have just ignored you, believe me. On top of that, I provided proof for my point above your comment.

You accuse people here of lacking experience, but that’s just your personal opinion. Don’t you realize you’re being superficial? You judge members’ expertise based on how long they’ve been in this forum? How ridiculous is that? How about reconsidering this perspective? Maybe that would be better for you, because right now, you end up accusing anyone who joins here of not being experienced.

 

[StarShooter80]

What’s your opinion now? Do you have any other objections? Or are you even contradicting the moderator? If the work doesn’t mention that the dimension is small or not cosmic, then we consider it to be cosmic in size directly, and it doesn’t require verification.

One guy. Also can you link the thread where this conversation was said? And stop treating this as some sort of gotcha lol

 

[TiltedFN]

@Vietthai96 @TiltedFN @Killerdrone123 @Shar122 @Ednaxel2 @CelestialVortex01

 

[LegendariumOfLies]

What’s your opinion now? Do you have any other objections? Or are you even contradicting the moderator? If the work doesn’t mention that the dimension is small or not cosmic, then we consider it to be cosmic in size directly, and it doesn’t require verification.

Enough Yapping, give us the Instant Death Thread.

 

[Supersonicmaker]

anyone know how many times nuova shenron scales above 3x universes?

 

[Nonynho]

anyone know how many times nuova shenron scales above 3x universes?

geez, tough one

SS3 Baby-saga Goku is 2 billion times, from there i haven't calced yet and wish you luck

 

[Nonynho]

anyone know how many times nuova shenron scales above 3x universes?

to be more precise, this is what i got so far, and you can go on with the rest to wherever wanted

Buuhan's 2-C feat (3 universes) > [2x gap > Ultimate Gohan ~ Inside Buu Goku < 100x gap]* < Outside of Buu Goku < 400x gap < GT Base Goku < 50x gap < SS1 < stomp gap < Rildo Fight Base Goku < 400x gap < SS3

*This quite weird wording is because UGohan has 50% of Buuhan's AP, which the Inside Buu Goku is scaling to since he fought a clone of UGohan. This means that Outside of Buu Goku is 50x the 2-C feat

Typically in or Versus Threads, we call 7x a one-shot gap, but 7x is an ugly number, so let's call each stomp gap a 5x diff, respectable and not far from the truth

 

[Mgebrat282]

anyone know how many times nuova shenron scales above 3x universes?

Here's the truth (not promotion or something, just a joke)

 

[Anonymous_Learner]

Here's the truth (not promotion or something, just a joke)

Using YT Dragon ball scaling... (Ik it's an obvious joke)

 

[StarShooter80]

anyone know how many times nuova shenron scales above 3x universes?

Which Nuova Shenron key?

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

A guy on Facebook told me that Goku has no interaction with 4D, because to do so he would have to destroy the universe in the past, present, and future. Is that true?

 

[Mgebrat282]

A guy on Facebook told me that Goku has no interaction with 4D, because to do so he would have to destroy the universe in the past, present, and future. Is that true?

Goku isn't star lvl because Whis can't create stars

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

'-'

 

[LegendariumOfLies]

Is it true Goku shook Heaven & Hell by transforming into Super Saiyan 3

 

[Nonynho]

With the thread locked today, i proved that GT is the superior Goku :>

now i think it's a good time to actually watch the anime lmfao