• 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.
Deagonx
Reaction score
14,966

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • It's very rare for me to look at threads that are posted on my wall. You are free to ask, but unless it is a verse I am already interested in, it is not likely that I will respond to it.
    Can you lock this thread?
    latest


    latest



    latest



    Why are you the only one basically fighting against tier 0 Root on that thread? Aren't there anyone else who could "aid" you?
    Hi, could you evaluate this if you have some time please ?

    Could you check this thread when you have some time? Thanks!

    Hi, could you evaluate this if you have some time please ?

    I just wanted to point out for the MeiouHades case, @Hasty12345 seems to have had a negative interaction with said user. I don’t know the specifics though so I’d find it best to ask Hasty themselves what exactly happened.

    Yo! Mind giving your quick input on this?
    Small request: Can you check the last reply (which is about layers)? It must be evaluated because the layers are already in the profile.

    I didn't mean to cause any problems.

    The profile was made the same month as the layers evaluation thread in 2023, and I didn't know about it at that time, so it should be evaluated.

    I asked 1-2 months ago, but no one cared.
    Hi Deagonx, may i have some feedback from you?
    HammerStrikes219
    HammerStrikes219
    I CAN NOT BELIEVE THIS.



    A mystery distinct from sorcery. The final destination of magi.
    "Magic" is that which makes the impossible into the possible, for a given era. A "result" which can be realized with the application of time and effort is not magic. In the past, when civilization was young, most magi were also magicians, but currently only five remain.
    Each particular magic is named by its number: i.e., the First, the Second, and so on. Aozaki Aoko is the user of the Fifth magic.”

    Melty Blood Act Cadenza PS2 Manual - Dictionary: Magic [Term], p.049



    Collapse[v] Fate/complete material III: World material - Theory of Magic - Magecraft: "Magic" making the impossible possible, p.048​
    "Magic" making the impossible possible
    True Magic. This is a different mystery than magery. Magi call the events that are unachievable by magery and science in that age True Magic. If that event could be achieved by time and resources, then no matter the difficulty, that event will not be seen as True Magic.
    When the civilization of mankind was still young, all magery had been True Magic. But along with the advancement of science, the number of things that "could be done" by people had increased, and in exchange, True Magic diminished. The number of remaining "True Magics" in the modern era are extremely few, only 5. In "Fate/stay night", the achievement of one of these, the "Third True Magic", occupied the portion of the Grail War that could also be said to be its base.
    All magi strive to arrive at "True Magic". Even if they can't reach it, the next generation will. Even the next generation can't reach it, then the one after....and like that, thus was weaved the history of trial and error of magery.




    Collapse[v] Kara no Kyoukai Special Pamphlet - Encyclopedia: Magicians [Others], p.040 [T]

    Magicians [Others]
    Nickname of people who can turn mysteries that are not magecraft, things that are impossible, possible.
    In the past when civilization was less developed, most magi were magicians.
    As civilization developed, the impossible became possible, and many magic devalued into magecraft. Mysteries, in the face of reality, tasted great defeat.
    ———However, even among those, there still exists miracles unreachable by humans.
    Magi who can realize those mysteries are called “magicians,” bearing with them fear and respect, admiration and jealousy.
    In the world of Kara no Kyoukai, there are only five magicians.

    HammerStrikes219
    HammerStrikes219
    I gonna stop Paul Frank there as he deliberately left out a crapton of other statements regarding True Magic.


    I will not stand for this as this seems to overlook the context of the other chapters as well.
    HammerStrikes219
    HammerStrikes219


    01 - Cursed Cutting Crater (C. C. C.)

    An attack on the world by BB in control of the Moon Cell.
    Also called the spiritron imaginary pit.

    A World Purge through event rewriting that makes maximum use of the EX skill "Conception of All Animals"Potnia Theron BB has acquired.

    The goddess who is the mother of earth mother goddesses that created earth is, in other words, the 'root' that created all creation. This anti-world Noble Phantasm outputs that information through an ultra-precise 3D printer and crushes the present world with the world the user desires.

    The space eroded by BB becomes imaginary space and a curse that consumes reality. "CCC", as the name suggests, is a cursed pit that bores out reality.

    It is not the full details regarding her NP, but I will note the space turns into imaginary space because of her NP
    Question about your Aca Type 4 thread. I saw your now changing it to where you must show feats for any "resistances". However say a verse does have the wording that allows them to grant a resistance, can we equate it to the same level as when it was previously? I recall Aca Type 4 (as it currently is) is allowed to shield you from layered Hax as you need feats of your own Hax to work on a Aca Type 4 for it to work (layering won't help) or will it just be a baseline resistance for Aca Type 4 for the verse that showed the feats of resistance?
    Huesito88
    Huesito88
    Wait it seems Catz is asking the same question

    Hi, just wondering if this is an OK thread question to ask the community at large? (mostly cause I'm trying to figure out when the site is most active/when most of the members are active) (And if you don't mind perhaps you could help me invite other people to contribute to the thread?)
    From the thread, what other nerfs will you do for the verse?
    Palito266
    Palito266
    I don't really think it'd be that long but that aside, I meant more as a whole, like, are you just doing resistances or things like speed or tier?
    Deagonx
    Deagonx
    I am not sure yet. I haven't thoroughly looked into the tiers and speed feats. For now I am focusing on abilities.
    Palito266
    Palito266
    Ah, alright thank you.
    Are you good about abstract existence type 2?
    The question is relevant to the thread at hand. You do not have to close the thread. They can easily respond to it. Its generally hard to get a grasp on them in DMs or in a FAQ thread. I already pinged them in multiple FAQ threads but to no avail. I hope u understand that it is not that difficult for you to keep the thread open a bit longer to get my responses.

    I am already pressed for time and can barely manage to get some time to respond here.
    Deagonx
    Deagonx
    Idk why u have such a problem with me asking questions
    They are both constantly inundated with questions, the point was to simplify the discussion in such a way that they could clear up any remaining ambiguity that you were holding on to in one fell swoop. If you wanted certain questions added, you should have specified that beforehand.

    U simply close threads without having any sort of conclusion by any of the staff. U just need votes as an excuse to rush and close threads.
    Does "rushing" just mean any closure before you personally are satisfied? It was over two weeks and 9 pages, with 8 staff members voting, none of whom agreed with adding a spatial axis. These are clearly just sour grapes because the upgrade failed and you're looking for an excuse, you want to blame it on me instead of a bad argument.

    Ik what it means. You know I was right about that so u stopped arguing about it.
    "Knowing" someone was right does not mean you've conceded, the definition of the word concede means you actually admit that. Further, you are not a psychic. Don't make false claims of me "conceding" because you've imagined in your mind that I "knew you were right about it" and that was the reason that I stopped arguing. I stopped arguing because it was clear you would not listen to what I was saying, and I thought the disagreement could be resolved by showing you that the FAQ's authors agreed with me, which they did. You were wrong about the FAQ, I did not "concede" nor was I persuaded by your arguments.
    Tanin_iver
    Tanin_iver
    They are both constantly inundated with questions, the point was to simplify the discussion in such a way that they could clear up any remaining ambiguity that you were holding on to in one fell swoop. If you wanted certain questions added, you should have specified that beforehand.
    That doesn't mean that I am not free to ask them, just because they are inundated with questions.
    Did u specify beforehand that u will ping them to the thread and ask me if I have any more questions or anything to add extra to something new that they might come up with?
    Does "rushing" just mean any closure before you personally are satisfied? It was over two weeks and 9 pages, with 8 staff members voting, none of whom agreed with adding a spatial axis. These are clearly just sour grapes because the upgrade failed and you're looking for an excuse, you want to blame it on me instead of a bad argument.
    Its weird and ironic that u keep bringing up votes but u urself refused a thread closure when u were losing a thread by 2x vote lead. Also no, not about personal satisfaction, its a discussion, so a conclusion with some consensus rather than just votes is what I would expect. The length and number of pages is irrelevant a discussion can finish in a few posts or take months or multiple pages. We don't have any specific rules regarding some threshold.
    "Knowing" someone was right does not mean you've conceded, the definition of the word concede means you actually admit that.
    Yeah, Ik that. It is against your character to admit it. All u did was changed stances. That's enough to conclude.
    Further, you are not a psychic. Don't make false claims of me "conceding" because you've imagined in your mind that I "knew you were right about it" and that was the reason that I stopped arguing. I stopped arguing because it was clear you would not listen to what I was saying, and I thought the disagreement could be resolved by showing you that the FAQ's authors agreed with me, which they did.
    They literally did not agree with the specific quote of the FAQ that u were arguing and brought up a different thing entirely.
    Also, you are not a psychic either, that u just concluded that I was going to say the FAQ is wrong, the authors are wrong, I will argue with them, I wont concede
    Deagonx
    Deagonx
    That doesn't mean that I am not free to ask them,
    Of course, but you wanting to ask them questions doesn't mean that I am not free to close the thread, which was universally rejected.

    Its weird and ironic that u keep bringing up votes but u urself refused a thread closure when u were losing a thread by 2x vote lead
    Big difference between being 0-8 and being 5-8, and big difference between closing a thread after two days and two weeks.

    It is against your character to admit it. All u did was changed stances. That's enough to conclude.
    I am currently informing you that I didn't change stances. I also didn't give you any indication that I had changed stances. I said:

    I feel largely that we are getting nowhere, and that there is little to nothing that I could say that would effectively demonstrate to you that you have read the FAQ wrong and are advocating for Low 1-C on a basis that we explicitly reject as a wiki. I'm not content to go in circles here, if I feel that you are simply beyond convincing I will spend my time in better ways.

    Somehow you interpreted this to mean "I think you're right so I'll stop arguing because my stance has changed."

    Also, you are not a psychic either, that u just concluded that I was going to say the FAQ is wrong, the authors are wrong, I will argue with them, I wont concede
    I asked if you would, I did not merely assume it. You responded:
    And since we are discussing this with regards to the FAQ on what they mean by their wordings specifically, well they are the ones who have written it so their interpretation is absolute.

    DT responded:
    Just containing multiple 4D structures just makes you multiverse-sized. And being called infinite in no way means being infinite in terms of a 5D axis. Anything containing an infinite universe is infinite. That we have the difference between countably infinite and uncountably infinite as the difference between dimensional levels (as, amongst others, explained in the multiverse example) is just the cherry on top.

    This is very clear.
    Hello, can you give input in this thread? points and counter points from both sides were given, since you participated in the last threads about it, it must interest you i think

    Hi Deagon, I thought you might be interested since you were in the previous thread. If you are interested, could you take a look? You can ignore if you want.
    Hello! I'd appreciate it if you gave input here:
    It's a minor Downgrade CRT (slightly DC Cosmology-related).
    Could I please have your input in this small CRT
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Back
Top