• 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.

A Certain Llama Wants In On The Low 1-C club; Pokemon Low 1-C Upgrade for True Form Arceus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Would a Likely work?

Speaking as someone who made the upgrade thread in the first place, I really don’t think we should spend so much time debating on what precise format the upgrade takes if you ask me.
 
ProfessorKukui4Life said:
Would a Likely work?

Speaking as someone who made the upgrade thread in the first place, I really don’t think we should spend so much time debating on what precise format the upgrade takes if you ask me.
Click to expand...
Eh I get that but I really do believe that a flat-out Low 1-C rating is most accurate and also as it was the most agreed on, it's kinda unfair to go with the lesser agreed upon option
 
theultimate5105 said:
I mean it can't really be likely as their rating is already 2-B likely 2-A
Click to expand...
Its possible for it to be 2-B likely 2-A or Low 1-C

CloverDragon03 said:
Eh I get that but I really do believe that a flat-out Low 1-C rating is most accurate and also as it was the most agreed on, it's kinda unfair to go with the lesser agreed upon option
Click to expand...
Agreed, not many people agree with possibly
 
Pokemonfan807 said:
when arceus becomes low 1-C

i think i should throw a blazblue character as they resist many layers of his hax
Click to expand...
Not the right time Donatello, so shut your mouth
will-smith-slap-ragdoll-chris-rock.gif
 
Anyways Strym you're taking the words of people who are right in front of you and twist their words in your favor yet again. You should stop that practice.

I believe that it is indeed more reasonable to do possibly Low 1-C since that would ne a good compromise and wouldn't piss people off. If we do solid Low 1-C there'll be many people who'd probably come after Arceus just for the sake of coming after him, and considering Strym and Kukui like to vanish for extended periods of time, me and the boys are the ones who have to deal with it, and we aren't exactly ready for that since we aren't the ones making the CRTs, we're mostly just the lower tier pokemon experts. I ain't dealing with another 20 nerf attempts simply because we refused to add "possibly".
 
Arceus0x said:
Anyways Strym you're taking the words of people who are right in front of you and twist their words in your favor yet again. You should stop that practice.

I believe that it is indeed more reasonable to do possibly Low 1-C since that would ne a good compromise and wouldn't piss people off. If we do solid Low 1-C there'll be many people who'd probably come after Arceus just for the sake of coming after him, and considering Strym and Kukui like to vanish for extended periods of time, me and the boys are the ones who have to deal with it, and we aren't exactly ready for that since we aren't the ones making the CRTs, we're mostly just the lower tier pokemon experts. I ain't dealing with another 20 nerf attempts simply because we refused to add "possibly".
Click to expand...
This is incredibly problematic: While you do think it's more accurate to do a possibly, you're also really trying to push for it just so "people won't come after Arceus." That should not be a reason

And there is also no reason to go for the option that is less agreed on
 
CloverDragon03 said:
This is incredibly problematic: While you do think it's more accurate to do a possibly, you're also really trying to push for it just so "people won't come after Arceus." That should not be a reason

And there is also no reason to go for the option that is less agreed on
Click to expand...
Look man I'm just defending the positions of us common folk. Like if that's a problem, then where were you when he debates surrounding the CT?
Where were you when we had to explain why arceus isn't 3-A to people for the 50th time?
Where were you when Rohan was under siege?
 
Arceus0x said:
Look man I'm just defending the positions of us common folk. Like if that's a problem, then where were you when he debates surrounding the CT?
Where were you when we had to explain why arceus isn't 3-A to people for the 50th time?
Where were you when Rohan was under siege?
Click to expand...
Where was I? Probably hadn't joined the wiki yet, if I'm being honest. Pretty sure when I first joined, Arceus was 2-B
 
CloverDragon03 said:
Where was I? Probably hadn't joined the wiki yet, if I'm being honest. Pretty sure when I first joined, Arceus was 2-B
Click to expand...
Nah there were threads about the whole thing after that BIG POKEMON REVISIONS thread where we worked together.

Anyways it's irrelevant so forget it, i dont have a final say in this matter anyways
 
As i said again, it's not the right time for saying match-up since this thread goes really controversial
I just tell you to shut up (in joking way) and you get angry by it and thats not needed at all
Anyway no more derailing from this point
 
guys, no memes in general, or rather the CRT

i agree with possible but i still think there is enough 2-A proof to change 2-B, likely 2-A to 2-A, likely low 1-C
 
Or if it’s that much of a debate, maybe make 2-A the solid tier and drop 2-B entirely?
CloverDragon03 said:
This is incredibly problematic: While you do think it's more accurate to do a possibly, you're also really trying to push for it just so "people won't come after Arceus." That should not be a reason

And there is also no reason to go for the option that is less agreed on
Click to expand...
This honestly. While I am open for compromising, I definitely agree that we shouldn’t compromise just so we’re not afraid about people targeting a characters stats.

Character ratings should be done based on what’s logistically the best decision. If people disagree, thats their problem at the end of the day.
 
From what i understand, low 1-C transcend the usual way at minimun, arceus does that but also transcends and predates the concepts of them
 
QuasiYuri said:
You don't have to be tier 1 through dimensions tho.
Click to expand...
What I mean is that being that superior to 4D concepts in existence shouldn't grant you BDE, as that's just stuff for Low 1-C rating from what I got.

Because Low 1-Cs like Enerjack don't have BDE despite they treat the "regular" space-time concepts as irrelevant iirc.
 
Last edited:
StrymULTRA said:
No. I've already explained, any Low 1-C character in existence already transcends space and time completely like Arceus does, it being the 1st would be a weird precedent.
Click to expand...
Not any Low 1-C characters transcends spacetime completely like Arceus does, they can gain such rating with higher layers or large extra dimensions as per se. Any characters who surpassed the limitation of spacetime or dimensions in-verse is viable as BDE2.

"Characters whose nature is defined by lacking spatiotemporal features and being superior to them in nature. These characters aren't necessarily superior to spacetime on every level, but just within the scope which they are shown."

Bold words means that they aren't necessarily 1-A or above.
 
GreatIskandar14045 said:
Not any Low 1-C characters transcends spacetime completely like Arceus does, they can gain such rating with higher layers or large extra dimensions as per se. Any characters who surpassed the limitation of spacetime or dimensions in-verse is viable as BDE2.

"Characters whose nature is defined by lacking spatiotemporal features and being superior to them in nature. These characters aren't necessarily superior to spacetime on every level, but just within the scope which they are shown."

Bold words means that they aren't necessarily 1-A or above.
Click to expand...
StrymULTRA said:
I think is more coz just being beyond space and time isn't enough. This dude is an example tbf. Ik the whole "but is the concepts", but that's something Low 1-Cs do in comparison with 2-A concepts like always.
Click to expand...
^
 
StrymULTRA said:
^
Click to expand...
I don't understand what comparison you're trying to make, but I'll say it once more. A character which transcends all spacetime or dimensions in a cosmology does correspond to BDE2. Either the example you gave doesn't indicate that way, or it should be revised.
 
GreatIskandar14045 said:
I don't understand what comparison you're trying to make, but I'll say it once more. A character which transcends all spacetime or dimensions in a cosmology does correspond to BDE2. Either the example you gave doesn't indicate that way, or it should be revised.
Click to expand...
Meh, I'll concede if Enerjack should get it as well then.
 
This is why I hate bringing other verses as an argument, it makes people not understanding the basic reason of how any tier or abilities actually work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Everything12
Arceus Avatar Tiering Issue Solution?
Replies
30
Views
6K
TheGreatJedi13
TheGreatJedi13
Everything12
  • Locked
Arceus Qualitative Upgrade
2
Replies
58
Views
16K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
RigelBR7
Amazo upgrade to Low 1-C, possibly 1-C.
Replies
6
Views
997
Vyfourthaccount
Vyfourthaccount
Everything12
  • Locked
Pokemon Tier 1 Upgrade? (Distortion World range and Arceus)
2
Replies
56
Views
8K
Everything12
Everything12
Ikhvagracia
Low 1-C Mikumoverse
Replies
2
Views
799
Miril
Miril
Back
Top