Analyzing the Tiering System

[DontTalkDT]

@DonTalk Sera also suggestion an option three; which we don't change the tier names of High 1-B or below but slightly alter some definitions. But we add Low 1-A and High 1-A for explaining borders of Outerversal or beyond stacking higher infinities.

Seems like this best of the three options.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

an creature above the outerversal hierarchy, but in their world there is another hierarchy, that character is 1-A or high 1-A?.

High 1-A.

 

[Lightbuster30]

I wonder if we'd finally be able to add 1-A match-ups.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Okay, so, if we are rejecting Option 1, then that's fine by me. Although I don't really like Option 3 either; Having infinite degrees of Outerversal being rated as solid 1-A just feels out of place, considering it seems to be based on Option 2, which divided Outerversal strictly into three sections: Measurable (Low 1-A), Immeasurable (1-A) and Boundless (0). If we are going to lean towards it, then infinite outerversal hierarchies should just be a + modifier, in my opinion, considering they branch off of Low 1-A more than anything. Then again, this is relatively minor, so

Anyways...

It is impossible to properly compare 1-A/0 and 1-A/0 from different settings. No one can make a proper argument to support one or another character. Isn't it the reason why we don't add 1-A matches to the character pages?

And the new tiering system is even worse simply because we will not be able to compare the stuff especially with more fanmade limits.

Okay, first off. There is literally zero concise reasons behind what you are saying: 1-A and 0 aren't special or in any way differentiated from the rest of the Tiering System, to the extent we have to say comparing characters from different verses who are at this level is impossible or whatever else. If you want to say this, then that's great, because we can also apply that same logic to 1-B and 1-C, and just merge it in a single, massive rating which we can't quantify.

Really, there is no reason Outerverse level can't be treated just like those two and be separate into subtiers denoting greater levels (which are normally demonstrated in fiction in the form of layers/levels of existence, but don't have to be denoted by either of those two), especially since one of the main proposals behind this thread is that we change it's (primary) definition from "lul beyond-dimenshuns" to "sizes which you can't reach by stacking more infinities", meaning the practical definition of it becomes way more solid and less fluid as a consequence.

This also loops back to what both me and Aeyu have been saying basically since this revision started: Tiering should be based off of area, the size of the sphere of influence demonstrated by a character, the stuff which they can provably affect.

Say, if an 1-A Character A fulfills only the basic requirements for the tier, but is depicted as an unchanging, boundless supreme being who governs all things in their verse and blah blah, then that's cool. But if there is an 1-A Character B, who has feats which far surpass the basic requirements for the tier, but isn't portrayed in a manner that as esoteric and grandiose as Character A, then we say Character B is stronger: It's as simple as that, and there is absolutely no need to overcomplicate it.

I am not saying portrayal has no bearing on the rating of a character, sometimes it ca be important in the process of finding out how strong this character is, of course, but in cases where there is no further context regarding it, it amounts to nothing.

Besides, I don't really care about 1-A matches anyways, if it were up to me we would just ban them and call it a day.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

"Literal Cardinality also ain't all that useful for measuring the global sizes of objects either, since literally anything has cardinality equal to the real numbers if we go by it. If you wanted to use infinite numbers as a measuring stick it would be more appropriate to say a given object has size analogous to a given number, rather than pointing at its cardinality."

Any thoughts on this?

Well, this is a bit different from what I am saying right now. Yeah, it is really a dumb practice to point at some physical space, say "omg it has cardinality of aleph-one!!!!!" and treat it as something impressive, because by then you'd be visualizing said space as a set, and thus it would have an uncountably infinite number of points anyways, just like literally any object we can think of: A circle is mathematically an uncountably infinite set, and so is piece of bread or an object of 1cm.

However, I personally don't see anything wrong with saying that a character's sphere of influence / size is equivalent to a given cardinal number. Yeah, yeah, a line with a length of 1cm has uncountably infinite points in it, but its actual size is still... well, 1cm.

So under @Sera's suggestions where would characters who view 1-A's as weak as dimensional characters like CM characters go? Just higher into "infinitely above 1-A"? In addition, wasn't it discussed in the Dark Tower thread that most of the tier 0s are where they are because they view 1-A as no different from the other tiers? Effectively transcending outervse hierarchies already?

This sort of perspective is sort of blurry and hard to quantify, to be blunt, especially when statements such as those are almost always giant hyperboles that are just there to show that X character is much stronger than Y character. But, assuming a verse means that literally, then you can either lowball it to hell or wank it all the way up to the ceiling.

I also always figured that this was something that was specifically the case with Gan. Otherwise, I think this should be inferred from like, actual feats / reliable statements done in the verse from which the character in question comes from; As I said, I don't really see why we should treat 1-A and 0 as any different from 1-B and 1-C, they aren't that special.

now onto @DontTalk's post...

 

[Sera_EX]

>1-A

>Feats

Let me stop you right there...

 

[VenomElite]

I see more hypothetical examples being used for an argument here, than actual notable examples from fiction. So why is 1-A and especially 0 even being discussed as being capable of comparison without evidence?

 

[Nepuko]

While it is kinda weird to have Infinite Outerversal tier not be assigned a "High" next to it like it's usually the case, I don't think adding a "+" modifier would do it...I mean, we never had a Tier with + next to it (Tier, not AP or stuff like that where it's for ex : Universe level+).

They say there's always a first time for something, but by that logic High 3-A should be 3-A+, etc.....

*sweats profusely*

Just bring back High 1-A dammit

 

[Sera_EX]

2-A is infinite, yet isn't assigned a "High".

 

[Nepuko]

Oh, indeed. So there's already a precendent huh.

 

[Andytrenom]

There are only 3 tiers in total currently that represent an infinite level of something

Two of them having a high is probably more something that just happens to be the way it is than a real convention that has to be preserved

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Is it okay if I just say this is all confusing as **** to me.

 

[Sera_EX]

Just as each higher dimension in 1-B is qualitatively superior to the previous, and this extends infinitely - with High 1-B being uncountable infinite dimensions - so can all the "outerversal layers" of 1-A extend infinitely with High 1-A being beyond the infinite outerversal hierarchy. It's quite simple.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

I see more hypothetical examples being used for an argument here, than actual notable examples from fiction. So why is 1-A and especially 0 even being discussed as being capable of comparison without evidence?

I believe a better question would be, "why can't they?", especially since, as I said in the post above, one of the proposals of this revision is extending the notion of "how big are you?" and making it universal all across the system, It's aiming to make the more linear, pretty much, mainly at the higher parts.

 

[Sera_EX]

Is it okay if I just say this is all confusing as **** to me.

When even Matt is confused... that's a red flag.

 

[VenomElite]

@Ultima

They can be compared in a way that we can say Featherine > Hajun, but when they're close in scale/size things get muddy since. So from a CRT perspective you're right on the money, but from a vs debating viewpoint it's controversial.

 

[Nepuko]

Is it okay if I just say this is all confusing as **** to me.

Basically, unless it changes in the future, the current suggestion is :

Low 1-A to be basically the Outerversal equivalent of 1-B : From baseline Outerversal till any finite number of "muh transcendence"

1-A : The Outerversal "equivalent" of current High 1-B. Outerversal "transcendence"/"layers"/etc extending out infinitely, (or even beyond I dunno)

High 1-A : Beyond all the Outerversal hierarchy. It might be a rough comparison, but that'll be basically like Current High 1-B with Current 1-A. Current 1-A compeltely surpassed High 1-B "hierarchy".


Hope that was clear .

Edit : got Ninja'd by Sewa

 

[Antoniofer]

Is it okay if I just say this is all confusing as **** to me.

It's also confusing to me, that's why I haven't voted. But I believe that main premise it's "extra-dimensional =/= stronger", that it may also apply to hax cuz really tired of hearing stuff like 4d mindhax, or 5d soul.

 

[Andytrenom]

While it is kinda weird to have Infinite Outerversal tier not be assigned a "High" next to it like it's usually the case, I don't think adding a "+" modifier would do it...I mean, we never had a Tier with + next to it (Tier, not AP or stuff like that where it's for ex : Universe level+).

And if that modifier is for the AP section only? It's kinda weird with how we use the + in tier 2 but then again, we use the + for different purposes in different parts of the system anyway. It wouldn't be as odd as adding it to the tier at least (which I don't think was the intent anyway, but I could be wrong)

 

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

I do have some questions:

For one, I'm very confused about the whole 'aleph' situation, despite reading the whole thread . Exactly how do we handle verses whose attempted to make cardinals such as "aleph" number to attempt to explain the number of "dimensions" and explicitly "larger than infinty" type of deal in explicit detail ?

 

[Nepuko]

reply

Unless you plan on giving it a new name, I don't see why adding the + modifier on only the AP would be a problem. 3-A and Low 2-C are different tiers, but in AP they're respecitvely Universe level and Universe level+.

 

[VenomElite]

Just as each higher dimension in 1-B is qualitatively superior to the previous, and this extends infinitely - with High 1-B being uncountable infinite dimensions - so can all the "outerversal layers" of 1-A extend infinitely with High 1-A being beyond the infinite outerversal hierarchy. It's quite simple.

^This

 

[Andytrenom]

@Nep Low 2-C is universe level+, high 3-A is high universe level

 

[Sera_EX]

@Nepuko

No. High 3-A is High Universe level. Low 2-C is Universe level+

 

[Nepuko]

Ye sorry just realised lmao. But anyway I don't think that changes much what I said, since in this case we have Universe -> High Universe -> Universe level+. For the "if it's AP only". Anyway XD.

 

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

I'm sorry for interrupting but can someone please answer my question ? If a verse explicitly has George Cantor's concepts[ Starting with Aleph and above] explaining the number of dimensions [universes or higher-dimensions]... where would this end up in the new tiering system ?

 

[Sera_EX]

Please don't dwell on hypotheticals. Unless you have a notable example from a fictional series, we'll be arguing about nothing. We shouldn't waste our time debating outliers.

 

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

With all due respect Sera, that isn't "really" hypothetical:

"George Cantor is a russian Monk that at the turn of the century was the first to study what is called Transfinite Numbers, starting with Aleph, an infinite series of infinite numbers, all greater than each other. Quite understadably, he died a madman"

"Yet it is of such concepts and more that the Multiverse is made. The Multiverse is literally a Transfinite --- A Number Greater than Infinity --- of Universes, popularly called dimensions " .

This isn't all the occurences of Cantor's concepts being connected to the verse but this is the most notable segment I would like for the verse name to be unmentioned but I'm mentioning the quote to have an idea of how the aleph number stuff will work for future threads so that's why I'm using it.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

@Ultima

They can be compared in a way that we can say Featherine > Hajun, but when they're close in scale/size things get muddy since. So from a CRT perspective you're right on the money, but from a vs debating viewpoint it's controversial.

I am like, 99% sure you are referring to something else with that, but should a VS Debating perspective matter when dealing with these characters? They are mostly just there for indexing in the first place, and matches on their level should honestly have been banned a long time ago. I am pretty sure no one in their right mind would make TOAA vs The Creator as an actual match or smth, especially with the new system making the difference between tiers more visible and accentuating whose cosmology is larger or smaller.

 

[Sera_EX]

@Seed

I meant hypotheticals as in "what verse even does this?" Basically, give an example of a verse that explicitly uses George Cantor terminology.

 

[Udlmaster]

@Sera EX

Azrael from Discworld specifically transcends Cantor's theory on Sets of infinity.

 

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

... Marvel does Sera. That was what that example was. I wanted to know if that example , based on the newer stuff introduced in this thread, would boost it higher than 2-A or not, and if so... where would it be on the new tiering system ? . I won't discuss it any further if you answer this question since I don't think we should be discussing how it affect explicit verses [unless I took this info wrong] but this question was nagging me since Schroeder mentioned it loosely before.

 

[Setsuna_tenma]

I have to disagree on having 1A+ since 1A is a tier that can go on as much as the writer wants.

 

[Sera_EX]

Well, hopefully Ultima can answer that. I personally am very uncomfortable with all this.

 

[Udlmaster]

X-Y+ just seems really out of place, I don't think there's any tier that uses + in it, it is easy, as Nep's example gave, that we can decompress 1-A, into Low 1-A, 1-A, High 1-A, and at the absolute most 0.

 

[The_2nd_Existential_Seed]

Okay then. Thank you Sera for your time. Because based on the full context of the scan Marvel wasn't just referring to "Aleph".in describing the concept of trasnfinite .. He was talking about Cantor's entire theory of transfinite numbers and that it describes the Multiverse entire [ at least before they got into the higher-dimensions... They are talking about realities here]... Meaning transfinite in Marvel is equivalent to the highest thing in cantors theory involving numbers which I'm utterly confused on how to convert this properly.

Here is the scan but I'm certain people are well aware of it (https://comicvine1.cbsistatic.com/u...02593/3070536-drstrangesorcerersupre21-18.jpg)

 

[Kepekley23]

Treating this wiki as if it were an actual real-world job that you can "waste valuable time" on instead of an accuracy/fun-driven project that can take its time getting to the important point is why it's common for people to comment it is declining.

Considering the recent growth of "composite cosmology" verses, Seed's hypothetical isn't even a hypothetical. There are quite a few popular verses out there that deal with "obscure" mathematical hierarchies, so it's a worthwhile question.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Ban all matches 1-A or higher in the new system.

Also, no shitty "Apeirofartoversal" terms or anything.

And no High 1-A either.

 

[Udlmaster]

Ban all matches 1-A or higher in the new system.
Also, no shitty "Apeirofartoversal" terms or anything.

And no High 1-A either.

Assfartoutversal

For "Low 1-A", which is said to be Baseline Outerversal, that seems fine to use, as it's a concrete tier and not fluid like Old/Current 1-A, unless Low 1-A is gonna be fluid too, then Neo 1-A would be okay, as you're at infinite Transcendences which is a concrete position too.

 

[Hykuu]

Also, no shitty "Apeirofartoversal" terms or anything.

LMFAO