Another Addition/Revision to/for Tier 2

[PrinceofPein]

While there is a general idea on how we treat the merging of universes/timelines and empty spaces. There is no written rule on it.
This thread aims to change that since it does not hurt to have a solid rule on how we treat this cases.
(And as usual, I do not mind a clean up of the language to make it more coherent)

Post One
Currently, Tier 2 deals with space-time continuums/timelines, and anything less than a complete space-time continuum will not qualify for tier 2, so how do we treat merging of spaces or universes?
Here is a guideline that I think should be added to the timeline/tier section of the FAQ or the Universe page.
- Merging of the two or more universal spaces that is not done across all of time does not qualify for tier 2. The merging of two or more universes qualifies for tier 2 only when the merge is done across all of time i.e. the past, present and the future are merged to become one.

Post Two
Another thing that we do not have written rule for is the destruction of empty spaces.
Since the reason for why we tier anything is the energy needed for the destruction of matter of that scale even for tier 1 and above. The creating/destruction/affecting of empty spaces as absurd as it sounds(since that is just something I can also do, I can create an empty space, but hey it is fiction and it happens a lot) should not be tiering applicable and should just grant range since nothing is been destroyed. i.e. destroying/creating or affecting an empty universal space or void instead of it to be 3-A (due to the range of it) should not grant any tier and just range, since no matter is been created or destroyed. this can be added to the FAQ also or Universe page
- Destruction of empty spaces are not tiering applicable since what we give ratings to is the amount of energy needed to destroy/create or affect certain amount of matter. Hence, there is no logical way to tier the creation or destruction of a space in which there is no matter

Miscellaneous
And another thing is how we treat mind spaces
I am reading a series Overgeared, and I am making profiles for the novels already and in this novel there are things called "mental worlds" in most cases these mental worlds are just worlds in your head and not physical spaces, you can think of it as a meta-physical spaces but whatever you will in it can be brought into reality and lastly these worlds are infinite in size, this is more of a question, how do we treat someone who can enter such a mental world and destroy the space?


Votes

Post one
Agree: @Eficiente
Neutral:
Disagree: @Lonkitt

Post two
Agree: @Eficiente
Neutral:
Disagree:

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Post One
Currently, Tier 2 deals with space-time continuums/timelines, and anything less than a complete space-time continuum will not qualify for tier 2, so how do we treat merging of spaces or universes?
Here is a guideline that I think should be added to the timeline/tier section of the FAQ or the Universe page.
- Merging of the two or more universal spaces that is not done across all of time does not qualify for tier 2. The merging of two or more universes qualifies for tier 2 only when the merge is done across all of time i.e. the past, present and the future are merged to become one.

I'm aware this is a staff thread, but how would you even prove this? Can you give an example of a verse that explicitly lays out that two universes being merged also have them be merged across past, present, and future?

 

[PrinceofPein]

I'm aware this is a staff thread, but how would you even prove this? Can you give an example of a verse that explicitly lays out that two universes being merged also have them be merged across past, present, and future?

Prove what part exactly?
That's is already how we treat tier 2, affecting across a space-time continuum and merging of just 2 universal space in the presence to become a bigger one or for other reasons should be tier 3.

If it is a contained space-time, then you do not need to prove it is done across all of time as that is a full ST continuum on its own. But for verses where is it bringing two universes closer and joining it together, or simply done through other means that happens just in the present, that tier 3

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Prove what part exactly?
That's is already how we treat tier 2, affecting across a space-time continuum and merging of just 2 universal space in the presence to become a bigger one or for other reasons should be tier 3.

The part about them being explicitly confirmed to merge the past, present, and future, not just two universes.

- Merging of the two or more universal spaces that is not done across all of time does not qualify for tier 2. The merging of two or more universes qualifies for tier 2 only when the merge is done across all of time i.e. the past, present and the future are merged to become one.

If no verse here would qualify under these new standards, then the standards are bad and should not be applied. We've done this song and dance before with type 5 acausality, so let's not repeat that, okay?

 

[PrinceofPein]

The part about them being explicitly confirmed to merge the past, present, and future, not just two universes.

That's what tier 2 is though, affecting a universe across all of time. So yes if you do not do that it is tier 3.

If no verse here would qualify under these new standards, then the standards are bad and should not be applied. We've done this song and dance before with type 5 acausality, so let's not repeat that, okay?

If it is not tier 2 it is tier 3. Simple as that, it's not a must a verse should be tier 2 through merging if they do not qualify.
Same thing was said when I wanted to apply across time to tier 2 and guess what lots of verses still qualify.
This is accepted already, I am just applying it to a part we do not touch.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

That's what tier 2 is though, affecting a universe across all of time. So yes if you do not do that it is tier 3.

If it is not tier 2 it is tier 3. Simple as that, it's not a must a verse should be tier 2 through merging if they do not qualify.
Same thing was said when I wanted to apply across time to tier 2 and guess what lots of verses still qualify.
This is accepted already, I am just applying it to a part we do not touch.

Okay, so by your own admission no universe merging feat would be valid, which means the first half of this thread is bunk and should be removed.

"If it's not (x) then it's ( y)" is a bad argument; Literally no different than saying "if it's not type 5 acausality then it's type 4", which in case you've forgotten, was removed specifically because it was way too strict for any character to ever get. Why is this different?

 

[PrinceofPein]

Okay, so by your own admission no universe merging feat would be valid, which means the first half of this thread is bunk and should be removed.

Huh? Where on my post did I say universe merging feats are not valid?
I said if it is not done according to tier 2 standards it should be tier 3

"If it's not (x) then it's ( y)" is a bad argument; Literally no different than saying "if it's not type 5 acausality then it's type 4", which in case you've forgotten, was removed specifically because it was way too strict for any character to ever get. Why is this different?

No it is not bad arguments and this is literally if it does not qualify for tier 2 then it is tier 3, simple as that. And also there is still Acausality type 5 and just fewer characters scale to it. This is not so hard, tier 2 involves space time continuums, merging that should qualify should also involve that. The only way this will not be true is to change the current tier 2 standards.

You have said enough and bring nothing new here so I will have to ask you to stop and wait for staffs and knowledgeable members to give their inputs.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Huh? Where on my post did I say universe merging feats are not valid?
I said if it is not done according to tier 2 standards it should be tier 3

No it is not bad arguments and this is literally if it does not qualify for tier 2 then it is tier 3, simple as that. And also there is still Acausality type 5 and just fewer characters scale to it. This is not so hard, tier 2 involves space time continuums, merging that should qualify should also involve that. The only way this will not be true is to change the current tier 2 standards.

You have said enough and bring nothing new here so I will have to ask you to stop and wait for staffs and knowledgeable members to give their inputs.

Pein this is extremely simple

Can you give me an example of a single verse that would have a valid universe merging feat if your new standards were applied? If not, then the standards are too strict.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Pein this is extremely simple

Can you give me an example of a single verse that would have a valid universe merging feat if your new standards were applied? If not, then the standards are too strict.

They are still valid, they are just tier 3 if it is joining of two universal spaces alone and tier 2 if it is joining of two space time continuums.
Just as the standard is destruction of two universal space is 3-A and destruction of two space-time continuum is tier 2. So please stop derailing this now, if you want you are welcome to make a thread to address tier 2.

Not that it matters but, I cannot even think of that many universe merging feat aside FF which is not really one but I will get to that later, and the only valid universe merging feat I can think of is bleach.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

They are still valid, they are just tier 3 if it is joining of two universal spaces alone and tier 2 if it is joining of two space time continuums.
Just as the standard is destruction of two universal space is 3-A and destruction of two space-time continuum is tier 2. So please stop derailing this now, if you want you are welcome to make a thread to address tier 2.

Not that it matters but, I cannot even think of that many universe merging feat aside FF which is not really one but I will get to that later, and the only valid universe merging feat I can think of is bleach.

Okay, let me rephrase that.

Can you give me an example of a single verse that would have a valid 2-C universe merging feat if your new standards were applied? If not, then the standards are too strict.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Okay, let me rephrase that.

Can you give me an example of a single verse that would have a valid 2-C universe merging feat if your new standards were applied? If not, then the standards are too strict.

Please try and read what I am saying properly. These are not new standards they are already accepted, this is just a thread to say it should be written somewhere.

If your verses do not qualify for tier 2 they are tier 3. We cannot change the tiering system or be biased towards one part cause of your personal preferences.

Lastly, you are derailing, if you want to list all the verses that have universe merging feat be my guest aside that get permission before posting here. As I will report the next derailing post.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Please try and read what I am saying properly. These are not new standards they are already accepted, this is just a thread to say it should be written somewhere.

If your verses do not qualify for tier 2 they are tier 3. We cannot change the tiering system or be biased towards one part cause of your personal preferences.

Lastly, you are derailing, if you want to list all the verses that have universe merging feat be my guest aside that get permission before posting here. As I will report the next derailing post.

1. This has nothing to do with my verses. Quit poisoning the well.
2. Can you post where this specific standard was accepted?
3. That is not even remotely my point; It's not that other verses wouldn't have universe merging feats at all, it's that no verse would have a 2-C universe merging feat, which would make the "2-C merging feat" standards completely useless as it would apply to nobody.
4. This is not derailing as it directly pertains to one of the proposals in the thread.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Please try and read what I am saying properly. These are not new standards they are already accepted, this is just a thread to say it should be written somewhere.

If your verses do not qualify for tier 2 they are tier 3. We cannot change the tiering system or be biased towards one part cause of your personal preferences.

Lastly, you are derailing, if you want to list all the verses that have universe merging feat be my guest aside that get permission before posting here. As I will report the next derailing post.

1. Quit the "read what I'm saying properly" nonsense, she is and you're avoiding her question.
2. Her question is valid to begin with. If nothing qualifies by these standards, then they're too strict.
3. You're the OP, so if you're being asked this, you don't shift the need to provide proof back onto her.

 

[PrinceofPein]

1. This has nothing to do with my verses. Quit poisoning the well.

Never said it does.

2. Can you post where this specific standard was accepted?

I have been doing a series of thread.

https://vsbattles.com/threads/small-addition-to-the-low-2-c.127383/

https://vsbattles.com/threads/tier-2-requirements-and-examples-part-2.145939/

3. That is not even remotely my point; It's not that other verses wouldn't have universe merging feats at all, it's that no verse would have a 2-C universe merging feat, which would make the "2-C merging feat" standards completely useless as it would apply to nobody.

Again these are already accepted that is what 2-C is, do you have any example of a verse who has merging feats?

4. This is not derailing as it directly pertains to one of the proposals in the thread.

You need permission to post in a staff thread.
That's all and you have done enough.

1. Quit the "read what I'm saying properly" nonsense, she is and you're avoiding her question.

No I am not avoiding the question, I answered it well and she is not reading what I am saying properly, this is not a new standard.

1. Her question is valid to begin with. If nothing qualifies by these standards, then they're too strict.

You should also read what I am saying. These standards are already accepted, they are not new, tier 2 is for space time continuums

1. You're the OP, so if you're being asked this, you don't shift the need to provide proof back onto her.

I was asked to provide examples which is not part of my job, as the two I know would not qualify and I asked her to provide more examples, if she has them. Simple.

 

[CloverDragon03]

No I am not avoiding the question, I answered it well and she is not reading what I am saying properly, this is not a new standard.

I am telling you that you are. Not once did you provide any verse that would qualify for this (which was Fuji's question), and if nothing qualifies for this, then the standards are too strict. That simple.

You should also read what I am saying. These standards are already accepted, they are not new, tier 2 is for space time continuums

If you're being told to quit that kind of attitude, it only hurts you if you double down on it.

And if they're accepted already, this thread is unnecessary. But that's not what you're doing. You're requiring explicit statements that specifically mention past, present, and future, and that anything ever-so-slightly short of that just straight up doesn't qualify. And I'm not a fan of that level of strictness, so I disagree with this premise.

I was asked to provide examples which is not part of my job, as the two I know would not qualify and I asked her to provide more examples, if she has them. Simple.

You are the OP. If concerns are brought to the OP's attention, it is the OP's job to address them or concede to them.

 

[PrinceofPein]

I am telling you that you are. Not once did you provide any verse that would qualify for this (which was Fuji's question), and if nothing qualifies for this, then the standards are too strict. That simple.

Again it is not required I do so, there are very few merging feats to begin with, 2 of which I know and I have provided

If you're being told to quit that kind of attitude, it only hurts you if you double down on it.

What attitude? you fail to read what I am writing and I am calling you out on it. I said these are not new standards and you keep hammering that I am trying to add a new standard, are you really reading what I am writing in that scenario?

And if they're accepted already, this thread is unnecessary. But that's not what you're doing. You're requiring explicit statements that specifically mention past, present, and future, and that anything ever-so-slightly short of that just straight up doesn't qualify.

Refer to the OP,

Currently, Tier 2 deals with space-time continuums/timelines, and anything less than a complete space-time continuum will not qualify for tier 2

Tier 2 requires for the destruction of space-time continuums and anything less than that is not, same thing goes here, anything less than that is not. This is not a new standard, we have been at it for 2 years now, it was done last year and then another thread which was finished this year. This is not a new standard.

And I'm not a fan of that level of strictness, so I disagree with this premise.

Okay you can make a thread on your own to change the tier 2 standards.

You are the OP. If concerns are brought to the OP's attention, it is the OP's job to address them or concede to them.

There are no concerns brought, that I have to address "I do not know a verse that have merging universe feat" is frankly not my own concern.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Agnaa @Everything12
What do you think about this?

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Pein, there is an inherent contradiction between the ideas of "a rule that outlines what you need to qualify for 2-C merging feats" and "nobody on the wiki qualifies for a 2-C merging feat"; If the latter is true, which it would be according to you, then the former is deeply flawed and should be fixed.

I will again point to type 5 acausality, where we had standards on how to get it, but nobody fit those standards so we removed them. Can you prove that this will be any different?

 

[PrinceofPein]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Elizhaa @Agnaa @Everything12
What do you think about this?

Thank you, please tag Deagonx, firestorm, efficiente also.

 

[Agnaa]

@Agnaa
What do you think about this?

I currently have 40 threads in my "to-evaluate" backlog, I've added this to the list, and will get to it eventually.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

Thank you, please tag Deagonx, firestorm, efficiente also.

@Deagonx @Firestorm808 @Eficiente

 

[CloverDragon03]

Again it is not required I do so, there are very few merging feats to begin with, 2 of which I know and I have provided

You brought up Fire Force, which you don't even agree with, and Bleach, which doesn't even have such a feat (the realms are considered planets, not universes)

So one of these isn't even a Tier 3 feat (let alone a Tier 2 one) and you even admit that the other one is one you don't agree with and I assume that you will attempt to remove.

What attitude? you fail to read what I am writing and I am calling you out on it. I said these are not new standards and you keep hammering that I am trying to add a new standard, are you really reading what I am writing in that scenario?

I'm not "failing to read" anything, I'm simply saying something you don't like and you view it as such. You're trying to add an unreasonable level of strictness to an existing standard, and as Fuji said, this is very much akin to the Type 5 Acausality debacle.

Tier 2 requires for the destruction of space-time continuums and anything less than that is not, same thing goes here, anything less than that is not. This is not a new standard, we have been at it for 2 years now, it was done last year and then another thread which was finished this year. This is not a new standard.


Okay you can make a thread on your own to change the tier 2 standards.

You're trying to add additional, unnecessary strictness that requires hyper-specific statements (such as requiring explicit statements of "past, present, and future") to an existing standard. I don't need to make a new thread to contest that, and I will not.

There are no concerns brought, that I have to address "I do not know a verse that have merging universe feat" is frankly not my own concern.

There are. You're being provided with one and you're failing to address it

 

[CloverDragon03]

With my stance on the matter being made clear, I'll take my leave until more staff come in

 

[PrinceofPein]

Pein, there is an inherent contradiction between the ideas of "a rule that outlines what you need to qualify for 2-C merging feats" and "nobody on the wiki qualifies for a 2-C merging feat"; If the latter is true, which it would be according to you, then the former is deeply flawed and should be fixed.

There are very few merging feat on the wiki currently, and I have not even seen a single tier 2 merging feat, all the ones I see are for tier 3 and follows the rule that if what you are merging are just 3-D spaces, then it is tier 3.

I will again point to type 5 acausality, where we had standards on how to get it, but nobody fit those standards so we removed them. Can you prove that this will be any different?

We still have acausality type 5 and it is still pretty much the same thing, please read the page.
Also if you have nothing else to add, stop.

You brought up Fire Force, which you don't even agree with, and Bleach, which doesn't even have such a feat (the realms are considered planets, not universes)

Well they used to be universes from what I remember I guess that changed

So one of these isn't even a Tier 3 feat (let alone a Tier 2 one) and you even admit that the other one is one you don't agree with and I assume that you will attempt to remove.

Maybe and maybe not, we will see.

I'm not "failing to read" anything, I'm simply saying something you don't like and you view it as such. You're trying to add an unreasonable level of strictness to an existing standard, and as Fuji said, this is very much akin to the Type 5 Acausality debacle.

I do not know what else to say if you will not simply read what I am saying. "These are not new standards, these are already accepted" for a universal feat to qualify for tier 2, it needs to be done across all of time.
Low 2-C are for 4D feats, and how is joining two 3D spaces together a 4D feat? please if you cannot be objective do not come at me

You're trying to add additional, unnecessary strictness that requires hyper-specific statements (such as requiring explicit statements of "past, present, and future") to an existing standard.

the standard already has that but of course you never bothered with it

Characters or objects that are capable of significantly affecting,[1] creating, and/or destroying an area of space qualitatively larger than an infinitely-sized 3-dimensional space. Common fictional examples of spaces representing such sizes are space-time continuums (the entire past, present and future of 3-dimensional space) of a universal scale.

Do you understand this? affecting a space that is qualitatively superior to a universe sized 3-D space, 2 3-D spaces combined are not qualitatively superior to 3-D
That is not all, let us take a look at the FAQ

the affected area either has to be a large four dimensional space, be qualitatively superior to three dimensional spaces or, most commonly, be an entire space-time continuum.

two spaces that are 3-D are not a large 4-D space.
More from the FAQ

The latter means that all of the three-dimensional space of the universe has to be destroyed or created, at each moment in time. I.e. the entire timeline has to be destroyed.

"each moment in time" not just anytime

Now another quote from the universe page

the entire timeline must be destroyed or created, taking into account all moments in time.

These are not new standards, I cannot stress this enough, they are literally everywhere

I don't need to make a new thread to contest that, and I will not.

Exactly, so please let the staff members and knowledgeable members comment here

There are. You're being provided with one and you're failing to address it

An actual argument or concern that I have to address will be "I do not think merging of just spaces should be tier 3 because x happens when y goes and then you have 4+4 which makes 8 so just merging the spaces will still result in as much energy as destruction of two infinite uncountable universe spaces" you know logical arguments that argues against the premise of the thread and not personal preference of what is strict and cause they cannot think of any example of merging feat.

 

[Eficiente]

Post One
Currently, Tier 2 deals with space-time continuums/timelines, and anything less than a complete space-time continuum will not qualify for tier 2, so how do we treat merging of spaces or universes?
Here is a guideline that I think should be added to the timeline/tier section of the FAQ or the Universe page.
- Merging of the two or more universal spaces that is not done across all of time does not qualify for tier 2. The merging of two or more universes qualifies for tier 2 only when the merge is done across all of time i.e. the past, present and the future are merged to become one.

Ok, I agree.

Post Two
Another thing that we do not have written rule for is the destruction of empty spaces.
Since the reason for why we tier anything is the energy needed for the destruction of matter of that scale even for tier 1 and above. The creating/destruction/affecting of empty spaces as absurd as it sounds(since that is just something I can also do, I can create an empty space, but hey it is fiction and it happens a lot) should not be tiering applicable and should just grant range since nothing is been destroyed. i.e. destroying/creating or affecting an empty universal space or void instead of it to be 3-A (due to the range of it) should not grant any tier and just range, since no matter is been created or destroyed. this can be added to the FAQ also or Universe page
- Destruction of empty spaces are not tiering applicable since what we give ratings to is the amount of energy needed to destroy/create or affect certain amount of matter. Hence, there is no logical way to tier the creation or destruction of a space in which there is no matter

Are we talking about something that would otherwise be 3-A or below? If so, sure.

Miscellaneous
And another thing is how we treat mind spaces
I am reading a series Overgeared, and I am making profiles for the novels already and in this novel there are things called "mental worlds" in most cases these mental worlds are just worlds in your head and not physical spaces, you can think of it as a meta-physical spaces but whatever you will in it can be brought into reality and lastly these worlds are infinite in size, this is more of a question, how do we treat someone who can enter such a mental world and destroy the space?

Enter is Immersion, take things from it is Subjective Reality (Can be the powers of characters, or the rules of the place allowing this, the latter not belonging to the characters. Same with Immersion), destroy them is Mind Manipulation. Now, could it be that this level of destruction is something that shows they can do the same in reality? Sure, but the standard is that this needs needs to be proven to be the case.

If they showed any powers in this mind spaces that they do not have in the real world, or call powers (they already have in reality) "mental powers" while inside minds or something alike, it's even worst, but this doesn't need to be the case for the destruction to not be applicable in reality.

 

[PrinceofPein]

Ok, I agree.

Are we talking about something that would otherwise be 3-A or below? If so, sure.

Yes, it is for such spaces.

Enter is Immersion, take things from it is Subjective Reality (Can be the powers of characters, or the rules of the place allowing this, the latter not belonging to the characters. Same with Immersion), destroy them is Mind Manipulation. Now, could it be that this level of destruction is something that shows they can do the same in reality? Sure, but the standard is that this needs needs to be proven to be the case.

If they showed any powers in this mind spaces that they do not have in the real world, or call powers (they already have in reality) "mental powers" while inside minds or something alike, it's even worst, but this doesn't need to be the case for the destruction to not be applicable in reality.

The character was dragged into another's mental world and then he started destroying the place with normal magic spells he uses in reality. So while it is a mind space, and nothing is a reality, characters can physically access it and perform feats in it. That was why I asked how we treat mind spaces

 

[Eficiente]

The last bit could be its own thread to build standards on it. I myself definitely wouldn't give it a tier if it's a higher tier than what they show in reality and it's not stated that the do things with the same power they have in reality, but as a wiki, we could likely agree on standards (The ones I said before, no abnormal physics there or any display of empowerment, etc.) that would leave it as a "possibly".

--

Having read the rest of the thread. I saw miscommunication rather than misbehavior. And it's not the best practice to ask ourselves "how does this affect X verse?", just "how much sense does this make?". In that regard, let's take small steps, if it's proven in-universe that all of time wasn't affect then we agree it's not 2-C. -> We can have that written then. -> In many verses where this happens, legit everyone remembers the times where the universes weren't fused, it was a notable thing of the past and how they have to live is the now. Structures and characters' lives likewise stay with their life up to the point being the same, rather than with their history changed for the new context given by the 2 universes being fused. -> So needless to say, they don't count. So far so good?

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

There are very few merging feat on the wiki currently, and I have not even seen a single tier 2 merging feat, all the ones I see are for tier 3 and follows the rule that if what you are merging are just 3-D spaces, then it is tier 3.

lol
Here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. Ten separate examples, limited only by my lack of ability to care any more than that.

 

[PrinceofPein]

lol
Here,

See this qualfies, "merging timelines" look at that

here,

to little context but probably not, since it is the stopping of two spaces merging together

here,

too little context, maybe not

here,

merged two timelines, qualifies

here,

nothing here talks about merging

here,

does not qualify

here,

has nothing to do with merging timelines

here,

two little context, need more

here,

too little context also

and here.

Too little context

Ten separate examples, limited only by my lack of ability to care any more than that.

8 actually, 2 of which solidly qualifies, one Rick and morty not likely not based on my knowledge of it anyway. and the rest I will need more context.

So yes verses do qualify for this

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Except this presents yet another contradiction, where the mention of a time axis (a timeline) makes the feat valid, but we treat a universe as all of space and time, so it'd be equally valid under the same logic; Either a time axis lets the feat qualify or it doesn't. As of right now, your distinction between timeline and universe is wholly arbitrary.

 

[Eficiente]

We don't treat "universe" as all of time as in Low 2-C unless prove, because while someone can say "universe" and refer to it, it is immensely unlikely. A universe is all of space and time, yes, but by far more often than not we refer to time as a present thing, not all of time from the start of the universe to the end of time. Just like saying "what time it is?" refers to the present time only.

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

We don't treat "universe" as all of time as in Low 2-C unless prove, because while someone can say "universe" and refer to it, it is immensely unlikely. A universe is all of space and time, yes, but by far more often than not we refer to time as a present thing, not all of time from the start of the universe to the end of time. Just like saying "what time it is?" refers to the present time only.

So what's the alternative? That any given universe lacks time until proven otherwise?

That's also... a comically bad comparison. I don't even know where to start with that.

 

[deonment]

Post One
Currently, Tier 2 deals with space-time continuums/timelines, and anything less than a complete space-time continuum will not qualify for tier 2, so how do we treat merging of spaces or universes?
Here is a guideline that I think should be added to the timeline/tier section of the FAQ or the Universe page.
- Merging of the two or more universal spaces that is not done across all of time does not qualify for tier 2. The merging of two or more universes qualifies for tier 2 only when the merge is done across all of time i.e. the past, present and the future are merged to become one.

You do realize that if you merge two timelines present to future, that is still affecting an infinite 4D hypervolume since we presume timelines are infinite, and tier 2 and up is based on affecting a volume, meaning that this standard simply just doesn't work by mathematical or physical metrics.

Post Two
Another thing that we do not have written rule for is the destruction of empty spaces.
Since the reason for why we tier anything is the energy needed for the destruction of matter of that scale even for tier 1 and above. The creating/destruction/affecting of empty spaces as absurd as it sounds(since that is just something I can also do, I can create an empty space, but hey it is fiction and it happens a lot) should not be tiering applicable and should just grant range since nothing is been destroyed. i.e. destroying/creating or affecting an empty universal space or void instead of it to be 3-A (due to the range of it) should not grant any tier and just range, since no matter is been created or destroyed. this can be added to the FAQ also or Universe page
- Destruction of empty spaces are not tiering applicable since what we give ratings to is the amount of energy needed to destroy/create or affect certain amount of matter. Hence, there is no logical way to tier the creation or destruction of a space in which there is no matter

We don't tier stuff from high 3-A and up based on the amount of energy they use, otherwise high 3-A to high 1-B would be the exact same tier as they all still deal with only an infinite amount of joules, what we care about from low 2-C and up is affecting a requisite hypervolume (R^4 for low 2-C, R^5/6 for low 1-C, R^7-9 for 1-C, etc) with energy, irregardless of what is within said hypervolume as if you can affect it, either way, you are outputting infinite joules.
Also, it's kinda funny you mention this given that most of the universe, and thereby timeline is made up of empty space, and we only get 3-A from it because of said empty space since even the mass-energy of the universe isn't anywhere close to 3-A, and only gets that high due to ISL + a one-off celestial body near the edge that you would have to overcome the GBE of, empty space is a shitty argument to use.

 

[PrinceofPein]

So what's the alternative? That any given universe lacks time until proven otherwise?

No please do not take his words out of contexts.
He said without the needed "context"
Same thing for tier 2 like I already hammered so many times, statement of "he destroyed the universe" are just tier 3, but with context that all of time was involved it becomes tier 2, this is how we treat it currently you dont like it, provide logical arguments in a thread of your own and not here.

That's also... a comically bad comparison. I don't even know where to start with that.

Thank you for your input but any other thing from you, I will be reporting you.

You do realize that if you merge two timelines present to future, that is still affecting an infinite 4D hypervolume since we presume timelines are infinite, and tier 2 and up is based on affecting a volume, meaning that this standard simply just doesn't work by mathematical or physical metrics.

First, get permission before posting
And where in that statement did it say that merging of the the present and the future will not qualify? In fact if what was merge is just the past and present, and the past is not infinite, that will be high 3-A, what makes it low 2-C to begin with is because the future is usually assumed to be infinite in contrast to the past.
Merging of just the present means they have the same future now by paradoxical means, that is just tier 3, same thing with destroying a universe in the present means no more future for it, but such paradoxes are natural and will not get you a higher tier than 3.

Also your post makes no complete sense, tell me how tier 2 involving affecting 4D volume means this does not work? When what this is saying is that there should be 4D volume getting merged together for it to be tier 2, like do you guys even bother to read this things or you just see things you don't understand and decide to post?
Also if anyone is worried about the standard make a thread. This is already the standard and I am tired of sounding like a broken record.

We don't tier stuff from high 3-A and up based on the amount of energy they use, otherwise high 3-A to high 1-B would be the exact same tier as they all still deal with only an infinite amount of joules, what we care about from low 2-C and up is affecting a requisite hypervolume (R^4 for low 2-C, R^5/6 for low 1-C, R^7-9 for 1-C, etc) with energy, irregardless of what is within said hypervolume as if you can affect it, either way, you are outputting infinite joules.

Please read the OP properly, this is for high 3-A and below.

Also, it's kinda funny you mention this given that most of the universe, and thereby timeline is made up of empty space, and we only get 3-A from it because of said empty space since even the mass-energy of the universe isn't anywhere close to 3-A, and only gets that high due to ISL + a one-off celestial body near the edge that you would have to overcome the GBE of, empty space is a shitty argument to use.

Who talks about timeline in point two? Like where are you seeing these takes from?
And no we tier things based on the matter within it, this is literally the definition of tier 3 in the tiering page "Characters or objects that can create or destroy all celestial bodies within a finite 3-D space at least equivalent in size to the observable universe" literally the amount of energy needed to destroy all celestial bodies within an observable universe space.
what tier will you give for creating nothing or destroying nothing? Look at that I just destroyed nothing the size of a car by swinging a bat in 360 in an empty space, I must be tier 9-B. You get nothing from destroying nothing
Please stop clogging up this thread, you dont have to comment.

 

[KLOL506]

@AKM sama @Celestial_Pegasus @Planck69 @Theglassman12 @LephyrTheRevanchist @Lonkitt @Qawsedf234 @Abstractions @Sir_Ovens @ByAsura @Starter_Pack @Just_a_Random_Butler Your opinions here would be appreciated.

 

[Lonkitt]

I disagree to both

 

[PrinceofPein]

I disagree to both

Reasons?

 

[Lonkitt]

Reasons?

Essentially for the same reasons spoken of above from users who disagree. I find the arguments in the OP to be incredibly faulty

 

[PrinceofPein]

Essentially for the same reasons spoken of above from users who disagree. I find the arguments in the OP to be incredibly faulty

The reasons spoken above are "it is too strict" and as efficiente said "who will not scale to this" is not an argument. Aside that, this is the standard already, so it is not a matter of preference. You are a mod you should be familiar with the system already but I'd copy out my previous reply to clover, the standard already said this is what qualifies for tier 2.

the standard already has that but of course you never bothered with it

Characters or objects that are capable of significantly affecting,[1] creating, and/or destroying an area of space qualitatively larger than an infinitely-sized 3-dimensional space. Common fictional examples of spaces representing such sizes are space-time continuums (the entire past, present and future of 3-dimensional space) of a universal scale.

Do you understand this? affecting a space that is qualitatively superior to a universe sized 3-D space, 2 3-D spaces combined are not qualitatively superior to 3-D
That is not all, let us take a look at the FAQ

the affected area either has to be a large four dimensional space, be qualitatively superior to three dimensional spaces or, most commonly, be an entire space-time continuum.

two spaces that are 3-D are not a large 4-D space.
More from the FAQ

The latter means that all of the three-dimensional space of the universe has to be destroyed or created, at each moment in time. I.e. the entire timeline has to be destroyed.

"each moment in time" not just anytime

Now another quote from the universe page

the entire timeline must be destroyed or created, taking into account all moments in time.

These are not new standards

These are from the FAQ, Universe and Tiering page, this thread is to apply it also to merging.

So forgive me if I refuse to find your vote valid, since you have failed to provide a good reason for it, but you are welcome to change the standard or make an actual argument against why an already accepted standard should not be applied.

 

[ImmortalDread]

You can't simply invalidate staff votes because you find them insufficient, excuse my comment (you can delete it if you want), but that's a violation as (vote manipulation). Also, it is an eye of perspective if you find it good or bad reason, so this is a bit subjective to conclude to remove his vote unless his reasons are on blatant personal level.