- 19,202
- 28,274
Do you have any thoughts on the Garganta fulfilling vsbw standards for being universal in size?Alright things are getting peaceful again, keep it up gents
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do you have any thoughts on the Garganta fulfilling vsbw standards for being universal in size?Alright things are getting peaceful again, keep it up gents
Actual question about that, why do we consider Yhwach non-corporeal at that point?YH at that point when the arrow was used was non corporeal
Just to respond to this real quick, this doesnt help your argument either. Worsens it if anything.YH at that point when the arrow was used was non corporeal
I never said it being a void = it being infinite... as far as the second part of your statement it doesn't apply to my post at all.I'll be addressing the Garganta more in my response to Arc, but i'll say this here.
Being the void between the universes has nothing to do with it’s size being infinite. You know universes & dimensions in fiction can be separated by physical distances right? Dragon Ball Super’s Multiverse can tell you that much with how it’s treated here these days.
This wasnt in response to you Arc. This was in response to what Hasch said to me.I never said it being a void = it being infinite... as far as the second part of your statement it doesn't apply to my post at all.
My question is do you agree that the Garganta meets vsbw standards for being universal in size yes or no?
If that was your issue then as I explained in my previous post it was poor communication on my end. All I argue is that the Garganta qualifies for 3-A size, but we all agree on that right? If so I'll get into my next point.The point that my counter argument was addressing wasn’t Garganta being universal in size, but infinite in size.
This is a 100% correct. ovoHonestly the Garganta is probably like building sized at best
I'm still not gonna bother arguing it if it's gonna change down the line, I'll come back to it if I still think it fits.That Tier 2 CRT shouldn't even be happening right now, it's way too big to deal with right now, I mean many members have restarted school and therefore won't be able to give ample time to discuss such a huge site wide revision, I mean that thread effects numerous verses of all different kinds
To be honest after rereading the chapter I don't think that Yhwach himself was non-coporeal at that time. Was he surrounded by a mass of Reiatsu? Yes. But I don't think that means his fleshy body was non-corporeal inside of that. I don't think there's any strong way of proving it, since it's not like the final battle had much explanation to go with it.YH at that point when the arrow was used was non corporeal
The original post's point wasnt that Uryu does or doesnt scale. It was talking about the arrows strength, not Uryus.I don’t wanna talk much about the arrow yet, but I’ll say that the arrow doesn’t inherently scale to Uryu as it isn’t something made of Uryu’s own reiatsu.
So the arrow penetrating Yhwach does not mean Uryu scales or vice versa.
If the arrows only feat is piercing Yhwach then it scales to Yhwach. The arrow has no set stats prior to piercing Yhwach because it is featless. So, when it gets its first feat that is what it scales to, which so happens to be piercing Yhwach. It'd be like me saying Dangai Ichigo harming Aizen is an anti-feat. Both the Silver Arrow and Dangai Ichigo have no feats prior to their introductory battle, Dangai Ichigo cuts Aizen, the arrow pierces Yhwach, so just as Dangai Ichigo scales to Aizen, the arrow scales to Yhwach, but I digress.The original post's point wasnt that Uryu does or doesnt scale. It was talking about the arrows strength, not Uryus.
Agreed. I'm not particularly interested in the Garganta's size or Uryu's arrow (though I feel this latter one is somewhat relevant).I don't think the Garganta Size and Uryu's Arrow are the main core of the arguments against the upgrades, it's the stabilization stuff and it being done by the Almighty
I don't think the Garganta Size and Uryu's Arrow are the main core of the arguments against the upgrades, it's the stabilization stuff and it being done by the Almighty
I'm going to address how the Garganta's collapse affects scaling later. I just want to establish that A) we accept the Garganta is universal in size and B) that it was going to be destroyed. If we all agree on A and B, I can move on. From what I gather we have 2 staff that agree that the Garganta was going to be destroyed for some reason or another.Agreed. I'm not particularly interested in the Garganta's size or Uryu's arrow (though I feel this latter one is somewhat relevant).
The main issue surrounding the Garganta is that the collapse of the Garganta would have naturally happened anyway with the collapse of Soul Society, and that we don't have any proof that Yhwach was going to destroy the Garganta himself.
Well as of now the only claims I've made are:@Arc7Kuroi I don't think anyone can fully agree with you until we see your full argument
So are we not discussing about the OP and other related stuff that were the reasons of the current ratings? Because you seem to be moving on a completely unrelated topic that had no bearing in the previous thread or this OP.I'm going to address how the Garganta's collapse affects scaling later. I just want to establish that A) we accept the Garganta is universal in size and B) that it was going to be destroyed. If we all agree on A and B, I can move on. From what I gather we have 2 staff that agree that the Garganta was going to be destroyed for some reason or another.
Did you read your own OP? You mention Ganju's quote so I'm addressing the OP. How is the discussing Bleach cosmology unrelated to the god tiers?So are we not arguing about the OP and other related stuff that were the reasons of the current ratings? Because you seem to be moving on a completely unrelated topic that had no bearing in the previous thread or this OP.
Nope I'm going to go point by point. Whenever I post my whole argument it is always the case that it isn't addressed in its entirety. So by going point by point I force you to respond to each point. This is how debating works, I'm not baiting you into answers.How about you actually post your complete argument here so everyone can take one look at it as a whole and decide for themselves instead of asking one question after another that has nothing to do with the current justification of the current ratings.
I mean maybe in a voice chat debate, but on the forums, you pretty much have to lay your full argument out on the table, or else people won't be able to properly follow your argument, and Kukui has addressed everything you talked about in his full argument when he posts itNope I'm going to go point by point. Whenever I post my whole argument it is always the case that it isn't addressed in its entirety. So by going point by point I force you to respond to each point. This is how debating works, I'm not baiting you into answers.
If I don't lay things out point by point I won't have any basis to form my other arguments, as I'd have to assume that you all agree on some points. I don't want to assume.or else people won't be able to properly follow your argument
Huh? Im sorry? IDK about others here, but what parts of your arguments did I not address Arc?Whenever I post my whole argument it is always the case that it isn't addressed in its entirety.
You brought up Ganju's quote -> I am addressing Ganju's quote. These are very relevant to the thread.You can just post your complete argument so it's easier for people to follow whenever they read it. Otherwise this seems like unnecessary stalling with points that are not even relevant to the current justifications.
So far you've entirely addressed my point on Garganta's size and are going to address my point on Ganju's quote as you've said, so you're doing fine. If we agree that the Garganta is going to be destroyed, I'll move on to scaling (the meat of discussion).Huh? Im sorry? IDK about others here, but what parts of your arguments did I not address Arc?
You can do one thing, lay out your arguments point by point, in a single comment, that contains all of your points so it's easier to see and follow the entire point you're trying to make with respect of the conclusion you are trying to reach.If I don't lay things out point by point I won't have any basis to form my other arguments, as I'd have to assume that you all agree on some points. I don't want to assume.