• 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.

Byakuya Kuchiki vs Killer_B

Status
Not open for further replies.
@Professor Well this was the conclusion to that thread -

The SBA page states - It is also important to note that characters won't lose or gain any abilities or resistances which they do or do not inherently possess. However, if an ability has a weakness, condition, caveat, or limitation, stated by at least a valid and uncontradicted statement, then it should be applicable after the equalisation.

You'd need to prove there's some caveat first. Or make a CRT to change this.
 
Then you missed part of it because it was debunked. You continuously repeating "nothing was debunked" doesn't change that AKM addressed it, saw the arguments in-favor for them, and dismantled them.
 
@Emperor

Im aware. The whole Caveat addition to the rule was made because of AKM's arguments and other user's supporting points. Bleach was at the fore-front of this in the thread.

@Sigurd

I know I didn't. AKM did. So yeah.
 
That for RC, the caveat is AP limited for it not working on people with more power. And before it's repeated again, the whole "weaker characters surviving stronger character's soul crush" argument was addressed and countered too. Not just by AKM also.
 
There is nothing Emperor, you can even alt F the thread. The thread concluded with that rule you just posted.

He thinks there is some imaginary debunk that only he is apperently aware of, but like I said Kukui make a thread explaining why it's not legit again ofc.
 
ProfessorKukui4Life said:
That for RC, the caveat is AP limited for it not working on people with more power. And before it's repeated again, the whole "weaker characters surviving stronger character's soul crush" argument was addressed and countered too. Not just by AKM also.
This is nonsense the series itself debunked it, that's how debunks work not parroting stuff off of bleach wiki with no source.

Even Elizhaa disagreed woth everything single one of his points regarding the verse and him trying to compare it to DB. There is no debunk.
 
Tbh there should be a thread specifically for RC (probably like the 100th time) because that thread was pretty convoluted. Or what was is the latest conclusion for RC that we could go off?
 
IDK where you got the "parroting stuff off bleach wiki" part from because thats not what im talking about. But your self-claimed "series itself debunks that" doesn't apply here.
 
EmperorRorepme said:
Tbh there should be a thread specifically for RC (probably like the 100th time) because that thread was pretty convoluted. Or what was is the latest conclusion for RC that we could go off?
I actually don't know where RC was originally accepted as soul crushing in the first place. I've pointed this out and asked multiple times and was never given anything.
 
I'd be surprised if there was no thread to address this. I've read Bleach but my memory is hazy so I can't really say for certain what the caveat is, if any. I'll look to see if there's a thread that properly addresses this for me.
 
@Prof

Blatant lie, you've been given it several times and it even posted several times in the very series of threads about verse equalization.

Unless you think it was just slapped on to the profiles?
 
EmperorRorepme said:
I'd be surprised if there was no thread to address this. I've read Bleach but my memory is hazy so I can't really say for certain what the caveat is, if any. I'll look to see if there's a thread that properly addresses this for me.
Go here for a start. Literally majority of the replies here argue Bleach's SC and the replies from AKM and few other users address why there's a caveat.

As for where the thread that originally accepted RC in the first place, idk.
 
Apparently people can't seem to accept RC without trying desperately to "debunk it." with whatever reasoning they can, AKM is utterly unknowable in regards to Bleach, the caveat for countering RC is having a higher amount of Soul Resistance, this is explained in verse time and time again. To say that RC can be resisted by having more "power." is blatantly leaving out important context and inserting your own ideas to something that's been clearly explained time and time again within the Manga and by extremely knowledgeable Bleach Supporters such as Imade.
 
Sigurd Snake in The Eye said:
@Prof
Blatant lie, you've been given it several times and it even posted several times in the very series of threads about verse equalization.
Most definitely havent. I've asked for the very first thread on where Reiatsu Crush, which initially was rejected several times here, got it accepted. Never gotten it.
 
>AKM is utterly unknowledgeable regarding Bleach

"No, I don't have any misunderstanding about reiatsu and reiryoku. I don't know what gave you that idea. Plus, Soldier Blue is one of the most rational, reliable, unbiased and trustworthy person here so excuse me for using his word on the topic on which he is sufficiently knowledgeable. And if it's your word against his, I'll side with him for reasons that I hope you may understand."


^Quoted from AKM himself. Not that he's heavily versed into it, but it isn't like he has 0 knowledge of it at all.
 
ProfessorKukui4Life said:
Most definitely havent. I've asked for the very first thread on where Reiatsu Crush, which initially was rejected several times here, got it accepted. Never gotten it.
Then go look for it, easy to find with simple google searches.
 
I'm not gonna take the words of a man who can't even take the time to explain what either one of those are. Any fool online can claim to understand what something is, that doesn't make it true. And the fact that he's claiming to understand what Reiatsu and Reiryoku are while also arguing that Reiatsu can be countered by sheer AP is absolutely contradictory. Also with all due respect to Solider Blue, he's done nothing to help improve upon Bleach and was barely able to provide help in revising it, Imade is our most knowledgeable Bleach member, not Solider Blue.
 
Oh not this **** again...

I thought we handled this in the Issues with Energy Equalization thread that got the rule changed.
 
Sigurd Snake in The Eye said:
Then go look for it, easy to find with simple google searches.
You'd be surprised of how difficult it is to do that. And you're talking to someone who googles threads from this site on a nearly daily basis.
 
Blind ignorance and the unwillingness to accept what's been a thing here for quite some time. We were actually doing good on RC for quite some time before Kukui decided to bring it up again, as he tends to do with anything Bleach related.
 
Both adress Verse equal and both target bleach RC and both got debunked by knowledgeable members of bleach .

Just accept that not everything is linked to AP and move on man .
 
Tetsucabrah said:
Is it even possible to have a good Bleach match up anymore
yes , pick a characther that resist soul manip to an enough degree or use quincies as opponents , they don't soul crush passively (Yhwach is an execption)
 
At this point there needs CRT for it. Specifically for this issue. Put it to the community whether or not RC stays, goes or what-the-Hell-ever. Put it to a vote and then soldify that vote with a rule so we can stop talking about it!

I don't care what side you're on but I'm sick of this argument and it's become an eyesore over the years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top