• 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.

Castlevania: The "Possible" 2-C rating

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bobsican

He/Him
21,628
6,273
This thread was made as the continuation of the previous CRT to discuss about the tiering of the cahracters.

The Castlevaniaverse is known to have at the very least 3 separate continuities, aka universes.

God is logically the one responsible for them, making it possible that he made all of them at once is something to be noted, but as it´s only a possibility (As he should also logically be at least Low 2-C via upscaling from the Time Reaper), meaning that it´s also a possibility that it made the multiverse by making a universe once at a time.

There´s also the possibility of it being 2-B via the alternate endings the verse is well known to do in nearly all the games (to not say all), but that´s as of right now stretching it too much, so that part is easily left at a side for more accurate ratings.

It´s worth to know that Chaos directly scales to it via being the opposite entity to it, Soma Cruz killed it and so he also scales, and for simplicity purposes, pretty much all the CV guys that have a flat-out rating of "Low 2-C" would also scale as they should be directly scaling enought to be in such high tiers without being locked into the "At least 4-A, Possibly Low 2-C"

Then there´s something very agreed on in the previous thread: Change the rating of those with the "At least 4-A, possibly Low 2-C" to "At least 4-A, likely Low 2-C, possibly 2-C" (or whatever "possibly" rating we grant to God in the end.)

Assuming the "possibly" 2-C rating God gets is accepted, the following rating would likely be the one that should be applied to those with the current "Low 2-C" rating:

"At least Low 2-C, possibly 2-C"

Thoughts?
 
I totally agree with Likely Low 2-C for the mid tiers instead of Possibly Low 2-C

However, I'll more input about God and 2-C
 
Dante Demon Killah said:
I totally agree with Likely Low 2-C for the mid tiers instead of Possibly Low 2-C
However, I'll more input about God and 2-C
In which part exactly do you want the input?
 
Opinions, literally

For now, I don't agree with 2-C, but if some people thinks it should in their profiles, I'm all ears for more arguments
 
I don't agree with 2-C because the assumption that Chaos and God are 100% equals, and also the idea that God created every universes are not proven. Besides, none of the Tier 2 feats we see on-screen are 2-C, they are all Low 2-C.
 
So, what about "Likely Low 2-C" instead of "Possibly Low 2-C" ?

They shouldn't be far superior to the other Belmonts and Dracula, I believe
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
I don't agree with 2-C because the assumption that Chaos and God are 100% equals, and also the idea that God created every universes are not proven. Besides, none of the Tier 2 feats we see on-screen are 2-C, they are all Low 2-C.
And that´s why it´s being approached as a "Possibly" rating, not straight up upgrade everyone to 2-C, after all, it´s a reasonable possibility.
 
@Matthew

So what, if anything, needs to be done here?
 
Bobsican said:
And that´s why it´s being approached as a "Possibly" rating, not straight up upgrade everyone to 2-C, after all, it´s a reasonable possibility.
 
Okay. Should we close this thread then?
 
Well, the topic is about whether the "possible" rating to 2-C can be accepted or not.

Matt appears to only have denied it being actually going straight forwad to make those that scale 2-C directly, overwriting the previous Low 2-C rating.

In other words, a conclusion for whether or not they can get a "2-C, possibly 2-C" rating.

If not, one thing that was already accepted is to just change the "At least 4-A, possibly Low 2-C" to "At least 4-A, likely Low 2-C" for the before-mentioned reasons in the threads, which a decent amount of users appear to have already agreed on.
 
Well, let's wait to see what Matthew thinks first.
 
I don't think so because there are reallly... No 2-C feats. Possibly Low 2-C is fine given a few high-ends but not 2-C.
 
Apparently not. Should we close this now?
 
Well, the only thing left in that case is the before mentioned act to just replace the "At least 4-A, possibly Low 2-C" to just "At least 4-A, likely Low 2-C" to those that apply.

tt was quite agreed upon in the previous thread, then again.
 
Bobsican said:
Well, the only thing left in that case is the before mentioned act to just replace the "At least 4-A, possibly Low 2-C" to just "At least 4-A, likely Low 2-C" to those that apply.
tt was quite agreed upon in the previous thread, then again.
Thoughts on this one, then again?
 
What do you think about Bobsican's suggestion Matthew?
 
Okay. I will close this then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top