• 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.

Constellation Feats

Status
Not open for further replies.
@Ever

Kind of figured that, which is why I added in "or better yet".

And no Kep that is completely false. We have a pletora amount of characters here who are where they are solely through creation feats, which counts as their AP. Unless we're talking about specific abilities, creation feats arent treated as pure hax.
 
Likewise, if you created something from nothing, you should normally have the ability to destroy it.
 
and how is destroying a constellation destroys "empty space" as you are just affecting the stars and possibly its systems themselves. the space would still be there youre just emptying it.
 
Kepekley23 said:
Creating the universe is obviously Low 2-C. But creating a solar system isn't.
Click to expand...
Im sorry, but I literally do not see how this is legit at all.

If you create a solar system, your applying the energy to make planets, stars, etc. It's no different than making a whole universe and its space-time. I see 0 reason why creating a solar system can't be a tier just as any other creation feat can.
 
Completely incorrect, my friend.

In order to create a Solar System, you literally just need to put the Sun in there. Boom. You've already created a solar system. Once a comet hops in there, it gets caught in the gravitational influence of the star and so on.

Creating a solar system completely ignores how far away each celestial body is from each other.
 
Kepekley23 said:
In order to create a Solar System, you literally just need to put the Sun in there. Boom. You've already created a solar system. Once a comet hops in there, it gets caught in the gravitational influence of the star and so on.
Click to expand...
This isn't what im talking about.

Im talking about creating an entire solar system from completely nothing. And by "entire" I mean all of the solar systems contents straight up. Not comets and stuff coming later, but all of them being created in that moment as well.

If this makes any sense?
 
What I said already covers that. Creating all the contents in a Solar System is star level, large star level at best if there are multiple suns on that SS.

In order to reach Solar System level based on our values, you need to surpass the energy required to engulf all celestial bodies in the system with an explosion. And due to the fact that, in a three-dimensional universe, the energy gets diluted the farther it travels, you'd need a lot of energy to do that. Enough for it to decrease with distance but still be able to accomplish that feat.

To create a Solar System, you literally just need to put the Sun and a few planets in there. You already have a solar system that is 100% identical to a normal one. This method ignores the distance between each celestial body, however, so it doesn't require anywhere near the same energy.

For example, if you destroy every building in a city block one-by-one, you're still not generating as much power as what it takes to bust all the buildings with an explosion that covers the distance between the buildings.

This concept is called the inverse square law, and it's the same reason why tanking an explosion 1km away from the epicenter is literally tens of thousands of times less impressive than tanking it 100m away.
 
In Mario 64 Wiggler says: I can see the stars through my ceiling at night. They make me feel...peaceful. Please, come back and visit anytime.
 
Anyways.

Pucca created a constellation.

This means she created stars.

Now, how do you create mass.

You convert energy into mass

The sun weights 1989000000000000000000000000000 Kilograms.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-weight-of-the-su

To make that much mass requires 1.7876 × 10^47 joules of energy

Thats solar system level.

Count hoe many stars Pucca made, and multiply it by my result, and it will probabaly end up around the solar system ranges.

Idk where Weekyly got creating mass = overcoming it's GBE, thats blantly wrong.
 
Dark649 said:
In Mario 64 Wiggler says: I can see the stars through my ceiling at night. They make me feel...peaceful. Please, come back and visit anytime.
Click to expand...
Azzy debunked that
 
@Why

E=mc┬▓ tends to inflate the results. A single kg of mass is in the small-island busting range due to the speed of light in a vacuum being so massive.

Due to that, we only use it as a last resort.
 
What did Azzy debunk about the Wiggler statement?
 
Why is right. I wasn't here for that conversation so I ignored it, but I always wondered that myself.
 
What more context is needed? It's a character talking about watching the stars in the night sky? That clearly indicates that these realms have other stars within them. What I disagree with honestly is the assumption that every fodder character ever who gets a slight strength boost from the Stars scales to their full power.
 
Why

Why in the everlasting hell have all of you decided that the most valid scientific formula in the last 1000 years, and by one of the geniuses of the greatest magnitude this world has ever seen, and is the bases for the field of physics it's self considered "invalid" and should not be used.

You all better have the best reason in the world for this utter **** up.
 
Not only is that an enormous appeal to authority, but I also linked you the reason.

That's how we do things here, so chill out.
 
Because fiction tends to ignore it, perhaps. I wasn't there but that might be why. Remember, fiction be fiction.
 
So

What the thing is saying

Is that the science gives us results to high, so **** science in that case, but it's good in any other.

And that the fiction tends to ignore science, so we should ignore it in that case, but any other we should use science.

... ... ... ... ... ... ...

I-

I feel like my profile picture right now.
 
Likely the same for Mario Verse, while Disney Zeus might be just High 4-C, also i agree that Pucca profile is bad......
 
High 4-C MFTL+ is probably the best i can estimate at this point if there isn't that disproves there ratings, the tier 2 stuff is disproved.
 
Our rules don't allow that. I don't care about you personally disagreeing with them as long as you aren't so confrontational.
 
KH is undoubtedly 4-B for reasons Repp listed above.
 
@Kepekly >Accuses me of appealing to authrity >Appeals to authority.

How about this

Our science and understanding of the universe, along with Einstein himself on the most accepted equation ever, does not allow that. I don't care about your wiki disagreeing with them.

There.

I fixed it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

StoneKillerz12
The Problems With Kingdom Heart's high-tier scaling (Part 1: True Kingdom Hearts Scaling)
Replies
16
Views
4K
StoneKillerz12
StoneKillerz12
Ayewale
  • Locked
2-B KH is a bit bad
2
Replies
63
Views
8K
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
Bobsican
Kingdom Hearts Low 1-C Ocean Between Re:Evaluation
2
Replies
78
Views
8K
Eseseso
Eseseso
Omnificence
  • Locked
Super Multiplier Bros REVAMPED (4-B AP proposal for Mario Bros)
2
Replies
56
Views
4K
Omnificence
Omnificence
Omnificence
  • Locked
Super Revision Bros (4-A proposals, Grand Star key, and two calculations)
2 3 4
Replies
148
Views
10K
Armorchompy
Armorchompy
Back
Top