Dbs downgrade

[CloverDragon03]

If the individual multipliers are accepted how can the end result of them not be?

THIS

I couldn't have said it better. If we accept the individual multipliers, we accept the end result of their usage. If we don't, that's just personal bias

 

[omegabronic]

I'm really not a fan of this comment. You know what it sounds like to me?

"I want evidence of such a boost. Except for the times such a boost is shown, that doesn't count"

when is a 2.000.000 times boost is shown? Do they have a feat approaching such value? how many instances of such a massive boost in speed is shown? what is the evidence? again, that is just the standards of the site, idk what to tell you, we could try and change them if you don't like the way they work on this

 

[omegabronic]

If the individual multipliers are accepted how can the end result of them not be?

the bigger the multiplier, the bigger the evidence needed, so multiple accepted multipliers stacked into 1 massive bigger one needs more evidence for the final value of said stack, to see if it is consistent, again, this are the standards, it is not me saying it

 

[CloverDragon03]

when is a 2.000.000 times boost is shown? Do they have a feat approaching such value? how many instances of such a massive boost in speed is shown? what is the evidence? again, that is just the standards of the site, idk what to tell you, we could try and change them if you don't like the way they work on this

You don't need all of this.

We have this evidence for the 50x Super Saiyan amp. We have this evidence for the Kaioken amp of up to 20x. That's why both were accepted. This is just applying those whenever necessary. I can't help but call this scrutiny for the sake of scrutiny.

 

[omegabronic]

THIS

I couldn't have said it better. If we accept the individual multipliers, we accept the end result of their usage. If we don't, that's just personal bias

You don't need all of this.

We have this evidence for the 50x Super Saiyan amp. We have this evidence for the Kaioken amp of up to 20x. That's why both were accepted. This is just applying those whenever necessary. I can't help but call this scrutiny for the sake of scrutiny.

"For higher multipliers, like times 100 and above, the importance of stronger evidence, such as feats displaying power of a similar magnitude as the value the multiplier points to or the multipliers importance to the plot of the story, and a higher amount of evidence becomes increasingly necessary."

"If multiple multipliers are to be stacked, that are used upon each other, the evidence for the end result is equal to the total multiplier applied to the best feat. That means that if, for example, a character has a times 10 multiplier and later on gets another times 50 multiplier, than the evidence necessary to use both multipliers to get a statistic, is like that of a times 500 multiplier, as the best feat would be increased by a factor of 500 in that case."

 

[CloverDragon03]

"For higher multipliers, like times 100 and above, the importance of stronger evidence, such as feats displaying power of a similar magnitude as the value the multiplier points to or the multipliers importance to the plot of the story, and a higher amount of evidence becomes increasingly necessary."

"If multiple multipliers are to be stacked, that are used upon each other, the evidence for the end result is equal to the total multiplier applied to the best feat. That means that if, for example, a character has a times 10 multiplier and later on gets another times 50 multiplier, than the evidence necessary to use both multipliers to get a statistic, is like that of a times 500 multiplier, as the best feat would be increased by a factor of 500 in that case."

We see such amps though. SSB Goku kept up with Hit, then with Kaioken he was able to completely escape Hit's sight, for instance. But let me guess, that doesn't count.

Honestly, this is a bad standard if it's gonna be abused like this. These multipliers are consistent within the series, but now people are trying to axe them just because we don't see feats septillions of times FTL with every move made

 

[BoastJr]

this whole thread is going nowhere.

I would at best suggest a standard revision on the whole multiplier rule thing because thats the main issue

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

he did provide a reason, the simple lack of supportive evidence for such a high multiplier stack, which the standards ask for


no one is saying that it is baseless, only that it is against the standards since it needs far more supportive evidence for such a high multiplier as the 2.000.000x that the chain currently does


the individual ones are, they are stated, the problem is the stack of them, the standards due note that the higher the number of the multiplier, the bigger evidence you need, you would need a lot of evidence for a 2.000.000x multiplier


again, you are looking at the individual multipliers and not the full picture of the multiplier stacking chain

It’s consistent though i am looking at the full picture of the multiplier scaling chain theres no contradictions and the multipliers are accepted

Though what we do need right now is clarification on the standards because I don’t agree with how you guys are interpreting it

this whole thread is going nowhere.

I would at best suggest a standard revision on the whole multiplier rule thing because thats the main issue

Nah we just need a clarification on the standards because i do not feel the arguments are what are the standards say

 

[Serlock_Holmes]

A clarification would be good. I just can't wrap my head around the fact that accepted multipliers need to be reaccepted because although they individually are we aren't allowed to what multiply them? Like that sounds so ridiculous. And again the fact that the multipliers allow the bridging of tremendous gaps is a good enough portrayal of their scale and validity. Asking for a specific calculation showcasing an exact or near increase in speed is pedantic for the sake of being pedantic as we are able to see the increase in action.

 

[omegabronic]

We see such amps though. SSB Goku kept up with Hit, then with Kaioken he was able to completely escape Hit's sight, for instance. But let me guess, that doesn't count.

that is certainly proof of him getting faster sure, but is that proof of him getting more than 50.000x faster specifically tho? also the bigger point is the scaling above 2.000.000 times the initial value without solid proof of them getting that much faster consistently, a multiplier can be accepted sure, but the evidence for the stacked value of the stacked multiplier with another would be necessary independent of the accepted initial multiplier

Honestly, this is a bad standard if it's gonna be abused like this. These multipliers are consistent within the series, but now people are trying to axe them just because we don't see feats septillions of times FTL with every move made

i mean, that is what i have been saying, if the problem is that the standard is bad, then change the said standard for it to not be bad, the reasoning in the standard is that it is for it to make sure that the boost is consistent and that it makes sense, again, like how the immeasurable LS zamasu thread, we can't complain about a standard being bad without changing them, or else it is no evidence for it to be ignored just because i find it to be bad

It’s consistent though i am looking at the full picture of the multiplier scaling chain theres no contradictions and the multipliers are accepted

not having contradictions is not enough by the current standard, it needs evidence for it in the first place, like evidence that the chars really did get 2.000.000x faster like what the multiplier scaling chain would imply, not having contradictions is not enough

Though what we do need right now is clarification on the standards because I don’t agree with how you guys are interpreting it

i don't see how it is an interpretation when it is written pretty blatantly

 

[Damage3245]

I'm neutral on this.


I don't think that the multipliers are implemented in the best way right now, but I don't think this thread was thought out well enough to tackle it.

 

[TiltedFN]

I'm neutral on this.


I don't think that the multipliers are implemented in the best way right now, but I don't think this thread was thought out well enough to tackle it.

you mean for DB? How are they not implemented well

 

[Lonkitt]

I disagree

 

[Guacamolefletcher]

To summarize:

This is what this guy is proposing:
key1: Character peforms an X m/s feat
key 2: has a new form that is directly 10x faster in combat speed, stated consistently.

this is what the new quantification under his CRT would be:

Y tier (exactly at X m/s) | Y tier ( X m/s, faster than before when using a 10x speed multiplier)

 

[Guacamolefletcher]

"For higher multipliers, like times 100 and above, the importance of stronger evidence, such as feats displaying power of a similar magnitude as the value the multiplier points to or the multipliers importance to the plot of the story, and a higher amount of evidence becomes increasingly necessary."

The standards need to change then. That literally makes no sense.

 

[omegabronic]

To summarize:

This is what this guy is proposing:
key1: Character peforms an X m/s feat
key 2: has a new form that is directly 10x faster in combat speed, stated consistently.

this is what the new quantification under his CRT would be:

Y tier (exactly at X m/s) | Y tier ( X m/s, faster than before when using a 10x speed multiplier)

Well the multiplier scaling chain, small multipliers like 10x would still remain

 

[Guacamolefletcher]

Well the multiplier scaling chain, small multipliers like 10x would still remain

Nah cause they'd be yeeted under this CRT. Keep in mind, SSJ would remain a 50x speed so

 

[omegabronic]

Nah cause they'd be yeeted under this CRT. Keep in mind, SSJ would remain a 50x speed so

Well, some of the multipliers would still remain, the smaller ones, like kaioken and ssj1, the real big ones, like the stack that makes MUI and gogeta blue 2.000.000x the BoG feat would be the ones removed

 

[omegabronic]

The standards need to change then. That literally makes no sense.

Someone finally got it, thank you

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

The standards need to change then. That literally makes no sense.

The standard dont need to change that specific part is just talking about what is needed to get a multiplier above 100x to be specifically accepted

If a character uses SSJ with x50 and then surpasses his previous Ssj state in base and goes Ssj again that’s 2500x that wouldn’t be needed

 

[omegabronic]

The standard dont need to change that specific part is just talking about what is needed to get a multiplier above 100x to be specifically accepted

If a character uses SSJ with x50 and then surpasses his previous Ssj state in base and goes Ssj again that’s 2500x that wouldn’t be needed

Well you would need proof of a 2500x increase, since you would be stacking multipliers with one another

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

Well you would need proof of a 2500x increase, since you would be stacking multipliers with one another

It’s the same accepted multiplier it’s not just a number pulled out of thin air

Goku SSJ (Transforming after improved Base)>Improved Goku Base>SSJ goku>Base Goku

The Ssj multiplier would be accepted as a x50 therefore he does have proof of that increase

And I’ve already explained what evidence is considered on the multiplier page and why this also doesn’t contradict anything

 

[omegabronic]

It’s the same accepted multiplier it’s not just a number pulled out of thin air

Goku SSJ (Transforming after improved Base)>Improved Goku Base>SSJ goku>Base Goku

The Ssj multiplier would be accepted as a x50 therefore he does have proof of that increase

Why would the evidence for the 50x multiplier matter for the requested proof for the 2500x one? One beinf accepted matters not for the fact that bigger ones need far more proof than smaller ones like 50x

And I’ve already explained what evidence is considered on the multiplier page and why this also doesn’t contradict anything

And not what the evidence is for the stupedely higher ones like the 2 billion multiplier currently used

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

All I'm seeing is circular arguments so I'm going to disagree with the thread. Saying we can't use any of our multiplers is asinine and I've yet to see a convincing argument other than pointing to so very reductive standards for reasoning.

Of all the paragraphs I've seen for removing this, none of them had a single good argument.

We have 2+2, that's our proof for 4. Not accounting for the disconnect between writer and power scaler and saying that because the exact increase isn't stated within the show is hilariously unproductive. It's as someone said, scrutiny for the sake of scrutiny.

 

[omegabronic]

All I'm seeing is circular arguments so I'm going to disagree with the thread. Saying we can't use any of our multiplers is asinine and I've yet to see a convincing argument other than pointing to so very reductive standards for reasoning.

When has anyone said that no multiplier can be used at all?

saying that because the exact increase isn't stated within the show is hilariously unproductive

Well, the standards call for evidence for the increase for really big multipliers, this is as guacamolefletcher said, a standards problem

 

[CloverDragon03]

Well Lonkitt has expressed disagreement with the thread and DDM has given a like to my initial comment on the thread, which was literally just "No"

I'm seeing very little, if any, support for this

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

Well Lonkitt has expressed disagreement with the thread and DDM has given a like to my initial comment on the thread, which was literally just "No"

I'm seeing very little, if any, support for this

Because no one has made any arguments.

'I disagree. We have 2+2, that's all we need for proof for 4'

'But muh standards'

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

Why would the evidence for the 50x multiplier matter for the requested proof for the 2500x one? One beinf accepted matters not for the fact that bigger ones need far more proof than smaller ones like 50x


And not what the evidence is for the stupedely higher ones like the 2 billion multiplier currently used

… Are you doing this on purpose? Did you just ask why the evidence for the 50x multiplier would matter for 2500x?

If a character scales to 1 joule

SSJ so now 50 joules

they now surpass their previous state in base 50 joules

SSJ again 2500 joules it’s simple math your claims are not what our standards are saying
you keep saying standards this standard that but they’re not claiming what you’re claiming

Because no one has made any arguments.

'I disagree. We have 2+2, that's all we need for proof for 4'

'But muh standards'

Standards don’t even claim what’s being claimed

 

[omegabronic]

… Are you doing this on purpose? Did you just ask why the evidence for the 50x multiplier would matter for 2500x?

If a character scales to 1 joule

SSJ so now 50 joules

they now surpass their previous state in base 50 joules

SSJ again 2500 joules it’s simple math your claims are not what our standards are saying
you keep saying standards this standard that but they’re not claiming what you’re claiming

Yeah, which would make the character 2500x the initial value of 1 joule, so by the multiplier standards you would need to provide evidence for the value of 2500x, quoting it again here:

"If multiple multipliers are to be stacked, that are used upon each other, the evidence for the end result is equal to the total multiplier applied to the best feat. That means that if, for example, a character has a times 10 multiplier and later on gets another times 50 multiplier, than the evidence necessary to use both multipliers to get a statistic, is like that of a times 500 multiplier, as the best feat would be increased by a factor of 500 in that case."

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

Yeah, which would make the character 2500x the initial value of 1 joule, so by the multiplier standards you would need to provide evidence for the value of 2500x, quoting it again here:

"If multiple multipliers are to be stacked, that are used upon each other, the evidence for the end result is equal to the total multiplier applied to the best feat. That means that if, for example, a character has a times 10 multiplier and later on gets another times 50 multiplier, than the evidence necessary to use both multipliers to get a statistic, is like that of a times 500 multiplier, as the best feat would be increased by a factor of 500 in that case."

Yes evidence doesn’t just refer to only feats the multiplier page gives other examples of evidence that would help with multipliers and the increases in strengths via multipliers for the requirements with said evidence

also you’d have to downgrade saiyan saga as well if it was only via with feats since characters go from Moon Level to like large planetary via multipliers which is way beyond just 100x Kaioken multipliers

 

[omegabronic]

Yes evidence doesn’t just refer to only feats the multiplier page gives other examples of evidence that would help with multipliers and the increases in strengths via multipliers for the requirements with said evidence

Yeah, which is why i have been asking for someone to compile all the said evidence so that we can add it to the current blog and keep the multipliers

also you’d have to downgrade saiyan saga as well if it was only via with feats since characters go from Moon Level to like large planetary via multipliers which is way beyond just 100x Kaioken multipliers

The saiyan saga is 5B tho, what are you talking about?

 

[Arnoldstone18]

@DontTalkDT even made a thread about using importance of multiplier to the plot as evidence too.

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

Yeah, which is why i have been asking for someone to compile all the said evidence so that we can add it to the current blog and keep the multipliers


The saiyan saga is 5B tho, what are you talking about?

Evidence can be clear increase against equally matched or superior opponents and importance to the plot I don’t think a blog is needed for that

Meant speed because Namek Saga Goku scales above x4 kaioken and can use Kaioken x10 So x40 post zenkai goku gets stronger than that and can use Kaioken x20 but even if you say x120 you would have to make it so they wouldnt be able to scale past this point

 

[Serlock_Holmes]

Let's just tell all the authors to always match a new multiplier with a feat because else that multiplier is not real despite a drastic increase in the stats of the character. That's what this is basically.

 

[Guacamolefletcher]

Let's just tell all the authors to always match a new multiplier with a feat because else that multiplier is not real despite a drastic increase in the stats of the character. That's what this is basically.

yeah exactly. it makes no sense. The sagan standard in general should be dropped, tbh, since it doesn't work like they're saying it does

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

This thread is basically;

'50x50 equals 2500'

'Erm, proof?'

 

[omegabronic]

Evidence can be clear increase against equally matched or superior opponents and importance to the plot I don’t think a blog is needed for that

For smaller multipliers yes, but:
"For higher multipliers, like times 100 and above, the importance of stronger evidence, such as feats displaying power of a similar magnitude as the value the multiplier points to or the multipliers importance to the plot of the story, and a higher amount of evidence becomes increasingly necessary."
What you said apply to small multipliers, but not really big ones

Meant speed because Namek Saga Goku scales above x4 kaioken and can use Kaioken x10 So x40 post zenkai goku gets stronger than that and can use Kaioken x20 but even if you say x120 you would have to make it so they wouldnt be able to scale past this point

you are not trying to compare a multiplier of 120x to one of 2.000.000 bilions and saying that the same ammount of evidence is needed for both, are you?

 

[AStrangeverse]

ain't ya using these kinds of multipliers in that Speed upgrade CRT of yours, omega?

 

[omegabronic]

ain't ya using these kinds of multipliers in that Speed upgrade CRT of yours, omega?

yep, because my crt is purely updating the speed value of the base feat, and then applying it with the current scaling, mine is not trying to change the multiplier scaling outside of changing the base value

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

For smaller multipliers yes, but:
"For higher multipliers, like times 100 and above, the importance of stronger evidence, such as feats displaying power of a similar magnitude as the value the multiplier points to or the multipliers importance to the plot of the story, and a higher amount of evidence becomes increasingly necessary."
What you said apply to small multipliers, but not really big ones


you are not trying to compare a multiplier of 120x to one of 2.000.000 bilions and saying that the same ammount of evidence is needed for both, are you?

It’s evidence in general can refer to those and either way how are the multiplier increases not important to the story?

If it’s over 100x it’s the same with our standards no?