Dbs downgrade

[Omegabronic]

It’s evidence in general can refer to those

and they on themselves are not sufficient for bigger multipliers, now if there is more evidence

and either way how are the multiplier increases not important to the story?

i am not saying that they aren't, but if you want to hang on that, you would really need to make an explanation text and put on the blog, that is all i am asking, i am not even completely against the big multipliers staying, i just have no idea what is the justification for why they were and are accepted currently, like, something as big as 2 billion times would surely require a massive detailed evidence for it, but yet i can't find a reason for it to be accepted by our current standards, it should at least be noted or the thread that accepted them linked, but no one wants to do that for some reason, without the thread as proof how can we be sure of the true reason they were accepted? the reasoning? even if they stay, we sure as hell need that thread, just like we needed to have the dbz mftl+ thread on the verse page

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

bigger the multiplier = bigger evidence and support needed, dbz's one is barely above 100, and has numerous story and blitz moments to support, which i don't think that i need to know that a gargantuan big multiplier, would also need a gargantuan bigger amount of evidence

 

[CloverDragon03]

Arbitrarily requiring a calc for this is absolutely ridiculous, especially when the case isn't even one big multiplier, but rather applying the same canon multipliers whenever necessary. All there is to it

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

and they on themselves are not sufficient for bigger multipliers, now if there is more evidence


i am not saying that they aren't, but if you want to hang on that, you would really need to make an explanation text and put on the blog, that is all i am asking, i am not even completely against the big multipliers staying, i just have no idea what is the justification for why they were and are accepted currently, like, something as big as 2 billion times would surely require a massive detailed evidence for it, but yet i can't find a reason for it to be accepted by our current standards, it should at least be noted or the thread that accepted them linked, but no one wants to do that for some reason, without the thread as proof how can we be sure of the true reason they were accepted? the reasoning? even if they stay, we sure as hell need that thread, just like we needed to have the dbz mftl+ thread on the verse page


bigger the multiplier = bigger evidence and support needed, dbz's one is barely above 100, and has numerous story and blitz moments to support, which i don't think that i need to know that a gargantuan big multiplier, would also need a gargantuan bigger amount of evidence

You may think it isn’t enough for some reason but our standards classify it as so

Okay so you want us to make a blog on each part of the story where a power increase is important to the plot? That could be done but it would take a while and unnecessary for the reasons I’ve said above and its basic common sense

I mean not really if said multipliers are accepted and aren’t contradicted and follow what the multiplier page considers evidence but if it is contradicted then I would see your point

 

[Omegabronic]

Arbitrarily requiring a calc for this is absolutely ridiculous, especially when the case isn't even one big multiplier, but rather applying the same canon multipliers whenever necessary. All there is to it

which the standards cover:
"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."

You may think it isn’t enough for some reason but our standards classify it as so

no they don't, they clarified that for smaller multipliers, they specify that for bigger ones that is not sufficient evidence on its own

Okay so you want us to make a blog on each part of the story

i want it to be included in the current blog

That could be done but it would take a while and unnecessary for the reasons I’ve said above and its basic common sense

firstly you would to provide said evidence first, since it isn't anywhere in the current blog for the series, there is simply no good justification for a 2 billion times multiplier written in the blog anywhere

I mean not really if said multipliers are accepted and aren’t contradicted and follow what the multiplier page considers evidence but if it is contradicted then I would see your point

it being accepted is not a counter evidence when this crt is trying to change that dude, i will be repeating myself again? bigger multipliers = bigger ammount of evidence, which is nowhere to be found in the current scaling blog, so can you please just point them out and write them? if you say that it is obvious then it should be fairly easy right?

 

[CloverDragon03]

which the standards cover:
"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."

It just says evidence. You're extrapolating that in a way so as to make a bunch of arbitrary requirements to the point where absolutely nothing will be considered satisfactory. You could very easily abuse this standard by brushing off anything provided by just saying "Oh but I dunno if that's enough for a boost of 2,000,000 times"

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

It just says evidence. You're extrapolating that in a way so as to make a bunch of arbitrary requirements to the point where absolutely nothing will be considered satisfactory. You could very easily abuse this standard by brushing off anything provided by just saying "Oh but I dunno if that's enough for a boost of 2,000,000 times"

Are there an accepted amount for the forms with unknown multipliers? (ssg,mui) If there aren't im going to have to agree there needs to be more evidence for a 2 million multiplier

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

It seems like the goalposts are constantly being moved and some things are just being arbitrarily decided, 2 billion multiplier came out of nowhere, thats through up scaling, not multiplers since SSG and UI aren't accepted yet. A whole lot is being typed, but nothing of note is being said. So again, I haven't seen anything convincing other than a bad standard. DBS has plenty of blitz and keeping pace moments, which is what the scaling chain was built around, which is more sound evidence than anything being provided.

So I'm still not convinced because the arguments are just being repeated again and again, just different and less coherently.

 

[CloverDragon03]

My biggest problem with this standard is just how easily it can be abused to debate in bad faith against literally any multiplier

 

[BasedNecoScaler69]

It seems like the goalposts are constantly being moved and some things are just being arbitrarily decided, 2 billion multiplier came out of nowhere, thats through up scaling, not multiplers since SSG and UI aren't accepted yet. A whole lot is being typed, but nothing of note is being said. So again, I haven't seen anything convincing other than a bad standard. DBS has plenty of blitz and keeping pace moments, which is what the scaling chain was built around, which is more sound evidence than anything being provided.

So I'm still not convinced because the arguments are just being repeated again and again, just different and less coherently.

If it's just upscaling, that makes a lot more sense

 

[CloverDragon03]

Are there an accepted amount for the forms with unknown multipliers? (ssg,mui) If there aren't im going to have to agree there needs to be more evidence for a 2 million multiplier

The forms with unknown multipliers are reflected as such in the multiplier blog. The only ones with concrete multipliers are Super Saiyan, Kaioken, and Super Saiyan Blue (SSB is 50x SSG from what I can tell)

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

Are there an accepted amount for the forms with unknown multipliers? (ssg,mui) If there aren't im going to have to agree there needs to be more evidence for a 2 million multiplier

The 2 million multiplier I'm assuming is SSBKK20. Which right now is 50x SSJ, then 50x SSB, then 20x KK. All of which are accepted multipliers. What's going on is because the series itself doesn't exactly state that number, it can't be used. As I said earlier, we have 2+2, but we can't get 4 because of the standards. Which again is debatable, because it's not like they don't treat SSBKK like a massive ass boost.

 

[Omegabronic]

It just says evidence.

yeah, which has been asked to be provided, at least the thread where it was accepted should be shown and linked in the verse page if the multipliers are to be justified in some way, because no reason for the 2 billion times multipliers being accepted was provided anywhere in the current speed blog, all i am asking is for the reason it was accepted, a concrete reason with the thread as proof that this was indeed the reason it was accepted, but neither have been provided thus far

You're extrapolating that in a way so as to make a bunch of arbitrary requirements to the point where absolutely nothing will be considered satisfactory.

i really don't see how, i am not adding anything to what is said in the page, i am purely just using what is said in it, how am i extrapolating?

You could very easily abuse this standard by brushing off anything provided by just saying "Oh but I dunno if that's enough for a boost of 2,000,000 times"

well all the evidence provided thus far is "they got stronger and faster clearly" which the multiplier page says explicitly that is not enough evidence for a multiplier of a number so high, i really dunno what to tell you


also, people should really understand that the more you stack them to get a higher multiplier, the more evidence you need for said higher number you get https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Multipliers "The amount of extra evidence one has to provide to get larger multipliers accepted is proportional to the size of the multiplier." "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."
just using accepted multipliers is not enough justification to just accepted the stacking of multiple ones to get a gargantuan higher number, the evidence needed is relative to the higher number, not to the individual numbers of the multipliers being stacked

 

[CloverDragon03]

yeah, which has been asked to be provided, at least the thread where it was accepted should be shown and linked in the verse page if the multipliers are to be justified in some way, because no reason for the 2 billion times multipliers being accepted was provided anywhere in the current speed blog, all i am asking is for the reason it was accepted, a concrete reason with the thread as proof that this was indeed the reason it was accepted, but neither have been provided thus far

Apologies for the fact that I don't know where the hell the thread is I guess

i really don't see how, i am not adding anything to what is said in the page, i am purely just using what is said in it, how am i extrapolating?

You're taking the "you need substantial evidence" part as a green light to make unreasonable requests, like I feel like you're gonna start demanding calcs for every multiplier

well all the evidence provided thus far is "they got stronger and faster clearly" which the multiplier page says explicitly that is not enough evidence for a multiplier of a number so high, i really dunno what to tell you

Kinda proving my point that you can just dismiss anything to reject multipliers with how the standards currently are

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

yeah, which has been asked to be provided, at least the thread where it was accepted should be shown and linked in the verse page if the multipliers are to be justified in some way, because no reason for the 2 billion times multipliers being accepted was provided anywhere in the current speed blog, all i am asking is for the reason it was accepted, a concrete reason with the thread as proof that this was indeed the reason it was accepted, but neither have been provided thus far


i really don't see how, i am not adding anything to what is said in the page, i am purely just using what is said in it, how am i extrapolating?


well all the evidence provided thus far is "they got stronger and faster clearly" which the multiplier page says explicitly that is not enough evidence for a multiplier of a number so high, i really dunno what to tell you

What 2 billion multiplier are you taking about? And why does the scaling chain not justify it? Be specific. Because since no evidence has been brought on your end, I don't need any evidence to dismiss your claims. The scaling blog uses accepted multipliers and upscaling. Goku doesn't get from the starting calc to the end result with one transformation.

 

[CloverDragon03]

At some point, I really don't want to, yet I can't help but question how much this is turning into pushing a downgrade simply for the sake of pushing a downgrade...

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

Pointing to the standards again and again isn't a proper argument for why the scaling chain doesn't abide by it. I want specifics.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

At some point, I really don't want to, yet I can't help but question how much this is turning into pushing a downgrade simply for the sake of pushing a downgrade...

Well..... without a third mod to close this down, we are basically gonna be stuck in stone wall central. It's just circular arguments and paragraphs of the same thing over and over again.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

This is a very outdated concept, stacking multipliers is fine when it's supported, which it is in Dragon Ball

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

I think this can be closed since it's only staff disagrees (3) and damage who is neutral but thinks argument behind this is flawed.

 

[Omegabronic]

Apologies for the fact that I don't know where the hell the thread is I guess

it was a silly error from.....whoever made said thread i guess, i don't blame you don't worry

You're taking the "you need substantial evidence" part as a green light to make unreasonable requests

what makes them "unreasonable"? the multiplier page puts the demands, the current ones are not living up to the said demands, i really don't see how me asking for what the page is asking anything unreasonable

like I feel like you're gonna start demanding calcs for every multiplier

i will still be asking for evidence, such as:
"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."
look you can't blame me for asking what the page is asking for, can you?

Kinda proving my point that you can just dismiss anything to reject multipliers with how the standards currently are

look, if you give a feat or any reasoning at all that isn't just that i couldn't dismiss it, since it would be in line with what the multiplier page is asking for, the page asks for a type of evidence, and as such the multipliers need to follow and provide said evidence, how is me questioning and asking for said evidence my fault?

What 2 billion multiplier are you taking about?

the entire stacking of multipliers and scaling that makes the upper tiers of dbs septilions in contrast to the quadrilions of the initial feat, that is a multiplier stack

And why does the scaling chain not justify it? Be specific.

because it purely relies on reasons the multiplier page specifies that are not enough for higher multipliers, "For lower multipliers, like things much less than times 100, evidence can take the form of a clear increase in combat strength against priorly equal or superior opponents."
the upper bolded parts being the only reasoning used in the current multiplier blog, but for such high multiplier number such as 2 billion:

"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."
don't blame me for asking for feats or other reasoning, blame the multiplier page for asking for such

Because since no evidence has been brought on your end, I don't need any evidence to dismiss your claims.

it has, a lot of times, constantly saying again and again why we need more evidence, and how the current one uses evidence that are noted to not be enough for higher multipliers

The scaling blog uses accepted multipliers and upscaling.

and stacking of multipliers, which i believe i have linked and said enough times how the page says that evidence for stacked multipliers must be of the number resulting for said stack, like how a stack of a 50x multiplier and one of 20x needs evidence equivalent of one of 1000x

Goku doesn't get from the starting calc to the end result with one transformation.

that is honestly not relevant, the stack of various to get a higher number makes it so that the evidence needs to be equivalent of said higher number gotten

 

[Omegabronic]

This is a very outdated concept, stacking multipliers is fine when it's supported, which it is in Dragon Ball

i could honestly agree with that, we should probably make a thread to fix said outdated concept, since it is one still on the multiplier page, i would agree immediately

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

it was a silly error from.....whoever made said thread i guess, i don't blame you don't worry


what makes them "unreasonable"? the multiplier page puts the demands, the current ones are not living up to the said demands, i really don't see how me asking for what the page is asking anything unreasonable


i will still be asking for evidence, such as:
"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."
look you can't blame me for asking what the page is asking for, can you?

look, if you give a feat or any reasoning at all that isn't just that i couldn't dismiss it, since it would be in line with what the multiplier page is asking for, the page asks for a type of evidence, and as such the multipliers need to follow and provide said evidence, how is me questioning and asking for said evidence my fault?


the entire stacking of multipliers and scaling that makes the upper tiers of dbs septilions in contrast to the quadrilions of the initial feat, that is a multiplier stack


because it purely relies on reasons the multiplier page specifies that are not enough for higher multipliers, "For lower multipliers, like things much less than times 100, evidence can take the form of a clear increase in combat strength against priorly equal or superior opponents."
the upper bolded parts being the only reasoning used in the current multiplier blog, but for such high multiplier number such as 2 billion:

"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."
don't blame me for asking for feats or other reasoning, blame the multiplier page for asking for such

it has, a lot of times, constantly saying again and again why we need more evidence, and how the current one uses evidence that are noted to not be enough for higher multipliers


and stacking of multipliers, which i believe i have linked and said enough times how the page says that evidence for stacked multipliers must be of the number resulting for said stack, like how a stack of a 50x multiplier and one of 20x needs evidence equivalent of one of 1000x


that is honestly not relevant, the stack of various to get a higher number makes it so that the evidence needs to be equivalent of said higher number gotten

This is massive nothing burger, sorry. You just keeping proving my point. We say 2+2 equals 4 and you say 'proof' and when we say that's how the series always worked you say 'but the standards'. Do you really think the speed ratings came out of mid air?

And you still haven't provided evidence for why the current scaling chain doesn't work.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

The series itself had Goku stack Kaioken atop Super Saiyan Blue. That's the concept of multiplier stacking in the series itself.

The math doesn't suddenly change because we get over 100x.

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

Math doesn't just suddenly stop because the parts of the equation add up to more than a specific number. The series gave us multipliers, and all we are doing it applying the series own logic onto itself.

 

[CloverDragon03]

It's very ridiculous that the moment a value gets too high for our liking, we disregard all basic math and logic just because the big number is just... oh so scary.

We need to revise multiplier standards

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

So I don't see how the evidence used in the scaling chain isn't in line with what the standards are for multipliers above 100. All I got was a bolded copy and paste, and the reasoning for why it doesn't qualify is just 'because it doesn't' instead of anything specific, like I asked.

 

[Omegabronic]

It's very ridiculous that the moment a value gets too high for our liking, we disregard all basic math and logic just because the big number is just... oh so scary.

We need to revise multiplier standards

honestly, i agree 100%, like, i still believe that some sort of limitation is needed, but looking back at this discussion, i can see that they seem to be a little too strict

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

honestly, i agree 100%, like, i still believe that some sort of limitation is needed, but looking back at this discussion, i can see that they seem to be a little too strict

Can I go to bed now?

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

which the standards cover:
"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."


no they don't, they clarified that for smaller multipliers, they specify that for bigger ones that is not sufficient evidence on its own


i want it to be included in the current blog


firstly you would to provide said evidence first, since it isn't anywhere in the current blog for the series, there is simply no good justification for a 2 billion times multiplier written in the blog anywhere


it being accepted is not a counter evidence when this crt is trying to change that dude, i will be repeating myself again? bigger multipliers = bigger ammount of evidence, which is nowhere to be found in the current scaling blog, so can you please just point them out and write them? if you say that it is obvious then it should be fairly easy right?

I’ve already said everything that addresses this you’re just repeating yourself atp my guy
just gonna summarize with 2 sentences

You don’t need a new Calc for every time you upscale with a multiplier
The multiplier page says showing a clear increase in power and the importance of the increase to the plot is enough both of which db follow

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

I’ve already said everything that addresses this you’re just repeating yourself atp my guy
just gonna summarize with 2 sentences

You don’t need a new Calc for every time you upscale with a multiplier
The multiplier page says showing a clear increase in power and the importance of the increase to the plot is enough both of which db follow

No stop responding let this thread be closed so I can go to bed for the love of god

 

[Guacamolefletcher]

All I'm bout to drop is the fact that it's literally complete arbitrary bias to be like "10x multiplier, that's ok"

but then be like "1,000,000,000,000 multiplier? that sounds suspicious"

there is nothing inherently crazier within fiction about a big speed increase. A billion times multiplier isn't inherently different to a trillion one or a 1.0003 x one

 

[Omegabronic]

Can I go to bed now?

why weren't you already?

I’ve already said everything that addresses this you’re just repeating yourself atp my guy
just gonna summarize with 2 sentences

You don’t need a new Calc for every time you upscale with a multiplier
The multiplier page says showing a clear increase in power and the importance of the increase to the plot is enough both of which db follow

for bigger multipliers you do, you are repeating yourself also, but as i said before, this is a problem with the multiplier page, therefore we need to change them, not complain about here

 

[Arnoldstone18]

As a wise man once said

 

[XXBenShapiroXx]

why weren't you already?


for bigger multipliers you do, you are repeating yourself also, but as i said before, this is a problem with the multiplier page, therefore we need to change them, not complain about here

Because mom didn't give me my forehead kiss, idiot. Like bro, do you not get goodnight kisses, that's pretty cringe

 

[TheGodOfICE777]

why weren't you already?


for bigger multipliers you do, you are repeating yourself also, but as i said before, this is a problem with the multiplier page, therefore we need to change them, not complain about here

Yeah I’m pretty much saying the same thing but you somehow keep missing what I’m saying the current multipliers are still fine with our current standards

You are the one insisting we need to change them I do not mind if you do but I just wanna let you know it still qualifies via our current standards and ive not complained once that our standards are dumb as you insisted I have

 

[TiltedFN]

As a wise man once said

Agree completely, this thread should be closed? These multipliers are 100 percent valid, and does not go against our standards.

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

I will ask for this topic to be closed, the doubts have been resolved and everything is in order, there were even team members disagreeing.

 

[Huesito88]

Separate thread should be made if there actually is a problem with the standards

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

I was told to close this thread