• 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.

Debunking Bill Cipher's 2-A tier + Axolotl downgrade

Status
Not open for further replies.
What Kep said makes perfect sense, if Bill is gonna threaten the multiverse with its destruction than its 2-A. Doesn't need a possibly just because it's only statements
 
Low 2-C, possibly 2-A was literally where Bill was before all of the memes and downgrades lol
 
Like I said, Bill's plan was shown that he was reality warping things and causing chaos. We shouldn't assume he was going to destroy the multiverse, but if he is a threat to the multiverse then he should be able to reality warp on that scale to be a threat.
 
Even in the book Bill says he wants to "tamper with" alternate realities

Threat to the multiverse can easily mean reality warping it into a state of weirdness in how Ford words that statement.
 
I'm not vehemently against a 2-A Bill Cipher, I'm really not.

I know the statements aren't really contradicted or anything, but should we really place him at a solid 2-A rating from it? If anything, "Low 2-C, possibly/likely 2-A" would make more sense from a feats-to-statements balance.

Also. "Low 2-C, 2-A via Dimensional Rip" is a completely different thing compared to getting a flat out "Low 2-C, possibly 2-A" rating that, potentially, scales to his dura as well. The change would actually be pretty huge.
 
ShakeResounding said:
I'm not vehemently against a 2-A Bill Cipher, I'm really not.
I know the statements aren't really contradicted or anything, but should we really place him at a solid 2-A rating from it? If anything, "Low 2-C, possibly/likely 2-A" would make more sense from a feats-to-statements balance.

Also. "Low 2-C, 2-A via Dimensional Rip" is a completely different thing compared to getting a flat out "Low 2-C, possibly 2-A" rating that, potentially, scales to his dura as well. The change would actually be pretty huge.
Click to expand...
That's what me and Shadow were trying to get to, but no one else is really listening
 
Like Kep said, the context implies destruction most of the time therefore threat more than likely means destruction. Therefore flat 2-A is fine IMO
 
The show portrays Bill treating reality like it's a frat party. I honestly think it's out of character for him to destroy the mutliverse outright. His goal wasn't to destroy, it's to reak havoc. He likes tormenting things, torturing, and causing great grief and strife. Even in the finale, he chooses to prolong the torment of the main characters than outright killing them and only resulting to murder when he finally recognizes them as legitmate threat to his plans.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
The show portrays Bill treating reality like it's a frat party. I honestly think it's out of character for him to destroy the mutliverse outright. His goal wasn't to destroy, it's to reak havoc. He likes tormenting things, torturing, and causing great grief and strife. Even in the finale, he chooses to prolong the torment of the main characters than outright killing them and only resulting to murder when he finally recognizes them as legitmate threat to his plans.
Click to expand...
that's where something like "likely 2-A" is more viable here. If he's capable of something that's still baseline 2-A, then yea, we'll recognize it. But we need more proof beyond just mere statements to give a straight up solid 2A.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
The show portrays Bill treating reality like it's a frat party. I honestly think it's out of character for him to destroy the mutliverse outright. His goal wasn't to destroy, it's to reak havoc. He likes tormenting things, torturing, and causing great grief and strife. Even in the finale, he chooses to prolong the torment of the main characters than outright killing them and only resulting to murder when he finally recognizes them as legitmate threat to his plans.
Click to expand...
Just because that's how we treated reality doesn't mean the statement about him ripping something apart wouldn't be so. Why would that be said and why would the context be about him havin the power of destroying the multiverse not matter because Bill wouldn't do so and party.

@Shadow Yeah but the rip isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about what Ford says and the rip is a supporting statement. I'm showing the context. Gravity Falls more than often implies destruction more than tempering. Therefore it's safe to assume Bill being a threat as said by Ford is due to destruction, just like what they said about his rip causing destruction because contextually, they don't just mean tamper with
 
I'm not saying the RIP is 2-A

I'm using the RIP time baby quote as supporting evidence to suggest why when Ford says Bill is a threat to an infinite multiverse, it further supports Gravity Falls referring to Bill being destructive. His toying and partying nature doesn't actually stop him from having that destructive power, and quotes like Time Baby's and Ford's are almost certainly meaning destructive damage. Bill becoming being a threat to the infinite multiverse therefore should mean its Bill's destructive power rather than Hax, because the context of the show and the quote itself support AP more than anything else

But if I'm the only one who believes this, that's fine.
 
I don't agree with that because it's just using the highest possible interpretation of a general statement. Bill is immortal, he has all the time in the world to wreak havoc across as many universes as he wants.
 
I may need more context and details to give a proper opinion, but I so far can't help but doubt if this is really about picking the more reasonable interpretation of a statement or if it's just picking the lower interpretation for the sake of picking the lower interpretation.
 
I mean, the context of the show constantly implies Bill destroying stuff, so the statement of him being a threat to the multiverse SHOULD be from a destructive standpoint given the context
 
" If Bill is 2-A then why would he need to travel to other universes in the first place?"

ya do realize you contradicted your own argument right?

Also, maybe because he first needed to regain his complete power beforehand???? Bill isn't 2-A in all of his forms, Stanford was taking about the threat he would posses if he reached full power.
 
on another note, this thread was concluded, right? Or am I missing the reason as to why the dozen 2-A Bill "FRAs" aren't being used (Not sure if they were sarcastic tho)
 
Hykuu said:
on another note, this thread was concluded, right? Or am I missing the reason as to why the dozen 2-A Bill "FRAs" aren't being used (Not sure if they were sarcastic tho)
Click to expand...
It's being debated if it will be Possibly 2-A or just 2-A

With me debating for the latter
 
I'd only be ok with straight up 2A, but that's just so I can watch all the 2A matchups with him end up with him getting yeeted on (unless other 2A character is outrageously weak) :3

He fares better in the Low 2C category, by all means.
 
Christian Higdon said:
He really does better in Low 2-C TBH. This'll just get him killed.
Click to expand...
Imagine the amount of excuses (not explanations) that the GF supporters will try to come up in those threads, if such "explanations" somehow get accepted, then this sloppiness could bleed off into discussions for other verses, and it could get really bad. I'm being dead serious here, even if that part was slightly off topic for some reason.
 
Hykuu said:
" If Bill is 2-A then why would he need to travel to other universes in the first place?"
ya do realize you contradicted your own argument right?

Also, maybe because he first needed to regain his complete power beforehand???? Bill isn't 2-A in all of his forms, Stanford was taking about the threat he would posses if he reached full power.
Click to expand...
A 2-A wouldn't need to travel to other universes to tamper with them. He'd do it from the spot he's at.

Bill did reach full power. The barrier only restricted his range to within Gravity Falls.
 
Why are people even mentioning how Bill would "fare" in that tier like it matters in any shape or form? VS debating should NEVER have any impact on a CTR and bringing that up in a CTR is nothing short of derailment.

The majority consent of the community and Staffbody that voiced their position on this topic seems to be in favor of Bill being 2A again or gaining a 2A rating in some way (I am not familiar with GF or Bills rating). I fully agree with Hykuu and Keplekey on this topic and especially agree with Kepe on that the arguments presented by the OP seems to lowball for the sake of lowballing, sometimes even going against Occams razor for no reason.
 
GiverOfThePeace said:
@First Witch

It looks like they were just talking about how matches are gonna go with his 2-A tier, not arguing he shouldn't be 2-A cause he'd be terrible there.
Click to expand...
He won't fair well in most 2B matches, either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MaybeWantsToEdit
Immeasurable Bill Cipher has Blaring Problems
2 3
Replies
109
Views
5K
StrymULTRA
StrymULTRA
StrymULTRA
Book Of Bill - Gravity Falls (Part 1.5 , Cosmology update)
2
Replies
60
Views
7K
StrymULTRA
StrymULTRA
TheOrangeGuy09
  • Locked
Simplest Bill CRT
Replies
31
Views
3K
TheOrangeGuy09
TheOrangeGuy09
BrainiacWorld
  • Locked
I Don't Agree with Bill Cipher's 1-B Scaling
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
ShionAH
ShionAH
ShionAH
Minor Bill Cipher Additions
2
Replies
41
Views
2K
Ti58
Ti58
Back
Top