• 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.

Dragon Ball Super Discussion Thread 100

Nullflowerblush said:
Why does the Wiki consider that an energy attack and not, like, his Existence Erasure ability?
Click to expand...
What difference does it make? We aren’t really told that it’s some kind of EE like we’re told with Hakai, so I suppose the simplest explanation that it’s an energy attack seems fine for now.
 
MeiouHades said:
What difference does it make? We aren’t really told that it’s some kind of EE like we’re told with Hakai, so I suppose the simplest explanation that it’s an energy attack seems fine for now.
Click to expand...
aren't we kind said that it was during the ToP?
 
omegabronic said:
aren't we kind said that it was during the ToP?
Click to expand...
We did? I don’t really remember. Personally I don’t think it makes a difference. Maybe a future CRT can handle that. If that and Low 1-C timelines get accepted we’ll probably have Low 1-C with EE or something
 
MeiouHades said:
I just realized. Zamasu is basically DBS ripping off Hades (even the part about him possessing Goku’s body is similar to Hades taking over Shun). And Trunks “defeating” Zamasu is basically him pulling a Pegasus Seiya
Click to expand...
I don't think it's as much ripping as them just going with the most simple "complex" plot for Dragonball.
 
Vietthai96 said:
what summary????
Click to expand...
I want to address how he is blatantly lying about standards and making things up, I also asked ultima to comment and he said he would get to it. But i just need to make it very clear that our side of the argument is being handled unfairly and dishonestly. For example, how pein says a higher timeline needs to be flowing ******* backwards, or sideways, made up standards that do not exist, and the staff who allow him to blatantly lie and ignore arguments.
 
I have yet to be shown a standard which says an additional time axis has to be flowing in a direction that is not forward. What does that even mean? Pein is treating temporal dimensions like spatial dimensions, like how spatial dimensions are perpendicular to each other, which allow for movement between however many axis. Time is not the same, time is always going to flow forward no matter the dimension, time encompassing an n dimensional space will always be assumed to flow forward. Time is not physical, time measures change in the dimensions it encompasses and allows for events to occur. I saw him in another thread similar to ours and he never brought up this argument he is using against us. It's just a desperate attempt to downplay dragon ball.
 
Also, iirc, isn't guidebook stated that each universes have their own history, with them having their own time ring allow traveling to their own future??, in anime Gowasu and Zamasu traveling to the future of......eh their own universe, Universe 11 right??
 
Vietthai96 said:
Also, iirc, isn't guidebook stated that each universes have their own history, with them having their own time ring allow traveling to their own future??, in anime Gowasu and Zamasu traveling to the future of......eh their own universe, Universe 11 right??
Click to expand...
the time rings are for the entire timeline, zamasu used a time ring from universe 11 to the future of universe 7
 
Vietthai96 said:
Also, iirc, isn't guidebook stated that each universes have their own history, with them having their own time ring allow traveling to their own future??, in anime Gowasu and Zamasu traveling to the future of......eh their own universe, Universe 11 right??
Click to expand...

https://www.kanzenshuu.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=34894 Does that help? Also the issues brought in the thread I just mentioned mean more timelines exist?
That's what was said in a conversation there. If it's not useful then excuse me.

Six rings, five splits.

Confirmed splits:

  • Happened in U12 long ago.
  • When Trunks travelled back the first time and killed Freezer and Cold.
  • When Beerus killed Zamasu.

Probable but unconfirmed splits:

  • When Cell woke up from his hibernation and started chasing the androids.
  • When Trunks returned to his timeline stronger and killed Cell instead of the other way around.

If this splits didn't happen, then they would be for other time travels and events unrelated to the DB history we know.

Also another thread on the topic here: https://www.kanzenshuu.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=42105
 
Last edited:
Serlock_Holmes said:
This is getting irritating. Can Pein bring the standards or is he just speaking in riddles.
Click to expand...
Yeah, what was up with his response?

“I’m tired of explaining it, I’m not making up standards.”

Then will you show us where we can find such a description within the standards if the arguments aren’t made up? Like Tilted said, these postulates are nowhere in the standards, are Pein himself knows as he’s participated in hypertimeline threads without bringing up these arguments. We’ve asked him to prove those are what the standards say, and he can’t do that one little thing.

“Just because something didn’t address you or you think you’ve debunked something, doesn’t make it true.”

Wow… this has to be the worst case of bad faith I’ve ever had the displeasure of seeing. I thought it was common sense that the opposition has the burden of rebuttal. Is that an outright admission of refusing to address the argument?

And then there’s Deagonx’s response.
Well, as it was explained earlier, we do not have a good reason to consider these as being separate time axes. The fact that a single timeline encompasses the entire cosmology doesn't really tell us it's an additional temporal axis, it actually leans more towards implying they all share a time axis. I also didn't consider anything written about the neutral space as helping us identify whether or not it has a temporal axis separate from the main cosmology.
Click to expand...
How many times do we have to explain that the macrocosms must have their own time axes since we recognize them as 2-C? Tilted explained it, I explained it, Jaakor explained it, this derailment is absurd.

He doesn’t see how the neutral zone helps our argument? Maybe it’s because the timelines would consist of 4 dimensions of space and 2 of time? Maybe it’s because it debunks DDT’s model of a non-low 1-C overarching timeline applying to Dragon Ball?

Look… I’m getting the feeling that some staff and others are looking at the thread thinking “there go those toxic Dragon Ball fans berating anyone who doesn’t wank Goku,” but is it too much to ask that the opposition fulfill their basic burden of rebuttal? All we’ve seen is derailment tactic after derailment tactic.

They said the Macrocosms aren’t parallel space-times, but the wiki has rejected 3-A macrocosm time and time again which means any rebuttal in good faith has to be done under the premise that the macrocosms are low 2-C to 2-C. They say time has to flow in a “different” direction to be a higher time axis, but the more we ask them to show where the standards say that, the more they try to deflect. The only person who’s put actual effort into refuting our argument was Reiner with the whole “timelines encompassing timelines can be modeled in a way that doesn’t fulfill low 1-C requirements,” but I responded to his argument in my second comment which nobody has responded to.
 
ProfectusInfinity said:
Yeah, what was up with his response?

“I’m tired of explaining it, I’m not making up standards.”

Then will you show us where we can find such a description within the standards if the arguments aren’t made up? Like Tilted said, these postulates are nowhere in the standards, are Pein himself knows as he’s participated in hypertimeline threads without bringing up these arguments. We’ve asked him to prove those are what the standards say, and he can’t do that one little thing.

“Just because something didn’t address you or you think you’ve debunked something, doesn’t make it true.”

Wow… this has to be the worst case of bad faith I’ve ever had the displeasure of seeing. I thought it was common sense that the opposition has the burden of rebuttal. Is that an outright admission of refusing to address the argument?

And then there’s Deagonx’s response.

How many times do we have to explain that the macrocosms must have their own time axes since we recognize them as 2-C? Tilted explained it, I explained it, Jaakor explained it, this derailment is absurd.

He doesn’t see how the neutral zone helps our argument? Maybe it’s because the timelines would consist of 4 dimensions of space and 2 of time? Maybe it’s because it debunks DDT’s model of a non-low 1-C overarching timeline applying to Dragon Ball?

Look… I’m getting the feeling that some staff and others are looking at the thread thinking “there go those toxic Dragon Ball fans berating anyone who doesn’t wank Goku,” but is it too much to ask that the opposition fulfill their basic burden of rebuttal? All we’ve seen is derailment tactic after derailment tactic.

They said the Macrocosms aren’t parallel space-times, but the wiki has rejected 3-A macrocosm time and time again which means any rebuttal in good faith has to be done under the premise that the macrocosms are low 2-C to 2-C. They say time has to flow in a “different” direction to be a higher time axis, but the more we ask them to show where the standards say that, the more they try to deflect. The only person who’s put actual effort into refuting our argument was Reiner with the whole “timelines encompassing timelines can be modeled in a way that doesn’t fulfill low 1-C requirements,” but I responded to his argument in my second comment which nobody has responded to.
Click to expand...
I would just prefer to let the thread remain as is until Ultima responds. The god of war one has been open for years. Let it remain until he can give his input. Then this can be rested.
 
So deagonx is disagreeing with the crt's accepted? Yeah no call someone there. Deagonx should make a different crt if he wants to disagree with every universe having a different space-time. Also would the time rings affect the entite timeline including the 5-d one?
 
TiltedFN said:
Yeah that is why im waiting, this is such a joke.
Click to expand...
Just don't let the thread be closed before Ultima replies. GoW thread is kept open. We should also keep it open till Ultima replies and if the upgrade doesn't pass that's that but this thing happening in the staff discussion is pure bullshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ednaxel2
Dragon Ball Daima Spoiler Discussion Thread
19 20 21
Replies
828
Views
58K
Tipper17
Tipper17
Ednaxel2
Dragon Ball: Fixing page names & quick Vegito upgrade
Replies
14
Views
2K
AwkguyDB
AwkguyDB
RedReaper616
  • Locked
God Ki Stuff, Buu Stamina, and Android Thing
Replies
30
Views
3K
SwordLegendz01
SwordLegendz01
SSJ God multiplier/Vegetto base power
Replies
3
Views
490
Gp972
Ednaxel2
Dragon Ball: Updates (Planet Vegeta Re-Calc, DBS Manga Downgrade)
3 4 5
Replies
178
Views
13K
Ednaxel2
Ednaxel2
Back
Top