Dreams of an Overlord (Metal Overlord Tiering CRT)

[Theuser789]

Don't go around saying "objectively" when it's up to interpretation and most of the fanbase outside of the wikia believes to be one. Let's use words correctly.

 

[Dalesean027]

Don't go around saying "objectively" when it's up to interpretation and most of the fanbase outside of the wikia believes to be one. Let's use words correctly.

Dawg by the time of the first amp we know shadow is stronger, we don't know how strong though he's an unknown at that point, saying for certain he's X amount stronger is the part is the subjective part but we know we're told bro is getting stronger. So yes he is objectively stronger the only part that's up to interpretation is how much stronger which should be based on his own feats. I don't see the problem there, and I'm not sure how you are either?

 

[Theuser789]

Yes, he is stronger, but it isn't "objective" that it isn't an anti-feat for the very reasons you listed:

saying for certain he's X amount stronger is the part is the subjective part but we know we're told bro is getting stronger. So yes he is objectively stronger the only part that's up to interpretation is how much stronger which should be based on his own feats

So thanks for agreeing with me.

 

[Chariot190]

It's only a anti-feat if he didn't get stronger.
If he did get stronger, Shadow doesn't effect it at all as he's an unknown variable whom's very scaling is dictated by what he does post growth, as in Shadow has no bearing on MO, but MO would effect Shadow's.

It isn't an anti-feat. It's objectively not an anti-feat. The conditions for it to be one, are not met as Shadow's degree of power prior doesn't effect him st that point.

 

[Dalesean027]

Yes, he is stronger, but it isn't "objective" that it isn't an anti-feat for the very reasons you listed:

If you agree he is objectively stronger to an unknown degree then we literally have nothing to discuss, that means in fact you should be agreeing cause otherwise you're just holding into a double standard. He IS unquantifiable stronger from the moment he gets the first amps from doom and continuously gets amps making him still unquantifiably more strong throughout the game something you have just agreed with so therefore you agree that'd make him an empty slate as we don't know how much stronger he got which would mean he should be judged off of what feats he has throughout the game.

So I'll say again contextually him jobbing against Sonic wouldn't be an anti-feat either since he very clearly intentionally let himself lose and held back to make a play to swap the emeralds, the scene isn't saying oh shadow is losing even with amps no its saying shadow played a bit to deceive Sonic and get his chaos emeralds by holding back his power in their encounter. Anything else is just up to whatever shadow does in the game so yes it should very much be objective that he is stronger to an unknown degree and that we should judge him off of what his actual feats are in the game...

 

[DoggoTron]

If you agree he is objectively stronger to an unknown degree then we literally have nothing to discuss, that means in fact you should be agreeing cause otherwise you're just holding into a double standard. He IS unquantifiable stronger from the moment he gets the first amps from doom and continuously gets amps making him still unquantifiably more strong throughout the game something you have just agreed with so therefore you agree that'd make him an empty slate as we don't know how much stronger he got which would mean he should be judged off of what feats he has throughout the game.

So I'll say again contextually him jobbing against Sonic wouldn't be an anti-feat either since he very clearly intentionally let himself lose and held back to make a play to swap the emeralds, the scene isn't saying oh shadow is losing even with amps no its saying shadow played a bit to deceive Sonic and get his chaos emeralds by holding back his power in their encounter. Anything else is just up to whatever shadow does in the game so yes it should very much be objective that he is stronger to an unknown degree and that we should judge him off of what his actual feats are in the game...

Gonna have to agree with Dalesean here, the Sonic and Shadow fight shown from Shadow's POV in SxS Gens clearly shows Shadow holding back as he does here (time stamped) likely because he knows he is much more powerful at that point in the expansion to beat Sonic going on to further explain that he will "beat him on equal terms or none at all" (1:49).

 

[Theuser789]

Him being unquantifiable stronger doesn't mean it's "objectively" not an anti-feat. If you agree how strong he got is up to interpretation than it's not objective in anyway. People can just interpret he's barely stronger and that already shatters this "objective". This is what I was talking about in my previous posts...

 

[Dalesean027]

Him being unquantifiable stronger doesn't mean it's "objectively" not an anti-feat

He is a blank slate an objective unknown not bound by his previous scaling, literally just "stronger to X degree". So again his scaling is ONLY bound by his feats in this game.

The Sonic thing is literally him just throwing the fight for a plan, this isn't even implied its like stated outright so ig if you're arguing otherwise to that then please provide proof? because right now I'm not really like seeing what the point is you're trying to make about that specific thing at all since that's what you're arguing is an anti-feat for whatever reason?

If you agree how strong he got is up to interpretation than it's not objective in anyway

that interpretation of how strong he got is bound by what his feats are after being amped, he scales from what he does not others scaling from him so yes it is objective where he scales is based on his feats, that's how the scaling SHOULD be interpreted otherwise its basis is on headcanon if you're not using what literally happens in the events of the game.

People can just interpret he's barely stronger and that already shatters this "objective".

that's great for them and not to be rude but that quite literally means nothing? People are always free to say whatever they want but that's got no bearing on what actually happens in the game. We as a wiki striving for accuracy however should not be creating our own interpretations after we already know he's a blank slate which makes it pretty objective that we should be using his own feats to scale from which means if you're and not without additional evidence, context, or reasoning to support your points then something is wrong

 

[Theuser789]

that's great for them and not to be rude but that quite literally means nothing? People are always free to say whatever they want but that's got no bearing on what actually happens in the game.

Okay, but that's not my point. My point wasn't that you are right or not, it’s just that the claim "Shadow beating Overlord is objectively not an anti-feat" is just wrong. It's not an objective interpretation. Demeaning the people who believe otherwise doesn't really change that there are other interpretations, thus it isn't objective.

 

[Baken384]

Keep Tier 1 Metal Overlord.

 

[Dalesean027]

Demeaning the people who believe otherwise doesn't really change that there are other interpretations, thus it isn't objective.

Gonna just pass this because at no point did I demean you or say anything remotely rude?

Okay, but that's not my point. My point wasn't that you are right or not, it’s just that the claim "Shadow beating Overlord is objectively not an anti-feat" is just wrong. It's not an objective interpretation.

Its a claim made followed by me providing a reasoning for said claim, something which you agreed too. People are free to have their own interpretations but that's not what we're looking at on the wiki, we're looking at the fact of the matter based on what we know to be the evidence and facts given to us from the game not what some random who isn't going to really care about the scaling aspect and just played the game because he thought it looked fun thinks about it.

So really there was just no point in even arguing that man, basically just a derailment from what the actual substance of what I said was.

 

[Theuser789]

So really there was just no point in even arguing that man, basically just a derailment from what the actual substance of what I said was.

You said it was "objectively" not an anti-feat. I addressed it's not objective in anyway possible. This isn’t derailing. By asserting that your take is the factual one, this takes away the debate. It already dismisses any counters before they can be thrown. The fact you agree it can be up to interpretation means it cannot be objective. A objective fact has no other interpretations. If Shadow beating Metal Overlord is supposed to be objective, then you cannot agree it has other interpretations. I can only assume you don't know the weight the word "objective" has, then.

Gonna just pass this because at no point did I demean you or say anything remotely rude?

I didn't say you deamed me, I said you deamed people in general by just ignoring and discarding them, which is true. You are dismissing them because of them being just casuals, but their opinion still matters in the case of something being objective, since objective facts cannot have any other interpretations whatsoever.

 

[Dalesean027]

The fact you agree it can be up to interpretation means it cannot be objective. A objective fact has no other interpretations. If Shadow beating Metal Overlord is supposed to be objective, then you cannot agree it has other interpretations. I can only assume you don't know the weight the word "objective" has, then.

that interpretation of how strong he got is bound by what his feats are after being amped, he scales from what he does not others scaling from him so yes it is objective where he scales is based on his feats, that's how the scaling SHOULD be interpreted otherwise its basis is on headcanon if you're not using what literally happens in the events of the game.

We'll leave it at that because otherwise no real argument was addressed here by ya at all so I've no business to continue with you

 

[Theuser789]

We'll leave it at that because otherwise no real argument was addressed here by ya at all so I've no business to continue with you

You are the one who didn't address my arguments, there. I will just have to assume you aren't using the word "objectively" correct, then.

 

[Dalesean027]

You are the one who didn't address my arguments, there. I will just have to assume you aren't using the word "objectively" correct, then.

So I can take this as your disagreement to this then?

that interpretation of how strong he got is bound by what his feats are after being amped, he scales from what he does not others scaling from him so yes it is objective where he scales is based on his feats, that's how the scaling SHOULD be interpreted otherwise its basis is on headcanon if you're not using what literally happens in the events of the game.

You don't believe Shadow should judged by his feats in game or that we should interpret his strength due to that.

 

[ZothythoTheNephalem]

I'm telling you that objectively it is baseless, there's no room for arguing it. And all you're doing is stirring the pot further by going "don't be sensitive" after making accusations - as if starting a random fire and then being confused when it spreads

No more of this. Focus on the thread at hand

Same goes for this btw, let's chill on accusations

There's no accusations being thrown. All I said was that putting him at 2-C is dishonest. Not pointing at anyone. You made it into an issue when it wasn't. I don't care what you have to say, personally.

 

[ZothythoTheNephalem]

Saying this when the low 1-C argument was literally made up JUST to keep him in tier 1 is certainly a choice.

I mean, you can complain about it if you want. That's certainly a choice.