Environmental Destruction, Low Multi and Qualitative Superiority

[TheOrangeGuy09]

For Environmental Destruction, I just wanted to ask: does being able to destroy timelines count as Universal Level+ Environmental Destruction AP, or just Universal Level+ AP? The guy in question never showed that he can concentrate that into a laser or something “smaller” to destroy an opponent without actually destroying timeline itself. I thought Environmental Destruction is when you can significantly affect structures in question, but it wouldn’t harm anyone (Star Butterfly merging dimensions feat is a perfect example of it), but someone told me that it’s not the case and the situation I mentioned above (on destroying timelines) counts under Environmental Destruction…
About Low Multiverse, if a character can destroy, let’s say, two universes (NOT timelines, at least not specified as such), shouldn’t it still be 3-A (assuming universes in question are not infinite in size)? Because what eventually that character would be doing is destroying their space which would be above 3-A but below High 3-A, and since he is destroying only spaces and not their past, present, and future, it would mean it does not even get to Low 2-C. Also another way to look at this is that Low 2-C and above are 4D Tiering and above, meanwhile High 3-A and below is 3D and below
About qualitative superiority: I know there is Ultima’s revision of current Tiering System, but I wanted to ask: on this wiki under current definitions and tiering system, cube is not qualitatively superior to a line, segment, or a point? Segment is not qualitatively superior to point, but line is qualitatively superior to point? (using geometrical meanings of these words of course) So basically you need infinitely-sized n+1 D structure/character to be qualitatively superior over n-D structure where n is number of dimensions, and non-infinitely sized would not work?
Thanks in advance to everyone, and sorry if these were answered already in other discussions
(EDIT: I regret naming the thread as “…Low Multi…”, I kinda meant another thing and Low Multi was just an example, it can apply to Multi and Multi+ too, kinda misleading)

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Bump ig

 

[TheTenno07]

If the character destroys space he also destroys time because these are united, there is a reason for the theory of time-space, and if he destroys time he destroys the past, present and future.
I think this thread answers your questions.

SMALL ADDITION TO THE LOW 2-C

I got permission from KingTempest to make this thread THE MAIN POINT AND REASON WHY I MADE THE THREAD My believe is that all of the wiki tiering pages and terms be explained in a way that even a layman can understand it with ease or little help, so here it goes Currently for low 2-C on the...

vsbattles.com

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

If the character destroys space he also destroys time because these are united, there is a reason for the theory of time-space, and if he destroys time he destroys the past, present and future.

Under current Tiering System, no, this isn't true. This is the whole reason why we have 3-A and Low 2-C separated. We also have many characters downgraded (or attempted to be downgraded) from Low 2-C to 3-A for the fact that it can't be proved that destruction of the universe means not only space, but time too.
But, I'll read what you sent soon.

 

[TheTenno07]

One of The reasons why 3-A and low 2-C are separated tiers is cause in 3-A only is involved the destruction of the matter in the universe or the destruction of a space without time,
It is emphasized at level 3-A that it does not involve the destruction of time-space and, by our standards, the universe is all time-space.

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

One of The reasons why 3-A and low 2-C are separated tiers is cause in 3-A only is involved the destruction of the matter in the universe or the destruction of a space without time,
It is emphasized at level 3-A that it does not involve the destruction of time-space and, by our standards, the universe is all time-space.

Here one guy told me that destroying universe would be 3-A, destroying timeline would be Low 2-C.
Also that queen literally exploded the whole dimension which is the whole universe in SvtFoE, but she still got 3-A rating.
From what I understand, 3-A is when you destroy universe but only at present time, without actually destroying its past or future (future would be destroyed, but only as chain reaction). Low 2-C is when you prove that you destroy universe with the entire of its past, present, and future.

 

[TheTenno07]

Here one guy told me that destroying universe would be 3-A, destroying timeline would be Low 2-C.
Also that queen literally exploded the whole dimension which is the whole universe in SvtFoE, but she still got 3-A rating.
From what I understand, 3-A is when you destroy universe but only at present time, without actually destroying its past or future (future would be destroyed, but only as chain reaction). Low 2-C is when you prove that you destroy universe with the entire of its past, present, and future.

Yeah, definitely, the thread will answer your questions because the rule was added there, but as I said, if you destroy the entire universe, the past, present and future are destroyed unless the verse proves otherwise.
Destroying a universe is low 2-C by default unless there is an anti-feat like going back to the universe's past before it was destroyed or something like that.

 

[TheTenno07]

Here one guy told me that destroying universe would be 3-A, destroying timeline would be Low 2-C.
Also that queen literally exploded the whole dimension which is the whole universe in SvtFoE, but she still got 3-A rating.
From what I understand, 3-A is when you destroy universe but only at present time, without actually destroying its past or future (future would be destroyed, but only as chain reaction). Low 2-C is when you prove that you destroy universe with the entire of its past, present, and future.

Destroy a universe or a timeline generally are the same feat

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Destroy a universe or a timeline generally are the same feat

People under the threads hardly argue against that, and many verses such as MCU and SvtFoE cap at 3-A although they can destroy universe. They are just not stated to be able to do so with the entire past, present, and future.

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

Yeah, definitely, the thread will answer your questions because the rule was added there, but as I said, if you destroy the entire universe, the past, present and future are destroyed unless the verse proves otherwise.

Okay

Destroying a universe is low 2-C by default unless there is an anti-feat like going back to the universe's past before it was destroyed or something like that.

Hmmm, interesting, although I’ll need to check thread anyways

 

[ProfectusInfinity]

Destroy a universe or a timeline generally are the same feat

Not really. Although Universe, Timeline, and Space-Time all default to a Low 2-C construct, the word "Universe" doesn't inherently indicate a fabric of space-time in the same way "Timeline" and "Space-Time" do. That's why feats impacting a Timeline/Space-Time are Low 2-C, but feats impacting a "Universe" are assumed to be affecting only physical matter on a universal scale.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Not really. Although Universe, Timeline, and Space-Time all default to a Low 2-C construct, the word "Universe" doesn't inherently indicate a fabric of space-time in the same way "Timeline" and "Space-Time" do. That's why feats impacting a Timeline/Space-Time are Low 2-C, but feats impacting a "Universe" are assumed to be affecting only physical matter on a universal scale.

Not at all, destroying a 3-D sized Universe is what qualifies for 3-A, destroying a 4-D size Universe would be qualifying for Low 2-C, that's why "Destroying everything in the Universe" and "Destroying the Universe" is treated differently

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

For Environmental Destruction, I just wanted to ask: does being able to destroy timelines count as Universal Level+ Environmental Destruction AP, or just Universal Level+ AP? The guy in question never showed that he can concentrate that into a laser or something “smaller” to destroy an opponent without actually destroying timeline itself. I thought Environmental Destruction is when you can significantly affect structures in question, but it wouldn’t harm anyone (Star Butterfly merging dimensions feat is a perfect example of it), but someone told me that it’s not the case and the situation I mentioned above (on destroying timelines) counts under Environmental Destruction…
About Low Multiverse, if a character can destroy, let’s say, two universes (NOT timelines, at least not specified as such), shouldn’t it still be 3-A (assuming universes in question are not infinite in size)? Because what eventually that character would be doing is destroying their space which would be above 3-A but below High 3-A, and since he is destroying only spaces and not their past, present, and future, it would mean it does not even get to Low 2-C. Also another way to look at this is that Low 2-C and above are 4D Tiering and above, meanwhile High 3-A and below is 3D and below
About qualitative superiority: I know there is Ultima’s revision of current Tiering System, but I wanted to ask: on this wiki under current definitions and tiering system, cube is not qualitatively superior to a line, segment, or a point? Segment is not qualitatively superior to point, but line is qualitatively superior to point? (using geometrical meanings of these words of course) So basically you need infinitely-sized n+1 D structure/character to be qualitatively superior over n-D structure where n is number of dimensions, and non-infinitely sized would not work?
Thanks in advance to everyone, and sorry if these were answered already in other discussions
(EDIT: I regret naming the thread as “…Low Multi…”, I kinda meant another thing and Low Multi was just an example, it can apply to Multi and Multi+ too, kinda misleading)

• It would depend on how they destroy the timeline, but it would be Low 2-C or Universe level+ either way and can be used against an opponent.
• We generally treat the word Universe as referring to all matter, space, and time, unless there is context proving otherwise, so destroying two universes would be 2-C/Low Multiverse level normally.
• Destroying all matter in a universe would be 3-A, destroying infinite matter is High 3-A, and significantly affecting an infinite universe, by creating a shockwave for example would be High 3-A. Yes though, Tier 3 is 3D and Tier 2 is 4D.
• In the current Tiering System, a 3D Cube is quantitatively superior, not qualitatively superior to a 2D Plane, for example. It is physically bigger, however, it is just as real as a plane, therefore they have the same level of quality, and the only significant difference is quantitative.

 

[Lloydblitzed]

• It would depend on how they destroy the timeline, but it would be Low 2-C or Universe level+ either way and can be used against an opponent.
• We generally treat the word Universe as referring to all matter, space, and time, unless there is context proving otherwise, so destroying two universes would be 2-C/Low Multiverse level normally.
• Destroying all matter in a universe would be 3-A, destroying infinite matter is High 3-A, and significantly affecting an infinite universe, by creating a shockwave for example would be High 3-A. Yes though, Tier 3 is 3D and Tier 2 is 4D.
• In the current Tiering System, a 3D Cube is quantitatively superior, not qualitatively superior to a 2D Plane, for example. It is physically bigger, however, it is just as real as a plane, therefore they have the same level of quality, and the only significant difference is quantitative.

Makes sense

 

[TheOrangeGuy09]

First of all, thank you very much for reply.

• It would depend on how they destroy the timeline, but it would be Low 2-C or Universe level+ either way and can be used against an opponent.

This makes sense.

• We generally treat the word Universe as referring to all matter, space, and time, unless there is context proving otherwise, so destroying two universes would be 2-C/Low Multiverse level normally.

Okay, this makes sense. But what if in-verse interchangeable words are used? Like “he can destroy ten realms”, “he is going to
merge two dimensions”, “he will warp the entire world”? If the context suggests it is referring to the whole universe, would it be safe to assume Low 2-C/2-C too, or wording specifically “Universe” is needed?

• Destroying all matter in a universe would be 3-A, destroying infinite matter is High 3-A, and significantly affecting an infinite universe, by creating a shockwave for example would be High 3-A. Yes though, Tier 3 is 3D and Tier 2 is 4D.

Hmmmm okay. Which is why “exploding universe” and “destroying universe to its last atom” granted only 3-A, I guess.

• In the current Tiering System, a 3D Cube is quantitatively superior, not qualitatively superior to a 2D Plane, for example. It is physically bigger, however, it is just as real as a plane, therefore they have the same level of quality, and the only significant difference is quantitative.

Okay, I see. But does it mean that even infinite-dimensional space with, let’s say, 1 meter in each (of infinite) direction would still be only qualitatively superior to a point, line or square? So dimensions matter only if they are infinitely-sized?

Thank you again! I hope these questions are not annoying.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

First of all, thank you very much for reply.

Np

Okay, this makes sense. But what if in-verse interchangeable words are used? Like “he can destroy ten realms”, “he is going to
merge two dimensions”, “he will warp the entire world”? If the context suggests it is referring to the whole universe, would it be safe to assume Low 2-C/2-C too, or wording specifically “Universe” is needed?

Yeah. For example, if the ten realms have been described as having stars and galaxies as a normal universe does, that can lead to them being 3-A. And if they're said to have their own space/time, or dimensional barriers that can be evidence for 2-C.

As for merging two dimensions, or warping the world. It depends on if 'world' is referring to a planet or some greater cosmological structure, and the same goes for the two dimensions. Pocket dimensions the size of a solar system wouldn't be 2-C, so that kind of stuff needs to be clarified.

Hmmmm okay. Which is why “exploding universe” and “destroying universe to its last atom” granted only 3-A, I guess.

Okay, I see. But does it mean that even infinite-dimensional space with, let’s say, 1 meter in each (of infinite) direction would still be only qualitatively superior to a point, line or square? So dimensions matter only if they are infinitely-sized?

No, dimensions don't have to be infinite. For example, a cup in the 3rd Dimension is not infinite to us, however in comparison to the 2nd Dimension, it is. So higher dimensions don't have to be infinite, just superior to the ones below them.

 

[TheTenno07]

Not really. Although Universe, Timeline, and Space-Time all default to a Low 2-C construct, the word "Universe" doesn't inherently indicate a fabric of space-time in the same way "Timeline" and "Space-Time" do. That's why feats impacting a Timeline/Space-Time are Low 2-C, but feats impacting a "Universe" are assumed to be affecting only physical matter on a universal scale.

A context of the way destruction works is always necessary my friend.
Although it is worth emphasizing that when I referred to the destruction of the universe, I was referring to its entire structure. (The entire structure low 2-C)

 

[TheTenno07]

Np

Yeah. For example, if the ten realms have been described as having stars and galaxies as a normal universe does, that can lead to them being 3-A. And if they're said to have their own space/time, or dimensional barriers that can be evidence for 2-C.

As for merging two dimensions, or warping the world. It depends on if 'world' is referring to a planet or some greater cosmological structure, and the same goes for the two dimensions. Pocket dimensions the size of a solar system wouldn't be 2-C, so that kind of stuff needs to be clarified.

No, dimensions don't have to be infinite. For example, a cup in the 3rd Dimension is not infinite to us, however in comparison to the 2nd Dimension, it is. So higher dimensions don't have to be infinite, just superior to the ones below them.

The rule of a necessary size like the observable universe still applies in superior dimensions?

 

[TheTenno07]

The rule of a necessary size like the observable universe still applies in superior dimensions?

Or is only necessary for tier 2 feats a size of 93 billions light years in the structure?

 

[Lloydblitzed]

Or is only necessary for tier 2 feats a size of 93 billions light years in the structure?

The size should be 4D or the same as a space time continuum

 

[TheTenno07]

The size should be 4D or the same as a space time Continuum

The time is uncountable infinite by default, I was talking about the significant size (or as it is said) what is necessary for the feats

 

[TheTenno07]

First of all, thank you very much for reply.

This makes sense.

Okay, this makes sense. But what if in-verse interchangeable words are used? Like “he can destroy ten realms”, “he is going to
merge two dimensions”, “he will warp the entire world”? If the context suggests it is referring to the whole universe, would it be safe to assume Low 2-C/2-C too, or wording specifically “Universe” is needed?

Hmmmm okay. Which is why “exploding universe” and “destroying universe to its last atom” granted only 3-A, I guess.

Okay, I see. But does it mean that even infinite-dimensional space with, let’s say, 1 meter in each (of infinite) direction would still be only qualitatively superior to a point, line or square? So dimensions matter only if they are infinitely-sized?

Thank you again! I hope these questions are not annoying.

This is why exists questions and answers section bro