• 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Last edited:
Or what we can do it's list them as "At least Low 2-C" and problem solved as the user Iamunanimousinthat said. That makes the most sense to me , honestly, it's not "Half 2-C" nor we are giving away the 2-C Tier that easily.
 
Or what we can do it's list them as "At least Low 2-C" and problem solved as the user Iamunanimousinthat said. That makes the most sense to me , honestly, it's not "Half 2-C" nor we are giving away the 2-C Tier that easily.
Current standards won't allow it. It just isn't possible anymore.
 
Current standards won't allow it. It just isn't possible anymore.
What about a Low 2-C+ rating?

That should do the trick.

Or if we wanna go for the safest option then "2-C at most" is better.


But I don't think it will be too hard to create a Low 2-C+ rating
 
What about a Low 2-C+ rating?

That should do the trick.
Nope. Also doesn't satisfy current standards. "At most 2-C" is your best bet.

Or if we wanna go for the safest option then "2-C at most" is better.
Already what I suggested. "At most 2-C".

But I don't think it will be too hard to create a Low 2-C+ rating
No. This will give a bad impression for favoritism for Dragon Ball getting a unique rating. We need to be consistent with our standards as much as we can. There's no in-betweening bullshit here that's gonna fly. All or nothing.
 
No. This will give a bad impression for favoritism for Dragon Ball getting a unique rating. We need to be consistent with our standards as much as we can.
It doesn't have to be just DB, I didn't name any verse in specific.

I meant a Tier that could be used in general for all verses in the wiki, such as the others.
 
Or what we can do it's list them as "At least Low 2-C" and problem solved as the user Iamunanimousinthat said. That makes the most sense to me , honestly, it's not "Half 2-C" nor we are giving away the 2-C Tier that easily.
At most 2-C*

But yes.
 
Doesn't matter, the fact that it was created solely in response to a verse having a specific feat is enough of a precedent to disqualify it from being a thing.
Fair. Then I guess "At most 2-C" is the safest option.

But obv, that would be baseline 2-C, no?
 
Beerus in the manga should also be low 2-C via this
101.jpg

Just saying
Putting this in a spoiler so it doesn't take up a lot of space on this thread

But anyways I agree as well
 
Would this make all the Sonic Low 2-Cs to 2-C?
nope, because of these two https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Heavy_King

only one that would really get that is blaze since she only eer fought 2-Cs and 2-B

but alas
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top