- 969
- 799
The logic here is that if his sword has succeeded in destruction with its cuts, and has not been stopped in its stab or slash by anything, it has no anti-feat to its AP
-
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.
High 3-A downgrade Anos
- Thread starter ImmortalDread
- Start date
- Status
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #122
Also, there were one feat where he stabbed someone, but this is not even AP feat.
So again, are you going to continue in an endless discussion to tell me "there are no anti-feats" while all his feats are "hax feats" till volume 4.
So again, are you going to continue in an endless discussion to tell me "there are no anti-feats" while all his feats are "hax feats" till volume 4.
- 969
- 799
How so? If anything, I’ve proved my own point pretty nicely. He states it to be able to destroy anything, including infinite things. In his world, that’s anything, in our system, that’s High 3-A.
Apologies for the accusation, but are you being purposefully obtuse?
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #124
Elaborate why it is high 3-A and not tier 0? Unless you are claiming tier 0 is not infinite?
- 12,956
- 5,085
What in the goddamn **** is this bullshit. Everything with infinite mass is High 3-A, as the glass has still infinite KG due to it having still desnity over an infinite volume.
Are you trying to tell me that destroying an universe with finite size and weight is more impressive than destroying anything with infinite volume?
KingNanaya
He/Him- 2,701
- 3,771
where the hell did tier 0 come from?????
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #127
The statement pretty much is no limits, you can argue for tier 0 since those structures are also infinite.
So not sure why we need to limit it to high 3-A if the statement itself leaves no limitations, boundaries or exceptions.
- 969
- 799
The burden of proof is on you, but I’ll humor you.
It’s not tier 0, because there have been no statements that substantiate tier 0! Layers, if any, do not have R>F Transcendence. Higher dimensions are not described either. You’ve committed a hasty generalization by sweeping all infinities together into one idea. Fun fact, that’s not how it works. Infinity is a type of model we use to describe something, and obviously varies case to case, verse to verse.
- 4,325
- 732
Your thing is bullshit, the resistance of a some thing doesn't change with it's length but with it's tickness. If it's have infinite length but the same tickness (1mm) then it shouldn't need that more force to break through. Like it's not harder to cut a paper that have 10km length than 1m if they have the same tickness
KingNanaya
He/Him- 2,701
- 3,771
if I say "the one thing I'm the best at is working hard" that doesn't mean I'm the hardest working, that means that my best strength is working hard.
- 12,956
- 5,085
Alright, a 3-A can destroy some of the glass you're talking about, but it'll never be able to cover a significant part of it as it's still a finite amount of power, which can't cover all of its volume.
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #133
Why it is my burden to prove negative?
Alright, let me demonstrate it for you.
The statement is “no limits' fallacy." This fallacy occurs when someone claims (in our case, Anos was claiming this) that the sword has no limits or boundaries, and can do absolutely anything without exception or limitation.
There are many things that I need to address:
Alright, let me demonstrate it for you.
The statement is “no limits' fallacy." This fallacy occurs when someone claims (in our case, Anos was claiming this) that the sword has no limits or boundaries, and can do absolutely anything without exception or limitation.
There are many things that I need to address:
- All his feats that are demonstrated as far till volume 4 are hax feats and not AP feats
- So simply saying (there are no anti-feats) does not counter the fact that it has no relevance to begin with)
- If you interpret the statement literally, it cannot be restricted because doing so would contradict its inherent nature. For instance, if something is considered to be at "tier 0," it must be capable of destroying itself, or else the statement becomes meaningless.
- 17,924
- 17,579
Destroying such a structure is very much High 3-A, tf are you talking about?
- 286
- 352
Dread, there's no way wiki will give Tier 0 to characters with only infinite power statements….
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #137
You are not countering my point that taking the statement literal will require giving no limitations.
ShionAH
He/Him- 15,173
- 3,919
Dread is not saying that. She means "I can try to scale this to Tier 0 but it wont be accepted so H3-A should not be accepted too" I think.
- 3,566
- 877
We limit it to High 3-A because nothing suggest that it's beyond High 3-A without any additional context.....
- 17,924
- 17,579
The minimum rating of destroying infinite structures (which is the most quantifiable aspect of his statement of destroying anything), especially with respect to 3-dimensional beings, is High 3-A.
That's it. Trying to make it sound silly by conflating it to Tier 0 is the most disingenuous argument possible.
That's it. Trying to make it sound silly by conflating it to Tier 0 is the most disingenuous argument possible.
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #142
But the statement itself excludes limitations. It's pretty much your burden to prove why he can't destroy low 1-C structures if they are already infinite.
You are already proving my point. It is pretty much no limits statement.
- 4,325
- 732
How? If i make a hole in a infinite sized paper than have the same tickness that the one of a random book, i'm high 3-A?
Not all structure need a force to be applicated in the entierty of their size to be damaged.
- 3,566
- 877
And That's why lowball exist in the first place
KingNanaya
He/Him- 2,701
- 3,771
that uhhhh.... probably wouldn't be tier 0 either.....
- 969
- 799
ImmortalDread I don’t want to have to remind you to address my points pls
- 3,566
- 877
Infinite statements are considered High 3-A by default unless it was specifically proven it's tier 1
- 3,182
- 3,373
I concur with this.
- 12,956
- 5,085
...
- 580
- 387
I would understand NLF if y'all were arguing about true infinity but this is just infinity..
- 17,924
- 17,579
No cause you haven't destroyed the entire structure. That's the point. Not "damaging" X but destroying it completely.
As for the rest of this thread, I've said my part. If going by the most minimal intepretation of destroying infinite objects is somehow NLF then go off queen. You're welcome to ask other staff.
- 969
- 799
Feel free to write Planck69 down as disagree ImmortalDread, you said you’d include staff opinions only
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #154
It is nowhere disingenuous as the statement itself gives those possible interpretations with excluding that absolutely there are no limits to it.
No, otherwise Saitama would have high 3-A long ago.
It depends on the action and functionality and feats that have been demonstrated. Not "any infinite power" will get high 3-A.
ShionAH
He/Him- 15,173
- 3,919
Saitama has infinite potential not infinite power
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #156
Mind pinging them? I require some extra staff evaluations. I will add your vote.
Godsatoshi23
He/Him- 854
- 876
If it had said normally way I wouldn't have shared but the real reason I said this is because Anos said it when they are talking about omnipotent or almighty (Also we know from v4 Anos was even stronger than the order of destruction) which says that when Anos said the infinite statement he would have all the knowledge of it and then also he said it.
He also said that he is best at destruction which implies that in terms of destruction he is even beyond omnipotent/almighty.
- 969
- 799
Any day now….
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #159
Not currently discussing it, but there were many instances where they implied his power. Such as there were a canon statement about infinite strength/power.
- 18,393
- 14,310
- Thread starter
- #160
- Status
