• 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.

Kakuzu is Being Downplayed

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is....an underwhelmingly vapid retort. If you actually studied debate you'd know just how much of a non-sequitur and ad hominem this is, since it's about as substantive as your contributions thus far.

No, actually, why would him calling you out for ad nauseam and then calling you out for not knowing why committing ad nauseam in a debate setting is fallacious be a non-sequitur? And while it might be a bit much to say you're ignorant, it's not like he used that as a point, he just said it alongside his other statements, so why would that even be an ad hominem?

Simply refusing to accept proof that debunks you is what is truly dishonest, and making an unfounded assertion that you're correct and all those disagreeing are naysayers for no reason other than to naysay is pretty highfalutin and a bit offensive.

Can you explain why anything given was actual evidence that debunked the arguments?
 
@ Foliedeux

Why are you trying to contribute a counter to a Naruto AP thread when you don't even know basic lore of the verse?

thats going too far

we are human so we do mistake and could forgot some event
 
Niarobi (Formerly Hadou) said:
And while it might be a bit much to say you're ignorant, it's not like he used that as a point, he just said it alongside his other statements, so why would that even be an ad hominem?

Can you explain why anything given was actual evidence that debunked the arguments?
Replying not to an argument but diercting any statement directly at one's opposition in a debate is ad hominem. Literally any and all direct insult or affront is ad hominem. Specific application of it would be Poisoning the Well, for example.

And are you asking why having no feats that scale to harming a Tailed Beast needs defended as evidence of why Kakuzu's AP doesn't need upgraded? Why having no scaling interaction needs defended as evidence, why being thrashed by lower-tier ninja is evidence of not being a higher-tier? I'm pretty perturbed if that's what you're legitimately asking, since that just fails to grasp the context of what's being argued.
 
LSirLancelotDuLacl said:
@Jaja Then you could actually point out these so called refutals, instead of just saying they are there.
You can literally scroll up in chat, I fail to see why you're deserving of the privilege of me typing out the entire argument in paragraphs while looking for the evidence as well. That will just waste time for arguments that's already been made.
 
ad ho┬Àmi┬Ànem

/╦îad ╦êhämənəm/

adjective

  1. 1.
(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

"vicious ad hominem attacks" adverb

  1. 1.
in a way that is directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

"these points come from some of our best information sources, who realize they'll be attacked ad hominem"
 
JaJasBizarreAdventure said:
What part of that definition supported you?
I was called ignorant and my person insulted.

I said no need for ad hominem.

'how is that ad hominem' was the reply.

The definition states anything directed at a person rather than their argument is ad hominem.

It's alarming that I have to interpret a direct dictionary definition to showcase how it applies, since you've read the context.
 
The only way Kakuzu should scale is High 6C+ with Ninjutsu but AGAIN 3rd/4th Raikage could hurt Hachibi well....also the fact that SM Madara was basically taking on all the Tailed Beasts in the War
 
BlackeJan said:
The only way Kakuzu should scale is High 6C+ with Ninjutsu but AGAIN 3rd/4th Raikage could hurt Hachibi well....also the fact that SM Madara was basically taking on all the Tailed Beasts in the War
 
This thread is a joke and should be closed, literally several of the users that all spammed the first few comments that they agree are users that made their accounts today and immediately commented here, it's definitely being brigaded with sockpuppets and should be reported.
 
I may be extremely blind but I do see that you cannot refute the arguments so suddenly you pull the sockpuppet card. I know for a fact that these guys aren't sockpuppets because I know them. https://community.fandom.com/wiki/Help:Sockpuppet It isn't just one user it's multiple which means it's allowed. It isn't made for disruption it's for revision. They didn't have accounts before and just made them to access threads.
 
Most of this has already been debunked, but needless to say High 6-C Kakuzu or Hidan is a complete no.

And what is this crap about Kakashi's Raikiri ignoring durability? That has literally never been said anywhere in the entire series.

And the stuff about Kakuzu "steamrolling" Kakashi or Team 8 is equally as hilarious. Scans of him stomping fodder (Choji and Ino) don't change the fact that his attacks were tracked, countered and tanked by Kakashi several times in their fight;
 
And there was a pretty obvious retcon to the lower Bijuu's powers after early Shippuden rolled out - this much is nearly undeniable just by the feats alone.

The Bijuu went from being featless hype-only beasts to being capable of casually killing even the most powerful ninja in the series until then, up until Madara's arrival.

It is completely ludicrous to ignore logic and scaling and break the entire series' scaling, as well as ignore the individual feats by suggesting the entire Akatsuki and those who can fight them, including anyone considerably above freaking Asuma, somehow scale to High 6-C and above.
 
@Kepekley23, also, contexts sugguest victories against jinchuriki/tailed beast are by Hax which are supported by this sca as unique abilities so there would be no High 6-C scaling
 
Overall I agree with what Noodles has put forward.

I would like to add my own points for not only Kakuzu but many others being Bijuu level, as being Bijuu level in Naruto is honestly considered Mid Kage Level at this point, it isn't some godly accomplishment.

For one, all the Akatsuki are strong enough to take on Jinchuuriki and Bijuu (Translations differ but all say Jinchuuriki) Many are still Perfect Jinchuuriki, in which Bijuu are weaker without a Jinchuuriki host.

From here I'll explain that it's pretty basic that Bijuu can injure eachother, however it's less common knowledge that Bijuu can stop eachothers Bijuu Bombs with Physical Attacks, even the 8 Tails a lesser Bijuu can stop a Nine Tails Bijuu Dama, with characters like Minato being able to casually slice through those same partial transformations. Naruto with the Kurama Chakra Cloak could swat away numerous Bijuu Damas. Etc.

Next it's important to show that numerous shinobi reach Bijuu Levels and it's not anything very notable, besides the Deidara casually destroying 3 Tails Feat earlier, Kakuzu could withstand attacks from the 2 Tails Perfect Jinchuuriki. The Raikage is on Bijuu Levels while suppressed and Sasuke could fight him. (it's also stated the Raikage is the strongest in his village in the databook even with Bee there) Kazekage Rasa who got destroyed by Orochimaru used to stop Shukaku's Rampages with his jutsu. (Gaara could counter these)

Those are just a few of the many examples you could name, all it points to is that Mid Kage are easily Bijuu Level and beyond in combat, whether it be in their Jutsu potency which is strong enough to take out Bijuu that can take eachothers attacks and so on, with the Akatsuki being specifically formed to be powerful enough to not only take out Bijuu but their even stronger Jinchuuriki counterparts.

Kakuzu being damaged while Edo is a non-point as I've already shown that Kakuzu could still take attacks from Bijuu. In all honesty though, the people that attacked Kakuzu didn't even do anything to him anyway, as Kakuzu has just released all his hearts before this, and then proceeds to mock and insult them for not being worth his time. In the end it was Butterfly Choji who defeated Kakuzu with Darui's assistance, not an anti-feat.
 
Elizhaa said:
@Kepekley23, also, contexts sugguest victories against jinchuriki/tailed beast are by Hax which are supported by this sca as unique abilities so there would be no High 6-C scaling
Being immortal does not give you an Attack Potency Buff, and even then Kakuzu's Hearts can be destroyed, he's not true immortal. I have ZERO idea what godly hax you think Kakuzu has to defeat a Two Tails Perfect Jinchuuriki while being Town Level. Absurd.
 
Every bijuu minus gaaras, narutos, bees were all beaten by an akatsuki member. At this point the lot of you are just ignoring feats.
 
Kepekley23 said:
And there was a pretty obvious retcon to the lower Bijuu's powers after early Shippuden rolled out - this much is nearly undeniable just by the feats alone.

The Bijuu went from being featless hype-only beasts to being capable of casually killing even the most powerful ninja in the series until then, up until Madara's arrival.

It is completely ludicrous to ignore logic and scaling and break the entire series' scaling, as well as ignore the individual feats by suggesting the entire Akatsuki and those who can fight them, including anyone considerably above freaking Asuma, somehow scale to High 6-C and above.
I wonder if you actually read through the forum and all the evidence presented. Also how would Kakuzu being this strong break the series scaling?
 
The 3 tails getting defeated by a few bombs from Deidara, who had trouble agaisnt Sasuke, who survived a ton of his bombs, said Sasuke getting being completely treated nearly as a joke by B even before he pulls out the 8 tails chakra. Losing Cursed Mark doesn't justify this horrible discrepancy.
 
LSirLancelotDuLacl said:
The 3 tails getting defeated by a few bombs from Deidara, who had trouble agaisnt Sasuke, who survived a ton of his bombs, said Sasuke getting being completely treated nearly as a joke by B even before he pulls out the 8 tails chakra. Losing Cursed Mark doesn't justify this horrible discrepancy.
Uh, have you actually ever seen Sasuke VS Deidara?

Curse Mark 2 Sasuke only took one attack and he blocked it with his wings and one of them got blown off, he didn't get tagged afterthat. The Raikage landed a direct strike on Sasuke and Sasuke was fine, he didn't get hit after that. Going from getting your wings blown off by a casual attack in an amped form to taking attacks from a guy stronger than Killer Bee and Bijuu's without damage isn't an anti-feat.
 
Actually, he blocks his whole body with snakes to cover for a first bomb he launches and comes out not at all harmed, because snecks apparently. And then he goes in with C2 which is what Sasuke blocks, and costs him wing arm.

So Sasuke, a 7A with cursed mark, only loses a wing to a bomb stronger than Deidara's normal bombs? And the snakes block the normal bombs so well he doesnt get even a acratch? Makes a lot of sense.

I am not sure why you bring up the Raikage? The Raikage had to punch through the Susanoo ribcage, his full power didn't smack Sasuke. Considering it blocked a Liger Bomb without issue, this is even more blatant.
 
Lightning Release doesn't make Sasuke magically take less damage from bombs that are way above his Dura level, especially when one of those bombs just hits his snakes.

Jaja, once more saying things have been debunked because it suits you doesn't make them debunked. You couldn't even repeat the "debunks", when it's you guys arguing for this and need to give the proof. You are already arguing, you don't need to be so lazy if you actually think this makes so much sense and are willing to debate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top