- 40,473
- 12,955
As a neutral staff who's been following this from the beginning, I'll close it in your stead when it's done, Ant.
-
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.
Kratos Tier 2-C Downgrade.
- Thread starter Spawn888
- Start date
-
- Tags
- god of war kratos
- Status
- 813
- 137
Im neutral when it comes to the tiering, but the speed is a different story.
I completely oppose Infinite Speed still. That has to go if it has not been decided yet.
I completely oppose Infinite Speed still. That has to go if it has not been decided yet.
- 10,758
- 6,491
Who in history was a 9-B exactly?
- 643
- 293
Alright, there is alot to unpack. I admit, I am not the biggest God of War fan, I have no personal objections to them being 2-C and I write this with great pragmatism and skepticism.
I will link the threads here: https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2363126#The_Olympians_1:_Helios_and_Nyx https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2666458 https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2800404
From my understanding, these are the only three threads but I will break them down, point for point.
Olympians and Nyx I will start with the first thread, the one that got denied before Kepekley had any power in this community. The first point with the primordials is sort of sketchy. The video itself does hint that Uranus and Co created the universe, however the video narrator itself said and quote. "The wrath of the primordials… the very beings that forged the earth." Clearly there is a disconnect between the two, do we trust the visuals or do we trust the narrator? One is 5-B the other is 4-A to 3-A. The OP for this post does have evidence right here that the primordials created the universe, but this contradicts what we see in any of the games directly. This also is partially contradicted by another writer right here. https://imgur.com/PkglJaU Spawned by the big bang =/= Universe Level. This is blatantly "The primordials were created by the big bang." and not "I started the big bang." However, if I were to accept her comments at face value, creating galaxies does mean 4-A to 3-B obviously. But not universe level. This is blatant Equivocation. The same thing with bringing life to the universe. This is a vague statement. It could mean he created the universe, but it can also mean he either brought life, lifeforms into the universe. Now before you say that is a reach, I have the OP's next point. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/a4oPQ5QSBu...VD9M8NJvclUg9ihszl_cXtRuw6T-OB6eHGNjuXjMrW=s0
Birthright means an inherited gift. This means that in this construction exactly. The Son of Chaos (aka who ever this eyeball dude is), are granted the gift of the universe by the father of the universe. Who is the father? Uranus? Well we can't equivocate the above statement because it is vague. He was in the original myth, and yes I am aware GOW using the original myth as a sort of basis, not a fact of life. This one could be 3-A, but I am more tempted to chalk this up to flowery language. The construction is off. Even by GOW standards. I will come back to this, and I admit this is the strongest piece of evidence.
-Hyperion's Spear This one is just really ridiculous. For one, a star can't hold the weight of the cosmos. Period. Matt brought up even if it did that it would be a supermassive blackhole because of the weight. This seems like writer induced stupidity. Also, forging it in the sun's core is also not even star level. We all know this. IIRC this is 5-B or somewhere in tier 4, but not tier 3. I have many more issues with this but for the sake of brevity, I will just touch upon this one. Naming a spear after the progenitor =/= the power of the progenitor. I don't care which verse it is, this is never a valid way to scale.
Yes, we ignore alot of science the way we handle things in the wiki, but this has three red flags I am just writing this off as 'No'. Period. Even if it was accurate, Weekly pointed this out, this can be up to 3-B. But no, not valid. Ignores science in two ways, using the name of the progenitor also does not count to me.
-Chrono's created Time Yeah no issues here, if Matt does with his skepticism, I will probably be inclined to listen. But on this one,I am on Kepekleys side. I do however have a personal bias. I used this exact reasoning for upgrading this guy right here. https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Xelor So yes, Infinite Speed and our first blatant Low 2-C statement. Now if you have a problem with the premise of creating time = Low 2-C, I can pull up some science as evidence but yes this is fine.
-Nyx https://youtu.be/g-aJyHnTycU?t=14 So according to this we have a few things here. First off, banishment from the night sky is blatant BFR. Period. Not an ap feat, just hax. Also, 4-A https://imgur.com/Km55JRy Also, the OP argued that this was an alternate dimension. Another equivocation fallacy. For one, writers use dimension in space time Low 2-C context or High 2-A and beyond or even just a small pocket realm that I have seen upwards of 4-A, to 3-B to whatever.
Without a size, we just know it is a big pocket with a moon, which is 5-A. See Dracula from Castlevania in some games, his castle has a moon inside in some of them, and that is it.
https://imgur.com/ByFED0X
This one the OP just lied. No, they were not 'equal' in strength.The writer herself said that they had all different strengths and weaknesses. This is true for even the gods in old myth.
-Zeus https://imgur.com/VFRpWVi All this proves a giant war happened. Nothing more or less. Not 3-A. It was probably used by the OP to prove that 3-A in scale was consistent, so not going to strawman him here, but it is worthy of mention. https://imgur.com/XWuqKxL Also, this is another nitpick admitedly, but the question is sound. Are the Titans/Gods equal to the Primordials? He answered yes, which is fine, but then answered with "Because they took replaced eachother." That is...silly. When people replace eachother in power, they dont all have the same level of 'power'. Arguing otherwise is fallacious usually. This portion of the OP seems fine, so I won't harp on it too hard but this seems to be wishy washy at best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMBm4F11KS4&feature=youtu.be&t=26 Although Idk GOW too well, it looks like Zeus and Hades wrestled Chronos to the ground. You can argue that makes it more consistent, but I honestly will trust the OP here.
Again, if Matt has more issues with it, may he answer with his great gospal. -World Pillar https://imgur.com/dug5tDe I get that we settled that creation, as controversial as it is, is 3-A. But it seems like to me since it referenced the living world, it is 5-B, and that is the creation discussed here. Not the entire universe. If the writers are fine with cosmic scaling, why not use the word here too? They used living world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksY846OVDX0&feature=youtu.be&t=204 Also here too, using of the word world. 5-B Equivocation to assume otherwise. It seems like all of this is just the crux of existence, not it being 3-A. Now, if you read this far. I am mostly fine with the scaling below and speed, so I will focus on this point. I just so happen to be taking a mythology class, and the term 'Chaos' is thrown around here alot, so lets look at the mythology from the time as a brief history of the term https://drive.google.com/open?id=1JUc8ERH19rAzcaTsuJJJqSqScth7Hxpk Chaos is the primordial state of existence, both in GOW and in Greek Myth. It is formless. Now if you read, you get 5-B, then 4-A then 3-B/3-A in the order. The first thing ever born from Chaos was Gaja, or the Earth itself. So it seems like Causality follows through, Peresphone is correct. Destroying the world pillar will destroy the living world and descend it to chaos. Because in myth, the first thing born from Chaos was the Earth. So this is honestly up to your interpretation, read the myth for yourself (sorry it is sideways my teacher is a silly goose.) I am counting it as 5-B however. Maybe 4-A Wow, 4-A is looking real consistent, is it? Well, that is this thread.
I will only address the ones I think are fallacious, and not backed by evidence, so lets go over them.
Claim 3: "Helios doesn't actually banish Nyx, it's a metaphor for him bringing the day". Response: This is a strawman. One it is BFR, two even if it was accurate, it is 4-A. But losing your domain doesn't count. I can lock someone out of their house, doesn't make me 8-C. No, I used hax, the almighty Key! This doesn't prove anything, in all honesty. This just proves that he was banished, setting it up as a strawman to promoted 3-A GOW.
Claim 4: "You are using Word of God to support your claims. We reject that here" Answer: No problem with your claim here, but a few feats are vague and have sentence construction that can be picked apart. But not gonna set up that as a sort of red herring. My issue here is that consistency does lean to 4-A, not 3-A. Plain and simple.
Claim 7: "The God of War universe has small stars and is not a proper universe, the Sun is just a chariot carried into the sky by Helios." Answer: https://gfycat.com/perkywateryaustraliankelpie-characterrant-god-of-war-gow This is your shining example? Again, 4-A. I am being super generous too. I am sure if you pixel scaled that, it would be far lower. Maybe 4-A, but by a low end. Kratos is clearly not that far away and we already know his height. Get to work Kepekely. https://i.imgur.com/PkglJaU.png I already debunked this screenshot for 3-A, but it is credence for 4-A.
Claim 8: "The concept artist statement where the Underworld is stated to be infinite is hyperbole." Claim 9: "Gaia states Kratos fell next to the very edge of Hades, proving it has an edge and is not infinite. It's false." Answer: Pick one. Having an 'upper' part of the underworld means either it is not infinite or that upper part is higher dimensional space. High 3-A is an infinite space, correct? Meaning it has infinite length, width and height. If he fell and there is a top, it isnt infinite. Cherry picking and equivocation once again. I am more inclined by the way to just dismiss the statement as per authorial intent. However it does mean it is very big. If it was higher dimensional space, then I will have some concerns. And that is it, time for the next thread.
___ https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2666458
Now based on what I wrote above, lets render judgement.
Uranus creating the universe and Cronos killing him (3-A/High 3-A due to GoW's universe size) Fine, but an outlier. Hyperion having a spear that can bear the weight of the universe (3-A to High 3-A due to universe size in GoW) Scientifically incorrect, equivocation. Atlas holding up the cosmos (3-A to High 3-A) Vague, can be 5-B or 3-B. The World Pillar holding up the cosmos before Atlas (3-A to High 3-A) 5-B The World Pillar's destruction threatening all of creation, including the infinite Underworld, and being stated by Persephone to be able to revert the whole world to the primordial void of Chaos, which preceded the universe (High 3-A, possibly even Low 2-C considering the void preceded time itself, suggesting space-time would be destroyed) Equivocation and non sequiter Cronos creating time (self-explanatory Low 2-C) Also an outlier. I am fine with the feat itself however, but I will admit it is sort of on the speculatory side. Nyx creating and warping a dimension that contains stars and celestial bodies passively, with said dimension being a mirror of our own (Anywhere from 4-A to 3-A or higher) Agree, but it is 4-A Helios's light illuminating all of the Underworld, an infinite plane (Self-explanatory High 3-A) Didn't touch upon this too much, but nope. Helios's power damaging the World Pillar, which held up the cosmos for milennia
Counter Arguments Uranus created the universe! Obvious outlier. Need I remind you the gap even between 3-B and 3-A is so big it is even funny. Now, I have this imaginary rule (and until it is added on the outlier page, it is a stick of logic more then anything. It is called the rule of top tiers.) If a Top/God tier of a verse does something and it is contradicted by other feats by similar top tiers, it is not accurate. Roshi busting the Moon (5-C), but Piccolo max power was that of a nuke (7-B) Percy Jackson holding the sky (6-C) but max powered Percy, Hazel and Nico Struggle with various of their own high end feats. IE: Percy causing an eruption, Hazel destroying a small island and Nico best feat is 7-B (7-B to High 7-A) Mundus created a pocket dimension (3-A), literally anyone else struggles to cause High 6-A damage. There is this word called "nuance", you can argue for consistency only when it suits you, not for when you cherry pick definitons. Now you can argue if it was JUST Uranus and Primordials who scaled to this, I would be fine with it. But no, you are not. You say this scales to everyone. Ignoring how haxy myth is, I will be fine at face value if you said this was just Uranus. Chronos feat backs this up. But your claim that they scale to everyone when others struggle to do similar feats is equivocation and i hate using this word because it is borderline Ad Hominem, but pure headcanon. I am sorry, I just dont see it.
Hyperion having a spear that can hold the weight of the universe. Well for one it is scientifically inaccurate. Two, creating a spear inside the sun is not even tier 3. Three, naming yourself after the progenitor god that created the universe that I previously stated has alot of issues doesnt mean 3-A. Four, lifting the cosmos can range from 4-A to 3-B. Depends on how big the 'cosmos' is. Atlas holding up the cosmos. Again, Equivocation. Atlas has been shown to lift the Earth in myth, so he gets the pass in this regard. But lifting the cosmos, again is 3-B. And this has been done for 5-B context in the game so I am just gonna say this is inconsistent. Not based on headcanon, just based on the fact that while the two have been used interchangably, this requires more solid evidence for a definite 3-B. I can just as easily say it only is 5-B in this context Incredulous? Sure, but I need more evidence. This one though, I am close to neutral on.
The World Pillar holding up the cosmos before Atlas I don't actually remember you stating this in the first OP i went through, so I am gonna hold judgement on this. But again, 3-B at face value. The World Pillar's destruction threatening all of creation, including the infinite Underworld, and being stated by Persephone to be able to revert the whole world to the primordial void of Chaos, which preceded the universe Doesn't logically follow through, it was stated that this would bring the destruction of the living world. Creation in this context could easily mean 5-B as the original myth implies the same. Even assuming it was legitimate, destroying the world pillar isnt a feat. It merely destroying a crux in existence. If I can't have this for Final Fantasy 9, i am not letting it happen here! Destroying a ******* stone pillar isnt god damn 3-A or Low 2-C. It scales to literally no one and it is environmental destruction.
Helio's light illuminating the underworld.
I already stated that if it was truly infinite, Kratos would have not fell because High 3-A is something with infinite width, height and length. If he fell on something, such as the 'upper underworld', then that means it is not an infinite sized realm. Also, if there is an edge, it would imply it doesn't have infinite length or width so just plain inconsistent.
That is it with this thread.
In conclusion, the third thread has brought up a lot more issues with the feats above and I will just let the op speak for himself, some of which I was kind enough to entertain, but not this OP. Spawn has made some points 1 - The timeline scan is completely un - sourced, it supposed to be from the "official" website for God of War ascension but that doesn't even exist as nothing comes up when it is searched for which makes this very dubious canon at best and that's definitely pushing it. There is no confirmation the [2010 comics](http://godofwar.wikia.com/wiki/God_of_War_(comics) are canon either they weren't made by whoever makes the God of War games
Really? Well even if they were on FB (I am aware that GOW used this as a marketing trick), so sure why not but if we can't find the source of ANY of this. Then no, auto discredit. We need sources. Period.
2 - Atlas lifting the world's crust and Atlas's hammer having the weight of the world:.
So equivocation for world the planet, the crust and the cosmos? Only strengthens my above points.
I will admit that the other side of this debate has resorted to wanking and headcanon as ways to dismiss the otherside, which I am not for in any way. I think my arguments work well enough to debunk this. I just added some fallacies and used some logic.
TLDR: 4-A is definitely fine. Consistent.
Anything beyond is not fine. Don't use the lol its fiction fallacy, because It takes us nowhere. This wiki uses both fiction and science to come to reasonable conclusions in power. We don't dismiss science to side with fiction or vice versa. We use nuance.
Edit: For some reason the trailer wont link but it is crucial so here it is. https://youtu.be/fbMZc_clZU4?t=32
I will link the threads here: https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2363126#The_Olympians_1:_Helios_and_Nyx https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2666458 https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2800404
From my understanding, these are the only three threads but I will break them down, point for point.
Olympians and Nyx I will start with the first thread, the one that got denied before Kepekley had any power in this community. The first point with the primordials is sort of sketchy. The video itself does hint that Uranus and Co created the universe, however the video narrator itself said and quote. "The wrath of the primordials… the very beings that forged the earth." Clearly there is a disconnect between the two, do we trust the visuals or do we trust the narrator? One is 5-B the other is 4-A to 3-A. The OP for this post does have evidence right here that the primordials created the universe, but this contradicts what we see in any of the games directly. This also is partially contradicted by another writer right here. https://imgur.com/PkglJaU Spawned by the big bang =/= Universe Level. This is blatantly "The primordials were created by the big bang." and not "I started the big bang." However, if I were to accept her comments at face value, creating galaxies does mean 4-A to 3-B obviously. But not universe level. This is blatant Equivocation. The same thing with bringing life to the universe. This is a vague statement. It could mean he created the universe, but it can also mean he either brought life, lifeforms into the universe. Now before you say that is a reach, I have the OP's next point. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/a4oPQ5QSBu...VD9M8NJvclUg9ihszl_cXtRuw6T-OB6eHGNjuXjMrW=s0
Birthright means an inherited gift. This means that in this construction exactly. The Son of Chaos (aka who ever this eyeball dude is), are granted the gift of the universe by the father of the universe. Who is the father? Uranus? Well we can't equivocate the above statement because it is vague. He was in the original myth, and yes I am aware GOW using the original myth as a sort of basis, not a fact of life. This one could be 3-A, but I am more tempted to chalk this up to flowery language. The construction is off. Even by GOW standards. I will come back to this, and I admit this is the strongest piece of evidence.
-Hyperion's Spear This one is just really ridiculous. For one, a star can't hold the weight of the cosmos. Period. Matt brought up even if it did that it would be a supermassive blackhole because of the weight. This seems like writer induced stupidity. Also, forging it in the sun's core is also not even star level. We all know this. IIRC this is 5-B or somewhere in tier 4, but not tier 3. I have many more issues with this but for the sake of brevity, I will just touch upon this one. Naming a spear after the progenitor =/= the power of the progenitor. I don't care which verse it is, this is never a valid way to scale.
Yes, we ignore alot of science the way we handle things in the wiki, but this has three red flags I am just writing this off as 'No'. Period. Even if it was accurate, Weekly pointed this out, this can be up to 3-B. But no, not valid. Ignores science in two ways, using the name of the progenitor also does not count to me.
-Chrono's created Time Yeah no issues here, if Matt does with his skepticism, I will probably be inclined to listen. But on this one,I am on Kepekleys side. I do however have a personal bias. I used this exact reasoning for upgrading this guy right here. https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Xelor So yes, Infinite Speed and our first blatant Low 2-C statement. Now if you have a problem with the premise of creating time = Low 2-C, I can pull up some science as evidence but yes this is fine.
-Nyx https://youtu.be/g-aJyHnTycU?t=14 So according to this we have a few things here. First off, banishment from the night sky is blatant BFR. Period. Not an ap feat, just hax. Also, 4-A https://imgur.com/Km55JRy Also, the OP argued that this was an alternate dimension. Another equivocation fallacy. For one, writers use dimension in space time Low 2-C context or High 2-A and beyond or even just a small pocket realm that I have seen upwards of 4-A, to 3-B to whatever.
Without a size, we just know it is a big pocket with a moon, which is 5-A. See Dracula from Castlevania in some games, his castle has a moon inside in some of them, and that is it.
https://imgur.com/ByFED0X
This one the OP just lied. No, they were not 'equal' in strength.The writer herself said that they had all different strengths and weaknesses. This is true for even the gods in old myth.
-Zeus https://imgur.com/VFRpWVi All this proves a giant war happened. Nothing more or less. Not 3-A. It was probably used by the OP to prove that 3-A in scale was consistent, so not going to strawman him here, but it is worthy of mention. https://imgur.com/XWuqKxL Also, this is another nitpick admitedly, but the question is sound. Are the Titans/Gods equal to the Primordials? He answered yes, which is fine, but then answered with "Because they took replaced eachother." That is...silly. When people replace eachother in power, they dont all have the same level of 'power'. Arguing otherwise is fallacious usually. This portion of the OP seems fine, so I won't harp on it too hard but this seems to be wishy washy at best. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMBm4F11KS4&feature=youtu.be&t=26 Although Idk GOW too well, it looks like Zeus and Hades wrestled Chronos to the ground. You can argue that makes it more consistent, but I honestly will trust the OP here.
Again, if Matt has more issues with it, may he answer with his great gospal. -World Pillar https://imgur.com/dug5tDe I get that we settled that creation, as controversial as it is, is 3-A. But it seems like to me since it referenced the living world, it is 5-B, and that is the creation discussed here. Not the entire universe. If the writers are fine with cosmic scaling, why not use the word here too? They used living world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksY846OVDX0&feature=youtu.be&t=204 Also here too, using of the word world. 5-B Equivocation to assume otherwise. It seems like all of this is just the crux of existence, not it being 3-A. Now, if you read this far. I am mostly fine with the scaling below and speed, so I will focus on this point. I just so happen to be taking a mythology class, and the term 'Chaos' is thrown around here alot, so lets look at the mythology from the time as a brief history of the term https://drive.google.com/open?id=1JUc8ERH19rAzcaTsuJJJqSqScth7Hxpk Chaos is the primordial state of existence, both in GOW and in Greek Myth. It is formless. Now if you read, you get 5-B, then 4-A then 3-B/3-A in the order. The first thing ever born from Chaos was Gaja, or the Earth itself. So it seems like Causality follows through, Peresphone is correct. Destroying the world pillar will destroy the living world and descend it to chaos. Because in myth, the first thing born from Chaos was the Earth. So this is honestly up to your interpretation, read the myth for yourself (sorry it is sideways my teacher is a silly goose.) I am counting it as 5-B however. Maybe 4-A Wow, 4-A is looking real consistent, is it? Well, that is this thread.
I will only address the ones I think are fallacious, and not backed by evidence, so lets go over them.
Claim 3: "Helios doesn't actually banish Nyx, it's a metaphor for him bringing the day". Response: This is a strawman. One it is BFR, two even if it was accurate, it is 4-A. But losing your domain doesn't count. I can lock someone out of their house, doesn't make me 8-C. No, I used hax, the almighty Key! This doesn't prove anything, in all honesty. This just proves that he was banished, setting it up as a strawman to promoted 3-A GOW.
Claim 4: "You are using Word of God to support your claims. We reject that here" Answer: No problem with your claim here, but a few feats are vague and have sentence construction that can be picked apart. But not gonna set up that as a sort of red herring. My issue here is that consistency does lean to 4-A, not 3-A. Plain and simple.
Claim 7: "The God of War universe has small stars and is not a proper universe, the Sun is just a chariot carried into the sky by Helios." Answer: https://gfycat.com/perkywateryaustraliankelpie-characterrant-god-of-war-gow This is your shining example? Again, 4-A. I am being super generous too. I am sure if you pixel scaled that, it would be far lower. Maybe 4-A, but by a low end. Kratos is clearly not that far away and we already know his height. Get to work Kepekely. https://i.imgur.com/PkglJaU.png I already debunked this screenshot for 3-A, but it is credence for 4-A.
Claim 8: "The concept artist statement where the Underworld is stated to be infinite is hyperbole." Claim 9: "Gaia states Kratos fell next to the very edge of Hades, proving it has an edge and is not infinite. It's false." Answer: Pick one. Having an 'upper' part of the underworld means either it is not infinite or that upper part is higher dimensional space. High 3-A is an infinite space, correct? Meaning it has infinite length, width and height. If he fell and there is a top, it isnt infinite. Cherry picking and equivocation once again. I am more inclined by the way to just dismiss the statement as per authorial intent. However it does mean it is very big. If it was higher dimensional space, then I will have some concerns. And that is it, time for the next thread.
___ https://vsbattles.com/vsbattles/2666458
Now based on what I wrote above, lets render judgement.
Uranus creating the universe and Cronos killing him (3-A/High 3-A due to GoW's universe size) Fine, but an outlier. Hyperion having a spear that can bear the weight of the universe (3-A to High 3-A due to universe size in GoW) Scientifically incorrect, equivocation. Atlas holding up the cosmos (3-A to High 3-A) Vague, can be 5-B or 3-B. The World Pillar holding up the cosmos before Atlas (3-A to High 3-A) 5-B The World Pillar's destruction threatening all of creation, including the infinite Underworld, and being stated by Persephone to be able to revert the whole world to the primordial void of Chaos, which preceded the universe (High 3-A, possibly even Low 2-C considering the void preceded time itself, suggesting space-time would be destroyed) Equivocation and non sequiter Cronos creating time (self-explanatory Low 2-C) Also an outlier. I am fine with the feat itself however, but I will admit it is sort of on the speculatory side. Nyx creating and warping a dimension that contains stars and celestial bodies passively, with said dimension being a mirror of our own (Anywhere from 4-A to 3-A or higher) Agree, but it is 4-A Helios's light illuminating all of the Underworld, an infinite plane (Self-explanatory High 3-A) Didn't touch upon this too much, but nope. Helios's power damaging the World Pillar, which held up the cosmos for milennia
Counter Arguments Uranus created the universe! Obvious outlier. Need I remind you the gap even between 3-B and 3-A is so big it is even funny. Now, I have this imaginary rule (and until it is added on the outlier page, it is a stick of logic more then anything. It is called the rule of top tiers.) If a Top/God tier of a verse does something and it is contradicted by other feats by similar top tiers, it is not accurate. Roshi busting the Moon (5-C), but Piccolo max power was that of a nuke (7-B) Percy Jackson holding the sky (6-C) but max powered Percy, Hazel and Nico Struggle with various of their own high end feats. IE: Percy causing an eruption, Hazel destroying a small island and Nico best feat is 7-B (7-B to High 7-A) Mundus created a pocket dimension (3-A), literally anyone else struggles to cause High 6-A damage. There is this word called "nuance", you can argue for consistency only when it suits you, not for when you cherry pick definitons. Now you can argue if it was JUST Uranus and Primordials who scaled to this, I would be fine with it. But no, you are not. You say this scales to everyone. Ignoring how haxy myth is, I will be fine at face value if you said this was just Uranus. Chronos feat backs this up. But your claim that they scale to everyone when others struggle to do similar feats is equivocation and i hate using this word because it is borderline Ad Hominem, but pure headcanon. I am sorry, I just dont see it.
Hyperion having a spear that can hold the weight of the universe. Well for one it is scientifically inaccurate. Two, creating a spear inside the sun is not even tier 3. Three, naming yourself after the progenitor god that created the universe that I previously stated has alot of issues doesnt mean 3-A. Four, lifting the cosmos can range from 4-A to 3-B. Depends on how big the 'cosmos' is. Atlas holding up the cosmos. Again, Equivocation. Atlas has been shown to lift the Earth in myth, so he gets the pass in this regard. But lifting the cosmos, again is 3-B. And this has been done for 5-B context in the game so I am just gonna say this is inconsistent. Not based on headcanon, just based on the fact that while the two have been used interchangably, this requires more solid evidence for a definite 3-B. I can just as easily say it only is 5-B in this context Incredulous? Sure, but I need more evidence. This one though, I am close to neutral on.
The World Pillar holding up the cosmos before Atlas I don't actually remember you stating this in the first OP i went through, so I am gonna hold judgement on this. But again, 3-B at face value. The World Pillar's destruction threatening all of creation, including the infinite Underworld, and being stated by Persephone to be able to revert the whole world to the primordial void of Chaos, which preceded the universe Doesn't logically follow through, it was stated that this would bring the destruction of the living world. Creation in this context could easily mean 5-B as the original myth implies the same. Even assuming it was legitimate, destroying the world pillar isnt a feat. It merely destroying a crux in existence. If I can't have this for Final Fantasy 9, i am not letting it happen here! Destroying a ******* stone pillar isnt god damn 3-A or Low 2-C. It scales to literally no one and it is environmental destruction.
Helio's light illuminating the underworld.
I already stated that if it was truly infinite, Kratos would have not fell because High 3-A is something with infinite width, height and length. If he fell on something, such as the 'upper underworld', then that means it is not an infinite sized realm. Also, if there is an edge, it would imply it doesn't have infinite length or width so just plain inconsistent.
That is it with this thread.
In conclusion, the third thread has brought up a lot more issues with the feats above and I will just let the op speak for himself, some of which I was kind enough to entertain, but not this OP. Spawn has made some points 1 - The timeline scan is completely un - sourced, it supposed to be from the "official" website for God of War ascension but that doesn't even exist as nothing comes up when it is searched for which makes this very dubious canon at best and that's definitely pushing it. There is no confirmation the [2010 comics](http://godofwar.wikia.com/wiki/God_of_War_(comics) are canon either they weren't made by whoever makes the God of War games
Really? Well even if they were on FB (I am aware that GOW used this as a marketing trick), so sure why not but if we can't find the source of ANY of this. Then no, auto discredit. We need sources. Period.
2 - Atlas lifting the world's crust and Atlas's hammer having the weight of the world:.
So equivocation for world the planet, the crust and the cosmos? Only strengthens my above points.
I will admit that the other side of this debate has resorted to wanking and headcanon as ways to dismiss the otherside, which I am not for in any way. I think my arguments work well enough to debunk this. I just added some fallacies and used some logic.
TLDR: 4-A is definitely fine. Consistent.
Anything beyond is not fine. Don't use the lol its fiction fallacy, because It takes us nowhere. This wiki uses both fiction and science to come to reasonable conclusions in power. We don't dismiss science to side with fiction or vice versa. We use nuance.
Edit: For some reason the trailer wont link but it is crucial so here it is. https://youtu.be/fbMZc_clZU4?t=32
- 32,359
- 20,298
Personally I am of the opinion that even 4-A is too much, and definitely inconsistent. But it is certainly more believable than 2-C
- 15,332
- 7,563
Alright, I will respond. Those are old counter-points that have been answered for long here.
- 15,332
- 7,563
Okay. I think you should actually read the blogs and scans with a bit more attention before preparing other responses. I noticed lots of gaps on your post regarding the Word of Gods given.
- 643
- 293
You are 'correct', I only looked at the OP admitedly and I will probably counter the counters or accept them.Kepekley23 said:
As for the blogs? I honestly dont have the time to read through each one of them. Give me a guideline for when I come back?
Which parts should I read and take into account for your next reply?
- 813
- 137
BTW, I also think Matt should have a chance to clarify any more points he possibly disagrees with before finishing this discussion.
- 15,332
- 7,563
You are 'correct', I only looked at the OP admitedly and I will probably counter the counters or accept them.
As for the blogs? I honestly dont have the time to read through each one of them. Give me a guideline for when I come back?
Which parts should I read and take into account for your next reply?
I think you should have simply read the entire blog made by WindGodAcheron. I am almost done with my reply to you and will post it separately, but there were lots of things that could have been answered if you read the scans in their order.
As for the blogs? I honestly dont have the time to read through each one of them. Give me a guideline for when I come back?
Which parts should I read and take into account for your next reply?
I think you should have simply read the entire blog made by WindGodAcheron. I am almost done with my reply to you and will post it separately, but there were lots of things that could have been answered if you read the scans in their order.
- 15,332
- 7,563
> I will start with the first thread, the one that got denied before Kepekley had any power in this community. The first point with the primordials is sort of sketchy. The video itself does hint that Uranus and Co created the universe, however the video narrator itself said and quote. "The wrath of the primordials… the very beings that forged the earth." Clearly there is a disconnect between the two, do we trust the visuals or do we trust the narrator? One is 5-B the other is 4-A to 3-A
This point has been debunked for a really long time. The person who is narrating the introduction is Gaia, the Embodiment of the Earth/Titan of the Earth. The Earth is her personal domain and it's what she personally cares about. In fact, the war between the Primordials literally spawned her. So obviously she is going to tell the bits about the war that are relevant to her.
And - even then, how is this at all inconsistent? The very beings to forge the Earth is not a power limiter. It is a general statement about what they did. We literally see what happens in the introduction. They're fighting on a void, then Uranus gets punched and bam - that's the universe coming into existence, right there.
> The OP for this post does have evidence right here that the primordials created the universe, but this contradicts what we see in any of the games directly.
No, it does not. We see just that happening in the introduction. We're also given that information in the canon comics. There is no contradiction, unless you attempt to actively make contradictions.
> This also is partially contradicted by another writer right here. https://imgur.com/PkglJaU Spawned by the big bang =/= Universe Level
Completely irrelevant. The Big Bang, in actual science, is not even 3-A, and is not anything you'd imagine it to be at. In fact, when the Big Bang happened, the universe was just raw emptiness with high temperature, and it was microscopic in size. So this is a misguided counter-argument. A fictional "Big Bang" can take shape at whatever the writers imagine it at.
In God of War cosmology, there was Chaos - similar to Greek Mythology - a primordial void that preceded everything. Then, from said void, the Primordials were spawned from. That's exactly what the writer means by "Big Bang". The void expanded, from said void the Primordials came into existence.
> owever, if I were to accept her comments at face value, creating galaxies does mean 4-A to 3-B obviously. But not universe level. This is blatant Equivocation. The same thing with bringing life to the universe. This is a vague statement. It could mean he created the universe, but it can also mean he either brought life, lifeforms into the universe. Now before you say that is a reach, I have the OP's next point.
Yes, they filled the universe with galaxies. How did this happen? We know how. It's on the intro. Uranus was the one who contained all that inside his body in the beginning of the universe. Then, as we see, he takes a blow which has the universe come right out of his body.
The point about "giving life" has been debunked for a really long time. Gyges outright states later on that his father was the creator of the universe:
> Birthright means an inherited gift. This means that in this construction exactly. The Son of Chaos (aka who ever this eyeball dude is), are granted the gift of the universe by the father of the universe. Who is the father? Uranus? Well we can't equivocate the above statement because it is vague.
This part confirms my suspicions about how much you read on the subject or how much you read on this thread before making your post. Which is why I asked you to read the blogs and scans carefully before trying to make this post.
Gyges ("eyeball thing") is the son of Uranus. He is not the Son of Chaos , at all. The Son of Chaos is a reference to Uranus. As he himself states. Uranus found him so ugly that, while he was being born, he literally tore him off of Gaia's loins and threw him into Tartarus in order to prevent him from ever appearing in the surface again.
What he means by the world and the universe being his birthright is because he is the son of Uranus. The guy who, as he describes, is quite literally the father of the universe. And, as he later states, he would have used the Ambrosia to heal him and his brothers so they would come back and try to wage a war against the Olympians. Then, with their death, they would rule all that their father created. I
There is no vagueness here. You can just actually read the comics and get the context behind the scans to get rid of this speculation.
> This one could be 3-A, but I am more tempted to chalk this up to flowery language.
It is fine to believe that. It still doesn't change the actual facts of God of War lore. Gyges literally hates his father. His father threw him on Tartarus to be tormented and tortured for literally all of eternity just because he was ugly. He has no reason to exaggerate or boast his father's ego anymore than the truth. If Gyges says Uranus is the creator of the universe, then he is, especially when we quite literally see that it's true on the beginning of Ascension.
> This one is just really ridiculous. For one, a star can't hold the weight of the cosmos.
This is just your personal disbelief. You can deny things as they are stated, but what is actually stated overrides any speculation and personal incredulity that is irrelevant to the debate. Surtr from the new God of War could create all the stars with his flames. Is your reply to the feat going to be "flames can't create stars?" too?
> Matt brought up even if it did that it would be a supermassive blackhole because of the weight.
This is yet another indication that you didn't read the recent posts.
I debunked this. In fact, this is not even what is actually stated!
So no. Debunked.
> This seems like writer induced stupidity. Also, forging it in the sun's core is also not even star level
Completely irrelevant. It was forged personally and overseen by a Titan with magical powers controlling the Sun. This is just personal disbelief at what is stated. This sort of downplay can be used with almost every series out there which has a magical weapon with a mundane power source.
The Blade of Olympus, the weapon that created a tornado that one-shotted all the Titans, and ended the war, was quite literally forged using...normal lightning and clouds channeled from the skies, and normal rock from the bare Earth. Are we going to downgrade it too, because normal lightning is 8-C?
This argument holds no weight at all.
> I will just touch upon this one. Naming a spear after the progenitor =/= the power of the progenitor.
Except the spear is literally from Hyperion himself. It doesn't just bear his name. That's exactly why it is forged in the Sun's core. In God of War lore, the Titan Hyperion is the Titan of the Sun.
> Yes, we ignore alot of science the way we handle things in the wiki, but this has three red flags I am just writing this off as 'No'. Period. Even if it was accurate, Weekly pointed this out, this can be up to 3-B. But no, not valid. Ignores science in two ways, using the name of the progenitor also does not count to me.
Agreed, it can be up to 3-B. So what? It is meant to support high tier 3.
> So according to this we have a few things here. First off, banishment from the night sky is blatant BFR. Period. Not an ap feat, just hax.
No. The "banishing" talked about here is because Helios is literally forcing Nyx to leave and retreat with his powers, not that he BFRs her. In Chains of Olympus, it's stated that Helios's Chariot rests in the west when it's time for night to come. That's when Nyx takes over. When it's time for the Chariot to rise again, he overpowers her. We briefly see a dimension guarded by a statue of Nyx on Ascension, where it's eternal night. So Helios truly is forcing Nyx to leave. If she could help it, it'd be night-time forever.
> Also, this is another nitpick admitedly, but the question is sound. Are the Titans/Gods equal to the Primordials? He answered yes, which is fine, but then answered with "Because they took replaced eachother." That is...silly. When people replace eachother in power, they dont all have the same level of 'power'. Arguing otherwise is fallacious usually.
No. You completely misunderstood his answer. What he means by "replacing" each other...is that they literally fought each other in order to establish their own rule. Cronos defeated Uranun. Zeus defeated Cronos. And so on. And trying to put your spin on a developer's word is extremely nitpicky, indeed.
> I get that we settled that creation, as controversial as it is, is 3-A. But it seems like to me since it referenced the living world, it is 5-B, and that is the creation discussed here. Not the entire universe.
This has been debunked a bit too many times to count.
The timeline was made alongside Ascension. The same game that showed the universe was part of said creation to begin with. As seen in the very beginning of the introduction, the universe is created as a result of the war.
Persephone herself states in the very game that, with the World Pillar's destruction, it'd be the time for all that came before to end. That's a conclusive statement for everything collapsing with the Pillar's destruction. There is no basis to state anything else, other than nitpicking about characters using the "world" inconclusively.
> If the writers are fine with cosmic scaling, why not use the word here too? They used living world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksY846OVDX0&feature=youtu.be&t=204 Also here too, using of the word world. 5-B Equivocation to assume otherwise. It seems like all of this is just the crux of existence, not it being 3-A.
Yes, characters use "world". So what? Again, taking the exact same counter I used in the other thread; using "world" does not automatically mea that it's all the destruction extends to. Persephone herself states that all that came before the Pillar's existence would end. It is a conclusive statement; there is absolutely no basis for reading anything else into the "all", other than exactly that. Especially when Persephone later reaffirms that the Pillar's destruction would lead to everything reverting back into Chaos. The void that preceded the universe and the Primordials's existence. The mere usage of a universal primordial void with the Pillar's destruction already logically makes it universal in scale.
The same distinction exists outside of Chains of Olympus, when other sources enthusiastically affirm that Atlas, who was chained to the top of Pillar after it was destroyed and was forced to carry its burden, holds up the Heavens - a word that is used, both in myth and in ancient and modern astronomy, to reference the portion of the cosmos that is outside of the Earth. In God of War, this holds especially true. Uranus is called the embodiment of the "Heavens" in the Ascension artbook - the same guy whose body spawned the universe. In God of War Ascension, Kratos comes across a device called the Antikythera Mechanism. The description in-game states it is used to "track the heavens". This device was a real-life Greek Mechanism that calculated the position of the fixed stars, planets, sun and moon. So when it says "heavens", it is specifically talking about outer space.
So yes - this argument is effectively false. Next.
> I just so happen to be taking a mythology class, and the term 'Chaos' is thrown around here alot, so lets look at the mythology from the time as a brief history of the term https://drive.google.com/open?id=1JUc8ERH19rAzcaTsuJJJqSqScth7Hxpk Chaos is the primordial state of existence, both in GOW and in Greek Myth. It is formless. Now if you read, you get 5-B, then 4-A then 3-B/3-A in the order. The first thing ever born from Chaos was Gaja, or the Earth itself. So it seems like Causality follows through, Peresphone is correct. Destroying the world pillar will destroy the living world and descend it to chaos. Because in myth, the first thing born from Chaos was the Earth
Yet another thing you should have paid attention to when you read the blog. No, Greek Mythology is not valid to use here. In God of War lore, Gaia was not the first thing to be spawned from Chaos. The Primordials, such as Uranus, Ceto and Nyx, were the first beings to come out of said void. Gaia was specifically spawned by their war - in fact, Gaia is not even considered a Primordial Goddess in God of War's lore. She is a Titan, the first among the Titans. So this distinction not at all valid to use for God of War.
> I am counting it as 5-B however. Maybe 4-A Wow, 4-A is looking real consistent, is it?
4-A for a feat of reverting the universe into the very void that preced all of reality is pulled out of nowhere and inventing things. Considering Chaos in God of War preceded the existence of time itself, then it'd actually not even be a 3-A feat, but rather a Low 2-C one. You can lowball it at tier 3 for Atlas specifically if you want, however. The point is that this specific bit is wrong.
> This is your shining example? Again, 4-A. I am being super generous too. I am sure if you pixel scaled that, it would be far lower. Maybe 4-A, but by a low end. Kratos is clearly not that far away and we already know his height.
Since when are galaxies in the background 4-A? This is completely false and out of nowhere. Again, you make an unwarranted distinction.
And angsizing or pixelscaling stars and galaxies is, needless to say, completely wrong due to the sheer distance involved. In fact, angular sizing and parallax is precisely why the Ancient People who dominated geometry and math got their universe sizes wrong.
> Pick one. Having an 'upper' part of the underworld means either it is not infinite or that upper part is higher dimensional space.
Maybe you could have read the very next sentence. Tartarus is the infinite plane surrounding the main realm of Hades. Hades itself is the portion of the Underworld that is below the Earth. Beneath Hades, there is Tartarus, which stretches out beyond that area that Gaia says has an edge. Tartarus is the infinite plane. Since Tartarus is also included when one talks about the Underworld, then all feats involving the Underworld would include Tartarus by default.
So...effectively debunked. I suggest you read the blogs more carefully next time, as some of your assumptions here were, needless to say, extremely questionable and gave me the impresion you just skimmed things over.
This point has been debunked for a really long time. The person who is narrating the introduction is Gaia, the Embodiment of the Earth/Titan of the Earth. The Earth is her personal domain and it's what she personally cares about. In fact, the war between the Primordials literally spawned her. So obviously she is going to tell the bits about the war that are relevant to her.
And - even then, how is this at all inconsistent? The very beings to forge the Earth is not a power limiter. It is a general statement about what they did. We literally see what happens in the introduction. They're fighting on a void, then Uranus gets punched and bam - that's the universe coming into existence, right there.
> The OP for this post does have evidence right here that the primordials created the universe, but this contradicts what we see in any of the games directly.
No, it does not. We see just that happening in the introduction. We're also given that information in the canon comics. There is no contradiction, unless you attempt to actively make contradictions.
> This also is partially contradicted by another writer right here. https://imgur.com/PkglJaU Spawned by the big bang =/= Universe Level
Completely irrelevant. The Big Bang, in actual science, is not even 3-A, and is not anything you'd imagine it to be at. In fact, when the Big Bang happened, the universe was just raw emptiness with high temperature, and it was microscopic in size. So this is a misguided counter-argument. A fictional "Big Bang" can take shape at whatever the writers imagine it at.
In God of War cosmology, there was Chaos - similar to Greek Mythology - a primordial void that preceded everything. Then, from said void, the Primordials were spawned from. That's exactly what the writer means by "Big Bang". The void expanded, from said void the Primordials came into existence.
> owever, if I were to accept her comments at face value, creating galaxies does mean 4-A to 3-B obviously. But not universe level. This is blatant Equivocation. The same thing with bringing life to the universe. This is a vague statement. It could mean he created the universe, but it can also mean he either brought life, lifeforms into the universe. Now before you say that is a reach, I have the OP's next point.
Yes, they filled the universe with galaxies. How did this happen? We know how. It's on the intro. Uranus was the one who contained all that inside his body in the beginning of the universe. Then, as we see, he takes a blow which has the universe come right out of his body.
The point about "giving life" has been debunked for a really long time. Gyges outright states later on that his father was the creator of the universe:
- "Then, with your death, we will once again rule all that our father created."
- "This world is the birthright to those who were born to the Son of Chaos, father of the universe."
> Birthright means an inherited gift. This means that in this construction exactly. The Son of Chaos (aka who ever this eyeball dude is), are granted the gift of the universe by the father of the universe. Who is the father? Uranus? Well we can't equivocate the above statement because it is vague.
This part confirms my suspicions about how much you read on the subject or how much you read on this thread before making your post. Which is why I asked you to read the blogs and scans carefully before trying to make this post.
Gyges ("eyeball thing") is the son of Uranus. He is not the Son of Chaos , at all. The Son of Chaos is a reference to Uranus. As he himself states. Uranus found him so ugly that, while he was being born, he literally tore him off of Gaia's loins and threw him into Tartarus in order to prevent him from ever appearing in the surface again.
What he means by the world and the universe being his birthright is because he is the son of Uranus. The guy who, as he describes, is quite literally the father of the universe. And, as he later states, he would have used the Ambrosia to heal him and his brothers so they would come back and try to wage a war against the Olympians. Then, with their death, they would rule all that their father created. I
There is no vagueness here. You can just actually read the comics and get the context behind the scans to get rid of this speculation.
> This one could be 3-A, but I am more tempted to chalk this up to flowery language.
It is fine to believe that. It still doesn't change the actual facts of God of War lore. Gyges literally hates his father. His father threw him on Tartarus to be tormented and tortured for literally all of eternity just because he was ugly. He has no reason to exaggerate or boast his father's ego anymore than the truth. If Gyges says Uranus is the creator of the universe, then he is, especially when we quite literally see that it's true on the beginning of Ascension.
> This one is just really ridiculous. For one, a star can't hold the weight of the cosmos.
This is just your personal disbelief. You can deny things as they are stated, but what is actually stated overrides any speculation and personal incredulity that is irrelevant to the debate. Surtr from the new God of War could create all the stars with his flames. Is your reply to the feat going to be "flames can't create stars?" too?
> Matt brought up even if it did that it would be a supermassive blackhole because of the weight.
This is yet another indication that you didn't read the recent posts.
I debunked this. In fact, this is not even what is actually stated!
- "Forged in the Sun's core, this spear possesses THE STRENGTH TO BEAR the weight of the cosmos."
So no. Debunked.
> This seems like writer induced stupidity. Also, forging it in the sun's core is also not even star level
Completely irrelevant. It was forged personally and overseen by a Titan with magical powers controlling the Sun. This is just personal disbelief at what is stated. This sort of downplay can be used with almost every series out there which has a magical weapon with a mundane power source.
The Blade of Olympus, the weapon that created a tornado that one-shotted all the Titans, and ended the war, was quite literally forged using...normal lightning and clouds channeled from the skies, and normal rock from the bare Earth. Are we going to downgrade it too, because normal lightning is 8-C?
This argument holds no weight at all.
> I will just touch upon this one. Naming a spear after the progenitor =/= the power of the progenitor.
Except the spear is literally from Hyperion himself. It doesn't just bear his name. That's exactly why it is forged in the Sun's core. In God of War lore, the Titan Hyperion is the Titan of the Sun.
> Yes, we ignore alot of science the way we handle things in the wiki, but this has three red flags I am just writing this off as 'No'. Period. Even if it was accurate, Weekly pointed this out, this can be up to 3-B. But no, not valid. Ignores science in two ways, using the name of the progenitor also does not count to me.
Agreed, it can be up to 3-B. So what? It is meant to support high tier 3.
> So according to this we have a few things here. First off, banishment from the night sky is blatant BFR. Period. Not an ap feat, just hax.
No. The "banishing" talked about here is because Helios is literally forcing Nyx to leave and retreat with his powers, not that he BFRs her. In Chains of Olympus, it's stated that Helios's Chariot rests in the west when it's time for night to come. That's when Nyx takes over. When it's time for the Chariot to rise again, he overpowers her. We briefly see a dimension guarded by a statue of Nyx on Ascension, where it's eternal night. So Helios truly is forcing Nyx to leave. If she could help it, it'd be night-time forever.
> Also, this is another nitpick admitedly, but the question is sound. Are the Titans/Gods equal to the Primordials? He answered yes, which is fine, but then answered with "Because they took replaced eachother." That is...silly. When people replace eachother in power, they dont all have the same level of 'power'. Arguing otherwise is fallacious usually.
No. You completely misunderstood his answer. What he means by "replacing" each other...is that they literally fought each other in order to establish their own rule. Cronos defeated Uranun. Zeus defeated Cronos. And so on. And trying to put your spin on a developer's word is extremely nitpicky, indeed.
> I get that we settled that creation, as controversial as it is, is 3-A. But it seems like to me since it referenced the living world, it is 5-B, and that is the creation discussed here. Not the entire universe.
This has been debunked a bit too many times to count.
The timeline was made alongside Ascension. The same game that showed the universe was part of said creation to begin with. As seen in the very beginning of the introduction, the universe is created as a result of the war.
Persephone herself states in the very game that, with the World Pillar's destruction, it'd be the time for all that came before to end. That's a conclusive statement for everything collapsing with the Pillar's destruction. There is no basis to state anything else, other than nitpicking about characters using the "world" inconclusively.
> If the writers are fine with cosmic scaling, why not use the word here too? They used living world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksY846OVDX0&feature=youtu.be&t=204 Also here too, using of the word world. 5-B Equivocation to assume otherwise. It seems like all of this is just the crux of existence, not it being 3-A.
Yes, characters use "world". So what? Again, taking the exact same counter I used in the other thread; using "world" does not automatically mea that it's all the destruction extends to. Persephone herself states that all that came before the Pillar's existence would end. It is a conclusive statement; there is absolutely no basis for reading anything else into the "all", other than exactly that. Especially when Persephone later reaffirms that the Pillar's destruction would lead to everything reverting back into Chaos. The void that preceded the universe and the Primordials's existence. The mere usage of a universal primordial void with the Pillar's destruction already logically makes it universal in scale.
The same distinction exists outside of Chains of Olympus, when other sources enthusiastically affirm that Atlas, who was chained to the top of Pillar after it was destroyed and was forced to carry its burden, holds up the Heavens - a word that is used, both in myth and in ancient and modern astronomy, to reference the portion of the cosmos that is outside of the Earth. In God of War, this holds especially true. Uranus is called the embodiment of the "Heavens" in the Ascension artbook - the same guy whose body spawned the universe. In God of War Ascension, Kratos comes across a device called the Antikythera Mechanism. The description in-game states it is used to "track the heavens". This device was a real-life Greek Mechanism that calculated the position of the fixed stars, planets, sun and moon. So when it says "heavens", it is specifically talking about outer space.
So yes - this argument is effectively false. Next.
> I just so happen to be taking a mythology class, and the term 'Chaos' is thrown around here alot, so lets look at the mythology from the time as a brief history of the term https://drive.google.com/open?id=1JUc8ERH19rAzcaTsuJJJqSqScth7Hxpk Chaos is the primordial state of existence, both in GOW and in Greek Myth. It is formless. Now if you read, you get 5-B, then 4-A then 3-B/3-A in the order. The first thing ever born from Chaos was Gaja, or the Earth itself. So it seems like Causality follows through, Peresphone is correct. Destroying the world pillar will destroy the living world and descend it to chaos. Because in myth, the first thing born from Chaos was the Earth
Yet another thing you should have paid attention to when you read the blog. No, Greek Mythology is not valid to use here. In God of War lore, Gaia was not the first thing to be spawned from Chaos. The Primordials, such as Uranus, Ceto and Nyx, were the first beings to come out of said void. Gaia was specifically spawned by their war - in fact, Gaia is not even considered a Primordial Goddess in God of War's lore. She is a Titan, the first among the Titans. So this distinction not at all valid to use for God of War.
> I am counting it as 5-B however. Maybe 4-A Wow, 4-A is looking real consistent, is it?
4-A for a feat of reverting the universe into the very void that preced all of reality is pulled out of nowhere and inventing things. Considering Chaos in God of War preceded the existence of time itself, then it'd actually not even be a 3-A feat, but rather a Low 2-C one. You can lowball it at tier 3 for Atlas specifically if you want, however. The point is that this specific bit is wrong.
> This is your shining example? Again, 4-A. I am being super generous too. I am sure if you pixel scaled that, it would be far lower. Maybe 4-A, but by a low end. Kratos is clearly not that far away and we already know his height.
Since when are galaxies in the background 4-A? This is completely false and out of nowhere. Again, you make an unwarranted distinction.
And angsizing or pixelscaling stars and galaxies is, needless to say, completely wrong due to the sheer distance involved. In fact, angular sizing and parallax is precisely why the Ancient People who dominated geometry and math got their universe sizes wrong.
> Pick one. Having an 'upper' part of the underworld means either it is not infinite or that upper part is higher dimensional space.
Maybe you could have read the very next sentence. Tartarus is the infinite plane surrounding the main realm of Hades. Hades itself is the portion of the Underworld that is below the Earth. Beneath Hades, there is Tartarus, which stretches out beyond that area that Gaia says has an edge. Tartarus is the infinite plane. Since Tartarus is also included when one talks about the Underworld, then all feats involving the Underworld would include Tartarus by default.
So...effectively debunked. I suggest you read the blogs more carefully next time, as some of your assumptions here were, needless to say, extremely questionable and gave me the impresion you just skimmed things over.
- 300
- 219
Exact same thing as the other thread so far.
- 3,461
- 1,724
Not a single historical figure was 9-B IRL. People like Jeanne are 9-C IRL with weapons. You also ignored they used characters not just from history, but also mythology, such as Hercules, among others, as well as other mythological ffigures in fate that are also VERY inconsistent with their original counterpart, for example King Arthur is clearly a male in his original counterpart, while Saber who is supposed to be King Arrthur, is a female.DMB 1 said:
- 813
- 137
No, we give him and others a chance to make rebuttals.
You cannot just close a thread after one side gives a couter argument on something.
You cannot just close a thread after one side gives a couter argument on something.
- 15,332
- 7,563
To be frank, this thread so far has been an identical repeat of arguments countered in the other thread. I'd prefer it if something new were brought up.
- 643
- 293
╠Â2╠Â-╠ÂA╠ ╠ÂK╠Âr╠Âa╠Ât╠Âo╠Âs╠ ╠Âs╠Âo╠ ╠Ât╠Âh╠Âa╠Ât╠ ╠Âw╠Âa╠Ây╠ ╠Âh╠Âe╠ ╠Âc╠Âa╠Ân╠ ╠Âf╠Âi╠Âg╠Âh╠Ât╠ ╠ÂNicol Bolas?Kepekley23 said:
I will reply to this later, give me a day. If no reply happens by tomorrow, can you shoot me a pm?
Super busy, I havent even had a chance to read your argument.
- 300
- 219
Uh...that did not sound like something in favor of our side, considering you mentioned us as "the other side of this debate". Unless I misinterpreted your pragraph (in which case, I apologize and will edit that post out), that sounded like very much you claiming that we were wanking and bringing up headcanon.
- 643
- 293
I will admit that the other side of this debate has resorted to wanking and headcanon as ways to dismiss the otherside, which I am not for in any way.
I personally admit that using wanking and headcanon to dismiss the other side.
Meaning that using wanking and headcanon for dismissal which then goes too
which I am not for in any way.
Which I am not for in either way.
It may be weird, I wrote that in the morning, but that is the intent.
I apologize for the bad construction.
╠Ân╠Âo╠Âw╠ ╠Ây╠Âo╠Âu╠ ╠Âa╠Âp╠Âo╠Âl╠Âo╠Âg╠Âi╠Âz╠Âe╠ ╠Âf╠Âo╠Âr╠ ╠Ât╠Âh╠Âi╠Âs╠ ╠Âs╠Âl╠Âi╠Âg╠Âh╠Ât╠ ╠Âo╠Âf╠ ╠Âh╠Âa╠Ân╠Âd╠ ╠Ây╠Âo╠Âu╠ ╠Âf╠Âo╠Âd╠Âd╠Âe╠Âr╠ ╠Âb╠Âl╠Âu╠Âe╠ ╠Ân╠Âa╠Âm╠Âe╠Â
We are just users who disagree is all.
I honestly only ask for a day or two.
Hell, even if this not explored and gets no downgrade what so ever, I know a few matches I can abuse this for.
I really dont care.
I just think there is a case for a pragmatic 4-A rather then a high end.
Thats all.
I personally admit that using wanking and headcanon to dismiss the other side.
Meaning that using wanking and headcanon for dismissal which then goes too
which I am not for in any way.
Which I am not for in either way.
It may be weird, I wrote that in the morning, but that is the intent.
I apologize for the bad construction.
╠Ân╠Âo╠Âw╠ ╠Ây╠Âo╠Âu╠ ╠Âa╠Âp╠Âo╠Âl╠Âo╠Âg╠Âi╠Âz╠Âe╠ ╠Âf╠Âo╠Âr╠ ╠Ât╠Âh╠Âi╠Âs╠ ╠Âs╠Âl╠Âi╠Âg╠Âh╠Ât╠ ╠Âo╠Âf╠ ╠Âh╠Âa╠Ân╠Âd╠ ╠Ây╠Âo╠Âu╠ ╠Âf╠Âo╠Âd╠Âd╠Âe╠Âr╠ ╠Âb╠Âl╠Âu╠Âe╠ ╠Ân╠Âa╠Âm╠Âe╠Â
We are just users who disagree is all.
I honestly only ask for a day or two.
Hell, even if this not explored and gets no downgrade what so ever, I know a few matches I can abuse this for.
I really dont care.
I just think there is a case for a pragmatic 4-A rather then a high end.
Thats all.
- 15,332
- 7,563
I think he meant that people who were arguing against the current ratings weren't bringing up anything new (which hasn't changed), only resorting to calling it "wanking" and "headcanon". So yeah, not an insult.
- 15,332
- 7,563
There is no great number of 4-A feats. Maybe one of the feats is 4-A. All the others are 3-B/3-A/Low 2-C, with a considerable number of 2-C feats in the new game. So there is no reason to pick 4-A. It's a random rating.
- 3,461
- 1,724
^^^^^^
Nitpicking 4-A for GoW would be like Nitpicking Tier 8 for Shin Megami Tensei
Nitpicking 4-A for GoW would be like Nitpicking Tier 8 for Shin Megami Tensei
- 5,510
- 718
Shaking the 9 realms abc scaling to Thor whose battle with the Serpebt shattered Yggdrasil (a single strand of which transcends space time)
He's also shut realm tears with his strength (realm tears being able to threaten whole realms)
He's also shut realm tears with his strength (realm tears being able to threaten whole realms)
- 15,332
- 7,563
Thor, Thor again, Ymir, Ymir again, Surtur. 5 confirmed 2-C feats from those characters.
- 3,461
- 1,724
Inb4 someone says Ymir flooding the world is only Continental
- 5,510
- 718
- the realms
- 15,332
- 7,563
That legit High 6-A flood that threatens to wipe out the entirety of all realmsAogiriKira said:
- 200
- 13
- Thread starter
- #235
Aren't all the nine realms existing in the same place and time?
Realms can be anything from a country, kingdom, or geographical area on a continent.
Tyr's Temple and the World Tree are like essentially an elevator that travels to a different region of the Norse World.
Realms can be anything from a country, kingdom, or geographical area on a continent.
Tyr's Temple and the World Tree are like essentially an elevator that travels to a different region of the Norse World.
- 5,510
- 718
Well realms and geographty seem to be different (With different regions like Greece being harder to get to then with realms)
But it's odd since the realms are stated to treanscend space time but then they are said to occupy the same physical space (Kep made a good but long blog on the cosmology of the verse)
But it's odd since the realms are stated to treanscend space time but then they are said to occupy the same physical space (Kep made a good but long blog on the cosmology of the verse)
- 40,473
- 12,955
>Flood the realms
I'm almost certain this is a hyperbole. Unless flood means something else in terms of GoW, filling 9 universes with water (which is also a 3-A feat, not a 2-C feat) doesn't seem plausible.
I'm almost certain this is a hyperbole. Unless flood means something else in terms of GoW, filling 9 universes with water (which is also a 3-A feat, not a 2-C feat) doesn't seem plausible.
- 5,510
- 718
Because a physical flood would have to travel through one space but because the realms are separate dimensions with their own space time this cannot occur
- Status
Similar threads
