League of Legends Discussion Thread 5

[RegisNex1232]

Statements by themselves aren't convincing evidence. Please don't just blindly accept unconfirmed things as fact.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

So you insist that Galio is not 300 tons?

 

[RegisNex1232]

I mean I would like more than one line to know for sure whether he's 300 tons, Aatrox can destroy mountains, etc. I'm not interested in blind acceptance of unconfirmed stuff to wank whatever I like.

 

[Ayrandros]

I agree with the logic of Regis.

Like I can say: I can destroy the moon, but that doesn't make it true. It would be true if I show some feat that corroborates that statment.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

And there is, people on Aatrox's level have city level feats so casual that theyre done with a gesture while weakened

 

[ShrekAlmighty]

Are we still on the mountain destroying statement?

 

[RegisNex1232]

We have no idea how casual a feat is to immediately assume that they are mountain level/etc. without looking for proof.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

Funnily enough Shurimans had to topple mountains during Jax's lore when god-warriors were involved, so there's at least a precedence for certain (not all) god warriors requiring mountains. When these god-warriors became corrupted they became the darkins, as we discovered yesterday with their new lore.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Half a mountain =/= mountain. Please stop exaggerating feats.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

So half mountains (plural). Make it Low 7-A then.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Doesn't mean anything when there's no calculations since statements aren't strong evidence. Giving tiers without actually analyzing the feat and seeing if it needs a calc/can be calculated is standard wanking.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

You dont need a calculation when a feat is as blatant as this

 

[RegisNex1232]

Yes you do, because sometimes a feat isn't exactly what you think it is and so it's always better to check and figure out for sure.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

No Regis. High and low ends are perfectly viable debating standards. This is practiced in virtually 90% of vs in debate forums. In this site this practice is represented by prefixes.

Likely 7-A is a viable stat because we still have two corroborating statements (the events in Jax's lore, and Aatrox VO corroborating the magnitude of this event), not a conflicting one. If you continue to be anal that killing certain god-warriors had required mountain toppling firepower then we'll just assign a prefix for the feat.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Technically they dont even say the mountain busting thing is what killed the ascendant, only brought him down. Dropping the weight of half a mountain would be enough to trap an Ascendant.

Also, in the new Darkin lore they say that the Ascendants fought the same kinds of Voidborn that Kassadin and Kai'Sa fought, so there's another tier 7 feat

 

[RegisNex1232]

I'm just not into taking assumed stats as facts, unlike you I prefer when there's more proof than a misunderstood feat and unconfirmed statements. Say whatever you want, if it's just an excuse to give them 7-A without providing valid reasoning and evidence then it's completely useless and can't be used in the profile. Unless such things have become standard wiki policy.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

If a character unboastfully says "I have destroyed mountains" and people he scales to have City level feats casual enough that theyre done with a gesture, its not a stretch to say the feat is legitimate

 

[RegisNex1232]

Firstly, 'unboastfilly' isn't a word, you're probably looking for 'matter-of-fact', which Aatrox really isn't.

Secondly, I take issue with the fact that you're just assuming what the characters' upper ends are without reason. And no, super casual feats =/= higher tiers unless there's more evidence than that.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unboastful

http://www.yourdictionary.com/unboastfully

 

[WeeklyBattles]

And unfortunately for you, there IS evidence, Aatrox destroying mountains.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Then show it. Don't just dodge around and wank stuff.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Azir performing a City level feat with a mere gesture is more than enough proof that Aatrox is 7-A and Aatrox destroying mountains is more evidence that Azir's 7-B feat is extremely casual

 

[RegisNex1232]

Circular logic =/= evidence, not to mention that you can't assume any high ends when there's no hard evidence to support the assumption.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

WB's right though. Azir can lift millions of tons of gold disk a kilometer across casually and Xerath has similar feats. As you know his new lore establishes quite firmly that Aatrox is now from the same group (darkin = Ascendants).

A lot of assumptions about Azir's TK can change now because recently we discovered that Shurima is actually a large empire that had a standing army (not levies) that numbered several hundred thousands, not a city state. The bigger the size of Shurima's capital, the more massive his scale of TK is.

 

[RegisNex1232]

There is still zero evidence presented that would put any Ascendant at 7-A other than your wanked assumptions. By this warped logic, many profiles here should have been rated higher than they are.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

What warped logic? The guy literally says he can destroy mountains with no hint of boasting or lying, and people on his level have immensely casual 7-B feats.

This is common sense

 

[RegisNex1232]

Basic wanking, sure. Not logic. Again, unsupported statements and casual feats doesn't mean that they're 7-A when they have no feats on that level.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

They do, you just refuse to accept it because in your eyes anything above tier 9 in LoL is wank regardless of how much evidence there is

 

[RegisNex1232]

Nice try in assuming things I've never said. Still doesn't mean you have an argument.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Just because you refuse to accept it doesnt mean there is no argument

 

[RegisNex1232]

Hard to accept unproven assumptions, no matter how nice it seems.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

Like I said, At least 7-B Likely 7-A is a perfectly valid rating.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Not without any reasons.

 

[Jinsye]

Wait what?

Don't know much about LoL but....

We don't accept statements for tiers anymore?

 

[RegisNex1232]

Those statements are actually backed up by feats on a similar level, unlike here.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Regis Except they are backed up by feats here

 

[RegisNex1232]

You must have missed '''feats on a similar level'''. Which they don't have unless you wank the calc.

 

[Jinsye]

Those statements are actually backed up by feats on a similar level, unlike here.

Besides from Berserker, this is somewhat incorrect.

The Player's entire tier is based off of two entities having a general chit-chat.

Makoto's entire tier is based off of scaling to Erebus, which the narration states could destroy mountains.

Jiren's entire tier is literally from being repeatedly stated to be the strongest foe in Dragon Ball, the others really only scale to him.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Regis An immensely casual 7-B feat done with nothing but a gesture is more than enough evidence to back up a claim of being able to destroy mountains

 

[RegisNex1232]

If there's a problem then just make a CRT for clarity. Otherwise for the most part, I don't see how this disagrees with my argument that feats are needed to support such statements.