• 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.

Let's finally fix Star Butterfly.

Okay. Thanks. I need an explanation that paints more of a full picture of what our staff needs to evaluate though.
 
I do agree with 3-A via that blast that destroyed some dimension+the general idea that the wand can do destroy universes, but believe that since the blast that destroyed that dimension took a very notably long time to charge then so should a blast that would destroy a universe. This in turn is consistent with other spells in the book like the one that erases gravity from Earth needing a notable, if not as big time to charge first.

I don't see characters like Moon Butterfly having her every magical attack be Low 2-C just like that w/o a charge up first because that clearly goes against what the book shows, and it would fit that she has lower power with her own feats like the best attack she shot at Toffe only destroying 1 side of a castle.
 
Maverick_Zero_X said:
Other feats
Click to expand...


I shall try to calculate some other feats too. In fact, I have done one of them.
 
Last edited:
Eficiente said:
I do agree with 3-A via that blast that destroyed some dimension+the general idea that the wand can do destroy universes, but believe that since the blast that destroyed that dimension took a very notably long time to charge then so should a blast that would destroy a universe. This in turn is consistent with other spells in the book like the one that erases gravity from Earth needing a notable, if not as big time to charge first.

I don't see characters like Moon Butterfly having her every magical attack be Low 2-C just like that w/o a charge up first because that clearly goes against what the book shows, and it would fit that she has lower power with her own feats like the best attack she shot at Toffe only destroying 1 side of a castle.
Click to expand...
Okay so here's the thing, when someone dips down (cheeks glow), their maximum power is far above the wand because the wand's maximum power is only the tip of the iceberg for all of magic itself. So if we agree that the wand is 3-A, then someone who dips down should be (far) above 3-A. So maybe I guess for now I can compromise on something like "3-A, likely far higher when dipping down."

As for Skywynne taking long to charge up, it was her first time ever dipping down, so it would make sense that it took long compared to someone who is experienced. This makes sense considering the wand by itself is 3-A but she dipped down to destroy the dimension, which shows how she didn't know what she was doing and was only testing things out. As for deleting gravity, I don't believe it was stated anywhere that it needed a charge up at all. What you're referring to is the wand needing to charge up so it can spawn in a lasso that could spin the planet, thus putting gravity back. This makes sense considering Star super causally stopped time itself with zero charge up but it took a whole episode and a lot of work to reverse the spell. These spells don't even look reversible, you kinda just have to manually reverse their effects by totally different spells or other means entirely.

As for Moon, I mean just think about other series like Dragon Ball with the concept of ki control and what not. The characters can't go blowing up the planet or universe they live in with every attack because it would ruin the plot and nor do they need to in order to be planet or universe level. Why can't we just say SVTFOE is AP based sometimes and not DC based? And as for Toffee being stronger than Mewberty Moon, he had just absorbed most of MHC's power stacked with Moon's own power on top of that. So doesn't it make sense that Moon couldn't do much?
 
Last edited:
8-B Whispering Spell then, unless destroying one of the Towers of Butterfly Castle and making that big crater gets higher results.
 
Galvino said:
Okay so here's the thing, when someone dips down (cheeks glow), their maximum power is far above the wand because the wand's maximum power is only the tip of the iceberg for all of magic itself. So if we agree that the wand is 3-A, then someone who dips down should be (far) above 3-A. So maybe I guess for now I can compromise on something like "3-A, likely far higher when dipping down."
Click to expand...
That needs hard proof and being beyond the wand's maximum power isn't necessarily 3-A as the wand's maximum power isn't 3-A w/o a built up. That's like saying that tier 9 weapon can do tier 7 damage w/ built up, but if you use it w/o a built up & beyond its maximum regular power (tier 9) then it can do tier 8 damage, that doesn't have to scale to the tier 7 damage.
Galvino said:
As for Skywynne taking long to charge up, it was her first time ever dipping down, so it would make sense that it took long compared to someone who is experienced. This makes sense considering the wand by itself is 3-A but she dipped down to destroy the dimension, which shows how she didn't know what she was doing and was only testing things out.
Click to expand...
Proof of that being her first time? Not that it matters much anyway.
Galvino said:
As for deleting gravity, I don't believe it was stated anywhere that it needed a charge up at all. What you're referring to is the wand needing to charge up so it can spawn in a lasso that could spin the planet, thus putting gravity back.
Click to expand...


Quote: "Power up your wand to a count of 115 so it is extra charged. When you have enough power [stuff]"

This is more time I even remembered, if anything blowing up the universe should take an even longer time than this as it's notably more complex and they go over how there is a built up for a longer time over and over in the book.
Galvino said:
This makes sense considering Star super causally stopped time itself with zero charge up but it took a whole episode and a lot of work to reverse the spell. These spells don't even look reversible, you kinda just have to manually reverse their effects by totally different spells or other means entirely.
Click to expand...
For the first sentence, that spell only stops someone from running in a wheel. And even if it didn't and it worked like any other time stop in fiction then that would still mean it's meaningless to point out AP wise. You should be able to tell to not say things like that.

For the second sentence I don't see why that matters at all.
Galvino said:
As for Moon, I mean just think about other series like Dragon Ball with the concept of ki control and what not. The characters can't go blowing up the planet or universe they live in with every attack because it would ruin the plot and nor do they need to in order to be planet or universe level. Why can't we just say SVTFOE is AP based sometimes and not DC based?
Click to expand...
Not the same, ki control exists there as it's pointed out sometimes and they have better and more consistent feats. Saying that is like not minding at all anti-feats, which is very much what users do to this verse.
 
Eficiente said:
That needs hard proof and being beyond the wand's maximum power isn't necessarily 3-A as the wand's maximum power isn't 3-A w/o a built up. That's like saying that tier 9 weapon can do tier 7 damage w/ built up, but if you use it w/o a built up & beyond its maximum regular power (tier 9) then it can do tier 8 damage, that doesn't have to scale to the tier 7 damage.
Click to expand...
Here's a statement from the god of magic saying the wand only skims the surface of magic. I didn't really say, when it came to dipping down making you likely far above 3-A, that it wouldn't need build up. Maybe it still does. My point is that the potential of someone who dips down is likely far above 3-A, building up or not.
Eficiente said:
Proof of that being her first time? Not that it matters much anyway.
Click to expand...
Here for what it's worth. And when it's your first time doing almost anything, you're not gonna do it properly, it's common sense.
Eficiente said:
This is more time I even remembered, if anything blowing up the universe should take an even longer time than this as it's notably more complex and they go over how there is a built up for a longer time over and over in the book.
Click to expand...
You're comparing two different situations, Skywynne isn't dipping down here, she's using just the wand. So it would make sense that it would take longer than usual. Now if Skywynne wasn't dipping down when she blew up the dimension, then it could make sense that it would take longer.
Eficiente said:
For the first sentence, that spell only stops someone from running in a wheel. And even if it didn't and it worked like any other time stop in fiction then that would still mean it's meaningless to point out AP wise. You should be able to tell to not say things like that.
Click to expand...
To be fair, I was mainly saying that the idea that deleting gravity or turning off stuff, like stopping time, needing a charge up is wrong. Like I said, the charge up you're referring to is making a lasso.
Eficiente said:
Not the same, ki control exists there as it's pointed out sometimes and they have better and more consistent feats. Saying that is like not minding at all anti-feats, which is very much what users do to this verse.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.
 
Last edited:
Also can we add something "Can do this much damage or be this tier via environmental damage" or something?
 
So what are the conclusions here so far?
 
Oleggator said:
And probably 8-B dura for star? Since she tanked it.
Click to expand...
She did not tank that particular blast - she was with Marco inside the super tough glass prison as the mansion exploded. She may have done so in other situations.

Or she did so in another situation - maybe I will find it and include such calculation.
 
Jasonsith said:
She did not tank that particular blast - she was with Marco inside the super tough glass prison as the mansion exploded. She may have done so in other situations.

Or she did so in another situation - maybe I will find it and include such calculation.
Click to expand...
Well, she did tanked second whispering spell explosion. Though I can't say sure tanked exactly or just BFR'd. Want give this under yours sense justice since I can't be very sure what would be more right.
 
Galvino said:
It seems Eficiente and Jason are gonna downgrade Star along with other characters down to 3-A while I'm proposing we put something like "3-A, possibly or likely far higher".
Click to expand...
Okay. Thank you for the summary.

Can you or somebody else explain the arguments for and against the above suggestions please?
 
Antvasima said:
Okay. Thank you for the summary.

Can you or somebody else explain the arguments for and against the above suggestions please?
Click to expand...
Well the argument for 3-A in the first place is due to a couple of statements and a scan showing the destruction of a dimension using the wand. I think the argument against tier 2 is the lack of hard definitive proof or at least the lack of proof to scale a tier 2 feat to AP, instead of environmental destruction. Eficiente points out characters need to charge up for a bit to be 3-A.

Meanwhile my argument is, since we know the wand by itself is 3-A and that characters who "dip down" scale far above the wand itself, that characters who dip down should have "possibly or likely above 3-A" rating. Lastly there is the feat of Star and Marco merging two universes together, which I think is a 2-C feat. This can be categorized as environmental destruction I suppose but it's still worth noting.

I don't think that's all the arguments or details but that's as much as I can remember.
 
Thank you. Merging two universal space-time continuums together is a low-level 2-C feat, yes.
 
Antvasima said:
Thank you. Merging two universal space-time continuums together is a low-level 2-C feat, yes.
Click to expand...
"2-C | Low Multiverse level: Characters who can significantly affect, create and/or destroy small multiverses which can be comprised of several separate space-time continuums ranging anywhere from two to a thousand, or equivalents."

It would barely be 2-C and not low 2-C according to this definition I believe.
 
Galvino said:
"2-C | Low Multiverse level: Characters who can significantly affect, create and/or destroy small multiverses which can be comprised of several separate space-time continuums ranging anywhere from two to a thousand, or equivalents."

It would barely be 2-C and not low 2-C according to this definition I believe.
Click to expand...
It is exactly 2-C by that ultimate spell if we take Devil May Cry as an example. Look at what Mundus did.
That assuming it is one earth universe merged with one Mewni universe.


Oh in my new calculations I have just found that what Star dodged is not light at all.
 
Last edited:
Galvino said:
One of the mods noted that one had the beam shoot into a wall and explode, making it not light or something.
Click to expand...
Well, that leaves only one option.








Have someone in the verse ever dodged laser puppies?

Iirc they're stated to attack exactly by lasers, but still not known could anyone dodge their attacks through series.
 
Galvino said:
Here's a statement from the god of magic saying the wand only skims the surface of magic. I didn't really say, when it came to dipping down making you likely far above 3-A, that it wouldn't need build up. Maybe it still does. My point is that the potential of someone who dips down is likely far above 3-A, building up or not.
Click to expand...
I wanted proof that dipping down is the amp you said it was. You have no reason to say that doing that would be above 3-A rather than just some amp because you have no reason to say that dipping down gives as much or more power than charging up power over and over w/o dipping down, it was both things combined that made the would-be 3-A feat.

I mean if I take water over and over from the surface of a lake at unknown speeds and taking in unknown amounts of water then after a long time doing that I can end up with more water than someone inside the lake. Unless you want to claim that the latter uses all the water in the lake and not just the water around his body.
Galvino said:
And when it's your first time doing almost anything, you're not gonna do it properly, it's common sense.
Click to expand...
One can argue that but it's not objectively so, and besides she did not use it properly and destroyed a dimension, there's no reason to say that a more controlled use would also be even more powerful than it. Let alone as that feat also needed prior built up.
Galvino said:
You're comparing two different situations, Skywynne isn't dipping down here, she's using just the wand. So it would make sense that it would take longer than usual. Now if Skywynne wasn't dipping down when she blew up the dimension, then it could make sense that it would take longer.
Click to expand...
Didn't you also say that the wand should be 3-A and even higher when dipping down? That notion clearly goes against you saying here that it's not the same as the user isn't dipping down. Idk what you mean by the second sentence as she was dipping down and had a built up.
Galvino said:
Like I said, the charge up you're referring to is making a lasso.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that lasso can be calc'd at 5-A, and spinning the Earth at the same or High 5-A.
 
Oh.
Jasonsith said:
She did not tank that particular blast - she was with Marco inside the super tough glass prison as the mansion exploded. She may have done so in other situations.

Or she did so in another situation - maybe I will find it and include such calculation.
Click to expand...
I solved the turbo nuclear butterfly blast just now. It is important as Star is at the epicenter of that blast therefore her physical durability scales.
Also solved the anti gravity spell.
(workings)
 
Last edited:
Eficiente said:
I wanted proof that dipping down is the amp you said it was. You have no reason to say that doing that would be above 3-A rather than just some amp because you have no reason to say that dipping down gives as much or more power than charging up power over and over w/o dipping down, it was both things combined that made the would-be 3-A feat.

I mean if I take water over and over from the surface of a lake at unknown speeds and taking in unknown amounts of water then after a long time doing that I can end up with more water than someone inside the lake. Unless you want to claim that the latter uses all the water in the lake and not just the water around his body.
Click to expand...
There's the statement of the wand being universe level with no mention of dipping down needing to be involved because you don't need to. Moon was concerned for the universe right then and there, she's not warning Star that when she grows up that then it will become a problem, why even mention the possibility if it's impossible for Star to destroy the universe if she can only do so while dipping down which Moon knows she can't (at that moment) and figured Star wouldn't be able to dip down at least until the around the same age Moon did which was 19. Moon had no reason to assume Star would be able to dip down at the age Star actually did. Point is, Star could have destroyed the universe at anytime with the wand all the way back from episode 1.

Skywynne dipped down to destroy the dimension because it was her first time and didn't know what she was doing. She was only trying to rip a planet apart but she screwed up and destroyed the dimension instead. As far as I remember, I don't think anyone ripped a planet apart before Skywynne. So if she charged and dipped down, all that says is that she thought it would need that much power but obviously it was overboard. So point is, she didn't know the wand by itself could destroy the dimension, so dipping down due to ignorance and inexperience doesn't mean you need to in order to destroy a dimension.

So back to the statement of dipping down making characters stronger than the wand and keeping the earlier statement from Moon (the wand being universe level) in mind, Glossaryck states: "Imagine the universe as this big old cauldron, and magic is the bubbly stew inside, and your wand is the spoon... Now the wand can only skim the surface of the hobo gravy, watery and brown. But if you want to get to the chunks, you've got to dip down." When Glossaryck says universe, he's obviously referring to totality of existence (or the multiverse) because we know magic exists throughout the multiverse. Characters refer to the multiverse as universe multiple times as a couple of others and I already clarified with Jason. So anyway, since the wand is 3-A and someone dipping down makes them far above the wand, then that character is above 3-A.

Also what's with this idea that charging up is comparable to dipping down? All charging up does is let characters use the wand to its maximum potential. Dipping down lets characters go beyond that maximum potential.
 
Galvino said:
There's the statement of the wand being universe level with no mention of dipping down needing to be involved because you don't need to. Moon was concerned for the universe right then and there, she's not warning Star that when she grows up that then it will become a problem, why even mention the possibility if it's impossible for Star to destroy the universe if she can only do so while dipping down which Moon knows she can't (at that moment) and figured Star wouldn't be able to dip down at least until the around the same age Moon did which was 19. Moon had no reason to assume Star would be able to dip down at the age Star actually did. Point is, Star could have destroyed the universe at anytime with the wand all the way back from episode 1.
Click to expand...
That's wrong, that's no Universe level statement like you say, "evil forces could destroy the universe w/ this"=/="they could simply one-shot the universe w/ it". We don't know the things that they would do to have the universe destroyed, we can't say it's just one-shotting it, and we have 1. the example w/ Toffe using a wand to suck the power of others and grow more powerful to do evil stuff and 2. a clearly stated use of built up of power charging up the wand to use it at more power than normal. It stands to reason that this unknown way in which the universe could be destroyed is inapplicable AP wise, and below that we can say it might be via a built up of power from the wand, and far below that it just one-shotting the universe.

I already pointed out how dipping down has no reason to be more powerful that an unknwon charge of power for an unknown about of time, let alone more time than what's needed to count 115.
Galvino said:
Skywynne dipped down to destroy the dimension because it was her first time and didn't know what she was doing. She was only trying to rip a planet apart but she screwed up and destroyed the dimension instead. As far as I remember, I don't think anyone ripped a planet apart before Skywynne. So if she charged and dipped down, all that says is that she thought it would need that much power but obviously it was overboard. So point is, she didn't know the wand by itself could destroy the dimension, so dipping down due to ignorance and inexperience doesn't mean you need to in order to destroy a dimension.
Click to expand...
I already replied to this.
Galvino said:
So back to the statement of dipping down making characters stronger than the wand and keeping the earlier statement from Moon (the wand being universe level) in mind, Glossaryck states: "Imagine the universe as this big old cauldron, and magic is the bubbly stew inside, and your wand is the spoon... Now the wand can only skim the surface of the hobo gravy, watery and brown. But if you want to get to the chunks, you've got to dip down." When Glossaryck says universe, he's obviously referring to totality of existence (or the multiverse) because we know magic exists throughout the multiverse. Characters refer to the multiverse as universe multiple times as a couple of others and I already clarified with Jason. So anyway, since the wand is 3-A and someone dipping down makes them far above the wand, then that character is above 3-A.

Also what's with this idea that charging up is comparable to dipping down? All charging up does is let characters use the wand to its maximum potential. Dipping down lets characters go beyond that maximum potential.
Click to expand...
I don't believe that means what you think it means. He was using a metaphor to tell Star that she can use magic w/o the wand but he didn't point out how it gave more power. That bigger amount of soup/magic dipping down gives next the wand only having less can just as well refer to how the wand allows the user to use some spells at a time using some magical abilities at a time, while dipping down allows using anything w/o using the wand. The more soup/magic meaning more magical abilities rather than power.

And, even if that wasn't the case, the point before still stands. The wand using a bit of the soup/magic means nothing next to charging up power. Charging up power can still mean grabbing more and more soup/magic because stating that the wand only uses a bit of it can refer to its regular uses, w/o a built up
 
Thank you for helping out with trying to make the wiki more reliable Eficiente.
 
It's seeming pretty subjective at this point with our beliefs, the statements could be taken as evidence of tier 2. I'll admit just being tier 3 is a valid interpretation but mine is also valid as well. If you want to be more conservative with your opinion, then I'll respect that.

Also where does this leave the 2-C feat of merging two universes?
 
If somebody lists the staff members who have commented in this thread earlier, I can send them a notification and ask them to help out here again.

An explanation of what we currently need to decide here wouldn't hurt either.
 
Galvino said:
It's seeming pretty subjective at this point with our beliefs, the statements could be taken as evidence of tier 2. I'll admit just being tier 3 is a valid interpretation but mine is also valid as well. If you want to be more conservative with your opinion, then I'll respect that.

Also where does this leave the 2-C feat of merging two universes?
Click to expand...
The 2-C feat of merging two universes seems agreed upon, along with all the constraints and conditions. (4 casters, with a family of sprits supporting and the approval of the book genie. Plus a pair lovers hugging and begging the book genie to do final changes on the side effects)
Unless you want to argue again it is just planets Earth and Mewni.

The debating parts are
1. How big even is the pocket dimension of Omnitraxus Prime and Dimension 811
(There are a lot of "dimension" creators across all fiction and they are not all tier 2 or above)
I have clues these dimensions are much smaller than a regular universe.
2. Any good direct feat yield for the total annihilation spell?
3. I think I can do the Butterfly tower explosion part. But I need to spare time from my day job. Feel free to do it on my behalf.
Feel free to add more.

I am really, REALLY overwhelmed by work so I may not do calcs or explanations often enough. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
Jasonsith said:
The 2-C feat of merging two universes seems agreed upon, along with all the constraints and conditions. (4 casters, with a family of sprits supporting and the approval of the book genie. Plus a pair lovers hugging and begging the book genie to do final changes on the side effects)
Unless you want to argue again it is just planets Earth and Mewni.
Click to expand...
Ploz and I already clarified how the erasing magic feat and the merge feat are two totally different feats and how the merge is not the result of some chain reaction caused by the erasure of magic, but if you want to believe that, go ahead, not much I can do at this point.
Jasonsith said:
I have clues these dimensions are much smaller than a regular universe.
Click to expand...
Feel free to share them.
Jasonsith said:
3. I think I can do the Butterfly tower explosion part. But I need to spare time from my day job. Feel free to do it on my behalf.
Feel free to add more.

I am really, REALLY overwhelmed by work so I may not do calcs or explanations often enough. Sorry.
Click to expand...
Do the calcs whenever you can and want to.
 
Antvasima said:
If somebody lists the staff members who have commented in this thread earlier, I can send them a notification and ask them to help out here again.

An explanation of what we currently need to decide here wouldn't hurt either.
Click to expand...
Sir_Ovens, Eficiente, and Jasonsith are all the staff that commented on this thread. I wanted to get Eficiente's opinion on the 2-C feat of merging 2 universes and what role does environmental damage and damage over time play into all this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tr&Lokumu
Omnitraxus Prime 2-A Upgrade
Replies
4
Views
1K
isaac18289129
Lloydblitzed
Ninjago Star Tiering and Possible New Value
5 6 7
Replies
262
Views
8K
Lloydblitzed
Lloydblitzed
Jinx666
Bayonetta Low 1-C Summons/Other Characters Standard + More Justification for the High 6-A minimum + Resistances Additions
Replies
24
Views
2K
Jinx666
Jinx666
Jackof_noTrades068
  • Locked
Honkai Impact/Star Rail: Major Lifting Strength Downgrades and Small Upgrade (Grace)
Replies
21
Views
3K
Jackof_noTrades068
Jackof_noTrades068
Aernasilver
HSR Small Revisions
Replies
7
Views
985
LephyrTheRevanchist
LephyrTheRevanchist
Back
Top