Low 2-C, 2-C and 2-B potential sitewide revision

[The_Smashor]

Now, currently, multipliers cannot cause a Low 2-C character to become 2-C or 2-B, as described on our tiering system page.

Due to the fact that the distance between any given number of universes embedded in higher-dimensional / higher-order spaces is currently unknowable, it is impossible to quantify the numerical gap between each one of the subtiers in Tier 2. As such, it is not allowed to upgrade such a character based solely on multipliers. For example, someone twice as strong as a Low 2-C character would still be Low 2-C, and someone infinitely more powerful than a 2-C would not be 2-A.

The reasoning behind this is because the distance between universes is unknown.

However, distance should be an irrelevant factor, as all that matters is the number of timelines destroyed. So far as I'm aware, the general assumption is that there's no time "inbetween" these universes, and that all there is in timeless void between. As a result, distance between universes is utterly irrelevant, as distance only refers to three dimensional space. Three Dimensional space is, of course, insignificant to a Low 2-C character.

Low 2-C is one timeline, 2-C is two to a thousand timelines, etc...

The distance simply doesn't seem relevant to this level of power, as the only factor is number of timelines.

As a result, multipliers should logically turn Low 2-C characters into 2-C and such.

 

[Jason_Courne]

I have always agreed especially since we perform the inverse method for cooperative 2-C feats (like Beerus and Champa)
Allowing division of Tier 2 but not multiplication has always seemed like a faulty/hypocritical method of scaling

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

I agree, we base the tiering off size. If someone can destroy one timeline and that power is multiplied by six, then obviously they can destroy six timelines. Whether or not their power can cross the distance between timelines is irrelevant, in the end, they have the power to do it and would be just as strong as someone who did it without the multiplication.

 

[FluffyCreatureZ]

I will wait to see the counter arguments.

 

[Ovrhide]

Another revision going to the trash. What trash logic.

 

[Stefano4444]

Agree.

I understand not allowing a tier jump between Low 2-C and 2-C due of the unknown unquantificable distance, but that logic never made much sense when reaching 2-C.

Like for some reason we assume that the distance between the 2nd and 3rd universe its somehow infinitely above the distance between the 1st and 2nd universe and so on, when it make more sense to assume that the distances are the same instead.

 

[PrinceofPein]

The reasoning behind this is because the distance between universes is unknown.

However, distance should be an irrelevant factor, as all that matters is the number of timelines destroyed. So far as I'm aware, the general assumption is that there's no time "inbetween" these universes, and that all there is in timeless void between. As a result, distance between universes is utterly irrelevant, as distance only refers to three dimensional space. Three Dimensional space is, of course, insignificant to a Low 2-C character.

This is wrong, distance does not refer to 3-D space at all, it can refer to any dimension of space even 1-D has distances, so I don't know where you got that, as spaces of any numbered dimension can be measured.
So distances do matter.

Low 2-C is one timeline, 2-C is two to a thousand timelines, etc...

The distance simply doesn't seem relevant to this level of power, as the only factor is number of timelines.

As a result, multipliers should logically turn Low 2-C characters into 2-C and such.

Do the maths if a universe/timeline is considered infinite;
2*infinity
100*infinity
Infinity*infinity

Edit: (since some did not get the memo); No matter what you multiply infinity by, it will still be infinite unless you are multiplying it by an uncountable infinite number. Even infinity times infinity is still infinity. Meaning you cannot become larger than infinity by multiplication of any number ranging from one to infinity and you need an uncountable infinite number multiplication to become larger than infinity, so essentially this thread is wrong

Anyway I disagree with this, but yes I do agree that the distance between universes/timelines are unknown and the material separating them should be default voids or nothingness unless stated otherwise by the series. Which will be fixed by an ongoing threads for tier 2.

 

[It_is_i_wyatt]

dragon ball fans side-eyeing 2-B rn

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

dragon ball fans side-eyeing 2-B rn

Oh

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

I agree with everything

 

[Spinoirr]

I agree with everything

Of course

 

[Quantu]

Neutral for now.

 

[Greatsage13th]

I agree.

Do the maths if a universe/timeline is considered infinite;
2*infinity
100*infinity
Infinity*infinity

?

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

Of course

with that maybe updates Dragon Ball

 

[StekFence]

with that maybe updates Dragon Ball

That’s not valid reasoning though

 

[DivineAura44]

Now, currently, multipliers cannot cause a Low 2-C character to become 2-C or 2-B, as described on our tiering system page.



The reasoning behind this is because the distance between universes is unknown.

However, distance should be an irrelevant factor, as all that matters is the number of timelines destroyed. So far as I'm aware, the general assumption is that there's no time "inbetween" these universes, and that all there is in timeless void between. As a result, distance between universes is utterly irrelevant, as distance only refers to three dimensional space. Three Dimensional space is, of course, insignificant to a Low 2-C character.

Low 2-C is one timeline, 2-C is two to a thousand timelines, etc...

The distance simply doesn't seem relevant to this level of power, as the only factor is number of timelines.

As a result, multipliers should logically turn Low 2-C characters into 2-C and such.

I'm pretty sure it's not just 2 timelines. Destroying the 2 separate timelines means you destroyed the separate space between the timelines. At least thats how it was once explained to me.

 

[DivineAura44]

That’s not valid reasoning though

Sounds valid to me

 

[LuffyRuffy46307]

this low 2C and 2-C business could be easier to catch

example: if a character destroyed the universe and it contains more than one space-time it would be low 2-C, like hell and heaven

and to be 2-C affect more than two universes with different spacetime

that would make things a lot easier

 

[Reiner04]

Well, multipliers don't work for tier 2 as it's a very controversial tier and complicated one to include them, distroying multiple timelines is treated as another gap. It's highly based off fictional stuff then of mathematical or scientific. This change can be expanded upto distroying single timeline= distroying infinite timelines, but we don't do that. It's distructive change for the wiki as far as I am aware. And it won't be passed.

 

[PrinceofPein]

?

Edit: (since some did not get the memo); No matter what you multiply infinity by, it will still be infinite unless you are multiplying it by an uncountable infinite number. Even infinity times infinity is still infinity. Meaning you cannot become larger than infinity by multiplication of any number ranging from one to infinity and you need an uncountable infinite number multiplication to become larger than infinity, so essentially this thread is wrong

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

I just wanna bring up "infinite multipliers" obviously context matter, but in a cosmology that is 2-A with infinite universes and each universe has infinite distance between them.... that cosmology is no longer 2-A...

This is me saying Low 2-C with infinite multiplier should be 2-A

 

[Greatsage13th]

Edit: (since some did not get the memo); No matter what you multiply infinity by, it will still be infinite unless you are multiplying it by an uncountable infinite number. Even infinity times infinity is still infinity. Meaning you cannot become larger than infinity by multiplication of any number ranging from one to infinity and you need an uncountable infinite number multiplication to become larger than infinity, so essentially this thread is wrong

that includes the distance between one universe to another. even if the distance is unquantifiable. the notion of it is absolutely ignorable in the view of infinity so basically you proved that distance does not affect the potency of destroying 2 or more universe with or without distance added between them as they are ignorable.

 

[PrinceofPein]

each universe has infinite distance between them

That distance is not infinite but unquantifiable. Most likely uncountable infinite void or a Higher dimensioned space. You cannot exactly separate infinite spaces by another just infinite space, it needs to be contained in something bigger or larger.

that includes the distance between one universe to another. even if the distance is unquantifiable. the notion of it is absolutely ignorable in the view of infinity so basically you proved that distance does not affect the potency of destroying 2 or more universe with or without distance added between them as they are ignorable.

You should probably read what I wrote again. Cause you missed the point totally.

 

[TheUnshakableOne]

That distance is not infinite but unquantifiable. Most likely uncountable infinite void or a Higher dimensioned space

Overall what im saying is Low 2-C times infinity should be infinite 4D or 2-A imo
Anything below that the rule should remain.

 

[Hagane_no_Saiyajin]

Neutral for now.

got some popcorn?

 

[Reiner04]

got some popcorn?

I doubt it'll last long enough to bring it.

 

[Blackcurrant91]

As others have noted, the difference between Low 2-C and 2-A is already unquantifiable which I would imagine is more the reason you cannot get to 2-C from low 2-C with multipliers currently.

 

[Antvasima]

I strongly agree with Pain regarding this revision, but will move it to our staff forum since it concerns an intended overall wiki policy revision.

 

[KLOL506]

I strongly agree with Pain regarding this revision, but will move it to our staff forum since it concerns an intended overall wiki policy revision.

Didn't we already have a revision eons ago disapproving of multipliers in any way, shape or form for Tier 2? By that basis alone this thread should've been closed minutes after its creation.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

Yeah as based as this would be I’m not really seeing new arguments here?

 

[Tatsumi504]

Overall what im saying is Low 2-C times infinity should be infinite 4D or 2-A imo
Anything below that the rule should remain.

It's not cause the distance between the space times are also taken into account.

 

[The_Smashor]

My main issue here is that we don't really assume there's time in between timelines. For example, two places having separate concepts of time is considered sufficient for them to be different universes and for destroying both of them to be 2-C.

All that appears to matter is that two (or more) timelines are destroyed. And, outside of those timelines, we have very little reason to believe anything exists at all, or at the very least anything that matters. It just seems weird to assume that, outside of these timelines, there's something between that matters in terms of destruction.

 

[The_Smashor]

It's not cause the distance between the space times are also taken into account.

I think the idea is that the distance between spacetimes is irrelevant since the power is already infinitely higher. That infinitely higher would include anything between universes because infinite is infinite.

 

[Tatsumi504]

My main issue here is that we don't really assume there's time in between timelines. For example, two places having separate concepts of time is considered sufficient for them to be different universes and for destroying both of them to be 2-C.

All that appears to matter is that two (or more) timelines are destroyed. And, outside of those timelines, we have very little reason to believe anything exists at all, or at the very least anything that matters. It just seems weird to assume that, outside of these timelines, there's something between that matters in terms of destruction.

Either space or a void exists between those timelines. For a space to contain a Space-time, it'll have to be 4D at least and destruction of that space is included when giving a rating.

Furthermore, going from past discussions, the space between timelines was suggested to be insignificant 5D.

Why should insignificant Levels of 4D reach higher levels because of multipliers? This is where what pain said comes into play. Any number * infinity= infinity

 

[Tatsumi504]

I think the idea is that the distance between spacetimes is irrelevant since the power is already infinitely higher. That infinitely higher would include anything between universes because infinite is infinite.

Hell no. Most times in fiction the distance depicted between timelines is huge compared to the timeline itself. That distance at least is 4D by virtue of containing a 4D structure.

 

[Jinsye]

(I was given permission to speak here by Tllm i think)

Tier 2 is already a massively incongruent tier with the rest of the tiering system, is making it even more of an outlier a good idea?

Ignoring the fact that technically destroying two timelines is just not superior to destroying one (which we ignore for the sake of fiction), every other tier from 4-B to 3-A always takes into account empty space in regards to destruction values. It's pretty much the same concept for tier 2, you need to take into account the empty space. (This empty space is not "3-dimensional" by the way).

However, due to the fact we're destroying a multiverse, we don't know how much energy is required to destroy that empty space, which is why the gap is unquantifiable. That's why you can't bridge that gap via multipliers.

HOWEVER, not entirely sure why we discard infinite jumps in power. Remember, the gap between Low 2-C and 2-C is unquantifiable, not infinite. There's no real proof about it being an infinite jump in AP. (This is also why half 2-C is stupid).

Do the maths if a universe/timeline is considered infinite;
2*infinity
100*infinity
Infinity*infinity

This is proof against multiversal being a tier altogether, so I wouldn't really consider this an argument.

 

[Antvasima]

Didn't we already have a revision eons ago disapproving of multipliers in any way, shape or form for Tier 2? By that basis alone this thread should've been closed minutes after its creation.

Yeah as based as this would be I’m not really seeing new arguments here?

I also think that we should preferably close this thread.

 

[The_Smashor]

Most times in fiction the distance depicted between timelines is huge compared to the timeline itself

Most times in fiction, the distance between timelines isn't depicted. The distance between universes is depicted, but not the distance between timelines.

 

[Therefir]

I also think that we should preferably close this thread.

Agree, the space between universes do matter, it's not something that can be bypassed by multipliers or power ups.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. I will close this thread then.

Thank you to everybody who helped out here.