Making the Tiering System foolproof

[Antvasima]

I think that Wokistan makes sense as usual.

 

[Eficiente]

"On the Tier 2 category, I'm not sure if saying 4-dimensional is wise."
This isn't really a rebuttal. It doesn't even say why you have your doubts.

The 4° dimension doesn't have a universal meaning, so why act like it has? In physics it's time, in math and science fiction it isn't, at least not necessarily for the latter, which can treat it like whatever or how math does it. Imagine talking to a normal person about it and expecting it to know it's the same take physics has and not some other, I for one would be completely comprehensive if the person talks me back about the 4° dimension but thinking it had other meaning that isn't the one physics uses. And so what's the point of using it when explaining things? Why can't we just not do so and avoid confusion? Using it doesn't support some correct way of how things should be.

"On the Tier 1 category, I kinda don't need to say why it's wrong, we already agreed on a number of dimensions not giving a tier."
This also isn't quite true. It's really more scrutiny put on these sorts of feats. Some offhanded mention of whatever dimensional doesn't work, but you can still very much get to higher tiers off dimensions shit. It all depends on the whims of some Brazilian teenager if the dimensions in question fit criteria we used to not judge them on.

..that still means the category is wrong and leads to confusion. If I make a character that's 5-dimensional then they're not going to have that category, and yet it meets the current requirements for it.

"The Higher-Dimensional Existence is currently a problem, it claims that if you have it then you gain a lot of powers that have nothing to do with being higher dimensional, people has given tier 1 stats to characters just based on how they had that ability."
Looking closer at it, that section seems pretty useless. It negates itself with the preface that it's not applicable to all fiction but it's also default higher dimensional abilities, which is pretty amusing. There is no reason to keep a default page aroudn that we don't actually use as a default.

Before, it was a nightmare to know what characters were h.dimensional and who weren't, and as was said before in the thread, deleting it is too much. We just need to make its standard to not give anything and to do give stuff when x requirements are met.

 

[Wokistan]

"4D shit"
Whether the fourth dimension is spatial or temporal doesn't actually change the AP that you'd get from destroying everything along these for axes though.

"5D and up"
How does that mean its's wrong? We have extra criteria for what we consider acceptable dimensions, that's all there is. We have criteria for everything on this site, stuff can't really be added through offhanded mentions.

"Higher dimensional existence page"
I mean deleting the section at the bottom of the page that talks about standard powers and also says there aren't standard powers.

 

[Antvasima]

Wokistan still makes sense.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

My only concern is how we treat sustaining feats. Ones that have nothing to do with creating or destroying, but ones that include keeping up and entire country. Passively, actively, whatever.

Furthermore, what do we define as significantly affect? There’s no real... definition for that, and I wonder if that even works for structures that are countless or infinite in size. From what I know, the smallest fraction of a countless / infinite number is still countless or an infinite number, so what does significantly affect really even do at this point? How do you significantly affect something countless / infinite?

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

My only concern is how we treat sustaining feats.

I'm concerned on this too.

We have cases where a character sustaining the universe doesn't make them Tier 2 based on this explanation, for example.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Also, the requirements for 5-D / Low 1-C. What the hell are they?

I’ve heard a structure transcending (keyword transcend) space & time, I’ve heard seeing the lower structure as infinitely lower / fiction. What’s also the end all be all term for Low 1-C? Is it transcend, is it surpass, is it above? Are they all the same? Is transcend the only real definitive word to justify this tier?

 

[Agnaa]

I'm concerned on this too.

We have cases where a character sustaining the universe doesn't make them Tier 2 based on this explanation, for example.

Well I don't think it really seems true that 682 is sustaining the universe. The characters in the tale itself have no clue why it happens, with one of the ideas being that "non-682 bearing timelines are culled".

Also, the requirements for 5-D / Low 1-C. What the hell are they?

I’ve heard a structure transcending (keyword transcend) space & time, I’ve heard seeing the lower structure as infinitely lower / fiction. What’s also the end all be all term for Low 1-C? Is it transcend, is it surpass, is it above? Are they all the same? Is transcend the only real definitive word to justify this tier?

They all work. Just any qualitative difference above 4-D. This can happen in tons of ways. Seeing a 4-D construct as fiction, being uncountably infinitely superior to a 4-D construct (we often equalize 'transcending' to this), having an uncountably infinite number of timelines, having a 4-D structure be an apple on a tree of a higher realm, affecting a properly 5-D construct.

It's open-ended like all other tiers on purpose, we don't want to restrict it to just verses with reality-fiction differences, for example.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Well I don't think it really seems true that 682 is sustaining the universe. The characters in the tale itself have no clue why it happens, with one of the ideas being that "non-682 bearing timelines are culled".

They all work. Just any qualitative difference above 4-D. This can happen in tons of ways. Seeing a 4-D construct as fiction, being uncountably infinitely superior to a 4-D construct (we often equalize 'transcending' to this), having an uncountably infinite number of timelines, having a 4-D structure be an apple on a tree of a higher realm, affecting a properly 5-D construct.

It's open-ended like all other tiers on purpose, we don't want to restrict it to just verses with reality-fiction differences, for example.

Do you mean they all work as in, all the phrases used do dictate superiority, or the ways I mentioned (a structure transcending space & time / seeing something lower as fiction), or yes to both questions?

 

[Agnaa]

I don't understand what your second question in, but the answer to your first question is yes.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

What’s also the end all be all term for Low 1-C? Is it transcend, is it surpass, is it above? Are they all the same? Is transcend the only real definitive word to justify this tier?

Most often, I see the word transcend as the end all be all word for usage of a structure being above space & time. Can words like “over”, “surpass”, “above”, etc.

 

[Ionliosite]

Even "transcend" doesn't always equate to Tier 1, we just always use that one for simplicities' sake.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Well, that’s sorta why I ask what is the requirement for Low 1-C, as to which I got:

A structure that transcends space & time / looking down on a lesser realm like fiction.

 

[Agnaa]

All of them depend on context. There's no word where if it's used it will magically always give higher tiers no matter what.

The requirement is a context that establishes a qualitative superiority. Not some magical word.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Hm. I see. So it would have to be proven by numerous statements / feats of superiority. Ok, nice. I got 1/2 of what I came here for.

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality

Are you willing to provide input here?

 

[Eficiente]

On those last comments, I kinda disagree with the Yggdrasil in GoW being Low 1-C via having inside and trancending time, space and fate, trancend wouldn't have any higher meaning than what a normal person would think it means there.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Probably best if Ultima takes a look, but I guess I can give input...
Can someone briefly summarize all the points that are being currently discussed, though? Is the core issue just the stuff in the OP or was there more added during the conversation?

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

On those last comments, I kinda disagree with the Yggdrasil in GoW being Low 1-C via having inside and trancending time, space and fate, trancend wouldn't have any higher meaning than what a normal person would think it means there.

I know little of GOW, but why not? Is it because it’s inside the structure or...? Why does transcend not work here?

 

[Eficiente]

Transcend doesn't mean being infinite times more complex or seeing as fiction without context making it be so, it can just mean being a bit superior in x regard, like complexity, power, or location in a way that has nothing to do with complexity and power. A multiversal structure transcending a multiverse shouldn't mean it's Low 2-C in the same way a person transcending a 10-B person doesn't have some super wacky tier.

 

[Wokistan]

Literally everything is context dependent though, as said above there is no magic phrase that guarantees tier 1, it's what it means in context

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Now I’m all confused on Low 1-C again. What are you all’s definition of the requirements of that tier?

 

[Agnaa]

Low 1-C | Low Complex Multiverse level: Characters who can affect, create and/or destroy the entirety of spaces whose size corresponds to one to two higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model (Low 2-C structures, in plain English.) In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 5 and 6-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 5 to R ^ 6)

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Yeah I’ve read that, but the two definitions I got for Low 1-C I listed earlier came from Ultima, amongst seeing the justification for other verses like BlazBlue, SMT, etc.

 

[Agnaa]

What exact part of the definitions provided are tripping you up?

 

[Eficiente]

one to two higher levels of infinity greater than

@Milly_Rocking_Bandit This is the source of your confusion. The dictionary doesn't have "transcend" to mean this, thus it alone doesn't mean that. Simple as that.

Don't trust what other verses say, they usually go all "it's above all existence" and whatever and that just means tier 1 based on info on blogs and the like, not at all what the profiles say.

Given how common of a misconception this is, should we make a note about it in the tiering? To prevent people from using transcend like that with insufficient context? A lot of people in the wiki use it not like regular people in real life, especially with non-worthy supporting context.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

What exact part of the definitions provided are tripping you up?

Like definitively... what is the exact requirement? Like how do we quantify infinitely superior? Before I used to see transcend the multiverse (SMT, BlazBlue), and that’s why they’re Low 1-C. It’s very confusing because now it’s like... what is the definition? I’m specifically mentioning those verses because it’s what I’m most versed in when it comes to this stuff, and as such I want to see if that’s the requirement for it.

Of course I would only mean transcend in the usage of an actual multiverse / space-time, and not simply for any reason. Like “my punches transcend reason”.

 

[Agnaa]

I don't know how else I can say this. I gave you the exact requirement, phrased in my own way and as phrased by the tiering system page, and I gave you many examples of evidence which would meet that exact requirement. I don't know what's missing.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

No no, I agree with your definition and it was far easier to digest, I don’t get Efi’s explaination.

 

[Eficiente]

That's easy to say, but what about it? You don't agree that the definition of the dictionary matters to it or what? And is it related to this thread?

 

[Agnaa]

I think Efi's saying that the context for tier 1 ratings for many verses is too large to fit on profiles, being backed by blogs with a huge amount of evidence. This can make the descriptions on profiles a tad misleading and imply that the standard of evidence is lower than it actually is.

tl;dr Don't trust the two-sentence explanations on profiles to give you all the nuance behind a verse being a certain high tier.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Okay. **** it, I’ll just go what I always do, get as much contextual evidence a possible & try to explain it for what I’m reasoning for. Thanks.

Regardless, onto the “sustaining” or rather “significantly affecting” something, how does that apply to a structure beyond normal numbers, like countless / infinite? How do you significantly affect that?

 

[Padaruyos]

Question: Is it possible to be given a Low 2-C rating by having infinitely more power than a High 3-A? I sometimes heard this argument used in the past, but I don't quite remember. I'm always confused by this since the difference between 3D power and 4D power is unquantifiable.

 

[Agnaa]

Not without more context. You'd need uncountably infinitely more power to be guaranteed a jump to Low 2-C.

@Eficiente Can you clarify exactly what still needs to be discussed here? This thread has been really hard to follow.

 

[Eficiente]

1. The explanation of the "Significantly affect" umbrella term needs to clarify that the affecting needs to be proven to be on the same level as destroying or creating the structure, because people think any form of manipulation over the structure inhereditary means having a tier = to destroying it.
2. We need to clarify somewhere how we treat "shaking" x big structures, we got reasonable things said about it before in the thread.
3. Same with how we deal with x big feats being done over time, same as before.

There's more but we can start with that.

 

[Ionliosite]

The first part is pretty simple, since we just need to expand the explanation on the page to clarify that "significantly affect" has to be proven to be on the same level as destruction for it to count as said tier.

As for shaking, that's pretty much unquantifable if you ask me, since knowing the energy for shaking a multiverse would need knowing the size of said structure, and we kinda can't without knowing the distance between universes.

Feats over time should be treated the same as they always have imo.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Furthermore, what do we define as significantly affect? There’s no real... definition for that, and I wonder if that even works for structures that are countless or infinite in size. From what I know, the smallest fraction of a countless / infinite number is still countless or an infinite number, so what does significantly affect really even do at this point? How do you significantly affect something countless / infinite?

I also wanna talk about this.

 

[Agnaa]

By causing a notable effect over the entirety of it. A notable effect that can be roughly equalized to creation/destruction.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

It has to be the entirety? That’s the only way? Because I’m very skewed on this, there was a CRT where it involved a 5-D structure, but there was no evidence to suggest they were or weren’t affecting the whole thing, but they were affecting it in general, and infinitely higher structure than the universe.

 

[Agnaa]

Okay maybe I shouldn't comment, because I'm not super familiar with how we actually give out ratings for tier 1 verses.