- 16,174
- 12,706
Oh I know, it's just higher than I'd have thought.
-
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.
Marvel Comics Herald Tiers Upgrade to 3-C
- Thread starter Kulf_Boba
- Start date
- Status
- 3,759
- 1,615
Atleast it should be higher.
- 243
- 160
Could be, but that's the most we can assume
If nothing else, it'd be more consistency for the other galaxy feats me thinks?
If nothing else, it'd be more consistency for the other galaxy feats me thinks?
- 1,092
- 198
I would go with 2 or 3 trillion LY for the whole universe
- 939
- 581
- Thread starter
- #45
They vary in size.
- 23,031
- 50,371
- 939
- 581
- Thread starter
- #47
1,000,000,000,000 Light Years | 9.4607304725808E+27 meters
Magnitude 4: 4 * (4.459613919339E+21)* ((4.7303652e+27)/(6371000))^2 = 9.8340268e+63 Joules | 98 ExaFoe (4-A)
But hadn't it been agreed that you can only use this diameter for the Universe if it's in a comic feat written by Jason Aaron?
- 12,673
- 9,625
Yeah. Ig we can consider the eight multiverse universes to be 1 trillion LY. Iirc we don't have statements about its size since secret wars ended
- 243
- 160
If nothing else it could be fine as a high end
- 15,468
- 5,060
That takes down one of the reasons I had then.
- 5,879
- 1,072
Agree with at least 4-A
- 11,807
- 7,372
I mean at this point I’m just sorta confused if the proposal is 3-C or 4-A :V
Like both are fine to list too, but specify which one goes :/
Like both are fine to list too, but specify which one goes :/
- 12,673
- 9,625
Let's be lazy and do this;
- 11,807
- 7,372
No smh
- 168,536
- 77,316
A timespan was not mentioned. It could easily have been over time.
Withstanding a very small part of a galactic explosion is not a 3-C feat.
- 168,536
- 77,316
Anyway, 4-A seems fine to me.
@C2_of_Omegon @Eficiente @Qawsedf234 @SuperAPM @Firestorm808 @EmperorRorepme @Ehnkr2beboh @Tllmbrg @LuciferDC099 @Deagonx @Elizio33 @LordTracer @MarvelFanatic119 @catzlaflame
What do you think about this?
@C2_of_Omegon @Eficiente @Qawsedf234 @SuperAPM @Firestorm808 @EmperorRorepme @Ehnkr2beboh @Tllmbrg @LuciferDC099 @Deagonx @Elizio33 @LordTracer @MarvelFanatic119 @catzlaflame
What do you think about this?
- 1,716
- 855
I would pick the most consistent end. Whichever it may be.
- 15,600
- 22,915
The evidence for 4-A or 3-C (more-so the former) seems to check out. I agree.
- 7,638
- 7,806
Sources of scans?
- 5,879
- 1,072
Is anyone gonna summarize whats been accepted?
- 168,536
- 77,316
Please see my comments regarding that above.
- 2,610
- 350
It can't really be suggested to be any tier in that case, It could easily be referring to continuous star busting up until the point of galactic destruction. Personally I don't think they would have bothered to have mentionted galactic destruction if it wasn't referring to near instantanuous galactic destruction, but fair enough.
The scan mentions him travelling through the "heart" of an exploding galaxy which seems to suggest travelling through the epicenter tho
- 168,536
- 77,316
Destroying stars one at a time is not a reasonable timeframe. It would take far too long.
It would still be a very small part of the full energy of the explosion.
- 2,610
- 350
This is referring to a character that can travel the entire length of the universe in a matter of minutes at worst on his board, don't think timeframes are too much of an issue here. We simply don't have enough information to pin down this statements specific tier of power if it isn't referring to near instant galactic destruction
Flying through what is described as the epicenter of an explosion sounds like a pretty big portion of it, but fair enough
- 168,536
- 77,316
I suppose that is a good point.
The Surfer is very small, and even the center of a galactic explosion is extremely large.
- 2,610
- 350
To be honest the statement is pretty non-descript by itself so we have no idea what actually happened during those events, could even be simple hyperbole on Surfers part (although that's probably out of character for him in most cases)
- 16,174
- 12,706
Generally I would consider being in the core of a galactic explosion to be 3-C, although it is vague. In the end any explosion no matter how big has a starting point.
- 20,607
- 17,607
A Supermassive Black hole dwarfs the radius of how solar system multiple times over. Silver Surface isn't being exposed to anywhere close to a relevant portion of the energy if the explosion has already happened.
Also all the scans needs sourced.
- 2,610
- 350
That's another thing as well, the comic doesn't clarify how far the explosion had travelled at that point, whether it had just started or whether it had already encompassed the entire galaxy in question by that point, or anywhere inbetween. Granted the context of the statement is Surfer trying to hype up his power so I'm sure it means he tanked a close to equivalent amount of the full explosion, but it's way too vague to rely on as a solid piece of evidence for scaling.
- 11,807
- 7,372
Nah, 's too long :/
Like, just do a tally and see which overpowers which, between the two :V
Like, just do a tally and see which overpowers which, between the two :V
- 4,834
- 7,878
Just from tallying the feats in the OP, 4-A beats out 3-C feats by around 2-3 feats.
I say 2-3 because a couple of those feats could be considered either 4-A or 3-C and a couple of them would require a timeframe to be 4-A or 3-C
I say 2-3 because a couple of those feats could be considered either 4-A or 3-C and a couple of them would require a timeframe to be 4-A or 3-C
- 11,807
- 7,372
So we'll do 4-A then :v
- 15,567
- 16,199
After reading through the thread, 4-A seems like the more consistent rating here.
- Status
Similar threads
