• 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: Possible Yggdrasil Upgrade (Staff only)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Strongly agreed.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
Well I'm still mostly against this and I don't trust Kepekley23 or Alonik with revising the profiles.
this wiki so unreliable to the point that a topic begins to be defined by a moderator's decision not to trust someone?

I thought this was taken seriously and what mattered was the arguments, and not how you trust someone, you have a page of fallacies employing about the use of Ad Hominem, and you use it? Literally 0 credit.
 
The wiki is unreliable because instead of using objective feats and/or statements with consistent context, we use any seemingly reliable statement and second-hand sources to get the highest possible ratings rather than the most sensible rating. This is caused by an influx of people that join our site from other sites that are way more strict (if too strict) and people here subscribing to their mentality because they too want high stats. I just wish people were honest about it. Unfortunately, some of our most logical users either have lost interest, full-on quit, or are not as productive as they used to be (with some becoming a bit problematic).

I agree that "I don't trust them" isn't a good argument though.
 
Comics used to be considered the most feat-based verses, but even they aren't safe from VSBW's high tier inflation.
 
Thank you for being a voice of reason Sera.
 
To be fair, back in 2016, Comicbook characters used to be so heavily downplayed; such as Superman's flight speed not being comparable to his combat speed because "He consistently gets tagged by Batman", or Thor not even being FTL due to getting tagged by Spider-Man while leaving out context of the stronger/faster characters holding back. We've gotten better in 2017-2018, but now we receiving the exact opposite problems. And one of the main problems would be verses or the wiki in general getting way too popular way too fast. All I can say is blame Google+ for shutting down.
 
I agree with Medeus. Currently we likely have some very exaggerated ratings for some of our superhero comicbook characters. Formerly we had the opposite problem.
 
Sera EX said:
The wiki is unreliable because instead of using objective feats and/or statements with consistent context, we use any seemingly reliable statement and second-hand sources to get the highest possible ratings rather than the most sensible rating. This is caused by an influx of people that join our site from other sites that are way more strict (if too strict) and people here subscribing to their mentality because they too want high stats. I just wish people were honest about it. Unfortunately, some of our most logical users either have lost interest, full-on quit, or are not as productive as they used to be (with some becoming a bit problematic).
I agree that "I don't trust them" isn't a good argument though.
Thanks for transparency, and we need to continue in this focus, if not as @Peter "Quicksilver" Maximoff said, we're going to other path out of focus.
 
Well, I personally don't think that we have reliable concrete evidence for such an unfathomably enormous power-up for either Gorr, Old King Thor, or Rune King Thor. All that this is built on is unreliable patchwork scaling and conjecture.
 
But several legitimate scans were shown about Rune King Thor, and we don't want anything with Gorr or King Thor here, the main problem of acceptance for level of rkt was only if Odin, Surtur, and Seth would scale because for threatening yggdrasil.
 
Nothing that showed him to ascend to anywhere near such a massive scale within the Ragnarok story itself. All that we know is that he broke 9 universes out of a cyclical loop and became considerably more powerful than his father Odin. That may imply 2-B or so, possibly higher, but not remotely Low 1-A or 1-A.

11 years later, in an unrelated storyline, we were shown that Those Who Sit Above In Shadow could survive outside of the multiverse in a story that portrayed Loki, a human ghost, the Silver Surfer, his human companion, and Glorian, as capable of doing the same thing, and Loki speculated that they were created from the belief systems of the Norse deities, after which they fled, if I remember correctly.

None of this is good evidence at all.
 
If I remember well Loki was the god of stories and his companion was already dead and silver surfer was saved from the colapse of the multiverse by the shaper of world's herald.

Also there are some silver surfer feats but know isn't the time or page to discuss
 
It was repetedly showed to you Ant.

No offense, but you are straight up ignoring evidence by this point
 
No, I just remain completely unconvinced by pure conjecture. The so-called evidence is very unreliable.
 
Yes, we all know you are not convinced. That's the entire point. Your apparent need to repeat this every twenty seconds as if every different comment you make is a separate person who disagrees is what I find off putting.
 
The track has already been broken by the last thread being abruptly closed and a non-neutral person being handed the ability to summarize what is being argued despite not understanding it themselves.
 
Honestly, this whole thing to me is a symptom of bigger problem: the inconsistent nature of comics have finally caught up with us. We knew it was there, we dealt with it the best we could but now we've hit the wall. Decades of continuity, feats, anti-feats, outliers and tangently related material are piling up and we are split on how to regard them.

DC is pretty easy all things considered because its continuity reboots give us a fresher slate to work with and categorize. Marvel, as we've noted, doesn't do reboots like that and this is the result.

Realistically, we need to figure out a way and a time period of where to divide all of this stuff between the modern era and the older era. It's very clear Marvel ain't what it was even a decade or, shoot, five years ago. Because until we do, we're going to keep coming back to these issues of continuity, retcons, outliers. If we don't split this up, not only to show the completely different eras of Marvel but to also make this easier on ourselves.

Cuz, I'll be frank, I love Marvel but I'm sick and tired of having to deal with this for what feels like every two months.
 
But slipt Marvel in classic ans modern don't work too. For example see how the Dr.strange profile is the only one with this category. Yggdrasil have been treated as the key to invade the multiverse by Seth before in classic comics and now too.

I don't know the problem with upgrade just two profiles by now (RKT and TWSA).
 
Also are we just gonna ignore how ginnungagap literally can't even be 1-A because things like "north" (which imply direction, I.e dimension) are literally still there? like come on, the rest is just pretty clear stretchs, I'm fine with 2-A RKT tho

@Kep also, there is literally nothing wrong about Ant making it clear that he still doesn't disagree and clarify what his position again like multiple other people did, just because you already knew he had that position doesn't unjustify the action, Come on, kep. Can we just please try and finish this thread up already?

@C2 completely agreed btw, That's the main reason I just stopped trying to participate in marvel threads for awhile.
 
I agree with C2's assessment regarding Marvel continuity.

I will ask some of the members who know most about Marvel to help us out here.
 
@Hykuu

A 2-B or 2-A RKT makes sense. One that has transcended his father by an uncountable number of infinities does not (at all).
 
I need to remember that even if the ginnungagap it isn't 1-A, the TWSA still living in the Oblivion itself, and that they are comparable to Beyonders
 
No, we have no reliable proof for them being comparable to the Beyonders at all. Just loose speculation. Also, they fled from Loki when he threatened to reveal that they were created from the imaginations of the Norse deities, if I remember correctly.

Also, again, the original Ragnarok storyline did not establish anything remotely approaching such an enormous scale.
 
Re-Posting some pretty clear hard evidence for the Low 1-A rating

When Jane Foster went to threw Heimdall in the heave (not heven the tenth realm), she had to go to a yggdrasil root that lay in Greek hell, the anti-tree, the shadow of yggdrasil. Through this, she threw Heimdall beyond the Far Shore on the outside.

In addition, Al Ewing spoke in an official interview of this chapter about the yggdrasil that she is:

"The overarching idea here … is a kind of tour of Heaven and Hell in the Marvel Universe that's also a journey up the middle pillar of the Tree of Life."
 
it wasn't refused in the OP, the OP didn't refute anything, it only lists the arguments of boths sides and threating it as anything else is bias
 
Being saying "was refuted" is not what we need, this will only go into more circular arguments in the same way as it was before, I did several texts and the NES in the same way, so we need competence to evaluate this than just say that someone refuted the another according to our beliefs.
 
I did evaluate it, I couldn't have said that it was actually refuted if I didn't evaluate it beforehand, again, there is no need for literally anyone to go scan for scan in a case like this when all they have to do is see which argument seems to have more basis. I'm not even attempting to argue here since the thread is settled.
 
Thank you for helping out. I appreciate it. Should we upgrade RKT TO "At least 2-B" then?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top