• 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.

MCU Love & Thunder Spoiler Thread

Lacku said:
so are does this mean were gonna upgrade our high 6-Cs to high 6-A now? also possible high 6-A ms. marvel rating maybe đź‘€
Click to expand...
That's a big if.

You still have to deal with the biggest issue of the Bifrost beam not actually doing that kind of damage on Jotunheim.
 
Lacku said:
idk I think it's pretty clear that when it closes it's akin to piercing damage
Click to expand...
I get that, but I was more so talking about its ability to bring about High 6-A destruction that quickly, doesn't seem like something that's done fast but rather over time thing.
 
KLOL506 said:
I get that, but I was more so talking about its ability to bring about High 6-A destruction that quickly, doesn't seem like something that's done fast but rather over time thing.
Click to expand...
by destruction do you mean it for example cutting off cull obsidians arm or something else?
 
KLOL506 said:
That's a big if.

You still have to deal with the biggest issue of the Bifrost beam not actually doing that kind of damage on Jotunheim.
Click to expand...
The Bifrost was hitting Jotunheim from Asgard, which are in different galaxies. I get that VS Battles follows inverse square law, which does not work in this situation. But just logically, the energy required to damage anything from a galaxy away has to be astronomical.

Like it takes more energy to throw a baseball 300 feet than it takes to throw it 3 feet. There is no way the damage the Bifrost produced when it hit Jotunheim was equivalent to 100% of the energy the Bifrost released at the spot it fired from on Asgard.

If that were the case, it would mean the Gateway to Eternity requires the same amount of energy to open as it took to topple ice spires on Jotunheim. Does anyone here really believe that to be the case?
 
KLOL506 said:
Nah, I mean causing damage to the Earth's surface due to misuse or some other staff like that.
Click to expand...
personally I think clarifying that it's environmental destruction instead of just straight up giving it a rating is a bit redundant since even though it could probably damage the earth if misused it can damage things in other ways as well, if anything I think piercing damage would make more sense if you want to clarify the rating
 
ParkerKent007 said:
The Bifrost was hitting Jotunheim from Asgard, which are in different galaxies. I get that VS Battles follows inverse square law, which does not work in this situation. But just logically, the energy required to damage anything from a galaxy away has to be astronomical.

Like it takes more energy to throw a baseball 300 feet than it takes to throw it 3 feet. There is no way the damage the Bifrost produced when it hit Jotunheim was equivalent to 100% of the energy the Bifrost released at the spot it fired from on Asgard.
Click to expand...
I'd argue Thor wasn't hitting it at the source either, he was halfway at the bridge when he smacked it.

ParkerKent007 said:
If that were the case, it would mean the Gateway to Eternity requires the same amount of energy to open as it took to topple ice spires on Jotunheim. Does anyone here really believe that to be the case?
Click to expand...
The problem is that these two are not comparable in any meaningful way whatsoever, because the Bifrost at Asgard was used in combat purposes, the Bifrost at the Gateway to Eternity was not. Simply having the energy source at hand does not make your physicals automatically scale to its full power unless you can show that you are able to channel its power through yourself to further amplify yourself in order to fight stronger foes.
 
KLOL506 said:
I'd argue Thor wasn't hitting it at the source either, he was halfway at the bridge when he smacked it.


The problem is that these two are not comparable in any meaningful way whatsoever, because the Bifrost at Asgard was used in combat purposes, the Bifrost at the Gateway to Eternity was not. Simply having the energy source at hand does not make your physicals automatically scale to its full power unless you can show that you are able to channel its power through yourself to further amplify yourself in order to fight stronger foes.
Click to expand...
The Bifrost was firing for roughly the same amount of screen time at the climax of Thor 1 and Thor 4.

Is there any evidence that the energy itself of the Bifrost is substantially different in type or magnitude for these two events? Not how the Bifrost was used. I mean the nature of its energy.

Also, Thor was much closer to the source of the Bifrost (500 feet max) than Jotunheim (a galaxy away). So from a durability standpoint, it does seem like Thor should have been hit with more energy than Jotunheim was in Thor 1, per second.

But if we don't have agreement on this, it will not make the CRT.
 
ParkerKent007 said:
The Bifrost was firing for roughly the same amount of screen time at the climax of Thor 1 and Thor 4.

Is there any evidence that the energy itself of the Bifrost is substantially different in type or magnitude for these two events? Not how the Bifrost was used. I mean the nature of its energy.
Click to expand...
How long it fires is irrelevant, if the intent for unleashing the beam is different. An energy source and its output yield can be the exact same yet they may not scale to AP at all if used in a certain way.

Bifrost at Asgard was weaponized. Bifrost at the Gateway was not. That is the one key defining moment which determines which one is AP and which one is just dimensional travel hax.

ParkerKent007 said:
Also, Thor was much closer to the source of the Bifrost (500 feet max) than Jotunheim (a galaxy away). So from a durability standpoint, it does seem like Thor should have been hit with more energy than Jotunheim was in Thor 1, per second.
Click to expand...
That is still too fundamentally far away for Thor to scale to the full value in any shape or form.

ParkerKent007 said:
But if we don't have agreement on this, it will not make the CRT.
Click to expand...
Count me in for disagreement to using the Bifrost feat then.
 
Is the Bifrost feat really necessary for the CRT? It's just something that was brought up at the last moment and has only been discussed for about a day, so if we agree on the rest, we can still make the CRT without using the Bifrost
 
ArkhamDC06 said:
Is the Bifrost feat really necessary for the CRT? It's just something that was brought up at the last moment and has only been discussed for about a day, so if we agree on the rest, we can still make the CRT without using the Bifrost
Click to expand...
The Bifrost feat is absolutely not necessary for the CRT at all IMHO. The only reliable feat to go off here would be Zeus's scaling scenario to the Gods, Ra in particular.
 
I started to write the CRT while ignoring what I consider to be the elephant in the room, and I felt myself going a little bonkers. I'm not trying to piss anyone off here. But, just once, I would greatly appreciate it if you all just weigh here in with a simple Yes or No to this question:

DO YOU SEE STARS MOVING HERE?





YES or NO?
 
ParkerKent007 said:
I started to write the CRT while ignoring what I consider to be the elephant in the room, and I felt myself going a little bonkers. I'm not trying to piss anyone off here. But, just once, I would greatly appreciate it if you all just weigh here in with a simple Yes or No to this question:

DO YOU SEE STARS MOVING HERE?





YES or NO?
Click to expand...

I see stars, but a bunch of people complained that they aren't real stars. So in all honestly I'd say just drop it. The admins aren't gonna accept it.
 
ParkerKent007 said:
I started to write the CRT while ignoring what I consider to be the elephant in the room, and I felt myself going a little bonkers. I'm not trying to piss anyone off here. But, just once, I would greatly appreciate it if you all just weigh here in with a simple Yes or No to this question:

DO YOU SEE STARS MOVING HERE?





YES or NO?
Click to expand...

Yes, but it’s probably not gonna get accepted
 
Sorry, but based on those responses I find the system here to be misguided. I respect the intention of this site, but I cannot justify how you are going about it in this situation. I will not, in good conscience, lie by omission about facts to get what I want, and tailor my argument for power scaling to match criteria that ignores reality. You all have the Thor - Zeus - Ra - Khonshu scaling argument above if someone else wants to create a CRT based solely on that. But I'm not going to act like Thor actually went from Large Island Level for most of his time in the MCU to suddenly Star Level, just to get him higher.

If this site has legitimacy, that should occur based on a true accounting of his power history. And there is no way that anyone being honest with themselves and others can look at these two scenes and say they do not see individual stars moving on different paths separate from the larger pattern of the other stars that move in relation to each other. Individual star movements diverging from the larger pattern of other stars is clear proof the Bifrost was moving stars each light years from one another, Thor tanked a star-level explosion in his first movie, and Thor has always had star-level durability.

BEFORE THOR BREAKS THE BRIDGE:





AFTER THOR BREAKS THE BRIDGE:





Would this require changing scaling of other characters? Maybe Loki, Hulk, and Thanos. Would be worth it, if only to maintain ethical integrity on this site. The issue is about what it takes to knock out Thor, not "hurt" him. And no, we don't even have proof the Sokovia blast KO'd him. All we know regarding Sokovia is Thor fell in the water because he could not fly without Mjolnir, which had gotten knocked from his grasp by "atomic action doubling back" (Tony's words). The only other things to KO a fully powered Thor were Grandmaster discs, Infinity Stones, a neutron star, and Thanos. Anyway, do what you want here.

NASA:

https://chandra.harvard.edu/resources/faq/black_hole/bhole-4.html

"A wormhole is a hypothetical type of tunnel consisting of two entrance holes that resemble black holes."

"It has been estimated that to create a wormhole with a diameter one millionth the size of a proton, wormhole engineers would need negative energy equivalent in magnitude to the energy generated by ten billion suns in one year."

https://science.nasa.gov/milky-ways-black-hole

"There's a black hole at the center of the Milky Way. Stars are observed to orbit a very massive and compact object there known as Sgr A* (say "sadge-ay-star").

JANE:


 
Last edited:
From what I understand, the internal logic of the site prohibits those feats from being counted (as clearly as they're shown onscreen) because it would so dramatically throw off the scaling of the other characters that shouldn't be near that level. I definitely think that Thor should be rated higher than he is, but would it make sense for a 4-C Bleeding Edge Iron Man in Infinity War to exist, or a 4-C Loki scaling to Cap or Valkyrie?

I definitely want Thor to get upgraded. He should get upgraded. I'm just no longer hopeful of getting any sort of admin approval for upgrades to Pre-L&T Thor.
 
NaturalDestroyer said:
From what I understand, the internal logic of the site prohibits those feats from being counted (as clearly as they're shown onscreen) because it would so dramatically throw off the scaling of the other characters that shouldn't be near that level. I definitely think that Thor should be rated higher than he is, but would it make sense for a 4-C Bleeding Edge Iron Man in Infinity War to exist, or a 4-C Loki scaling to Cap or Valkyrie?

I definitely want Thor to get upgraded. He should get upgraded. I'm just no longer hopeful of getting any sort of admin approval for upgrades to Pre-L&T Thor.
Click to expand...
Phase 3 should definitely not be backscaled to tier 4 from this
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Yokoahh5743
  • Locked
edit mcu character profile
Replies
11
Views
2K
Baabasaplar95
Baabasaplar95
Yoazkk6188
Gorr ( God of the butcher ) Vs Hela (Goddess of death ) MCU
Replies
4
Views
1K
Yoazkk6188
Yoazkk6188
Yoazkk6188
Gor ( God of butcher ) vs hela ( Goddess of death) MCU
Replies
0
Views
666
Yoazkk6188
Yoazkk6188
V999
Thor VS Tartaglia (0-7-0) GRACE
Replies
19
Views
3K
Woomica
Woomica
  • Locked
3-B MCU Thor (Onscreen + WoG Proofs)
Replies
3
Views
2K
Propellus
Propellus
Back
Top