Nasuverse Discussion Rule

[CrimsonStarFallen]

Long overdue. I am proposing a discussion rule for the Nasuverse.

Time and time again, people have tried to downgrade Nasu from tier 1, or even tier 2, back into tier 5 or whatever. This has been atempted ever since Fate first became tier 2 back in 2019, and continues to be done even now.

The amount of debates over the years cannot be understated. Examples of this can be seen here, here, here, here, here, here, here (this one in particular being a really strong argument, as I closed this guy's previous thread, closed his one and he's apparently immediatly made another one today), here, here and here (this one being done in the general discussion thread for some reason???). There's more, but I can't find all of them, obviously. Point is, all of these arguments have been used over and over and over again, and every Nasu supporter is incredibly tired of having to argue and reject them. They seem to either originate from a fundamental misunderstanding of how the cosmology works, misinformation originating from mistranslations, or just ignoring the rules the wiki even operates on. We'd rather not continue this over and over, as motivation to debate goes down.

For the specific write-up=

Do not atempt to downgrade the tier 1 ratings of Nasuverse characters. Its cosmology, consistency and ratings have been debated heavily over the years, and atempts at downgrades have frequently been rejected before (Examples include: this, this and this. Threads that compile evidence for the tiers can be seen here and here). Debates over this have grown tiring, and proven to be a waste of time for all parties involved.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

Agreed.

 

[Dereck03]

3 discussion rules for different verses in less than a month...

Sure, seems fine.

 

[AizenSosuke]

Long overdue. I am proposing a discussion rule for the Nasuverse.

Time and time again, people have tried to downgrade Nasu from tier 1, or even tier 2, back into tier 5 or whatever. This has been atempted ever since Fate first became tier 2 back in 2019, and continues to be done even now.

The amount of debates over the years cannot be understated. Examples of this can be seen here, here, here, here, here, here, here (this one in particular being a really strong argument, as I closed this guy's previous thread, closed his one and he's apparently immediatly made another one today), here, here and here (this one being done in the general discussion thread for some reason???). There's more, but I can't find all of them, obviously. Point is, all of these arguments have been used over and over and over again, and every Nasu supporter is incredibly tired of having to argue and reject them. They seem to either originate from a fundamental misunderstanding of how the cosmology works, misinformation originating from mistranslations, or just ignoring the rules the wiki even operates on. We'd rather not continue this over and over, as motivation to debate goes down.

For the specific write-up=

Agrees + Respects

 

[Migue79]

About time this happened!

100% agreed.

 

[Ubdon]

Sure, looks good.

 

[KLOL506]

Looks good, don't forget to link the threads where they were discussed, we did the same for Dragon Ball.

 

[CrimsonStarFallen]

Looks good, don't forget to link the threads where they were discussed, we did the same for Dragon Ball.

Noted. Do I also link the upgrade thread?

 

[XSOULOFCINDERX]

I agree with the OP.

 

[KLOL506]

Noted. Do I also link the upgrade thread?

Sure.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

These discussion rules are somewhat helpful, but I don’t think they actually staunch the main root of the problem, that being said arguments themselves. I won’t ask you, nor any verse to accommodate by this suggestion (especially considering the work it would actually take, but I do find it far more effective), but I think instead of highly controversial verses and ratings that have been accepted, instead of a discussion rule, an “Anti-Feat debunk” blog would be far more useful.

Popular examples include Dragon Ball, and God of War.

 

[Dereck03]

Either one is fine, but the point is that others will believe that their arguments have more validation than what is written in those blogs. Simply having the discussion rule is enough to close a thread at once with the same argument.

 

[CrimsonStarFallen]

These discussion rules are somewhat helpful, but I don’t think they actually staunch the main root of the problem, that being said arguments themselves. I won’t ask you, nor any verse to accommodate by this suggestion (especially considering the work it would actually take, but I do find it far more effective), but I think instead of highly controversial verses and ratings that have been accepted, instead of a discussion rule, an “Anti-Feat debunk” blog would be far more useful.

Popular examples include Dragon Ball, and God of War.

I've thought about this too. Tried to work on a cosmology blog, which also accomplishes the same result as a anti-feat debunk blog, but, for one, Nasu is kinda big, and for two I don't have as much time as I'd like with this stuff, specially given the limited amount of help I have (not to put down anyone who helps me, the franchise is just too massive).

With a discussion rule in place, I can at least work in peace on those projects without having to worry about arguing with someone.

 

[KLOL506]

Either one is fine, but the point is that others will believe that their arguments have more validation than what is written in those blogs. Simply having the discussion rule is enough to close a thread at once with the same argument.

Damn, you beat me to the punch.

And yeah, given my experience with the CharacterRant and CV mooks with their "holier than thou" attitudes with how they perceive our "anti-debunk" blogs, it'd be better to not give them any time of the day instead of losing countless hours debunking the same old arguments over and over and over again. If they bring nothing new to the table, shut 'em down, if they keep doing it repeatedly, report and block. The Rule should help make it just a bit easier, if not outright stop the issue.

 

[KLOL506]

I've thought about this too. Tried to work on a cosmology blog, which also accomplishes the same result as a anti-feat debunk blog, but, for one, Nasu is kinda big, and for two I don't have as much time as I'd like with this stuff, specially given the limited amount of help I have (not to put down anyone who helps me, the franchise is just too massive).

With a discussion rule in place, I can at least work in peace on those projects without having to worry about arguing with someone.

It'd be best to establish both.

 

[Dereck03]

It'd be best to establish both.

For now the discussion rule is fine until the supporters have time to create a blog.

 

[RitsuØ1]

This should work. I agree.

 

[KLOL506]

Honestly the simple matter of the truth is, some individuals will never agree with our standards for battleboarding and powerscaling, and neither will we agree with theirs or CharacterRant's or CV's. It's just how battleboarding is, subjective. There is no one universal opinion about scaling all of fiction and there never will be.

 

[KLOL506]

For now the discussion rule is fine until the supporters have time to create a blog.

I'd suggest keeping both. As you have seen in both the cases of Dragon Ball and God of War, making the blogs alone won't stop them. Sometimes, when a verse is really controversial and you're getting flooded with terrible "debunk" threads, you've at one point got to make that choice of barring such discussions.

 

[Dereck03]

I'd suggest keeping both. As you have seen in both the cases of Dragon Ball and God of War, making the blogs alone won't stop them. Sometimes, when a verse is really controversial and you're getting flooded with terrible "debunk" threads, you've at one point got to make that choice of barring such discussions.

They already said they don't have time to create a blog because of how big Nasuverse is by itself, as long as the rule is in place they save many hours of pointless debate, I say this also from experience of 2 years of discussion with Maou until I had to create the discussion rule, the same thing happened to DT with Daimaou as well.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

I've thought about this too. Tried to work on a cosmology blog, which also accomplishes the same result as a anti-feat debunk blog, but, for one, Nasu is kinda big, and for two I don't have as much time as I'd like with this stuff, specially given the limited amount of help I have (not to put down anyone who helps me, the franchise is just too massive).

With a discussion rule in place, I can at least work in peace on those projects without having to worry about arguing with someone.

That’s very true, yeah. r/CharacterRant, DeathBattleMatchUps, Powerscaling and more are already stuck in their interpretations. This would provide a small stake until you all could make one, but in any case, neither option is bad, I just prefer a blog, since that forces others to read before actually getting to any supporters to waste time and energy.

 

[Migue79]

At the very least it’s a step in the right direction to put up a rule.

Also, considering the sheer amount of lore behind each bit of the cosmology, a cosmology blog is going to take ages. It really doesn’t help that the Earth in the Nasuverse is a ******* mess.

 

[KLOL506]

They already said they don't have time to create a blog because of how big Nasuverse is by itself, as long as the rule is in place they save many hours of pointless debate, I say this also from experience of 2 years of discussion with Maou until I had to create the discussion rule, the same thing happened to DT with Daimaou as well.

What I mean is, it's alright to either keep a rule or a blog, and that it should be fine to keep the rule even after an explanation blog has been made to avoid further trouble and time loss.

 

[CrimsonStarFallen]

Reading LB7's translations and seeing all the ORT feats is already giving me a headache, I'm gonna have to do maintainance on that blog every 3 months too kek

Either way, this is derailing somewhat.

 

[Dereck03]

What I mean is, it's alright to either keep a rule or a blog, and that it should be fine to keep the rule even after an explanation blog has been made to avoid further trouble and time loss.

That's clearly fine, that's why I said the discussion rule is fine for the moment until they have time to create their blog if they see the need.

 

[Migue79]

Reading LB7's translations and seeing all the ORT feats is already giving me a headache, I'm gonna have to do maintainance on that blog every 3 months too kek

Grand Foreigner ORT headass LMAOOO

Anyways… Uh… Should staff members that support the verse as well as neutral ones be tagged for this?

 

[Dereck03]

Anyways… Uh… Should staff members that support the verse as well as neutral ones be tagged for this?

In the past 2 recently created discussion rules the opinion of the administrators was requested, but the opinion of the other staffs related to the verse would be appreciated as well.

 

[CrimsonStarFallen]

I think all the staff members that support Nasu are already here, so yeah, I'll ping some neutral ones.

@DarkDragonMedeus @Celestial_Pegasus @Elizhaa @Sir_Ovens @Everything12 @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Ultima_Reality

 

[ShivaShakti]

This seems reasonable.

 

[Violatas]

I'm usually not one for rules like this since I feel it kinda just squanders down the other side (and in some cases arguments are genuinely good), buuuuuut keyword here is "usually".

Agree with the OP

 

[Artorimachi_Meteoraft]

Agree with the OP

 

[Antvasima]

The first post in this thread seems to make sense to me.

 

[DaReaperMan]

I agree too

This seems to be an apsolute ****** landslide, this should be added.

 

[Antvasima]

@Iapitus_The_Impaler @RegisNex1232 @Creaturemaster971 @ShadowWhoWalks @Zencha9 @Strife304 @TheUnshakableOne @Duragoji123 @Newendigo

What do you think about this?

 

[Zencha9]

@Iapitus_The_Impaler @RegisNex1232 @Creaturemaster971 @ShadowWhoWalks @Zencha9 @Strife304 @TheUnshakableOne @Duragoji123 @Newendigo

What do you think about this?

I agree, the moon cell has been brought up more times than the amount of hair I have(which is not much but it's definitely more than 10).
Also you should ping @Paul_Frank as he is one of the more knowledgeable members regarding nasuverse

 

[Antvasima]

I agree, the moon cell has been brought up more times than the amount of hair I have(which is not much but it's definitely more than 10).
Also you should ping @Paul_Frank as he is one of the more knowledgeable members regarding nasuverse

Okay.

@Paul_Frank

Are you also willing to help out here please?

 

[Paul_Frank]

As the person who has seen literally every argument that's been repeated since they were upgraded and been in every thread, I agree, the points brought are almost always the exact same or just ignore and/or misconstrue things from the series itself to make their points, and are almost always made without even reading any past threads that either got them to, or defended the ratings before

 

[Antvasima]

@Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Ultima_Reality @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @Firestorm808 @Everything12 @Maverick_Zero_X

Does this seem acceptable to you as well?

 

[Maxeez]

I'm not a staff member but I also obviously agree .

 

[Starter_Pack]

I have no feelings towards Nasu whatsoever, but it sounds like this verse had gone through a constant back and forth much like several other verses that have had these rules implemented for them.

So sure, I'm fine with it.