• 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.

Pokemon Scaling Issue (IMPORTANT)

Status
Not open for further replies.
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
Ryukama... The dude is not arguing for everyone being multiversal. He is arguing about giving the people who have caught said pokémon having the tier, and if someone has fought them and it's not inconsistent, then scale them. Why is this so hard to understand?
I already know the scaling about this this, there is no need to repeat it again, this is something that i wanted to do with other admins withouth badly spreading like it's happening here.
 
Someone give me a RATIONAL argument. Please. Because NO ONE has even humored me. Instead of banning this topic without even hearing it, why don't you actually debate for once? This is what I was talking about Dragon. Making a CRT was pointless-- even if I agree with what you guys are saying about how ridiculous the claim is-- trust me, I do-- it doesn't matter how ridiculous something is. If it's true, it's true.

God, how many times do I have to say "Fallacy". Or is no one here rational.
 
Quantity of times a feat has been done does not make it legit. Otherwise let's make Pokémon 9-B due to having to learn a special move to be able to cut down trees.
 
And there we fo woth multiversal magikarp again. Honestly, I'm tired of this too. Or no one is reading the arguments correctly, or they are letting what they think is being said come through their minds instead of the things that is ACTUALLY being said.
 
LephyrTheRevanchist said:
Ryukama... The dude is not arguing for everyone being multiversal. He is arguing about giving the people who have caught said pokémon having the tier, and if someone has fought them and it's not inconsistent, then scale them. Why is this so hard to understand?
"But any trainer who has been demonstrated to catch Arceus (hypothetically speaking) is Arceus's level with his pokémon. Or at least "possibly"."

^ I heavily disagree with this. These trainers or the Pokemon they use have no place being on Arceus's level. And using game mechanics, constant scaling or similar PIS cases you can get to everyone being Multiversal. Which I am extremely against.

There was also Kukui's suggestion (which I know he disagrees with but still the argument he brought up) of "
every single trainer and their mother's pokemon are 2-C/2-B in scaling" which is primarily what I was opposing.
 
Hell, you can't even argue it only goes for the people who caught the CT. This would literally apply to any capable trainer with a pokeball PERIOD.

Even more reason why this is complete crap.
 
There's no Fallacy here, Amexim. Stop putting yourself into a pedestal and looking down at everyone as if you are an intellectual god, and stop trying to appel to unbiased rationality. If it is by unbiased rationality that we must play, then you would agree that the upgrade is nonsense.
 
The thing is, lore wise, the members of the CT dwarf literally anyone excluding Arceus.

Suppose that you accept the Platinum protagonist as 2-B via possessing Giratina. Is Cynthia a higher degree of 2-B given that you fight her later in the game?
 
Like, this is stupid. Like, seriously! We're going to ignore consistent plot points-- not just 1 or five, but TONS of them for "consistency" when TRAINED Pokemon are the only pokémon that scale? Really?
 
Amexim said:
Like, this is stupid. Like, seriously! We're going to ignore consistent plot points-- not just 1 or five, but TONS of them for "consistency" when TRAINED Pokemon are the only pokémon that scale? Really?
"ONLY A TON OF CHARACTERS WILL BECOME 2-B. NOT ALL OF THEM. Not the 8-Cs, just the 6-Cs. That totally makes it acceptable."
 
Overlord:

It might. So long as there's context supporting it, and maybe feats too, or consistent showings or something, it might not be PIS.

My God, stop it. The fallacious arguments are everywhere.
 
>I have no idea but becayse I find it impossible it does not matter.


Get Reading if ya wanna talk about things ya have no idea on.
 
What fallacy? The fact that this is an obvious PIS, contradicted by literally every single scene that can be taken even slightly seriously?

What a shitstorm. We should make a rule against this.
 
148 replies, did we get somewhere? Honest question, Im not keeping up with this.
 
TheJ-ManRequiem said:
Agreeing with amexim.
And Kukui, stop taking him capturing via out of context.
Except it isn't and you not seeing that is beyond me.

He's specifically trying to limit this to certain stuff when nothing implies that and logically applies to everyone, which makes this even more stupid.
 
Amexim said:
Like, this is stupid. Like, seriously! We're going to ignore consistent plot points-- not just 1 or five, but TONS of them for "consistency" when TRAINED Pokemon are the only pokémon that scale? Really?
Yes, because this the way this wiki and its Admins have decided to maintain consistency i think it's redicolus to see Future Warrior vs 2-B Ash.
 
@Amexim I dont really care either way, but the way you keep screaming fallacy is really annoying and is adding nothing despite the fact that you seem to think you are bringing up the most points.
 
Kukui, it wouldn't scale to everyone. Stop strawmanning me. And if it does, ******* explain your reasoning in detail or something-- for Christ sake, no one is actually debating here!
 
@Ryukama

This thread is a complete mess. If you don't mind, and want to continue the discussion, I will go to your wall.

Anyways... Amexim is not arguing to use game mechanics or scale to anyone other than those that has actually fought the dude with that pokémon and scale, as long as it is not inconsistent.
 
THAT MAKES IT EVEN WORSE. You are trying to argue that capturing Arceus is legit when it is an obvious game mechanic. And even then, if the trainers capture Arceus that means that their Pokémon Party would be 2-B. Which could be composed of Lv.99 Magikarps for all we know.

And the Pokeballs are suddenly capable of containing 2-B energies and now the Pokémon Civilization it is so advanced that their humanity whose tech is only somewhat better than hours has multiversal weaponry.

Man, **** the Time Lords. Pokémon Earth is where its at.
 
Matt, I think it's "stupid" too. I think it's "stupid" that Caulifla is universal (hypothetically speaking), but she's consistently fought against Goku and Universal beings.
 
Blatant false equivalency. If there was a manga with Magikarp as its lead character and he went through numerous training arcs and powering ups, going from fighting fodder to mid-tiers, to strong Pokémon like Charizard and Tyranitar, and the final fight was Magikarp vs Arceus, I'd accept scaling that Magikarp to 2-B.

Not the Magikarp which you grinded to Lv.99 to be able to beat Arceus in gameplay.
 
Trainers can't train their Pokémon to the level of GODS, no matter if they're Cynthia, Lucas, Platinum, because they always go back to being comparable to people literally multiple degrees of infinity weaker in a continuous story. And before people bring up that Lucario, his story ended right after that feat, it was a completely separate continuity, and lost a fight (without it being on purpose) once.
 
@Amexim

The very fact your arguing trainers catching them alone proves that it goes for everyone, not just specifics.

If one trainer is able to do it, the others would to. And nothing else says otherwise.

And your condescending attitude toward this is starting to get annoying. I suggest you take it down a notch before your kicked from here.
 
No. I'm not. What the ****? Stop putting words in my mouth like you in my argument.

Stop being whiney little children, calm down, and actually logically assess something. Just because it's absurd doesn't mean it's false.

And that's exactly why I keep shouting fallacy. Because you guys refuse to be rational-- but would be quick to ban me when I heckle you and ad hominem you for not being rational here when you debate other threads.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
THAT MAKES IT EVEN WORSE. You are trying to argue that capturing Arceus is legit when it is an obvious game mechanic. And even then, if the trainers capture Arceus that means that their Pokémon Party would be 2-B. Which could be composed of Lv.99 Magikarps for all we know.
@Lephry Basically this ^

No one should be on Arceus's level. That's like basic in the lore of Pokemon. And this "trainer" and their "Pokemon" can be essentially anyone. Or you can go ahead and scale those certain Pokemon to other ones, then other ones, then other ones until you eventually get everyone to 2-B. And just because he doesn't want everyone to become 2-B, does not mean that isn't the consequence of his suggestion.
 
I'll say it again.

If this was accepted (i'm against this for the record), you get stuff like Cynthia's Garchomp being ridiculously stronger than Giratina.

This doesn't make sense, at all. If you could train a Pokemon that much, Cyrus would create his new world via training a random reality warping Pokemon all the way to tier 2 and making a new universe
 
No. No one even understands what my position is. Did anyone actually read the other thread? Or are you guys just ignoring facts because it doesn't "make sense" to you?
 
This thread, literally, this entire thread can be debunked with:

"Lore > Game Mechanics > PIS"

Seriously.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top