Soni- I mean! Mario Bros AP Revision/Upgrade! (M&L Brothership Spoilers)

[Eden_Warlock99]

Why wouldn't we just go with the lowest interpretation? Instead of just, completely ignoring the feat?

 

[Chariot190]

Hiding the outlier yadda. Like yeah it could be 6-A (or even 6-B), or it could be 5-B, 5-A, 5-C, High 5-A, low 4-C, hell I mean technically speaking it could probably even get above star lv depending on speed and the temp shift.

Using it as support for the lowest stuff, is just assuming the feat in question is that level and calling it a ay. What if the statement is actually a 4-C statement? How does that support 6-A?

It only acts as support if you use the lowest possible interpretation, but if we were arguing Mario was 5-B instead, would it be ok to use that statement as support there too because in theory it COULD be a 5-B feat too?

It's just arbitrarily picking an end out of literally trillions and going "it COULD be this so it's support", it's not at all solid.

there's better stuff to cling to anyway, ice feats suck to scale

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Hiding the outlier yadda. Like yeah it could be 6-A (or even 6-B), or it could be 5-B, 5-A, 5-C, High 5-A, low 4-C, hell I mean technically speaking it could probably even get above star lv depending on speed and the temp shift.

Using it as support for the lowest stuff, is just assuming the feat in question is that level and calling it a ay. What if the statement is actually a 4-C statement? How does that support 6-A?

It only acts as support if you use the lowest possible interpretation, but if we were arguing Mario was 5-B instead, would it be ok to use that statement as support there too because in theory it COULD be a 5-B feat too?

It's just arbitrarily picking an end out of literally trillions and going "it COULD be this so it's support", it's not at all solid.

there's better stuff to cling to anyway, ice feats suck to scale

isnt the point is because there's a bunch of unknown variable and such that we use the lowest one..?

 

[Accelerated_Evolution]

Hiding the outlier yadda. Like yeah it could be 6-A (or even 6-B), or it could be 5-B, 5-A, 5-C, High 5-A, low 4-C, hell I mean technically speaking it could probably even get above star lv depending on speed and the temp shift.

Using it as support for the lowest stuff, is just assuming the feat in question is that level and calling it a ay. What if the statement is actually a 4-C statement? How does that support 6-A?

It only acts as support if you use the lowest possible interpretation, but if we were arguing Mario was 5-B instead, would it be ok to use that statement as support there too because in theory it COULD be a 5-B feat too?

It's just arbitrarily picking an end out of literally trillions and going "it COULD be this so it's support", it's not at all solid.

there's better stuff to cling to anyway, ice feats suck to scale

The Wonder Flower feat ins't being used as a support for the High 6-A proposal, though

 

[Eden_Warlock99]

Thing is, we always go with the low-end when feats are vague, this happens in like practically every verse I know? We don't disregard surface wipe statements cause those feats can reach 5-A with KE and as such become an outlier for High 6-A, no?

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

Thing is, we always go with the low-end when feats are vague, this happens in like practically every verse I know? We don't disregard surface wipe statements cause those feats can reach 5-A with KE and as such become an outlier for High 6-A, no?

I think tossing away something altogether that's clearly a pretty good feat or statement just because "well it could be higher than the low end who knows" is very reductive and generally goes against how things are done on the wiki.

 

[Chariot190]

isnt the point is because there's a bunch of unknown variable and such that we use the lowest one..?

That shit don't work when the gap is like 100000000000x any it can realistically be ANY of those and just going with the lowest possible interpretation and acting like it's legitimate support is just cherry picking a end to suit one's needs. Like you didn't answer the question, if instead of 6-A, we were arguing 5-B, would it suddenly be a supporting feat for 5-B because it could be that level as well?

The lowest possible interpretation isn't support for High 6-A anyway, it's like a hundred times lower so it's just a weird one off standalone "feat" if you assume the lowest possible means.

Thing is, we always go with the low-end when feats are vague, this happens in like practically every verse I know? We don't disregard surface wipe statements cause those feats can reach 5-A with KE and as such become an outlier for High 6-A, no?

We actually do. A surface wipe statement has a general ballpark it's going to be in, after a certain point it's no longer surface wiping.
But that only works even then if we have info like timeframe, singular attack, etc.

If someone just said they could surface wipe without elaborating, we wouldn't do shit because even a supersonic 8-C could raze the planet if given the chance.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

We actually do. A surface wipe statement has a general ballpark it's going to be in, after a certain point it's no longer surface wiping.
But that only works even then if we have info like timeframe, singular attack, etc.

If someone just said they could surface wipe without elaborating, we wouldn't do shit because even a supersonic 8-C could raze the planet if given the chance.

Dont think questioning timeframe really works here either since it would have to freeze the sun fast enough in order to not just get melted while it's happening. Singular attack or not dunno

 

[Chariot190]

Dont think questioning timeframe really works here either since it would have to freeze the sun fast enough in order to not just get melted while it's happening. Singular attack or not dunno

You realize that in itself is a huge range right? It could be half a second, or it could literally take like a few dozen million years.
And that isn't even me being hyperbolic, the minimum timeframe would be about that. What needs to be outpaced is the sun's radiative processes and nuclear fusion, the ice flower ig in this context would be cooling it faster than the Sun generates heat and radiates it. The sun's big heat energy of ten fucktrillion joules (idk i forget the exact value, i just copied it off google and did the math), would makes the process long af, leading to a minimum timeframe of around 30-40 million years. But you also need to remember, the cooling continuously offsets the Sun’s heat production and radiation. The freezing outpaces thawing because the heat removal surpasses the Sun's natural energy replenishment through nuclear fusion and radiative loss, it's basically a net-loss thing, if we're talking the BARE minimum needed to simply outpace the sun's ability to thaw itself, while freezing it over, it would literally be something dumb like 40 million years due to the scale of the sun itself. that's the tldr but like, you get me dude.

But that's JUST the minimum based on your own argument.
The very fact the ice is cold enough to freeze millions of degrees hot plasma means thawing that shit out, ain't even a concern really if we're being realistic, I doubt the intent behind the statement was "it'll take like a million years lmao".

Which also brings into question the temperature shift, in order to freeze the core the temp drop would need to be nearly -273c, almost AZ, but if that's how cold the Ice Flower is, the freezing the outer layers of a sun would be piss easy in theory? But freezing the outer layers would also inversely effect the sun's own radiative energy and fusion processes as halfassedly explained above right? So that's a whole other can of worms.

I could go on, you really don't get how ass and or how dumb this feat could be, the actual science behind it is obnoxious af i looked into a bit for metroid

There's no less than 5 variable factors to the statement in question, each one working as a sliding scale, effecting each other, and thus the result.

 

[TartaChocholate]

We don't have tier 7 Plat despite the existence of like 3-4 feats on that scale that could be argued to scale if you squint when they have like 200 feats around 8-C with some of the higher ones taking effort for good reason.

Ah, ya. I legit didn't know that regarding Jojo. And come to think about it, given this answer is coming from you, Zelda also has some pretty measured tiering all things considered. Also, you and Dust also wanted to give it a go with FFVII Remake, but then I butted in being stupid and killed the mood >_>;

 

[DaReaperMan]

Ah, ya. I legit didn't know that regarding Jojo. And come to think about it, given this answer is coming from you, Zelda also has some pretty measured tiering all things considered. Also, you and Dust also wanted to give it a go with FFVII Remake, but then I butted in being stupid and killed the mood >_>;

Oh so you killed the mood huh? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

 

[The_Almighty_Wholesome]

I agree with High 6-A myself, and in my opinion should be valid to use, though it’s not like my peasant tier vote is substantial in the end lmao