(STAFF ONLY) EE AP revision

[KLOL506]

For what it's worth, I also agree with DT's proposal.

 

[DontTalkDT]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality

I thought that creation scales to tiering by size alone rather than energy, or do I misremember?

We go with things that roughly correspond to size, but not exactly.
Up to High 6-A we decided to use the mass/weight of the object after much debate, as people thought it more reasonable to not scale creating 1000 m^3 of stone and 1000 m^3 of air as the same level.
Afterwards, we use GBE for things in the celestial body range and then for solar system and upwards we basically go roughly by size. (Which in practice means inverse square law, since that's what we used to determine the corresponding values on the AP scale)
For Universes and stuff we only go by size, as physics, and hence energy, is meaningless at those tiers.

Also, isn't anything that affects universal spacetime in its entirety, i.e. Low 2-C and above, technically a form of existence erasure?

It definitely is breaking physics and can not be described as enrgy in the common sense. Whether it's existence erasure... well, logically it might be, but fiction of course depicts things however it likes.

 

[KLOL506]

Not to mention that for the record we do tier hax as AP where it's a notable-enough feat like the examples DT mentioned so... yeah.

I see no reason to deviate from that standard.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay, so why can't we continue to rate existence erasure as tiers relative to the size or scale of what is being erased then?

 

[ImmortalDread]

We can, I think DT is opposing to rate it as “AP”. We however simply can rate it like this:

Tier: At least 9-C, likely higher With Blazin' Move, likely 9-B, 2-A via Existence Erasure

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. That seems reasonable to me. Thank you.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

Well, what should I say?
I'm generally still of the opinion that it (and other similar hax for that matter, like reality warping) should be treated by the same standards as for creation.

What placing it in the AP section is concerned: I would do it if it's particularly notable, i.e. above the characters usual tier. Noting the Tier 9 character can erase planets from existence seems in interest of the reader of the profile. It's a technique which self-evidently is much stronger than everything else the character has and deserves to be given particular attention. Otherwise, the character would just seem misrepresented.
This goes double when we get to incorporeal Tier 1 god characters that fight exclusively via reality warping and other technically not quantifiable yet self-evident stuff.

I agree with this, for the matter

 

[Antvasima]

We can, I think DT is opposing to rate it as “AP”. We however simply can rate it like this:

So is Dread's solution above acceptable then?

 

[Ultima_Reality]

So is Dread's solution above acceptable then?

It seems fine to me. Though it's important to note, of course, that there are cases where the Existence Erasure feat has direct ties to the character's overall AP, so it isn't always a separate rating altogether.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. We seem to be in agreement then. Thank you for helping out.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Sure, we can simply add it as a note. Is anyone here would like to handle the overall thread, or should I take the task? I would suggest a final post to summarize everything and include our conclusion and its respective draft.

Edit: Apparently @omegabronic will take over the thread. I will be unfollowing the thread.

 

[Omegabronic]

Sure, we can simply add it as a note. Is anyone here would like to handle the overall thread, or should I take the task? I would suggest a final post to summarize everything and include our conclusion and its respective draft.

This is the current draft for the note, i don't think that i understood your suggestion 100%, so please feel free to modify this to fit into your proposal:

"Existence Erasure" can be included in a character's Attack Potency, depending on the circumstances. This is determined by the scope of the erasure and what is being erased. For instance, if a character were to erase an entire universal space-time with the "Existence Erasure" ability, it would be classified as "universal+ environmental destruction with Existence Erasure". While this does not scale to the character's Attack Power, it is still a form of damage inflicted on a specific area using a unique ability, similar to how creation feats are typically categorized. It is to be noted that this type of rating would not be listed for structures bellow tier 2 since Existence Erasure has no joule value and as such is not applying real energy, but in the case of tier 2 structures and above, there is little difference between "destroying" and "erasing" such structures, making Existence Erasure qualify for such tiers in "joule energy" per say"

 

[KLOL506]

It seems fine to me. Though it's important to note, of course, that there are cases where the Existence Erasure feat has direct ties to the character's overall AP, so it isn't always a separate rating altogether.

This should also be noted down.

 

[Antvasima]

This should also be noted down.

Yes, this seems fine to me as well.

 

[Antvasima]

Edit: Apparently @omegabronic will take over the thread. I will be unfollowing the thread.

?

 

[ImmortalDread]

?

This is the current draft for the note, i don't think that i understood your suggestion 100%, so please feel free to modify this to fit into your proposal:

"Existence Erasure" can be included in a character's Attack Potency, depending on the circumstances. This is determined by the scope of the erasure and what is being erased. For instance, if a character were to erase an entire universal space-time with the "Existence Erasure" ability, it would be classified as "universal+ environmental destruction with Existence Erasure". While this does not scale to the character's Attack Power, it is still a form of damage inflicted on a specific area using a unique ability, similar to how creation feats are typically categorized. It is to be noted that this type of rating would not be listed for structures bellow tier 2 since Existence Erasure has no joule value and as such is not applying real energy, but in the case of tier 2 structures and above, there is little difference between "destroying" and "erasing" such structures, making Existence Erasure qualify for such tiers in "joule energy" per say"

I suppose, he handled it.

Although, in other thought, I think I need to edit it a bit. I will create a sandbox for this, so staff members can evaulate it properly.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for helping out.

 

[Omegabronic]

Will try to twek the note tommorow, i suppose, tonight i am kind of busy

 

[ImmortalDread]

I have done so

ImmortalDread/Existence Erasure

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Antvasima]

I have done so

ImmortalDread/Existence Erasure

vsbattles.fandom.com

Thank you for helping out.

Which staff members have helped out in this thread previously, so I can call for them?

 

[ImmortalDread]

@DontTalkDT, @Ultima_Reality, @KLOL506, @DarkDragonMedeus, @IdiosyncraticLawyer, @Damage3245, @KingTempest, @Mr._Bambu, @Deagonx, @LordGriffin1000, @ByAsura, @Elizhaa, @DemonGodMitchAubin, @Crabwhale

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I am already notified and already said what I agreed with even though my name has been misplaced a lot on what I agree with; I should have my name listed alongside DontTalkDT. And given I posted, there no need to ping me again.

 

[Antvasima]

I have done so

ImmortalDread/Existence Erasure

vsbattles.fandom.com

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @KLOL506 @IdiosyncraticLawyer @Damage3245 @KingTempest @Mr._Bambu @Deagonx @LordGriffin1000 @ByAsura @Elizhaa, @DemonGodMitchAubin @Crabwhale

Does the above page draft seem acceptable, or does it need to be modified, and if so, in what ways?

 

[Damage3245]

Looks fine to me.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for your reply.

 

[KLOL506]

AFAIK, Ultima and DT's sentiments revolve around not hard-capping EE feats to Tier 2 and above, as DT's example includes erasing planets, which would be 5-B.

Well, what should I say?
I'm generally still of the opinion that it (and other similar hax for that matter, like reality warping) should be treated by the same standards as for creation.

What placing it in the AP section is concerned: I would do it if it's particularly notable, i.e. above the characters usual tier. Noting the Tier 9 character can erase planets from existence seems in interest of the reader of the profile. It's a technique which self-evidently is much stronger than everything else the character has and deserves to be given particular attention. Otherwise, the character would just seem misrepresented.

So I'd suggest removing this part and its subsection completely:

It should be noted that this rating won't be assigned to structures below tier 2, as Existence Erasure lacks a joule value and doesn't involve actual energy transfer.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I have done so.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you both for helping out.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

The draft seems fine enough.

 

[Antvasima]

Wait a minute. After reading through the draft, it does not seem to follow what I think that I, DontTalk, and Ultima agreed about, i.e. that EE should scale to attack potency based on size or scale.

ImmortalDread/Existence Erasure

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Damage3245]

Wait a minute. After reading through the draft, it does not seem to follow what I think that I, DontTalk, and Ultima agreed about, i.e. that EE should scale to attack potency based on size or scale.

Isn't EE scaling directly to attack potency what many staff members here disagreed with?

 

[Deagonx]

I believe the compromise was that it would only scale above a certain tier.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

With KLOL's mention applied, I think the draft looks good.

 

[KLOL506]

I believe the compromise was that it would only scale above a certain tier.

Ultima stated this:

It seems fine to me. Though it's important to note, of course, that there are cases where the Existence Erasure feat has direct ties to the character's overall AP, so it isn't always a separate rating altogether.

DT also stated that in the case it is not tied to one's physicals, EE should still be fine to list as a separate AP rating akin to Environmental Destruction.

Well, what should I say?
I'm generally still of the opinion that it (and other similar hax for that matter, like reality warping) should be treated by the same standards as for creation.

What placing it in the AP section is concerned: I would do it if it's particularly notable, i.e. above the characters usual tier. Noting the Tier 9 character can erase planets from existence seems in interest of the reader of the profile. It's a technique which self-evidently is much stronger than everything else the character has and deserves to be given particular attention. Otherwise, the character would just seem misrepresented.
This goes double when we get to incorporeal Tier 1 god characters that fight exclusively via reality warping and other technically not quantifiable yet self-evident stuff.

 

[Elizhaa]

The updated draft seem fine.

 

[KLOL506]

@ImmortalDread After reading your draft...

• While this does not scale to the character's Attack Power, it is still a form of damage inflicted on a specific area using a unique ability, similar to how creation feats are typically categorized.

Is automatically rendered redundant by the following:

• In certain instances, the Existence Erasure ability is closely linked to the character's overall Attack Potency, making it not necessarily a distinct rating on its own.

Plus whatever else Ultima and DT said.

Basically, it should be reworded according to what DT and Ultima said, that in case there is no evidence that the ability is tied to the character's physical statistics (AKA their striking strength and physical durability), it should still be fine to list as an AP feat separate from the character's physical statistics similar to how Creation Feats are categorized (Such feats are also typically categorized as Environmental Destruction Feats).

And of course, whether the ability scales to physical stats (Striking Strength and Physical Durability) or not, should, as usual, be determined on a case-by-case basis.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I will fix it and thanks for sharing the issue.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Is this a better version?

In instances where there is no discernible correlation between the ability and the character's physical attributes, such as striking strength and physical durability, it is permissible to list the feat as an Attack Potency feat independent of the character's physical statistics. This categorization aligns with how Creation Feats are typically classified, often falling under the designation of Environmental Destruction Feats.

• However, the determination of whether the ability scales with the character's physical stats, should continue to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, as is the norm.

I added the links in the drafts. So you may review the draft to see how it looks like at the end.

 

[KLOL506]

Seems okay, but you might wanna consult DT and Ultima to see if it's good in their books as well.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Klol, you speak as I have some super mod permissions and omnipotent powers to summon them here, you are the guy here with pings permission, not me.