• 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.

(STAFF ONLY) EE AP revision

KLOL506 said:
I mean, you could message them on their walls and send them the link directly but sure, I guess.
Click to expand...
Nope, it is not my position to do so, I offered assistance, not a suggestion, thus I am not even trying to argue for or against it.

Anyway, the sandbox is pretty much editable and accessible for everyone. So if there are still complaints, feel free to do adjust it.
 
Last edited:
Antvasima said:
@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @DarkDragonMedeus @Damage3245 @Elizhaa @LordGriffin1000 @Deagonx @IdiosyncraticLawyer @KingTempest @Mr._Bambu @ByAsura @DemonGodMitchAubin @Crabwhale

Does ImmortalDread's reworked draft seem acceptable to you?

vsbattles.fandom.com

ImmortalDread/Existence Erasure

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com

vsbattles.com

(STAFF ONLY) EE AP revision

For what it's worth, I also agree with DT's proposal.
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com
Click to expand...
This does not clarify whether it is decided sub Tier 2 EE is allowed as AP, which I was against. In general it looks fine.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
This does not clarify whether it is decided sub Tier 2 EE is allowed as AP, which I was against. In general it looks fine.
Click to expand...
From the looks at the bullet points, it seems like sub-Tier 2 EE can be noted as AP if it doesn't align with the characters physical stats.
 
Damage3245 said:
From the looks at the bullet points, it seems like sub-Tier 2 EE can be noted as AP if it doesn't align with the characters physical stats.
Click to expand...
Lightly implied, yes, not certain if that's intentional though. I still disagree if it is.
 
Mr._Bambu said:
This does not clarify whether it is decided sub Tier 2 EE is allowed as AP, which I was against.
Click to expand...
DT was fine with sub Tier 2 EE as being AP, as he noted with his Planet level example. Ultima also agreed with DT.

Of course, it should be noted that scaling EE to physicals in any case would be case-by-case as per what Ultima noted.
 
KLOL506 said:
DT was fine with sub Tier 2 EE as being AP, as he noted with his Planet level example. Ultima also agreed with DT.

Of course, it should be noted that scaling EE to physicals in any case would be case-by-case as per what Ultima noted.
Click to expand...
I mean that's cool, and I disagree.
 
I am not trying to contest for those two consultants because they obviously know their overall stance better than me trying to reason it for them (logically speaking). And this should go to everyone, since you may create misunderstandings under their names.

All I can say is the consequences of having absolutely no tier for EE/creation feats (environmental destruction) are that we are going through a tough cleaning process in more than 2000 profiles, presumably. Is it really that important to undertake this huge task for a simple addition to tiers, especially when they still don't even correlate with their overall statistics? You are administrators of the wiki, and you should probably possess more knowledge on this matter than I do.

Again, I am not trying to contest here since my sole purpose is to fix the page and the draft in question. However, I feel it's indispensable to at least acknowledge and take responsibility for it.
 
Last edited:
ImmortalDread said:
I am not trying to contest for those two consultants because they obviously know their overall stance better than me trying to reason it for them (logically speaking). And this should go to everyone, since you may create misunderstandings under their name.

All I can say is the consequences of having absolutely no tier for EE/creation feats (environmental destruction) are that we are going through a tough cleaning process in more than 2000 profiles, presumably. Is it really that important to undertake this huge task for a simple addition to tiers, especially when they still don't even correlate with their overall statistics? You are administrators of the wiki, and you should probably possess more knowledge on this matter than I do.

Again, I am not trying to contest here since my sole purpose is to fix the page and the draft in question. However, I feel it's important to at least acknowledge and take responsibility for it.
Click to expand...
This problem further solidifies my agreement with DontTalk and Ultima here.
 
When we have changed our Tiering System page to state we can have "10-B, 3-C via Illusion Creation (Created an illusion the size of a galaxy)", I will agree.
 
@ImmortalDread

Have you adjusted your draft page based on DontTalk's, Ultima's, and my conclusions here? As you mentioned above, it isn't realistic for us to go around and edit the pages for all characters with less than tier 2 existence erasure.
 
Antvasima said:
@ImmortalDread

Have you adjusted your draft page based on DontTalk's, Ultima's, and my conclusions here? As you mentioned above, it isn't realistic for us to go around and edit the pages for all characters with less than tier 2 existence erasure.
Click to expand...
The current draft is based on DT and Ultima's viewpoint, but we simply lack their own last evaluation on it.

Antvasima said:
Also, what is the staff tally here so far?
Click to expand...
Only @Mr._Bambu and @Damage3245 are opposed to it. (not fully, but with the notion that any lower tier 2 EE should be removed)
 
So far the votes look like this:

Agreement with Sub-Tier 2 EE being AP: 5 - Antvasima, DontTalkDT, Ultima_Reality, DarkDragonMedeus, Elizhaa, (Most of the votes agreeing to DT's line of reasoning here, and Ultima agreeing with DT and also giving some other notes of scaling EE AP to physicals on a case-by-case basis)

Disagreement with Sub-Tier 2 EE being AP: 3 - Damage3245, Mr._Bambu, Agnaa,
 
Last edited:
Antvasima said:
Okay. Thank you for your reply. 🙏

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT

What do you think about this draft page? Does it seem acceptable to you?

vsbattles.fandom.com

ImmortalDread/Existence Erasure

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
Click to expand...
This looks fine, to me, though this part:

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 “Universe level+ environmental destruction with Existence Erasure".
Click to expand...

I'd change to something like:

This is determined by the scope of the erasure, as well as what is being erased. A good rule-of-thumb regarding this is cases where the Existence Erasure is of a much higher tier than the character's other statistics, to the point it bears explicitly mentioning it separately. For example, if a character is physically 9-B but is capable of erasing an entire timeline with their abilities, such a thing would be rated as "9-B. Low 2-C Environmental Destruction with Existence Erasure
Click to expand...

The usage of "permissible" here is odd, though, as if it is something optional, rather than mandatory:

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.
Click to expand...

I'd change that as well.
 
Antvasima said:
Okay. Thank you for your reply. 🙏

@Ultima_Reality @DontTalkDT

What do you think about this draft page? Does it seem acceptable to you?

vsbattles.fandom.com

ImmortalDread/Existence Erasure

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
Click to expand...
I think the first bullet point should mention that it's only environmental destruction if it doesn't correlate with the attack potency of the technique itself, and otherwise should be listed as "Universe level+ via [name of the technique]". Environmental Destruction is non-combat applicable AP, while this may be a separate form of combat applicable AP, after all.
 
DontTalkDT said:
I think the first bullet point should mention that it's only environmental destruction if it doesn't correlate with the attack potency of the technique itself, and otherwise should be listed as "Universe level+ via [name of the technique]". Environmental Destruction is non-combat applicable AP, while this may be a separate form of combat applicable AP, after all.
Click to expand...
How would we word this?
 
Since DontTalk hasn't responded to the above pings, I'll take the liberty to write up something for his suggestions myself:

This is determined by the scope of the erasure, as well as what is being erased. A good rule-of-thumb regarding this is cases where the Existence Erasure is of a much higher tier than the character's other statistics, to the point it bears explicitly mentioning it separately. For example, if a character is physically 9-B but is capable of erasing an entire timeline with their abilities, such a thing would be rated as "9-B. Low 2-C" Environmental Destruction with Existence Erasure

Note, also, that Existence Erasure can be listed as conventional AP, as opposed to simple Environmental Destruction, if the character has demonstrated the ability to employ it in a fashion resembling regular attacks (E.g. Focusing it though energy beams and the like)
Click to expand...
 
Antvasima said:
If Ultima's suggested text coincides with what DontTalk has stated above, it can probably be applied, yes. 🙏
Click to expand...
Done. This can be closed now.
vsbattles.fandom.com

Existence Erasure

Existence Erasure is the simple power to remove something from existence, leaving nothing behind, a level of destruction beyond incineration, vaporization, and atomization. Rather than just reducing something to its constituent parts, this ability leaves absolutely nothing behind. Powerful...
vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
 
I only just found this thread, but I want to point out that I strongly, strongly disagree.

It is completely implausible to find an equivalent joule value for erasing something from existence. This sort of thing cannot meaningfully be put into our AP section, and trying to do so conflicts with other rules that we have on AP, such as this note on our Tiering System page:
Tiers between 9-A and 3-B, even those which do correspond with their namesakes, should not be assigned unless there are accepted calculations, multipliers, and/or reliably stated precise Joule values that correspond with those ratings, as many verses can have their own context result in these feats being above or below their namesakes. The exceptions are that the lower borders of 5-B, 4-C, 4-B, 4-A, 3-C, and 3-B can be considered standard calculations for destroying a planet, a star, a solar system, two or more solar systems, a galaxy, and two or more galaxies respectively, and adding those tiers based on those specific feats is allowed.
Click to expand...
Neither DT nor Ultima provided a solution for this problem.

When it was noted for Creation, we made a table on the Creation Feats page to categorise the inapplicable feats, but such a thing wasn't done here, and seems nonsensical here.

If we were to draw that equivalence, why would we say that EEing a rock takes 2 orders of magnitude less energy than fragmenting it?

It's even worse hearing some people talking about EE scaling to other attacks through a UES. That just makes things even more flagrantly wrong, since rather than being a loose approximation it becomes a precise value for physical blows.

I also think that it's generally misleading, since a character with 8-B EE can still EE a character who is tier 5, as long as their body's small enough, since EE negates durability. I think that such scale should just be explained in the range section, or at most, with a "can negate durability with Existence Erasure" in the tier/AP section.

For now, I'll leave the thread closed, since I'd like to get a quick staff view on this topic before re-opening.
 
Last edited:
If we have to grant AP via EE, which I disagree with for Agnaa's reasons, I'd do it like our Creation feats, which have an equally arbitrary reason of just using the object's weight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Kaguya in Naruto has L2C
Replies
16
Views
2K
UchihaSlayer96
UchihaSlayer96
DavidTPPM
About Aizens existence erasure
2
Replies
60
Views
4K
Arcker123
Arcker123
Flashlight237
Upscaling: Should There Be A Number For It?
Replies
12
Views
1K
Flashlight237
Flashlight237
Chris_only9271
How to measure hax?, and what is the boundary of Durability Negation?.
Replies
12
Views
3K
Chris_only9271
Chris_only9271
Fwyzzverse
  • Locked
Timeframe | Creation Feats (Revision)
2
Replies
41
Views
5K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top