• 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.

Steven Universe CRT Thing Part 2

WeeklyBattles said:
Pretty sure the creator of the show is more trustworthy than some guy who worked for her
Click to expand...
By "some guy who worked for her" are you referring to the guy who wrote the comics, or to Ian who in his Tweet said they're non-canon? If the latter then we should clarify that Ian isn't JUST some guy who worked for Rebecca, he has been her boyfriend for like a decade and they are married now, LOL! He was the supervising-director of the series and did storyboards with her sometimes, although to be fair the final word on everything is hers, not his, meaning that regardless of whether you were referring to Ian or not, your point is possibly still valid!!!! Here is my reasoning (wall of text as usual but that's because as you guys know I like to be thorough in my logic to help lay issues to rest, but of course I will concede if the majority still disagree):

An analogy to help: Let's say Eiichiro Oda's (the mangaka of One Piece) wife Chiaki Inaba were to make some statement about canon for One Piece, like "the movie Strong World wasn't actually canon after-all." Granted, being a huge fangirl of the series who married Oda, she probably knows answers to all the major questions as well as the outline of his plans, and I highly suspect he gets input from her on his plot-decisions since he LOVES input from fans and is married to one. But regardless, if Eiichiro Oda himself were to make a statement contradicting the (hypothetical) one I came up with from her, saying "Strong World IS canon" or "Strong World is SECONDARY/SEMI-canon," then we would have to take his word over hers, as he is the ultimate authority and actual creator of the series.

Based on this analogy, ya guys see why we should probably take Rebecca's statement more seriously than Ian's? Another thing to consider here is that Ian LEFT as a director for the show in 2015, and only came back to do a couple storyboards in the original-series. In the end, he only storyboarded or co-wrote four of the original-series episodes, plus the movie. Based on my analogy plus those reasons, I think it is safe to take Rebecca's word over his and consider the comics Secondary Canon, meaning we can consider them canon as long as they don't contradict the show like Weekly said (and they don't).

Also yeah we have some 7-A calcs for the dura of Rubies which are consistent with the comic-feats anyway. What are the issues with those calcs? They got rammed into at relavistic speeds, right? There some issue with that reasoning?
 
Anyway, it's been half an hour and no link was given to Rebecca's statement, so, until evidence is shown, it is safe to assume that Rebecca's statement that the second comics series is canon does not actually exist.
 
Paulo.junior.969 said:
Anyway, it's been half an hour and no link was given to Rebecca's statement, so, until evidence is shown, it is safe to assume that Rebecca's statement that the second comics series is canon does not actually exist.
Click to expand...
Ah well crap.

So what about those Ruby durability-feats though? They seem absolutely, completely solid to me. What are the "issues" with them? They got rammed at Relativistic speeds by the Roaming Eye and tanked it with no damage, right? What's the "issue?"
 
Not really, people were still arguing about it, until it just died down and was never finished; unless you're referring to another thread, and if that's the case, feel free to link it.

Regardless, this doesn't really have anything to do with my point that Anti-Gravity isn't canon.
 
By the way, still waiting for the link to Rebecca Sugar's statement that the comics are canon, plus proof that she wasn't only talking about the first series.
 
Paulo.junior.969 said:
By the way, still waiting for the link to Rebecca Sugar's statement that the comics are canon, plus proof that she wasn't only talking about the first series.
Click to expand...
Cant find it
 
WeeklyBattles said:
The canon comics have a 7-A feat on top of the 7-A feats in the show so
Click to expand...
The only 7-A feat from the comics is from Anti-Gravity, which is from 2017. Fist series ended in 2015, and everything afterwards is non-canon, to the point in which we even have a direct statement that Too Cool for School (which is from the same series as Anti-Gravity, and came out one years earlier) isn't canon.

If you're referring to another feat, feel free to link it.
 
Well, one of the justifications for Connie's AP is "Able to block and deflect the Training Robot's attacks which were capable of destroying cars".

Isn't that 9-A? Although you potentially argue that was due to the sword's durability, not Connie's AP, but still might be worth bringing up.
 
Okay so Weekly and I were wrong; Sorry Weekly. Rebecca's statement was from 2015, after the first comic series but before Anti-Gravity in 2017. Ian's Tweet was from 2019. So we're going to have to let go of the issue of the comic. Contrary to what some seem to think (and I don't blame you guys since I've been a dick), when the logic for a point against mine is more solid than my own, I will concede the point WITHOUT screaming like a banshee, lol. Remember early in the thread when you guys proved me wrong about Connie's LS and I immediatley conceded I was wrong because the logic was more solid than my own? Oh well.Thus THESE are the things we need to discuss (another wall of text but as always I'm just trying to be THOROUGH putting everything organized in one place, Soupywolf5 you can feel free to add any of these discussion-points to the OP):

1. We need to talk about the Ruby feats. It looks like in the thread, the only ISSUE was whether folks scaling way above them are 7-A+ rather than 7-A; Is there a thread in which it was questioned whether the Rubies themselves are 7-A? If so, can we get a link? If we decide the Rubies are 7-A and the fact that even the likes of Pearl or Amethyst consider them fodder is solid enough to make Garnet 7-A+, then nothing changes.

2. IF we decide the Rubies are 7-A but Garnet doesn't get 7-A+ then we need to take that "+" out of the tiering for characters. But in that case we will need to decide on and THOROUGHLY DISCUSS the tiering of powerful-but-below-Malachite/Alexandrite-level fusions like Opal, Sugilite, Smoky (although their Pink State stays the same), possibly Sunstone (although in fact shouldn't Sunstone be UPGRADED to match the Diamond Mech due to overpowering its stomp???), Rainbow Quartz 2.0, MAYBE Stevonnie, etc! Question is: Will all the 6-C fusions get downgraded to At Least High 7-A while the High 7-A ones (like Smoky) get downgraded to 7-A+? And should ROSE (big question) be downgraded to At Least High 7-A in this scenario?

3. IF we decide EVERYTHING about the Rubies is unacceptable, we will then have to re-determine the tiering for all below-Lapis-level non-fused Gems and then make major downgrades. Then just as in Point 2 above, we will THEN have to discuss the below-Alexandrite-level fusions (except maybe Sunstone WHO MIGHT NEED AN UPGRADE, and obviously not Pink State Smoky) as well as Rose, and what tiering they should get.

Finally: WE (including myself) MISSED TWO ADDITIONAL POWERS THAT WE NEED TO ADD FOR PINK STATE STEVEN! Yeeesh. Okay so first: He has Sound Manipulation, obviously. But he also likely needs Energy Projection!!! Why? Because the "screams" seem to only be a CARRIER for actually-visible waves of pink energy which damage his surroundings far more than the volume of the screams should be able to. Do people agree with this and if so, should I add those abilities (with explanations) to Pink State's key? It seems kinda straightforward but I need input from you guys.
 
Opal already has a 6-C feat and the rest of the fusions scale to or below her, so all of the fusion's tiers (Barring Garnet, Stevonnie, and Bluebird Azurite) would be fine (Assuming we even need to downgrade the 7-A characters, if the Rubie's feat is usable)
 
Paulo.junior.969 said:
Well, one of the justifications for Connie's AP is "Able to block and deflect the Training Robot's attacks which were capable of destroying cars".

Isn't that 9-A? Although you potentially argue that was due to the sword's durability, not Connie's AP, but still might be worth bringing up.
Click to expand...
Could be worth looking into
 
Them not using their fusions is seen a PIS, so they're no counted, so we only consider the Gems in their base forms when using Garnet's statement that the Light Cannon was the only thing powerful enough.

Living island was off-screen, and breaking Steven's bubble at that point in the series would be High 6-A, which would be an outlier, since it would make them comparable to the Diamonds.
 
Them being comparable to the Diamonds is consistent because Connie and Bismuth have been able to damage their Warships
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Soupywolf5
Minor SU Additions
Replies
13
Views
2K
GodlyCharmander
GodlyCharmander
Soupywolf5
Steven Universe CRT Thing
10 11 12
Replies
465
Views
8K
Goodyfresh
Goodyfresh
Robot972
Save/Attack the Light Abilities
Replies
6
Views
561
Robot972
Robot972
Dargoo_Faust
Newer Newer Newer SU continuation revision
9 10 11
Replies
407
Views
7K
CinnabarManx421
CinnabarManx421
WeeklyBattles
  • Locked
Erza Scarlet vs Pearl
2 3
Replies
107
Views
3K
WeeklyBattles
WeeklyBattles
Back
Top