- 12,673
- 9,625
- Thread starter
- #201
Can't remember it too well myself, but should be fine.
-
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.
Superman (Rebirth) 2-A removal
- Thread starter Confluctor
- Start date
- Status
- 11,807
- 7,372
Yeah sure
- 3,270
- 1,096
Our literal foot note says this
- 5,879
- 1,072
Sure
- 5,879
- 1,072
So to summarise everything, the suns weren't even normal suns, so its not like any sun can increase his power to this extent, which means it is unnecessary to have the key on his profile due to our guidelines. This is what most people agreed on?
- 16,008
- 8,262
Option 2 seems fine.
It seems fine.
- 11,141
- 14,180
You're free to disagree but saying that it is "extremely ******* stupid and disingenuous" doesn't sit right with me. There is no objective proof here that says the stars that look like normal suns are qualitatively different. It's an assumption extrapolated on the basis of "oh well but the dimension is different so let's assume it". Especially when Superman can absorb this energy just like he does with normal sunlight supports my point. I'd need some kind of direct evidence for the claim that these stars are radiating 1-A solar energy somehow, I don't get how people can simply assume such an illogical thing without evidence.
I can also say something like "people are making wonky unfounded assumptions to explain a mere inconsistency in an already inconsistent medium simply to stick a high rating on the profile", but I didn't say that despite feeling that "6th dimensional suns" seems sillier. Speak your opinion but respect other's as well, like I did.
@Antvasima you can ping more admins and thread mods to evaluate which alternative to go with. So far six have stated their views.
Last edited:
- 11,807
- 7,372
Meh, I don't see why further staff input is needed from people not already pinged yet, only real reason I can see for it is to overwhelm my side of the argument by having AKM's argument featured greater in contrast to mine, which as I already say is ignorant of greater verse context.
More I think about it the less subjective it is, especially since AKM's argument does the cardinal sin of assuming a positive, that being the "if it looks like a duck" line of reasoning for a dimension explicitly having things such as different physics to ours and thus equating it, which is immensely disagreeable in regards to higher tier, where analogues are REQUIRED for anything to ever be indexable (unless it's at the risk of laughably alienating audience), and wiki has ALWAYS, across multiple definitions, allowed for these analogies.
So i retract my statement this is a votecount, and instead saying by accepted wiki standards my narrative is favoured more than AKM's, something that will require fundamental sitewide changes to remedy as being otherwise.
Thus this reverts to 1-on-1 debate.
More I think about it the less subjective it is, especially since AKM's argument does the cardinal sin of assuming a positive, that being the "if it looks like a duck" line of reasoning for a dimension explicitly having things such as different physics to ours and thus equating it, which is immensely disagreeable in regards to higher tier, where analogues are REQUIRED for anything to ever be indexable (unless it's at the risk of laughably alienating audience), and wiki has ALWAYS, across multiple definitions, allowed for these analogies.
So i retract my statement this is a votecount, and instead saying by accepted wiki standards my narrative is favoured more than AKM's, something that will require fundamental sitewide changes to remedy as being otherwise.
Thus this reverts to 1-on-1 debate.
- 168,537
- 77,322
As far as I can tell, the footnote is wrong in that case.
- 168,537
- 77,322
But going by the greater verse context, this is a ridiculously extreme inconsistency.
Well, as I said earlier, the compromise solution that I suggested earlier is better than nothing, but I am still uneasy with this feat, especially as it fulfills all 5 general outlier requirements as far as I can tell.
Our fundamental wiki rules for superhero comic book scaling currently state that we should focus on using consistency and explicit power display feats to scale from, rather than one-time "everybody can fight everybody" matchups against opponents with infinitely higher feats than themselves and consistently comparable characters.
Given that the editor for the story clarified that Superman did not destroy the multiverse, he simply gave the World Forger a black eye, and that it was a brief power-up that lasted for a few pages and completely contradicts the gained power from previous sun-dip-charge power-ups, our quality control wiki standards actually strongly support that we should ignore it, as far as I am aware.
If AKM wants further input, I personally don't mind if he gets it.
- 168,537
- 77,322
@DontTalkDT @DarkDragonMedeus @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @Qawsedf234 @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Damage3245 @Starter_Pack @Ogbunabali @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @Dino_Ranger_Black @JustSomeWeirdo @Theglassman12 @Crabwhale @Eficiente @GyroNutz @DarkGrath @The_Wright_Way @Moritzva @Firestorm808 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Everything12 @Duedate8898 @Planck69 @KingTempest @QuasiYuri @Armorchompy @CrimsonStarFallen @UchihaSlayer96 @Confluctor @Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer
Your input or further input would be appreciated here. It is preferable if you read the entire preceding discussion from the start to properly understand the full context. My apologies.
- 11,141
- 14,180
Well, Ant and I agree with option 1. Damage leaned towards agreeing with it as well but he is fine with option 2 if there is supporting evidence. The only supporting evidence here is "it's the sixth dimension so the stars may be different" which isn't evidence but assumption when these stars function the same way as normal ones. You, Confluctor and Elizhaa agree with option 2. In such a scenario, it's better to call out more people and get their opinions as well.
You might think you're objectively more correct, and I would feel the same way about my take. We'd just go back to repeating the same arguments. Let others pitch in and decide which they feel should be more accurate here.
- 12,673
- 9,625
- Thread starter
- #213
The burden of the proof falls on the opposition who thinks the sun's are somehow normal, despite what the verse context says.
If you guys don't believe us, I recommend reading the whole arc which goes from JL 2018 19 - 25 to get the WHOLE context.
To summarize;
I can't get scans right now since I am at work, but if anyone wanna verify them, read the issues I mentioned above.
If you guys don't believe us, I recommend reading the whole arc which goes from JL 2018 19 - 25 to get the WHOLE context.
To summarize;
- Sixth dimension exists beyond the multiverse, it defys all forms of logic and reason. That's the whole purpose of this dimension is that impossible is actually possible.
- In addition, the batman gets a new machine which he uses to create dozens of suns or something, for the sole reason to empower Superman so he fight World Forger.
- And the whole story is about achieving the impossible and heroism shit.
I can't get scans right now since I am at work, but if anyone wanna verify them, read the issues I mentioned above.
- 11,141
- 14,180
1. Okay, we are not talking about the dimension. We are talking about the stars. The stars radiate the same energy that Superman absorbs on Earth, and the stars look exactly the same. Just because the dimension is different doesn't justify 1-A stars. Especially when in your next point you say that Batman created them, this point becomes null and void. It's not about the dimension anymore, it becomes about what Batman created.
2. Batman creating stars with his machine to empower Supes is alright. This doesn't tell us that they are 1-A stars. Batman could create normal stars to empower Supes because after all, stars do empower him. The point here is the boost is inconsistent this time because the story demanded it. Is there any proof where Batman says he is creating "special" stars that will empower Superman differently?
3. Most stories are about that. This is not a point.
- 12,673
- 9,625
- Thread starter
- #215
Yeah, with an extremely powerful new device that the world forger have him. He was asking him to use it for something else, but he instead used it to empower Superman.
Is there any proof he is creating normal stars?
No, but it's relevant here. These sort of things plays a heavy role in the outcome of this war. It is used as an amping thing throughout the entire 2/3 years long arc of Snyder on justice League.
The boost is inconsistent to some of you, sure. But not to the story or the lore/context of verse.
- 11,141
- 14,180
Fine. Batman could create stars with prep time when he has a machine. We have established this much.
Proof is needed to detract from normal. The only reason we are saying that these stars aren't normal is because they gave Supes an inconsistent boost. That's literally the same point which is being argued as an inconsistency here. So you can't use "since these stars gave Supes an inconsistent boost, these stars must be special". To prove that these stars are special, you have to show what these stars are doing that is objectively not normal besides that. And while I haven't seen anything that proves these stars aren't normal, I can at least see these stars burn and radiate solar energy just like a regular sun.
You're saying since B happens, it must mean A must be special. And I am questioning that B itself is an inconsistency going by previously established norms of consistency. So to prove that A is special, you can't use B. You have to bring a C that can prove A being special and thus justify the validity of B.
- 5,879
- 1,072
Hold on, the suns are comparable in size to the World Forger, right? That's literally proof they are 1-A in size. In fact, Superman is not 2D or non existent in comparison to these suns, implying he got a size increase which is common in DC. Its already accepted that World Forger is 1-A in size here
- 168,537
- 77,322
The story was very inconsistent.
First it was established that Perpetua in the 6th Dimension could hold the DC multiverse in her hand, with her children, including the World Forger, being of a comparable size there, and then, after the Justice League were sent there by Mister Mxyzptlk, the multiverse that he had constructed there to replace the old one was shown to function the same way as its predecessor, with the World Forger himself being displayed as a mocroscopic speck inside of it, just slightly larger than the Justice League members, who were of normal size compared to their environment.
First it was established that Perpetua in the 6th Dimension could hold the DC multiverse in her hand, with her children, including the World Forger, being of a comparable size there, and then, after the Justice League were sent there by Mister Mxyzptlk, the multiverse that he had constructed there to replace the old one was shown to function the same way as its predecessor, with the World Forger himself being displayed as a mocroscopic speck inside of it, just slightly larger than the Justice League members, who were of normal size compared to their environment.
- 5,879
- 1,072
I think its best to assume the JL were increased in size
- 12,673
- 9,625
- Thread starter
- #221
All the relevant scans I can remember - I will reread the arc soon and provide a better breakdown - but might take a while cause I am busy.
JL 2018 #19
I will post from others later,
JL 2018 #19
I will post from others later,
- 11,807
- 7,372
It's not.
It's not about consistency when it's a onetime scenario
If you want to argue World Forger isn't 1-A, or if Superman doesn't scale to him, clarify that, so I can focus on that argument.
Nah
If you did it without a single bit of elaboration from me and did it regardless, close the thread right now and say bluntly that you just don't want the feat on the page, this is ridiculous.
That's not how objective arguments work.
OBJECTIVITY CANNOT BE SUBJECTIVE, this is straight up wrong definitions.
Prove they're stars.
And Batman has created 1-A shit. Your point?
Again, prove they're stars in the exact same way as you understand them.
Normal in every sense of the word is, EXTRADIMENSIONAL ENTITIES aren't stars. Premise of your argument is flawed, aegue that, not other bullshit.
- 11,807
- 7,372
No that's just straight up ignoring context that they had to be amped to reached that degree.
- 5,879
- 1,072
Yes, so its a size increase which makes sense
- 168,537
- 77,322
In that case the multiverse within the 6th Dimension would have to have been of an infinitely higher 1-A size, which doesn't make any sense, given that it was going to replace the regular 3rd dimension DC multiverse.
- 11,141
- 14,180
No, that's what I am saying. According to that logic, they are all 1-A even before the sun dipping because they were amped. So these arguments are needless if we are going by that train of thought.
- 11,807
- 7,372
It's needless upon further context given, yeah, although without it the arguments you made against the previous train of thought were immensely flawed.
- 11,807
- 7,372
Anyways I'll return to this thread tomorrow, stress 'n' stuff. Don't take my silence for some concession here.
- 12,673
- 9,625
- Thread starter
- #230
??????
What? That was only one illusionary universe he had created.
Also to correct an earlier point of mine, I just remembered batman likely didn't create it but moved the sun's in the universe for superman. But I will reread it soon to clairfy
- 168,537
- 77,322
I have repeatedly explained that it does not fit at all with all other Superman feats, including the same types of power-ups.
That's the very definition of being inconsistent.
As I have explained many times earlier, and I think you have said that you agree with in the past, superhero comic books are recurrently narratively built on the "everybody can fight everybody" principle. Stan Lee has even explicitly admitted this himself in a YouTube video linked to in our Marvel and DC rules page. That is why our rules make it clear that we should focus on power display feats and consistency in portrayals, rather than temporary match-up results.
Well, that is what our rules say in any case, and they are necessary safeguards in order to not scale everybody to everybody.
I have already stated repeatedly that I find the feat extremely unreliable, just like you have stated the opposite. I am just as entitled to hold a view about this as you are.
The World Forger's multiverse was explicitly created to replace the regular DC multiverse with an almost identical copy. It wouldn't make any sense if the stars within it jumped from tier High 4-C to 1-A. The burden of proof is on your head regarding this, as extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.
Last edited:
- 168,537
- 77,322
Agreed.
- 168,537
- 77,322
Okay. I definitely know the feeling, as we have talked about in private. Please take care of yourself.
- 168,537
- 77,322
Why do you think that it was illusionary? For example, jail warden version of Lois Lane and the reformed villains within the new multiverse that freed the Justice League from a prison within it seemed perfectly sentient with a long history of experiences.
Thank you for helping out.
- 7,638
- 7,806
What is the criteria on the site for a power-up of a significant amount to not to be included?
- 11,141
- 14,180
Wouldn't this scan shatter the wild assumption of "the suns were built different"
They are called "real" suns by the narrator. The interpretation of "real" would be what we are used to, i.e. similar to the sun in our solar system. It also says that he can see the nuclear fusion at the core, hydrogen into helium, which solidifies that the sun is following normal physics not some weird magical 1-A property. At no point is he surprised by this sun's supposedly distinct "1-A" qualities and no mention of anything like that is made. So this whole argument of "let's assume the sun is built different" is objectively incorrect now.
Consider me vehemently in favor of treating this amp as an inconsistency. Until new info is presented.
They are called "real" suns by the narrator. The interpretation of "real" would be what we are used to, i.e. similar to the sun in our solar system. It also says that he can see the nuclear fusion at the core, hydrogen into helium, which solidifies that the sun is following normal physics not some weird magical 1-A property. At no point is he surprised by this sun's supposedly distinct "1-A" qualities and no mention of anything like that is made. So this whole argument of "let's assume the sun is built different" is objectively incorrect now.
Consider me vehemently in favor of treating this amp as an inconsistency. Until new info is presented.
Last edited:
- 12,673
- 9,625
- Thread starter
- #238
Long story short, they are the souls of those humans he had stolen from alt realities and then created these versions of it. He talks about it to Bruce when he asks him 5o kill superman.
- 10,687
- 6,336
Arguing that the stars can't be special is so disconnected from not only how the site actually operates but how fiction itself operates that it genuinely baffles me. It completely lacks any critical thinking skills whatsoever and genuinely can't be argued in good faith due to how backwards and idiotic it is. EVERYTHING we do on this site is an assumption, have you ever read a calc blog before? We have to assume a lot of stuff frequently. The very existence of our tiering system itself is a massive assumption, do youu have any idea how reductive it is to assume every verse uses the same laws of physics? Or even remotely follows ours? We make assumptions if they're logical, and this assumption is logical. Saying it is not is bafflingly dumb.
- 168,537
- 77,322
Okay. Thank you for the reply. The multiverse itself was still portrayed as a physical construct though.
- Status
