• 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 tier upgrade

Status
Not open for further replies.
Boundaries being weakened doesn’t devalue nearly destroying a universe. If I destroy a wall around a kingdom, me busting the kingdom doesn’t suddenly become illegitimate.
And we still have the fact that a weak 4-D structure would still be 4-D, in the same way that a pencil and a weak pencil are 3-D, the weak pencil is weaker, but still 3-D
 
Destroying one wall? No. Destroying several? Yes. It depends on how much the barriers were weakened and we really aren't given context here. Still 4-D is 4-D.
That’s not how it works. Destroying a walled kingdom and destroying an unwalled kingdom is still destroying a kingdom.
 
"Easily breakable, probably not. It's still unquantifiable. The Multiverse being unstable would make it easier to break, that much should be undeniable. If you have evidence quantifying how weakened it was, I'd love to see it."

It is undeniable that is is easier to break. However, the jump from Low 2-C to High 3-A is extremely uncomparable in a mathematical sense. No matter how weak a Low 2-C, it is Low 2-C. It is not quantifiable the level of Low 2-C, but Low 2-C nonetheless.

"Could you clarify what you mean with the first part? I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing it's a Low 2-C feat for Orion. The "1/5th Universal" feat is from Cosmic Odyssey #4. It's also a chain reaction."

I mean that it is a at most Low 2-C feat. The feat would eventually bring a Low 2-C result. Of course, it can't really scale.

"Er, care to elaborate why he would at least be giving 1/4th? Him helping could be 1/100th for all we know."

As I stated, the scaling chain of Captain Adam<Superman is almost always at play, and it can be clearly assumed that he contributed 1/4 of Low 2-C (which is still Low 2-C). Of course, citation is needed for this comic for further info.

"I don't think you understand the point. There was a scan used from Infinite Crisis for Post-Crisis Superman scaling to Golden Age. However, it was stated in JLA #74 Golden Age started to decrease in power, and DC Comics Presents Annual #1 shows he was below Pre-Crisis. More time passes by until we get to Infinite Crisis, which has the same older Golden Age Superman (well he's actually even older than before, but you get the point)."


I agree, though Supes should once again downscale in this situation. As a said, no amount of power-drain is making a Low 2-C character fall from that to High 3-A.

"Yeah I'd say so. I don't remember the argument from the opposition though so I'd need one of them to show up."

Glad we agree.

"You do have a point, but he definitely downscaled. It's probably still Universal though."

As I explained, it is indeed still Universal, just downscaled.

"He solos the entire league. He says he was using "the power of countless red suns" but I'm unsure of it's supposed to be taken literally. Also, even then he took out multiple Superman-tiers."

I was in agreement here already lol.

"I think either point of view has merit. I do lean towards it not being an illusion though considering they fought for a prolonged period of time."

Both views do have merit, though I am inclined to one side. I would like to see any opposers to it though.

"Alright. Do you have the citation for the issue? The 1st one being written by Grant Morrison shows to me it can be Universal."

I do not. Better to ask Niarobi.

"It's still a different version of Firestorm. Being mad isn't the only thing, please check out this thread."

I see your point, and I agree.

"Alright. Glad we could agree on a decent amount of points."

I shall never again agree
 
They are blaming eachother because of their ideology dooming the world: the softer pre-crisis heroism vs the post-crisis grim dark heroism.

Alexander Luthor
I don’t see how that’s true. That doesn’t exactly make sense. You don’t blame ideology for destroying the universe when you’re doing cosmic scale fights.
 
I don’t see how that’s true. That doesn’t exactly make sense. You don’t blame ideology for destroying the universe when you’re doing cosmic scale fights.
....Ok, taking this from the top

The entire event starts because Alex, GA Superman, and Superboy Prime watched the current incarnation of the Justice League continually fail at protecting the world whilst slowly becoming grittier, more horribly people, much like how comic fans at the time were complaining about the darker tone, so they try to reclaim and fix the world. This fight is symbolic of their different ideologies coming to head, they metaphorically believe the other is destroying the world while Alex is literally destroying the world. It's not a feat for Superman, it's a story telling device.
 
I'm just saying that the two Supermen are at odds in an ideological level. Whether or not the two were actually affecting the universe at the same time Alex and his Tuning Fork were is another question.
 
It is undeniable that is is easier to break. However, the jump from Low 2-C to High 3-A is extremely uncomparable in a mathematical sense. No matter how weak a Low 2-C, it is Low 2-C. It is not quantifiable the level of Low 2-C, but Low 2-C nonetheless.
I know very little about the tiering system for how higher dimensions work so I'll take your word.
As I stated, the scaling chain of Captain Adam<Superman is almost always at play, and it can be clearly assumed that he contributed 1/4 of Low 2-C (which is still Low 2-C). Of course, citation is needed for this comic for further info.
It's Zero Hour. Maybe issue 4? Anways, why can it clearly be assumed?
I agree, though Supes should once again downscale in this situation. As a said, no amount of power-drain is making a Low 2-C character fall from that to High 3-A.
Why not? Characters can train and reach 4D, why can't they lose enough power to reach that level?
I was in agreement here already lol.
Yeah I know. You just asked for the direct scans.
"I think either point of view has merit. I do lean towards it not being an illusion though considering they fought for a prolonged period of time."

Both views do have merit, though I am inclined to one side. I would like to see any opposers to it though.
Alright. Also oof, the "prolonged period of time" thing was supposed to be for the Time Trapper scaling part. Dunno how that happened.
I do not. Better to ask Niarobi.
Yeah I found it. If you missed my edit, here it is again:
Also, to the rest of the thread, the Superman fight was very much needed for Alex's plan. The DC website, back of the comic and end page of Infinite Crisis #5 say they were genuinely damaging the Universe. The only debate here imo is if the feat is quantifiable.
 
To answer why you can't go from Low 2-C to High 3-A via power drain its because of the dimensional scale, Low 2-C is inherently 4-D, the requirements for Low 2-C is to destroy a timeline or have some leverage in doing so, while the character in question can actually be physically 3-D, which makes the difference between Low 2-C and High 3-A, is infinite. High 3-A being infinite power on a 3-D scale, 4-D is infinitely superior, i hope that made sense

Low 2-C is destroying/damaging a timeline, the closest thing is Asriel Dremurr being Low 2-C for slowly destroying a timeline
 
...None of those scans convince me that the fight was causing the universe's destruction. It seems like fairly typical "everything comes to head during the climactic showdown" hype. Batman and Joker don't literally destroy Gotham with their blows when people say things like "Gotham goes up in flames during their climactic clash".

And Alex specifically referred to Superman of Earth 2, not them fighting. I don't know where you got that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can you tell i don't deal with Low 2-C often yet? The only time I've genuinely dabbled in Low 2-C for a character before this is Terraria Calamity, but that was a blatant Low 2-C feat
 
To answer why you can't go from Low 2-C to High 3-A via power drain its because of the dimensional scale, Low 2-C is inherently 4-D, the requirements for Low 2-C is to destroy a timeline or have some leverage in doing so, while the character in question can actually be physically 3-D, which makes the difference between Low 2-C and High 3-A, is infinite. High 3-A being infinite power on a 3-D scale, 4-D is infinitely superior, i hope that made sense
Why can't he just grow that much weaker? As I said, characters can train and go from 3D to 4D tiers, why can't losing power do the same?
...None of those scans convince my that the fight was causing the universe's destruction. It seems like fairly typical "everything comes to head during the climactic showdown" hype. And Alex specifically referred to Superman of Earth 2, not them fighting. I don't know where you got that.
I mean he does say Lois' death (what caused the Superman fight) was necessary as well (though I suppose it could be necessary for more reasons than the 2 busting the Universe, like stalling for time or setting up other events). I don't see how it's just hype. Maybe if there was no other evidence, then sure I'd take this statements as flowery hyperbole, but it's just confirming what was already said in the story.
 
"It's Zero Hour. Maybe issue 4? Anways, why can it clearly be assumed?"

Why would Superman reasonable not contribute at least a fourth of the power?

"Also, to the rest of the thread, the Superman fight was very much needed for Alex's plan. The DC website, back of the comic and end page of Infinite Crisis #5 say they were genuinely damaging the Universe. The only debate here imo is if the feat is quantifiable."

I would definitely say the feat is credible.

"Why not? Characters can train and reach 4D, why can't they lose enough power to reach that level?"

Low 2-C is infinite time and space. High 3-A is infinite space. You can train to Low 2-C, but that is completely unrealistic. (Though 3-A is also an infinitesimal portion of time, so High 3-A scaling from there is weird... but ignore that as it has never been really discussed)
 
Why would Superman reasonable not contribute at least a fourth of the power?
Why would he? The burden of proof is on you to prove he did, not for me to prove he didn't.
Low 2-C is infinite time and space. High 3-A is infinite space. You can train to Low 2-C, but that is completely unrealistic. (Though 3-A is also an infinitesimal portion of time, so High 3-A scaling from there is weird... but ignore that as it has never been really discussed)
Losing that much power can be unrealistic, but it's possible. Like hell he even says he might get to the point of the original "leap tall buildings" level. While he hadn't got there yet, it shows it would be possible for him to go a dimensional tier down.

Anyways, it's getting late where I am, so I might not be able to respond much or at all until tomorrow.
 
Why can't he just grow that much weaker? As I said, characters can train and go from 3D to 4D tiers, why can't losing power do the same?

I mean he does say Lois' death (what caused the Superman fight) was necessary as well (though I suppose it could be necessary for more reasons than the 2 busting the Universe, like stalling for time or setting up other events). I don't see how it's just hype. Maybe if there was no other evidence, then sure I'd take this statements as flowery hyperbole, but it's just confirming what was already said in the story.
Only none of the statements in story suggest that when you look at what they actually mean. The fight statements clearly refer to ideology.

Furthermore, Alex lies immediately after his mention of Lois's death, which Pycho Pirate calls him on, so using him as a source is questionable. This is the guy who thinks destroying the universe is necessary, his idea of "necessary" isn't really reliable.
 
No he didn’t. All he said is that’s where he started.
Do you not see "and I guess it could end the same"? And the context is clearly him growing weaker with the passage of time.
Edit:
Furthermore, Alex lies immediately after his mention of Lois's death, which Pycho Pirate calls him on, so using him as a source is questionable. This is the guy who thinks destroying the universe is necessary, his idea of "necessary" isn't really reliable.
He calls him out on not being sympathetic and viewing Lois' death as something to advance his plan. I don't know how that shows he's not an acceptable source, especially when he's talking about his own plan.
 
i ofc agree to uni+ superman but hasn't this been discussed thousands of times here? whats the point in bringing it up now again
Why do I get the impression that your agreeing so you can make sonic verse matches with DC lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top