• 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.

The commoners thread: Discussing Ultima's "On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System"

Status
Not open for further replies.
An infinite multiverse has infinite insignificant 5D spaces. You can essentially argue, all tier 2 (aside from low 2-c) require some 5D range. This was acknowledged, but because the space between universes are seen as insignificant, it wouldn’t warrant anything with higher tier due to the lack of qualitive superiority. But now that qualitative superiority is 1-A and above, do we still just treat it as something too insignificant to bother tier?
 
This is funny because of a recent CRT I made.

But anyway, I'm pretty sure Tier 2 range is basically 5D range that is too insignificant to affect an actual 5D structure, as the range needed to effect even an infinite number of 4D objects is insignificant compared to a proper 5D object, and how much space divides these objects is pretty much never clarified enough to have any clue if it would make it significant or not, so we just default with the low ball.

Basically Tier 2-C to 2-A is basically not quite 4D but not anywhere close to quite 5D and exists because multiverses are just so popular, but it just doesn't have the evidence needed to prove that it can cross the significant size difference that is fundamental to Higher-Dimensional Existence's invincibility. None of this have changed.

Basically only ontological differences are qualitative but for higher dimensions quantitative differences are just the exact same thing under a different name.
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
An infinite multiverse has infinite insignificant 5D spaces. You can essentially argue, all tier 2 (aside from low 2-c) require some 5D range. This was acknowledged, but because the space between universes are seen as insignificant, it wouldn’t warrant anything with higher tier due to the lack of qualitive superiority. But now that qualitative superiority is 1-A and above, do we still just treat it as something too insignificant to bother tier?
Click to expand...
Yes. We initially said that because the space was insignificant in terms of granting another uncountable infinity, which we previously erroneously referred to as a qualitative superiority. That we no longer refer to it with that term doesn't invalidate the logic.
 
Everything12 said:
Low 1-A is for Type IV Multiverses that only encompass all possible multiverse involving mathematics and dimensions and non-ontological things. High 1-A+ is Type IV Multiverses that is proven to include ontological things like Reality-Fiction and 1-A things.
Click to expand...
Type IV Multiverses, by their definition, involve such a structure being equivalent to all of mathematics, so that would be an anti-feat which bumps it down to Low 1-A.

High 1-A+ are things that are similar to Type IV multiverses, but don't involve the invocation of mathematical equivalence, and include ontological things.
Iamunanimousinthat said:
An infinite multiverse has infinite insignificant 5D spaces. You can essentially argue, all tier 2 (aside from low 2-c) require some 5D range. This was acknowledged, but because the space between universes are seen as insignificant, it wouldn’t warrant anything with higher tier due to the lack of qualitive superiority. But now that qualitative superiority is 1-A and above, do we still just treat it as something too insignificant to bother tier?
Click to expand...
Yes. That has absolutely nothing to do with these revisions, so it won't be changed.
 
Agnaa said:
High 1-A+ are things that are similar to Type IV multiverses, but don't involve the invocation of mathematical equivalence, and include ontological things.
Click to expand...
I guess I need to learn how to reforge my own opinions before quickly throwing them into the trashcan as soon as I find at least a small piece of contradiction
 
Iamunanimousinthat said:
Are platonic concepts and world of forms considered to fall under ontological things or will it be a case by case basis?
Click to expand...
Generally, yeah. ofc there'd always need to be some room for case-by-case stuff.
 
Everything12 said:
If it's just called platonic and they don't show proper qualities of a true platonic concept or lack a sufficient explanation (or have anti-feats) then their not getting 1-A.
Click to expand...
I think that'd still land at 1-A, without a sufficient explanation, given how Ultima has treated all other concepts he's invoked in this revision.

Transcending and being the basis for things in reality, without being composed of things in reality, is the general definition of "platonic concepts", and is sufficient for 1-A.
 
Actually I'm think I fell for the mistake of thinking their is a lot of platonic concepts in fiction when it's actually just concepts with the platonic label being added on by supporters of the verse trying to make it sounder more impressive. If a series actual references plato by name then they probably know enough to at least give some kind of explanation (though their still might be anti-feats)... I'd hope.
 
Well well well. I'm done with my uni exams. I guess I should start cooking up some crts now.

Can we start making tier 1 and above crts now?
 
Deagonx said:
It's not really practical to do this. All they really would have to do is refer to someone else's argument.


Because the logic used to place a Monad at Tier 0 is incompatible with the idea that High 1-A transcendence could reach it.


Again, the reasoning used for the proposal is incompatible with this.
Click to expand...
Could deagon be cooking for once
caption_3.webp
 
Everything12 said:
I mean their is a chance on a more in-depth look that their might be an explanation on how they absorbed the mana attributed to Dina or some other goddess avatar thing and that might make it not an anti-feat, but as of now it doesn't look good.
Click to expand...
Honesetly, I doubt avatar related shenanigans would help. I mean she is a proxy and can use the smurf skills, and as such ruphas can too, unless we are saying that shows she can handle that power.

If I were to best explain it, the universe is something the Goddess created, and it's like a script or game to her. Ruphas used the key of the heavens which Dina prepared for them to gain ownership of the universe from the Goddess, but it was already being destroyed. So she used a skill to absorb the mana instead. The universe is mana and experience itself which bolstered their levels thanks to being a piece of the Goddess's power. Though it's not the same the smurf skills, I'm not sure if that makes it a higher world/smurf power since it's not really the script. It did allow them to leave the universe though, and gain access to her. Described as leaving the game, and gaining to "face the player who manipulates the game from safety." But while the mana allowed them to leave the game like world, seems just like leaving a file or something to see a vast expanse of more files and the Goddess herself. They still weren't on her level at all, so it seems the mana acted as power up and for them to fully leave the universe. Ascended in some way but not the same level as her.

Outside of that though, how Ruphas herself just jumped up to her level and the settings is a whole other situation (headache)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
VS Battles Is Nonsense / Delete My Account
Replies
6
Views
3K
Dragonite007
Dragonite007
demonwarrior2266
Application of Ultima's CRT
Replies
4
Views
2K
Hypertornado099
Hypertornado099
  • Locked
What would debunk the basis of the VSBW tiering system
Replies
6
Views
2K
Urshani
Boy.Line
Qualification issues.
Replies
7
Views
645
TheOrangeGuy09
TheOrangeGuy09
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System
12 13 14
Replies
530
Views
178K
Ultima_Reality
Ultima_Reality
Back
Top