• 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.
At least if we're staying on topic another teir that has suffers from a skewed one verse bloat is ironically 1-A with about a 100 to the 269. Which if r>f does get accepted hopefully it opens up some diversity.
 
this-is-how-u-look-saying-that-shit-silly-cat.gif
sassy the sasquatch will neg the 1-A fodders
 
ye csap 1-A is beyond the concept of dimensions
Sorta, R>F as far as I know on CSAP isn't t really treated the same as what's in Ultima's proposal which is ironic that people are saying it's exactly like CSAP when R>F there practically just treated as a n+1.
 
Sorta, R>F as far as I know on CSAP isn't t really treated the same as what's in Ultima's proposal which is ironic that people are saying it's exactly like CSAP when R>F there practically just treated as a n+1.
Ultimas criteria for R>F that he outlines along with the other general requirements he’s listed if sar closer yo CSAPs 1-A than current VBW 1-A.

The point is, if you think this is some “power scaling apocalyptic change” you’re in for a rude shock moving to CSAP.
 
But it doesn’t collapse that many cosmology’s a lot of 1-A versus already use r>f and stuff
Thanks to the hierarchical layers in cosmology, every cosmology can get 1a from r>f, and some can get higher if there is a r>f context just because they are outside the concept of geometric dimension? And tell me the cosmology that takes 1a with just one r>f, hurry up, my friend.
 
Okay, for real now, knock it right off. Nothing gives anyone the right to taunt IdiosyncraticLawyer for his deadpan approach to this thread. Even before, I’m pretty sure some of you were taunting him relentlessly about how SCP would be downgraded. I’ll take this straight to RvR personally if it persists. Just calm down ffs.
 
Last edited:
Thanks to the hierarchical layers in cosmology, every cosmology can get 1a from r>f, and some can get higher if there is a r>f context just because they are outside the concept of geometric dimension? And tell me the cosmology that takes 1a with just one r>f, hurry up, my friend.
1. I don’t see how any of that is a problem “my friend”, introducing a concept of a dimension to something that can’t seems valid to me

2. Marvel, scp, narnia
 
Okay, for real now, knock it right off. Nothing gives anyone the right to taunt IdiosyncraticLawyer for his deadpan approach to this thread. Even before, I’m pretty sure some of you were taunting him relentlessly about how SCP would be downgraded. I’ll take this straight to RvR personally if it persists. Just calm down ffs.
Doesn’t scp have r>f tho?
 
1. I don’t see how any of that is a problem “my friend”, introducing a concept of a dimension to something that can’t seems valid to me

2. Marvel, scp, narnia
Friend, I know all the cosmologies you wrote and they consist of layered hierarchical r>f's, you can say that each cosmology has a compound hierarchy and the r>f's taken in the compound hierarchies are also layered, so here "1a cannot be taken with just a single r>f" in the same way. It is also valid for other cosmologies and also for the higher layers than the current h1a super flow in the Marvel fiction, for example, for the far shore, it does not exceed the super flow with r>f. I recommend you write knowing these.
 
Friend, I know all the cosmologies you wrote and they consist of layered hierarchical r>f's, you can say that each cosmology has a compound hierarchy and the r>f's taken in the compound hierarchies are also layered, so here "1a cannot be taken with just a single r>f" in the same way. It is also valid for other cosmologies and also for the higher layers than the current h1a super flow in the Marvel fiction, for example, for the far shore, it does not exceed the super flow with r>f. I recommend you write knowing these.
"Friend" what tf are you talking about, is English your first language because I genuinely cannot understand you or your point, no offence
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top