- 967
- 795
Ultima pushing CSAP agenda, holy hell
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A lot of people on CSAP are heavily opposed to the idea of R>F.Ultima pushing CSAP agenda, holy hell
CSAP is more entrenched into set theory/math tiering than this place is.A lot of people on CSAP are heavily opposed to the idea of R>F.
I thought CSAP has math at High 1-B at peak.CSAP is more entrenched into set theory/math tiering than this place is.
I thought CSAP has math at High 1-B at peak.
We used to have those.you are now discovering something that has been used for years on the Liber proelis wiki
Come again?Even if you are r>f you don't really trancend and not bound by dimension like us.. even if we are have qualitive superior to fiction I still 3d person. Then with that in mind we couldn't possibly understand higher dimension in that fiction. That would make it become one character couldn't defeat other and it will make it inconclusive match(even though 1a supposed to be superior than 1b)
Nah, A system much more full of assumptions and doubts. He makes his system based on objective information based more on subjective philosophical interpretation, and this... is so unhealthy.Ultima pushing the much better tiering system, hopefully he doesn't get stonewalled by DT!
TBH he does sort of bring up a good point that fiction is not the same as nothingness although functionally they seem similar.Ultima pushing the much better tiering system, hopefully he doesn't get stonewalled by DT!
If Dt acts like pain who stonewalled the JTTW CRT to the point of stagnation. We'll likely be denied this masterpiece.Ultima pushing the much better tiering system, hopefully he doesn't get stonewalled by DT!
Lets just give DT a chance to speak out. It doesn't look like he had responded to the OP in full quite yet.If Dt acts like pain who stonewalled the JTTW CRT to the point of stagnation. We'll likely be denied this masterpiece.
Personally, since Ultima cannot base its logic on any basis, this logic remains in the air and is very unsupported. Even what he does, he hypothetically adds dimensions that are not shown in the verse and do not exist. He claims that this is the quantitative and qualitative difference, but he goes beyond the boundaries of the verse.TBH he does sort of bring up a good point that fiction is not the same as nothingness although functionally they seem similar.
Besides that, I have yet to see any compelling argument against Ultima's proposal.
Well, there is a question and answer session between them right now, but the main problems of DT are the reasons i wrote above(for now)... Of course, there is more, i think they will talk about all of these later and it will be a discussion that will last monthLets just give DT a chance to speak out. It doesn't look like he had responded to the OP in full quite yet.
Power scaling as a whole is..............subjective and unhealthy, so the current system isn't any betterNah, A system much more full of assumptions and doubts. He makes his system based on objective information based more on subjective philosophical interpretation, and this... is so unhealthy.
And, even if the thread is not rejected, it is still accepted with more determining factors and objective information rather than its current state. In short, it becomes more difficult.
What assumptions and doubts are you concerned about?Nah, A system much more full of assumptions and doubts. He makes his system based on objective information based more on subjective philosophical interpretation, and this... is so unhealthy.
And, even if the thread is not rejected, it is still accepted with more determining factors and objective information rather than its current state. In short, it becomes more difficult.
At least there is a system, such as mathematics, that is based on objective information that everyone accepts as the same globally. That's why there is no confusionPower scaling as a whole is..............subjective and unhealthy, so the current system isn't any better
Fiction can indeed be equivalated to being nothingness.TBH he does sort of bring up a good point that fiction is not the same as nothingness although functionally they seem similar.
At least there is a system, such as mathematics, that is based on objective information that everyone accepts as the same globally. That's why there is no confusion
We can easily say that this system is healthier than subjective philosophical thoughts and assumptions that have no basis. I'm not saying there's nothing wrong in our current system, but at least there are fewer wrongs than the system that was tried, and the system we have now is extremely consistent and well-founded.
What you said nuked what you already said here, man. This minimizes the rate of inaccuracy.What assumptions and doubts are you concerned about?
Understandably, Mathematics are lot more rigid and objective, and thus more easy to quantify. But R>F is more than likely going to have some equally firm standards attached to it to remove doubt. As will other forms of tiering.
So can I ask why you think this way? What is it that moves you away from the globally accepted system, and its basis?Also, I should clarify that more "objective" doesn't mean it's a better or more accurate system of measuring fictional characters. For example, taking mathematics and trying to apply it to verses like Cthulhu Mythos which are like objectively beyond what math can quantify isn't a really good way to go about powerscaling a verse like that IMO.
This system is more like "only the number 2 is shown in the verse, but I should default to all in the quality" and fails to base it on that. Thats the problem.but this system isn't moving away from math... it's simply redefining where it sits within the system
Math isn't objective either, anything beyond infinity is just a mathematical concepts, ideas, theories that no different than philosophical thoughts. Theories being revised all days so no, they aren't objectiveAt least there is a system, such as mathematics, that is based on objective information that everyone accepts as the same globally. That's why there is no confusion
I think Ultima explains adequately that it doesn't work to have a character be "+1 dimensions" when the character doesn't belong to the category of dimensions but is still superior.This system is more like "only the number 2 is shown in the verse, but I should default to all in the quality" and fails to base it on that. Thats the problem.
Even if the logic is correct, it remains in the air when you cannot base it on it.
This completely depends on what you believe is inaccurate.What you said nuked what you already said here, man. This minimizes the rate of inaccuracy.
I thought I explained it pretty simply there. I think it's pretty reasonable for me to look at verses that literally spell out "I'm beyond math, dimensional hierarchies, logic, etc" and then say that us trying to quantify them within dimensionality is a pretty dumb thing to do if you're trying to be a reasonable power scaler, and not just trying to maintain consistency within a given tiering system.So can I ask why you think this way? What is it that moves you away from the globally accepted system, and its basis?
Even though "1+1=2" is accepted by everyone globally, it came from philosophy, right? In fact, philosophy is the ancestor of almost all branches of science, but it is not based on any proven basis, it is personal and can be interpreted differently by everyone, which causes trouble. That's why thinkers generally have different mindsets, and a solid foundation is needed to gather these different mindsets on a common ground. If this doesn't exist, these can't go much further than just "logical but unsupported" arguments. This is how the first steps of science took placeMath isn't objective either, anything beyond infinity is just a mathematical concepts, ideas, theories that no different than philosophical thoughts
That is sorta right, there's only two branches of representations that fall under concrete being physical: actions and models, and Contextual: applying math to real world situations. While most of anything tier 2 and onwards objectively uses the latter of verbal and symbolic representations of MathematicsMath isn't objective either, anything beyond infinity is just a mathematical concepts, ideas, theories that no different than philosophical thoughts. Theories being revised all days so no, they aren't objective
But, a concept, a structure of thought or any metaphysical element is still limited only to the dimension shown in the verse.This completely depends on what you believe is inaccurate.
Do you believe something is inaccurate because it doesn't align with the tiering system we have in place? If so, mathematical/dimensional systems are better with having more consistent ratings across the board on the site, due to its less flexible nature. I do agree there.
Do you believe something is inaccurate because it doesn't align with how a verse should realistically be scaled? If so, the Ultima suggested system is the best for attempting to accurately quantify most verses in a way that's more fair to the content contained within them. Space, dimensionality, and such are things that become quickly irrelevant to verses with metaphysical concepts and ideas.
Even when you say "beyond mathematics", you are actually still including mathematics. But, you only cover the mathematics shown in the verse, when you say "I am beyond all concepts of dimensions", you also include all theoretical dimensions, but even so, even the thought structure of these theoretical dimensions is limited only to the dimensionality shown in the verse (I have already mentioned it more or less above)It basically comes down to what you personally think is more important. A more consistent tiering system, or a more encompassing tiering system.
I thought I explained it pretty simply there. I think it's pretty reasonable for me to look at verses that literally spell out "I'm beyond math, dimensional hierarchies, logic, etc" and then say that us trying to quantify them within dimensionality is a pretty dumb thing to do if you're trying to be a reasonable power scaler, and not just trying to maintain consistency within a given tiering system.
from here, andR>F equalizing to dimensional jumps is no true correspondence, obviously. Technically, R>F and dimensional tiering should be on two separate power axis. Both being 5D and seeing a universe as fiction are being infinitely superior to it, but without feats neither should be able to affect the other. The 5D character can't punch something more real than it and the R>F character doesn't cover 5D space as part of the cosmology it transcends. I will say that, as usual, I consider assumptions that R>F should just be able to cover the dimensions because in real life dimensions don't matter for a writer as overextrapolation. It's too much enforcing our views on fictional verses.
1 level of infinity for R>F is a rough equalization, but I think it works better than value one of the several axis of being transcendent of something infinitely above the others.
from here.To B): Well, the thing is I would argue they are not comparable, not in the way you propose either.
If you ask me what the true state of things is, then I believe that there could be 100D characters that can't interact with some that sees the 3D universe as fiction, while there are also characters that see the universe as fiction and whose plot manipulation powers don't extend to higher D space at all, making the two beings unable to fight each other. And neither may be able to do anything against someone transdual and vice versa.
The first character basically has 100 dimension levels, 0 R>F levels and 0 transduality levels, while the second one has 3 dimension levels, 1 R>F levels and 0 transduality levels and the third has 3 dimension levels, 0 R>F levels and 1 transduality levels. And technically you can not put all of them on a single scale to compare their powers.
Problem is, that is absolutely garbage for a vs-community. It makes indexing convoluted and high tier characters couldn't fight each other. So instead we just sum up all the different levels of the characters and call the sum their "levels of infinity" and say that things which are equally infinite can fight each other.
I think that a R/F layer should be tiered higher than any dimensional difference, because it trivializes the base existence more.
I like DT's argument about transduality. Transduality is indeed transcend reality and fiction from it very nature