• 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 DC Comics Cosmology Revision Project

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anyway, do we have sufficient agreements here to consider the cosmology split itself to have been accepted, so we can proceed to the next part of this project (discussing tiering)?

Or should we wait for a while longer, given that this is a very importsnt revision thread?
 
Thank you. Our researchers in particular, and the rest of us as well, have really tried extremely hard to be thorough, so everything would be as accurate as possible.
 
Why tho? I just think this approach is obviously motivated in bad faith and biased against DC Comics. Several other long-running series, including ******* Marvel, are not receiving a similar treatment, so why should DC be singled out? That's all there is to it.
I disagree, everyone else more knowledgeable than me in the matter has already told you why the whole reason of "Supes won't be 1-A" is just short-sighted and disingenuous. Hell, I was one of the few people who agreed that this wasn't an outlier and was actually usable if Supes had those specific suns amping him to that level 24/7. That's the premise it was ended on, that it wasn't added to his tier because of outside help shenanigans. Not because it was Tier 1.
 
I disagree, everyone else more knowledgeable than me in the matter has already told you why the whole reason of "Supes won't be 1-A" is just short-sighted and disingenuous. Hell, I was one of the few people who agreed that this wasn't an outlier and was actually usable if Supes had those specific suns amping him to that level 24/7. That's the premise it was ended on, that it wasn't added to his tier because of outside help shenanigans. Not because it was Tier 1.
I literally gave reasons that have nothing to do with "1-A Superman" in the post you're quoting. You're the one who's bringing it up again.
 
Everybody knows the only reason this is being pushed is cause Superman can't have an 1-A key and because it makes characters too strong.
What the hell is this then?

Why tho? I just think this approach is obviously motivated in bad faith and biased against DC Comics.
That's it? That's your best argument? Care to explain how this approach has been made to be motivated in bad faith and biased against DC Comics? Any feats that have become neutered? Or is it your conflict with which author's interpretation lines up the most accurately for the verse?
 
Why tho? I just think this approach is obviously motivated in bad faith and biased against DC Comics. Several other long-running series, including ******* Marvel, are not receiving a similar treatment, so why should DC be singled out? That's all there is to it.
Because it takes a LOT of work, and I assume no Marvel fans have had the time. A lot of people who worked on this are DC fans, so I don't understand claims of bias against it
 
I literally gave reasons that have nothing to do with "1-A Superman" in the post you're quoting. You're the one who's bringing it up again.
"You're all just biased" is not a reason.

"We haven't done this for other verses" is also not a reason. This is obviously a new concept. The fact that it is new is not an argument against it.
 
I will speak for the staff who aren't DC supporters or tier 1 experts: We can only take your word on the blog at face value. A lot of us don't have the mental fortitude to read every abstract level piece of DC media to prove you wrong.

So take us agreeing with you with a grain of salt. We can neither confirm, nor deny, if what you're presenting to us is the only solution to the predicament. We can only say "Yeah that makes sense" based on what you have told us.
 
So take us agreeing with you with a grain of salt. We can neither confirm, nor deny, if what you're presenting to us is the only solution to the predicament. We can only say "Yeah that makes sense" based on what you have told us.
Yes, that's understood. In a perfect world, those who oppose the project could likewise explain their reasoning, and staff like yourself could make an unbiased assessment of both arguments, but so far no one has provided that, all I've seen is agreement or neutrality with one exception above.
 
Because it takes a LOT of work, and I assume no Marvel fans have had the time. A lot of people who worked on this are DC fans, so I don't understand claims of bias against it
Yes, I would personally prefer if we can eventually divide Marvel Comics by a few editorial direction eras, preferably pre-Quesada and post-Quesada, which is where the most drastic cosmological and thematic changes occurred, but these types of projects take massive amounts of time to properly investigate and figure out the most factually and logically accurate approach for.

If our most knowledgeable and unbiased Marvel supporters are willing to help me out long-term with that kind of project, including investigate how it should best be logically structured, that would obviously be extremely appreciated.
 
Why tho? I just think this approach is obviously motivated in bad faith and biased against DC Comics. Several other long-running series, including ******* Marvel, are not receiving a similar treatment, so why should DC be singled out? That's all there is to it.
No it isn't. Not everything in this world is (thankfully) motivated by completely partisan manipulative hatred of one thing or another.

I and the other members of this project simply genuinely think that our current scaling structure for DC Comics is logically completely incoherent and unreliable, and in my case I have the kind of mentality (Or medical condition. Take your pick.) that is extremely fixated on honesty and factual accuracy to an abnormal degree.

We have found a very thorough and comprehensive basis for our conclusions regarding this issue and I think that we have quite conclusively proven them in this regard.

Now can we avoid any more subversive emotion-based ad hominem derailments here, and focus on our actual evidence and logical arguments instead, please?
 
Last edited:
Stop derailing please, Matthew. Let us focus on the main issues here instead of engaging in empty claims or outright toxicity.
 
Because it takes a LOT of work, and I assume no Marvel fans have had the time. A lot of people who worked on this are DC fans, so I don't understand claims of bias against it
Just because they’re “DC fans” doesn’t mean they can’t hold certain biases against the verse. Literally one of the guys working on this revision thinks CAS and Mandrakk are star or galaxy level, thinks Mxy is below universal, thinks True Form Darkseid didn’t cast a shadow over the Multiverse, etc.

So I kind of do see where Matthews skepticism is coming from, even if I don’t disagree with the idea of splitting the cosmology.
 
Last edited:
Literally one of the guys working on this revision thinks CAS and Mandrakk are star or galaxy level, thinks Mxy is below universal, thinks True Form Darkseid didn’t cast a shadow over the Multiverse, etc.
This is not the venue for you to air out your personal grievances against me (and strawman me in the process). This kind of toxic derailing is why your participation warranted the degree of skepticism that it did.
 
Why tho? I just think this approach is obviously motivated in bad faith and biased against DC Comics. Several other long-running series, including ******* Marvel, are not receiving a similar treatment, so why should DC be singled out? That's all there is to it.
Pretty sure that even Marvel Comics will gets the same treatment as DC Comics but let's focus on the current thread. And this approach is not driven by bad faith and biased against DC Comics, but is rather motivated by inconsistent tierings of the DC characters, especially the god tiers, because of an attempt to create a composite cosmology with things that don't fit together. This approach is just to create to coherent that are more accurate to what the comics shows.
 
Okay. I would appreciate if any more derailing posts in this thread from this point onwards are deleted by our staff members.

Also, it simply did not seem practical to work on DC Comics and Marvel Comics cosmology splits at the same time, given the sheer research and discussion time that each project would require, and DC Comics seemed more urgent given that it was even more cosmologically incoherent which also resulted in even more unreliable statistics.

I would greatly appreciate if the members who are most knowledgeable about Marvel Comics are willing to help me initiate that kind of project as well after we are finished here though, especially as the splitting itself has already been accepted in a previous thread.

I would also appreciate if somebody asks Confluctor and Impress via Discord if they are willing to come back and help us out in that regard.
 
Last edited:
Just because they’re “DC fans” doesn’t mean they can’t hold certain biases against the verse. Literally one of the guys working on this revision thinks CAS and Mandrakk are star or galaxy level, thinks Mxy is below universal, thinks True Form Darkseid didn’t cast a shadow over the Multiverse, etc.

So I kind of do see where Matthews skepticism is coming from, even if I don’t disagree with the idea of splitting the cosmology.
I managed to convince Deagonx to go along with the rest of our project group's conclusions rather than go overboard. You can read the suggested tiering that our project members concluded seem most logical in the blog post that I linked to in my first post in this thread.
 
How many knowledgeable members agree with this CRT?
Considering those who were interested already replied, Everyone except Matt.
Also the split is reasonable and I don't think anyone is oppose to it and even Matt was only opposed to it because he thought marvel will not get the same treatment as DC but turned out it'll but in future, accusations of being bias doesn't mean anything now. So yeah it has got enough aggrements and nothing against.
 
No matter the number of agreements, I think the thread should be open for at least a week, there is no rush. By Thursday, then it can be closed if no one brings an argument against the thread
In that regard, yes. Ultima is kind of busy due to schoolwork, and in consideration for him I think it should be left open until next week.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
In that regard, yes. Ultima is kind of busy -- in consideration for him I think it should be left open until next week.
Ultima agrees with the split. One of the reasons we separated the thread into "split concept" and "specific splits" was because he agreed with the former but disagreed with one of the cosmology divisions, which is a conversation we intend to have on the next thread.

Also, I would err on the side of not posting his personal information on the forum, even if he speaks freely about it in the Discord.
 
I would also appreciate if somebody asks Confluctor and Impress via Discord if they are willing to come back and help us out in that regard.
I should note, Impress is pretty much done with the community based on the reaction of her most recent posts. So asking her to come back might not be a good idea, Confluctor I do not have his Discord, but he may be of help.
 
Okay. Is somebody else here willing to ask him to come back while explaining what we need his help with?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top