• 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 Problems With Tier 0 (Staff Only)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wokistan said:
I'm not sure I agree either. To me it's seemed like the presence or absence of limitations matters more at this level than raw scaling, which is the major differential. While a high 1-A could be superior in raw power, it would still have some other limitations that a "weaker" tier 0 would not, and as such is diffetent. I'm pretty sure that Shub-Niggurath scales higher than some of the High 1-As and 0s, and yet we aren't merging everything with 1-A, are we?
Click to expand...
I don't understand your first point. The very admittance that a High 1-A could be superior to a Tier 0 while simultaneously saying they have no difference renders the differentiation illogical and superfluous. They are at the same general level of "Supreme Power", the non AP characteristics shouldn't influence in the AP-based Tier.

As for the second point... No, she isn't.
 
Because editing all tier 0 pages is easier than editing all high 1-A pages

If you think tier 0 sounds better, I'm all for it.
 
@Sera

I mean, it's a sub-tier if you want, but that doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, as long as the gap between High 1-A and 1-A is clear.

Everyone knowledgeable about the tiering system knows the gap between 1-B and High 1-B, even if the latter is only a sub-tier. This would be the same case
 
if Tier 0 shouldn't be treated as omnipotent then why do we even use the term omnipotent on this site and tier 0???? Like I said it's kinda annoying to think that a character said by the writer to be omnipotent isn't stronger than a high 1A character who has shown limits
 
First Witch said:
I do agree with Matt, but i would personally still try to differentiate between an Azzy and an Yoggy.
Click to expand...
In regards to this particular example... I don't really get it.

Because Yog-Sothoth is just a figment of Azathoth's mind? That's not a particularly colossal difference. "You are a figment of my dream" has been achieved with just a single dimensional-level difference between both parties.

In the other hand, a baseline 1-A and someone who is infinite ^ infinite times above baseline 1-A will be in the same tier. Huge gaps between the same tier are nothing unusual and they actually tend to get larger with each tier.

Back in early 2016 I remember a controversy with people thinking Buu Saga DBZ characters should be 4-A due to being so much stronger than Cell, and we had to explain the trillion-wide gap between the tiers to them.

This is a similar case on a much greater level.
 
AstralKing7 said:
if Tier 0 shouldn't be treated as omnipotent then why do we even use the term omnipotent on this site and tier 0???? Like I said it's kinda annoying to think that a character said by the writer to be omnipotent isn't stronger than a high 1A character who has shown limits
Click to expand...
Me agrees.

How about we banish all tier 1s and 0s out of existence from this site?

Wait they'll banish us first
 
Yog wouldn't be 1-A. There can be more than Tier 0/High 1-A. That's the point that should have been made here.

The entire reason 0 should be removed as any form of omnipotence is because no character is truly boundless/omnipotent.
 
AstralKing7 said:
Like I said it's kinda annoying to think that a character said by the writer to be omnipotent isn't stronger than a high 1A character who has shown limits
Click to expand...
What the author thinks is not important. I can name a bunch of "omnipotent" Low 2-Cs, they would still get wrecked by a non-omnipotent 2-A Digimon
 
Sera EX said:
Yog wouldn't be 1-A. There can be more than Tier 0/High 1-A. That's the point that should have been made here.
The entire reason 0 should be removed as any form of omnipotence is because no character is truly boundless/omnipotent.
Click to expand...
Deadpool is, you fricc
 
They kinda don't have no difference though. If you want to base the system purely by AP, then merging would be fine. I just personally feel like that's not the only once the of importance, but it's not a big deal.

As for the second, I was saying that if you asume that say TOAA is a 1-A, in terms of scaling chains and transcendence I'm pretty sure higher end CM gods transcend 1-A to a greater degree.
 
Astral we try to not use the term omnipotent.
 
Hmm, I'd say we only keep high 1-A FRB:

Since we'r going to treat this as just a lot of transcendence over 1-A, i'd say High 1-A fits better, seeing as, it is just transcendence, and not another level of power.

We need a tier for a really really strong 1-A, i'd say High 1-A fits much better than tier 0 as there is no specific qualifier for such a thing. If there were a specific qualifier rather than "just much stronger than a 1-A" then i'd go for tier 0, since there is not, High 1-A.
 
But scaling chains don't really matter for High 1-A / Tier 0. That's not even the point of the Tier. It's to have a level for supreme transcendent characters.
 
Firephoenixearl said:
Hmm, I'd say we only keep high 1-A FRB:
Since we'r going to treat this as just a lot of transcendence over 1-A, i'd say High 1-A fits better, seeing as, it is just transcendence, and not another level of power.

We need a tier for a really really strong 1-A, i'd say High 1-A fits much better than tier 0 as there is no specific qualifier for such a thing. If there were a specific qualifier rather than "just much stronger than a 1-A" then i'd go for tier 0, since there is not, High 1-A.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Tier 0 is stupid anyways.
 
Sera EX said:
Bottom line: We should not subscribe to "absolute/unlimited/boundless/omnipotent/whatever-you-wanna-call-it" characters if we don't use omnipotence.
Click to expand...
Also I agree.
 
High 1-A is more suitable term because it makes it clear that this is not a separate tier, but simply a very powerful 1-A. The preservation of tier 0 will continue to maintain the illusion that this is some kind of unattainable exceptional tier, which exists by some very different rules.
 
Me agrees.

How about we banish all tier 1s and 0s out of existence from this site?

Wait they'll banish us first </div>


What they do is irrelevant. We will continue to argue it the Vacuum Decay of reality.
 
DarkLK said:
High 1-A is more suitable term because it makes it clear that this is not a separate tier, but simply a very powerful 1-A. The preservation of tier 0 will continue to maintain the illusion that this is some kind of unattainable exceptional tier, which exists by some very different rules.
Click to expand...
but The Writer can't lose
 
DarkLK said:
High 1-A is more suitable term because it makes it clear that this is not a separate tier, but simply a very powerful 1-A. The preservation of tier 0 will continue to maintain the illusion that this is some kind of unattainable exceptional tier, which exists by some very different rules.
Click to expand...
This is my main thinking process as well. I actually agree with you here.
 
DarkLK said:
High 1-A is more suitable term because it makes it clear that this is not a separate tier, but simply a very powerful 1-A. The preservation of tier 0 will continue to maintain the illusion that this is some kind of unattainable exceptional tier, which exists by some very different rules.
Click to expand...
^^
 
Instead of making them both High 1-A let's make them both 0 because that just sounds better. Otherwise, I agree 100%.
 
Firephoenixearl said:
Hmm, I'd say we only keep high 1-A FRB:
Since we'r going to treat this as just a lot of transcendence over 1-A, i'd say High 1-A fits better, seeing as, it is just transcendence, and not another level of power.

We need a tier for a really really strong 1-A, i'd say High 1-A fits much better than tier 0 as there is no specific qualifier for such a thing. If there were a specific qualifier rather than "just much stronger than a 1-A" then i'd go for tier 0, since there is not, High 1-A.
Click to expand...
Welp i feel like this is gonna get acceptance from even outside of the wiki. Let's all go back to suggsverse with above omnipotent level beings being possible.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
But scaling chains don't really matter for High 1-A / Tier 0. That's not even the point of the Tier. It's to have a level for supreme transcendent characters.
Click to expand...
Given how in your OP you said that a High 1-A can be "above" a tier 0 of a different verse, doesn't that kinda contradict the notion that it doesn't matter?
 
Suggest adding a footnote beside them to indicate their top dog status should be needed though. Tier 0 act like a Hall of Fame of sort for the Champion among High 1-A after all.
 
interesting discussion here, though my brain will fry if I try too hard and overthink this.

just let us know when there'll be a confirmed regarding the controversial "Tier 0" or "High 1-A"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

SpadeZ
Questions about tier 0
Replies
7
Views
656
SpadeZ
SpadeZ
Requiem_Yoriichi
Tier 0 Entities: Why is there only one?
Replies
15
Views
3K
Accelerated_Evolution
Accelerated_Evolution
Kev_Nino36U
Question about Tier 0/High 1-A
Replies
2
Views
1K
OMNIVERSAL-KING
OMNIVERSAL-KING
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
The Dread Tiering System Revisions
4 5 6
Replies
216
Views
40K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
Tiering System Revisions: Tier 0
5 6 7
Replies
251
Views
106K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top