• 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.

Tier 1 AP & Range Separation?

Maverick_Zero_X

Maverick_Zero_X

She/Her
VS Battles
Administrator
14,607
20,128
vsbattles.com

Contumelia range upgrade

Hey everyone, quick Ben 10 CRT. The Contumelia are fifth dimensional beings as already indicated on their page. Their range is currently listed as unknown. Their range should be low complex multiversal and the range of things that interact with them should be low complex multiversal as well...
vsbattles.com vsbattles.com


Basically, if you occupy 5 dimensions or affect a construct that is stated to be 5-dimensional, yet the dimensions in question are not stated to be a higher level of infinity or qualitatively superior, would you still receive Low Complex Multiversal Range?

There seems to be some conflicting answers on this due to some lines on the Tiering System FAQ, so I made this thread to see if that needs any modifications.
 
Last edited:
This seems pretty important. Is this staff only?

Also, I imagine higher dimensional pocket realities, dimensional travel feats etc. would qualify for range and not AP arguably (edited).
 
Last edited:

Are higher-dimensional beings infinitely larger than lower-dimensional equivalents?​

In a way, yes, though not how most would think when using this word. Basically, an arbitrary object of dimension n is essentially comprised by the total sum of uncountably infinite objects of one dimension less, which may be described as lower-dimensional "slices", each corresponding to one of the infinite points of a line. For instance, a square is made of infinitely many line segments (Lined up on the y-axis), a cube of infinitely many squares (Lined up on the z-axis), and so on.

One may think of it as a multiplication between sets: For instance, the unit square [0,1]² may be expressed as the product of two unit intervals [0,1] x [0,1], which itself can be visualized as taking "copies" of the first interval and lining them up along each point of the second interval, of which there are uncountably infinitely-many, thus forming a square out of infinite line segments.

Are higher-dimensional beings infinitely stronger than lower-dimensional equivalents?​

Unintuitive as that may be: Not necessarily, as a number of characteristics through which we quantify the strength or power of a character can remain unchanged when transitioning between higher and lower dimensions. For example: Mass is a quantity that is detached from the dimension of the object which it is inherent to, and unlike volume is not divided in units corresponding to each particular dimension (1-volume [length], 2-volume [area], 3-volume, 4-volume...). It is singular in nature and its units equally apply to all dimensions; whether it is distributed over an area or a volume only tells us about the span of space in which it is spread, not about the quantity itself.

As a consequence of that, much of the calculation methods which are used to measure strength apply equally to both higher and lower dimensions, as they do not care about the extra variables and often work with a single one of them. Examples of this are kinetic energy (Ek=0.5*M*V^2), force (F=M*A), work (W=F*d), and etc.

An intuitive example of that is found in the general definition of Work as defined in physics: In essence, as work itself denotes the energy applied to an object as it is displaced along a given path, the basic formula for calculating it only takes into account a single variable, and the path itself is treated as an one-dimensional object, regardless of the dimension of the space in which the action itself takes place.

Hence, a higher-dimensional entity can be both stronger or weaker than a lower-dimensional one, and thus, they are usually quantified based on their own feats, instead of dimensionality alone. If a character is merely stated to be higher-dimensional and simultaneously has no other feats to derive anything noteworthy from, then they are put at Unknown, and the same applies to lower dimensions as well.

Do note, however, that them not qualifying for Tier 2 and above doesn't mean they are "fake" higher-dimensional beings or anything of the sort. It is simply that being higher-dimensional does not inherently mean they have infinite power in the first place, as explained above.

...

A: No. To put it simply: Although the presence of the additional axis results in a higher-dimensional space being infinitely larger in comparision to a lower-dimensional one, the numerical values themselves remain unchanged, as a "dimension" is nothing more than a continuum of numbers representing a direction of space.



To sum it up mass is an undimensioned property and as such you need the superiority stuff to get tier 1 AP. So it's perfectly possible for say an omnidirectional attack to have the same range as an attack that's Low 1-C in AP without actually being Low 1-C in AP for the former.
 
Last edited:
So it's perfectly possible for say an omnidirectional attack to have the same range as an attack that's Low 1-C in AP without actually being Low 1-C in AP for the former.

No. We consider feats where you affect all of a, say, 1-C construct to be a 1-C feat, I'd take that to imply that 1-C range requires the same sort of superiority as 1-C AP. If the standards were different, you'd run into a bit of a contradiction there; you'd meet the qualifications for 1-C (affecting a 1-C sized construct) yet not get 1-C AP. The resolutions to this are to either lower the AP standards, or raise the range standards, and it seems like the latter is the route we've gone with.

Another unintended consequence of treating things in the way you describe, is that any random character with an 8-D statement would be immune to lower-D hax, even without knowing that those dimensions are qualitatively superior, because immunity to lower-tier hax is based off of physiology.
 
Agnaa said:
No. We consider feats where you affect all of a, say, 1-C construct to be a 1-C feat, I'd take that to imply that 1-C range requires the same sort of superiority as 1-C AP. If the standards were different, you'd run into a bit of a contradiction there; you'd meet the qualifications for 1-C (affecting a 1-C sized construct) yet not get 1-C AP. The resolutions to this are to either lower the AP standards, or raise the range standards, and it seems like the latter is the route we've gone with.
Click to expand...
Here's the thing though, can you prove that the superiority actually adds range, since the Q&A seems to imply that volume can be infinitely bigger but what really matters is the mass in said volume to actually qualify for tier 2 or 1. By what you're saying it implies a higher-D being who is not tier 2 or higher can just not exist.
Agnaa said:
Another unintended consequence of treating things in the way you describe, is that any random character with an 8-D statement would be immune to lower-D hax, even without knowing that those dimensions are qualitatively superior, because immunity to lower-tier hax is based off of physiology.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's exactly what I'd argue and have argued in the past, the entirety of their being can't be affected either way.
 
no. Xelee are an example of it. Their range extends to 11 dimensions but they are still Low 1C in range because the dimensions compacted, his dark materials, even rakudai are examples of it
 
Here's the thing though, can you prove that the superiority actually adds range, since the Q&A seems to imply that volume can be infinitely bigger but what really matters is the mass in said volume to actually qualify for tier 2 or 1. By what you're saying it implies a higher-D being who is not tier 2 or higher can just not exist.

They can exist, but they wouldn't qualify for anything particularly special (AP, range, hax immunity) by our standards.

And the superiority would actually add range, higher dimensions count when you can contain snapshots of lower-D universes in them, which happens when there's an established superiority, the dimensions are timelike, or if the dimensions are infinitely large. Finite spatial non-ontologically-superior dimensions are the ones that don't count. (I got this last part from asking Di/Aeyu for clarification on Discord).

no. Xelee are an example of it. Their range extends to 11 dimensions but they are still Low 1C in range because the dimensions compacted, his dark materials, even rakudai are examples of it

This case sounds even sillier. Why would you say that their range can stretch across huge 11-D constructs if they've only shown the ability to stretch across a planck length's distance in higher-dimensions?
 
Agnaa said:
They can exist, but they wouldn't qualify for anything particularly special (AP, range, hax immunity) by our standards.
Click to expand...
Actually, still within our standard there are characters who possessing high HDE with range, but not equate to tier. DMC is one of those iirc
 
Vietthai96 said:
Actually, still within our standard there are characters who possessing high HDE with range, but not equate to tier. DMC is one of those iirc
Click to expand...
HDE sounds fine, but range doesn't. Still, my bad for saying they wouldn't get anything, they would get HDE.
 
Vietthai96 said:
Actually, still within our standard there are characters who possessing high HDE with range, but not equate to tier. DMC is one of those iirc
Click to expand...
Dunno DMC’s specific case but if the higher-dimensional structures they affected or occupy don’t have infinite superiority it looks like their Range may need revising.
 
Vietthai96 said:
Then.........why DMC have range??? It is not like i'm jealous or whataboutism.
Click to expand...
Then it sounds like their range should be downgraded. Sometimes these sorts of things do slip by people's notice.
 
Agnaa said:
Then it sounds like their range should be downgraded. Sometimes these sorts of things do slip by people's notice.
Click to expand...
They have an entire thread about it though. About Demon Soul being 9D. And iirc Ultima did said they can have range, but my memories is nit the best lol
 
Vietthai96 said:
They have an entire thread about it though. About Demon Soul being 9D. And iirc Ultima did said they can have range, but my memories is nit the best lol
Click to expand...
Welp, guess we'll wait for Ultima to comment, then.
 
We had 3 threads with each hread being more than 5 pages long discussion spanning 4+ months on DMC having 9D/1C range. If you have problems with it go make a specific CRT about it after reading through all those torturous threads. Don't lump us with fodder verses in some random standard CRT. Seen all these arguements hundreds of times.

Tldr; ya can all cope.
 
Last edited:
Agnaa said:
no. Xelee are an example of it. Their range extends to 11 dimensions but they are still Low 1C in range because the dimensions compacted, his dark materials, even rakudai are examples of it

This case sounds even sillier. Why would you say that their range can stretch across huge 11-D constructs if they've only shown the ability to stretch across a planck length's distance in higher-dimensions?
Click to expand...
xelee dimensions don`t work on higher infinites but instead works on string theory so their 11 dimensions don`t qualify as High 1C,
 
The DMC guys cherry-picked a statement of Ultima out of context to claim that the 9D stuff is accepted as tier 1 (namely given that it's clear this goes under the assumption it's accepted to be tier 1, which it isn't as the premise was explicitly rejected on that regard) and whatever when he already said it'd just mean someone would require interdimensional range at most to affect the stuff in question, which wouldn't be tier 1 as said before.

However, as remarked at the end of the thread, Ultima remained in hiatus and never replied to clarify the semantics we're dealing with now in this thread, the thread got closed, and now here we are dealing with this (Arguable) wank too.
 
Last edited:
Agnaa said:
And the superiority would actually add range, higher dimensions count when you can contain snapshots of lower-D universes in them, which happens when there's an established superiority, the dimensions are timelike, or if the dimensions are infinitely large. Finite spatial non-ontologically-superior dimensions are the ones that don't count. (I got this last part from asking Di/Aeyu for clarification on Discord).
Click to expand...
I’ll talk to Di then
 
Luckyfun said:
A bit off-topic but would this mean removing 9D range of DMC?
Click to expand...
No. this is more so a general question not a CRT for a specific verse. sorry for commenting without staff permission btw but everyone else here seems to comment without it so.

as for the question itself. let us see what the FAQ says. because for some reason it's very difficult to read what's written in there.

Are higher-dimensional beings infinitely larger than lower-dimensional equivalents?​

In a way, yes, though not how most would think when using this word. Basically, an arbitrary object of dimension n is essentially comprised by the total sum of uncountably infinite objects of one dimension less, which may be described as lower-dimensional "slices", each corresponding to one of the infinite points of a line. For instance, a square is made of infinitely many line segments (Lined up on the y-axis), a cube of infinitely many squares (Lined up on the z-axis), and so on.

One may think of it as a multiplication between sets: For instance, the unit square [0,1]² may be expressed as the product of two unit intervals [0,1] x [0,1], which itself can be visualized as taking "copies" of the first interval and lining them up along each point of the second interval, of which there are uncountably infinitely-many, thus forming a square out of infinite line segments.
Click to expand...
first of all, it's important to establish that higher dimensions that are tier 1 are not that different from those that are not. the only difference is this :

Are higher-dimensional beings infinitely stronger than lower-dimensional equivalents?​

Unintuitive as that may be: Not necessarily, as a number of characteristics through which we quantify the strength or power of a character can remain unchanged when transitioning between higher and lower dimensions. For example: Mass is a quantity that is detached from the dimension of the object which it is inherent to, and unlike volume is not divided in units corresponding to each particular dimension (1-volume [length], 2-volume [area], 3-volume, 4-volume...). It is singular in nature and its units equally apply to all dimensions; whether it is distributed over an area or a volume only tells us about the span of space in which it is spread, not about the quantity itself.

As a consequence of that, much of the calculation methods which are used to measure strength apply equally to both higher and lower dimensions, as they do not care about the extra variables and often work with a single one of them. Examples of this are kinetic energy (Ek=0.5*M*V^2), force (F=M*A), work (W=F*d), and etc.

An intuitive example of that is found in the general definition of Work as defined in physics: In essence, as work itself denotes the energy applied to an object as it is displaced along a given path, the basic formula for calculating it only takes into account a single variable, and the path itself is treated as an one-dimensional object, regardless of the dimension of the space in which the action itself takes place.

Hence, a higher-dimensional entity can be both stronger or weaker than a lower-dimensional one, and thus, they are usually quantified based on their own feats, instead of dimensionality alone. If a character is merely stated to be higher-dimensional and simultaneously has no other feats to derive anything noteworthy from, then they are put at Unknown, and the same applies to lower dimensions as well.

Do note, however, that them not qualifying for Tier 2 and above doesn't mean they are "fake" higher-dimensional beings or anything of the sort. It is simply that being higher-dimensional does not inherently mean they have infinite power in the first place, as explained above.
Click to expand...
TL DR: being higher dimensional would grant you infinitely more Volume than lower dimensions. but that does not necessarily translate into infinitely more mass or energy. thus you would not qualify for tier 1 AP unless you prove superiority over other dimensions. that's why you need to prove qualitative superiority to begin with. this is what the pages say. if anybody has a problem with it then go make a CRT to change it

Now. let's look at what we need to get tier 1 range according to the range page.
Low Complex Multiversal: Attacks and abilities that are able to reach throughout 5-dimensional to 6-dimensional space.

Complex Multiversal: Attacks and abilities that are able to reach throughout 7-dimensional to 9-dimensional space.

High Complex Multiversal: Attacks and abilities that are able to reach throughout 10-dimensional to 11-dimensional space.

Hyperversal: Attacks and abilities that are able to reach 12-dimensional space and above, as long as it is a finite number of dimensions.

High Hyperversal: Attacks and abilities that are able to reach an infinite number of dimensions of space and time (Hilbert space).
Click to expand...
so yeah. based on what the range page says. you could get tier 1 range just based on your dimensionality alone. tier 1 AP or not.

now in my opinion. this does raise a few problems. like for example you can be higher-dimensional and cover less distance than a lower-dimensional object while still maintaining infinitely more volume. the best way to explain this is through an illustration.
Cw4SzW8.png

see in the following image the 2D square is covering more distance as in meters or CMs or whatever than the 3D cube. while the 3D cube is still infinitely larger in volume because it's measured in cubic meters while the square is in square meters. now does this mean the 2D square can affect the entirety of the cube? No. it would only affect an infinitesimal slice of it. not the whole thing. but the cube in this case would only be able to affect a finite portion of the square. the problem here is that the range page says that having more dimensions than something automatically means you outrange it. which is wrong in the case above. so you either could accept this and leave the page as is. or you guys could just make a better range page. I personally recommend the latter.
 
sorry for commenting without staff permission btw but everyone else here seems to comment without it so.

People who were offered staff before and declined (such as me) or who used to be staff are allowed to contribute to staff only threads; idk what everyone else's excuse is.

TL DR: being higher dimensional would grant you infinitely more Volume than lower dimensions. but that does not necessarily translate into infinitely more mass or energy. thus you would not qualify for tier 1 AP unless you prove superiority over other dimensions. that's why you need to prove qualitative superiority to begin with. this is what the pages say. if anybody has a problem with it then go make a CRT to change it

Now. let's look at what we need to get tier 1 range according to the range page.

so yeah. based on what the range page says. you could get tier 1 range just based on your dimensionality alone. tier 1 AP or not.

Note that that FAQ answer is about being a higher dimensional being, not about having an attack able to reach throughout higher-dimensional space. Higher-dimensional beings are often pretty small, and don't contain copies of universes inside of them, so they don't qualify for higher tiers.

If you'd turn your attention to the Tiering System page, you'd see that its qualifications include phrases like...
Characters who can universally affect, create and/or destroy spaces whose size corresponds to three to five higher levels of infinity greater than a standard universal model. In terms of "dimensional" scale, this can be equated to 7 and 9-dimensional real coordinate spaces (R ^ 7 to R ^ 9)
Click to expand...
Being able to affect the entirety of a higher-dimensional infinitely-sized continuous space qualifies you for a higher tier.

And back to the Range page, one can infer from the definition of Interdimensional that higher-D range which does not cover a universal distance is not considered higher-D.

From experience with profiles, you'd notice that characters can reach higher-D range even if they don't interact with literal physical higher dimensions, and just affect constructs with such a rating (reality-fiction differences and the like).

From this it seems as if the requirements are the same, give or take some wording issues (the range page doesn't explicitly accomodate cosmologies which aren't just higher dimensions, and the AP page has unclear wording about real coordinate spaces).

now in my opinion. this does raise a few problems. like for example you can be higher-dimensional and cover less distance than a lower-dimensional object while still maintaining infinitely more volume.

This shows a misunderstanding of the range page; you need to be able to cover a universal distance to get those sorts of ranges.
 
Agnaa said:
This shows a misunderstanding of the range page; you need to be able to cover a universal distance to get those sorts of ranges.
Click to expand...
that is my problem. it is not mentioned anywhere that you need distance to get it. interdimensional range does not mention higher dimensions as a part of it. it just vaguely says that it is reaching anything beyond conventional space-time without affecting universal distance. it should be more specific if it includes those. not to mention if someone is looking at how to get a higher tier range they would naturally go to the tier 1 stuff right away which just say that you need to affect higher dimensional space to get it. without looking at interdimenional range first. it still needs clarifications about how they work
Agnaa said:
Being able to affect the entirety of a higher-dimensional infinitely-sized continuous space qualifies you for a higher tier.
Click to expand...
also from what I've been told that alone is not enough you also need to prove some sort of superiority over lower-dimensional things but that would be derailing so i'll leave it at that.
 
Last edited:
interdimensional range does not mention higher dimensions as a part of it. it just says vaguely says reaching anything beyond conventional space-time without affecting universal distance. it should be more specific if it includes those.

it still needs clarifications about how they work

Reaching other universes/timelines is reaching across higher dimensions. But I do agree that it needs better wording.

also from what I've been told that alone is not enough you also need to prove some sort of superiority over lower-dimensional things but that would be derailing so i'll leave it at that.

I'm surprised to see that idea become so prevalent so suddenly; I don't remember that idea being around 9 months ago. I've been a part of discussions on these standards from before, during, and after they'd changed, and consulted other people who were also heavily involved; that statement I provided is correct. Stated superiority is one of 3 ways to reach it. The other two being temporal dimensions (since, by nature of each point referring to a state of the universe, each added dimension adds uncountably more copies of the universe), and being infinitely sized (some stuff I don't understand about N-measures).

And I don't think it's derailing; that's a pretty key piece of evidence in this thread. If AP was truly only able to be reached by stated superiority, and range made no mention of that, that would be an indicator for range having different standards.

EDIT: Whoops, there is actually a fourth way to reach higher tiers. Infinite-D stuff is always High 1-B, and does not need to prove infinite size, be temporal, or prove ontological superiority.
 
Last edited:
It appears we're waiting for Ultima Reality, so I'd suggest for an staff member to notify him once again, so the thread can go somewhere and all.
 
Also, Agnaa, what are the conclusions here so far?
 
From most important and concise to least so...

I've argued that AP and range have the same requirements, but that both pages (and the FAQ page) have some wording issues. Others have argued that, due to the current wording, AP and range have different requirements.

Some have brought up Ultima's comments in relation to a certain verse supporting a separation in requirements, but Bob has argued that those statements are out of context, and that in actuality he's argued for them to have the same requirements. Ultima hasn't yet commented to clarify this.

Also, some of the difference appears to be a difference in belief in what qualifies higher-dimensions as applicable to AP in the first place. Some people in this thread seem to believe that statements of higher dimensions being qualitatively superior are absolutely necessary. While I believe from past experience (and have reaffirmed from talking to Aeyu) that there are 3 other ways:
  1. Affecting the entirety of dimensions that are infinitely large; this started as a compromise when the big tiering system change occurred, but Aeyu believes it's mathematically supported by N-measures.
  2. The higher dimensions being temporal; as temporal dimensions necessarily contain copies of the universe in each instant, adding another temporal dimension adds another uncountably-infinitely many copies of the universe; this was properly established to defend ordinary timeline destruction still being tier 2.
  3. And there being infinitely many higher dimensions; I don't fully understand this one, but there being infinitely many dimensions creates a lot of weird situations in general. While moving in higher-D spaces isn't faster by default, any movement across infinite dimensions requires infinite speed. Also, if you have any size in infinite dimensions you have infinite size, a character's length, area, volume, hypervolume, and more, each get pulled across an infinite amount of space, making them infinite in all of those finite-D sizes. At least, that's my uneducated guess for why it qualifies.
 
Personally, I would say different requirements by current standards. Even for characters that are, say, High 1-C we don't demand that they can effect the entirety of their respective High 1-C realm. Meaning, Tier 1 characters might only have small extension in the higher D's as well. Higher-dimensional melee fighters, so to say.

What the other ways are concerned: There are definitely ways to get there without statements of qualitative superiority.
I'm not sure about the 3. requirement, though...
For 1. we actually don't demand infinity, but only proof of significant size (i.e. it should not be rolled up quantum mechanics stuff). That much was confirmed in the ToAru revisions after the system change, where it was checked whether they should stay tier 1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Epyriel
Tier 5 Revision
2 3
Replies
103
Views
7K
Everything12
Everything12
Fwyzzverse
  • Locked
Revisions (Tiering System) : Tier 2
Replies
10
Views
3K
Fwyzzverse
Fwyzzverse
Rakih_Elyan
  • Locked
Low 1-A Wiki Wide Tiering Revision, Beyond Dimensions.
9 10 11
Replies
429
Views
56K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
Tiering System Revisions: Tier 0
5 6 7
Replies
247
Views
71K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
Ultima_Reality
  • Locked
On the Many, Many Incoherences of the Tiering System
12 13 14
Replies
530
Views
148K
Ultima_Reality
Ultima_Reality
Back
Top