Tier 2 hotfix.

[Wankbreaker]

Currently, this wiki treats the strength of tier 2's by the amount of "universes" or space-time continuums they can destroy or survive having exploded in their face.
While it may seem sound or even obvious that a character that can exert "Infinite-multiversal" levels of power is stronger than a character who can "only" exert power over 2 universes, such difference is an illusion..

How, you may ask? It's simple. All "multiversal" characters are still affecting an infinite amount of points on a 4D scale, this is the same reasoning as why adding or multiplying anything by infinity, even itself, is still infinity. It's still the same level of infinity, not a "higher" one. The logic behind this should be simple to grasp, so i dont think i need to go any further into this.

What does this mean? All sub-sections of tier 2 should be unified.

basically turning this:

Low 2-C: Universe level+​

Characters or objects whose power is uncountably infinitely greater than the prior tiers. That is to say, they can significantly affect, create and/or destroy higher-dimensional structures that exceed lesser objects by an uncountably infinite margin. An example of this is 4-dimensional spacetime continuums of universal size, but this can be generalized to any 4-dimensional structure of a similar scope.

into this:

2: Multiverse level​

Characters or objects whose power is uncountably infinitely greater than the prior tiers. That is to say, they can significantly affect, create and/or destroy higher-dimensional structures that exceed lesser objects by an uncountably infinite margin. An example of this is 4-dimensional spacetime continuums of universal size, but this can be generalized to a 4-dimensional structure of any arbitrary "size".

Agree:
Neutral: @Agnaa
Disagree: @DarkDragonMedeus

 

[Pepsimanslover_69]

Just in case you didn't know, you need a staff permission to create a staff thread. I say this as I don't see your recent messages asking for it.

 

[Wankbreaker]

Just in case you didn't know, you need a staff permission to create a staff thread. I say this as I don't see your recent messages asking for it.

im technically a staff so it should be fine

thanks for letting me know,though

 

[Antvasima]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Agnaa @Qawsedf234

Your help would be very appreciated here.

 

[Agnaa]

We could do this.

Pros:

• It's more realistic.

Cons:

• It goes against how a lot of fiction operates.
• It makes Tier 2 ridiculously huge.

When I weigh all of that, I'm neutral.

 

[Wankbreaker]

Cons:

• It goes against how a lot of fiction operates.
• It makes Tier 2 ridiculously huge.

When I weigh all of that, I'm neutral.

A lot of fiction treats finite multipliers in strength to infinite characters as superior (see: DB), yet the tier rating itself stays the same, as far as im aware.
The same concept here: multiplying infinities does not give you a higher result.

Obviously there will be cases above baseline, in the case of finite or even infinite direct power multipliers afterward, but nothing that deserves different subtiers, as they are technically affecting constructs of the same size.

 

[Agnaa]

A lot of fiction treats finite multipliers in strength to infinite characters as superior (see: DB)

unless they're not meant to be infinitely strong

Obviously there will be cases above baseline, in the case of finite or even infinite direct power multipliers afterward, but nothing that deserves different subtiers, as they are technically affecting constructs of the same size.

That does improve the concept a bit.

Sadly, I also realised that this would give Tier 2 a very different formatting from the rest of our system, which may be confusing for visitors, which does worsen the concept a bit. Best remedy would probably be shifting some of Tier 1 down, since it's currently a bit overcrowded, but that also increases the workload.

 

[IdiosyncraticLawyer]

The logic is correct, but there's much more to say than that.

 

[Planck69]

A lot of fiction treats finite multipliers in strength to infinite characters as superior (see: DB), yet the tier rating itself stays the same, as far as im aware.
The same concept here: multiplying infinities does not give you a higher result.

Obviously there will be cases above baseline, in the case of finite or even infinite direct power multipliers afterward, but nothing that deserves different subtiers, as they are technically affecting constructs of the same size.

In fairness, I doubt that the intention within the work itself is that this happens, rather than just a consequence of how verses like Dragon Ball fit into our system.

I do not mind this in concept, given it is technically correct but it's a fairly large workload that like Agnaa said, also makes the formatting and tiering look off. That said, I'm rather leery of shifting Tier 1 down to compensate.

 

[Wankbreaker]

unless they're not meant to be infinitely strong

dont wanna get into that can of worms

That does improve the concept a bit.

Sadly, I also realised that this would give Tier 2 a very different formatting from the rest of our system, which may be confusing for visitors, which does worsen the concept a bit. Best remedy would probably be shifting some of Tier 1 down, since it's currently a bit overcrowded, but that also increases the workload.

0 is also a tier without any subtiers, is it not? It's way different conceptually, but the idea exists.
I would actually say the contrary though: Wouldnt packing everything up into one unified tier actually be easier to understand? (especially off site, i see some people say that multipliers would get you higher into tier 2.)

Tier 1 has an entirely different concept, being the tier of higher infinities and such, and would actually be harder to implement than what i'm proposing.

 

[CloverDragon03]

We can get technical about this but realistically, this is not how this concept tends to be treated in fiction. I'd consider this to be a case of a worthwhile concession to make for the sake of user-friendliness and being more in line with how fiction tends to handle destroying one space-time vs. multiple. And as a minor aside, I do not like how this proposed new tier looks. And then there's the age-old matter of too much work for not enough gain

So I'd have to say I disagree with this revision

 

[Wankbreaker]

We can get technical about this but realistically, this is not how this concept tends to be treated in fiction. I'd consider this to be a case of a worthwhile concession to make for the sake of user-friendliness and being more in line with how fiction tends to handle destroying one space-time vs. multiple. And as a minor aside, I do not like how this proposed new tier looks. And then there's the age-old matter of too much work for not enough gain

So I'd have to say I disagree with this revision

Like i said earlier, finite multipliers applied to tier 2 characters are also treated as superior in fiction, yet this wiki doesnt tier them differently, because there is no quantifiable difference if you get to the root of it.

each of the other tiers have some difference between them, yet tier 2is just "affecting infinite 4D space, except we've decided somehow that this infinite space-time is somehow "bigger" than the other one.

 

[GarrixianXD]

I significantly disagree with this. Sure it is on the same level of infinity but it should be noted that tier 2 isn't a tier section that strictly deals with higher levels of infinities. Our tiering system has traditionally maintained 3 dividers to the 4-D system of scaling for many years, and crap tons of characters who are tier 2 notably have their scales placed on the number of universes/space-time continuums they are capable of destroying. The multiversal tiering system is more widespread and known throughout fiction and the battleboarding community, and traditionally have been scaling multiversal characters based on the number of universes they scale to; the degree of infinity isn't taken in; no one would argue that a Low 2-C and 2-A character are on the same plane of infinity -- thus, a 2-A can easily one-shot and dominate a 2-B character in tiering and that is a completely valid fact. Going by this logic, we could also merge all the tiers 10-3 into a single tier, and the possibility of that even being worth consideration is just zero.

 

[Wankbreaker]

I significantly disagree with this. Sure it is on the same level of infinity but it should be noted that tier 2 isn't a tier section that strictly deals with higher levels of infinities.

I said tier 1,not 2 btw

Our tiering system has traditionally maintained 3 dividers to the 4-D system of scaling for many years, and crap tons of characters who are tier 1 notably have their scales placed on the number of universes/space-time continuums they are capable of destroying. The multiversal tiering system is more widespread and known throughout fiction and the battleboarding community, and traditionally have been scaling multiversal characters based on the number of universes they scale to; the degree of infinity isn't taken in; no one would argue that a Low 2-C and 2-A character are on the same plane of infinity -- thus, a 2-A can easily one-shot and dominate a 2-B character in tiering and that is a completely valid fact.

Tier 1 characters? im pretty sure they do not.
What's more known isnt always the most "correct"

Going by this logic, we could also merge all the tiers 10-3 into a single tier, and the possibility of that even being worth consideration is just zero.

the logic is entirely different. those tiers are finite, therefore adding or multiplying them would actually make a difference. false equivalence

 

[GarrixianXD]

I said tier 1,not 2 btw

Tier 1 characters? im pretty sure they do not.
What's more known isnt always the most "correct"

I meant tier 1. Yeah, fuсk.

the logic is entirely different. those tiers are finite, therefore adding or multiplying them would actually make a difference. false equivalence

Yes, those tiers are finite, however, it doesn't change the fact that they operate on the same logic as other tiers of our tiering system, and not to mention those tiers are as popular as all of the tier 2 subtiers. A 2-C one-shot a Low 2-C just like how a 3-A can one-shot a 10-B. Same logic, hope you get what I meant.

The main issue of this proposal is rather unnecessarily lessening the broadness of tier 2, as I said before, we shouldn't be dealing with higher infinities as there isn't a strict requirement for that in 4-D multiversal scaling. Also the popularity and the quantity of tier 2 characters, and how well it is widely known compared to the other hyperdimensional tier 1 subtiers.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Like i said earlier, finite multipliers applied to tier 2 characters are also treated as superior in fiction, yet this wiki doesnt tier them differently, because there is no quantifiable difference if you get to the root of it.

each of the other tiers have some difference between them, yet tier 2is just "affecting infinite 4D space, except we've decided somehow that this infinite space-time is somehow "bigger" than the other one.

Tier 2 actually isn't just affecting infinite 4-D space, it can be any 4-D space as long as it's at least universal in size. There are actual problems with Tier 2, such as how we made up the whole "needing to be of significant size" thing and the fact that 2-C and 2-B have arbitrary cutoffs, but this doesn't effectively address such problems.

To begin with, two space-time continua can absolutely be "bigger" in a sense. There are such things as one space-time continuum being countably infinitely bigger than another, for instance

 

[Wankbreaker]

Tier 2 actually isn't just affecting infinite 4-D space, it can be any 4-D space as long as it's at least universal in size. There are actual problems with Tier 2, such as how we made up the whole "needing to be of significant size" thing and the fact that 2-C and 2-B have arbitrary cutoffs, but this doesn't effectively address such problems.

time actually NEEDS to have an infinite amount of "points" in order to function, fyi. by definition, they are all "infinite".

To begin with, two space-time continua can absolutely be "bigger" in a sense. There are such things as one space-time continuum being countably infinitely bigger than another, for instance

a verse can indeed treat one to be "bigger" than the other, but from an indexing purpose, such difference might as well not exist.

 

[CloverDragon03]

time actually NEEDS to have an infinite amount of "points" in order to function, fyi. by definition, they are all "infinite".

I mean if you wanna get technical, then sure. But that's not what tends to be referred to - rather, it's the size of the space itself

a verse can indeed treat one to be "bigger" than the other, but from an indexing purpose, such difference might as well not exist.

And that's the problem in your proposal: it's pretty much entirely appealing to reality, regardless of how such things are treated in fictional verses

 

[Wankbreaker]

I mean if you wanna get technical, then sure. But that's not what tends to be referred to - rather, it's the size of the space itself

sure,makes sense.

And that's the problem in your proposal: it's pretty much entirely appealing to reality, regardless of how such things are treated in fictional verses

Obviously there will be cases above baseline, in the case of finite or even infinite direct power multipliers afterward, but nothing that deserves different subtiers, as they are technically affecting constructs of the same size.

the other tiers have a "size" or "Quality" difference that seperates them. Tier 2 does not.
also not really, as this is the same reason why multipliers dont net you deeper into tier 2.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I am going to have to strongly disagree with this; I have seen too many threads attempting to merge certain parts of Tier 2; not to mention it would be harmful to have to think of ways to reorganize the Low 1-C and above. It would really make out system disorganized to nuke the A, B, and C's. And it's even more extreme than all those rejected attempts to merge 2-C with 2-B even. So I highly doubt staff majority is even going to agree.

And either way, fiction doesn't really follow every logic like this; inherently, destroying 2 or more timelines at once is considered unfathomably above destroying one timeline. So separating Low 2-C from 2-C is an absolute minimum that needs to stick. Likewise, an infinite number is still objectively larger; also keep in mind that even 2-C and above is actually technically limited degrees of 5-D. Which makes the proposal moot.

 

[Wankbreaker]

I am going to have to strongly disagree with this; I have seen too many threads attempting to merge certain parts of Tier 2; not to mention it would be harmful to have to think of ways to reorganize the Low 1-C and above. It would really make out system disorganized to nuke the A, B, and C's. And it's even more extreme than all those rejected attempts to merge 2-C with 2-B even. So I highly doubt staff majority is even going to agree.

And either way, fiction doesn't really follow every logic like this; inherently, destroying 2 or more timelines at once is considered unfathomably above destroying one timeline. So separating Low 2-C from 2-C is an absolute minimum that needs to stick.

I can agree with this, at least

Likewise, an infinite number is still objectively larger; also keep in mind that even 2-C and above is actually technically limited degrees of 5-D. Which makes the proposal moot.

how is it objectively larger?

like i said to another user here:

If you are extending infinitely out of a universe into another space-time, you are also moving infinitely through the same axis that you need to enter another space-time.

You dont move 4th dimensionally and suddenly move 5th dimensionally. You would have to move 5th dimensionally from the very beginning.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Nah, it isn't really how fiction works.
As argued in past threads, one can also see it as insignificant 5D to different degrees.

Anyway, I disagree. Doesn't seem like an improvement.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

@DontTalkDT @Ultima_Reality @Agnaa @Qawsedf234

Your help would be very appreciated here.

I was toying around with something like the concept of this revision a while ago, but I'm pretty uninterested in it as it stands, especially with the Tiering System revisions and the leftovers from it still hanging. By consequence I'm indifferent towards this thread. (That said, I think making most of Tier 2 into a weird pseudo-5-D tier is a bad idea no matter what, but that's not a topic for this thread anyway)

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Similarly disagree. Doesn't gain us anything, seems like it just removes a great deal of context to favor something that verses rarely even consider for a second anyways.

 

[Wankbreaker]

seems like this was rejected by enough people, so whatever.

this can be closed probably

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I will do the honors in closing the thread via general staff input combined with OP request.