• 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 2 requirements and examples - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheUnshakableOne said:
It wouldn't be infinite 4D?
Click to expand...
The whole notion of infinite 4D is weird at this point, a single timeline is infinite 4-D on its own but I have seen others refer to it like it is not
Theglassman12 said:
@Pain_to12 I asked him about how we should treat branching timelines given they still extend infinitely across even if you nuke the branch it stems from with my comment here. He responded by saying if you nuked the branch and the Timelines that branches off still exist you’d essentially have parallel timelines by default. So technically speaking you’d still get higher than Low 2-C by default unless there’s any counter point to this, which I don’t recall seeing in this thread by you or KingPin.
Click to expand...
Yes I have seen it, and I thought I mentioned it already, they would be the exception and not the rule, if destruction of the past branches does not affect the future then they should certainly be treated as disjointed timelines
 
Pain_to12 said:
The whole notion of infinite 4D is weird at this point, a single timeline is infinite 4-D on its own but I have seen others refer to it like it is not
Click to expand...
It is weird because in fact, it is infinite 4D from scientifically view, but we deny this fact since the fiction never imply this setting in its plot most of the time.
 
DemonGodMitchAubin said:
This is a really tough topic since every verse handles universes and timelines differently

I need to spend time reading over everything first
Click to expand...
Thank you for helping out.

Can somebody provide an easy to understand explanation post for me regarding what Pain_to12 and DontTalk respectively suggest here please? I am very distracted and have limited time available.
 
Pain_to12 said:
Yes I have seen it, and I thought I mentioned it already, they would be the exception and not the rule, if destruction of the past branches does not affect the future then they should certainly be treated as disjointed timelines
Click to expand...
I mean, even if destruction of the past does affect the future, it could still be multiverse level. It just depends on whether the destruction of the multiverse abuses the fact that you can just nuke the past of one timeline to erase the rest (in which case it would be low 2-C at best) or not (in which case it would be multiverse level).

Like, if we are shown a big explosion that seems to just engulf all timelines / universes, than we can comfortably say that this destruction was independend of time paradox past erasure stuff and hence multiverse level. Even if the timelines branched off from each other at some point.

(I guess whether they are "disjointed" or not is another question, but that's exactly why I am against establishing such a term. It's only tangentially related to the true issue.)
 
DontTalkDT said:
I mean, even if destruction of the past does affect the future, it could still be multiverse level. It just depends on whether the destruction of the multiverse abuses the fact that you can just nuke the past of one timeline to erase the rest (in which case it would be low 2-C at best) or not (in which case it would be multiverse level).

Like, if we are shown a big explosion that seems to just engulf all timelines / universes, than we can comfortably say that this destruction was independend on time paradox past erasure stuff and hence multiverse level. Even if the timelines branched off from each other at some point.

(I guess whether they are "disjointed" or not is another question, but that's exactly why I am against establishing such a term. It's only tangentially related to the true issue.)
Click to expand...
I see, so it would be multiversal by default unless fiction abuses distruction of past to destroy all of timelines.

There is also another point in the OP that is universes shouldn't be considered separate spacetime continuum's by default, do you agree with that?
 
DontTalkDT said:
I mean, even if destruction of the past does affect the future, it could still be multiverse level. It just depends on whether the destruction of the multiverse abuses the fact that you can just nuke the past of one timeline to erase the rest (in which case it would be low 2-C at best) or not (in which case it would be multiverse level).
Click to expand...
If I am getting this right to simplify your claim, the tier should depend on the mode and way it was destroyed, not the structure itself.
That I can agree with.
DontTalkDT said:
Like, if we are shown a big explosion that seems to just engulf all timelines / universes,
Click to expand...
Reiner said:
I see, so it would be multiversal by default unless fiction abuses distruction of past to destroy all of timelines.

There is also another point in the OP that is universes shouldn't be considered separate spacetime continuum's by default, do you agree with that?
Click to expand...
I think I should clarify this better, I mean destruction of universes should not be default across all of time unless stated otherwise destruction should just be "present" not the entire continuum
 
Antvasima said:
Thank you for helping out.

Can somebody provide an easy to understand explanation post for me regarding what Pain_to12 and DontTalk respectively suggest here please? I am very distracted and have limited time available.
Click to expand...
DT has no problem with the rest of the OP and says branching timelines should be tiered based on the way they are destroyed.
I can agree with that
 
Reiner said:
I see, so it would be multiversal by default unless fiction abuses distruction of past to destroy all of timelines.
Click to expand...
Whether or not destruction of the past is abused, is a case-by-case thing to evaluate, though. I think one should have a look at the nature/depiction of the attack in question for that.

Reiner said:
There is also another point in the OP that is universes shouldn't be considered separate spacetime continuum's by default, do you agree with that?
Click to expand...
I think unless there is evidence of the contrary (such as characters just flying from one universe to the other) universes should per default be assume to be spatially separate i.e. not share the same 3D space.

On the other hand, it should per default by assumed that they share the same time dimension, unless evidence of the contrary exists.

Pain_to12 said:
If I am getting this right to simplify your claim, the tier should depend on the mode and way it was destroyed, not the structure itself.
That I can agree with.
Click to expand...
Right.
 
DontTalkDT said:
I mean, even if destruction of the past does affect the future, it could still be multiverse level. It just depends on whether the destruction of the multiverse abuses the fact that you can just nuke the past of one timeline to erase the rest (in which case it would be low 2-C at best) or not (in which case it would be multiverse level).

Like, if we are shown a big explosion that seems to just engulf all timelines / universes, than we can comfortably say that this destruction was independend of time paradox past erasure stuff and hence multiverse level. Even if the timelines branched off from each other at some point.

(I guess whether they are "disjointed" or not is another question, but that's exactly why I am against establishing such a term. It's only tangentially related to the true issue.)
Click to expand...
I also agree with this.
 
Pain_to12 said:
DT has no problem with the rest of the OP and says branching timelines should be tiered based on the way they are destroyed.
I can agree with that
Click to expand...
And what else does the OP suggest that we change, more specifically?
 
Antvasima said:
And what else does the OP suggest that we change, more specifically?
Click to expand...
Pain_to12 said:
Tier 2 is the destruction/creation of universe/universes across all of time/space-time continuums (past, present and future). i.e. destruction or creation of universe(s) that does not happen across all of time unless those universes are self-contained space-time continuums, does not qualify for tier 2. In a simpler term, destruction of one or multiple universes won't be default tier 2 unless all of time was shown or said to be affected or the universes are a separate space-time continuum.
Click to expand...
 
Pain_to12 said:
Tier 2 is the destruction/creation of universe/universes across all of time/space-time continuums (past, present and future). i.e. destruction or creation of universe(s) that does not happen across all of time unless those universes are self-contained space-time continuums, does not qualify for tier 2. In a simpler term, destruction of one or multiple universes won't be default tier 2 unless all of time was shown or said to be affected or the universes are a separate space-time continuum.
Click to expand...
Okay. That would require massive revisions across our wiki, as I do not think that destroying the past and future is usually mentioned during multiversal feats. In fact, tiers 2-C to 2-A would likely almost turn completely depopulated.

Isn't it enough to mention that the space-time continuums have been destroyed and the 5-dimensional space between them has been breached across? I think that seem like sufficiently reliable indicators of such a scale for our purposes.

@DontTalkDT
 
Antvasima said:
And what else does the OP suggest that we change, more specifically?
Click to expand...
Okay this is the OP and what is currently agreed on\
Here are the staffs that have commented on this thread so far
@DarkDragonMedeus @KingPin0422 @Sir_Ovens @KLOL506 @Theglassman12 @Antvasima @Celestial_Pegasus @Planck69 @DemonGodMitchAubin @DontTalkDT
Tier 2 is the destruction/creation of universe/universes across all of time/space-time continuums (past, present and future). i.e. destruction or creation of universe(s) that does not happen across all of time unless those universes are self-contained space-time continuums, does not qualify for tier 2. In a simpler term, destruction of one or multiple universes won't be default tier 2 unless all of time was shown or said to be affected or the universes are a separate space-time continuum.

Here are a few of the requirements and examples of cosmologies that qualifies for tier 2
1. Well no brainer, the most straighforward way is for it to be explicitly called a "Space-time continuum"
Click to expand...
Everyone agrees with this
2. Physically traveling between the universes is not possible, unless through a portal or something similar. As this is prove that these universes do not share the same physical space, as it is impossible for two separate space-time continuums to share the same physical space unless there is some sort of Higher Dimensional space seperating them. in other words, Two separate space-time continuums may share the same physical space, if the space between them is a 4-D or 5-D space or higher. So essentially unless the space between the universes was stated to be of Higher dimensional space, physically traveling among them should not be possible.
In a bit easier term, in a verse where traveling among universes is possible physically, for the verse to qualify for tier 2, there must be
i. A larger space containing all the universes/space-times
ii. There must be proof the space is a higher dimensional space
Click to expand...
No disagreements here
3. Two universes A and B are spatio-temporally separate if and only if there are no points in space or time that are in both A and B. Under this definition, timelines that branch off of each other are not, by default, separate spacetimes. Such timelines clearly share not just a single point, but an entire interval of time, that being the timeline that existed before the moment at which they diverged., which would mean branching timelines will not qualify for higher levels of tier 2, as those branches are not big enough to qualify for tier 2 to begin with.
Click to expand...
No one disagrees with this per say, but @KLOL506, @Theglassman12 and @DarkDragonMedeus thinks it should be a case by case basis and how the verse treats them, which is what the OP is also suggesting but in a case where the verse gives us no precedent, we go with this scenario. @Planck69 thinks the same
@DontTalkDT says the way the branching happens should not matter since it depends on the mode of destruction

So I can create a note to add to this point, to make way for the compromises

Note: Time flowing differently (Slower or faster) in different universes is not enough proof that they are of separate space-time continuums
Click to expand...
Everyone agrees with this
 
Last edited:
Pain_to12 said:
Everyone agrees with this
Click to expand...
AKM has rejected this change long before when a staff brought it up, his reason was it doesn't have to be mentioned if time and space has been affected but will be considered as it is, given that fiction do not treat multiversal destruction less impressive than universal destruction of any scale, even one of entire spacetime continuum.
 
Antvasima said:
Okay. That would require massive revisions across our wiki, as I do not think that destroying the past and future is usually mentioned during multiversal feats. In fact, tiers 2-C to 2-A would likely almost turn completely depopulated.

Isn't it enough to mention that the space-time continuums have been destroyed and
Click to expand...
This is covered by point 1, if there is a mention of space-time continuum it would qualify naturally
Antvasima said:
the 5-dimensional space between them has been breached across?
Click to expand...
this is also covered by the second point, if there is a higher dimensioned space between them, then they would also qualify for higher levels of tier 2.
Antvasima said:
I think that seem like sufficiently reliable indicators of such a scale for our purposes.
Click to expand...
Yes they are and they are mentioned in the OP.
The verses this will affect are verses that have no mention of destruction of the space-time continuums, destruction of the universes across all of time, destruction of a form of higher dimensional space separating the universes.
N.B. If there is a form of higher dimensioned space between the universes, by default to destroy these universes, you need to destroy the space in-between. Unless stated otherwise
 
Reiner said:
AKM has rejected this change long before when a staff brought it up, his reason was it doesn't have to be mentioned if time and space has been affected but will be considered as it is, given that fiction do not treat multiversal destruction less impressive than universal destruction of any scale, even one of entire spacetime continuum.
Click to expand...
Well AKM will need to come to this thread and tell us why he disagrees as this is a new thread. Then we will discuss it and vote on the matter. but so far the past revisions holds no water, that is the purpose of Content revision threads, to change what was formerly accepted
 
Reiner said:
Took me 27 threads to go through 🗿
Click to expand...
Found it a long time ago, all i had to do was
search for "2" and by member "QuasiYuri"

anyway here is AKM quote
We already assume that a character who can destroy two universes by breaching the 5-D gap between them is destroying time by default, and hence the destruction of two or more universes is assumed to be 4-D, unless there is evidence against it.

The tiering system is strict enough that it makes a distinction between 3-A and Low 2-C on the basis of "tell me where time is destroyed in the universal destruction or you're 3-A" when most fiction out there don't even treat the two as separate. This whole "tell me where time is destroyed when you destroy 45810962 universes" is just extending it to excessive levels.

Not to mention that a character who can destroy 45810962 universes being rated as 3-A would look absolutely stupid in my opinion. We should keep our already over-the-top standards in check so that it's in balance with how the general fictional verses work. This would just make the wiki look like a joke to be honest.
Click to expand...
Nothing here addresses any of my point or relates to them, which is why it is best for AKM to speak for themself
 
Pain_to12 said:
This is covered by point 1, if there is a mention of space-time continuum it would qualify naturally

this is also covered by the second point, if there is a higher dimensioned space between them, then they would also qualify for higher levels of tier 2.

Yes they are and they are mentioned in the OP.
The verses this will affect are verses that have no mention of destruction of the space-time continuums, destruction of the universes across all of time, destruction of a form of higher dimensional space separating the universes.
N.B. If there is a form of higher dimensioned space between the universes, by default to destroy these universes, you need to destroy the space in-between. Unless stated otherwise
Click to expand...
Okay. I suppose that it is probably fine then, but these issues need to be properly clarified in our tiering system page(s).
 
Question: what if it's clearly shown that it's impossible to travel to another universe w/o spacetime breach. Wouldn't destroying those universes will qualify as tier 2 by default? As same thing applies on energy, they would need to breach dimensional barrier of spacetime and thus affecting the spacetime itself.
 
Reiner said:
Question: what if it's clearly shown that it's impossible to travel to another universe w/o spacetime breach. Wouldn't destroying those universes will qualify as tier 2 by default? As same thing applies on energy, they would need to breach dimensional barrier of spacetime and thus affecting the spacetime itself.
Click to expand...
space-time breach is a broad term
do you mean space-time breach that creates a portal to teleport to another universes? yes that can be tier 2
do you mean space-time breach like a veil separating the universes, then that is not tier 2
do you mean space-time breach that causes you destroy the veil and to enter the space separating the universes? not tier 2 also if the space is not higher dimensioned. if it is higher dimensioned then it is tier 2
Do you mean space-time breach that causes you create a portal that sends you to a world in which you can access the other universes, that is tier 2.

but I think the space-time breach you are talking about is the one where a veil separates the universes, then you can check the other points on why they should qualify such as;
1, were they stated to be contained space-time
2. Do they have different dimensions of time
3. Does a higher dimension space separate them
e.t.c.
if they dont fully any of the above, and you can simply break a veil and arrive at the other universe, then they are not separate to begin with
 
So I realized that the tiering system is actually accurate with this thread, and it is how we treat the characters that are not accurate.

Low 2-C: Universe level+​

Characters or objects that are capable of significantly affecting[1], creating and/or destroying an area of space that is qualitatively larger than an infinitely-sized 3-dimensional space. Common fictional examples of spaces representing such sizes are space-time continuums (the entire past, present and future of 3-dimensional space) of a universal scale
Click to expand...

2-C: Low Multiverse level​

Characters or objects that can significantly affect[2], create and/or destroy small multiverses which can be comprised of several separate space-time continuums ranging anywhere from two to a thousand, or equivalents.

2-B: Multiverse level​

Characters or objects that can significantly affect[2], create and/or destroy larger multiverses which comprise from 1001 to any higher finite amount of separate space-time continuums.

2-A: Multiverse level+​

Characters or objects that are capable of significantly affecting[2], creating and/or destroying a countably infinite number of space-time continuums.
Click to expand...
So they all have the term separate space-time continuum, except the 2-A, which I will fix and add separate to it, to make it concise with the rest of the tier 2.
So aside the adding of "separate" to the 2-A, everything else is fine.

Now this is what I propose we add to the FAQ page.

Q: When is the destruction/creation of a Universe(s) Tier 2?​

Click to expand...
A: Tier 2 is the destruction/creation of universe/universes across all of time in other words destruction or creation of space-time continuums (past, present and future). i.e. destruction or creation of universe(s) that does not happen across all of time unless those universes are self-contained space-time continuums, does not qualify for tier 2. In a simpler term, destruction of one or multiple universes won't be default tier 2 unless all of time was shown or said to be affected or the universes are a separate space-time continuum.
Click to expand...

When can two or more universes/timelines be considered separate space-time continuums?​

Click to expand...
Two universes/timelines A and B are spatio-temporally separate if and only if there are no points in space or time that are in both A and B
Two universes/timelines can be considered separate space-time continnums if; Physically traveling between the universes is not possible, unless through a portal or something similar. As this is prove that these universes do not share the same physical space, as it is impossible for two separate space-time continuums to share the same physical space unless there is some sort of Higher Dimensional space seperating them. in other words, Two separate space-time continuums may share the same physical space, if the space between them is a 4-D or 5-D space or higher.
In a bit easier term, in a verse where traveling among universes is possible physically, for the verse to qualify for tier 2, there must be
i. A larger space containing all the universes/space-times
ii. There must be proof the space is a higher dimensional space

Note: Time flowing differently (faster or slower) in different universes is not enough proof that they are separate space-time continuums, for even in a single universe, we can have different flow of time.
Click to expand...

Does branching Timelines qualify for higher levels of Tier 2?​

Click to expand...
While we can assume that branching timelines are not big enough to qualify for tier 2 because; "Two universes A and B are spatio-temporally separate if and only if there are no points in space or time that are in both A and B" and under this definition, timelines that branch off of each other are not, by default, separate spacetimes. Such timelines clearly share not just a single point, but an entire interval of time, that being the timeline that existed before the moment at which they diverged. So while branching timelines are not separate space-time continuums, there are instances where the branches are big enough to qualify as a tier 2 structure, if each branches extend infinitely; This would mean destruction of an entire branch that is not by some sort of time-paradox or casualty but destroyed directly, would qualify for tier 2 as;
Destruction of intersecting timelines qualifies for hier levels of tier 2, if and only if each timeline, without the parts that intersect with the other, is still of large 4-dimensional size. (Large in the sense of criteria "A)" in the Tiering System description of Low 2-C)
This includes branching timelines, but leaves out things like a timeline which only branches out for 2 Planck seconds before fusing back together.
Given, what "large" means in a time sense is of course hard to tell. Roughly one could say that they have to be separate for infinite time.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Wait other week, I need to reword your draft to be better formulated. (I am currently not available)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Fwyzzverse
  • Locked
Revisions (Tiering System) : Tier 2
Replies
10
Views
3K
Fwyzzverse
Fwyzzverse
BasedNecoScaler69
  • Locked
Tier 2 revision: Changing Space Time Continuum Standards. (Never cook again.)
Replies
5
Views
1K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
Arc7Kuroi
  • Locked
Tiering System Question
Replies
17
Views
1K
Arc7Kuroi
Arc7Kuroi
Deagonx
Tier 2 Revision: Merging 3D Spaces and Destroying Empty Space
2 3 4
Replies
154
Views
15K
Antvasima
Antvasima
PrinceofPein
  • Locked
Another Addition/Revision to/for Tier 2
2
Replies
77
Views
4K
Deagonx
Deagonx
Back
Top