• 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.
Alright, I wanted to just do some reformulations, but somehow ended up just writing it from scratch in the end while trying to fit stuff in.
Q: When is the destruction or creation of a universe or timeline ranked as Low 2-C (Universe level+)?

A: As the [[Tiering_System#Low_2-C:_Universe_level+|Tiering System]] specifies, the affected area either has to be a large four dimensional space, be [[Tiering_System_FAQ#Q:_What_is_qualitative_superiority?|qualitatively superior]] to three dimensional spaces or, most commonly, be an entire space-time continuum.
The latter means that all of the three-dimensional space of the universe has to be destroyed or created, at each moment in time. I.e. the entire timeline has to be destroyed.
Note that only direct destruction or creation qualifies. Just destroying the universe at the beginning of time and the rest vanishing due to the resulting causality paradox does not meet the requirements and would only be ranked as 3-A (Universe level).
For Tiering in regard to creating the Big Bang see [[Big Bang|here]]. Note that for creation feats additional considerations should be taken into account, as explained [[Creation Feats|here]].

Q: What is the Tier for destroying or creating several timelines?

A: As the [[Tiering_System#2-C:_Low_Multiverse_level|Tiering System]] specifies, destroying or creating multiple timelines or space-time continuums is usually ranked between 2-C and 2-A, depending on the number of timelines involved.
However, there are two edge cases, which require particular considerations.

First, note that in our terms a universe, and hence also space-time continuums and timelines, always includes all of the three dimensional space that can be reached from it. That is to say, any place that can theoretically be reached via regular three-dimensional movement alone (e.g. via spaceflight) would be considered as part of the same universe, and hence timeline, regardless of whether the fiction considers it as such. Traveling from one universe to another should only by possible via portals, higher-dimensional movement, teleportation or other unusual means of transportation.
Per default universes are assumed to have separate three-dimensional spaces, but should a piece of fiction demonstrate the opposite destruction of several timelines connected in such a way would only be Low 2-C (Universe level+).

Second, is the case of timelines that at certain points are connected. Contrary to the case where one can always travel from one universe to the other via three-dimensional movement, it is only possible in those at certain times. In fact, at certain points in time they might be the same universe. E.g. if a timeline branches into two, then the timelines were the same universe before the branch split happened. Other way around, if two timelines get merged into one, then they are the same universe only after they were fused.
In those cases, the destruction of any one timeline is only counted if it was not connected to any other timeline for an infinite amount of time. Other way around, if there are several timelines none of which were separate for an infinite amount of time, they would all be counted as just one timeline for the purpose of Tiering their destruction or creation.
Note that timelines, per default, are assume to be infinitely long i.e. it’s assumed that there is no end to time. Hence, unless the contrary are shown, the destruction of timelines that branch out from each other, and then never merge together again, would still be ranked between 2-C and 2-A (depending on the amount).
The underlying idea behind all of that is that each timeline that is counted should still be a large four dimensional object, as that’s the fundamental criteria to qualify for those tiers.

Note that, once again, only direct destruction or creation qualifies. Just destroying the universe at the beginning of time and the timeline(s) vanishing due to the resulting causality paradox does not meet the requirements. This, in particular, means that one needs to take care that if multiple timelines, which branch off from each other, are destroyed, that it is not done by just properly destroying one timeline and the rest getting paradoxed out of existence due to their mutual past getting destroyed. Whether or not that is likely to be the case is decided on case-by-case basis and depends on such things as the nature and depiction of the attacks.

Note that for creation feats additional considerations should be taken into account, as explained [[Creation Feats|here]].
Click to expand...
This much as a draft. Opinions? Better or worse than the prior one? I could try to replace or change certain sections if I made it harder to understand.

As a question, should I include the
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...
from Pain's draft? It's technically true, although a little awkward to include, as our default assumption says that it is assumed that they are separate anyway.
 
Thanks a lot for helping out.

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

I think that your draft looks great, and should be fine to apply.

I personally do not think that Pain's small extra text section seems necessary to include.
 
DontTalkDT said:
Alright, I wanted to just do some reformulations, but somehow ended up just writing it from scratch in the end while trying to fit stuff in.

This much as a draft. Opinions? Better or worse than the prior one? I could try to replace or change certain sections if I made it harder to understand.
Click to expand...
Well since your post is practically saying the same thing, I think it is fine. I dont know about it being harder tho I am not the one to ask. So i think it is better to ask others about that
DontTalkDT said:
As a question, should I include the

from Pain's draft? It's technically true, although a little awkward to include, as our default assumption says that it is assumed that they are separate anyway.
Click to expand...
Well the purpose of the draft is the fact, time flowing differently in some spaces has always been used as proof of different space-times, and I think it is time we just clarify that out
 
Pain_to12 said:
Well the purpose of the draft is the fact, time flowing differently in some spaces has always been used as proof of different space-times, and I think it is time we just clarify that out
Click to expand...
Hmmmmm... could it maybe be put on the Universe page instead? That has criteria for different worlds to be universes, so if one formulates it as
Note that time flowing at different rates (faster or slower) in different places is not enough proof that they are separate universes or space-time continuums, for even in a single universe or pocket dimension, we can have different flows of time.
Click to expand...
then it might fit well in there.
 
@DontTalkDT a little off topic but what about alternate space time realms that aren’t remotely close to being universe size, do they get disregarded for scaling a universe or timeline to be higher than Low 2-C or what?
 
Theglassman12 said:
@DontTalkDT a little off topic but what about alternate space time realms that aren’t remotely close to being universe size, do they get disregarded for scaling a universe or timeline to be higher than Low 2-C or what?
Click to expand...
Depends on the size, I guess. We only accept large dimensions as tiering applicable, after all.
 
Other way around, if there are several timelines none of which were separate for an infinite amount of time
Click to expand...
Late for this thread, however, i find this requirement is extremely specific and............bad. By default time is infinitely long and continuous. So even if the timeline is branched, the branches can still be considered to be infinitely long into the future, and when the entire branch is destroyed, it still mean legit tier 2 destruction due to it containing its entire past, present and future, infinitely long which in turn from mathematical perspective: uncountable infinite moment of 3D objects = 4D which is tier 2.

Now it is very hard to find some extremely cases where you can find out if the branch was already seperated for infinite amount of time or not
 
Vietthai96 said:
Late for this thread, however, i find this requirement is extremely specific and............bad. By default time is infinitely long and continuous. So even if the timeline is branched, the branches can still be considered to be infinitely long into the future, and when the entire branch is destroyed, it still mean legit tier 2 destruction due to it containing its entire past, present and future, infinitely long which in turn from mathematical perspective: uncountable infinite moment of 3D objects = 4D which is tier 2.

Now it is very hard to find some extremely cases where you can find out if the branch was already seperated for infinite amount of time or not
Click to expand...
Hmmm...? But what you describe meets the criteria for being Multiverse level, because it is separate for an infinite amount of time. (infinitely long into the future, as you said)
 
Sorry for commenting here, but I would like to ask, why does affecting the entire low 2-c structure do not qualify anymore for this tier and above?
 
DontTalkDT said:
Hmmm...? But what you describe meets the criteria for being Multiverse level, because it is separate for an infinite amount of time. (infinitely long into the future, as you said)
Click to expand...
I can't believe you typed this fast bruhh

I just found out some of my wording is bad and i forgot the last part from your comment about: unless contrary is shown

but anyway, should you shorten that Q&A, i personally find it pretty long
 
Shiroiyo said:
Sorry for commenting here, but I would like to ask, why does affecting the entire low 2-c structure do not qualify anymore for this tier and above?
Click to expand...
Eh? They still do, affecting/destroying/creating L2C is L2C..., How this thread affects that?
 
Reiner said:
Eh? They still do, affecting/destroying/creating L2C is L2C..., How this thread affects that?
Click to expand...
From the OP "Tier 2 is the destruction/creation of universe/universes across all of time/space-time continuums" and from DT's last draft "only direct destruction or creation qualifies".

If this still qualifies, I think the word affect/affecting could be more noticeable in the text or header for example, but I'll admit that it's late here, I'm quite sleepy and I didn't read the whole thread, I'm sorry if I missed or misread something.
 
Well tiering system is same as it is, so it qualifies, but FAQ only answers over creation/destruction but i suppose as directly affecting qualifies as well it can be added in FAQ.
 
Pain_to12 said:
I really don't see why that is necessary or possible without some important points getting lost.
Click to expand...
hmm, many peoples have tendency to.....skim too fast through a paragraph, too long with just discourage them from reading further, so i think some slight shortening isn't cause any harm. Also i just said that i will look to it if i can shorten it without losing informations, if i can't then it is not really a problem, i just don't want people miss any points, as much as possible
 
Yes, I also do not think that you should trim down DontTalk's text, especially given your past problems with spelling and grammar.
 
Antvasima said:
Yes, I also do not think that you should trim down DontTalk's text, especially given your past problems with spelling and grammar.
Click to expand...
Ah you hurt me Ant, i'm sad. Well joke aside, i just finish checking, so nothing need to be trimmed down anyway. However
Other way around, if two timelines get merged into one, then they are the same universe only after they were fused.
In those cases, the destruction of any one timeline is only counted if it was not connected to any other timeline for an infinite amount of time. Other way around, if there are several timelines none of which were separate for an infinite amount of time, they would all be counted as just one timeline for the purpose of Tiering their destruction or creation
Click to expand...
The bolded parts, somehow it look awkward to me (probably a bit nitpicky for my part but whatever)
 
As we have a dedicated page for the concept of “universe” in our fandom, it would be appropriate to establish a separate page for “space-time continuum” and include it in the list of relevant pages.

Here is the sandbox.
 
Pain_to12 said:
The tiering system the 2-A, needs to be "separate space-time continuum" that's all.
All the other tier 2 has that already
Click to expand...
ImmortalDread said:
I see a lot of grammar errors in the draft, I will create a page soon for it.
Click to expand...
ImmortalDread said:
As we have a dedicated page for the concept of “universe” in our fandom, it would be appropriate to establish a separate page for “space-time continuum” and include it in the list of relevant pages.

Here is the sandbox.
Click to expand...
@DontTalkDT

I apologise, but it seems like we still need your help here.
 
For a start, I should say while I dont mind it being a new page, we can also just add the whole section to the universe page also
anyway here are my thoughts
1.
The Space-time continuum refers to the concept in physics that describes the relationship between space and time.
Click to expand...
I think this should just be changed to space-time
while this is true the definition for space-time continuum should be separate maybe below
and it is should be
"This is the concept of physics that refers to all the time of a certain space, i.e. the past, present and future of a space"
or something along this line
2. this should be linked to the term gravity
en.wikipedia.org

Gravity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
3. this to the "theory of relativity"
en.wikipedia.org

Theory of relativity - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

I will try and go through and add more materials later in the day
 
I mean I don't mind the rewording, but I don't think putting it below universe page is good idea. The page is a bit large.

Also, please keep with current text style
 
ImmortalDread said:
As we have a dedicated page for the concept of “universe” in our fandom, it would be appropriate to establish a separate page for “space-time continuum” and include it in the list of relevant pages.

Here is the sandbox.
Click to expand...
I don't think we need to make a new page entirely, but just a section in the Universe page to separate 3-A sized universes from the Low 2-C sized ones and what not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Wankbreaker
  • Locked
Tier 2 hotfix.
Replies
25
Views
4K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
Fwyzzverse
  • Locked
Revisions (Tiering System) : Tier 2
Replies
10
Views
4K
Fwyzzverse
Fwyzzverse
BasedNecoScaler69
  • Locked
Tier 2 revision: Changing Space Time Continuum Standards. (Never cook again.)
Replies
5
Views
2K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
MightyFrogBeyond
How to Keep infinite branching timelines as Low 2-C??
Replies
2
Views
422
MightyFrogBeyond
MightyFrogBeyond
Arc7Kuroi
  • Locked
Tiering System Question
Replies
17
Views
2K
Arc7Kuroi
Arc7Kuroi
Back
Top