• 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 3-A/Low 2-C Saint Seiya Ap Revisions (Gold Saints, and Scaling)

You are the one strawmaning everyone, Alonik, people are not ignorant, they are being factual and in fact you're on the minority here.

I still agree with HaxD because in general he is entirely right and not being biased against the series like you suddenly became.
 
You can tell someone is being biased when they're anally literally interpreting any statement to wield lower results while also ignoring context and feats, and repeatedly accusing everyone that disagrees with them of being "ignorant".
 
You can see that a person is biased when they accuse someone in the message wall of some moderator for conspirancy against the verse just by not sharing the same opinion as they.

I'm not interpreting any statement to have lower results here, i am taking reality. If i were against Saint Seiya, i would not be preparing upgrades for the work. And I am not a minority here, there were many people who have already agreed that seiya's big bang scale is hyperbole.

And to say that someone is making some fallacy is not to be biased, be more impartial, after all, why do we have a page to indicate fallacies, if when we do that you are accused of being biased?

This accusation that i am biased against saint seiya has to be proven, if not, it is just ploy to not answer properly what i said.
 
Real quick i just want to say i debated everyones points and shhown why its not just Hyperbole, and shown why the other feats are also tier 3/2, and there was a couple people who changed their mind on it (From disagreeing with the upgrade to agreeing with it) from what it seems to be.

there is only 2 people left who seems to disagree.
 
Matthew Schroeder said:
You are the one strawmaning everyone, Alonik, people are not ignorant, they are being factual and in fact you're on the minority here.

I still agree with HaxD because in general he is entirely right and not being biased against the series like you suddenly became.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry to say, but a minority and a majority does not influence anything here, if you guys are unable to refute alonik, it is useless to keep playing comments that he is fallacious, when it is exactly the opposite, I really expected more from someone who frequents this wikia for years ago and you still don't seem to understand that if you are unable to refute your opponent, the last thing you should do is accuse him of something.

And yet, no one refuted my points either, I still wait here.
 
Archaron said:
I'm sorry to say, but a minority and a majority does not influence anything here, if you guys are unable to refute alonik, it is useless to keep playing comments that he is fallacious, when it is exactly the opposite, I really expected more from someone who frequents this wikia for years ago and you still don't seem to understand that if you are unable to refute your opponent, the last thing you should do is accuse him of something.

And yet, no one refuted my points either, I still wait here.
Click to expand...
We been debating this.. The debute isn't over, and all we been doing is "Refuting" each other. its becoming one big circle, a full circle. neither side will yield. What other way is there to break a deadlock?

and what points of yours do you claim remain undisputed?
 
Following this long thread, going over the back and forth points. I still agree with the upgrades. The opposing side seems to still be using fairly weak arguments, and points to me. So I still agree with Upgrade, and Matt.
 
TheUpgradeManHaHaxD said:
We been debating this.. The debute isn't over, and all we been doing is "Refuting" each other. its becoming one big circle, a full circle. neither side will yield. What other way is there to break a deadlock?
and what points of yours do you claim remain undisputed?
Click to expand...
And do you think that your method of asking for the general vote to support your argument and keep the opponent down is the conduct of someone who is refuting the other? Honestly, it's not that you refuted someone here, you're just closing in on your stubbornness and saying that anything contrary to what you say is wrong, without considering someone else's view and argument. In my view, until you abandon it, this circle will remain until everyone is tired.

Here.
 
I just think it's better stopping this mentality that only saying that you agree with the vision of someone that already been debunked will make his argumment more valorous.

All counter argumments that Upgrade receive, he'd only said that it's wrong, and repeat the same thing that he already said. If you're agree with Up and Matt, show why the argumments that Archaron and Alonik posted are wrong.
 
Okay, first let me say this. I found this thread as someone posted it in a facebook group. It was posted a few days ago, and I was interested. So, I been watching, observing, reading everyone's' points.

I must give user Archaro some credit here. He isn't using just 1 source material to debate with, but multiple. I give him +10 points for that!

BUT, the one thing that is rubbing me the wrong way is these false accusations against UGM (TheUpgradeMan), and corrupting "his points" into things he didn't say just because its easier to defeat by use of some minor alterations within the text of the opposing side without actually quoting UGM. I find this just plain rude.

I also find it oddly suspicious that most of the opposing side (Not all of their of their points, but a massive chunk is) is abusing massive amounts "of out of context scans," and abuse of "misinformation/false information." Edit: It also appears that the Opposing Side seem to be misunderstanding some of their own scans they use in their own points. It feels more like they are really trying to stretch, and exaggerate their own scans to make it fit their own point. Most of their evidence is just plain vague, or self contradictory.

UGM is doing a very good job debating everyone on the "opposing side." I would even go as far as to say he might have actually debunked the opposing side entirely too.

I also think all this fallacy that, and fallacy this, is some weird way to flex intellectually, and its failing fairly hard too. Its basically a fallacy inception their falling into. Falling into a complex maze of the fallacies they claim people are making. (As in they are trapping themselves inside the very fallacies they are claiming people are making.) The Opposing Side should probably drop this fallacy stuff as its making them look very bad in my opinion. As it feels like they can't come up with some way to counter UGM's points so they just call it a fallacy.

As a previously unconvinced third party just watching, and reading over things.

UGM has me solid. He convinced me the most here.
 
To say that I have not given scans, links, sources, and explanations is somewhat biased, since I even translated scans that UGM itself provided to fully understand the context here.

The point that was needed judge the veracity of each argument, now become a popular support, which is something very restricted here.

About fallacies issues, besided me saying it was a fallacy, i showed why it was a fallacy, i didn't just acused, i showed why it fit into it. Did you really read the texts? Because it doesn't look like.
 
  • The Great Will (Big Will, or even Divine Will), released by the Big Bang, collided with fragments of the universe, forming the stars that shine in the sky and the vacuum of the space which we alive.
  • Their combat force, however, surpassed that of the knights of Athena. It was believed that it was Hades or Zeus who brought these creatures from a world before the Big Bang.
Upon rereading the thread, both of those seem to be pretty blatantly portraying the Big Bang as something less than the birth of space-time or the whole universe.

I agree with Alonik's arguments.
 
The Big Bang has shwon to actually defeat people who were universal level. I don't see how it's being portrayed as something lesser than Universal when it's been used to hurt and defeat universal level opponents
 
Alonik's entire point: There was a universe before the Big Bang, where the Gigas came from. The Big Bang releases the Great Will, and simply shape an already existing universe into our universe.

Not only does the "World before Big Bang" being vague, it can mean they came from a void before the universe was born. Which is a common thing.

And fragments of the universe? Hm... So, the Big Bang releases powers that can shape things into... an entire timeline?
 
In other timelines like saint seiya omega, where the creator of the multiverse is Abzu it can be truth, however in classic timeline no. According to Next Dimension the only being that has the level of the Big Bang is "infinitely" above the Olympians.

In the classic timeline, Chronos is the only one that scales to this level.
 
Gold Saints picking up universal scales is due to a statement about the Athena Exclamation power being comparable to the Big Bang.

The point is, the classic timeline big bang doesn't even take 3-A. And the power of the Gods is based on the Big Will.

Which shows that the AE of classic timeline is inconsistent and a hyperbole.
 
Alonik said:
Gold Saints picking up universal scales is due to a statement about the Athena Exclamation power being comparable to the Big Bang.
The point is, the classic timeline big bang doesn't even take 3-A. And the power of the Gods is based on the Big Will.

Which shows that the AE of classic timeline is inconsistent and a hyperbole.
Click to expand...
Cool. I read the OP compiling universal statements from each installments of Saint Seiya to propose 3-A. There's like, 2-3 statements that partially involves AE


Despite Hades Arc (made after Hypermyth) stating AE replicates the Big Bang that created the universe. Yes.
 
The hypermyth after Hades arc was released in a kazenban of the saint seiya box in 2001 within the Saint Seiya Shoshu-Hen at Monthly Comic Tokumori. And was the basis for the novel of Gigantomachia, which takes place after Hades arc.

About the "2-3" statements were debated through the thread.
 
I don't think i can give a proper opinion since i've didn't read all of this thread.

But i should point that Alonik's argumentation is backed up by a lot of scans, unlike the opposition.
 
I also think that Matthew's side seems to make sense.
 
But it was justified, just look at the thread, I provided several scans and context of why it should take downgrade.
 
Ant you should look at the whole conversation, and all the points that have been established by the various other members who have a strong sense judging the franchise as well.
 
Antvasima said:
Well, I admittedly only had time to read through the staff posts, but I trust Matthew's sense of judgement regarding this franchise.
Click to expand...
So you admit that you only agree with him because you only have eyes for what he says, ignoring everyone else, well, I really expected more.
 
More like that I have limited available time, and have good experience of Matthew being knowledgeable about this subject.

Still, I suppose that you have a point that I am not well informed enough to make a good judgement call here yet.
 
If you do not have time to evaluate everything, you should not agree without knowing if it is right or wrong.

Take your time, the thread will not run away, read everything, give the reasons why you agree and not just that you trust someone, this goes against our thread evaluation standards, as is listed in our Rules.
 
Diinou HotHead said:
Yeah. The weaker ones should still be comparable to the stronger ones in AP. They all have the 7th Sense on, which Seiya, who literally just awakened it, created an explosion that Aldebaran described as a Big Bang (probably just an explosion like a Big Bang, not a literal Big Bang)
Click to expand...
Aldebaran was referring to a big bang in Seiya's cosmos. Cosmos, which are statedly scaled replications of the macrocosmos inside every individual, should not scale to the entire universe.

Considering it requires the full power of three gold saints to pull off an Athena Exclamation (which is again statedly a scaled replication of the explosion that created the universe) and gold saints have full control over the seventh sense, it makes no sense to read into that statement as if Seiya had literally reached power comparable to the Big Bang, especially since Taurus no-sells that attack briefly after.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hiryu-Z
SoL-only seems to be too slow for Gold Saints
2 3 4
Replies
128
Views
6K
Huesito88
Huesito88
Reiner04
Saint Seiya; Low 1-C thread.
2 3
Replies
85
Views
5K
Reiner04
Reiner04
StekFence
Low 1-C Saint Seiya(Toei)
2 3 4
Replies
158
Views
10K
NatzuX
NatzuX
Hasty12345
Saint Seiya Verse-Wide Revision pt. 1.5: Key Restructuring
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
Danny33wise
Danny33wise
AlexZiggy
  • Locked
Saint Seiya Episode T: Prologue
Replies
32
Views
2K
Duedate8898
Duedate8898
Back
Top