Tiering System Revisions - Part 3

[Antvasima]

@Ultima

Okay. Understood.

I would still prefer if we go by what we agreed about earlier though.

Meaning, uncountable dimensions or degrees of infinity end up as High 1-B, and we then go by 1-A | 1-A+ | High 1-A | 0. It seems aesthetically neater.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Why did you treat 1-A plus like a separate tier. Pretty sure that won't even be a thing?

 

[Antvasima]

I thought that was what you agreed about for option 2.

 

[Sera_EX]

That's what Andy agreed on

 

[EmperorRorepmeThree]

How is High 1-A defined? What is seen as an "Outerversal Structure".

 

[Antvasima]

No more derailing non-staff replies please.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

@Ultima

Okay. Understood.

I would still prefer if we go by what we agreed about earlier though.

Meaning, uncountable dimensions or degrees of infinity end up as High 1-B, and we then go by 1-A | 1-A+ | High 1-A | 0. It seems aesthetically neater.

I don't think we should really care that much for something as subjecive as aesthetics here, especially when all that differs from the Modified Option 2 and Option 4 is that the latter adds in a Low 1-A tier and keeps the rest unchanged as well.

How is High 1-A defined? What is seen as an "Outerversal Structure"

That's mostly where the measuring stick behind the higher parts of the system come into play: Outerverse level and its "steps" (or rather the size which they are assumed to occupy) are defined by the Aleph Numbers (which can also be represented by repeated exponentiations of R [i.e R ^ R, R ^ R ^ R, R ^ R ^ R ^ R...], although that's more of a way to explain it in simpler terms than anything), while High 1-A is, as it currently stands at least, represented as a strongly inaccessible cardinal, or some arbitrary large cardinal which nonetheless surpasses the hierarchy of aleph numbers.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, we received 61 votes for defining uncountably infinite dimensions and ascending degrees of infinity as High 1-B, and just 7 votes to make it Low 1-A, so I would appreciate if you and Matthew could try to be reasonable and accept this decision, so we can finally move on. Thank you.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

That was for a different option, but I digress. I don't really care about what option we choose anymore, I was just addressing the modified Option 2 people were suggesting earlier.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. No problem.

 

[Agnaa]

@Ultima

Okay. Understood.

I would still prefer if we go by what we agreed about earlier though.

Meaning, uncountable dimensions or degrees of infinity end up as High 1-B, and we then go by 1-A | 1-A+ | High 1-A | 0. It seems aesthetically neater.

It's kinda weird how you're appealing to how we voted earlier, and then insisting we implement an option that wasn't voted on...

1-A | 1-A+ | High 1-A | 0 isn't option 1, 2, 3, or 4, and only a handful of members have supported it.

 

[Antvasima]

I thought that it was a slightly modified option 2. I was trying to be reasonable in accepting the + sign.

 

[Antvasima]

Anyway, I personally still favour indexing different types of concepts into different types of tiers for better organisation.

 

[Nepuko]

I honestly don't know what's going on here any more .

All that I know is that we're at 300 posts already, and still seemingly no consensus reached.....

 

[DMB_1]

I share the same opinion as Matt, into having the Outerversal problem being devided in just 3 Tiers rather than 4, though instead of

Low 1-A, 1-A and 0, I prefer the tiers being 1-A, High 1-A and 0 while their definitions still being respectively Baseline Outerversal, Infinite Hierarchy and Boundless Dude, as I think that "low" would seemibngly deminish Regular Outerversal characters as loosely related to the Tier and the Infinite Hierarchy being the true thing, while in reality that's not the case.

I know it's just a minor personal thing, but that's just a name thing, so whatever.

 

[Agnaa]

@DMB 1 Why would you have a separate tier for "Infinite Hierarchy" but no tier for "Transcends any extension of the hierarchy"?

 

[Nepuko]

@DMB you're wrong about the 2nd Tier, it's not Infinite Hierarchy, it's characters above Outerversal Hierarchies (and any extension of it).

 

[DMB_1]

I was referring to this:

• Baseline "Outerverse level" stuff and up gets knocked down to Low 1-A

• Infinitely-layered stuff on an Outerversal scale becomes 1-A

• Characters who transcend any extensions of Outerversal Hierarchies become High 1-A

• Characters who transcend High 1-A by the same degree it transcends Low 1-A are Tier 0.

As in, discard the current High 1-A, while changing Low 1-A's and 1-A's names respectively to 1-A and High 1-A.

I apologize if I misunderstood something in the overall thread.

 

[Nepuko]

I don't think discarding High 1-A there is a good idea. Doing so would be like putting current High 1-B and current 1-A characters in a same tier.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Yeah DMB got what I've been saying.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I don't think discarding High 1-A there is a good idea. Doing so would be like putting current High 1-B and current 1-A characters in a same tier.

It's not comparable in the slightest. The proposed standards for High 1-A and 0 in this unmodified scale are so ridiculously high that there's no point in them being 2 tiers.

 

[Agnaa]

@DMB 1 I know what you're referring to, and that's exactly what I was responding to.

I'm not sure how you'd even keep tier 0 with the same definition there, since it now refers to transcending a tier that doesn't exist.

 

[Nepuko]

I don't think discarding High 1-A there is a good idea. Doing so would be like putting current High 1-B and current 1-A characters in a same tier.

It's not comparable in the slightest. The proposed standards for High 1-A and 0 in this unmodified scale are so ridiculously high that there's no point in them being 2 tiers.

They are tho, analogically speaking. 1-A is above High 1-B's infinite dimensional stuff, the whole dimensional system too. High 1-A is above the Outerversal System, and above Infinite Transcendences above baseline Outerversal.

Hence removing High 1-A would put characters in that are outside the system in 1-A, which would be like putting Outerversal characters in Infinite Hyperversal. It's very comparable as you can see.

And maybe it would be a surprise to you, but there are characters qualifying for that. Featherine for one, who is beyond the Infinite Outerversal stuff qualifies for that tier. The Creator qualifies for 0, etc.

Tho, I'd reccomend discussing that with Sera or Aeyu to make things clear for you, Matt.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

So, after having a small talk with Agnaa and looking at Matt's posts, I noticed that the quantity of characters present in some of the proposed subtiers of 1-A may actually bear some weight on which Option is the most effective, since there is not exactly a point in making obscure tiers that only a few characters would occupy.

I am honestly not really sure if this is a good idea, myself, but what do you all think of first analyzing the characters which may qualify for the higher-ends of the new system, and then deciding on which Option is more optimal?

 

[Sera_EX]

So, after having a small talk with Agnaa and looking at Matt's posts, I noticed that the quantity of characters present in some of the proposed subtiers of 1-A may actually bear some weight on which Option is the most effective, since there is not exactly a point in making obscure tiers that only quite a few characters would occupy.

I've brought that multiple times and was always ignored ;_;

 

[Maxnumb231]

when it comes to thje first paragraph i would say option 2 might be the best when it comes to having sub tier 1-As but then again option 3 is the most voted so i say stick to option 3.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

@Sewa

;_;

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Again, I already offered a solution and for the most part I feel both Sera and Ultima have agreed with the basis.

 

[Dvorak1902]

Maybe the real Option was the friends we made along the way.

 

[The_King_of_Prudence]

So, after having a small talk with Agnaa and looking at Matt's posts, I noticed that the quantity of characters present in some of the proposed subtiers of 1-A may actually bear some weight on which Option is the most effective, since there is not exactly a point in making obscure tiers that only quite a few characters would occupy.

I've brought that multiple times and was always ignored ;_;

I think that the counterargument is that tier 11 doesn't have many characters.

 

[Agnaa]

And I actually agree with putting tier 11 characters into fewer tiers, but like I said in the last thread, those revisions will have to wait until these ones are over.

 

[Antvasima]

So to summarise the alternatives here, if I have understood them correctly, should we go with this:

1-A: Finite outerversal hierarchy

1-A+: Infinite outerversal hierarchy

High 1-A: Immeasurably transcends any infinite outerversal hierarchies

0: Boundless (Transcends High 1-A by the same degree it transcends Low 1-A)

Or this:

1-A: Finite outerversal hierarchy

High 1-A: Infinite outerversal hierarchy

0: Immeasurably transcends any infinite outerversal hierarchies

Or this:

1-A: Finite and infinite outerversal hierarchies

High 1-A: Immeasurably transcends any infinite outerversal hierarchies

0: Boundless (Transcends High 1-A by the same degree it transcends Low 1-A)

Please feel free to make corrections, if I have misunderstood something.

 

[Nepuko]

The first and third are basically what are talked about, but from what I understood Ultima and Sera's suggestion on how to choose an option would be :

I am honestly not really sure if this is a good idea, myself, but what do you all think of first analyzing the characters which may qualify for the higher-ends of the new system, and then deciding on which Option is more optimal?
to avoid having obscure tiers.

 

[Andytrenom]

I don't know if this is an actual misunderstanding or not, but + goes strictly on the attack potency (outerverse level+) not the tier

The plan as I've understood it, is to have tiers 1-A, High 1-A and 0 with 1-A characters on top of infinite hierarchies receiving a + modifier next to their AP rating. Assuming we have turned down low 1-A at this point

 

[Antvasima]

I am aware of that we will only write Outerverse level+, not 1-A+, in practice, yes. No problem.

It was only an illustrative example.

 

[Agnaa]

None of those alternatives seem to represent option 3, as far as I can tell, and that option has by far the most votes.

Are those alternatives listed just meant to be the different flavors of option 2?

 

[Antvasima]

Well, option 2 and option 3 are almost identical, and since the staff here seem to have shifted their views a bit, I am trying to be flexible.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

Ant more or less understood the intent. Those are the tiers which will be meddled with and altered, while all others will pretty much remain the same albeit with changed definitions for all Tier 1 stuff pretty much.

 

[Ultima_Reality]

So, after having a small talk with Agnaa and looking at Matt's posts, I noticed that the quantity of characters present in some of the proposed subtiers of 1-A may actually bear some weight on which Option is the most effective, since there is not exactly a point in making obscure tiers that only a few characters would occupy.

I am honestly not really sure if this is a good idea, myself, but what do you all think of first analyzing the characters which may qualify for the higher-ends of the new system, and then deciding on which Option is more optimal?

^

 

[Antvasima]

@Ultima

That seems to make sense to me.