• 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.

Very Important Dragon Ball Super Revision

Status
Not open for further replies.
So, then, you want to break the entire tiering system just because you think Dragon Ball is inconsistent with how it works.

Even though, for one, it breaks Vs Battles against other verses at this tier, as in other verses, they're using 4D power which is by definition beyond 3D power. Meaning even if they have the same "tier" the power and strength is not the same at all. For two, this also true to an extent in Dragon Ball. Shaking infinity and Zamasu being a 4D being, and being stronger than a 4D being makes you 4D, no matter what. And for 3, Ant seems to be referring to making noticeable distinctions between Low 2-C and 3-A, not 3-A to Low 2-C to 2-C. That's false. I'm sure he's against that, and even then, that change would break the entire upper tiers of the wiki because everyone has the same ratings but they mean different things and are all weaker than they should be.

Just no. This tiering is dimension based, Dragon Ball has dimension and infinity based power IN the scaling via Jiren and Zamasu, and that's not changing, and no amount of appealing to author intent or author unintelligence is going to be a valid argument. And saying "That's how Dragon Ball Works" only leads us to downgrade it to 3D and keep everything at High 3-A because we can't put them at the same tiers as people with objectively superior 4D power when "Dragon Ball doesn't do dimensions and infinities". It does tho. Zamasu.
 
The "show's take" is meaningless nonsense speak. You need to drop this idea of using narrative/author intent or whatever because that's not how you get ratings for scaling here. You look at the facts and how they fit together in the same type of physics— not the "presentation" of it, otherwise the whole conversation loses meaning because so many verses deal with dimensional tiering that making this silly, needless, and last but not least, false distinction will make more of a mess across the WHOLE wiki than it would to apply Dragon Ball to our standards instead of the reverse, where then everything can't fit together.

If we make it so that way Dragon Ball doesn't follow our dimensional tiering system, then we cannot have Vs Battles, as the power of dragon ball is incompatible in conversation, quality, type, and "language" (to say that they're not even the same thing anymore). This means we can't have them fight, because their powers don't mean the same thing. Just like we need to speak the same language to have a debate, or a conversation has to be based in the same premises at the baseline of the discussion, in order for characters to fight, they have to apply to the same standards. This is the basis of EVERYTHING we do here.
 
'> Even though, for one, it breaks Vs Battles against other verses at this tier, as in other verses, they're using 4D power which is by definition beyond 3D power. 'Meaning even if they have the same "tier" the power and strength is not the same at all.

Why would they?

2-C's have to be compared to other 2-C's.The distance in sheer power that separates them from 3-A should not matter. At the end, their Attack Potency is still the same, the can break 4D things.

3D beings will never be comparable to 4Ds anyway, infinite or not.

> Shaking infinity and Zamasu being a 4D being, and being stronger than a 4D being makes you 4D, no matter what.

Sure, they are all 4D. That's not the problem here.

We have 3-As tanking hits from beings way stronger than said Low 2-Cs. Or Gods saying the can destroy multiple universes.

This is furhter noticeable by the nonsense of having a "Post-UI SSB Goku" in DBS Goku's profile page.

> And saying "That's how Dragon Ball Works" only leads us to downgrade it to 3D and keep everything at High 3-A

That is possible, actually. That's the very reason OP opened his thread.

If you want to maintain this stance, it would make much more sense to consider the Dragon Ball multiverse just as single universe as a whole.

I'm not against the definition, at most it would sound "strange" because we would be treating a multitude of universes as a single universe, but that wouldn't be "wrong", at least.
 
1. You're agreeing with me here. Why respond then? Stop.

2. Those are called outliers, bad scaling, or Low 2-C durability feats. None of that means that the characters in question should be downgraded from 4D to 3D, and none of that justifies treating DB different in terms of tiering, which was your argument, unless I am mistaken. Irrelevant to this conversation. Again. Pls stop.

3. You're agreeing with me again up until downgrading it to high 3-A. They're stronger than a 4D being, so they have 4D power, even if the universes don't have individual space-time, they still have 4D power. But that's not treating the scaling or the verse or "dragon ball" different. At ALL. That's just changing the cosmology. How it interacts with tiering is not affected at all, unless you count downgrades from Low 2-C to... Low 2-C. And Zeno going down to Low 2-C. So you're either arguing w/ me for no reason, or we agree and you said something that doesn't follow what you actually meant, or I misinterpreted you. Either way, consult my wall if you want to argue more. Not here.
 
Amexim said:
1. You're agreeing with me here. Why respond then? Stop.
2. Those are called outliers, bad scaling, or Low 2-C durability feats. None of that means that the characters in question should be downgraded from 4D to 3D, and none of that justifies treating DB different in terms of tiering, which was your argument, unless I am mistaken. Irrelevant to this conversation. Again. Pls stop.

3. You're agreeing with me again up until downgrading it to high 3-A. They're stronger than a 4D being, so they have 4D power, even if the universes don't have individual space-time, they still have 4D power. But that's not treating the scaling or the verse or "dragon ball" different. At ALL. That's just changing the cosmology. How it interacts with tiering is not affected at all, unless you count downgrades from Low 2-C to... Low 2-C. And Zeno going down to Low 2-C. So you're either arguing w/ me for no reason, or we agree and you said something that doesn't follow what you actually meant, or I misinterpreted you. Either way, consult my wall if you want to argue more. Not here.
Click to expand...
1) Uh, what? I just said that (IMHO) having the distance between said tier as infinite or not-infinite hardly changes crossover battles.

And then why asking me to stop? I like taking part on the argument.

2) So, THESE are outliers now? I'd call them not. It's just evidence that Dragon Ball treats said tiers differently. We can discuss if the VS wiki should adapt to shows that treat tiers this way, of if we should take another route / another solution. But it can't be "inconsinstent", if it's consistent with the show's philosophy on the matter. At most, it can be called inconsistent to this wiki.

(The string theory, from where the 11 dimension concept is taken from, is barely factual science anyway, it's very, very theorethical, so it's not like that Dragon Ball would go against factual real-world science or something)

If you want my opinion, though, I think that our take on the matter is useless here. As I said previously, this is an issue that have been brought in N.17's thread as well, and not by me, but by other people. Before proceeding, I'd like to hear the staff's take on the matter, whatever we should treat the tiers as non-infinite as Dragon Ball does, or treat them as infinite no matter what.

And asking me to stop again. Am I bothering you? That is not my intention.

3) I'm fine with either upgrading or downgrading, as long as it's not inconsistent with what it's shown in the cartoon. Makes no difference to me. If you read the first message I wrote when I replied to you, it was "It has been obvious for quite some time that Dragon Ball doesn't treat the distance between Universal - Multi-Universal - Multi-Dimensional beings as infinite.". Dragon Ball, not the VS Wiki. I'm just of the opinion that if we should closely follow the show, than we should have the liberty of treating the distance between said tiers as non-infinite if the show requires it.
 
1. Yes it does. Having more infinite power than someone makes them stronger. Basic stuff. Take part in this irrelevant side tangent on my wall plz.

2. Make a CRT if you don't think they're outliers. Whether or not I agree with you, which I might, is irrelevant to THIS THREAD. It only bothers me that you're not debating me in PMs or on my wall so we don't clog this thread any longer, and I hate all of your points. But that last part is MY issue, not yours. The former is. Take it to my wall. That being said, the wiki handles things the way it does. It's not changing, no matter how you or I want to, and our conversations in other threads demonstrate that you have a completely different, possibly incompatible way of analyzing and doing powerscaling. To the point where you would rather make separate dimensional tiering and nonsense just to fit a story into a new special snowflake system when that story already fits our current standards just fine. And to the point where you take Death of the Author to mean nothing, because you would rather prioritize what YOU believe the author wants for the story, and that YOU think that it matters what the author wants for the story in the first place, when it doesn't. If I write something that cannot be interpreted in any other way possible, but I say that it means something it doesn't from every other perspective but my own, not only will those who don't know my statement, including those who read my content long after I am dead and unable to answer questions, not know what it means "truly" or from the perspective of the one who wrote it due to it not at all being conveyed to mean what I wished it to, but it won't change what I actually wrote. So your methods aren't compatible with how we generally do things, according to Death of the Author. If you want to debate me further, go to my WALL.

We should treat the tiers consistently across the entire wiki, because then the powers of a 2-C who's only that strong because they're 20x a Low 2-C is objectively weaker than even another Low 2-C could be with a higher multiplier. This LITERALLY breaks the system, all because you want to remain faithful to some abstract, imaginary standard that doesn't hold any importance. Disagree? Debate me on my WALL. I want you to stop here because this is derailing and your arguments are really...

3. Again. You use the phrase "closely follow the show" which is nebulous at best, meaningless and irrelevant at worse. This is because, again, not only would not doing so for the rest of the wiki be catastrophic for Vs Debates, as all AP in these tiers would be messed up. It would be ridiculous and unnecessary. There's dimensional tiering in DB. There's infinite power gaps between them in DB. Zamasu and Jiren are proof. Following the show is what we'ee Doing. What you seem to want is to have the tiering change around the show when that isn't how that works.
 
> I hate all of your points.

Jeez

> Yes it does. Having more infinite power than someone makes them stronger. Basic stuff. Take part in this irrelevant side tangent on my wall plz.

Having more power in general makes someone stronger than another. Doesn't have to be infinite.

> *Rant*

All because I said Dragon Ball treats different tiers as non-infinite.

Whoppidy-doo.

> We should treat the tiers consistently across the entire wiki, because then the powers of a 2-C who's only that strong because they're 20x a Low 2-C is objectively weaker than even another Low 2-C could be with a higher multiplier.

As far as I recall, a low 2-C is a low 2-C because he has a 2-C FEAT, not because he has proven to be X Times a 3-A Tier character.

So the relation to lower tier characters has no relevance at all to having an accurate display of their power.

Even if said distances would not be infinite, nothing would change. If a universe that treats them as infinite faces an universe that doesn't, 2-C character would still be 2-C because they broke 4-D things. Simple.

> Go to my wall

Seeing as you're experiencing this discussion, I think I'll decline this offer.
 
1. Infinite power makes this especially true and for almost EVERY other verse, somehow characters with the same tier will be infinitely weaker than characters of a lower tier due to how heavy infinity plays into the tier system everywhere else on the wiki. So. We can't treat dragon ball special. I hate your points, not you, and I don't have to lie about that. Nothing to do with you. If I was so butthurt about it, I wouldn't be willing to argue with you, and I would certainly tell you off. But that's not my intention. Sorry if my bluntness offends you.

2. They don't. You're wrong. They use higher dimensional beings. And even if I grant you that because of the verses tendency to have characters climb infinite power differences, that still doesn't make treating Dragon Ball separately any more possible. Any more viable. Any more rational.

3. You are the one proposing we treat 3-A to 2-C as not infinite. Therefore, you would HAVE to support multipliers in these cases, and that bodes massive issues. And it's not that simple because not ever character is the same strength in the same tier. If we make 3-A and Low 2-C not separated by dimensions or infinities, they can be breached by multipliers. But some Low 2-Cs have power on a higher dimensional scale. 2-Cs have infinite power on a 4D scale, iirc. If you can have Low 2-Cs get to be 2-Cs with multipliers, somehow all of DBs Low 2-Cs will be weaker than every 2-C, and scale to certain really powerful Low 2-Cs. Making 2-Cs equal to Low 2-Cs. Which is like Galaxy Level being equal to Wall Level. It doesn't work. Shifting the tiers like this is neither "simple" nor sensible. I'm sorry if that upsets you, but it's true.

4. If you won't go to my wall, will you drop this? Because asking us to treat DB as though it's tiering is super special and erroneously trying to say that it would be more work to make DB conform, even though we already have been and did this, than it would be to make an entirely new set of rules just for it will not help this discussion one way or the other.
 
Wait, if we are discussing in general, Tiers CAN have a non-infinite difference.

Here we are discussing about Universe level stuff and above, but everything BELOW that can be calculated.


There would be no multipliers. No one can calc the force it takes to blew space-time. It's impossible. But the impossiblity of doing this doesn't automatically mean it's infinite.

Impossible to calc =/= Infinite.

That's why it wouldn't change anything. 3-A can get stronger how much they want, but if they don't have a 2-C feat, they will NEVER go to 2-C. Just like it is now.

The difference is simply semantic, some universe treat the 2-C as infinitely above 3-A, others don't.


Oh, I'd just like to point out: This "Dragon Ball treats 2-C tier as not infinite thing" isn't something that I came up with. I wrote it in this thread. Doesn't mean I invented it.

I bought it up from the other N.17 topic because it's relevant to the stuff we're talking about.
 
1. Tiers above High 3-A don't. We're EXPLICITLY talking about 3-A and ABOVE so bringing up things below 3-A is irrelevant. Of course we can calculate things below 3-A. Why are you fighting to be technically right but only where it doesn't matter? We're talking about infinities.

2. You do not understand how things work here it seems. While you're not technically wrong, the problem isn't the difference between 2-C and 3-A it's the difference between a Low 2-C and a 2-C. The only meaningful way for us to tell the difference is through those infinite thresholds, otherwise we have 2-C Dragon Ball characters being more closer in power to Low 2-Cs than the actual baseline, weakest 2-Cs. That's dumb. It ***** with everything.

3. I don't really... Care...? That's not how our tiering works, Dragon Ball doesn't acknowledge 2-C at all then if that's the case because "not infinite" 2-C is NOT 2-C. We made 2-C up. That N. 17 topic should stay where it was.
 
1) That's why I said' '"if we are discussing in general". All it would take is "no, i'm not talking in general" Read my posts. Thank you.

2) Accoring to what's written here "The power difference between Low 2-C and 2-C characters is not possible to exactly quantify". So, again, not possible to quanitify = Not infinite.

The infinite difference only comes up to play when bringin dimensions up. Universe destroyer and multi-universe destroyer are both 4-D.

So, we don't care for differences between 2-Cs. We only care for the issue between 3-A and 2-C.

3) I brought it up since you "hate my points", and act as if what you said is widely accepted. It's not, or there wouldn't have been an argument about the matter in the first place.
 
1. You know i'm Not talking in general. I don't need to say that.

2. That might be true. But then why add the idea that infinity scaling isn't applicable to [Universe] - Multi-Universal - Multiversal ranges and INCLUDE 3-A in that "no infinity" zone when that's still false. There's still infinities separating 3-A and 2-C and ignoring that is going to break the tiering system. In general, we shouldn't treat Dragon Ball as if it's a special snowflake. If 2 baseline Low 2-Cs equals a 2-C feat, there's at least 1 infinity separating 3-A from 2-C in this verse. Which is why we can't just pretend like they don't exist for the sake of Dragon Ball's writers being... Themselves.

3. Widely accepted is relative. Sorry to say that a fraction of a greater amount of people agreeing with you isn't necessarily a negation of the claim that most people or a lot of people disagree with you or with the idea that you present being rational.
 
That happen when Beerus and Champa were 3-A. Back then it did not make sense.

Now since they are stronger than Infinite Zamasu who is base Low- 2C via scailing. We can use it now to explain that in Dragon Ball if two Low-2C fight it can destroy both universes which make it 2-C regardless it goes against the Teiring system. Here

Again that's how Doragon Bōru works...

In dragon ball they don't treat a difference between 3-A and Low-2C. I don't see it farfetch to do the same for Low-2C and 2-C.
 
And that broughts us to what I've written earlier.

There would be no multipliers. No one can calc the force it takes to blew space-time. It's impossible. But the impossiblity of doing this doesn't automatically mean it's infinite.

Impossible to calc =/= Infinite.

That's why it wouldn't change anything. 3-A can get stronger how much they want, but if they don't have a 2-C feat, they will NEVER go to 2-C. Just like it is now.

The difference is simply semantic, some universes treat the 2-C as infinitely above 3-A, others don't.

Make it of what you want. Rules aren't set in stones.

If that's not the case, wipe out the content revision board. If what's written here it's law, then it's useless debating in the first place.

What would help now is an actual example of what would be "broken" by this semantic change.


(And mostly importantly, would like the opinion from someone of the staff)
 
Because having 3D power and 4D power aren't the same in other verses.

Treating 3-A (3D power of a finite or even infinite amount) the same as Low 2-C (4D power) would make Dragon Ball characters 3D powered Low 2-Cs. An oxymoron, breaking any fights with anyone with actual 4D power, despite the whole distinction between the two being that dimensional and infinite gap. This breaks the wiki's tiering because now Low 2-Cs are stomping Low 2-Cs who shouldn't even be low 2-c because Low 2-C is, BY DEFINITION, 4D Power. If Dragon Ball doesn't treat the gap between 3-A and Low 2-C as real despite it being separated by literally 4D and an infinite gap that can't ever be reached besides feats or extradimensional existence, then without Zamasu, we would have people who are by definition not Low 2-C as Low 2-Cs. But we have Zamasu, and i'm sure you think having that 4D and Infinity gap between it mean nothing. So this is pointless.

Dragon Ball DOES keep a difference between Low 2-C and 3-A otherwise they wouldn't be Low 2-C. They need 4D shenanigans to be Low 2-C. Do you get it now?
 
The only thing I think would require discussing in that 3-A to Low 2-C range isn't the 4D or the infinity between it and 3-A, but the restrictions on what statement we enterpret to be Low 2-C.

And actually. **** that. The standards for that are just fine. So no.
 
> Treating 3-A (3D power of a finite or even infinite amount) the same as Low 2-C (4D power) would make Dragon Ball characters 3D powered Low 2-Cs. An oxymoron, breaking any fights with anyone with actual 4D power, despite the whole distinction between the two being that dimensional and infinite gap.

It wouldn't. 3-A don't have a Low 2-Cs feat, otherwise they wouldn't be in 3-A in the first place, Remember, it's impossible to quantify.

So, yeah, they'd still lose no matter what.

> Dragon Ball DOES keep a difference between Low 2-C and 3-A otherwise they wouldn't be Low 2-C

N.17 and the very existence of Post-UI Blue Goku disagree.
 
1. Then why are you trying to doublespeak people into making (without Zamasu) 3-As with no 4D feats Low 2-Cs. Because you can't have there be no difference between 3-A and Low 2-C and also have there be a difference between 3-A and low 2-C.

2. Zamasu says hi. He's the reason why they're even 4D in the first place. They'd be High 3-A at absolute best without him. So... Plz stop derailing.
 
1 I did what? I never said a thing about Zamasu.

By all means, quote the post where I do talk about him. I'm very, VERY curious.


2 Yeah, and so? They all have 2-C feats, they all remain 2-C. They're gonna downgrade only if we change the cosmology of DB into a single universe. Not related to changing the semantics regarding the difference between tiers.
 
and you're forgetting that in DB everything depends on Ki and multipliers, Goku overcame the Hit technique and broke his temporal dimension only by multiplying his power, however impractical it may be by wiki standards
 
You say that you disagree with the statement that... **** it. You can have it. That ain't even what i'm mad at.
 
Not many verses in general are consistent with our Tiering system, and Dragon Ball isn't even close to being the worst example. Dissidia Final Fantasy also has Tier 6 characters going toe to toe with Tier 2 characters and even Massively Hypersonic+ characters keeping up with Immeasurable speed characters. And the worst examples are Marvel and DC comics; even 9-C and 1-A has been treated as a finite gaps in some of those comics. But yeah, AKM Sama, Prom, and Matt make sense, most if not all of our Dragon Ball Super ratings are fine where they are.
 
Tldr: No need for 2-C gods, no need for single universe that embraces all 12, the thing doesn't make any sense anyway.

Sounds about right.

Makes me wonder why this philosophy isn't applied to other stuff about this franchise, but whatever.
 
dissidia is a "crossover" among characters in the franchise, it is common in crossover characters to have a predetermined level that does not match the original material so they can face each other, and the comics usually have more than one editor, writter, or creator, so it's common to contradict each other, but if you want to take on as the low 2-C gods you would automatically agree that any character 2x stronger than a god would be 2-C
 
Not quite how it works, the distance between 2 Space-Time Continuums is incalculable and could be anywhere between 2x and Infinite. The gap is still finite, but just saying it's impossible to determine.
 
"Also, kindly remember that Attack Potency is the measure of Destructive Capacity of an attack, and as such, is measured via its energy damage equivalent. Hence, characters that destroy mountains or islands are not automatically mountain or island level, especially if they are small. The attack potency depends upon the energy output of the attack, not the area of effect of the attack. https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Attack_Potency

Note 6: Due to the fact that the distance between any given number of universes is currently unknowable, it is impossible to quantify the numerical gap between each one of the subtiers in Tier 2. As such, it is not allowed to upgrade such a character based solely on multipliers. For example, someone twice as strong as a Low 2-C character would still be Low 2-C, and someone infinitely more powerful than a 2-C would not be 2-A https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/Tiering_System

you are contradicting the system, in order to merely not accept the update.
 
Since this thread is going to hell afterall, much to my dismay, I just want to re-explain my point in why I made this thread in the first place.

Listen, I dont care on whetther or not Beerus and Champa get upgraded to 2-C or they stay where they currently are. I don't. But all im saying is that the current discussion rule cannot be in place due to how we currently treat the Dragon Ball Super Cosmology.

Currently, the discussion rule treats Beerus and Champa's feat of destroying Universe 6 and Universe 7 as only 3-A. Yet, at the same time, we currently treat the universes in the Dragon Ball Super Multiverse as being their own individual space-time continuums, hence why Zen'o for instance is a 2-C. The point that my thread is supposed to be clarifying is that we cannot have both of these current standards in place because they make absolutely no sense and are contradicting each other.

You cannot destroy 2 individual space-time continuums with only 3-A level attacks, unless, those 2 universes are not separated by their own space-times afterall and actually share the same one. So we have to choose between 2 options in order for this to make any sense:

Option 1: If we are to continue treating what Beerus and Champa would have done as nothing more than 3-A, then that means we are accepting that U6 and U7 can be destroyed by 3-A level attacks, meaning they are not separated by their own space-times and we have to downgrade the cosmology of the Multiverse to one large universal space-time.

or

Option 2: If we are to continue treating the universes in the Dragon Ball Super Multiverse as individual space-time continuums, then that means Beerus and Champa's feat of destroying the 2 universes cannot just be 3-A. They would be breeching dimensional walls to destroy 2 individual space-time continuums from where they fought, meaning it would be a feat that would upgrade them to 2-C as a result.

We cant have this both ways as its flat out contradicting and paradoxical. It has to be either one or the other.
 
There are clearly 12 separate universes. Treating them as one single universe is an option, but is also not what intended.

Also, aren't both Beerus and Champa both Low-2C? The feat is neither 3-A or 2-C, is... Low 2-C

Thinking i'm missing something here.
 
and as I said, it is not possible to travel between universes, the only ones who can do this are the angels, you can not get into another flying universe, accessing subspace or with teleportation, the only way a mortal does this is with the cube of whis.

And as zamasu chan said, whis and vados were worried about the fight being that they could simply rewind time if only matter was destroyed, but on another occasion whis showed no concern when the universe was threatened in the fight of goku and beerus.
 
>There are clearly 12 separate universes. Treating them as one single universe is an option, but is also not what intended.

Its only an option if we decide to treat Beerus and Champas feat as a 3-A feat. Because you cant destroy separate universes with only 3-A level strength, which is my point. If we're going to treat this as only 3-A level, then that means the 12 universes aren't separate universes.

>Also, aren't both Beerus and Champa both Low-2C? The feat is neither 3-A or 2-C, is... Low 2-C

Thats not what ive been told recently. Apparently, the feat cant just be Low 2-C because combining the power of 2 Low 2-C's doesnt reach 2-C. That would be implying 2x Low 2-C ='s 2-C, which our tiering system doesnt abide by. The feat would have to be 2-C and it would upgrade Beerus and Champa.
 
It's not that 2 Low 2Cs cannot reach Multiverse Level. The distance between the two tiers is finite. We simply don't know by how much.

Even if there was an upgrade, Beerus and Champa would stay in Low 2-C. Destroyng two universes is the absolute lowest ball for reaching 2-C, and Beerus and Champa are doing this in two. Not singularly.
 
Agreed, we can just fulfill that proposal and close the thread. It's best to save our time and our energy for more important matters.
 
RashFaustinho said:
It's not that 2 Low 2Cs cannot reach Multiverse Level. The distance between the two tiers is finite. We simply don't know by how much.
Even if there was an upgrade, Beerus and Champa would stay in Low 2-C. Destroyng two universes is the absolute lowest ball for reaching 2-C, and Beerus and Champa are doing this in two. Not singularly.
Click to expand...
Well this is what I previously argued as well and I was told by multiple users that I was wrong. You can check the previous thread yourself, I linked it in my OP.
 
if we accept beerus and champa low 2-C (as illogical as it is) we would have to automatically consider any character stronger than a god being 2-C
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

LuffyRuffy46307
  • Locked
Dragon Ball Conceptual Manipulation End Closing
2 3 4
Replies
143
Views
8K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
Damage3245
  • Locked
Massive Dragon Ball Super Downgrade
6 7 8
Replies
282
Views
11K
Damage3245
Damage3245
Damage3245
  • Locked
Piccolo Profile Split (Dragon Ball)
Replies
11
Views
868
Damage3245
Damage3245
Reiner04
  • Locked
Dragonball: 1-B Timeline
2
Replies
67
Views
3K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
SamanPatou
About Toei Saiyans' Space Survival
Replies
34
Views
1K
Maverick_Zero_X
Maverick_Zero_X
Back
Top