• 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.

Welcome to Pagemageddon! Bill Cipher Rework.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Regardless I think @Magicomethkuon is right, we can talk about the rest in a Part 2 of this CRT for discussing hax and so on.

The stats part was accepted and implemented, so I guess we should close this and apply the changes.
 
Applied the changes to the actual profile.

I'll ask for this to get closed.

The hax stuff can be discussed in the next CRT
Also, I think this thread has gone on long enough, but I might as well mention it now;

It is revealed in the Gravity Falls complete series DVD set that, after the events of the show, Bill Cipher was put into a cosmic punishment, where he is forced to relive the events of the show forever, over and over again.

I think this could give him better reasoning for type 4 Immortality, and is probably combat applicable considering Bill is aware that he is in a loop.
So you can bring these as well there.
 
You're making a fuss over a small detail come on now...
It's not a small detail, it's a relevant part of the rating. And if it's a small detail, all the more reason to stay in line with the votes seen through the thread. Rest looks fine enough though I guess, you have my agreement with haxes in the next CRT.
 
Most of the references are before the "," and "."
That should be fixed, alas the profile is locked for me
 
This thread seems slightly off-topic now, I thought it was on hold. What happened?
 
McGucket resists memory manip, not mind manipulation.

The second is hard to quantify but I think it'd only be Power Null within the Mindscape.

Electricity Manip works.

Madness Manip is a bit questionable but works I suppose.

Subjective Reality works.

Probability Manipulation is much too vague to give it any real credence.
 
McGucket resists memory manip, not mind manipulation.

The second is hard to quantify but I think it'd only be Power Null within the Mindscape.

Electricity Manip works.

Madness Manip is a bit questionable but works I suppose.

Subjective Reality works.

Probability Manipulation is much too vague to give it any real credence.
hax is being discussed in a seperate crt
 
No??? 3-A would destroy just one of the infinitesimal parts of it.
It's still a perfectly acceptable and the most common way to refer to time, it doesn't matter how it's infinitesimal next to all of time from its beginning to the end of time, that's the highest possible way to interpret the use of the word and you need proof that it's referring to that.
Plus, I don't see why Time Baby would exclude time as part of the fabric of existence, given that fabric's very definition is the structure of something. I just don't see why he wouldn't include the whole of time, where the latter is part of existence as well.
You already have as a premise that he must refer to it when you need proof that he does due to that being the highest possible way to interpret the use of the word. The "fabric of something" is super vague, yes, it can refer to all of something, but it can also refer to parts of something, even the page you link says "the parts of something that hold it together"; "it" is "something", meaning that there are more parts of that something that the fabric doesn't refer to, which is being hold together by the parts of that something the fabric does refer to. Dictionaries are clear as water when a word refers to the entirety of something rather than this not necessarily being the case.
I don't understand this point? Are you saying that because they time traveled the destruction can't be Tier 2? Huuuh... you do know that happens in literally every fiction which has Tier 2 characters and time travel, right? You never see destruction of space-time in fiction taking in account the time travels happened in the series prior, as that would make the story extremely convoluted and no one ever thinks about it.

So I don't really get this whole point, really.
You are very confused. Why don't the other staff or other users tell you what I meant?
It is BS because the timelines are all fundamentally different from each other? Ford says so himself.
You ignored what I said.
I belived you were arguing for NR being just High 3-A/Low 2-C in size instead of 2-A here, if I read it correctly, given you're basically saying as if given NR is only in the present, it can't be 2-A sized. But this is just... overcomplicating things? I mean if the thing encompasses infinite space-times then it is just 2-A in size and that's it.
The Nightmare Realm is infinite in size. That's a terrible argument you already have as a premise that the Nightmare Realm encompasses space-times while not having the reading comprehension to know how I call you out on what you are wrong on; "the Nightmare Realm is the space between all universes, not timelines. You don't even show proof of that, you just say it", it also doesn't "encompasses" that, it is outside of them but has wormholes to them.
Fiction can indeed showcase characters with finite perceptions describing infinite stuff, it's up to you proving the negative and tell how Ford is wrong outside of "is an hyperbole because I want to."
I already did that.
Yourself have said you disagree with many things here but... isn't this basically enforcing Double Standards lmao? The wiki already suffers too much from this, and you're not helping here.
It's not Double Standards because I'm not the wiki.
I was talking about this. He was granting extra power to them without growing in size himself.
I know, and as with anyone that can do that to others, they can make them stronger than themselves if themselves are at a smaller size.
I am saying that due to Bill still being the one who makes the character enlarge through just giving his power, he's not giving the power to enlarge one's self. I am seeing where you're coming from but I think is fair to argue Bill scales to the max size of the thing, given that he seems to enlarge himself due to simple convenience rather than simply empower himself.
You can't assume that it's convenience w/o gaining the power and speed he shows on those bigger sizes, you need proof that it's like that.
See the point above.
It seems like you say that just because I start my argument like that too, but I also talk about other stuff that I don't believe you now agree with, I believe you misread my argument again instead.

@DarkDragonMedeus Question, how much attention can you give to the thread? Can you reply to rest of my arguments after that? I would like to know if this is something casual or if we have your full attention, for the record.
 
I've talked about this off-site, and yeah, I also do think that this, adding with other stuff like Bill killing time and meaning, creating the 7 deadly sins and Mabeland shenanigans is conceptual manipulation.
 
As stated before, we would focus on Tier, AP, SS, and Durability first.
 
@DarkDragonMedeus Question, how much attention can you give to the thread? Can you reply to rest of my arguments after that? I would like to know if this is something casual or if we have your full attention, for the record.
I was pinged about this at work, and I started with that post but I also have read the following posts. And I have read your counterarguments, but I personally still believe Styrm makes sense that at least Low 2-C, possibly 2-A makes more sense.
 
Which post specifically was this?
You disagreed, you made your points, you got outvoted. If it were up to me alone, Undertale would still have flat Durability Negation, Metal Gear Raiden would still have Reactive Power Level, and Darksiders would be above 8-A(personal preference), but this is a "Democracy"(I use the term loosely) and the word of one usually doesn't universally apply.
 
Flashlight237 doesn’t have evaluation rights here, no reason for their name to be bolded.
 
When was this agreed upon among the staff here?
Which post specifically was this?
Here:
Having read through the justification on the blog, the argument against the change provided by Eficiente, and the arguments for the change provided by Strym and Phoenks, I'm willing to say I'd support possibly/likely 2-A.

I will note that the justification in the blog is quite wordy, and a lot of the information in it is unnecessary for establishing the case - I'd rather the published page cut down on the word count, but that's a tangential matter. More importantly, I don't find the case regarding the "fabric of existence" only denoting a single universe to be compelling. Nothing about referring to the fact that their universe will be destroyed inherently implies the impact will be limited entirely to that singular universe. If an action will destroy "the fabric of existence", and all universes are included under this label of "existence" (i.e.: they exist, which certainly appears to be the case), then we'd naturally assert that action would destroy all of them unless some evidence to the contrary was established. There doesn't appear to be any such evidence, and the added context of Bill already being established as a "threat to the multiverse" in the midst of this supports this interpretation. There's a small degree of ambiguity in the phrasing that would lead me to err away from considering this a decisive rating, but I've not been convinced that anything brought up contradicts the justification.
Regarding the tiers, I think "Low 2-C, possibly 2-A" works after reading the main arguments.
This post looks good to me yes.
So unless more staff suddenly chime in and disagree AP is accepted I suppose.
 
Alright, I'm sorry for the abilities/"at least" stuff. Shion, me and the others got a biiit carried away after the staff agreed with us.

We'll discuss it in a second CRT as I said, don't worry!
I ******* told you to get it accepted before adding didnt I. Chicken Wing
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top