Where does Necrozma's 3-C key come from?

[Peptocoptr27]

This also applies to Zygarde, Mewtwo and everyone else who scales to Necrozma's feat of absorbing the light from Ultra Space. The feat used to be 4-B as that's the amount of energy required to light up a baseline universe. Now that Ultra Space is heavily implied to be infinite in size, they all have a 3-C key instead. Why? The high 3-A key made perfect sense, so why is it attached to the word “likely”? Almost anything would make more sense than that. If you think a definitive high 3-A rank is too generous for a feat that doesn't involve creating or destroying something, then why not “at least 4-B, likely 3-A” or “at least 3-A, likely high 3-A”. Both of these have at least SOME logic to them. That's how I see it.

 

[Adem_Warlock69]

New Necrozma's feat calc is 3-C

 

[Peptocoptr27]

Woops. That's embarassing. It's even on his profile. I really thought it stemed from the realization that Ultra Space is most likely infinite. My bad

 

[Lightbuster30]

I've got a better question: Why are we still assuming 100 billion Stars per galaxy as if they're all the Milky Way without making any counterarguments against the arguments made against it?

 

[Peptocoptr27]

What are you suggesting? Is there a better galaxy to use for the average amount of star per galaxy?

 

[Lightbuster30]

What are you suggesting? Is there a better galaxy to use for the average amount of star per galaxy?

I suggested 100 million stars based on what I found as opposed to 100 billion stars like the Milky Way (On account that there is no evidence presented that proves the average galaxy contains as many stars as the Milky Way), which would make light absorption of the Universe 4-A. But everyone decided it would be funny to stop responding to any arguments I made halfway through. Same thing happened when I brought the arguments to the calculation blog.

 

[Peptocoptr27]

I mean, isn't the milky way small to average in size compared to other galaxies? If anything , the other ones would have more light to pull from.

 

[Lightbuster30]

Being small relative to other galaxies doesn't mean it's the average galaxy in terms of Star when others are even smaller. There's a reason why we don't treat random background Stars as the same size as the Sun. There simply isn't enough evidence to justify the sheer star number, and unless there is evidence for it, then it either needs to be posted pronto or the calc needs to be adjusted.

 

[Peptocoptr27]

Sure, but in this case it doesn't really matter anyway since 3-C is a massive low-ball. Ultra space is infinite in size, making the feat high 3-A. I guess the only reason Necrozma has a 3-C key is because Ultra space isn't DIRECTLY stated to be universe-sized? Honestly, I don't know.

 

[Lightbuster30]

I frankly don't care if High 3-A is legit or not. This is about whether or not Milky Way sized galaxies for the og rating is legit or not.

 

[Peptocoptr27]

Even if Ultra space isn't infinite and the feat isn't high 3-A, Ultra space is still much larger than our universe via housing portals to every universe of a countless 2-B multiverse. No matter what, 3-C is a conservative estimation. If a character ever pulls off the same light absorbing feat in a universe that doesn't have this absurd size, I would agree with your complaint, and even now, I still think they deserve to be heard, but again, I really don't think it matters for this ranking in partcular.