why aren't constellation feats considered 4-A

[TyranoDoom30]

so, according to the tiering system, to be 4-A you have to "destroy multiple solar systems"

constellation stars can be solar systems.

so why arent constellation feats considered 4-A?

 

[Thelastmlg]

Creating costellations is just creating a bunch of stars, same goes for solar systems, you gotta create the space between them.

Destroying them should be 4-A if it happens normally (i.e. a big explosion) instead of you, idk, making each star disappear at once somehow.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

If they're formed via an omnidirectional blast, it actually would be 4-A. But if they're created or destroyed via doing it to the stars one by one, it's only High 4-C. But calculations using Inverse Square law are what we go by for our tiering borders.

 

[Thelastmlg]

Destroying stars one by one would be 4-C though, high would be for the creation, plus has any constellation destruction feat ever done one by one, i always saw creation ones but never a destruction one, beyond sections of galaxies.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

That depends on the size of the individual stars actually if it's one by one.

 

[TyranoDoom30]

If they're formed via an omnidirectional blast, it actually would be 4-A. But if they're created or destroyed via doing it to the stars one by one, it's only High 4-C. But calculations using Inverse Square law are what we go by for our tiering borders.

i understand now, thanks

 

[ShadowWarrior1999]

If you’re destroying a constellation, that’s 4-A. Creating one is High 4-C as you’re only providing the energy necessary to create the stars and not the space in between them.