-
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.
Why is Yhwach not low 2c anymore ? I just want tho hear the justifications
- Thread starter KINGRDB
- Start date
- Status
- 15,495
- 10,297
because it was deemed that the destruction of garganta was too vague (iirc)
yes
- 15,495
- 10,297
It wasnt really a debunk but i dont have it here
DragonLord
She/Her- 1,570
- 1,590
I believe this may be what your looking for
- 15,495
- 10,297
Yeah, that was the downgrade CRT, and after it, they made other 2 CRT to bring the tier 2 ratings back, but only Soul King now is a solid Low 2-C and yhwach, ichigo and aizen become 5-B
- 5,220
- 3,346
If you want my opinion, there is no real justification, 3-A/Low 2-C Yhwach was rejected based on nothing more than a downplayed interpretation of the feat and because people didn't want Ichigo/Aizen becoming 3-A/Low 2-C through scaling to him.
If you want the "official" justification, the answer will probably be something similar to;
If you want the "official" justification, the answer will probably be something similar to;
- "Vague destruction method"
- "Vague timeframe"
- "Vague as to whether or not he would actually destroy the Garganta or it would be caused by a chain reaction"
- 2,954
- 1,440
Originally they were given the rating based on them being able to stabilize the universe with their power. However VSB change the Rules for stabilization. To were know you need a immediate collapse after the stabilizer dies aka the soul king. Because the universe did not collapse immediately after the soul king died it was deemed unquantifiable. This is all BS considering DC and creation feats don't require time-frames. Yet stabilization does.
- 15,366
- 11,193
In some ways, time-frames for certain destruction/creation feats are needed otherwise we don't know if the feat was done overtime or not.
- 15,495
- 10,297
Thats against Occam Razor, it was stated that everything was going to be destroyed after Reio death, why would it take an eternity or something similar? And in the end, it still is a Low 2-C feat
- 15,366
- 11,193
...I was just commenting in general, it wasn't about the Bleach thing. I was just saying that some creation and destruction feats could have been done overtime thats all. That's why I bolded that specific section in the comment I quoted.
- 2,954
- 1,440
True but i could name like 10 characters.
Kaguya ETSO we didn't get a timr frame for how long it would take for the dimension to be destroyed.
Goku and beerus destroying the universe not time-frame given.
Arcues creation of the universe.
Ect
- 15,495
- 10,297
The 2 punches shaked the universe and the 3rd punch was stated that will destroy everything, the context seems instantly
- 16,927
- 4,844
Just to correct you on this topic, Pokemon creating universes doesn't fall under that requirement as 2-A Multiverses being infinite ignores the need for timeframes. So thats a false example to use here. And even then, universe creation has been blatantly shown to be done in a matter of moments, minutes at the worst.
But any who, LordGriffin is right where there are cases of creation feats needing timeframe. Case by case.
- 2,954
- 1,440
What about a few minutes time-frame
- 6,127
- 4,206
So is a low2C contruct ignores time frames. So whats the difference?
Hell even High3A does.
- 16,927
- 4,844
Because it doesn't, low 2-C structures are not infinite in scope. This was said already before.
- 6,127
- 4,206
Why?
- 6,127
- 4,206
Forget low2C.
Answer me why stabilization of High3A realm overtime isn't qualifiable.
Answer me why stabilization of High3A realm overtime isn't qualifiable.
DragonLord
She/Her- 1,570
- 1,590
- 129
- 50
I don't get why infinite creation or destruction would require a time-frame. With finite power and finite time, you would never be able to reach infinite levels of power. So long as the fact can be achieved in finite time, that would mean that they would need to have infinite power. Whatever finite time they needed would just be the wind-up before they reached that infinite power.
- 6,127
- 4,206
That is what I find flawed in current stabilization standards.
- 15,495
- 10,297
Yeah that doesnt makes sense, if an attack takes 9999999999999999999 years to destroy a High 3-A structure is still High 3-A
- 2,954
- 1,440
VS wiki logic to downplay feats
- 383
- 218
Bleach is great example of the wiki shooting for the lowest interpretation of a feat no matter what, even if it's even less cohesive and more assumptive compared to just going for the interpretation that actually makes sense.
What happened to "the simplest solution is always the better one"? Simple. It's all just wank guys
What happened to "the simplest solution is always the better one"? Simple. It's all just wank guys
- 21,129
- 30,082
Question has been answered
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked