• 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.

Splash Star revisions 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messages
10,804
Reaction score
1,639
Continued from here, these are the current arguments for 3-A:

  • Goyan all but stating that Spiral Heart Splash Star is on par with the big bang
  • After Goyan destroyed the planet, there were no stars visible, implying that he destroyed the entire universe, or at least part of it
  • As Goyan predates the universe, he presumably tanked the big bang.
There's also All Stars scaling to think about.
 
Sorry but this isn't enough. We only know Goyan existed since the creation of the universe. This doesn't confirm he tanked a big bang. Nor thus the final attack reminding him of the phenomenon means it has the same AP. It's best to stop bringing this up because it's too weak to consider for a 3-A.
 
Goyan in particular existed in what he described as a complete void. They also get resistance to radiation and self-sustenance for being OK in space.
 
To be fair, it is one of the most reliable Big Bang statements possible. I agree, I was adding onto resistance to absolute zero. I'm guessing that "no stars" doesn't change your stance in the slightest.
 
Sorry but no. There's still not enough context for it. We can't scale from assumption with insufficient proof and I know mutiple staff members will likely say the same thing. It's best to drop it all together since it's not happening.
 
I'll add abilities, and we can close this, then. I saw this one Ajimu thread where they were saying that her not being corporeal was the only justification for not having 3-A durability.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top