One-Punch Man: Garou and Saitama Graph Discussion (Cleaned and Continued)

[ZillertheBucko]

This Calc Group Thread is a new version of this thread that was discontinued due to it being cluttered.


The discussion is based on chapter 168 of One-Punch Man, where Saitama and Garou's growth was plotted on a graph and stated to be rising exponentially. @Qawsedf234 has calculated the graph, which has been evaluated and accepted:

One Punch Man - That one power graph

vsbattles.fandom.com

Transferring the votes from the original thread:
Bold = Staff Opinion

Agree: 21 (4;17): @Tago238, @KLOL506 , @ZillertheBucko, @Kachon123, @RethPo, @Phoenks , @Dread, @Maitreya, @Dienomite22, @CrimsonStarFallen, @Antvasima, @Ultima_Reality , @IRizz21, @Tamasensei123, @GilverTheProtoAngelo, @MARVEL_Future_Fight_Gamer, @Quangotjokes, @IllustriouS44, @Tural2004, @Bernkastelll, @Franako

Neutral: 5 (4;1): @Quantu, @Qawsedf234, @Damage3245, @Maverick_Zero_X, @LordTracer

Possibly: 2 (2;0): @Ayewale, @Kin201

Disagree: 12 (3;9): @DontTalkDT, @Matthew_Schroeder, @Aachintya31, @Lightning_XXI, @HammerStrikes219, @Agnaa, @BOEGVELD, @Jasonsith, @GodlyCharmander, @Andytrenom


Anyone and everyone (other than those thread banned of course) are welcome to vote and give your opinions and vote.

Agree

Forgot to add this vote to the OP

 

[ZillertheBucko]

Anyways can someone ping the staff who have voted
specifically DTD who I only remember having left one or two messages in page 1 of the last thread, as well as a few others who have been inactive after their votes

 

[Quantu]

I̶ ̶d̶o̶n̶'̶t̶ ̶l̶i̶k̶e̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶s̶t̶a̶f̶f̶ ̶s̶t̶e̶n̶c̶h̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶N̶e̶u̶t̶r̶a̶l̶

jk, but switch me to possibly. I was always neutral on the basis of knowing there would be opposition + me not being completely sure in the first place, but I can see a possibly

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

Count me as against using the calc.

 

[Matthew_Schroeder]

I have already stated I'm against, but I state here again to follow the thread.

 

[Coomandar]

Wheres da ******* chapter

 

[PrinceofPein]

My opposition vote now counts as one from a staff member.

Massive W

 

[ZillertheBucko]

Count me as against using the calc.

And why is that

 

[GodlyCharmander]

And why is that

The agreement isn't being questioned, so why is the disagreement being questioned?
She has been following the thread with kudos, it's likely she just agrees with the opposition's arguments.

 

[Chariot190]

Anyone and everyone (other than those thread banned of course) are welcome to vote and give your opinions and vote.

After reading both threads. I'm neutral, though leaning a bit toward agreeing (Though not fully, there's good points on both sides).

 

[ZillertheBucko]

The agreement isn't being questioned, so why is the disagreement being questioned?
She has been following the thread with kudos, it's likely she just agrees with the opposition's arguments.

I’ve also asked for the agreeing sides to give t reasoning earlier in the thread, I just find it to be a better way of doing things since this is gonna be an Fra train coinflip otherwise, and I don’t like leaving it up to chance

 

[Yar_R_agi_7k]

please count me as disagree for the calc

 

[Whiz_Almighty]

Count me as agree

 

[ZillertheBucko]

I don’t really like that people are only really voting for either extremes, when I find a possibly rating to be far more realistic than an agree or disagree

 

[Whiz_Almighty]

How about likely?

 

[Lightning_XXI]

My opposition vote now counts as one from a staff member.

Power and Abilities: Reactive Evolution (When pushed hard enough, Agnaa is capable of quickly gaining new powers in order to become stronger and fight against what seems to be wrong)

Jk, congrats for the promotion

 

[Cimafranca133]

I'm neutral. (Mostly since I'm not sure if agree or disagree. I think that the graph can be used, but also not at the same time)

 

[ZillertheBucko]

I'm neutral. (Mostly since I'm not sure if agree or disagree. I think that the graph can be used, but also not at the same time)

For possibly rating?

 

[ZillertheBucko]

My opposition vote now counts as one from a staff member.

Congrats on the promotion btw
From what I’ve seen it seems to be a deserved one

 

[D4yN4m0N]

I certainly agree, we have to consider some form of interpretation for the graph. We can't just ignore it for lack of information, if it doesn't exist, we'll make our own interpretation.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

I certainly agree, we have to consider some form of interpretation for the graph. We can't just ignore it for lack of information, if it doesn't exist, we'll make our own interpretation.

Wdym

 

[D4yN4m0N]

Wdym

exactly what I wrote.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

The phrasing is just a bit confusing is all

 

[D4yN4m0N]

The phrasing is just a bit confusing is all

what did you not understand?

 

[ZillertheBucko]

what did you not understand?

The entire second sentence

 

[D4yN4m0N]

The entire second sentence

as the graph does not have information to know how strong it was, some do not want to accept some methods of interpretation of the graph, I said that we need to consider some method, because even without the information we can interpret it in our own way is to measure how strong it can be stayed.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

Sure I guess that makes more sense.
Anyways, is anybody gonna ping DT?

 

[Aachintya31]

This post has pretty much reached a stalemate and i guess no other points are left to be discussed apart from staff discussion regarding the rules.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

That’s not true
I recently brought up new points, as well as the proposition of “possibly 3-C” rating which people have yet to really discuss

 

[Lightning_XXI]

Yeah, we haven't reached an agreement despite the great number of votes

Unsure if we should go for a middle ground or literally give this topic a break until new arguments appear, and in that case I suggest not doing it here, creating another thread after a while would not only keep the topic away from being repetitive and annoying, but it would also gather the staff again easier

 

[Agnaa]

We only just created this thread after deciding to ditch the last one

I'd suggest just pinging a bunch of staff and hoping that some consensus comes out of it.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

We only just created this thread after deciding to ditch the last one

I'd suggest just pinging a bunch of staff and hoping that some consensus comes out of it.

after the next chapter releases that is
I suggest until then, we just leave this thread silent for like a day or whatever

 

[Kachon123]

We only just created this thread after deciding to ditch the last one

I'd suggest just pinging a bunch of staff and hoping that some consensus comes out of it.

Can you do that please?

 

[Aachintya31]

I guess there should be a revision for "possibly" and "likely" ratings due them being used an excuse for poorly justified ratings.

 

[Agnaa]

We're having trouble determining how to resolve this thread due to a split in opinion. Would you be able to provide your thoughts?

@AKM sama @SomebodyData @Celestial_Pegasus @DarkDragonMedeus @Wokistan @Mr._Bambu @Elizhaa @ByAsura @Sir_Ovens @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @LordGriffin1000 @Colonel_Krukov @SamanPatou @GyroNutz @JustSomeWeirdo @Hop_Hoppington-Hoppenhiemer @Theglassman12 @Crabwhale @Eficiente @The_Impress @DarkGrath @Moritzva @Firestorm808 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Everything12 @Duedate8898 @Planck69 @KingTempest @Armorchompy @CrimsonStarFallen @UchihaSlayer96 @Emirp sumitpo @Amelia_Lonelyheart @Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Therefir @DMUA @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @CloverDragon03 @Dark-Carioca @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Aguywhodoesthings

 

[ZillertheBucko]

I guess there should be a revision for "possibly" and "likely" ratings due them being used an excuse for poorly justified ratings.

It’s not poorly justified, it’s just somewhat unclear, which is why it’s a possibility rating
I’d argue that possibly is the most reasonable one tho since there’s clear signs that they intended the graph to be a multiplier as explained above, but that’s only based on implication, not definitive confirmations, hence the possibly

 

[FinePoint]

• Unless we can figure out where the y axis start in value, we cannot figure out the rate of growth, making the multiplier impossible to gauge
• The graph has a narrative purpose to ease the understanding of Saitama's ability to grow while he fights, it has no probable mathematical purpose.
• One can assume the y starts at "sp^2" value in Joules, but then the initial point, used as a reference, cannot be measured, barricading a rate of growth as well.
• The lack of units of the graph is an indicative that the graph isn't meant to be meaningful statistically, and only serves to give visual context. It serves it's purpose.

I disagree with using the graph for the reasons Charmander summarized.

 

[Agnaa]

I guess there should be a revision for "possibly" and "likely" ratings due them being used an excuse for poorly justified ratings.

They can't be too badly justified if some people still believe it after extensive discussion.

Speaking of which, I should probably ping @Antvasima too; he might have ideas on how to resolve a split thread like this.

 

[Aachintya31]

They can't be too badly justified if some people still believe it after extensive discussion.

Fine.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

I personally think it's iffy to assume Saitama is still growing exponentially. In fact, I recall Saitama's own statements is not that he gets any stronger, but only that he already has strength that great but never uses it. Garou on the other hand does have an accelerated development who gets stronger, and I do think that not even the 4-A destruction feat is the pinnacle of Saitama's power and could be much higher; similar to the Boros point where even if he said he was serious, we wasn't actually close to being one.

I think simply giving Saitama the At least 4-A seems like a reasonable approach until there's more of an actual demonstration of a tier specific much higher.