Super Solar System Bros (Short and simple Power Star AP upgrade)

[Omnificence]

Brief Summary​

This is just a short but straightforward thread I made for the sole purpose of upgrading the AP for the Power Stars and those who are capable of using them based on a certain calculation I did from the Mario Party series. This is a recalculation of Jasonsith's blog that attempted to find the yield of the Power Star's explosion made in one of the Mario Party 4 character endings.

The calculation I performed yields Solar System level and already has 2 accepted evaluations on it as well as two CGMs on the forums who think it's fine. Here are the changes if this gets accepted.

Agree: @ZespeonGalaxy, @Psychomaster35, @StretchSebe, @Accelerated_Evolution, @DarkDragonMedeus,
Neutral:
Disagree (no anti-feats):

 

[ZespeonGalaxy]

If the calc got accepted then should be fine no? Calcs arent my strong-suite by any means but yeah should be ok.

 

[Omnificence]

If the calc got accepted then should be fine no? Calcs arent my strong-suite by any means but yeah should be ok.

Counted.

 

[Psychomaster35]

This should be fine

 

[StretchSebe]

Calc is accepted from two CGM's. Don't see why not. Agree.

 

[Accelerated_Evolution]

Should be noted that exist other calculation of the same feat

Anyway, the upgrade looks fine, i agree

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Looks good to me.

 

[Omnificence]

Should be noted that exist other calculation of the same feat

Technically, that blog only calculated the number of stars the Power Star released and moved, not the size of the explosion it made.

 

[Accelerated_Evolution]

Technically, that blog only calculated the number of stars the Power Star released and moved, not the size of the explosion it made.

Ok then

 

[Armorchompy]

Why's this being treated as an explosion? The stars are just moving, not getting destroyed.

 

[Omnificence]

Why's this being treated as an explosion? The stars are just moving, not getting destroyed.

Did I say anything about the stars getting destroyed? No; that's not the point of the calculation I made. The point is the Power Star created an explosion before releasing all those stars; if you paid attention to the scene you can see the star creating a blast after absorbing all the other stars. I'm calculating the size of the blast the Power Star made.

 

[Armorchompy]

Did I say anything about the stars getting destroyed? No; that's not the point of the calculation I made. The point is the Power Star created an explosion before releasing all those stars; if you paid attention to the scene you can see the star creating a blast after absorbing all the other stars. I'm calculating the size of the blast the Power Star made.

Well the formula is for destroying the stars, so it doesn't really make any sense to use it here at all. This would be a KE calc- an invalid one since they'd go FTL. So it is pretty pertinent from me to bring that up, actually.

 

[StretchSebe]

Well the formula is for destroying the stars, so it doesn't really make any sense to use it here at all. This would be a KE calc- an invalid one since they'd go FTL. So it is pretty pertinent from me to bring that up, actually.

Two CGM's have provided input on the feat, and found the calculation of such feat acceptable after fixes.

Do you have any evidence as to why the feat being presented and calculated is actually not what it seems, and should receive this special treatment you're suggesting after two CGM's have already looked over the feat and math and found both acceptable?

 

[Armorchompy]

My evidence is logic- I have given a reason why this isn't viable, and it's perfectly possible that they may have overlooked it (or that I may be unaware of some standard that makes it viable). Perhaps those CGMs (or anyone else) would like to discuss the calculation with me?

 

[Accelerated_Evolution]

Question: If the upgrade is accepted, would this match be removed? Because, even with the AP upgrade, the result would pretty much stays the same

 

[Mephistus]

Calculating the luminosity for that area would work as an alternative too, if you are so keen on getting a tier 4 result.

 

[Omnificence]

Calculating the luminosity for that area would work as an alternative too, if you are so keen on getting a tier 4 result.

You wanna guide me through on how to do it, or do you wanna calculate it?

 

[Armorchompy]

Yeah, no; we're not doing that KE BS again. Especially not after that last incident you and I had.

The "incident" that you refer to was me disagreeing with you on a calculation and you freaking out and proceeding to harass me on ten different threads about it until you got banned, so don't make it sound like it was something we shared an equal amount of blame for. Regardless I'm sorry, but you do not get to dictate what we are "doing" and what we are "not doing". The calculation is based on what I believe to be a wrong method and as far as I am concerned, unless anyone would like to explain to my why it is actually correct, it is not valid, and if you insist on utilizing other CGMs' disagreement to counter mine, I will simply summon more and see what they think.

 

[Omnificence]

The "incident" that you refer to was me disagreeing with you on a calculation and you freaking out and proceeding to harass me on ten different threads about it until you got banned, so don't make it sound like it was something we shared an equal amount of blame for. Regardless I'm sorry, but you do not get to dictate what we are "doing" and what we are "not doing". The calculation is based on what I believe to be a wrong method and as far as I am concerned, unless anyone would like to explain to my why it is actually correct, it is not valid, and if you insist on utilizing other CGMs' disagreement to counter mine, I will simply summon more and see what they think.

Harrass you? Stop, right there! You're the one who went on a couple of my calculations swearing and insulting my calculations, even calling them "shoddy logic" in one thread. I never treated you like that before you went and acted like that. If anyone was doing the harassing, it was you, and I asked you nicely a few times to stop it; that's why I stopped asking you for evaluations on my calculations.

 

[Armorchompy]

Sure, if you choose to remember it that way - I'm not the guy that got banned for it, and regardless this isn't the place. Anyways, the matter of the current calculation stands.

 

[SeijiSetto]

Well the formula is for destroying the stars, so it doesn't really make any sense to use it here at all. This would be a KE calc- an invalid one since they'd go FTL. So it is pretty pertinent from me to bring that up, actually.

GBE is generally used for feats with FTL KE for celestial bodies (as an alternative)

otherwise armor makes sense to me.
all the stars were pulled in towards the Power Star at the center and left the Power Star alone in the sky - if there are no stars to be destroyed, why use the inverse-square formula with stars?

 

[Armorchompy]

GBE is generally used for feats with FTL KE for celestial bodies (as an alternative)

otherwise armor makes sense to me.
all the stars were pulled in towards the Power Star at the center and left the Power Star alone in the sky - if there are no stars to be destroyed, why use the inverse-square formula with stars?

The sum of the stars' GBE is what is currently used for the feat.

 

[StretchSebe]

My evidence is logic- I have given a reason why this isn't viable, and it's perfectly possible that they may have overlooked it (or that I may be unaware of some standard that makes it viable). Perhaps those CGMs (or anyone else) would like to discuss the calculation with me?

The calculation is based on what I believe to be a wrong method and as far as I am concerned, unless anyone would like to explain to my why it is actually correct, it is not valid, and if you insist on utilizing other CGMs' disagreement to counter mine, I will simply summon more and see what they think.

So don't trust other CGM's, or those you don't 'approve' of, and despite providing no evidence to actually disprove the incredibly straight-forward feat and other CGM's analysis, if we don't respect your authority and 'logic,' you'll call in others to just shut the thread down?

Buddy, the thread just started. Pull it together.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Let's not please.

obviously, I would have no issues with using this feat/calculation so long as it's accepted by calc members. Now while it is accepted, another calc member clearly has an issue with it and thus, the calc members need to sort it out.

 

[Omnificence]

Let's not please.

obviously, I would have no issues with using this feat/calculation so long as it's accepted by calc members. Now while it is accepted, another calc member clearly has an issue with it and thus, the calc members need to sort it out.

Thank you, Griffin.

 

[Armorchompy]

So don't trust other CGM's, or those you don't 'approve' of, and despite providing no evidence to actually disprove the incredibly straight-forward feat and other CGM's analysis, if we don't respect your authority and 'logic,' you'll call in others to just shut the thread down?

I'm not sure how you could come to these conclusions in good faith. I have brought up an issue with the feat that previous CGMs did not address. I am not trying to undermine their authority, but there is nothing unfair about me suggesting that they may have missed something- I have very much done the same in the past and have no problem with admitting it.

If you consider getting people with the authority to evaluate a feat to weigh in on it when there's a disagreement, and considering said feat rejected if the majority considers it invalid, to be an unfair procedure then quite frankly that is just your own problem, because that's how the site's always worked.

 

[Omnificence]

Well the formula is for destroying the stars, so it doesn't really make any sense to use it here at all. This would be a KE calc- an invalid one since they'd go FTL. So it is pretty pertinent from me to bring that up, actually.

Uh, no? You do realize that stars can move at different speeds, right? Not ALL of them move near or above the speed of light.

 

[Armorchompy]

You are free to calculate their individual movement speeds in the feat (And get KE if they're under SoL), though bringing up a study of how fast they move IRL isn't pertinent given that this is being done by an outside force.

 

[Omnificence]

You are free to calculate their individual movement speeds in the feat (And get KE if they're under SoL), though bringing up a study of how fast they move IRL isn't pertinent given that this is being done by an outside force.

Okay, then; I will. Challenge accepted.

 

[Armorchompy]

That... wasn't a challenge. I was making you aware that it was an avenue for calculating it.

 

[AbaddonTheDisappointment]

Nah yeah that was an oversight on my part. It's probably better to just use the current calc on the profile given it simply uses GBE for the FTL movement

 

[Omnificence]

I mean, can't we at least give the Power Star Stellar Range based upon the calculation I made?

 

[AbaddonTheDisappointment]

I mean, can't we at least give the Power Star Stellar Range based upon the calculation I made?

The profile currently lists its range as interstellar but you could always put it as a supporting feat I suppose

 

[Omnificence]

The profile currently lists its range as interstellar but you could always put it as a supporting feat I suppose

Yeah, that should be fine, right?

 

[AbaddonTheDisappointment]

Yeah, that should be fine, right?

Yeah adding it as a range supporting feat is fine to me

 

[Mephistus]

You wanna guide me through on how to do it, or do you wanna calculate it?

Regarding the Mario Party 4 calculation, you should actually do that on your own with Armor's suggestion if you want a higher result than what I currently got and the luminosity end would be scraps.

I would actually suggest just going off a couple of the background stars that are the very last to appear near the middle next to the Power Star when they all get sent back into the sky and scale off their diameters since they move the slowest. The animation for the scenes is all identical but I'd recommend getting a really high-quality video to scale off of since they are pretty finely pixelated stars.

 

[Omnificence]

Ugh, let's just close this thread; I don't see there being anything we can do here other than give the Power Star a measly range calculation. We already have one for its AP, anyway.

 

[Omnificence]

Looks good to me.

Let's not please.

obviously, I would have no issues with using this feat/calculation so long as it's accepted by calc members. Now while it is accepted, another calc member clearly has an issue with it and thus, the calc members need to sort it out.

Can one of you rename my blog to something like Power Star Range, please?

 

[Omnificence]

This should be fine

Why's this being treated as an explosion? The stars are just moving, not getting destroyed.

GBE is generally used for feats with FTL KE for celestial bodies (as an alternative)

otherwise armor makes sense to me.
all the stars were pulled in towards the Power Star at the center and left the Power Star alone in the sky - if there are no stars to be destroyed, why use the inverse-square formula with stars?

Let's not please.

obviously, I would have no issues with using this feat/calculation so long as it's accepted by calc members. Now while it is accepted, another calc member clearly has an issue with it and thus, the calc members need to sort it out.

Looks good to me.

We don't have a problem giving the Power Star Stellar range based on this calculation, do we?

 

[Accelerated_Evolution]

We don't have a problem giving the Power Star Stellar range based on this calculation, do we?

I don´t think so