- 402
- 183
Yeah that should’ve been used imo. Not hard to make conservative estimates.If the wiki didn't get cold feet they'd take reasonable estimates for the Texas-sized asteroid
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yeah that should’ve been used imo. Not hard to make conservative estimates.If the wiki didn't get cold feet they'd take reasonable estimates for the Texas-sized asteroid
This is giving me deja vu, and may have even been from this sight. Huh, so she's definitely not stronger. Weird, but more headache than weird.It was actually both penvincipals AND in the comic itself, as well as the handbook:
-"The more she assumes her monster persona, the younger her human form becomes upon reverting back again. Converesly, the younger her human self becomes, her monster form grows in both stature and strength." [Invincible Handbook #2 page 17 (shows in scan)]
-Monster Girl comments on how the curse-reversing belt is working, but due to this her Monster form is slowly getting weaker and would soon become redundant in battle. [#94]
-Kirkman reaffirms the inverse proportion idea; comments on her appeared and true sizes. [Penvincipals #94]
not even gonna lie, I kinda forgot about the nervous system gunHe took no physical damage, not even a nose-bleed (which is the usual damage he receives from any injury, cosmetic or otherwise). I think the nervous system gun casts reasonable doubt on using this as a cap. He was most definitely weakened and groggy from the shot like less-than-a-minute prior.
The difference between H6-B and H6-A is extremely large. And this calculation will be lower when the things mentioned in the comments are corrected. So I would say no.Does this open up the possibility of Omni-man scaling to his High 6-A flaxan world feat? I'm pretty sure the reason we didn't use it was because it was far higher than anything either had shown up to that point.
![]()
Omni-Man Flies Across the Flaxan World
vsbattles.fandom.com
I looked at why this calculation is not used and the reason why it is not used is that it violates the KE rules. And it was recalculated using GBE instead of KE and the Low 6-B rating comes from this new calculation.Does this open up the possibility of Omni-man scaling to his High 6-A flaxan world feat? I'm pretty sure the reason we didn't use it was because it was far higher than anything either had shown up to that point.
![]()
Omni-Man Flies Across the Flaxan World
vsbattles.fandom.com
We need to know the time frame to use it. But we don't.Tbh we should use the Texas asteroid deflection.
YES YESTbh we should use the Texas asteroid deflection.
use the same values has the other asteroid that Mark deflected, is not that hardWe need to know the time frame to use it. But we don't.
There is no basis for using the values of the asteroid that Mark deflected.use the same values has the other asteroid that Mark deflected, is not that hard
Why would we need to know the time frame?We need to know the time frame to use it. But we don't.
And how long did it take Omni-Man to generate this energy and stop the asteroid? Because the longer it took, we would have to divide the KE by that time to calculate Omni-Man's AP.Why would we need to know the time frame?
Being able to deflect an asteroid would require you to output more force than it's initial kinetic energy.
The kinetic energy of an asteroid the size of Texas moving at general asteroid/meteorite speeds would be decently into Moon level.
So bare minimum he'd need to overcome that in order to deflect it away from its trajectory. Especially so if it literally sends it flying backwards like how Mark did it.
use the same valuesAnd how long did it take Omni-Man to generate this energy and stop the asteroid? Because the longer it took, we would have to divide the KE by that time to calculate Omni-Man's AP.
The KE of the asteroid Mark stopped was at Island level, but because it took Mark so long to stopped the asteroid, Mark's AP only at 7-A.
![]()
Invincible: Meteor Catching
vsbattles.fandom.com
There is no basis for this.use the same values
and there's also no basis for not using the same values in the first place just to say that we shouldn't use calculation in general.There is no basis for this.
As I said before, using the same value has the same validity as using 39 minutes and there is no basis for either.and there's also no basis for not using the same values in the first place just to say that we shouldn't use calculation in general.
I'm not saying the feat is not the same and not valid, I'm just saying we don't know how long it took him to do it.man, Omni man is just saying that Mark saved the country from a meteorite and says he deflected one the size of texas, why are we assuming that it is not a valid thing because we don't know the time, even thought in the context of the same, it is almost the same feat minus that the object is bigger.
It's not a bigger assumption. It is an equally valid assumption as using the time it took Mark to stop the asteroid.assuming that he took alot more of effort or less effort is already a bigger assumption without basis than just assuming it is the same thing
Dude, it's a training scene, the statement is thrown in there to draw a parallel between each other and to put into perpective their gap in power. Saying he high-diffed it is a bigger assumptionIt's not a bigger assumption. It is an equally valid assumption as using the time it took Mark to stop the asteroid.
If you'll allow me to add on to this. A timeframe only becomes necessary if we assume Nolan stopped the asteroid. However, we don't know if he did.As I said before, using the same value has the same validity as using 39 minutes and there is no basis for either.
I'm not saying the feat is not the same and not valid, I'm just saying we don't know how long it took him to do it.
Stopping an asteroid in 30 seconds is the same feat as stopping it in an hour. But even if these two are the same feat, there is a huge difference between the results.
It's not a bigger assumption. It is an equally valid assumption as using the time it took Mark to stop the asteroid.
yes we canThe issue with this feat is that we know literally nothing. Every assumption is equally valid, so we cannot use one over the other.
ACCEPT THE TEXAS METEORThis Season is pretty feats heavy lol
Can you calculate this while you're at it ?Spoilers for a feat in the new episode, in case anyone hasn't seen it.
Another feat, but this seems far more impressive than the nuke.
Immortal in the future personally destroys 10 cities and we see massive explosions. This should scale to the Immortal, yes? IDK if it'd scale to the past immortal but it clearly scales to Mark as he was able to take hits from him and killed him. I believe it should scale to the future Immortal because it was clearly stated he did that personally.
I'm getting 6-B to High 6-A results, which is pretty good. However, you should be a bit skeptical as I've never done this type of pixel scaling before.
I wouldn't be surprised if I did something wrong.
Yes, but he gets Attack Reflection, not Damage Reflection.Should Allen get Damage Reflection ?
Yes this is a great feat and fairly clear-cut with the "personally" I think. Immortal is also an idiot for wiping out damn near Continent-sized lands when wanting to destroy 10 cities.Spoilers for a feat in the new episode, in case anyone hasn't seen it.
Another feat, but this seems far more impressive than the nuke.
Immortal in the future personally destroys 10 cities and we see massive explosions. This should scale to the Immortal, yes? IDK if it'd scale to the past immortal but it clearly scales to Mark as he was able to take hits from him and killed him. I believe it should scale to the future Immortal because it was clearly stated he did that personally.
I'm getting 6-B to High 6-A results, which is pretty good. However, you should be a bit skeptical as I've never done this type of pixel scaling before.
I wouldn't be surprised if I did something wrong.
Btw would this double as a speed feat? Since he'd have flown to those spots and hit them each individuallySpoilers for a feat in the new episode, in case anyone hasn't seen it.
Another feat, but this seems far more impressive than the nuke.
Immortal in the future personally destroys 10 cities and we see massive explosions. This should scale to the Immortal, yes? IDK if it'd scale to the past immortal but it clearly scales to Mark as he was able to take hits from him and killed him. I believe it should scale to the future Immortal because it was clearly stated he did that personally.
I'm getting 6-B to High 6-A results, which is pretty good. However, you should be a bit skeptical as I've never done this type of pixel scaling before.
I wouldn't be surprised if I did something wrong.
I don't know how to. There's no way I can measure those chains, way too much.Can you calculate this while you're at it ?![]()
Added speed to the blog. Got low Sub-Relativistic results.Btw would this double as a speed feat? Since he'd have flown to those spots and hit them each individually
Goated thanksI don't know how to. There's no way I can measure those chains, way too much.
And Rex also doesn't destroy the entire gate. Trying to measure the exact destruction looks impossible.
I know some people are crazy enough to do stuff like that, but not me.
Added speed to the blog. Got low Sub-Relativistic results.
Approved it.Spoilers for a feat in the new episode, in case anyone hasn't seen it.
Another feat, but this seems far more impressive than the nuke.
Immortal in the future personally destroys 10 cities and we see massive explosions. This should scale to the Immortal, yes? IDK if it'd scale to the past immortal but it clearly scales to Mark as he was able to take hits from him and killed him. I believe it should scale to the future Immortal because it was clearly stated he did that personally.
I'm getting 6-B to High 6-A results, which is pretty good. However, you should be a bit skeptical as I've never done this type of pixel scaling before.
I wouldn't be surprised if I did something wrong.
What are their names ?I know some people are crazy enough to do stuff like that, but not me.
Why does it break the KE rules when it wipes out all of the ground it touches?Approved it.
Also yet another High 6-A KE feat that I’m pretty sure breaks KE rules. What’s with this show and that?
Well I’m pretty sure it breaks KE rules, at least based on the reason that my last calc on Omni Man’s Flaxan feat was removed and had to be changed to GPE cause it broke KE rules. That being the lack of damage mostly outside of the area of the explosion. Though considering the scene cuts it may still work.Why does it break the KE rules when it wipes out all of the ground it touches?
This explosion did massive damage, and wiped that area out. I don't know what else this explosion could do.
Can you point to the rule on the KE page that this breaks specifically? I'd like to understand this better.
im not familiar with the rules but what about it breaks KE rules? It's not high rel speed or FTL and idk any of the other rulesApproved it.
Also yet another High 6-A KE feat that I’m pretty sure breaks KE rules. What’s with this show and that?
Since we never get a full shot of the planet afterward, I can't really say what kind of damage was left.Well I’m pretty sure it breaks KE rules, at least based on the reason that my last calc on Omni Man’s Flaxan feat was removed and had to be changed to GPE cause it broke KE rules. That being the lack of damage mostly outside of the area of the explosion. Though considering the scene cuts it may still work.
Oh that's the rule? Pretty eh imo. And yeah changes shot before the explosions dissipate.Since we never get a full shot of the planet afterward, I can't really say what kind of damage was left.
It's possible it left a massive crater large enough that it doesn't break anything. Maybe it could be a possibly rating?
However, Omni-Man's feat was rather small lines. While this feat is a massive explosion that wiped those places off the map. I think there might be something here. Maybe it can be discussed in a future CRT.
Thank you for the evaluation regardless.