• 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.

At least Island, possibly Small Country level+ is REALLY ugly (Sparkle's Bijuu level Revisions: Part 1)

MinatoSparkle

He/Him
Messages
9,657
Reaction score
5,977
(For now, the examples portion of this CRT is being set aside)

A while ago, this CRT was passed, giving all Bijuu level characters a rating of at least 4.3 gigatons, possibly 4 Teratons (and some upscaling/downscaling from that for certain characters). However, in this CRT, I am proposing that the 6-C rating be scrapped entirely, giving all Bijuu level characters a full Low 6-B+ rating. I won't be arguing that through consistency of calcs, but rather of scaling. There are a plethora of characters ranging from borderline Bijuu level to Early KCM2 Naruto who don't have full scaling, but have evidence of not being unfathomably below top tiers in the 6-B range.

Since this isn't really a single argument that builds upon itself, the bulk of the CRT is gonna be spent listing separate examples that demonstrate how inconsistent it is for there to be a 6-C to 6-B gap between high tiers and top tiers. So with that disclaimer out of the way, feel free to go through all the arguments and see if they holistically convince you (I'd ask you to please refrain from nitpicking too much on individual examples, particularly from the "Supporting Evidence" section, as long as you agree overall, as I'm not currently proposing specific upscales/justification changes for any of these characters other than Edo Madara and the Gokage).

Benchmarks:
  • Madara
  • Juubi
  • Juubito
  • C0
  • Kurama
  • Hashirama
Before I get into the full list of examples, what I'd like to establish first, as it impacts several people, is that Edo Madara's Full Body Humanoid Susanoo should be Country level+. While he is notably weaker than his alive self, there's no chance that his Susanoo, which is a manifestation of his own chakra, is thousands of times weaker as an Edo, like the 6-C rating would suggest. In fact, even his 4.97 teraton rating is downplaying significantly, as Edo Tensei are close to their full power, and the difference is even smaller in Madara's case as his Edo Tensei was specially enhanced. Edo Madara's Humanoid Susanoo being in this tier of power is supported by it being able to cause slight cracks on Edo SM Hashirama's Wood Dragon (though it obviously doesn't fully scale considering its slash was mostly tanked, which makes sense as the Wood Dragon should be Large Country level). Thus, one of the only completely new upgrades I'm going to be proposing is that Edo Madara's Susanoo downscales from SM/EMS Madara's to be baseline 6-B+, or 53.5 teratons.

With that established, I'd like to address everyone this affects, as several people already scale to Edo Madara's Susanoo. First and foremost, 7th Gate Guy, who blasts Madara's Susanoo away and briefly incapacitates him. I wouldn't necessarily say this puts Guy at Country level+, as the Susanoo wasn't in its legged state (and doesn't really seem to be full size, but that's a lesser point as the Susanoo's size is drawn inconsistently), but it certainly provides support to the 20 teratons+ rating.

KCM2 Naruto intercepts Edo Madara's Susanoo blade, and my thoughts are essentially the same as they are for Guy. He doesn't have to be upscaled to 53.5 teratons, especially as the Susanoo seems more definitively smaller here, but it adds consistency to him being 20 teratons rather than 21 gigatons.

Then there's the Kage. Unlike Guy and Naruto, I suggest that them scaling to Edo Madara's Humanoid Susanoo should be removed rather than downscaled for a variety of reasons:
  1. Madara was playing against the Kage to test their strengths, and there's no verifiable way to prove he was going all out even aside from the Perfect Susanoo
  2. Even 100 Healings Tsunade, the strongest member of the team in terms of AP, struggles to break through Madara's Ribcage Susanoo, which is naturally far inferior to the Humanoid variant, letalone the Full Body Humanoid Susanoo
  3. When Ohnoki Amped Ay punches through Madara's Humanoid Susanoo, it had already been partially melted by Mei (and heat isn't treated as equivalent to AP on the site)
  4. Most of the other feats the Kage achieve against Madara's Humanoid Susanoo are those of his clones, which aren't as powerful as the original's, and this is particularly noted in the case of Wood Clones, as the user's overall power is implied to be distributed between them and their clones. In Madara's case when there were 25 Susanoos active, this would be a significant nerf for each (not saying each clone has 1/25th of Madara's power, just that they're significantly weaker than him at FP).
  5. The Kage scaling to KCM2 tier is very inconsistent with their general portrayal as being around SM/KCM1 Naruto
From here on out, it's basically just rapid fire examples, so grab your popcorn:
  • KCM2 Naruto, while definitely inferior, is able to slightly damage Edo Madara's Wood Dragon with his Kurama Avatar, and it withstands the Wood Dragon biting into its neck for a brief period of time. This is relevant because the Wood Dragon when used by Base Hashirama scales to 100% Kurama. Madara compares his Wood Dragon to Hashirama's, and their usage of the same jutsu being comparable is consistent, as both Edo Madara and Base Hashirama's strongest constructs are comparable to Kurama (I even think this comparison favors Madara for a couple reasons, but that's not particularly relevant right now). Even being conservative, Madara's Wood Dragon should be no weaker than Base Edo Hashirama's Mokuton, which is 98 Teratons, so KCM2 Naruto even scaling barely to Madara's Wood Dragon is pretty incompatible with him being 6-C
    • On that note, Edo Madara's Wood Dragon should be upgraded to 98.35 or 196.7 teratons. Personally, I'd suggest the latter, but the former is acceptable too
  • KCM2 Naruto survives part of the 1st form Juubi's Bijuudama (which is calced at 4.004 Teratons), and while it was weakened by Bee and Naruto's Bijuudamas, this wouldn't have any practical effect if they were 6-C attacks (Naruto's Bijuudamas shouldn't have been High 6-C as they only get to that level after charging to a much larger size; in a rapid fire state they'd be closer to standard 15.55 gigaton Bijuudamas x 5, or 77.75 gigatons)
    • Even being extremely generous and saying that all of Bee and Naruto's Bijuudamas have a regular level of power, Bee launches 4 Bijuudamas and Naruto launches 5, meaning the combined power of their Bijuudamas is at most (using the 6-C meta) around 1.87 teratons, meaning Naruto still had to take ~2.14 teratons of leftover energy
    • KCM2 Naruto taking significant damage from this doesn't debunk him being 20 teratons, as a calc provides a minimum, not a cap
  • Gamakichi powered by MKCM Naruto's chakra partially blocks/withstands Unstable Juubito's TSO attack
  • The Bijuu are relevant in destroying SM Madara's Susanoo
  • MKCM Naruto and EMS Sasuke's combination ninjutsu damages the 3rd form Juubi
    • Their combination ninjutsu is expected to injure Juubito, who even without them knowing the full strength of, is obviously superior to the Juubi (and KCM Minato, who is a top tier himself, and thought that being able to tank such an attack required "dreamlike power")
  • Bijuu Mode Bee's face withstands a small part of a 2nd form Juubidama's explosion and he briefly withstands the impact of a 3rd form Juubidama (whose momentum had been weakened by the Allied Shinobi Force's walls and his Bijuudamas)
  • Manda briefly survives after being hit by part of C0 and shielded Sasuke well enough for him to survive it, C0 being calced at 5.4 teratons, more than 1000x above the 6-C Bijuu level rating (in case someone's gonna note that him dying to this is evidence against him being 4 teratons, my thoughts are the same as they are for KCM2 Naruto vs the Juubi's Bijuudama, and I am actually planning to eventually downgrade Manda tier characters somewhat, probably to baseline Low 6-B)
  • KCM Naruto has a good portion of 50% Kurama's power, draining him so much that he became skinny. Even acknowledging that it can't be numerically quantified, Naruto certainly has more than 0.005% of Kurama's power, which is how KCM Naruto's 6-C rating compares to 50% Kurama
  • While it's not directly shown that he was hit, the Shinsuu Senju assaulted the Perfect Susanoo, destroying it entirely around the area where Madara was standing, yet he was perfectly fine despite almost certainly having taken at least a few leftover hits, especially considering that he looked to be floating above Kurama's head before the Shinsuu Senju attack, and he was standing firmly on Kurama's head after (and even downplaying severely since they wouldn't necessarily stack linearly, each arm would have 396.7+ gigatons of force, as the 1000 arms combined are 396.7+ teratons)

I recognize that some of the examples here don't mean much on their own (for varying reasons such as vagueness, outlierishness, not being directly tied to AP, combination attacks being more than A + B), but when there are literally dozens of examples of Bijuu level/+ characters being relevant in some way to top tiers, it just forms a consistency that top tiers are generally meant to be a step or two up from Bijuu level rather than in a complete scaling vacuum.

TL;DR
  • All characters that are At least 6-C, possibly Low 6-B get upgraded to full on Low 6-B and similar changes apply for those who downscale/upscale from Bijuu level
  • Edo Madara's Full Body Humanoid Susanoo gets upgraded to 53.5 teratons
    • The Gokage scaling to Madara's Humanoid Susanoo gets removed
  • Edo Madara's Wood Dragon gets upgraded to 98.35 or 196.7 teratons (with the latter being my recommendation)
And that's everything. Let's discuss!

Bijuu are the GOATs (Agree): SlendVeny, Ghostimuscrime

Those beasts ain't allat (Disagree):

Kaguya solos (Neutral):



One of the points discussed in the Calc Group thread about Arc's KN6 Naruto TBB calc is that the forest whose edge is visible in this panel may not even be the Forest of Death, rendering his calc invalid. But this argument makes little to no sense. Let's go through it.

"One of the main flaws with Arc7Kuroi's method as I see it is that his point of comparison for the explosion (the Forest of Death with its 20 km diameter) is mostly off-screen in the panel that he using for his pixelscaling.

This is the original panel with the partially visible forest in the top-right highlighted:

Gl8v9s1.jpeg


As Arc7Kuroi's pixelscaling shows, the majority of it is completely off-screen. Arc7Kuroi has compensated for this by using a circular guide to assist the pixelscaling (assuming that from the angle we're viewing it at, the Forest of Death would be a perfect circle like that) but it still introduces uncertainty for precise size scaling."

I'm gonna be honest, this argument means nothing. The specific panel doesn't need to show the full forest for us to know it's circular. That's how it's depicted, and it's stated to have a "circular perimeter" (which just makes sense with each team entering the forest from different points along the perimeter and the distance from each gate to the tower being about 10 kilometers). It's not an assumption at all to complete the partially drawn circle shown in the Bijuudama panel.

If the contention is that the angle might mean it's not circular from that panel's POV, this is demonstrably false, given that Arc's overlaid circle aligns almost perfectly with what we do see of the forest.

"Especially since, if we can't see the full landmark, how can we be entirely sure that it is the Forest of Death?

This is the same panel from the official colored version of the manga. It depicts that wide band I've highlighted bordering the forest as being what looks like a river going by the shade of blue.

sLU7iom.jpeg


But as we can tell from the only other existing shot we have of Konoha and the Forest of Death in the same panel, there is no such river encircling the circumference of the forest.

If Kishimoto, over the years, changed how he envisions the layout of Konoha to be, to include a wide stretch of river above it... then we can't be completely sure that what is being pixelscaled here is intended to be the Forest of Death at all. We don't have a complete look at it, so we can't say "This is definitely a completely circular patch of forest, so it must be the Forest of Death."

We see only a small area that has a bend to it following the river, which means it could simply be a forest on the other side of the riverbank and not necessarily the Forest of Death itself."

This is pretty disingenuous. What other huge patch of forest is there in the area left of the Hokage statue mountain? By all of Damage's calculations using other things in the panel as references, the forest is around a kilometer in diameter. That's much larger than any of the other locations (besides the FoD) on the map of Konoha, yet this supposed large random forest is nowhere to be seen.

The simplest explanation is that the forest next to KN6 Naruto's TBB is the Forest of Death. It's in the right area, is the right shape, is a tree-dense forest as the Forest of Death is, has tree-filled rings around the main forest, and is even eyeball wise on the right level of magnitude. It's not impossible that it's a different forest, but the supposed evidence against it of a river surrounding the area (which Godernet provided a sound explanation for) is in no way strong enough to outweigh the obvious reasons it should be considered the Forest of Death.

Given that this topic is almost entirely removed from the rest of the thread, I'll have a separate vote count for this specific point.

Agree: Nierre, UchihaSlayer96, LephyrTheRevanchist

Disagree: Qawsedf234

Neutral:
 
Last edited:
All characters that are At least 6-C, possibly Low 6-B get upgraded to full on Low 6-B and similar changes apply for those who downscale/upscale from Bijuu level
A full Low 6-B rating scaling to what value?
 
Dastardly maneuver by Damage. If the Possibly rating is from a calculation thread, it requires another calculation thread to address it as it derives its acceptance from accepting the mathematical assumptions made by the calculation itself, and how it coincides with the context of the story. Addressing the latter doesn't also address the former, basically.
 
The possibility comes from contention with the FOD being used to gauge the feat, not with the actual math


So I think if Sparkle can just argue why the FOD is more accurate and reflects what the actual scaling for Konoha would be, I think we should be fine and not require a whole new CGT
 
The possibility comes from contention with the FOD being used to gauge the feat, not with the actual math


So I think if Sparkle can just argue why the FOD is more accurate and reflects what the actual scaling for Konoha would be, I think we should be fine and not require a whole new CGT
I do believe you're mistaken on this. A CRT can't just overwrite a Calc Group Members thread.
 
Uhhhh the possibly rating comes from CGM being unable to decide if the pixel calcs are more consistent than the statement. Which the discussion itself was heavily calc based. Being about assumptions going into the calc.

Obviously story bits pop up in any calc inherently.
 
I do believe you're mistaken on this. A CRT can't just overwrite a Calc Group Members thread.
A CGMs Job is to validate math, a calc can be wrong assumption wise but be right math wise, thats why to implement stuff into a verse you need a CGT AND a CRT

the FOD end is fully evaluated and is math wise correct, the contention does not come from math flaw but assumptions, you dont need calc expertise for that stuff


what he cant override is the joule numbers that come from the calc
 
A CGMs Job is to validate math, a calc can be wrong assumption wise but be right math wise, thats why to implement stuff into a verse you need a CGT AND a CRT

the FOD end is fully evaluated and is math wise correct, the contention does not come from math flaw but assumptions, you need calc expertise for that stuff


what he cant override is the joule numbers that come from the calc
Incorrect; the Calc Group Members accepted the calc as a possibly. Making a CRT to change that is circumventing the Calc Group Member's evaluation.
 
Incorrect; the Calc Group Members accepted the calc as a possibly. Making a CRT to change that is circumventing the Calc Group Member's evaluation.
"Nuh Uh" isn't a real response


you have no arguments for why it non math things can't be decided on a CRT nor are you quoting anything from the wiki rule page to support your case (sorry your personal word isnt enough because you do not hold that authority to decide rules on a whim)
 
"Nuh Uh" isn't a real response


you have no arguments for why it non math things can't be decided on a CRT nor are you quoting anything from the wiki rule page to support your case (sorry your personal word isnt enough because you do not hold that authority to decide rules on a whim)
Our rules state this:
  • If there exist conflicting accepted calculations for the same feat, the calc group members should discuss which ones that are most reliable to use in their own forum. The calc group is free to ask for relevant information from reliable members, by using the knowledgeable members list for verses or the associated verse page list of supporters. After a decision has been reached, and the most reliable calculations have been selected, a discussion should be started in the content revision forum to decide which characters that should scale to the feats.
There were conflicting accepted calculations for the same feat; mine and Arc7Kuroi's. Mine is still accepted and wasn't rejected by that thread; Arc7Kuroi's was accepted as a possible rating. This was then moved onto a content revision thread by Arc7Kuroi which acknowledged the decision of the calc group members by proposing the ratings as At least 6-C, possibly Low 6-B.

If Arc had just made a CRT for a solid Low 6-B rating... then what would be the point of having a calc group thread on the topic at all?
 
Our rules state this:
  • If there exist conflicting accepted calculations for the same feat, the calc group members should discuss which ones that are most reliable to use in their own forum. The calc group is free to ask for relevant information from reliable members, by using the knowledgeable members list for verses or the associated verse page list of supporters. After a decision has been reached, and the most reliable calculations have been selected, a discussion should be started in the content revision forum to decide which characters that should scale to the feats.
There were conflicting accepted calculations for the same feat; mine and Arc7Kuroi's. Mine is still accepted and wasn't rejected by that thread; Arc7Kuroi's was accepted as a possible rating. This was then moved onto a content revision thread by Arc7Kuroi which acknowledged the decision of the calc group members by proposing the ratings as At least 6-C, possibly Low 6-B.

If Arc had just made a CRT for a solid Low 6-B rating... then what would be the point of having a calc group thread on the topic at all?
Except that issue is not present here, the contention for FOD is regarding if the FOD we think is the FOD is the FOD at all, it has 0 conflict with any other calcs, its not competing with the tier 7 calc, all of it is a matter of assumption, that's CRT territory



we are not gonna mix up two different problems like that.

If Arc had just made a CRT for a solid Low 6-B rating... then what would be the point of having a calc group thread on the topic at all?

to get the math evaluated.
 
Except that issue is not present here, the contention for FOD is regarding if the FOD we think is the FOD is the FOD at all, it has 0 conflict with any other calcs, its not competing with the tier 7 calc, all of it is a matter of assumption, that's CRT territory



we are not gonna mix up two different problems, why did arc make the CGT? to get the math evaluated.
That's not true; the math was already evaluated prior to the thread ever being made. The thread was for the calc group members to detirmine which version of the multiple accepted calcs to use.

I've given you my assessment on this as an Administrator and Calc Group Member; if you disagree then call for other staff members to detirmine whether I am correct or not. I'm not arguing over this any longer.
 
After thinking about it and discussing with other users, I've come to the conclusion that Damage is likely correct...partially. This thread can't determine that Arc's calc be used over all the others, but it can tackle whether the forest depicted here is the Forest of Death, much like how Arc's regular CRT deliberated over whether the forest depicted here is the Forest of Death. So we can discuss the FoD issue here (which was the main argument against Arc's calc), then when that matter is settled, a calc group thread can be made to determine if Arc's calc (with the FoD argument concretized) can be fully used.
 
Damage asked me to comment here.
While I personally have my gripes with it, I do think his arguments have merit based on our rules and standards.
I do like Sparkle's suggestion as well, as far as how we should proceed with this whole thing.
I guess until this whole situation is settled, I'll hold off on addressing the points in Sparkle's current OP.
 
The Forest of Death point seems reasonable to me but I'd like to see @Damage3245's rebuttal.

I think the iffiest part is that river that is shown which is clearly different from the other showings of the forest, but I believe @Godernet's explanation sounds reasonable to me. it's been a few years since then, and Konoha couldve definitely terraformed the landscape since then. but even if you wanna ignore that reasoning due to skepticism, it's very obviously the FoD, it's the only forest patch near the Hokage Faces that has a river within the area. it could've been an intentional decision by Kishimoto, or not, but it being some random other forest makes no sense to me.
 
The Forest of Death point seems reasonable to me but I'd like to see @Damage3245's rebuttal.

I think the iffiest part is that river that is shown which is clearly different from the other showings of the forest, but I believe @Godernet's explanation sounds reasonable to me. it's been a few years since then, and Konoha couldve definitely terraformed the landscape since then. but even if you wanna ignore that reasoning due to skepticism, it's very obviously the FoD, it's the only forest patch near the Hokage Faces that has a river within the area. it could've been an intentional decision by Kishimoto, or not, but it being some random other forest makes no sense to me.
Should I put you down as a tentative agree until Damage replies?
 
My main contention - and the main reason why the calc was accepted as a possibly - has never been whether or not it is the Forest of Death. That was only a part of it in my post on the original thread. The bigger issues are more calc related which is that the reference object (the Forest of Death) is mostly off-screen, and that the results are inconsistent with other methods.

I have no interest in trying to convince other users that it is the Forest of Death or not, you can all make up your own minds about that.
 
"The reference object is mostly off screen, and that the results are inconsistent with other methods"


Yes and Sparkle has gone out his way to argue against the claim that because it's mostly off screen, it would be any less valid than the other methods of calculating the feat. As Sparkle said, it's stared to have a circular perimeter and it's also depicted as a circle so Arc's circular guide to pixel scale said forest should be just as fine as the other methodology.

Personally if you ask me I think averaging said results is best. I don't believe any one calculation holds more weight or value than the other not only that but the profiles will look less cluttered than what we have now
 
That comment of mine that Sparkle addressed is my same stance as last time.

It's very very likely, so much so that it's almost blatantly Forest of Death.

And regardless of how we feel about the consistency of Kishi's paneling sometimes, the panels where the feat takes place should take more precedence than other isolated panels of Konoha from different points in the story.

And you can't get more blatant than a stated size for something that is a part of Konoha.
 
Last edited:
Personally if you ask me I think averaging said results is best. I don't believe any one calculation holds more weight or value than the other not only that but the profiles will look less cluttered than what we have now
Well, that was one option I did bring up in the original thread. I've always been open to compromise.
 
Consistent statements should always be prioritised over inconsistent visuals


Kishimoto isn’t gonna sit and think “oh dang this feat only calc to 5 teratons when I’ve intended for it to be 20 teratons, let start anew all over again”

Also trying to use other reference points to counter argue is just “Hokage Rock Too Big Konoha small” argument all over again and that got hard rejected
 
Consistent statements should always be prioritised over inconsistent visuals
This makes it sound like there are multiple statements supporting such a size for Konoha / the explosion, when there's just the 1 Forest of Death statement. You don't get a lot of measurement of consistency with just one statement / result.

And if you have a problem with "inconsistent visuals", shouldn't the most inconsistent visual be regarded with greater skepticism?

Kishimoto isn’t gonna sit and think “oh dang this feat only calc to 5 teratons when I’ve intended for it to be 20 teratons, let start anew all over again”
I doubt Kishimoto has specific energy values in mind at all when drawing feats... And while we can obviously never tell exactly what Kishimoto is thinking, the greater amount of consistency among the other calcs compared to the other calc which, in terms of data, is a statistical outlier, does give me some confidence in knowing what Kishimoto generally intended for the village.

Also trying to use other reference points to counter argue is just “Hokage Rock Too Big Konoha small” argument all over again and that got hard rejected
To me, it makes no sense. The proponents of the calc made by Arc7Kuroi depend on Kishimoto's art to some extent, clearly; you have to believe that Kishimoto keeps some internal consistency in mind in order to pixelscale between the partially-seen Forest of Death and the explosion on the panel.... but you seemingly vehemently believe that no internal consistency should be regarded when it comes to literally any other refernece point? How is this not precisely cherry-picking what is convenient and flat-out rejecting everything that is inconvenient?
 
Back
Top