Tier 7 The Boys - Now possible

[ByArrow]

Although part of the energy is emitted as radiation, the total power is still around 1 to 10 kiloton. I think it’s nonsense to scale down the statement that Homelander possesses the power of a neutron bomb to less than that of a neutron bomb simply because nearly half of the energy is released as radiation.

The radiation released is part of the bomb's total power, and it was said that Homelander possessed this power.

Furthermore, even if you still oppose this radiation issue, according to this table on Wikipedia, Homelander needs to be scaled to the blast and thermal energy emitted by a neutron bomb, and even the sum of these two at their lowest ratio equals 50%, with the average being higher.

Even if we consider the neutron bomb's power to be 2 kilotons, this still corresponds to Low 7-C.

Therefore, Homelander should be Low 7-C. Even if you oppose solid rating, this should be sufficient for at least a "possible" or "likely" rating.

 

[TegamiBachi25]

Still Star Wars fodder.

I agree.

 

[ByArrow]

Bump

 

[Random-Helper323]

Soldier Boy's explosion is omnidirectional, if memory serves. This is likely to be a problem for anyone scaling to it. We'd need to measure how much force people withstood.

 

[Hellbeast]

Soldier Boy's explosion is omnidirectional, if memory serves. This is likely to be a problem for anyone scaling to it. We'd need to measure how much force people withstood.

We could try to calculate that but I’d note she’s at the epicentre

 

[ByArrow]

Soldier Boy's explosion is omnidirectional, if memory serves. This is likely to be a problem for anyone scaling to it. We'd need to measure how much force people withstood.

Let's say an explosion occurs and a character endures the explosion.

For one to scale to the full yield of an explosion, one of the three following conditions must be met:

1. The explosion happens inside the character's body
2. The explosion is fully covered by the character in some form (Like their hands or body covering the bomb or source of the explosion)
3. The character is face-hugging/bear-hugging the bomb/explosion source or standing/sitting/crouching right on top of it or directly adjacent to it and the bomb/explosion source happens to be smaller than them

Soldier Boy scales to full yield because he can withstand his own explosions.

Meave scales to full yield because she was bear-hugging Soldier Boy.

Homelander scales because he can harm Soldier Boy and Meave.

 

[Rex_Eckles]

Doesn't Soldier Boy's explosion have a depowering hax against Compound V users? It should be fine to use for scaling then, I agree with scaling to Soldier Boy's explosion and whatever fraction of the neutron bomb thing.

 

[Random-Helper323]

Soldier Boy scales to full yield because he can withstand his own explosions.

That isn't always how it works.

Meave scales to full yield because she was bear-hugging Soldier Boy.

This seems reasonable. It might divide in half or a third due to being omnidirectional. Not a huge reduction. If she withstood it while already wounded that further makes up the difference.

Homelander scales because he can harm Soldier Boy and Meave.

That's fine, at least the Maeve part.

Explosion feat should be fine. A building sized explosion that only damages the skyscraper right beside it being Multi City Block level seems a bit strange, but calc group members accepted it, and we do know fiction heavily underestimates explosions, especially the air burst.

 

[Spinoirr]

She survived it while wounded by Homelander point blank

 

[Fallen_Angelicx]

If it is nuclear explosion it should reach crazy high temperatures.
If it's not nuclear explosion, why are you using formula meant only for nuclear explosion?

Bringing up back this point. Wouldn't this upgrade Homelander's heat vision and Maeve's heat resistance?

 

[Random-Helper323]

Bringing up back this point. Wouldn't this upgrade Homelander's heat vision and Maeve's heat resistance?

That quote says the maximum temperature, and it'd be referring to far larger and stronger blasts than Soldier Boy's.

 

[Fallen_Angelicx]

That quote says the maximum temperature, and it'd be referring to far larger and stronger blasts than Soldier Boy's.

I understand. However, knowing the radiation status and power of Soldier Boy's blasts, it could potentially get heat levels above what the verse currently has, no? I'm just speculating here but wouldn't Soldier Boy's blast surpass 3500°?

 

[Random-Helper323]

I understand. However, knowing the radiation status and power of Soldier Boy's blasts, it could potentially get heat levels above what the verse currently has, no? I'm just speculating here but wouldn't Soldier Boy's blast surpass 3500°?

That might warrant discussion.

 

[ByArrow]

That isn't always how it works.

This seems reasonable. It might divide in half or a third due to being omnidirectional. Not a huge reduction. If she withstood it while already wounded that further makes up the difference.

That's fine, at least the Maeve part.

Explosion feat should be fine. A building sized explosion that only damages the skyscraper right beside it being Multi City Block level seems a bit strange, but calc group members accepted it, and we do know fiction heavily underestimates explosions, especially the air burst.

Okay, thanks for input.

But what about Low 7-C? Do you agree or not?

 

[Monstermadman]

Agree with all, based

 

[Random-Helper323]

Okay, thanks for input.

But what about Low 7-C? Do you agree or not?

I'm sorry, I must agree with Qawsedf on that one.

 

[Qurbonboev]

That might warrant discussion.

I found relevant things from here (RAND paper about nuclear fireballs).
But first, most importantly, how long someone should be under effect of certain temperature for it to be counted as proper heat resistance. AFAIK we usually don't grant heat resistance to someone who is struck by lightning, since lightning struck by very short time

 

[ByArrow]

I'm sorry, I must agree with Qawsedf on that one.

Did you read the counterargument I wrote to his argument?

Although part of the energy is emitted as radiation, the total power is still around 1 to 10 kiloton. I think it’s nonsense to scale down the statement that Homelander possesses the power of a neutron bomb to less than that of a neutron bomb simply because nearly half of the energy is released as radiation.

The radiation released is part of the bomb's total power, and it was said that Homelander possessed this power.

Furthermore, even if you still oppose this radiation issue, according to this table on Wikipedia, Homelander needs to be scaled to the blast and thermal energy emitted by a neutron bomb, and even the sum of these two at their lowest ratio equals 50%, with the average being higher.

Even if we consider the neutron bomb's power to be 2 kilotons, this still corresponds to Low 7-C.

Therefore, Homelander should be Low 7-C. Even if you oppose solid rating, this should be sufficient for at least a "possible" or "likely" rating.

His argument is that because the neuron bomb emits part of its energy as radiation, the bunker's ability to withstand the power of such a bomb means that the bunker is radiation-resistant and does not need to withstand the full power of the bomb.

And therefore, Homelander shouldn't scale to the bomb's full power.

But that's completely wrong.

Bunker has no place in this equation. Edgar said Homelander has the power of a neutron bomb. And the radiation that released is part of a neutron bomb’s power.

If we scale Homelander down to less than a neutron bomb, we invalidate Edgar's statement, and if we invalidate Edgar's statement, Homelander cannot be scaled down to even a small fraction of a neutron bomb because we invalidated the statement that the scaling came from.

And also, even if you agree with Qaw, according to the table I provided in my previous message, Homelander should scale to at least more than 50% of the neutron bomb, even if we don't include radiation.

And the power of a neutron bomb ranges from 1 to 10 kilotons. Even if we take the average, according to the table I provided in my previous message, Homelander is still Low 7-C. Even if we take 2 kilotons, he is still Low 7-C. Even if we take 1.8 kilotons, he is still Low 7-C.

Furthermore, according to his logic, no one should scale to even the full yield of Soldier Boy's explosion. Because Soldier Boy emits radiation. Those with the power of a supernova should not scale to supernovas either, because only a very small portion of the energy is converted to KE.

 

[Random-Helper323]

Did you read the counterargument I wrote to his argument?

His argument is that because the neuron bomb emits part of its energy as radiation, the bunker's ability to withstand the power of such a bomb means that the bunker is radiation-resistant and does not need to withstand the full power of the bomb.

And therefore, Homelander shouldn't scale to the bomb's full power.

But that's completely wrong.

Bunker has no place in this equation. Edgar said Homelander has the power of a neutron bomb. And the radiation that released is part of a neutron bomb’s power.

If we scale Homelander down to less than a neutron bomb, we invalidate Edgar's statement, and if we invalidate Edgar's statement, Homelander cannot be scaled down to even a small fraction of a neutron bomb because we invalidated the statement that the scaling came from.

And also, even if you agree with Qaw, according to the table I provided in my previous message, Homelander should scale to at least more than 50% of the neutron bomb, even if we don't include radiation.

And the power of a neutron bomb ranges from 1 to 10 kilotons. Even if we take the average, according to the table I provided in my previous message, Homelander is still Low 7-C. Even if we take 2 kilotons, he is still Low 7-C. Even if we take 1.8 kilotons, he is still Low 7-C.

Furthermore, according to his logic, no one should scale to even the full yield of Soldier Boy's explosion. Because Soldier Boy emits radiation. Those with the power of a supernova should not scale to supernovas either, because only a very small portion of the energy is converted to KE.

@Qawsedf234 what do you think?

 

[Delusionaltx2]

So what I'm hearing is that I get to put homelander up against a deepwoken monster

 

[Legion350]

If it is nuclear explosion it should reach crazy high temperatures.
If it's not nuclear explosion, why are you using formula meant only for nuclear explosion?

Firstly, not every nuclear explosion will have the same degree of heat, and it differs based on the size of the explosion. Also, the maximum temperature being millions of degrees is a little misleading for the purposes of scaling. This is for a larger nuke but the point still stands. Once it goes off, the nuke’s explosion rapidly cools down within a second. So even if his blast [significantly smaller than most nukes] was anywhere near that temp, it wouldn’t for long enough to impact her.

 

[Qurbonboev]

Snip

I found relevant things from here (RAND paper about nuclear fireballs).

So, according to this calculator, fireball from 500 ton nuke would last around 0.1 seconds. According to paper above, fireball of 1.7 kilotonn would maintain inner temperature of 200K Kelvin for at least 0.2 seconds (page 18). Time of fireball at certain temperature changes with yield in a yield^(1/3) way, 500 tonn fireball should be able to maintain inner temperature of 200K Kelvin during its 0.1 seconds of existence

 

[Fallen_Angelicx]

So, according to this calculator, fireball from 500 ton nuke would last around 0.1 seconds. According to paper above, fireball of 1.7 kilotonn would maintain inner temperature of 200K Kelvin for at least 0.2 seconds (page 18). Time of fireball at certain temperature changes with yield in a yield^(1/3) way, 500 tonn fireball should be able to maintain inner temperature of 200K Kelvin during its 0.1 seconds of existence

Maeve scales to the heat of that explosion no matter what since she was bear hugging Soldier Boy throughout, before and after detonation

 

[Qawsedf234]

what do you think?

The website linked explains where the values come from:

The neutron bomb, or "enhanced radiation" device with its supposed promise of a "clean" kill was believed to be the strategic answer to a hole in the Cold War arsenal.

It then shows the following graph for a normal nuke and one for a Neutron Bomb.

So the 50% value per his source is not valid, it would be at most 40%. For the bunker like I said, he at best downscales from the kinetic yield of a Neutron Bomb. He has no reason to scale to its full yield unless you're arguing his punches are also radioactive.

Additionally they're assuming a maximum yield of 10 Kilotons. Stuff listed for the US Army's Neutron Bombs was 1 Kiloton of TNT to 2 KT, with some being as small as 100 Tons of TNT. If you wanted to be safe he'd be at 40% of a 100 Ton explosion since that the smallest warhead used for that purpose.

In my view the most you can reasonably scale Homelander to is 35-40% of a 1KT to 2KT nuclear weapon. That assumption is also built on the impression that the bomb blows up directly on top of the bunker and not the standard air-burst above it which would drop the feat to like Tier 9.

For the last point he's correct. No one ever scales to the full yield of explosions or supernova unless they're at point blank distances. Calcs involving explosions also dismiss all radiation elements to it as well unless the characters showcases that the attack also produces radiation.

 

[ByArrow]

The website linked explains where the values come from:

It then shows the following graph for a normal nuke and one for a Neutron Bomb.

So the 50% value per his source is not valid, it would be at most 40%.

In the source I provided, it gives a 40% ratio for "Blast," but when I said 50%, I was also referring to the thermal energy released. So I was saying that the lowest total ratio of "Blast" and "Thermal Energy" is around 50%. Even if we don't use radiation to scale the emitted energy, I was saying that the released "Thermal Energy" could be used with "Blast" for scaling.

For the bunker like I said, he at best downscales from the kinetic yield of a Neutron Bomb.

I don't understand why Bunker is even being brought up here.

He has no reason to scale to its full yield unless you're arguing his punches are also radioactive.

In Edgar's statement, he says, "Anyone with the power of a neutron bomb." So he implies that more than one person has such power. Since Soldier Boy is one of the most powerful sup and can fight Homelander, who is said to be the most powerful sup, and since his explosions are radioactive and emit radiation, what do you think about If we would scale Soldier Boy's explosion to the power of a direct neutron bomb?

Additionally they're assuming a maximum yield of 10 Kilotons.

This is what written on wikipedia.

If you wanted to be safe he'd be at 40% of a 100 Ton explosion since that the smallest warhead used for that purpose

This isn’t wanted be safe.

What we need to do is use the average, as we do with every value that gives us a range. If we take the lowest value for a neutron bomb as 100 tons of TNT and the maximum value as 10 kilotons of TNT, the average is 5.05 kilotons of TNT. And this is Low 7-C.

If we use the 35% or 40% ratio as you suggested, we get 1.7675 kilotons for 35% and 2.02 kilotons for 40%, and both of these are Low 7-C.

If we use 50%, we get 2.525 kilotons, and this is also Low 7-C.

In my view the most you can reasonably scale Homelander to is 35-40% of a 1KT to 2KT nuclear weapon. That assumption is also built on the impression that the bomb blows up directly on top of the bunker and not the standard air-burst above it which would drop the feat to like Tier 9.

It doesn't matter whether a neutron bomb detonates directly above the Bunker or not. It was stated that Homelander possesses the power of a neutron bomb. The crucial point is this statement. And how we scale this statement.

As I said before, even if we disregard the radiation emitted by the bomb, Homelander must be scaled to the "Blast" and "Thermal Energy" emitted by the explosion. And that means more than 50% of the bomb's power.

And as I mentioned above, it would be better to take the minimum and maximum limits for the neutron bomb and use the average.

After that, reduce 35-40% or 50% of this average value and scale the Homelander.

Even if this is insufficient for a solid rating, it is at least sufficient for a "Likely" or "Possibly" rating.

Also, I think this is relevant to the CGMs, so could you call a few of them?

 

[Just_Butchering]

For the bunker like I said, he at best downscales from the kinetic yield of a Neutron Bomb. He has no reason to scale to its full yield unless you're arguing his punches are also radioactive.

It gives me OCD that the bunker it's still being brought up. The quote is about how the bunker can withstand anyone with the power of a neutron bomb.

 

[Thunderman101]

So, according to this calculator, fireball from 500 ton nuke would last around 0.1 seconds. According to paper above, fireball of 1.7 kilotonn would maintain inner temperature of 200K Kelvin for at least 0.2 seconds (page 18). Time of fireball at certain temperature changes with yield in a yield^(1/3) way, 500 tonn fireball should be able to maintain inner temperature of 200K Kelvin during its 0.1 seconds of existence

kevin

 

[Qawsedf234]

the source I provided, it gives a 40% ratio for "Blast," but when I said 50%, I was also referring to the thermal energy released. So I was saying that the lowest total ratio of "Blast" and "Thermal Energy" is around 50%. Even if we don't use radiation to scale the emitted energy, I was saying that the released "Thermal Energy" could be used with "Blast" for scaling.

Why would we use Thermal Energy for Homelander? Are you suggesting his eye beams are what is going to be used to destroy the bunker?

don't understand why Bunker is even being brought up here.

Because a bunker is the scaling frame of reference for Homelander. Its the durability of the bunker that's in question after all.

what do you think about If we would scale Soldier Boy's explosion to the power of a direct neutron bomb?

Soldier's Boys explosions line up with low yield Neutron Bombs, so there would be no scaling adjustment. It would just further back his explosions as being comparable to a low yield nuclear weapon.

This is what written on wikipedia.

The largest possible classification of a Neutron Bomb is 10 KT, because past that point the explosion requires efficiency that drives down radioactive output. But that does not mean Neutron Bombs were on average 10 KT. Most of them were well below that threshold.

This isn’t wanted be safe.

It is, I don't think you understand how averages or common weapons yields work in relation to this statement.

What you're saying is "Thermonuclear Bombs range from 100 KT to a theoretical 10 GT yield, so we should use 500 MT as the average thermonuclear payload". Just because a bomb can theoretically max out at that value does not mean it's was ever used near that value.

What we need to do is use the average, as we do with every value that gives us a range. If we take the lowest value for a neutron bomb as 100 tons of TNT and the maximum value as 10 kilotons of TNT, the average is 5.05 kilotons of TNT. And this is Low 7-C.

What country used a 10 Kiloton Neutron Bomb? Look at the US:

• W66 -> 2 Kilotons
• W70 Mod 3 -> 1 kiloton
• W79 Mod 0 -> 100 Tons to 1.1 kilotons
• W82 -> 2 kilotons

The only time the weapon has a 10 Kilton yield is a Soviet anti-missile defense rocket which was meant to detonated in high atmosphere to knock out other nukes:

This ABM system contains at least 68 neutron warheads with a 10-kiloton yield each and it has been in service since 1995, with inert missile testing approximately every other year since then (2014). The system is designed to destroy incoming endoatmospheric nuclear warheads aimed at Moscow and other targets and is the lower-tier/last umbrella of the A-135 anti-ballistic missile system (NATO reporting name: ABM-3)

What I'm saying is that a 10 KT end, or even a 5 KT end, is highballing the yield. Neutron Bombs (that are declassified) consistently have yields far below that value unless they're meant to knock out other ballistic missiles.

Homelander must be scaled to the "Blast" and "Thermal Energy" emitted by the explosion. And that means more than 50% of the bomb's power.

The most I can reasonably see is Blast for Homelander. Thermal has no basis in my view.

gives me OCD that the bunker it's still being brought up. The quote is about how the bunker can withstand anyone with the power of a neutron bomb.

Yes, so the bunkers durability is what the scaling is based on. Is the bunker taking a direct blast for the statment or is the blast going to be a typical nuclear attack where it's detonated a few hundred yards above ground for maximized range?

My view point is 40% of a 2 Kiloton value, since that's seemingly the most commonly offensive yield range. Which would be 800 Tons of TNT or 8-A+.

 

[ByArrow]

My view point is 40% of a 2 Kiloton value, since that's seemingly the most commonly offensive yield range. Which would be 800 Tons of TNT or 8-A+.

I won't argue any further; I'm fine with this.

 

[Qawsedf234]

I won't argue any further; I'm fine with this.

I'm fine with that compromise then. If the last season gives any better statements (or feats but probably won't happen), we can come back and adjust accordingly.

 

[Just_Butchering]

Yes, so the bunkers durability is what the scaling is based on. Is the bunker taking a direct blast for the statment or is the blast going to be a typical nuclear attack where it's detonated a few hun

I quoted the statement twice, added a video and ByArrow also repeated it. At this point you are making your own narrative lol.

Edgar build his bunker to defend from a character (implied to be Homelander) with the power of a Neutron bomb, not that he made a bunker that can withstand a Neutron bomb because Homelander downscale. See the difference?

 

[Just_Butchering]

So, can I update the profiles? Or should we wait for more input?

 

[Qurbonboev]

So, can I update the profiles? Or should we wait for more input?

3 staff agreed, so you can change profiles, and put them at 800 tons

My view point is 40% of a 2 Kiloton value, since that's seemingly the most commonly offensive yield range. Which would be 800 Tons of TNT or 8-A+.

Btw, don't forget to make heat resistance CRT

 

[Just_Butchering]

3 staff agreed, so you can change profiles, and put them at 800 tons

Great. I'll grab the necessary links from here and edit them.

Btw, don't forget to make heat resistance CRT

Had we settle on the temperature to argue?

 

[Qurbonboev]

Had we settle on the temperature to argue?

Nah, it should be tackled in another CRT

 

[Mr._Propeller_Hat]

My view point is 40% of a 2 Kiloton value, since that's seemingly the most commonly offensive yield range. Which would be 800 Tons of TNT or 8-A+.

Wait a second, where are you getting 800 Tons of TNT estimation from? Because when I did the math myself by substracting 2 by 40% which should be like 1.2 Kilotons (Low 7-C)

 

[Rex_Eckles]

Wait a second, where are you getting 800 Tons of TNT estimation from? Because when I did the math myself by substracting 2 by 40% which should be like 1.2 Kilotons (Low 7-C)

No, it's taking 40% of the 2 Kiloton value.

 

[Mr._Propeller_Hat]

No, it's taking 40% of the 2 Kiloton value.

That still doesn't tell me how he got that value

 

[DragoZeroNova]

That still doesn't tell me how he got that value

1.2 is 60% of the blast (assuming it's 2kt). 0.8 is 40%. Qaw is saying Homelander scales to 40% of the blast.

Edit:
This is what you did: 2000 - (40% of 2000) = (60% of 2000)
This is what Qaw did: 2000 - (60% of 2000) = (40% of 2000)
Qaw only accepts scaling to 40% of the blast, so that's why it's 800 tons instead of 1200 tons

 

[Da3ggman]

Why are we going with 2 Kilotons, anyway? If most vary between 1-2, shouldn't we like average it to 1.5 and go from there?