• 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.
Drite77
Reaction score
1,606

Profile posts Latest activity Postings About

  • I'm still depressed, but I started taking calcs again. Don't send calcs you just made into my wall, don't send more then 1 calc per 1-2 days for me to evaluate. Friends and people I like don't need to follow these rules
    Hi, could you check this thread please? 🙏

    MrTayman616
    MrTayman616
    Bump. (Sorry for bumping here, could you evaluate the thread please? 🙏)
    Can you look at this calculation?

    Drite77
    Drite77
    Ok, first of all, do not talk about calculations in other people's comment about calculations, use your own comment, second of all, don't ping me in the wiki because I'll receive the notification alreayd, third of all, you don't need to remind me the minute you commented here, if I'm not responding there is a reason, only remind me again after around a day has passed
    NikHelton
    NikHelton
    Okay, sorry
    NikHelton
    NikHelton
    Holy shit, I'm sorry. I posted this under the wrong post. I thought I posted it in my own thread.
    Drite77
    Drite77
    I've commented on it, but I'll refrain, once again, to not come to my wall before going to the calc eval thread, you came here 3 minutes after you posted in the eval thread, if I noticed it again I'll say I won't evaluate it, ok?
    Hello! I am really sorry for the intrusion but could you please evaluate one of my calcs? Either way thanks for your time!
    Drite77
    Drite77
    No worries, I saw the reply, currently replying myself as I had a few problems with it, it might take me some time to reply again, but I will when I'm available
    ShrekAlmighty
    ShrekAlmighty
    Of course! Take as much time as you need, everything is appreciated and thanks again.
    ShrekAlmighty
    ShrekAlmighty
    Thanks a whole lot for the evaluation, really appreciate it and wish you a wonderful day!
    Hello. How many psi do you think should be used for this feat?


    I think 4 psi should be used, because 4 psi can tear steel apart. The shock wave ripped the roof beams apart, and the beams are usually made of steel.
    Drite77
    Drite77
    I've commented on it
    Viott
    Viott
    I replied.
    Drite77
    Drite77
    There is not a lot for me to reply back, I just disagree with using the steel beam and not the door, if you want to use the steel beam pixel scaling you would probably need to ask someone else because I won't accept it while it stays that way
    Hello

    I responded to you in this blog regarding the calculation. You yourself expressed doubts about the method due to the hollow nature of the door. Could you verify this?

    I'm absolutely certain that deforming a hollow door requires much less force than deforming a solid steel slab.

    Drite77
    Drite77
    Listen here man, I think it is very evident by my message wall text above that I ain't feeling great mentally, you have a problem with the calc? Recalc it, link the feat you are recalcing and say why you're recalcing. If you think it can't be calced, make a CRT and explain why you think it is inaccurate because I don't think I want to go back and forth about this topic
    NikHelton
    NikHelton
    I don't know what I was supposed to use to build a psychological portrait of your mood, given that you were polite and didn't express any negativity, but okay, I heard you. Have a good evening.
    Drite77
    Drite77
    Sorry if that came out rude, I just don't think I have the energy for that type of conversation
    Drite77
    Drite77
    Sorry for the wait, took me a while, but I evaluated the feats
    Viott
    Viott
    No problem. Thank you.
    Drite77
    Drite77
    I've left a reply there again, I'll likely be busy soon for some Christmas Eve event with my family so, once I'm there, I'll likely only be available a few hours later, since I'll be drunk and tired when I arrive home, and add a possible hangover there. If you don't mind waiting, that's fine by me, just a small warning in case I don't respond for some hours
    Hello, I have a small question

    Let us assume there are two characters from the same verse, where Character A is stronger than Character B in every aspect.

    Later, there is a feat in which Character A demonstrates speed and the calculation places it at Supersonic. This feat occurs when Character A is explicitly going all out and fighting seriously.

    After that, there is another feat in which Character B demonstrates speed and the calculation places it at Hypersonic. This feat occurs when Character B is not even fighting seriously

    In this case, can Character B’s Hypersonic calculation still be considered valid, even though Character B is weaker than Character A? Or should it be considered valid because calculations alone cannot definitively determine which character is actually faster?
    Drite77
    Drite77
    With only that context, I would say, yes, Character A should scale to Character B, the calculation for Character A can be faulty with the assumptions we normally have to take, after all
    Pxnd_013
    Pxnd_013
    From your perspective, if a character initially has Supersonic speed and is later upgraded to High Hypersonic+ with a calculation gap of around 36×, would you consider this an outlier or not?
    Drite77
    Drite77
    That is a question with many variables that I would only be able to respond if I personally knew the series
    Hi. I recently saw that you have been suffering from numerous mental difficulties. I just wanted to say that I am truly deeply sorry for anything negative happening in your life. You were the best calculation group member we have had in many years, maybe even the best we have ever had. You were the only one to actually look through the Calculation Evaluation Thread, and I really, really hope you get to recover. Good luck with everything.
    • Like
    Reactions: Drite77
    Drite77
    Drite77
    Your kind words mean a lot. I'm sure several others CGM had done what I'm doing, I've heard several of them saying so, I suppose we weren't around when that happened, but once again, your words mean a lot to me, thank you
    Hi, could you evaluate this calc please?


    (Wish you good health, i didn't get if you don't want someone to send a calc or just that it might be meaningless for someone to send one, so please ignore it if it's the first one)
    Drite77
    Drite77
    Thanks for the kind words, I've commented on it

    Edit: But I'm going to be busy for the next few hours or so, so other replies might eb slow
    MrTayman616
    MrTayman616
    Thank you, i changed the calculation.

    Also, no problem. (I mean, i can't say don't have a healthy life :d) jokes aside, take care.
    Drite77
    Drite77
    I've replied
    Hi, can you help me calculate this please?
    Not calc related.
    If you have any 6-C broskis, there's a tourney raging. Come join if interested.
    Drite77
    Drite77
    You still have to apply some type of hollowness, and I also said the people who evaluated the calc you linked prefer Pulverization, and not vaporization
    Tom4t0GG789
    Tom4t0GG789
    Well, I based it on the calculations that were accepted and that are used in the verse. Also, the use of vaporization was accepted for those same calculations. I simply copied the method.
    Could you please explain what you mean by apply some type of hollowness?
    Drite77
    Drite77
    It took me a good while because the person did not link the CRT when they changed, but Kaltias did accept Vaporization latter in a CRT, so while I'm not exactly happy about it, if this is consistant with the verse then I don't mind it.

    Basically, as your calc stands, you are assuming there is a big ass mountain, that is 4 km big, 8 km wide and 1200 km long, however, you're not calculating that, you're calculating the destruction of a mountain range, so not all of that space will have something there. I would use 80% hollowness, so you basically multiply the volume you got by 0.2 and that's your final volume
    Drite77
    Drite77
    Also separate this calcs in different blogs, I can see clearly that a lot of results are much lower and inconsequential, don't mix priority 4 feats to other ones in this big blogs, I already dislike looking at blogs with multiple calcs, no need to put things that are not relevant
    Lloydblitzed
    Drite77
    Drite77
    I've commented on it, only the 3rd feat needs no alteration, some need, and some I don't think are usable, and make sure to read the last paragraph
    Hey drite do you take calc eval requests here now? (It’s not about demon slayer dw)
    Drite77
    Drite77
    Clover retired, and I heard Damage doesn't like the high rating, but sometimes it is like that, for one reason or another (Don't know why Rusty didn't checked it)
    CastoriceTheFifth
    CastoriceTheFifth
    Dalesean is also another MHA CGM. He saw it but ig he didn't have time to give a response. Ive never seen damage ever being fine with a high rating for any verse tbf lol.

    Anyways since the 7 exaton calc already has 3 CGMs accepting it. Would you be willing to check out the 70 Petaton calc since no one checked that out yet/
    Drite77
    Drite77
    I've commented on it
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
  • Loading…
Back
Top