• 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.

VS Battles Wiki Forum

Agnaa
Agnaa
I tried.
NIK_FARIS
NIK_FARIS
Sorry Agnaa to message you here (for some reason I can’t message down in the blog). I want to ask back about my calculation. i want to choose the latter method that you propose. When you said fragmentation, does you mean simple fragmentation or violent fragmentation here?
Agnaa
Agnaa
Non-violent frag.
NIK_FARIS
NIK_FARIS
Can I argue for violent fragmentation instead? Since if it just normal fragmentation, there will be rubbles and the mountains but the crater is shown to have no rubbles and only mountains. So I argue that the crater is destroyed violently by the attack leaving nothing besides few small mountains inside of it.
Agnaa
Agnaa
I think the mountains are significant rubble. It shows a very uneven attack if it left mountains and craters inside of it.

Plus, if the mountains are particularly small, you couldn't use normal mountain height/diameter.
NIK_FARIS
NIK_FARIS
Okay, then. I give up on violent fragmentation value. I will just use what you propose. I will message you back once I finish calculate it.
  • Like
Reactions: Agnaa
Back
Top