It's only being cut, not destroyed. So volume wouldn't really be what you use. In fact cutting/splitting calcs in general give really underwhelming results. Still interested in the feat?
-
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
Armorchompy
Yar_R_agi_7k
hmm i was going to do something like this actually
but yes, I still interested. Very important feat for me
but yes, I still interested. Very important feat for me
Armorchompy
Ah, cause it was split to the sides. Just use the same volume as that calc I suppose.
Yar_R_agi_7k
Thank you 
So can I do something similar to this calc?
So can I do something similar to this calc?
Armorchompy
Yeah that seems fine
Yar_R_agi_7k
eh can i ask one more little question if you are available?
Armorchompy
sure
Yar_R_agi_7k
In the video, the character cuts two mountains, should I take the same volume in two mountains?
Armorchompy
Is it done with the same strike?
Yar_R_agi_7k
yes if you mean it with the same attack/strike
Armorchompy
If it's identical between the two then it should be easier to just calc it for one mountain and then double the result, but if you want to calc it for both then yes, assume the same volume.
Yar_R_agi_7k
Well, now that I look again, I'm a little against getting the same volumes, because as we can see the length of the small mountain after it is cut in the middle and the length of the mountain behind it, we understand that the mountain behind it is much larger, so I took the same as the minimum value of a big mountain for the mountain in the back, and the minimum value of a small mountain for the mountain at the front... So calc is here (Eh 7-A)
AKUTO123
In my opinion, it would be better not to take the same volumes because even the amount of energy coming out of the small mountain in front seems to be many times more than the larger mountain behind it.
Armorchompy
You're right, and the one in the back is way bigger. I'm not sure, honestly, maybe do like 600 for the smaller one and 1200 for the bigger one in the back?
Yar_R_agi_7k
sorry I didn't fully understand, can you explain a little more when you say 600 and 1200? (I have a terrible English 
)
)
Armorchompy
600 and 1200 meters tall, I think that's a safe lowball but maybe I'm not the right one to ask, I'm not great with mountains, most of my verses are tier 9/8