• 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.

Search results for query: *

  1. CloverDragon03

    Saitama and Garou Jump Around Io

    The persistence of light trails is the justification for a smaller timeframe, as suggested by Chariot. There's no need for an arbitrarily high timeframe
  2. CloverDragon03

    Saitama and Garou Jump Around Io

    I do agree with Chariot that if 13 milliseconds isn't usable, the persistence of the light trails leads me to believe that 1 second is much too high
  3. CloverDragon03

    Saitama and Garou Jump Around Io

    Adjusting the timeframe to 0.3 seconds is fine by me. It's consistent that way
  4. CloverDragon03

    The Dread Tiering System Revisions

    I remember IdiosyncraticLawyer supported the idea of a "Tier 12" during Ultima's first Tiering System revision thread, but Ultima's not proposing that at all here so I'm not sure how relevant it is
  5. CloverDragon03

    BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion

    I can Boruto is just not good 🗿
  6. CloverDragon03

    BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion

    They both result in the same conclusion of Boruto fans hating actually good series
  7. CloverDragon03

    Saitama and Garou Jump Around Io

    I had a similar thought at first, but I feel like it'd be a bit of a hassle to separate these when one could handle the replacement right away I guess if enough people believe it should be its own thread, I don't mind, but that was my thought process
  8. CloverDragon03

    The speed of light for Avada Kedavra

    I understand. That does make the veracity of it being real light super suspect, yeah
  9. CloverDragon03

    BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion

    Boruto fans consumed so much garbage that they gaslit themselves into believing anything actually good is bad
  10. CloverDragon03

    BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion

    Only fax for JJK is that it's mid 🗿
  11. CloverDragon03

    The speed of light for Avada Kedavra

    I read like, the first page and skimmed through the rest, I'm a busy man This is more interesting. With this in mind, what would you say is why Avada Kedavra doesn't quite meet our standards?
  12. CloverDragon03

    The speed of light for Avada Kedavra

    I believe you were bringing up earlier how there's "no reason for wizards to not be at that level of speed" which implied to me that wizards can react to Avada Kedavra And even ignoring that, things like the spell having mass and exploding would be anti-feats that couldn't be explained away by...
  13. CloverDragon03

    The speed of light for Avada Kedavra

    The light bending isn't really an anti-feat in this case since the anti-feats section for light says that this is fine if reflection/refraction can be proven That being said, I still think the other stuff - combined with wizards legitimately having no feats on this level, being like Subsonic at...
  14. CloverDragon03

    How fast is this?

    Depends on the timeframe. The phrase "with just a flap of their wings" doesn't really mean anything because that just means they can travel that much distance without needing to exert as much effort
  15. CloverDragon03

    Saitama and Garou Jump Around Io

    Well doesn't this sound smug? Anyways, as mentioned above, there is a MFTL+ calc that's accepted. That can simply be the replacement
  16. CloverDragon03

    BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion

    The sample size you used to reach this conclusion was yourself and that's it 🗿
  17. CloverDragon03

    The Dread Tiering System Revisions

    I do agree that Option 3 is not that great, but I have no strong opinions on using either Option 1 or Option 2. Either one's fine by me
  18. CloverDragon03

    Vs battles wiki pet peeves

    I hate you for this
  19. CloverDragon03

    Vs battles wiki pet peeves

    Y'all are preaching to the Xenoblade supporter
  20. CloverDragon03

    Vs battles wiki pet peeves

    That's fine. Nothing like a verse where no one knows it quite like you do
  21. CloverDragon03

    Vs battles wiki pet peeves

    This is why I almost exclusively rep more niche verses (well, niche in terms of having active VSBW scalers). None of this headache happens
  22. CloverDragon03

    Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

    I'm not saying anything about what it is and isn't, I'm just saying that these are the rules
  23. CloverDragon03

    Rule Violation Reports (New forum)

    @Quintessence_PE You can't push for an ability change like this without a CRT, that's just the rules
  24. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    He can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he's citing horror movies as another example of a certain kind of feat (in this case, ripping out someone's spine) that's much more impressive than at first glance - and that a YouTuber was the one who calculated this feat when these verses first...
  25. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    Oh, that's something I have no problem with. I guess my thing then is that it's odd to put this front and center here when we... already have standards in place for this sort of thing. Outliers, inconsistencies, all that
  26. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    Again, this begs the question: What's the issue if this is a legitimate feat that requires a calculable force to be exerted? And this in particular is a pulling feat, making it strange to label this is out of the question. This feels strangely limiting
  27. CloverDragon03

    [BORUTO] Sarada P&A Revision

    Is this just better organizing her P&A section? If so, this is good to go
  28. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    I've made my stance on the matter clear, and at this stage, this back and forth would just amount to us repeating our points over and over again. At this point, I'll simply defer to the staff
  29. CloverDragon03

    BAN-KAI! Bleach General Discussion

    Throw them at Xenoblade 5-C's, they're 98.28 exatons
  30. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    I suppose after further consideration, I'm fine with either of these ideas (either being a sustained lift or occurring over several seconds) - not necessarily the world's biggest fan, but the reasoning's sound enough - especially given the whole baseball player real world example - to where I...
  31. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    I think I'd like some more clarification on this point, since I'm definitely more open to legitimate reasons to question a certain kind of calc method's legitimacy. In practice, how would you resolve this sorta thing? What would be considered LS as opposed to SS? Since you could convert values...
  32. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    Your wording confuses me, like "poems" and "emissions," but from what I can gather... Yes, it is better to keep our current system, and trying this sort of appeal by saying "you'd rather not improve it" is - once more - completely meaningless Again, this comes from a failure to distinguish...
  33. CloverDragon03

    Dragon Slayer vs Dragon Slayer (Luffy vs Natsu)

    WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YEAH BABY THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN WAITING FOR THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
  34. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    Something as core as AP vs. DC being severely upended just because "it doesn't look natural"? Yeah, no. Gonna need something way better than that If you wanna say Grappler Baki then just say that. Again, inconsistencies with the verse are already handled by our current standards. Beyond that...
  35. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    How would such a thing be applied, though? It's still considered, for example, valid to calculate the kinetic energy of a character traveling at Relativistic+ speeds (assuming it's within the same scene that they reach such speeds, since it'd be Calc Stacking otherwise). In a similar vein, for...
  36. CloverDragon03

    Dragon Slayer vs Dragon Slayer (Luffy vs Natsu)

    Somehow I stopped getting notifications, but going through what I missed and what I've said before... Yeah, I'm voting Natsu
  37. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    The input's nice and all, but again...
  38. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    Yes, having multiple such feats would make it not an outlier. That's a good thing. What you're proposing requires a severe upending of our standards on Attack Potency vs. Destructive Capacity
  39. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    If it's inconsistent, we already have standards in place for this, such as the concept of outliers
  40. CloverDragon03

    Significance of history and destructive potential in a certain level of forces

    Why is this a problem? "Big number = bad" is not an argument
Back
Top