8-B Brackets Round 21

[WeeklyBattles]

Nothing has changed, perhaps you simply misunderstood. Being a health bar is not the same as your durability dropping the more damage you take, and its not how aura functions at all, its more akin to damage absorption, when it takes enough damage it breaks but until then its durability doesnt go down.

 

[Wokistan]

That would be its durability going down though?

Aura'd have a central pool, right? This would start off much higher than the attacks she has to tank, but gets whittled down over time. Say you can take 7000 tons total, and your own AP is 800 tons. At 100% that's no issue, but at 10% you'd only have 700 left so the 800'd break you.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Wok Except thats not how it works, for example, High 8-C Aura users can take dozens of High 8-C attacks without their aura going down, it takes attacks exceeding 4x their own AP to be able to take their aura down in only a few hits

 

[Wokistan]

So it's just not consistent within itself. Also, remember that people usually aren't gonna take a full on hit to an area unguarded, using attacks that get partly deflected or blocked or hit weapons aren't gonna do as much as a solid strike to the chest or head.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

No, it is highly consistent, feats like that are shown dozens of times throughout the series, because thats how its constantly stated and shown to work. And yes actually it would as Aura coats their entire body as well as their weapons so no matter what their Aura is blocking the hit.

 

[Wokistan]

Taking lots of High 8-C hits but also going down in 1 hit only 4 times as strong is inconsistent if you're saying it works like a health bar, which you seem to have agreed to before.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

They dont go down in one hit it takes multiple hits 4x stronger to take their aura down in less hits that it would to take it down with hits comparable to their own AP. So no, its not inconsistent at all

 

[Iapitus_The_Impaler]

I am deeply confused

 

[WeeklyBattles]

So am i, i thought this has been brought to an understanding months ago when that thread was made, up until this thread no one had any issues with it

 

[Wokistan]

How would that even go against what I'm saying in the first comment?

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Because theyre not being oneshot, theyre being taken down by either a ton of hits equal to their own AP or several but still lesser number of hits from something much, much stronger than themselves

 

[Wokistan]

How does that contradict this?

Aura'd have a central pool, right? This would start off much higher than the attacks she has to tank, but gets whittled down over time. Say you can take 7000 tons total, and your own AP is 800 tons. At 100% that's no issue, but at 10% you'd only have 700 left so the 800'd break you.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Because until their aura goes down they can continually take those 800 ton attacks without their aura breaking

 

[Wokistan]

But at 10% that attack would break the aura. At like 70% or whatever they'd still have 4900 tons left using my numbers so it wouldn't break there but would deplete much faster than others.

 

[Nico-v11]

@Dargoo Aura durability doesn't get lower the more hits the user takes, and A dam's amp makes him strong enough to bypass it completely so the amount of hits they've taken prior makes no difference

There seems to be a misunderstanding from this comment and downward. Weekly is simply saying that aura can tank the same power of attack when having taken previous damage. So it's not like wood how continuous attacks will make it chip and break to where it becomes brittle to where a significantly weaker attack will break it.

Weekly here is saying that in order to cause aura harm to begin with is an attack of a certain level and above. Blake's weapon will not all of a sudden become susceptible to weaker attacks due to low aura.

Think of it as a health bar that can only be lowered by attacks of a certain caliber and higher. I believe that is what Weekly is trying to say.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Yes, thank you Nico

 

[Wokistan]

Is there some specific scenes indicating this? Because it seems like such a specific barrier to entry mechanic would have to be pretty much just explained to work like that in verse.

 

[Nico-v11]

Yes, thank you Nico

No problem

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Weekly here is saying that in order to cause aura harm to begin with is an attack of a certain level and above. Blake's weapon will not all of a sudden become susceptible to weaker attacks due to low aura.

Think of it as a health bar that can only be lowered by attacks of a certain caliber and higher. I believe that is what Weekly is trying to say.

No, I perfectly understood where Weekly was going with that. It still doesn't make sense.

You can't say that it works like a health bar, depleting with every attack, then turn around and make up some kind of threshold you need to damage it, when there is little indicating so with that interpretation.

I only accepted the health bar because there was some implied stuff in the show that lended itself to the explaination. This goes into full-on fan theory.

I wish I had my chatlog with Weekly on me. We straight-up agreed to saying chip damage affects Aura.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

It depletes in that it can take less damage overall with every hit, it does not lower in DURABILITY with every hit

So it seems youve misunderstood for months Dargoo

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

"Can take less damage overall" is literally the same thing as "less durability".

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Basically think of it like this:

In a fighting game, you can deplete you opponent's health bar with a bunch of basic punches but it takes a ton of them.

You can also deplete your opponent's health bar with a super move that wipes out half their health with one attack.

Their durability does not decrease as they take damage as the opponent still deals the same amount of damage with each punch until their health bar is depleted and the opponent loses.

Aura works the same way.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Their durability does not decrease as they take damage as the opponent still deals the same amount of damage with each punch until their health bar is depleted and the opponent loses.

To use your example of a fighting game, said punch would OHKO the fighter in question if they are at a low enough health. Whereas at a higher health they tank it with little issue.

Of course fights don't function like this in real life, but we agreed aura has a functionable durability like this.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

With enough punches yes, they would break the aura if it is at a low enough health. This does not mean that it has lowered the durability of the aura in any way, just that the aura reached its limit for blocking damage.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Let's change the situation.

Vol 3-4 Ruby's aura has been hit with 18.99999999999 Tons of force (or whatever arbitrarily close number to her aura durability is). She's then punched by a 9-A.

You don't think her aura breaks?

 

[WeeklyBattles]

No, it wouldnt. Ruby HAS been hit by that level of force before during her fight with Tyrian and it took multiple hits from him to bring her aura down.

 

[Wokistan]

Reaching it's limit for blocking damage is it running out of durability though...

 

[WeeklyBattles]

No, its not, damage absorption and durability are not the same thing

 

[Wokistan]

There is a certain amount of damage the aura can absorb before breaking. This is it's durability.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

No, that is not durability, that is damage absorption

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

No, that is not durability, that is damage Absorption

And when it absorbs too much damage, it breaks.

Hence why when it's close to its limit, less damage can break it.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

But thats not durability though, thats damage it can absorb. Theyre still hitting with the same energy with their attacks whether its one attack or one hundred.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Anyways why are we even arguing this here? Aura isnt even a factor in this fight

 

[Nico-v11]

It's because the argument of Adam destroying Blake's weapon was contested due to supposed wear and tear along with decreased aura.

Which is really dumb considering we see no wear and tear on the weapon and have over the series seen the weapon sustain and deal tons of damage with no issue. Meaning being able to one shot the weapon would obviously one shot the wielder. In fact to even contemplate that Blake has a higher durability than her own weapon is just ridiculous.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

Meaning being able to one shot the weapon would obviously one shot the wielder

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever, considering Yang takes a full powered blast from it without even activating her aura.

It's more reasonable to assume Blake's weapon was weakened with multiple hits and broke from the stress of it.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Dargoo

No

He cut THROUGH her aura, she activated it and he cut through it. Thats what his Semblance does.

Blake's weapon wouldnt be broken at all as her aura is coating it meaning he wouldnt be able to break it without going through he raura which he did with his semblance.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Adam's entire blatantly stated in the show schtick with his semblance is that he becomes strong enough to cut clean through aura via sheer power.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

And we fall back to the "Blake's aura was stupid low at the moment" debate.

It enhances his blows, but he's not one-shotting Blake.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Except it wasnt because aura's durability doesnt become lower and even if it was low his semblance doesnt damage aura at all as it bypasses it completely.

It enhances his blows to be able to oneshot a weapon that has taken the physical force of 8-B Blake using it as a melee weapon for over a year with no signs of damage whatsoever.

 

[Dargoo_Faust]

he becomes strong enough to cut clean through aura via sheer power.

You do realize you're saying two entirely different things now, right?