• 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.

A Hunter X Hunter calculation blog

Status
Not open for further replies.
TioKill said:
  • This calc is incorrect, the crater wasn't a hemisphere.
  • The current version uses much more reliable pixelscaling
  • It's Low 7-B, not 7-B
  • Calc's not used in our profiles.


The upgrade is not going to be applied, no..
Click to expand...
There are like 50 ways to scale and calc the blast. Ranging anywhere from 8-B to 7-B. I was trying to give my input and upgrade the established yield to High 7-C+ or a Possible Low 7-B but the thread derailed and now here we are.
 
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
There are like 50 ways to scale and calc the blast. Ranging anywhere from 8-B to 7-B. I was trying to give my input and upgrade the established yield to High 7-C+ or a Possible Low 7-B but the thread derailed and now here we are.
Click to expand...
I was looking at Hunter x Hunter threads. These 50 ways were discussed back and forth several times, mostly about the size of the crater. The current panel was decided to be the most reliable, and required less pixelscaling.

The depth of the crater used the standard "(Diameter to depth ratio)" assumption. Making the volume consistent.

There is only one way accepted to calc the blast.
 
TioKill said:
I was looking at Hunter x Hunter threads. These 50 ways were discussed back and forth several times, mostly about the size of the crater. The current panel was decided to be the most reliable, and required less pixelscaling.

The depth of the crater used the standard "(Diameter to depth ratio)" assumption. Making the volume consistent.

There is only one way accepted to calc the blast.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm aware I read the original thread. I have narrowed it down to 2 potential panels. These two panels are the only time Youpi and the whole crater is shown. DMUA has already expressed approval however we are arguing over whether it is Vaporization or not.
Here is the most up to date calc
vsbattles.fandom.com

Re-calc Of Youpi's Rage Blast

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
 
DMUA said:
I think this was already shown to me (interesting that it explicitly brings up nukes to support the argument when I got criticized for bringing up that nuclear ordinance doesn't vaporize everything in a given crater it makes)

That said, looking at it a bit later I guess I am a bit harsh on it, the aftermath does show a bit more vapor qualities than just "no fragments, heat", so just go ahead
Click to expand...
@DMUA

Would you be willing to mention in the new calculation blog for this feat that our old vaporisation calculation can continue to be used please? It avoids future misunderstandings.
 
I'm sorry, it appears to me that the new blog, containing the Low 7-B result, uses a panel where the crater is much bigger in relation to Youpi. But in past threads, such as this one, the discussion and agreement of most supporters were that this panel, the first of the new blog, was the best option.
YEFOcuo.jpg

^ We can also use the official colored version, since it's much clearer.


I don't think that should be changed for a larger result for no discernable reason. It was Youpi in the crater, he was the only one there. The second scan we can barely see Youpi, and he was bowing down, making pixelscaling him impossible.
V5A0rc4.png

g8l2gBe.png

I should also mention, the logic behind his height is terrible. There is no reason to assume he is taller than Uvogin, we can pixelscale Youpi, something done in the original blog, and see he is 2.5m tall, somewhat shorter than what's assumed.

These are key problems in the new blog that makes it impossible to be indexed
 
Last edited:
TioKill said:
I'm sorry, it appears to me that the new blog, containing the Low 7-B result, uses a panel where the crater is much bigger in relation to Youpi. But in past threads, such as this one, the discussion and agreement of most supporters were that this panel, the first of the new blog, was the best option.
YEFOcuo.jpg

^ We can also use the official colored version, since it's much clearer.


I don't think that should be changed for a larger result for no discernable reason. It was Youpi in the crater, he was the only one there. The second scan we can barely see Youpi, and he was bowing down, making pixelscaling him impossible.
V5A0rc4.png

g8l2gBe.png

I should also mention, the logic behind his height is terrible. There is no reason to assume he is taller than Uvogin, we can pixelscale Youpi, something done in the original blog, and see he is 2.5m tall, somewhat shorter than what's assumed.

These are key problems in the new blog that makes it impossible to be indexed
Click to expand...
TioKill said:
It's all good, could you ping Clover and DMUA to ask them their opinion?
Click to expand...
@CloverDragon03 @DMUA
 
TioKill said:
I'm sorry, it appears to me that the new blog, containing the Low 7-B result, uses a panel where the crater is much bigger in relation to Youpi. But in past threads, such as this one, the discussion and agreement of most supporters were that this panel, the first of the new blog, was the best option.
YEFOcuo.jpg

^ We can also use the official colored version, since it's much clearer.


I don't think that should be changed for a larger result for no discernable reason. It was Youpi in the crater, he was the only one there. The second scan we can barely see Youpi, and he was bowing down, making pixelscaling him impossible.
V5A0rc4.png

g8l2gBe.png

I should also mention, the logic behind his height is terrible. There is no reason to assume he is taller than Uvogin, we can pixelscale Youpi, something done in the original blog, and see he is 2.5m tall, somewhat shorter than what's assumed.

These are key problems in the new blog that makes it impossible to be indexed
Click to expand...
Yes, that's why I used the original calculation panel shot as well. Though both panels show Youpi as very small and in regards to the second panel, Youpi is slouching which is why I didn't use his full height. Slouching peoples heights can be calced so it is by no means uncalcable. You just don't agree because the crater is slightly bigger. Also in regards to the height; In that very same thread it was discussed that Youpi's height is extremely ******* inconsistent so any pixel scaling comparing him to other characters is subject to scrutiny. My way of doing it requires only 1 assumption, that Youpi is taller than Uvogin which seems to be the best option. The way the original size was found was by comparing Uvo to a random person in the anime and assuming said persons height. The anime while having better consistency in regards to character sizes, is still inconsistent. Here is a good example
 
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
Yes, that's why I used the original calculation panel shot as well. Though both panels show Youpi as very small and in regards to the second panel, Youpi is slouching which is why I didn't use his full height. Slouching peoples heights can be calced so it is by no means uncalcable. You just don't agree because the crater is slightly bigger. Also in regards to the height; In that very same thread it was discussed that Youpi's height is extremely ******* inconsistent so any pixel scaling comparing him to other characters is subject to scrutiny.
Click to expand...
I am not against a higher result, I am a Hunter x Hunter supporter and would love to upgrade these characters. It just so happens that I'm not biased, not that you are, just informing my position.

If we have one where he is standing, thus requiring one less calculation, we have to pick that. It's far more reliable, objectively, than presuming the angle which Youpi's body was bending at, then calculating it, and then comparing it to the crater, with an assumed size even. It's all the unreliable. Yours has even one extra layer of unreliability by assuming the bendiny height based on nothing. We're simply not using that version.

I could be sly and claim that you just want the more unreliable panel because it's higher. But that would be rude. So don't do that to other people; "Say what you wanna say, hear what you don't wanna hear".
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
My way of doing it requires only 1 assumption, that Youpi is taller than Uvogin which seems to be the best option.
Click to expand...
It doesn't. It has literally no reason to be like that, we will not accept assumptions based on, quite frankly, nothing.
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
The way the original size was found was by comparing Uvo to a random person in the anime and assuming said persons height. The anime while having better consistency in regards to character sizes, is still inconsistent. Here is a good example
Click to expand...

You have got to be kidding me.
This is the scene where Youpi quite literally morphs his body and fist to grow and kill Knuckle. It's not inconsistent at all, you just disregarded the entire scene and the fact Youpi is a shapeshifter.
 
TioKill said:
I am not against a higher result, I am a Hunter x Hunter supporter and would love to upgrade these characters. It just so happens that I'm not biased, not that you are, just informing my position.

If we have one where he is standing, thus requiring one less calculation, we have to pick that. It's far more reliable, objectively, than presuming the angle which Youpi's body was bending at, then calculating it, and then comparing it to the crater, with an assumed size even. It's all the unreliable. Yours has even one extra layer of unreliability by assuming the bendiny height based on nothing. We're simply not using that version.

I could be sly and claim that you just want the more unreliable panel because it's higher. But that would be rude. So don't do that to other people; "Say what you wanna say, hear what you don't wanna hear".

It doesn't. It has literally no reason to be like that, we will not accept assumptions based on, quite frankly, nothing.

You have got to be kidding me.
This is the scene where Youpi quite literally morphs his body and fist to grow and kill Knuckle. It's not inconsistent at all, you just disregarded the entire scene and the fact Youpi is a shapeshifter.
Click to expand...

You seem very against me assuming him to be taller than Uvogin, very well then I shall offer a different option. We get a side by side comparison of youpi and Killuas heights. Killua has an established height thus requiring no assumptions, would that satisfy you?


Also in regards to the pixel scaling of the crater which you say is unreliable. The original calc assumes how far off panel the crater goes so by using the measurable radius instead of an assumed diameter it is already more valid than the old calculation.
 
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
You seem very against me assuming him to be taller than Uvogin, very well then I shall offer a different option. We get a side by side comparison of youpi and Killuas heights. Killua has an established height thus requiring no assumptions, would that satisfy you?
Click to expand...

I'm against indexing inaccurate information, yes.

Killua's method is fine, so is the average human method. I don't understand why you want to mess with these calcs in the first place.
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
Also in regards to the pixel scaling of the crater which you say is unreliable. The original calc assumes how far off panel the crater goes so by using the measurable radius instead of an assumed diameter it is already more valid than the old calculation.
Click to expand...
It doesn't assume anything. The radius is always the halfway point of the diameter, it's not an assumption, it's just how any basic circle-shape works. I don't understand why you're trying to fight reality itself now.
 
TioKill said:
It doesn't assume anything. The radius is always the halfway point of the diameter, it's not an assumption, it's just how any basic circle-shape works. I don't understand why you're trying to fight reality itself now.
Click to expand...
In fact, the original calc does no such thing. I have no idea why it shows a panel of the crater at a later point, but that panel is not the one used for the pixelscaling. It links to the pixelscaling at the beginning of the calc, and it's just the panel where we can see 99% of the crater anyway.
 
TioKill said:
I'm against indexing inaccurate information, yes.

Killua's method is fine, so is the average human method. I don't understand why you want to mess with these calcs in the first place.
Click to expand...
Glad we agree on that.
TioKill said:
It doesn't assume anything. The radius is always the halfway point of the diameter, it's not an assumption, it's just how any basic circle-shape works. I don't understand why you're trying to fight reality itself now.
Click to expand...
Go look at the current calcs pixel scaling. It cuts off the other side of the crater. Also I am aware how radius works, Using an incomplete diameter to find the radius of a circle results in an incorrect radius that's how it works. What I am doing is measuring the radius not the diameter, this method does not require a full view of the crater.


Here is the original pixel scaling
 
TioKill said:
I'm against indexing inaccurate information, yes.

Killua's method is fine, so is the average human method. I don't understand why you want to mess with these calcs in the first place.
Click to expand...
Funny you say this and then not care that Youpi's height and the craters diameter is scaled incorrectly
 
So since it was decided that we will keep the old scaling after all, is it fine if I close this thread?
 
Antvasima said:
So since it was decided that we will keep the old scaling after all, is it fine if I close this thread?
Click to expand...
Actually, I believe the value on the verse page needs to be adjusted, as Clover made a slight correction on the comments. But I can handle that, if it's okay.
 
TioKill said:
Actually, I believe the value on the verse page needs to be adjusted, as Clover made a slight correction on the comments. But I can handle that, if it's okay.
Click to expand...
That seems fine to me at least, but the main calculation blog post contents should also be updated accordingly.

If you link to the blog in question, I can probably handle it.
 
Thank you. I have updated the blog post in question. Is it fine if I close this thread now?
 
Antvasima said:
Thank you. I have updated the blog post in question. Is it fine if I close this thread now?
Click to expand...
The main issue of this thread has NOT been fixed. The issue being the incorrect height' scaling and the incomplete crater dimensions have not been addressed. However since we have established that the Vaporization rating used before is fine to use I will just make another thread.
 
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
The main issue of this thread has NOT been fixed. The issue being the incorrect height' scaling and the incomplete crater dimensions have not been addressed. However since we have established that the Vaporization rating used before is fine to use I will just make another thread.
Click to expand...
You have been utterly shut down on you complaints about the diameter, again, over 99% of the creater is visible, there is no need to change it. In fact, the pixelscaling was made by @Damage3245, who is a calc group member. If he thinks it's valid, then he does have the authority to keep it that way.

The height used in the original calculation is also linked to a thread which accepts the ratio.
 
TioKill said:
You have been utterly shut down on you complaints about the diameter, again, over 99% of the creater is visible, there is no need to change it. In fact, the pixelscaling was made by @Damage3245, who is a calc group member. If he thinks it's valid, then he does have the authority to keep it that way.

The height used in the original calculation is also linked to a thread which accepts the ratio.
Click to expand...
1. Calc group members can make mistakes dude I don't know why you think they can't.
2. Even if it is a small cutoff the distance per single pixel is pretty big and it would end up with an around 2 meter difference, which would change the calc by dozens of kilotons.
3. What are you talking about? I use the same depth to diameter ratio as the other calcs do. Next time actually look at the calc before you discredit it.
 
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
1. Calc group members can make mistakes dude I don't know why you think they can't.
2. Even if it is a small cutoff the distance per single pixel is pretty big and it would end up with an around 2 meter difference, which would change the calc by dozens of kilotons.
Click to expand...
That's actually correct.

Youpi: 2.47368421053m/16px = 0.154605263m per px
Radius of the crater: 307px = 47.4638158m

(47.4638158/45.8182399319)^5 = 1.19294725x by Joules.

386.7x1.19294725 = 461.312702 Kilotons.


Welp, alright, alright. I'll blog this new version and ask for evaluation.
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
3. What are you talking about? I use the same depth to diameter ratio as the other calcs do. Next time actually look at the calc before you discredit it.
Click to expand...
I didn't discredit yours, wasn't even talking about yours, but whatever.
 
TioKill said:
That's actually correct.

Youpi: 2.47368421053m/16px = 0.154605263m per px
Radius of the crater: 307px = 47.4638158m

(47.4638158/45.8182399319)^5 = 1.19294725x by Joules.

386.7x1.19294725 = 461.312702 Kilotons.


Welp, alright, alright. I'll blog this new version and ask for evaluation.

I didn't discredit yours, wasn't even talking about yours, but whatever.
Click to expand...
Thank you for actually going and looking before discrediting it. I will update the values on the new calc. Let me know when you make the new thread
 
Hk1488 said:
Can we not just calc the height. It surely isn't 25 meters like the Standart assumption you guys use.
Click to expand...
That's the thing about craters, they have an spherical shape on their end, so calculating the height is impossible.

25m is reasonable, it took these faster-than-horses running speed-characters several seconds to get to the center.
 
TioKill said:
That's the thing about craters, they have an spherical shape on their end, so calculating the height is impossible.

25m is reasonable, it took these faster-than-horses running speed-characters several seconds to get to the center.
Click to expand...
Yes but you can still calc the height from the center to the top of the crater. I did once and it came consistently at something like 15 meters. Also assuming they took several seconds seems kinda baseless. Do you have evidence for this statement
 
Hk1488 said:
Yes but you can still calc the height from the center to the top of the crater. I did once and it came consistently at something like 15 meters. Also assuming they took several seconds seems kinda baseless. Do you have evidence for this statement
Click to expand...
It was the conclusion reached on the original thread. Because the depth often seemed inconsistent
 
Hk1488 said:
Yes but you can still calc the height from the center to the top of the crater. I did once and it came consistently at something like 15 meters. Also assuming they took several seconds seems kinda baseless. Do you have evidence for this statement
Click to expand...
Anime.

Also, at that angle, that calculation would be impossible. We don't know where the celling would be relative to the diameter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Caleb1775
Upgrade of Squadron Leader level and Officer level characters in Hunter X Hunter
Replies
2
Views
284
Caleb1775
Caleb1775
We have to upgrade at least 2 characters to 7-B
Replies
0
Views
291
aktrguser
Arcker123
Tiny Edgelords Having A Squabble (Naruto Vs Hunter X Hunter) 2-1-0
Replies
16
Views
1K
Arkenis
Arkenis
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson
Hunter x Hunter Overhaul V2 - Part 1: Speed
2 3
Replies
82
Views
6K
Nierre
Nierre
The_man_with_the_Midas_touch
Best acrobatics for every tier
Replies
9
Views
584
Dragonite007
Dragonite007
Back
Top