All-purpose request thread (New forum)

[Hagane_no_Saiyajin]

@KLOL506 will it be posted on calc evaluations?

I also made a quick calc for crushing a wrist: https://fcoc-vs-battles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:Hagane_no_Saiyajin/Wrist_crush

 

[KLOL506]

Seems ok from what I'm seeing. I don't remember if there was a source that gave a more precise value or something, so going with what we're given in that blog should be the right move.

I made the blog.

 

[Coolboy6]

Pandimensionalbeing042 spite match

 

[Propellus]

Pandimensionalbeing042 spite match

I literally thought he gave up making alts to sneak back in the site

 

[Antvasima]

Seems ok from what I'm seeing. I don't remember if there was a source that gave a more precise value or something, so going with what we're given in that blog should be the right move.

Thank you for helping out.

Pulv. value has been fixed accordingly.

You think I should make a blog for the bone stuff so that you can evaluate it and then I can add it to the Table of Destruction Values page?

I made the blog.

@DontTalkDT

 

[Antvasima]

Pandimensionalbeing042 spite match

I locked it and banned his sockpuppet account.

 

[Hagane_no_Saiyajin]

This calc on here makes no sense to me: So total energy = 62 * 3500 * 38 + 0.65*62*1000*333.55 = 21,688,065 Joules

 

[The_Impress]

This calc on here makes no sense to me: So total energy = 62 * 3500 * 38 + 0.65*62*1000*333.55 = 21,688,065 Joules

Make a CRT. Not the place to discuss.

 

[Hagane_no_Saiyajin]

Make a CRT

https://vsbattles.com/threads/freezing-human-body-calc-makes-not-sense.132520/

 

[Antvasima]

I moved the thread to our calc group forum.

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

This Versus Match is no longer valid since one of the fighters got downgraded from 6-C. Should be closed.

 

[Elizhaa]

This Versus Match is no longer valid since one of the fighters got downgraded from 6-C. Should be closed.

Done.

 

[KLOL506]

Thank you for helping out.


@DontTalkDT

He accepted the blog. I will add it to the Destruction Values chart. I need it unlocked once more.

 

[Propellus]

Stomp match

 

[KLOL506]

He accepted the blog. I will add it to the Destruction Values chart. I need it unlocked once more.

Bump

 

[Antvasima]

He accepted the blog. I will add it to the Destruction Values chart. I need it unlocked once more.

Thank you. I have unlocked the page. Tell me here when you are done.

Calculations

In order to determine a character's Destructive Capacity, we must first look through the character's feats, and determine how much energy was exerted to preform such a feat. Sometimes the destructive capacity of the feat can be determined easily with no need of a calculation, but most of the...

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[KLOL506]

Thank you. I have unlocked the page. Tell me here when you are done.

Calculations

In order to determine a character's Destructive Capacity, we must first look through the character's feats, and determine how much energy was exerted to preform such a feat. Sometimes the destructive capacity of the feat can be determined easily with no need of a calculation, but most of the...

vsbattles.fandom.com

Done.

 

[Propellus]

Another stomp match

 

[The_Impress]

Another stomp match

It's argued as not being one, and a moderator is already on it.

Wait before declaring 'em.

 

[Confluctor]

Yeah, I was just looking at their files and it seems doable. But if not, I will close it later

 

[Hagane_no_Saiyajin]

Not sure what’s happening, but I cannot see comments on user blog calcs on mu iPad

 

[Confluctor]

That happens on my phone too. Blog comments don't load

 

[FinePoint]

I am not having this problem on a Galaxy J3 Orbit.
I can see blog comments just fine.

 

[Antvasima]

If the problem remains, you should inform the Fandom staff about it here:

https://support.fandom.com/hc/en-us/requests/new

 

[Sparkive]

So... currently 0.013 m/s is used as the speed for objects in the calculation of "Viewing Things as Standing Still" (speed of snails), right? (it's also in the reference for common feats)
Well, on the calculation page it does not reflect it, in fact it says that they are less than or equal to 0.001 m/s. (paragraph 10 from where directs the link)

 

[Antvasima]

So... currently 0.013 m/s is used as the speed for objects in the calculation of "Viewing Things as Standing Still" (speed of snails), right? (it's also in the reference for common feats)
Well, on the calculation page it does not reflect it, in fact it says that they are less than or equal to 0.001 m/s. (paragraph 10 from where directs the link)

@KLOL506 @Jasonsith

Would one of you be willing to handle it if I unlock the page?

 

[KLOL506]

@KLOL506 @Jasonsith

Would one of you be willing to handle it if I unlock the page?

Yeah a lot of feats were being changed and I am visibly sure we opted to apply the new timeframe in a CRT somewhere.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay, so should I unlock the page for you to edit now then?

 

[KLOL506]

Okay, so should I unlock the page for you to edit now then?

There was also another method DontTalk advised to use when a cinematic timeframe was usable and we had clear view of the object.

He recommended to find the apparent speed of the object (projectile) via figuring out how many pixels it moved in the duration it was visible and use that as its apparent speed, and explained why. Can depend on picture quality tho, so I'd recommend always using proper HD shots and not low-quality ones.

Also basically, limit snail speed usage to scenarios where there are no pictures.

 

[DontTalkDT]

There was also another method DontTalk advised to use when a cinematic timeframe was usable and we had clear view of the object.

He recommended to find the apparent speed of the object (projectile) via figuring out how many pixels it moved in the duration it was visible and use that as its apparent speed, and explained why. Can depend on picture quality tho, so I'd recommend always using proper HD shots and not low-quality ones.

Also basically, limit snail speed usage to scenarios where there are no pictures.

The part about using the visuals when available is already on the page.

In this case, if a reference object with known speed can be visually confirmed to not have moved even 1 pixel (which requires the feat to happen in a visual media like a comic, movie or animation) one can figure out the timeframe, by saying that it must have been less than the timeframe that the object would have taken to move 1 pixel.

But we never quite finished the debate in regard to what to do for upscaling i.e. different quality shots.

 

[KLOL506]

The part about using the visuals when available is already on the page.

Ah. Forgive my ignorance then.

But we never quite finished the debate in regard to what to do for upscaling i.e. different quality shots.

Well, it's not like we can ask members to actually always download the creme de la creme 4K shots either (Not everyone has the machine or the patience to do so), but at the same time I feel like not using HD shots is just doing a disservice to the feats altogether. This isn't just a problem for slow-mo calcs, this is an issue for calcs as a whole (At least, if it's well below the 720p mark as I have faced, going 1080p and above doesn't give any noticeable difference). I guess it's just a matter of how members choose to take screenshots. Anything comparable to the original source resolution should suffice I believe, as long as it has the native resolution support (Most games have it and movies and TV shows have 1080p Blu-Ray and 4K UHD blu-ray stuff) and hasn't been upscaled considerably (YouTube gets a bit fucky there because even 4K on a 1080p screen will never be true 4K quality, and recording lossless stuff on games just doesn't work with MSI Afterburner because it becomes a ******* slog-fest).

In the end, the pixel movement is actually largely based on how well you can determine where the movement starts and were it ends. I prefer to use MPC-HC as I can accurately fine-tune the start time and stop time via its millisecond function. needs a bit of elbow grease but any video player with a millisecond function and a frame-skip/decrease speed/screenshot feature should do just fine. And of course, the size of the object that you're calculating the movement of. If those remain consistent then I don't expect much variation to occur between actual proper quality shots (Anything from 1080p and above).

 

[Frieza_force_soldier_100]

I request some help with this match here. I have asked many people for input, and there has been little progress.

 

[Starter_Pack]

I request some help with this match here. I have asked many people for input, and there has been little progress.

Wrong thread, my friend. For versus debate promotions, please go to this thread.

Thank you.

 

[Mantidil]

Can someone add the Mounts category to the ”Characters by Occupation” page. It doesn’t look like there is an equivalent category as far as I can tell and it won’t allow me to add any categories to the page. I assume it would fit since there are similar categories such as “Summons” on the page.

Edit: though I suppose it could also fit on the ”Characters by Status” page but I’m unsure.

 

[Antvasima]

Can someone add the Mounts category to the ”Characters by Occupation” page. It doesn’t look like there is an equivalent category as far as I can tell and it won’t allow me to add any categories to the page. I assume it would fit since there are similar categories such as “Summons” on the page.

Edit: though I suppose it could also fit on the ”Characters by Status” page but I’m unsure.

@Damage3245

What do you think about this?

 

[Antvasima]

Ah. Forgive my ignorance then.

Well, it's not like we can ask members to actually always download the creme de la creme 4K shots either (Not everyone has the machine or the patience to do so), but at the same time I feel like not using HD shots is just doing a disservice to the feats altogether. This isn't just a problem for slow-mo calcs, this is an issue for calcs as a whole (At least, if it's well below the 720p mark as I have faced, going 1080p and above doesn't give any noticeable difference). I guess it's just a matter of how members choose to take screenshots. Anything comparable to the original source resolution should suffice I believe, as long as it has the native resolution support (Most games have it and movies and TV shows have 1080p Blu-Ray and 4K UHD blu-ray stuff) and hasn't been upscaled considerably (YouTube gets a bit fucky there because even 4K on a 1080p screen will never be true 4K quality, and recording lossless stuff on games just doesn't work with MSI Afterburner because it becomes a ******* slog-fest).

In the end, the pixel movement is actually largely based on how well you can determine where the movement starts and were it ends. I prefer to use MPC-HC as I can accurately fine-tune the start time and stop time via its millisecond function. needs a bit of elbow grease but any video player with a millisecond function and a frame-skip/decrease speed/screenshot feature should do just fine. And of course, the size of the object that you're calculating the movement of. If those remain consistent then I don't expect much variation to occur between actual proper quality shots (Anything from 1080p and above).

@DontTalkDT

 

[Damage3245]

@Damage3245

What do you think about this?

I've applied it.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for helping out.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Ah. Forgive my ignorance then.


Well, it's not like we can ask members to actually always download the creme de la creme 4K shots either (Not everyone has the machine or the patience to do so), but at the same time I feel like not using HD shots is just doing a disservice to the feats altogether. This isn't just a problem for slow-mo calcs, this is an issue for calcs as a whole (At least, if it's well below the 720p mark as I have faced, going 1080p and above doesn't give any noticeable difference). I guess it's just a matter of how members choose to take screenshots. Anything comparable to the original source resolution should suffice I believe, as long as it has the native resolution support (Most games have it and movies and TV shows have 1080p Blu-Ray and 4K UHD blu-ray stuff) and hasn't been upscaled considerably (YouTube gets a bit fucky there because even 4K on a 1080p screen will never be true 4K quality, and recording lossless stuff on games just doesn't work with MSI Afterburner because it becomes a ******* slog-fest).

In the end, the pixel movement is actually largely based on how well you can determine where the movement starts and were it ends. I prefer to use MPC-HC as I can accurately fine-tune the start time and stop time via its millisecond function. needs a bit of elbow grease but any video player with a millisecond function and a frame-skip/decrease speed/screenshot feature should do just fine. And of course, the size of the object that you're calculating the movement of. If those remain consistent then I don't expect much variation to occur between actual proper quality shots (Anything from 1080p and above).

It is, in general, somewhat debatable whether it makes sense to go with pixel value for things <1 pixel as one can artificially inflate the value by upscaling the picture/video. That was also the problem that came up in that past thread.
My suggestion was to use the thickness of a line or some other 'smallest detail' that can be seen in the image instead, so that the method becomes (largely) independent of the resolution, but we never reached a conclusion in that regard.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.