Arcker fails at calculations for an hour (Dishonored Revisions: Part 1.5)

[KLOL506]

A gun offers a secondary option in a fight and it ain’t a regular gun, it can get upgrades to be superior than any flintlock, that’s like saying any fantasy game that has bow users who move at ftl don’t get past supersonic.

Really the only issue here is that the feat is almost 9x higher than the next best feat (Which actually involves parrying bullets). But saying that it's an outlier because the character uses a gun is just... LOL.

 

[Vzearr]

Yeah no, sorry, we don't do that here without actual proper visual cues to rely upon. Going that low is simply absurd due to how the biomechanics of an arm swinging a sword work, and 10-20 degrees is absurdly low for any kind of a rapid swing.


I think you need to learn a bit more about how the human arm works when swinging weapons with enough force to cut through stuff.

I think you need to learn more about assumptions in a timeframe. The evidence behind her arm being directly infront of her after he pulled the trigger is literally non existent. If you can't prove it why are we having this discussion.

 

[Arcker123]

There is literally no indication of that.

Go look at her sword and check the postition of her arm in the scan, her arm can't move there from the gun and only move 20 degrees.

You're assuming that happens in the timeframe of the bullet not leaving the chamber with no evidence.

Because they're apart of the slash? The same slash that cuts the gun before it leaves the barrel is the same slash that ends up behind her back in a half circle.

No one can provide any real concrete evidence of her movement starting with the sword directly infront of her as the bullet was shot. This shouldn't be an argument. Why are we using an automatic highballed distance with no evidence ?

Look at this scan and tell me how this is only 20 degrees. Also just proof the sword was in front of her when the guy fired.

 

[Vzearr]

Go look at her sword and check the postition of her arm in the scan, her arm can't move there from the gun and only move 20 degrees.

Look at this scan and tell me how this is only 20 degrees.

It seems you've completely misunderstood my argument. I know full well her entire arm movement is 180 degrees ish, but whether or not its in the timeframe of the bullet not leaving the chamber is my problem with it.

 

[Arcker123]

It seems you've completely misunderstood my argument. I know full well her entire arm movement is 180 degrees ish, but whether or not its in the timeframe of the bullet not leaving the chamber is my problem with it.

I know full well what you're arguing. You're trying to say we cannot prove that the entire 180 degrees is traversed in the timeframe I gave the calc, but the issue is, all I have to do to justify this is prove that the slash happens after the trigger is pulled, which is justified in the blog. If that is proven, then the entire slash had to have taken place within the timeframe.

You could never hope to prove that some of the any of the slash could have happened outside of the timeframe given in the calc, and that doesn't even make sense given we see the guy aiming and firing before she even moves her sword.

 

[KLOL506]

It seems you've completely misunderstood my argument. I know full well her entire arm movement is 180 degrees ish, but whether or not its in the timeframe of the bullet not leaving the chamber is my problem with it.

You would still be stuck with the dilemma of Emily's arm moving well past the muzzle flash and the bullet (Which mind you, has not even made it across to its target yet and has barely moven the same length as in the blog by the time the swing is finished, assuming the real arc and the blade passing through the arm started at the exact moment the bullet left the gun). No way in hell would that be below 45 degrees at the absolute lowest.

This brings a new problem I just discovered. This would bring us the issue to whether the bullet reached top velocity within the barrel itself. Since muzzle velocity is for the speed of the bullet at the exact moment it leaves the barrel.

For which there is a fix. The muzzle flash (The length the bullet travelled), is more or less the same length as the barrel itself (I did some fixes), in which case the safer end to use would be 90 degrees, since by the time the swing is done, the bullet has barely gone much farther away from the gun's muzzle.

 

[Arcker123]

@KLOL506 did you re scale the feat using the entire barrel + muzzle to get distance instead of just where Emily cuts the barrel in half. Because my assumption was the bullet doesn't escape the barrel at all and the length it moves is at most up to where Emily cuts it.

 

[KLOL506]

@KLOL506 did you re scale the feat using the entire barrel + muzzle to get distance instead of just where Emily cuts the barrel in half. Because my assumption was the bullet doesn't escape the barrel at all and the length it moves is at most up to where Emily cuts it.

I ignored the barrel length and only used the length of the muzzle flash plus the inner barrel diameter, since muzzle velocity literally refers to the speed of the bullet right as it exits the muzzle (The end part of the barrel from where the bullet comes out).

 

[Vzearr]

but the issue is, all I have to do to justify this is prove that the slash happens after the trigger is pulled, which is justified in the blog. If that is proven, then the entire slash had to have taken place within the timeframe.

Creating swirls with blood doesn't prove its 180 degree movement. If anything that would suggest its 360 degree movement (I disagree with it but it symbolises it more)

You could never hope to prove that some of the any of the slash could have happened outside of the timeframe given in the calc, and that doesn't even make sense given we see the guy aiming and firing before she even moves her sword.

I don't need to prove it. All I'm saying is how do you know that her blade wasn't extremely close to his arm already ? She would only need to slash the width of his arm.

Let me give you an example: (In a series of panel) Character A is punching Character B, Character A's semi extended fist is 1cm away from Character B's face. Character B in the next panel is seen 1 meter away from character A's fist that is now fully extended. How much distance would you say Character B moved in the timeframe of character A's punch going 1cm ? With the way you're calcing this feat you would be suggesting Character B moved a meter when the true distance moved would only be the minimal distance to escape Character A's fist because there is not evidence proving otherwise. The same would go for this feat.

You would still be stuck with the dilemma of Emily's arm moving well past the muzzle flash and the bullet (Which mind you, has not even made it across to its target yet and has barely moven the same length as in the blog by the time the swing is finished, assuming the real arc and the blade passing through the arm started at the exact moment the bullet left the gun). No way in hell would that be below 45 degrees at the absolute lowest.

Ah, I see what you mean. But this still shows 180 degrees is a highball with no evidence. I will say that the best way to calc it would be to assume a 45 - 90 degree angle for the distance she moved, then to pixel scale how much the bullet move (seeing as it definitely moved more then the barrel length).

This brings a new problem I just discovered. This would bring us the issue to whether the bullet reached top velocity within the barrel itself. Since muzzle velocity is for the speed of the bullet at the exact moment it leaves the barrel.

Eyup.

 

[KLOL506]

Ah, I see what you mean. But this still shows 180 degrees is a highball with no evidence. I will say that the best way to calc it would be to assume a 45 - 90 degree angle for the distance she moved, then to pixel scale how much the bullet move (seeing as it definitely moved more then the barrel length).

Eyup.

90 degree would be the most appropriate in this case then.

 

[Vzearr]

Yeah. Just make sure to account for the bullet leaving the chamber to.

 

[Arcker123]

I dont think the bullet leaves the barrel. Cutting the gun itself in half wouldn't matter at all if the bullet wasn't inside of it and we see no bullet in the first.

 

[KLOL506]

Yeah. Just make sure to account for the bullet leaving the chamber to.

That's... literally what muzzle velocity is. It starts when you leave the chamber.

 

[Vzearr]

I dont think the bullet leaves the barrel. Cutting the gun itself in half wouldn't matter at all if the bullet wasn't inside of it and we see no bullet in the first.

If we are going with 90 degree movement then you should pixel scale to that big flash because otherwise you would be assuming a highball with no backing again.

 

[Arcker123]

If we are going with 90 degree movement then you should pixel scale to that big flash because otherwise you would be assuming a highball with no backing again.

I just gave the backing. The backing is the feat doesn't seem to make sense if the bullet leaves the gun.

 

[Vzearr]

I just gave the backing. The backing is the feat doesn't seem to make sense if the bullet leaves the gun.

The author clearly illustrates the bullet leaving the gun dude.

 

[Vzearr]

If you disagree then use the slower flintlock speed ig because if it hasn't left the gun then it hasn't reached peak velocity in any way so you may aswell lowball the speed if you want to keep it.

 

[KLOL506]

I dont think the bullet leaves the barrel. Cutting the gun itself in half wouldn't matter at all if the bullet wasn't inside of it and we see no bullet in the first.

Then there's no way you can use muzzle velocity, period.

Though I personally do not buy the bullet being inside the barrel argument, I more so think the slice is made just after the bullet leaves the barrel, as evident by the muzzle flash and the bullet's trajectory being still largely intact, if the cut happened before the bullet left the barrel, the muzzle flash would be distorted and curving to the left but it goes straight on without any alteration.

 

[Arcker123]

Upon further research on muzzle flash shenanigans, I think we can use KLOL's calculation of the distance the bullet travels if it isn't a muzzle glow. The end of the muzzle flash is the farthest the bullet could've moved. I still think 180 degrees is the best though.

Let me give you an example: (In a series of panel) Character A is punching Character B, Character A's semi extended fist is 1cm away from Character B's face. Character B in the next panel is seen 1 meter away from character A's fist that is now fully extended. How much distance would you say Character B moved in the timeframe of character A's punch going 1cm ? With the way you're calcing this feat you would be suggesting Character B moved a meter when the true distance moved would only be the minimal distance to escape Character A's fist because there is not evidence proving otherwise. The same would go for this feat.

He moves 1 meter, you yourself said that. I don't think this hypothetical makes much sense. You can't stipulate he's a meter away then ask me how far he moves. You're hypothetical stipulates that B moves 1 Meter in the time A goes 1cm. This is just Distance B moves (1M)/Distance A's punch moves (1CM)*How fast A's movement is. This is the calculation I used in my calc, and this hypothetical doesn't refute that.

I assume they go beyond the minimum distance needed to just cut the guys gun and arm because we are shown the sword started nowhere near the gunman's arm and ends in an arch behind her in an 180 movement in the same time it took the bullet to travel KLOL's distance.

I don't need to prove it. All I'm saying is how do you know that her blade wasn't extremely close to his arm already ? She would only need to slash the width of his arm.

I gave you a scan though, her sword starts nowhere near his arm and is in fact under it, and when the bullet is fired, the sword travels 180 degrees from in front of her (as shown in scan) to behind her in the time it took the bullet to barely exit the barrel.

Ah, I see what you mean. But this still shows 180 degrees is a highball with no evidence. I will say that the best way to calc it would be to assume a 45 - 90 degree angle for the distance she moved, then to pixel scale how much the bullet move (seeing as it definitely moved more then the barrel length).

The sword moves from in front of emily to behind her in the same time it took the bullet to move. 180 degrees is the best bet.

 

[Arcker123]

@Vzearr are you trying to say we would only use the distance the sword moves to cut the gun?

Edit: I'm still confused as to what the argument is that Emily's swing is only like 90 degrees here. It seems very intuitive and obvious that the sword's entire movement is 180.

 

[KLOL506]

@Vzearr are you trying to say we would only use the distance the sword moves to cut the gun?

Edit: I'm still confused as to what the argument is that Emily's swing is only like 90 degrees here. It seems very intuitive and obvious that the sword's entire movement is 180.

Entire movement would be 180 but we'd need to pinpoint exactly where she started to move simultaneously with the bullet.

 

[Arcker123]

Entire movement would be 180 but we'd need to pinpoint exactly where she started to move simultaneously with the bullet.

Oh so you're saying we need to know when she swung in relation to when the bullet is fired?

So basically where in that 180 degree movement is the bullet fired?

 

[Vzearr]

He moves 1 meter, you yourself said that. I don't think this hypothetical makes much sense. You can't stipulate he's a meter away then ask me how far he moves. You're hypothetical stipulates that B moves 1 Meter in the time A goes 1cm. This is just Distance B moves (1M)/Distance A's punch moves (1CM)*How fast A's movement is. This is the calculation I used in my calc, and this hypothetical doesn't refute that.

It makes sense, you just gotta think about it differently. I'll leave it for now though.

U assume they go beyond the minimum distance needed to just cut the guys gun and arm because we are shown the sword started nowhere near the gunman's arm and ends in an arch behind her in an 180 movement in the same time it took the bullet to travel KLOL's distance.

I gave you a scan though, her sword starts nowhere near his arm and is in fact under it, and when the bullet is fired, the sword travels 180 degrees from in front of her (as shown in scan) to behind her in the time it took the bullet to barely exit the barrel.

The sword moves from in front of emily to behind her in the same time it took the bullet to move. 180 degrees is the best bet.

Sigh.

Oh so you're saying we need to know when she swung in relation to when the bullet is fired?

So basically where in that 180 degree movement is the bullet fired?

The best assumption is at the 90 degree point, anything above it is a highball without any evidence.

 

[Arcker123]

It makes sense, you just gotta think about it differently. I'll leave it for now though.

He can't move a meter and then not move a meter.

Sigh.

Real. Anyways

The best assumption is at the 90 degree point, anything above it is a highball without any evidence.

That doesn't at all answer my question.

 

[Vzearr]

He can't move a meter and then not move a meter.

Its about the time in which he moved that meter. We have no evidence that he moved that meter by the time the fist moved 1cm, we only know he moved a minimum distance of the width of the fist.

Real. Anyways

x2

That doesn't at all answer my question.

So basically where in that 180 degree movement is the bullet fired?

Yes, and because we have no evidence it was fired when her arm was directly infront of her we would have to assume it was fired when her arm was at the guys arm, which would make the movement 90 degrees (ISH)

 

[KLOL506]

Oh so you're saying we need to know when she swung in relation to when the bullet is fired?

Yeah.

So basically where in that 180 degree movement is the bullet fired?

Particularly hard to tell, but in a case like this, where the bullet path is already there and the scan shows the full complete movement, it'd be more or less where the blade cuts through the arm (Half-way point) and there's no trajectory change for either the muzzle flash or the bullet.

 

[Arcker123]

Its about the time in which he moved that meter. We have no evidence that he moved that meter by the time the fist moved 1cm, we only know he moved a minimum distance of the width of the fist.

Assuming that the fist could've fully extended before B moves the one meter is inherently more assumptitive than just assuming they end their movements at the same time. You have to assume that off panel there was some further movement after the fist has completed it's movement, which is completely baseless when we just see their end at the same time. Why wouldn't I assume they occur in that same timeframe?

Yes, and because we have no evidence it was fired when her arm was directly infront of her we would have to assume it was fired when her arm was at the guys arm, which would make the movement 90 degrees (ISH)

We see him aiming the gun and preparing to fire the trigger whilst the sword is in front of her and she hasn't even begun a swing. He fired the gun in that instance (or at the very instatntly). Assuming she swung before he fired in this instance is assuming he didn't fire immediately even there is entirely reason to assume he fired at the same time Emily began her movement. 180 is more justified than 90.

Particularly hard to tell, but in a case like this, where the bullet path is already there and the scan shows the full complete movement, it'd be more or less where the blade cuts through the arm (Half-way point) and there's no trajectory change for either the muzzle flash or the bullet.

I take it that the full movement is shown because the swing and the firing occur at similar timeframes, and the panneling seems to support that, as we see the gunman about to take his shot before Emily has even swung. There's no reason to assume he fired mid swing, when we see that he's shooting before Emily has even moved.

The trajectory change happens when Emily cuts the guys gun. If the swing happens after the guy fires, the muzzle and bullet themselves wouldn't go downwards due to Emily's slash, which is what we see.

90 degrees is inherently worse as an assumption as you'd have to just disregard the panneling of the scene in order to say the bullet was fired mid swing, when the gunamn is shown taking his shot before Emily's swing. Assuming they begin their movements at the same time is less assumptitive than not doing so given the evidence. I understand 90 degrees is a lowball, one i'm willing to accept if it get's accepted by staff and CGM's.

To compromise here, I think we should add 2 ends. 1 with 90 degree movements, a high end with 180. I believe 180 has more backing and is less assumptitive than 90, but we can let other CGM's pick that.

Edit: A further issue with 90 degrees is that it assumes this guy fired the gun whilst his arm was being sliced off, which is kind of ridiculous.

 

[Arcker123]

Sorry for the double post, but the assumption that the bullet was only fired when Emily's sword reaches the guys arm just doesn't seem to work. Emily slices through the gun before she slices the arm. The gun literally wouldn't be able to fire (it would've already been sliced in half and thus not work) if we assume the 90 degree thing.

The 90 degrees assumes the gun was fired when Emily gets to the arm, but that wouldn't be possible when the gun is cut in half by the time Emily get's to the arm. The fact the gun is fired at all is proof of 180.

 

[Vzearr]

Sorry for the double post, but the assumption that the bullet was only fired when Emily's sword reaches the guys arm just doesn't seem to work. Emily slices through the gun before she slices the arm. The gun literally wouldn't be able to fire (it would've already been sliced in half and thus not work) if we assume the 90 degree thing.

The 90 degrees assumes the gun was fired when Emily gets to the arm, but that wouldn't be possible when the gun is cut in half by the time Emily get's to the arm. The fact the gun is fired at all is proof of 180.

The gun isn't even cut in half dude, what.

 

[Arcker123]

Lmao

 

[Vzearr]

Lmao

Where is the gun sliced exactly ?

 

[DaReaperMan]

Where is the gun sliced exactly ?

Are you joking???

 

[Vzearr]

Are you joking???

I literally can't see the gun being sliced whatsoever.

 

[Arcker123]

Peak discussion going on here.

I'm not pulling out MS paint to point this out, in your own words:

you just gotta think about it

 

[Vzearr]

Peak discussion going on here.

I'm not pulling out MS paint to point this out, in your own words:

Nah, I'm thinking about it really hard and there is no way the katana/sword woulda sliced the gun.

 

[Arcker123]

Okie Dokes.

 

[Vzearr]

Okie Dokes.

Sigh.

the assumption that the bullet was only fired when Emily's sword reaches the guys arm just doesn't seem to work. Emily slices through the gun before she slices the arm. The gun literally wouldn't be able to fire (it would've already been sliced in half and thus not work) if we assume the 90 degree thing.

I don't think if you slice a bit of a guns barrel of the gun won't shoot but idk.

The 90 degrees assumes the gun was fired when Emily gets to the arm, but that wouldn't be possible when the gun is cut in half by the time Emily get's to the arm. The fact the gun is fired at all is proof of 180.

The 90 degrees moved would still apply if we take the gun into account dude

 

[SYPHe5D]

Sorry for the double post, but the assumption that the bullet was only fired when Emily's sword reaches the guys arm just doesn't seem to work. Emily slices through the gun before she slices the arm. The gun literally wouldn't be able to fire (it would've already been sliced in half and thus not work) if we assume the 90 degree thing.

The 90 degrees assumes the gun was fired when Emily gets to the arm, but that wouldn't be possible when the gun is cut in half by the time Emily get's to the arm. The fact the gun is fired at all is proof of 180.

Focus on the part that is under the @Vzearr 3rd image on panel.

 

[Arcker123]

I don't think if you slice a bit of a guns barrel of the gun won't shoot but idk.

Lmao.

The 90 degrees moved would still apply if we take the gun into account dude

No it wouldn't. The 90 degrees KLOL is using is specifically assuming the gun isn't fired until Emily reaches the arm, which is wrong for multiple reasons. You'd be using the 180 if you're using anything before the gun in the timeframe.

 

[Vzearr]

Lmao.

Ah yes, they great debunk Arcker loves to use.

No it wouldn't. The 90 degrees KLOL is using is specifically assuming the gun isn't fired until Emily reaches the arm, which is wrong for multiple reasons. You'd be using the 180 if you're using anything before the gun in the timeframe.

Nope, the gun is higher then the arm but its still directly above the arm which means your debunk doesn't change anything.