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

[Arcker123]

Ah yes, they great debunk Arcker loves to use.

Do you expect a serious response to claiming that a gun could fire if you cut its barrel off?

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

It being above the arm increases the distance moved. It has to be the 180/full arm movement.

 

[Vzearr]

Do you expect a serious response to claiming that a gun could fire if you cut its barrel off?

I mean, yeah... Even though I don't believe she cut the barrel, there is no way in hell you think she cut a significant portion (above 30%) off.

It being above the arm increases the distance moved. It has to be the 180/full arm movement.

No it doesn't dude ? Are you being serious ?

 

[Arcker123]

I mean, yeah... Even though I don't believe she cut the barrel, there is no way in hell you think she cut a significant portion (above 30%) off.

We see that a large portion of it is cut off. Just look at the scan. There's not much I can tell you that the other guy didn't point out.

No it doesn't dude ? Are you being serious ?

The fact there is a vertical distance between the gun and arm increases the distances. The movement starts at the gun, and ends behind her back, in a movement we see is 180 degrees. This is not an absurd deduction.

 

[Vzearr]

We see that a large portion of it is cut off. Just look at the scan. There's not much I can tell you that the other guy didn't point out.

The gun doesn't even look cut and I can't visualise it being cut. You would need to prove it, even so I would still have more problems if you can prove it.

The fact there is a vertical distance between the gun and arm increases the distances. The movement starts at the gun, and ends behind her back, in a movement we see is 180 degrees. This is not an absurd deduction.

If the movement starts at the gun, then it would be 90 degree movement because the gun is directly above the dudes arm... My guy....

 

[KLOL506]

From the looks of it the barrel isn't completely cut, there's still a decent amount of it left sticking out, and given that flintlocks have smoothbore barrels, likely won't be much of a problem when all that gunpowder combusts and ass-blasts the bullet like Rocket Man.

 

[Arcker123]

The gun doesn't even look cut and I can't visualise it being cut. You would need to prove it, even so I would still have more problems if you can prove it.

We've given you the scan. You just refuse to be honest.

If the movement starts at the gun, then it would be 90 degrees because the gun is directly above the dudes arm... My guy....

It would mean that the full half circle is being moved. The distance between the gun and rhe arm is literally half the 180 distance as KLOL points out.

From the looks of it the barrel isn't completely cut, there's still a decent amount of it left sticking out, and given that flintlocks have smoothbore barrels, likely won't be much of a problem when all that gunpowder combusts and ass-blasts the bullet like Rocket Man.

Could you show that a flintlock would work with half of its barrel cut off?

Edit: ***** visibly got a revolver like chamber anyway, that gun is not working with half its barrel cut off.

 

[Vzearr]

We've given you the scan. You just refuse to be honest.

I am being completely honest. You are the one who's seemingly being unhonest here

It would mean that the full half circle is being moved. The distance between the gun and rhe arm is literally half the 180 distance as KLOL points out.

where does he say that ? The distance between her arm being infront of her and her arm being behind her is like 170 degrees to 180. The distance between the gun and her back is 80-90 degrees, the same as her back and her arm.

Could you show that a flintlock would work with half of its barrel cut off?

Pretty sure you made the claim that it wouldn't work if a bit of its barrel is cut off. You would need to provide evidence behind it in that case.

 

[Arcker123]

I am being completely honest. You are the one who's seemingly being unhonest here

I've given scans that everyone but you acknowledges the barrel was cut. I'm not the one denying obvious evidence.

where does he say that ? The distance between her arm being infront of her and her arm being behind her is like 170 degrees to 180. The distance between the gun and her back is 80-90 degrees, the same as her back and her arm.

it'd be more or less where the blade cuts through the arm (Half-way point)

The 90 degree assumption is incoherent given the gun is cut in half before the arm. You'd just use the shown starting position of the sword starting from her front to her back which is 180, also known as the full arm movement.

Also the distance between the gun and back would be 180. They are both on a similar "line." Traversing from the gun to arm is 180, and we are indicated by the blood swipe.

Pretty sure you made the claim that it wouldn't work if a bit of its barrel is cut off. You would need to provide evidence behind it in that case.

It has a damn cylinder, it's getting negged by cutting it in half.

 

[Vzearr]

I've given scans that everyone but you acknowledges the barrel was cut. I'm not the one denying obvious evidence.

Its not obvious evidence, you are really wrong but I'll come back to it later.

You'd just use the shown starting position of the sword starting from her front to her back which is 180, also known as the full arm movement.

Why would you ? That would mean you think the gun is directly infront of her ? You can't be serious dude LOL.

Also the distance between the gun and back would be 180. They are both on a similar "line." Traversing from the gun to arm is 180, and we are indicated by the blood swipe.

It has a damn cylinder, it's getting negged by cutting it in half.

Ah yes, irrefutable evidence with great sources !

 

[KLOL506]

Could you show that a flintlock would work with half of its barrel cut off?

I can do better. Double-barrel shotgun sawn off (Shotguns use smoothbore barrels).

 

[Vzearr]

I can do better. Double-barrel shotgun sawn off (Shotguns use smoothbore barrels).

Could you give your opinion on using 180 degrees ? Do you agree with arcker ? if so I'd probably need to pull out paint.

 

[Arcker123]

Its not obvious evidence, you are really wrong but I'll come back to it later.

Why would you ? That would mean you think the gun is directly infront of her ? You can't be serious dude LOL.

Ah yes, irrefutable evidence with great sources !

I mean we can all see the barrel is detached. Go look at MS paint, no part of the barrel that gets cut is connected.

No it doesnt. It just means the arm movement in its entirety is 180, something which KLOL (a calc member) has already agreed to. All I'm saying is we calc the feat using the accepted full arm travel, rather than some arbitrary and baseless cut off point for when the bullet is fired.

You can't accuse me of this whilst using memes in the very same post. Cylindered weapons use chambers, which wouldn't function if forcefully cut in half.

I can do better. Double-barrel shotgun sawn off (Shotguns use smoothbore barrels).

The cylinder would seem to not work with that tho, unless my knowledge of guns is off.

Also speaking, I think we should be using some revolver variant for this feat tbh, its more consistent with the depiction of the feat here, and bullets in Dishonored in general.

 

[Vzearr]

I mean we can all see the barrel is detached.

I can't.

No it doesnt. It just means the arm movement in its entirety is 180, something which KLOL (a calc member) has already agreed to.

No he hasn't ? Where did he agree to it, I'm generally interested.

You can't accuse me of this whilst using memes in the very same post. Cylindered weapons use chambers, which wouldn't function if forcefully cut in half.

Evidence please. Baseless claim without sufficient evidence.

 

[Arcker123]

I can't.

No he hasn't ? Where did he agree to it, I'm generally interested.

Evidence please. Baseless claim without sufficient evidence.

Okay. You're just committed to being dishonest. We've given the evidence for this multiple times. There's no point in this discussion if you're just gonna say "nuh uh" over and over without refuting any argument given or showing scans.

180 is the entire arm movement. This is obvious: Post in thread 'Arcker fails at calculations for an hour (Dishonored Revisions: Part 1.5)' https://vsbattles.com/threads/arcke...onored-revisions-part-1-5.163281/post-6308388

Cylinders by definition mean there are chambers.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cylinder_(firearms)&ved=2ahUKEwjigKyhgtSDAxUMBTQIHZfOCwMQFnoECCMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw17XYpz8eQ6bYoVTiWHBmJv

 

[Vzearr]

Okay. You're just committed to being dishonest. We've given the evidence for this multiple times. There's no point in this discussion if you're just gonna say "nuh uh" over and over without refuting any argument given or showing scans.

No you haven't lol. Stop lying.

180 is the entire arm movement. This is obvious: Post in thread 'Arcker fails at calculations for an hour (Dishonored Revisions: Part 1.5)' https://vsbattles.com/threads/arcke...onored-revisions-part-1-5.163281/post-6308388

You've completely lied here again. This statement has literally nothing to do with our current debate and comes before you bought up your "90 deg arm movement is dumb" point. If you're just gonna lie and lie again what's the point of our debate ?

Cylinders by definition mean there are chambers.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cylinder_(firearms)&ved=2ahUKEwjigKyhgtSDAxUMBTQIHZfOCwMQFnoECCMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw17XYpz8eQ6bYoVTiWHBmJv

Dude, this isn't evidence. You're meant to provide evidence that when a little bit of a guns chamber is cut off the gun will no longer work/shoot.

 

[Arcker123]

No you haven't lol. Stop lying.

You've completely lied here again. This statement has literally nothing to do with our current debate and comes before you bought up your "90 deg arm movement is dumb" point. If you're just gonna lie and lie again what's the point of our debate ?

Dude, this isn't evidence. You're meant to provide evidence that when a little bit of a guns chamber is cut off the gun will no longer work/shoot.

OK. You're just outvoted there and there's no reason to continue this. This is going nowhere and nobody agrees with you anyway.

All I said is the full arm movement was 180. Which KLOL confirms there.

Go read the page. Imagine accusing me of not proving claims when you haven't done anything.

 

[Vzearr]

OK. You're just outvoted there and there's no reason to continue this. This is going nowhere and nobody agrees with you anyway.

I'll prove why I'm also correct on that later.

All I said is the full arm movement was 180. Which KLOL confirms there.

This guy is a compulsive liar . Yk damn well what you're doing.

Go read the page. Imagine accusing me of not proving claims when you haven't done anything.

Lol, you read it wrong. It talks about detatching, not cutting off some of the chamber.

 

[KLOL506]

The cylinder would seem to not work with that tho, unless my knowledge of guns is off.

Revolvers =/= Smoothbore guns

Never underestimate Brazilian crackheads and their penchant for making ghetto guns out of scrap heap.

Also speaking, I think we should be using some revolver variant for this feat tbh, its more consistent with the depiction of the feat here, and bullets in Dishonored in general.

LMAO no, the pistol is a wheellock visually speaking (Mechanism and everything), but otherwise has the same ballistic performance as a flintlock (Both use smoothbore barrels and no rifling). Y'all really need to brush up your gunsmithing knowledge.

 

[SYPHe5D]

I can do better. Double-barrel shotgun sawn off (Shotguns use smoothbore barrels).

Sawed off shotguns.( i played too much red dead redemption)

 

[Vzearr]

Sawed off shotguns.( i played too much red dead redemption)

One of the most wanked series on the wiki ngl.

 

[KLOL506]

One of the most wanked series on the wiki ngl.

Don't make weird-ass jabs like these again, you set a bad precedent by doing so.

 

[Vzearr]

Don't make weird-ass jabs like these again, you set a bad precedent by doing so.

Small joke doesn't hurt. But sorry.

 

[Arcker123]

Revolvers =/= Smoothbore guns

Never underestimate Brazilian crackheads and their penchant for making ghetto guns out of scrap heap.

Ok? I don't disagree with any of this.

LMAO no, the pistol is a wheellock visually speaking (Mechanism and everything), but otherwise has the same ballistic performance as a flintlock (Both use smoothbore barrels and no rifling). Y'all really need to brush up your gunsmithing knowledge.

I don't see how

and

, are at all visibly similar. The chamber on the dishonored one is much more pronounced than on a wheelock, looking very cylindrical.

 

[KLOL506]

Ok? I don't disagree with any of this.

Wasn't responding to you, but to Vzearr.

I don't see how

and

, are at all visibly similar. The chamber on the dishonored one is much more pronounced than on a wheelock, looking very cylindrical.

They're both the same thing really.

Pistol

Pistols are one of the main weapons in the Dishonored franchise. The pistol fires by detonating a small whale oil resevoir at the base of each bullet, propelling the bullet forwards and often shattering the cap into a cloud of shrapnel. Pistol is a highly effective weapon at relatively close...

dishonored.fandom.com

Check the side profile. It's very much a wheellock in both appearance and function.

Here's a better example:

 

[SYPHe5D]

Ok? I don't disagree with any of this.

I don't see how

and

, are at all visibly similar. The chamber on the dishonored one is much more pronounced than on a wheelock, looking very cylindrical.

Is there an Ingame model for it ? If so get that

 

[Arcker123]

Wasn't responding to you, but to Vzearr.

Mb.

Wasn't responding to you, but to Vzearr.


They're both the same thing really.

Pistol

Pistols are one of the main weapons in the Dishonored franchise. The pistol fires by detonating a small whale oil resevoir at the base of each bullet, propelling the bullet forwards and often shattering the cap into a cloud of shrapnel. Pistol is a highly effective weapon at relatively close...

dishonored.fandom.com

Check the side profile. It's very much a wheellock in both appearance and function.

Here's a better example:

Some of the modified pistols (Like the one in the scan or Corvo's modified pistols) use cylinders. I'm willing to compromise on keeping using flintlocks for simplicity, but I felt this was worth noting.

 

[Vzearr]

Wasn't responding to you, but to Vzearr.

What.

 

[KLOL506]

Mb.

Some of the modified pistols (Like the one in the scan or Corvo's modified pistols) use cylinders. I'm willing to compromise on keeping using flintlocks for simplicity, but I felt this was worth noting.

Flintlocks and wheellocks are the same performance wise in terms of ballistics. They both share the same smoothbore barrels.

Basically, cutting off the barrel here has pretty much ****-all to do with reducing the velocity since the image shows that there's still a hefty portion of the barrel still intact (That doesn't stop people from using short-barreled weaponry barely bigger than their hands tho, just check the snub-nosed revolvers and derringers with shit range).

 

[KingNanaya]

what's still being argued?

 

[Arcker123]

Flintlocks and wheellocks are the same performance wise in terms of ballistics. They both share the same smoothbore barrels.

Okie dokie

Basically, cutting off the barrel here has pretty much ****-all to do with reducing the velocity since the image shows that there's still a hefty portion of the barrel still intact (That doesn't stop people from using short-barreled weaponry barely bigger than their hands tho, just check the snub-nosed revolvers and derringers with shit range).

My argument wasn't about reducing it's velocity, but just how the order of the cutting would lend more credence to using the full arm movement. One of my reasonings for this was the ability of a gun to function after half it's barrel is cut off, but I have other arguments.

It's just kind of arbitrary to use the moment before the dudes arm get's cut off and his gun is cut in half to argue for 90. If he fired after the gun got cut in half (As is entailed by using 90), the trajectory wouldn't be poinitng downwards.

Edit: The bullet would just be moving foward from a new shortened barrel, not downwards as we clearly see in the scan.

what's still being argued?

Whether or not we should use 180 or 90 degrees for the radius of Emily's sword swipe.

 

[Vzearr]

what's still being argued?

Arcker still hasn't proved the movement is 180 degrees.

 

[Arcker123]

Hahahahahahahaha

 

[Vzearr]

Hahahahahahahaha

 

[SYPHe5D]

 

[KingNanaya]

Whether or not we should use 180 or 90 degrees for the radius of Emily's sword swipe.

how much would it change the result by?

 

[Vzearr]

how much would it change the result by?

/2

Probably a bit more since the bullet didn't even reach peak velocity for most of its distance moved.

 

[KingNanaya]

is it this scan that's being used to argue 180 degrees?

 

[Arcker123]

Yes

 

[KingNanaya]

yeah, 180 makes sense to me. I just spent so long trying to figure out what was going on in that ss lol.

 

[Arcker123]

I recalc'd this feat with everything talked about here. Just wanted to bump. Needs Evaluation though.

Emily Blitzes a Bullet (Redux)

vsbattles.fandom.com