Black Clover: Immense Speed Downgrade

[CloverDragon03]

Why though? Why assume that? Magic is a universal construct which is pretty much the same across all characters. Assuming it works like this only for Langris is pretty dumb.

Well that's kind of what we're going with anyway considering, once again...

There is simply not enough support for this multiplier stack. Applying this to all characters means going back to that same, massive multiplier stack that's been repeatedly noted to not have support proportional to its total magnitude.

 

[CloverDragon03]

If you really want me to explain why it's laughable, I can. But I've debated with you several times, so I just don't see the use in explaining it when you'll just say no to it regardless of how true it is. Zora magic is not even described as the power to double strength and speed anymore but as the power to double magic. There are several examples that support the idea that doubling magic would also double speed and power equally, and denying all of it just because of the terrible multiplier is BS to me.

VSBW's multiplier standards are strict, as I've quoted myself. If you don't like it, I dunno what to tell you. So again I say, if you have nothing meaningful to comment, simply don't

It's frankly amazing how much shit I've had flung at me just for downgrading this

 

[Maverick_Zero_X]

So, this is what I've come up with:

• Base Asta (Eye of the Midnight Sun Arc) = 0.22c (Relativistic) -> Via Gauche's calc
• Patry/Fana/Raia/Vetto/Base Asta (Witches Forest Arc) = 0.22c (Relativistic) -> Can blitz EMS Arc Base Asta
• Base Asta (Royal Knights Exam Arc)/Mereoleona = 0.44c (Relativistic) -> Intercepted a doubled speed Elemental Quintet, which is > Raia's speed
• Black Asta (Royal Knights Exam Arc) = 0.88c (Relativistic+) -> Blitzed Rage Power Langris, who is 2x faster than his base form due to intercepting his own base form's attacks reflected at double the speed; his base form is comparable to Asta's
• Nozel/Julius = 0.89c (Relativistic+) -> Via Nozel's calc
• Light Magic = 1c (Speed of Light) -> Stated multiple times to move at light speed
• Demon Light Magic = 1.1c (FTL) -> Superior to Light Magic in all aspects, including speed
• Lucifero = 1.78c (FTL) -> Matched the speed of a punch that was twice his casual speed, which is superior to that of Devil Union Asta, who is far superior to Elf Arc characters

This looks fine.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

We can't pick and choose what to settle for, what integrity does this site have?

Okay Hey you might as well nuke the multi continental tiering because it's pure bullshit

You two should start toning it down. I can understand being frustrated, but getting petty is not the way to go. Instead of making peeps have the incentive to read your arguments, this attitude just pushes em away.

Debate normally. If you can't convince people, simply move on. I really don't wanna see you get brought to RVR for this nonsense, specially when you are the only opposition as of now. You are being given a courtesy, take advantage of it.

 

[Xinsignia1]

Well that's kind of what we're going with anyway considering, once again...

There is simply not enough support for this multiplier stack. Applying this to all characters means going back to that same, massive multiplier stack that's been repeatedly noted to not have support proportional to its total magnitude.

I don't think this would apply to strictly Langris though, because are other examples of the size of the magic visually increasing/doubling in size after Zora fired back from Zora's traps.

During the elf Arc Nozel, VD Noelle and Zora teamed up with one another to take down some elves. Noelle launched her SDR into one of Zora's traps and counter trap fired it back at the elves, the size of the SDR that was fired back was substantially larger, same thing with the lasers that Zora absorbed and fired back at the angles during the Paladin Damnatio fight.

 

[KingogKings777]

Yeah agree.

 

[DivineAura44]

Well that's kind of what we're going with anyway considering, once again...

There is simply not enough support for this multiplier stack. Applying this to all characters means going back to that same, massive multiplier stack that's been repeatedly noted to not have support proportional to its total magnitude.

Well I mean you can you prove it's not proportional? Unless the characters are using 100% of their speed and strength at all times, it's possible that the feats just aren't conveying the full strength of a character making it appear as if they aren't proportional. And no before you say "that's not evidence!", it's not supposed to be. However it's meant to debunk the argument against it meaning it's still on the table as a possibility.


The argument for it is above. Whether its valid or not, idc I'm not necessarily for or against the downgrade.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Well I mean you can you prove it's not proportional? Unless the characters are using 100% of their speed and strength at all times, it's possible that the feats just aren't conveying the full strength of a character making it appear as if they aren't proportional. And no before you say "that's not evidence!", it's not supposed to be. However it's meant to debunk the argument against it meaning it's still on the table as a possibility.

Can you please read what I'm saying again? Lemme lay this out for you:

• There are zero calcs that support these ratings of thousands of times faster than light
• There are zero statements of such a thing
• There are no instances of light being treated as small-time

 

[DivineAura44]

Can you please read what I'm saying again? Lemme lay this out for you:

• There are zero calcs that support these ratings of thousands of times faster than light
• There are zero statements of such a thing
• There are no instances of light being treated as small-time

Ok however there is infact arguments that support magic, AP, and speed being linear increases aka the entire basis for the speed currently on the profiles. Did you read that part?

 

[CloverDragon03]

Ok however there is infact arguments that support magic, AP, and speed being linear increases aka the entire basis for the speed currently on the profiles. Did you read that part?

To quote the multiplier standards page:

"However, a good statement alone is not enough to get a high multiplier accepted. The amount of extra evidence one has to provide to get larger multipliers accepted is proportional to the size of the multiplier. For lower multipliers, like things much less than times 100, evidence can take the form of a clear increase in combat strength against priorly equal or superior opponents. For higher multipliers, like times 100 and above, the importance of stronger evidence, such as feats displaying power of a similar magnitude as the value the multiplier points to or the multipliers importance to the plot of the story, and a higher amount of evidence becomes increasingly necessary."

"If multiple multipliers are to be stacked, that are used upon each other, the evidence for the end result is equal to the total multiplier applied to the best feat. That means that if, for example, a character has a times 10 multiplier and later on gets another times 50 multiplier, than the evidence necessary to use both multipliers to get a statistic, is like that of a times 500 multiplier, as the best feat would be increased by a factor of 500 in that case."

 

[DivineAura44]

To quote the multiplier standards page:

"However, a good statement alone is not enough to get a high multiplier accepted. The amount of extra evidence one has to provide to get larger multipliers accepted is proportional to the size of the multiplier. For lower multipliers, like things much less than times 100, evidence can take the form of a clear increase in combat strength against priorly equal or superior opponents. For higher multipliers, like times 100 and above, the importance of stronger evidence, such as feats displaying power of a similar magnitude as the value the multiplier points to or the multipliers importance to the plot of the story, and a higher amount of evidence becomes increasingly necessary."

"If multiple multipliers are to be stacked, that are used upon each other, the evidence for the end result is equal to the total multiplier applied to the best feat. That means that if, for example, a character has a times 10 multiplier and later on gets another times 50 multiplier, than the evidence necessary to use both multipliers to get a statistic, is like that of a times 500 multiplier, as the best feat would be increased by a factor of 500 in that case."

Oh ok, so it's clear you didn't read this part. Lemme go ahead and requote it for you so you can see it.

The argument for it is above. Whether its valid or not, idc I'm not necessarily for or against the downgrade.

Yw, don't need to thank me.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Burden of proof fallacy. I don't need to prove a negative

Edit: Also, a bunch of "it's possible's" is not the same thing as conclusive evidence to begin with

 

[DivineAura44]

Edit: Also, a bunch of "it's possible's" is not the same thing as conclusive evidence to begin with

Oh ok, so it seems you missed this part too.

And no before you say "that's not evidence!", it's not supposed to be. However it's meant to debunk the argument against it meaning it's still on the table as a possibility.

Here you go. Feel free to not completely ignore my statements next time, thanks.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Oh ok, so it seems you missed this part too.

Here you go. Feel free to not completely ignore my statements next time, thanks.

Just being "theoretically possible" isn't enough of a solid debunk. There's nothing indicating that they're frequently holding back, especially in the calcs displayed. They're all done at the characters' full capacity. And again, with the whole "prove it's not proportional," I don't need to prove a negative.

Now please get off your "hating grindset" with these replies, it's getting annoying

 

[ssgengar]

Some of the people against this thread are making it soo hard to hear them out lmao

 

[CloverDragon03]

Anyways, I'd like to ask for this thread to not be closed yet. Arnold wants to post a final argument in favor of the multipliers to be evaluated, and it's only fair to let him form it.

 

[Arnoldstone18]

Thank you.

 

[KingTempest]

My mouse was READY

 

[CloverDragon03]

My mouse was READY

AIN'T NO WAYYYYYYYY

 

[DivineAura44]

"prove it's not proportional," I don't need to prove a negative.

You are asserting that it isn't proportional, therefore yes, you do have to prove it. That's how burden of proof works. I'm taking the neutral stance while you are taking an explicitly negative one.
And frankly I couldn't care less what you find annoying or not, it doesn't make my argument less sound because it irritates you.

 

[CloverDragon03]

You are asserting that it isn't proportional, therefore yes, you do have to prove it. That's how burden of proof works. I'm taking the neutral stance while you are taking an explicitly negative one.

"It is proportional" is the positive stance. "It is not proportional" is the negative stance. The negative does not need to be proven in a burden of proof scenario, otherwise you could just go "It is because you can't prove it's not."

 

[CloverDragon03]

Also I'm sorry but while Arnold's forming his post, I'm gonna take a step back from this thread because I've had shit flung at me from every corner (both on-site and off-site, about this very topic) to a degree that I can't exactly handle in the best way for long periods of time. I'm sorry, but the conduct in this thread at times has been abysmal

 

[DivineAura44]

"It is proportional" is the positive stance. "It is not proportional" is the negative stance. The negative does not need to be proven in a burden of proof scenario, otherwise you could just go "It is because you can't prove it's not."

Once again, I never said it was proportional. There's no way you'd say this if you legitimately read what I put.

At this point, we are going in circles because you want to claim I said something I clearly didn't say so just say what you want at this point. I cba to respond.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Once again, I never said it was proportional. There's no way you'd say this if you legitimately read what I put.

At this point, we are going in circles because you want to claim I said something I clearly didn't say so just say what you want at this point. I cba to respond.

I didn't say you claimed it, I know you yourself are neutral. But generally, the negative stance doesn't need to be proven, the positive stance does. In your case, I know you don't need to prove anything given your neutral stance

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Some of the people against this thread are making it soo hard to hear them out lmao

Being reasonable? On this site? Surely you jest

 

[TimmyTurnero]

While it's not explicitly stated, it has been shown and implied multiple times. The "strong" evidence for this claim is in Chapter 130, where Langris countered his own magic, which was twice as fast and strong as his own, by increasing his own magical power [1]

It says nothing about speed. This is explicitly referring to force and doesn’t prove what you’re defending. That being a increase in MP/strength being relative to the increase in speed. What exactly does this prove? We don’t even know if his Mana/mp increased only 2x either, the force of the attack doubling proves nothing here.

 

[Worthless]

It says nothing about speed. This is explicitly referring to force and doesn’t prove what you’re defending. That being a increase in MP/strength being relative to the increase in speed. What exactly does this prove? We don’t even know if his Mana/mp increased only 2x either, the force of the attack doubling proves nothing here.

I like that, stay being clueless

 

[TimmyTurnero]

I like that, stay being clueless

….? What? Bro you’re weird asl, don’t be upset and rude because you can’t have your way. Your scan literally proved nothing and I asked you to provide proof.

 

[Joshyyy_64]

I gave refutations. Just because you don't like them, doesn't mean they don't exist. I said in advance already that after my last big post, I'd avoid more massive posts like this due to worrying about just constantly going in circles. I don't need to convince the few people disagreeing with the thread for it to go through, I just need the appropriate support

your refutations aren't good enough because the main focus of the post unfortunately comes from a lack of understanding conserning the way magic and the 1:1 boosts work which on top of it you're still either trying to defend or just not answering the question: how can the power and speed of spells be stated to double (Zora's trap mechanism) if you think that it wont happen because of a double in magic output? Please make this make sense because that's how magic power and spells have always worked. Spells dont just increase in power and speed without extra magic power lol

 

[Joshyyy_64]

Bro shut up

you first idiot

 

[Joshyyy_64]

If they're in the same boat as BC's MFTL+ speed stacking then they should have that stacking removed from their scaling, other verse's doing stuff isn't an excuse to ignore site standards.

The site standards are that the higher multipliers are stacked, the more evidence is needed for that scaling, in order to get MFTL+ BC approved by speed stacking, there needs to be a feat on the level of MFTL+. I don't think Patry using Demon Light Magic has been blitzed and I've already brought up how Zetten's amps are additional evidence for MP and Speed not scaling 1:1 in all cases

If it's the site standards, I'll be quiet. I'll still disagree but fair enough

 

[Joshyyy_64]

Also I'm sorry but while Arnold's forming his post, I'm gonna take a step back from this thread because I've had shit flung at me from every corner (both on-site and off-site, about this very topic) to a degree that I can't exactly handle in the best way for long periods of time. I'm sorry, but the conduct in this thread at times has been abysmal

you know what, fair enough. I'll disagree and continue following the thread and just make small comments and inputs here and there

 

[KingTempest]

@CloverDragon03 please add this shit

 

[ShigarakiShimura]

@CloverDragon03 please add this shit

He's waiting for a final response from Arnold

 

[KingTempest]

@Arnoldstone18

 

[MajimaLoco]

 

[SunDaGamer]

 

[Mazdoesstuff]

@Arnoldstone18

he forgor

 

[Kingofwolves999]

Ain’t no way.

 

[Joshyyy_64]

I'll be real rn, bro had better come up with the most diabolical, unrefutable, undeniable most jaw dropping argument of all time to be taking this long. Reminds me of the BC hype for december