Calc Stacking Issue (Regarding Speed)

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Might be not be the best time to make this, but I've noticed a particular problem with calc stacking when it comes to speed that I wanted to make a larger discussion about. I've spoken to some others here about this as well, one being a calc-group member themselves, to get input before making this, who have also expressed some concern about it.

Okay, so, I'll get right into it. The issue I have here is in regards to what's said for speed on the the calc stacking page:

• Using speed of characters or attacks calculated at other instances can't be used, as characters and attacks can vary in speed. This is the case regardless of whether the character is seriously trying to do his best or anything similar.

Now, the general idea of this is fine to implement still. But what the problem with this and what I don't quite understand is, the way it's being applied here. To be more specifc, what I don't understand is the bolded. On how characters and their attacks, even when they're being serious or have no intention of holding back, have varying levels of speed. Where and when was this ever agreed on here? Why would the speed of a character who is taking a fight seriously, or is purposely moving fast in another circumstance, have varied or lower tiers of speed? This makes little sense. Though, this isn't the most important part of the problem.

As I've recently learned, statistics like speed are not assumed to be at distinctly different levels in different instances here, under normal circumstances. Rather, they are constants. For instance, if a character demonstrates flight speed great enough to travel across the entire universe in seconds, and the feat gives them MFTL+ flight speed, their use of flight speed in other instances would be taken as them using the same MFTL+ flight speed (or roughly the same). Combat speed is the same in other instances of combat speed, attack speed is the same in other instances of attack speed, etc etc. And for characters who would normally display no signs of purposely altering their own stats for some specific purpose or reason, this is reasonable to think.

Now, here's where the main issue comes up. The ONLY reason why our site considers using calced speed for other feats calc stacking, is because of this idea that a character and their attacks can have varying speeds, as stated so on the calc stacking page. But what im not understanding here is that if we go with the idea that a character's speed is generally the same across the board for that speed type, we are then agreeing that there's no variation in their speed. That they won't have different speed levels, they will normally be the same.

So if that is the case, why wouldn't they be allowed to be used for calculations if they DON'T vary? The speed of Character A in the instance you would go off of to try calculating Character's B's speed would be no different than any other normal instance of Character A's movement and speeds, so there isn't any legitimate reason to say the calculated speed of Character A couldn't be applied. Without speed being normally disproportionate, it goes against what the calc stacking page currently specifies and gives no real justification to say calculated speed can't ever be used.

One explanation that can made for the case of "varied speed" that I've seen written up is something a calc-group member explained to me when I spoke to them about this to get their opinion:

"Looking at the bolded part, I believe what is meant is that characters can sometimes suppress themselves. Let's say Character A can keep up with Character B when Character B is fighting casually, but when Character B fights seriously, they blitz Character A."

If we go off of this idea of when characters suppress themselves, then sure, this is definitely a more reasonable take to use as to why using calculated speeds for other feats do not work. But, having said that, character's purposely limiting themselves isn't a reason to think speeds from character's normally vary. The speeds here, in this case, get altered specifically because of the circumstances that cause the character's speed to fluctuate from what their speed tier normally is. Whether this is because:

-Character's get a powerup that makes their speed faster than it normally is
-Character's get a powerup that makes their speed slower than it normally is
-A character is fatigued from battle, so their speed is slower than normal
-A character is purposely suppressing themselves to fight a weaker opponent
-A character is purposely suppressing themselves to let an opponent win
-A character gets their speed altered by another character

Or something similar that happens, they apply to only specific cases of where a change in speed for a character happens.

After that, comes the only other possible reason to deny calcs that use other character's calculated speeds, that being its "inflated". Only, again, this is also not a universally applicable reason, and to try arguing so is not only unrealistically ludicrous, but also boderline headcanon. Whether a feat can be considered "inflated" or not and then be rendered unusable, is for the series in question to determine here. If they have the necessary evidence and context to support the results, and causes no inconsistencies with their scaling and feats, why reject it simply because of the result being high?

Now, having said this, this leads me to what I think would be a more reasonable solution to implement regarding this.

For situations where one tries using a calculated speed to help find the speed of another character, it should be a case by case basis depending on the given series and the given context. As I've said, the general practice of us not allowing calced speed because of speed alterations is generally fine, and I don't completely disagree with using this justification to dismiss the use of applying calced speeds on other feats. But if we are given a case of a character that's proven to use their average / full speed, has reason to be using their average / full speed, without any known alterations in their stats being known to have happened, then we should be allowed to use their calculated speeds for those instances to calculate the speed of other characters should the latter's do something in relation to the former.

And with that, here we go with the discussion.

 

[KingTempest]

Following

 

[Zackra1799]

Following

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

Well this doesn’t effect any of my calcs, but I am intrigued on the subject

 

[M3X_2.0]

I think the "vary in speed" part is actually not the speed of the character itself, but the calculation that can vary, using different basis or methods.

 

[Zamasu_Chan]

Holy shit. This gave me an idea. Following.

 

[RisingIons]

Kukui's trying to change the game! I do agree with some of that, saying a character might not be trying their best or using a level of speed previously determined pretty much undermines several fundamental processes.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

I think the "vary in speed" part is actually not the speed of the character itself, but the calculation that can vary, using different basis or methods.

I mean, considering that the specification on the page immediately then follows with "This is the case regardless of whether the character is seriously trying to do his best or anything similar."

The page would have to be speaking about the speed of the character itself.

 

[WrongIdea21]

Interesting.

 

[Zamasu_Chan]

I agree with this. Especially when it comes to projectiles that can’t vary in speed.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Well, it's more so using AP to find speed that's the issue rather than using speed to fine AP. The latter can be used in certain scenarios but the former should be strictly forbidden as AP could come from other areas besides pure speed such as thermal energy, chemical energy, fusion energy, ect.

But even then, it's still a case by case scenario to calculate kinetic energy that is elaborated more in a different page.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Well, it's more so using AP to find speed that's the issue rather than using speed to fine AP. The latter can be used in certain scenarios but the former should be strictly forbidden as AP could come from other areas besides pure speed such as thermal energy, chemical energy, fusion energy, ect.

Oh this thread isn't speaking about finding AP from a calculated speed, but rather, finding other characters speeds using the calculated speed of the character they have relation with.

AP from speed is a different story that I am not attempting to touch.

 

[Bobsican]

TBH I agree too, if anything some rewording could be used at worst.

 

[Damage3245]

I'm wary about the basic proposition of the OP which seems to be encouraging that more calc stacking should be taking place.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

I'm wary about the basic proposition of the OP which seems to be encouraging that more calc stacking should be taking place.

Im not sure how applying a calced speed in cases where it can appropriately be applied, and justified to do so, is called calc-stacking as that's what my post is attempting to say isn't.

Or rather, it isn't BAD calc-stacking.

 

[Armorchompy]

Using the results of a calculation as basis for another calculation is the definition of calc stacking. I understand the argument and logically it makes sense but this leads to incredibly inflated calculations. Hell the same page states that "Using the calculated speed of a projectile to calculate the speed of a character dodging said projectile on the very same occasion is usually permitted" clearly implying that even something with a fixed, calculated speed should not be used for other calculations. IMO characters possibly varying in speed was never the big issue

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Using the results of a calculation as basis for another calculation is the definition of calc stacking. I understand the argument and logically it makes sense but this leads to incredibly inflated calculations. Hell the same page states that "Using the calculated speed of a projectile to calculate the speed of a character dodging said projectile on the very same occasion is usually permitted" clearly implying that even something with a fixed, calculated speed should not be used for other calculations. IMO characters possibly varying in speed was never the big issue

I already knew this argument would come up, and this too, should also be determined on a case by case basis as well. Just because something can lead to inflated results doesn't instantly mean the calc is wrong in relation to the verse its for.

Now, am I saying we should just take a calc with high results always? Obviously and absolutely not. But if it's consistent for the verse it's for without causing inconsistencies of what happens in said verse later on, then it should be permitted.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I’m of the opinion that as long as the obtained result is reasonable and is consistent with other calcs/methods of scaling, then it probably isn’t a bad or faulty use of “calc-stacking”.

Similar to how we treat multiplier-stacking, as the multiplier stack increases the burden of proof for it to be consistent increases as well. Kinda the same premise, but instead it’s “is this value obtained by ‘combining calcs’ consistent”, and then what proof is needed to determine if it’s consistent/valid would be case by case.

At least that’s what I garnered from the OP, and I share the same opinion more or less. I don’t think Kukui is saying we should use calc-stacking a lot now, and more so that there may arise situations every once in a blue moon where calc-stacking isn’t inherently inflating anything.

 

[Armorchompy]

I already knew this argument would come up, and this too, should also be determined on a case by case basis as well. Just because something can lead to inflated results doesn't instantly mean the calc is wrong in relation to the verse its for.

Now, am I saying we should just take a calc with high results always? Obviously and absolutely not. But if it's consistent for the verse it's for without causing inconsistencies of what happens in said verse later on, then it should be permitted.

If it's "consistent" then calc-stacking is not needed to begin with, but shit like "oh they have no anti-feats it's fine to make them Hypersonic+ off blitzing a Subsonic character despite the fact that the verse has no feats beyond Subsonic" absolutely shouldn't fly. You literally have shows like Kill La Kill where characters blitz each other repeatedly through the series, this would cause them to be something like MFTL based off a Relativistic feat which is not acceptable in my book.

You can apply the same argument to FTL KE in some verse- nothing says that High 3-A is wrong in relation to a character that has no anti-feats, right? But that's still not something we allow, because it goes way beyond the logical scope of a verse, "consistent" or not.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

If it's "consistent" then calc-stacking is not needed to begin with, but shit like "oh they have no anti-feats it's fine to make them Hypersonic+ off blitzing a Subsonic character despite the fact that the verse has no feats beyond Subsonic" absolutely shouldn't fly.

And again, why wouldnt this be acceptable either? No anti feats is no anti feats, you can't dismiss something off of no real basis to give them a dismissal of.

And my argument isn't even factoring in verses that lack anti-feats for them.

You literally have shows like Kill La Kill where characters blitz each other repeatedly through the series, this would cause them to be something like MFTL based off a Relativistic feat which is not acceptable in my book.

Not my problem. IDK Kill La Kill specifically so I can't argue for or against them, but saying no to a verse you don't find higher on the speed scale acceptable is not a legitimate reason to deny this from a general view.

Not to mention, my point here isn't to grant calced speeds in ALL cases. Im talking about scenarios where the character's speed undergoes no alteration from what it normally is, for any reason like the ones I listed in the OP.

You can apply the same argument to FTL KE in some verse- nothing says that High 3-A is wrong in relation to a character that has no anti-feats, right? But that's still not something we allow, because it goes way beyond the logical scope of a verse, "consistent" or not.

What does High 3-A and FTL KE have to do with this? Because I already said above that trying to use speed to get AP (IF thats what this point is talking about) isn't the purpose of this thread or something im attempting to make happen.

 

[Armorchompy]

What does High 3-A and FTL KE have to do with this? Because I already said above that trying to use speed to get AP (IF thats what this point is talking about) isn't the purpose of this thread or something im attempting to make happen.

That was indeed not my point, we disallow getting AP through FTL KE because while it is logically and scientifically accurate, it would lead to greatly inflated ratings. This is the same. We don't allow using calculated ratings in other calculations for this exact reason, not because "the characters might be moving slower", that's secondary.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

That was indeed not my point, we disallow getting AP through FTL KE because while it is logically and scientifically accurate, it would lead to greatly inflated ratings. This is the same. We don't allow using calculated ratings in other calculations for this exact reason, not because "the characters might be moving slower", that's secondary.

Ah. Then as I said, while a problem, this should be analyzed on a case by case basis and be accepted or denied based on the context and scaling of the particular verse in question, individually (and by this, I mean for speed scaling).

Im not saying inflation isn't an issue, and to a clear obvious extent, I agree. But as was said above, this should be determined by how the particular verse would treat the feat and what proves it isn't inconsistent or otherwise. Simply put, we need to be careful with it, but cases should have exceptions granted.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

I’m of the opinion that as long as the obtained result is reasonable and is consistent with other calcs/methods of scaling, then it probably isn’t a bad or faulty use of “calc-stacking”.

Similar to how we treat multiplier-stacking, as the multiplier stack increases the burden of proof for it to be consistent increases as well. Kinda the same premise, but instead it’s “is this value obtained by ‘combining calcs’ consistent”, and then what proof is needed to determine if it’s consistent/valid would be case by case.

At least that’s what I garnered from the OP, and I share the same opinion more or less. I don’t think Kukui is saying we should use calc-stacking a lot now, and more so that there may arise situations every once in a blue moon where calc-stacking isn’t inherently inflating anything.

This is exactly what im talking about by the way. Arc was on the mark here.

The burden of proof for keeping the calc consistent with whatever verse it's for rises and becomes case by case. The point isn't we should use calc stacking a lot at all, but that there would be situations that it doesn't cause inflated inconsistent results. And whether it's inconsistent or consistent is up to the discretion of the verse and who's arguing for its place in it (especially since this enters "outlier vs not an outlier" territory, which is definitely case by case dependent on the verse).

 

[Armorchompy]

Ah. Then as I said, while a problem, this should be analyzed on a case by case basis and be accepted or denied based on the context and scaling of the particular verse in question, individually (and by this, I mean for speed scaling).

Unless a verse explicitly mentions the workings of FTL KE, we don't allow this at all, it's not case by case. I think it should be a similar thing here.

Keep in mind, this wouldn't just apply to speed. Logically if a character's hand (for example) no-sells a 8-A attack, and then another attack completely obliterates that character's whole body, then realistically you could do 8-A / head volume * body volume to get a result for fragging the entire body- and that also really doesn't sit right with me.

Our site has a lot of somewhat arbitrary rules put there to avoid inflation- not just FTL KE but even just Relativistic KE is put under certain rules that prevent its result from shooting up if the object is faster than 93% SOL. And we don't allow the use of Inverse Square Law to retroactively get the full AP of an explosion just from what it did so something far from it. We also don't allow calculating speed from Kinetic Energy, because even just tier 7 attacks would get any character to Relativistic levels- for the same reason, we don't allow calculating mass from it. All of these rules are arbitrary from a logical and mathematical standpoint, but they are there for a reason.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Maybe a limitation to be added to this proposal to ensure a calc-stacking chain doesn't occur, is to (in the rare cases where a calc-stack isn't inherently awful) limit the stack to just 1.

Meaning let's say character A was calc'd at mach 1, we get a statement saying character B is much much faster than character A, character B blitzes character A and is calc'd at mach 5 off of character A's calc. Character B's speed wouldn't be allowed to be used in any calcs.

Essentially, this would prevent the scenario mentioned above where you calc-stack characters blitzing each other going from MHS to MFTL. Food for thought.

 

[Damage3245]

I agree with ArmorChompy.

 

[Armorchompy]

Maybe a limitation to be added to this proposal to ensure a calc-stacking chain doesn't occur, is to (in the rare cases where a calc-stack isn't inherently awful) limit the stack to just 1.

Meaning let's say character A was calc'd at mach 1, we get a statement saying character B is much much faster than character A, character B blitzes character A and is calc'd at mach 5 off of character A's calc. Character B's speed wouldn't be allowed to be used in any calcs.

Essentially, this would prevent the scenario mentioned above where you calc-stack characters blitzing each other going from MHS to MFTL. Food for thought.

I think that, in itself, is an arbitrary limit. Either we allow this calc-stacking without limit or we ban it completely as we already do.

 

[Urshani]

what's the problem with calc-stacking other than 'massively inflated results'? I mean, if it's done without making numbers up it's valid

 

[Armorchompy]

Also for the record I don't think the situation where calc-stacking would be allowed are that rare- in the end characters in fiction go all-out a lot more often than they don't, so this would apply to most feats.

what's the problem with calc-stacking other than 'massively inflated results'? I mean, if it's done without making numbers up it's valid

Read the thread.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Unless a verse explicitly mentions the workings of FTL KE, we don't allow this at all, it's not case by case. I think it should be a similar thing here.

I disagree, at least when comparing that with this case anyway. When it comes to getting AP from speed, that is a different story. DarkDragon above already laid out some parameters that differentiates the situations here, since AP is able to be derived from sources that aren't pure speed, so for finding AP from speed, needing FTL KE mentioned in some way before it can be applied can make sense.

Here we are talking about a character's speed in different instances being the same as their calced speed, which as I explained in my OP, shouldn't at all need the same kind of requirement as the former. Proof of the character's speed not altering from whatever given factor should be sufficient enough for this.

Keep in mind, this wouldn't just apply to speed. Logically if a character's hand (for example) no-sells a 8-A attack, and then another attack completely obliterates that character's whole body, then realistically you could do 8-A / head volume * body volume to get a result for fragging the entire body- and that also really doesn't sit right with me.

Our site has a lot of somewhat arbitrary rules put there to avoid inflation- not just FTL KE but even just Relativistic KE is put under certain rules that prevent its result from shooting up if the object is faster than 93% SOL. And we don't allow the use of Inverse Square Law to retroactively get the full AP of an explosion just from what it did so something far from it. We also don't allow calculating speed from Kinetic Energy, because even just tier 7 attacks would get any character to Relativistic levels- for the same reason, we don't allow calculating mass from it. All of these rules are arbitrary from a logical and mathematical standpoint, but they are there for a reason.

I've been on this site for several years now and know full well of the arbitrary rules put in a lot of our standards to avoid inflated results. And im not trying to upend these for everything (cause I'd die of old age before that ever happens) nor am I saying I completely disagree with why they're implemented. Hell, I don't even completely disagree with the rule here for speed in calc stacking.

My point is that the way we implement the rule should be whats changed to being case by case. Whether something is inflated or not has to be determined by the context of the verse itself.

 

[Urshani]

Read the thread.

all i see is what i said earlier.

 

[StrymULTRA]

Tbh as a calcer myself I disagree too as it would lead to immensely inflawed results which aren't supported from the feats in the verse. Calcs are from themselves lowballs as they apply IRL standards to fictional scenarios, and we use low ends to get a safe result in them.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I think that, in itself, is an arbitrary limit.

I mean as you said, a lot of our rules already are seemingly arbitrary.

Either we allow this calc-stacking without limit or we ban it completely as we already do.

I don't see why we must be black or white rather than gray.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Tbh as a calcer myself I disagree too as it would lead to immensely inflawed results which aren't supported from the feats in the verse.

And this is why my point here is that this should be case by case. There shouldnt be a total YES or total NO to this, but only accepting or denying it if the context of the verse supports what you're trying to claim is the case for them.

If the verse doesn't support it, then the results get yeeted.

 

[Armorchompy]

My point is that the way we implement the rule should be whats changed to being case by case. Whether something is inflated or not has to be determined by the context of the verse itself.

I don't agree with that. Going by that logic, literally every single tier 7 verse will be Relativistic unless people can clearly prove it's an outlier, with higher tiers easily breaching FTL. I'm not exaggerating, that would apply to every single verse with such levels of Striking Strength.

I mean as you said, a lot of our rules already are seemingly arbitrary. I don't see why we must be black or white rather than gray.

Because either black or white are a lot simpler, more intuitive and straightforward than grey in this situation.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Maybe a limitation to be added to this proposal to ensure a calc-stacking chain doesn't occur, is to (in the rare cases where a calc-stack isn't inherently awful) limit the stack to just 1.

Meaning let's say character A was calc'd at mach 1, we get a statement saying character B is much much faster than character A, character B blitzes character A and is calc'd at mach 5 off of character A's calc. Character B's speed wouldn't be allowed to be used in any calcs.

Essentially, this would prevent the scenario mentioned above where you calc-stack characters blitzing each other going from MHS to MFTL. Food for thought.

In my opinion, my thoughts on this to prevent calc-stacking chains is that the burden of proof for the calc to be added just goes higher and higher the more you calc stack.

For instance, if you take a characters calculated MFTL speed to get MFTL reactions or attack speed for other characters, and the verse already has a pre established history of MFTL existing, that makes the calcs more reasonable since this isn't something new for them and the scaling would support it.

However, if you were to take the calculated speed of the other characters and tried using their speeds to get even better speeds for other characters, the verse would then have the burden of proof of requiring better MFTL feats in the chain in order to support the newer calc's being accepted. Like, did they get considerably stronger? Did they demonstrate better feats than before? Things of that nature.

Basically, the more you calc stack, the higher the burden of proof increases on your part to make the newer calcs acceptable. Thats what I think anyway.

 

[Urshani]

are you trying to figure out speed by ap? no. that's stupid and i agree with you it should be banned

but using one character's speed to get higher and higher results isn't a bad idea.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

In my opinion, my thoughts on this to prevent calc-stacking chains is that the burden of proof for the calc to be added just goes higher and higher the more you calc stack.

For instance, if you take a characters calculated MFTL speed to get MFTL reactions or attack speed for other characters, and the verse already has a pre established history of MFTL existing, that makes the calcs more reasonable since this isn't something new for them and the scaling would support it.

However, if you were to take the calculated speed of the other characters and tried using their speeds to get even better speeds, the verse would then have the burden of proof of requiring better MFTL feats in the chain in order to support the newer calcs being accepted. Like, did they get considerably stronger? Did they demonstrate better feats than before? Things of nature.

Basically, the more you calc stack, the higher the burden of proof increases on your part to make the newer calcs acceptable. Thats what I think anyway.

That's pretty much exactly how we treat multiplier-stacking, which imo is a fair approach.

Because either black or white are a lot simpler, more intuitive and straightforward than grey in this situation.

Just because it's easier and would save the time of carefully discussing such topics doesn't make it the better option tho.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

I don't agree with that. Going by that logic, literally every single tier 7 verse will be Relativistic unless people can clearly prove it's an outlier, with higher tiers easily breaching FTL. I'm not exaggerating, that would apply to every single verse with such levels of Striking Strength.

Well as I said, getting speed from AP already has different parameters that are very different from the parameters that are being argued for this here, and just makes it a different situation as a whole, one im not attempting to revise.

 

[Armorchompy]

Well as I said, getting speed from AP already has different parameters that are very different from the parameters that are being argued for this here, and just makes it a different situation as a whole, one im not attempting to revise.

Not really, the idea is the same here: If it doesn't clash with the verse's power levels, it's fine. The parameters currently applied to it are the same to the ones applied to Calc Stacking, aka "It causes inflation of stats so it's not allowed".