Calc Stacking Issue

[Agnaa]

I think the last example listed on the Calc Stacking page should be replaced or removed. It currently reads:

Character A was calculated to be able to punch with an energy of 50 000 Joules. Assuming his fist weights about 0.5 kg, it needed to move at least with Mach 1.3 to get that much energy. So the attack speed of that character and the speed of everyone who can dodge his punches is supersonic.

This is not calc stacking, this is just a violation of our standards for Kinetic Energy Feats. The character punched and had a fist weighing about 0.5kg in the same scene. Other feats similar to this where multiple statistics can be legitimately determined from the same feat (throwing a mountain is AP, LS, and attack speed) are valid and not calc stacking. Thus, I think this example's conclusion is misleading.

If we want to replace it with a proper example of calc-stacking involving AP, I'd suggest something along the lines of:

Character A has a certain attack potency through a calculation. They made a 1mm dent in character B's shield composed of a fictional material. But character C destroyed the whole 30mm thick shield, so character C is thirty times as strong as character A.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Sounds ok

 

[KingTempest]

Nice example to me

 

[Nehz_XZX]

I'm watching the thread for now.

 

[KatBoi69]

I think the last example listed on the Calc Stacking page should be replaced or removed. It currently reads:

This is not calc stacking, this is just a violation of our standards for Kinetic Energy Feats. The character punched and had a fist weighing about 0.5kg in the same scene. Other feats similar to this where multiple statistics can be legitimately determined from the same feat (throwing a mountain is AP, LS, and attack speed) are valid and not calc stacking. Thus, I think this example's conclusion is misleading.

If we want to replace it with a proper example of calc-stacking involving AP, I'd suggest something along the lines of:

I keep seeing this thread in "similar to" the UES thread, and you're right. There is no initial calc that is being stacked on in the current example.

It isn't a valid speed calc, but it isn't the best example of calc stacking. If you separated it to say "so therefore in a second example, the character MUST be moving at this speed" it could work as an example.

I also enjoy your example because it is so illogical.

 

[Antvasima]

This seems fine to apply to me as well. Feel free to do so if you wish @DontTalkDT .

 

[Therefir]

Nobody ever added this, which inevitably resulted in the creation of a thread like this.

 

[Antvasima]

Is Agnaa or a staff member willing to apply what was accepted here?

 

[Kulf_Boba]

Bump

 

[Antvasima]

Is Agnaa or a staff member willing to apply what was accepted here?

@DontTalkDT @Therefir @Damage3245 @M3X @Jasonsith

 

[Antvasima]

Is Agnaa or a staff member willing to apply what was accepted here?

@Mr._Bambu @Wokistan @Armorchompy

Your help would also be appreciated here.

 

[Therefir]

It was applied it actually, we just forgot to close this thread.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. My apologies for being a bother then. I will close this thread.