Cardfight speed downgrade

[Agnaa]

I've asked AKM to since he suggested the standards for flight/reaction speed scaling, but he hasn't responded yet. I don't recall any other staff member weighing in on it.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Can you explain the arguments in an easy to understand manner please?

 

[Agnaa]

I can't, I'm too invested in the discussion to be able to give Kukui's view in good faith.

While my view is that all the reasons he brings up for the feat scaling to reaction speeds are either debunked in the thread establishing these standards, are irrelevant, or are fundamentally logically flawed.

 

[Agnaa]

Although, this back and forth hasn't taken the whole thread, it started with this post at the bottom of page 2. I don't see our disagreement getting summarized without just repeating that back and forth.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

If you're interpreting those as stars being passed by, they must be so laughably far away that no dodging would be necessary. Those would have to be thousands of light years away.

Cant have it both ways. If they are obstacles on the path you are taking to go to a certain destination, which as shown in the clip here is the case, then that is enough to assert that dodging would be necessary without a straight path being proven to be in place.

To say otherwise, you might as well argue any flight speed case doesn't scale to anything at all.

It's extremely close in terms of astronomical objects and being able to notice something to react to it.

Yes and because of the distance put between yourself and the celestial body that you are avoiding, that distance being hundreds of thousands of kilometers, that makes the feat far less impressive when accounting for said distance.

It does not make it more likely. I was not the one presenting that argument in those terms, YOU are the one who dug it up from the speed page when it was irrelevant.

Yes because of said page being oddly specific and using completely different scenarios as examples. Not my fault. And it hardly matters to the actual point. Judging a universe crossing flight speed the same way as judging a flight feat between celestial objects is just flat out wrong.

You: I didn't say that! I said that they were always at the same speed, except for the exact moment they left and the exact moment they arrived.

And I did not say this either. Again, do not put words in my mouth.

The thing that proves that deceleration happened is that at one point they were no longer moving.

You mean when they literally land....?

If they never ever decelerated they would have kept moving on at 500 quadrillion times the speed of light, never being at the planet for more than a nanosecond.

Or they halted themselves at the exact same speed they were traveling. That is not deceleration, and it most certainly isn't prior to landing at the exact spot you want to halt yourself at.

I don't understand why you'd bring up them not appearing damaged, then.

Because by being undamaged, it proves safely controlled descent. Halting at the exact place they want. Whether durability applies or not is a different discussion.

And you think your argument that there wasn't an explosion because there was no environmental damage isn't a copout?

That isn't what I said. I said it wasn't a crash landing, since if it was, the environment would suffer damage from the impact.

Well, I provided a mechanism for how they don't need those. If you just disagree with that without saying why, there's not much more I can say.

And I explained back about how they would need them, as you still need to properly perceive your target area and stop yourself in that exact position while simutaneously moving at the speed your traveling at. If you couldn't, you wouldnt be able to stop yourself to where you want.

"Thrusters" aren't a necessary part of the argument. Replace "thrusters" with "magic anti-speed" or "flexing really hard so that you stop moving" or whatever else you want to say is the case here.

Okay and by doing that, it ends up completely different since in the latter cases, you are the one that has to perceive the movement accurately. Not having a scanner or tech do it for you like what would be the case with rocket thrusters or spaceships.

Of course stellar objects were passed. If you were to cross the universe without passing by any stellar objects the universe would have to be completely 100% empty. The point is that they're so far away and that hitting them is so unlikely that maneuvering to dodge them is not required. And given the visuals of the scene in question (where the stars only look like tiny dots of light) they're clearly thousands of light years away.

Except, again, that is only the case if the path you are taking goes down a straight route. This isn't, especially when its involving going through universes.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

And for devils advocate, lets say the universe crossing for a second is only travel/flight speed. The Units, who would be upscaling from this and have their travel moments and flight movements MFTL+, would still have this end up scaling to their reactions (and then everything else)

Since Units can perceive each other traveling.

 

[Agnaa]

Cant have it both ways. If they are obstacles on the path you are taking to go to a certain destination, which as shown in the clip here is the case, then that is enough to assert that dodging would be necessary without a straight path being proven to be in place.

To say otherwise, you might as well argue any flight speed case doesn't scale to anything at all.

When those "obstacles on the path" are all thousands of light years away, that does not prove that dodging is necessary. Any random path you'd take would be overwhelmingly likely to avoid them by mere chance.

Flight speed scales when you would have hit the obstacles with an ordinary path but didn't, and it would scale relative to how close you were to the object before you dodged it.

Yes and because of the distance put between yourself and the celestial body that you are avoiding, that distance being hundreds of thousands of kilometers, that makes the feat far less impressive when accounting for said distance.

That is why it gives a low result, yes, but it wasn't some bad-faith choice, it's in fact over-generous compared to the typical interstellar dodging event you'd expect. It's big in one sense (absolute value) but not in another (relative to the average interstellar dodging feat), and the latter is what matters for whether it's applicable in a case like this; you were trying to argue that DMUA's calc isn't applicable as a point of comparison here for one reason or another. First it's because you mistakenly believed it involved a speed change, and after that you began arguing that the distance was "absurdly big". Yet it is not "absurdly big" in the sense that it's inapplicable to feats such as these.

Yes because of said page being oddly specific and using completely different scenarios as examples. Not my fault. And it hardly matters to the actual point. Judging a universe crossing flight speed the same way as judging a flight feat between celestial objects is just flat out wrong.

It isn't flat out wrong. You just keep saying it is without giving reasons why, and you haven't responded to my reasons for why it is comparable.

And I did not say this either. Again, do not put words in my mouth.

If you did not intend to also say that, then your statement would be inherently self-contradictory. If you believe that characters were unmoving, reached a high velocity, then stopped moving, without them ever accelerating or decelerating, you are describing an inherently impossible situation.

You mean when they literally land....?

Yes.

Or they halted themselves at the exact same speed they were traveling. That is not deceleration, and it most certainly isn't prior to landing at the exact spot you want to halt yourself at.

That is deceleration. Deceleration is change in velocity. They went from a high velocity to zero velocity. That is, by definition, deceleration.

The deceleration being done prior to landing is not a necessity, as I've explained in my posts. They just need to be prepared to land and enact that landing precisely. This is an argument provided on the Speed page itself.

Because by being undamaged, it proves safely controlled descent. Halting at the exact place they want. Whether durability applies or not is a different discussion.

And the explosion implies otherwise. So to list both of our views side-by-side we have:

1. The explosion happened and they tanked it with their durability. Environmental damage wasn't shown due to lazy artists.
2. The explosion didn't happen, as proven by them being undamaged and the lack of environmental damage.

Why do you prefer option 2 over option 1?

And I would also like to point out that halting at the exact place they want isn't sufficient evidence for scaling to reactions, as explained on the Speed page.

That isn't what I said. I said it wasn't a crash landing, since if it was, the environment would suffer damage from the impact.

So, what, there just happened to randomly be an explosion at the exact same time, which had absolutely nothing to do with their landing, and which happened to not damage the environment for no reasons? Come on dude.

And I explained back about how they would need them, as you still need to properly perceive your target area and stop yourself in that exact position while simutaneously moving at the speed your traveling at. If you couldn't, you wouldnt be able to stop yourself to where you want.

You don't need to perceive your target anymore than you need to when you first leave to fly there. And it seems pretty obvious that you need to be able to move at a speed when traveling somewhere.

Okay and by doing that, it ends up completely different since in the latter cases, you are the one that has to perceive the movement accurately. Not having a scanner or tech do it for you like what would be the case with rocket thrusters or spaceships.

Do I need to repeat myself again? You don't need to perceive it, you just need to adequately prepare and predict ahead of time. The Speed page already outlines this reasoning for it not scaling.

Except, again, that is only the case if the path you are taking goes down a straight route. This isn't, especially when its involving going through universes.

What? It applies to any arbitrary predetermined path. I also don't see why going through universes makes the route no longer straight. If you're talking about the unquantifiable transfer between universes, that seems irrelevant since your calc is only about traveling to the edge of the observable universe. Whatever weird indeterminate shit happens after that is none of our business, since it's not the part of the feat on the profiles.

And for devils advocate, lets say the universe crossing for a second is only travel/flight speed. The Units, who would be upscaling from this and have their travel moments and flight movements MFTL+, would still have this end up scaling to their reactions (and then everything else)

Since Units can perceive each other traveling.

Can you explain what "perceiving each other traveling" means here? Preferably with the relevant part of the series included.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

When those "obstacles on the path" are all thousands of light years away, that does not prove that dodging is necessary. Any random path you'd take would be overwhelmingly likely to avoid them by mere chance.

Flight speed scales when you would have hit the obstacles with an ordinary path but didn't, and it would scale relative to how close you were to the object before you dodged it.

Yes and as well established earlier (on the previous page or higher up in this one), directly being shown to nearly hit the obstacles shouldnt be required when the path is proven to have obstacles, which even yourself agreed with me on when saying "true, just need a calculation".

Saying any random non-linear path still would have little chances of running into them is just being somewhat dismissive in my view. We have obstacles, and the path isn't proven to go on a trajectory that gives complete avoidance from them. Even if this only means maneuverability is possible on some level, the possibility should be acknowledged when at this point.

Yes and because of the distance put between yourself and the celestial body that you are avoiding, that distance being hundreds of thousands of kilometers, that makes the feat far less impressive when accounting for said distance.

That is why it gives a low result, yes, but it wasn't some bad-faith choice,

I did not imply it was, I know its for the sake of examples.

it's in fact over-generous compared to the typical interstellar dodging event you'd expect. It's big in one sense (absolute value) but not in another (relative to the average interstellar dodging feat), and the latter is what matters for whether it's applicable in a case like this; you were trying to argue that DMUA's calc isn't applicable as a point of comparison here for one reason or another. First it's because you mistakenly believed it involved a speed change, and after that you began arguing that the distance was "absurdly big". Yet it is not "absurdly big" in the sense that it's inapplicable to feats such as these.

Then, again, I have to question the point on us even having standards for flight speed in the first place if that is the legit case. When it comes to maneuverability at least. If for the case of DMUA's example, being hundreds of kilometers apart from a celestial body is "over-generous" and something that is a big rarity in fiction to be the case, and is something that still results in relatively low level reaction speed, thats basically confirming any maneuverability feat is going to be lower than the characters travel speed no matter how high the result gets. And at that point, the question on why we have a rule for maneuverability and the purpose it serves here gets asked.

You might as well make it so that reactions scale only if you can react to someone's travel speed.

It isn't flat out wrong. You just keep saying it is without giving reasons why, and you haven't responded to my reasons for why it is comparable.

I gave reasons why. Flight between or across Celestial bodies has factors of seeing them from a far distance and acting accordingly for decent. Whether slowing down or altering the trajectory.

Universe crossing doesnt have those factors since a universes end can't be "seen". Neither can another universe you end up in. The factors pointed out on the page can only apply to one and not both. So again, why are they judged the same way?

You mean when they literally land....?

Yes.

Landing is not inherently deceleration. Deacceleration would be moving slower as you are about to land.

That is deceleration. Deceleration is change in velocity. They went from a high velocity to zero velocity. That is, by definition, deceleration.

Then I'll rephrase. They did not slow in speed while still moving, thus the speed is the same all the way through until the landing happens.

The deceleration being done prior to landing is not a necessity, as I've explained in my posts. They just need to be prepared to land and enact that landing precisely. This is an argument provided on the Speed page itself.

Which only applies if they slow themselves down before they land. Like levitating slower and slower to the ground and not just smashing into it at the speed you were flying at.

Because by being undamaged, it proves safely controlled descent. Halting at the exact place they want. Whether durability applies or not is a different discussion.

And the explosion implies otherwise.

How? They are still halting at the exact position they actively want to stop at.

So to list both of our views side-by-side we have:

1. The explosion happened and they tanked it with their durability. Environmental damage wasn't shown due to lazy artists.
2. The explosion didn't happen, as proven by them being undamaged and the lack of environmental damage.

Why do you prefer option 2 over option 1?

See above. At this point, the explosion bit hardly matters since it doesn't negate the fact that they are still halting their movement to the place and time they want to halt themselves at.

And I would also like to point out that halting at the exact place they want isn't sufficient evidence for scaling to reactions, as explained on the Speed page.

Nowhere on the page is this explained or stated at all.

That isn't what I said. I said it wasn't a crash landing, since if it was, the environment would suffer damage from the impact.

So, what, there just happened to randomly be an explosion at the exact same time, which had absolutely nothing to do with their landing, and which happened to not damage the environment for no reasons? Come on dude.

See above. At this point, im dismissing the explosion bit since it hardly matters. They still halted their movement at the exact place they wanted to.

You don't need to perceive your target anymore than you need to when you first leave to fly there.

Based on what? Having a cosmic awareness to somehow know the exact positioning, which you need to be the one to prove is the case?

Do I need to repeat myself again? You don't need to perceive it, you just need to adequately prepare and predict ahead of time.

And you need to be the one to prove this was done. Your burden of proof.

It's also incredibly unlikely for a flight feat thats done immediately without prior preparations done beforehand.

What? It applies to any arbitrary predetermined path.

Again, you need to prove the path was predetermined. Not assume it was.

And for devils advocate, lets say the universe crossing for a second is only travel/flight speed. The Units, who would be upscaling from this and have their travel moments and flight movements MFTL+, would still have this end up scaling to their reactions (and then everything else)

Since Units can perceive each other traveling.

Can you explain what "perceiving each other traveling" means here? Preferably with the relevant part of the series included.

Pretty sure this should've been obvious. The Units can react to other Units travel speeds, like one running or leaping after the other.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, if each of you writes a summary explanation post of your own arguments, I can ask some staff members to come and evaluate this.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

That won't be needed. Agnaa and mines discussion isn't about how fast the feat is but whether it would scale overall beyond travel/flight speed.

However, that has more to do with issues I have with the speed rules for flight speed in general, which I may just take to its own thread to discuss instead of derailing this one.

 

[Agnaa]

Yes and as well established earlier (on the previous page or higher up in this one), directly being shown to nearly hit the obstacles shouldnt be required when the path is proven to have obstacles, which even yourself agreed with me on when saying "true, just need a calculation".

Saying any random non-linear path still would have little chances of running into them is just being somewhat dismissive in my view. We have obstacles, and the path isn't proven to go on a trajectory that gives complete avoidance from them. Even if this only means maneuverability is possible on some level, the possibility should be acknowledged when at this point.

I don't consider obstacles thousands of light years away to be "obstacles in the path". They are so far away and so sparse as to be irrelevant.

Then, again, I have to question the point on us even having standards for flight speed in the first place if that is the legit case. When it comes to maneuverability at least. If for the case of DMUA's example, being hundreds of kilometers apart from a celestial body is "over-generous" and something that is a big rarity in fiction to be the case, and is something that still results in relatively low level reaction speed, thats basically confirming any maneuverability feat is going to be lower than the characters travel speed no matter how high the result gets. And at that point, the question on why we have a rule for maneuverability and the purpose it serves here gets asked.

You might as well make it so that reactions scale only if you can react to someone's travel speed.

It's better to give a character MHS reactions and MFTL+ flight speed than Unknown reactions and MFTL+ flight speed, if we can determine it all reliably.

I gave reasons why. Flight between or across Celestial bodies has factors of seeing them from a far distance and acting accordingly for decent. Whether slowing down or altering the trajectory.

Universe crossing doesnt have those factors since a universes end can't be "seen". Neither can another universe you end up in. The factors pointed out on the page can only apply to one and not both. So again, why are they judged the same way?

This is so frustrating. You're doing it again.

Like I said earlier, the important part of the trip for scaling to reaction speed in your example would be the travel in-between, not the takeoff or landing. All you have established is that situation A and situation B are different in their takeoff/landing, not that they're different in the actual travel in-between. The same reason that flights between celestial objects don't scale to dodging objects in their path applies when crossing a universe.

Which only applies if they slow themselves down before they land. Like levitating slower and slower to the ground and not just smashing into it at the speed you were flying at.

No it doesn't. The Speed page specifies this.

How? They are still halting at the exact position they actively want to stop at.

Because the landing generated an explosion. But I see later that you dropped this point, so I will too.

Nowhere on the page is this explained or stated at all.

Simply being able to stop accurately at the target destination does typically not qualify, as it can be spotted from a large distance to make preparations to stop or the character could even slow down before reaching the destination, assuming we only know the average speed with which they moved.

You will notice that there is an "or" here. The speed page is providing two situations where accurately stopping at the target destination wouldn't qualify it for speed. One being spotting it from a large distance and making preparations beforehand to abruptly stop on arrival, and the other being that they slow down before reaching their destination.

Based on what? Having a cosmic awareness to somehow know the exact positioning, which you need to be the one to prove is the case?

Based on them flying there in the first place. They must know where they are relative to their destination to be able to travel to their destination.

And you need to be the one to prove this was done. Your burden of proof.

Actually, given what the standards are, you need to prove that they reacted 1 meter before stopping.

It's also incredibly unlikely for a flight feat thats done immediately without prior preparations done beforehand.

Again, you need to prove the path was predetermined. Not assume it was.

They have the time of the flight to do such.

Also, it's ludicrous to imply that there was 0 thought given to the flight path ahead of time. If that was the case and they simply blasted off in a completely random direction, they would have had a nigh-zero-percent chance of actually arriving at their destination, or they would've needed to have the perception to realize in the middle of nowhere in space that they were off-course and adequately correct for that.

Pretty sure this should've been obvious. The Units can react to other Units travel speeds, like one running or leaping after the other.

So they upscale from 500 quadrillion times FTL, and use that speed to jump over each other while they're running? You haven't posted the scene so it's hard to respond, but I'd expect that this is just an anti-feat against them moving one third of the observable universe each second. Or more generally, that they hadn't reached speeds where they'd be traveling one third of the observable universe in a second.

It's really hard to tell without seeing the actual scene whether it scales travel speed to reaction speed.

 

[Quangotjokes]

Here's a clear antifeat for reaction. Clan leader units and Aichi riding Blaster Blade are all struck by lighting.

18:50

 

[Antvasima]

That won't be needed. Agnaa and mines discussion isn't about how fast the feat is but whether it would scale overall beyond travel/flight speed.

However, that has more to do with issues I have with the speed rules for flight speed in general, which I may just take to its own thread to discuss instead of derailing this one.

Okay, so is it better if I leave you two to discuss until you reach an agreement, and unfollow this thread in the meantime then?

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

At this point, since it's getting late for me and the back and forth is ultimately centered around one core thing, how we deal with flight speed, I won't be responding to most of that, since now this is devolving into a general issue I have with the general flight speed standards instead of the scaling of this thread. So I'll be making a separate thread to discuss the flight speed standards again instead so the back and forth here isn't kept up.

However, I will respond to one or 2 things.

Pretty sure this should've been obvious. The Units can react to other Units travel speeds, like one running or leaping after the other.

So they upscale from 500 quadrillion times FTL, and use that speed to jump over each other while they're running? You haven't posted the scene so it's hard to respond, but I'd expect that this is just an anti-feat against them moving one third of the observable universe each second. Or more generally, that they hadn't reached speeds where they'd be traveling one third of the observable universe in a second.

There is absolutely 0 basis or reason to assume it's an "anti-feat" based off of this. We never do this for characters here when they fly or move at quick speeds across a distance. Otherwise, everyone is getting downgraded based off logic like this.

If they have MFTL+ travel speed, then they will move at that speed when traveling or flying quickly.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Okay, so is it better if I leave you two to discuss until you reach an agreement, and unfollow this thread in the meantime then?

Yeah thats fine. Thank you Ant.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Here's a clear antifeat for reaction. Clan leader units and Aichi riding Blaster Blade are all struck by lighting.

18:50

Also not an anti feat when its Void attacking the Units.

 

[Quangotjokes]

Also not an anti feat when its Void attacking the Units.

That's irrelevant, it's lightning.

 

[Agnaa]

There is absolutely 0 basis or reason to assume it's an "anti-feat" based off of this. We never do this for characters here when they fly or move at quick speeds across a distance. Otherwise, everyone is getting downgraded based off logic like this.

If they have MFTL+ travel speed, then they will move at that speed when traveling or flying quickly.

I will be very sad if the site I'm using considers characters visibly running at mediocre speeds and jumping over each other on a planet to secretly be them moving at speeds that would cross the observable universe in 3 seconds.

Maybe there is some amount of leeway, but when characters running and jumping over each other on a planet are interpreted as moving at 500 quadrillion times FTL, I can't think of that as anything but an antifeat.

And I will be even sadder if something that pathetically slow isn't just ignored, but is actually used for scaling.

(If any of my representation of this feat is inaccurate, just note that I've asked repeatedly for video of this feat and you haven't provided it; just short vague descriptions from which I've had to infer details like these)

And as an aside, I sure as **** know that no parts of verses I work on use logic like this.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

That's irrelevant, it's lightning.

It isn't. It means his attacks are relative to the Units.

 

[DaReaperMan]

That's irrelevant, it's lightning.

Doesn't have to be MHS lightning.

 

[Quangotjokes]

It isn't. It means his attacks are relative to the Units.

The units who can't seem to react to lightning.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

There is absolutely 0 basis or reason to assume it's an "anti-feat" based off of this. We never do this for characters here when they fly or move at quick speeds across a distance. Otherwise, everyone is getting downgraded based off logic like this.

If they have MFTL+ travel speed, then they will move at that speed when traveling or flying quickly.

I will be very sad if the site I'm using considers characters visibly running at mediocre speeds and jumping over each other on a planet to secretly be them moving at speeds that would cross the observable universe in 3 seconds.

Not really my problem, nor do I care. What you consider "mediocre speeds" that are generally "quick zooms or dashes", which are not quantifiably different speeds, is not at all a counter against them traveling at a speed they have traveled with before or speeds that their travel speeds scale above.

This is basically arguing someones travel speed isn't FTL if they are only moving real quickly from one city to the next (and dragon ball characters know this very very well).

Maybe there is some amount of leeway, but when characters running and jumping over each other on a planet are meant to be moving at 500 quadrillion times FTL, I can't think of that as anything but an antifeat.

See above. You act as if the character needs to travel the universe purposely in order to unleash that amount of travel speed, which is ridiculous.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

The units who can't seem to react to lightning.

And your assuming Void's lightning attacks are only MHS because?

Better downgrade Naruto, Dragon Ball and a hell a lot of verses too now with this.

 

[DaReaperMan]

The units who can't seem to react to lightning.

The lightning came from a unit. What do you think?

 

[Quangotjokes]

And your assuming Void's lightning attacks are only MHS because?

Better downgrade Naruto, Dragon Ball and a hell a lot of verses too now with this.

Is his lighting ever stated to be faster than natural?

 

[Antvasima]

Yeah thats fine. Thank you Ant.

No problem. You can tell me when you are done.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Is his lighting ever stated to be faster than natural?

Why does it need to be? For your argument to work?

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Also, "visibly running" is just a nonsensically hilarious point since that is borderline using the telegraph argument of something not being x fast because us y viewers are able to see them visibly moving.

 

[Quangotjokes]

Why does it need to be? For your argument to work?

So no evidence that it's faster? Nice.

 

[DaReaperMan]

So no evidence that it's faster? Nice.

The evidence that it hit the MFTL+ units is enough. It came from a unit. It scales to that unit's attack speed.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Is his lighting ever stated to be faster than natural?

And since when is that required? Again, that is not how this site works and your way of logic on this virtually applies to every series ever.

Naruto characters lose FTL for being tagged by elemental attacks, Avatar characters losing MHS for being hit by elements, etc etc etc.

 

[Quangotjokes]

The evidence that it hit the MFTL+ units is enough. It came from a unit. It scales to that unit's attack speed.

Mftl travel with far inferior reaction

And since when is that required? Again, that is not how this site works and your way of logic on this virtually applies to every series ever.

Naruto characters lose FTL for being tagged by elemental attacks, Avatar characters losing MHS for being hit by elements, etc etc etc.

Idk why you're using other series as counters. Naruto has databooks to back up their claims and avatar has characters who've redirected natural lightning.

 

[Agnaa]

Not really my problem, nor do I care. What you consider "mediocre speeds" that are generally "quick zooms or dashes", which are not quantifiably different speeds, is not at all a counter against them traveling at a speed they have traveled with before or speeds that their travel speeds scale above.

The counter is that gravity functions, and that they simultaneously don't fly off the planet.

This is basically arguing someones travel speed isn't FTL if they are only moving real quickly from one city to the next (and dragon ball characters know this very very well).

I don't understand how my argument is similar to that. I don't see the connection between "At some point, the discontinuity between speed inferred from other scenes should make the visibly lower speeds, at best, be considered an anti-feat, and at worst, not be applicable for scaling." and "FTL travel can't be used to get from one city to another."

See above. You act as if the character needs to travel the universe purposely in order to unleash that amount of travel speed, which is ridiculous.

I'm just saying that if they're running at those speeds, they will leave the planet before gravity can pull them back down, which is particularly an issue when they're jumping over each other. It's not something that we have to suspend our disbelief and say we're viewing it in slow motion for it to make sense, it's something that just makes no physical sense.

Also, "visibly running" is just a nonsensically hilarious point since that is borderline using the telegraph argument of something not being x fast because us y viewers are able to see them visibly moving.

"Your argument's dumb because it's kinda similar to another argument that's really dumb." Damn. In that case, it's kinda suspicious how close your argument is to people arguing that nothing is ever an anti-feat because it had to happen that way for the sake of the story; even if they only have one feat on that level and struggle with lower feats, the story just wouldn't make sense if they were blowing up the planet constantly.

Naruto characters lose FTL for being tagged by elemental attacks, Avatar characters losing MHS for being hit by elements, etc etc etc.

Elemental attacks don't have a set speed. Lightning does. A better comparison would be bullets, in which case we do need something establishing that they're super fast for MFTL+ characters being hit by them to not be an anti-feat.

 

[Quangotjokes]

Anti feats I've seen in series so far.

Units struck by lightning

Units struck by moon light

Units struck by bullets.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Actually what is proving that this is natural lightning again?

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

The counter is that gravity functions, and that they simultaneously don't fly off the planet.

Because they are actively not trying to fly off the planet. Doesn't mean their speeds aren't comparably that fast.

This is basically arguing someones travel speed isn't FTL if they are only moving real quickly from one city to the next (and dragon ball characters know this very very well).

I don't understand how my argument is similar to that. I don't see the connection between "At some point, the discontinuity between speed inferred from other scenes should make the visibly lower speeds, at best, be considered an anti-feat, and at worst, not be applicable for scaling." and "FTL travel can't be used to get from one city to another."

Because that isn't how this site operates. We don't go with "visibly lower" speeds as thats going, again, with the borderline telegraph argument of character movements being telegraphed for us viewers to see, despite them moving faster or far far faster in-universe.

Travel speed is travel speed and the speed of ones running, jumping, leaping, flying, whatever similar action isn't magically lower when it's convenient for your incredulity.

See above. You act as if the character needs to travel the universe purposely in order to unleash that amount of travel speed, which is ridiculous.

I'm just saying that if they're running at those speeds, they will leave the planet before gravity can pull them back down, which is particularly an issue when they're jumping over each other. It's not something that we have to suspend our disbelief and say we're viewing it in slow motion for it to make sense, it's something that just makes no physical sense.

When speaking about series where several FTL and MFTL+ feats are performed despite not at all matching our reality, that is to be expected. This logic of yours doesn't even have to apply to just here. This goes for practically any series with a FTL character that doesnt jump off planets or zoom past star systems when moving in small areas.

And taking it seriously for even a second results in quite the amount of downgrades.

Also, "visibly running" is just a nonsensically hilarious point since that is borderline using the telegraph argument of something not being x fast because us y viewers are able to see them visibly moving.

"You're argument's dumb because it's kinda similar to another argument that's really dumb." Damn. In that case, it's kinda suspicious how close your argument is to people arguing that nothing is ever an anti-feat because it had to happen that way for the sake of the story; even if they only have one feat on that level and struggle with lower feats, the story just wouldn't make sense if they were blowing up the planet constantly.

False equivalence since things like PIS only apply when the character is proven to be capable of what they're claimed to do and the story just ***** itself over. And I can assure you that PIS doesnt go for one-feat characters.

Naruto characters lose FTL for being tagged by elemental attacks, Avatar characters losing MHS for being hit by elements, etc etc etc.

Elemental attacks don't have a set speed. Lightning does.

It doesn't, as we have many many lightning users on this site far faster than MHS with electrical based attacks being accepted as moving at higher speeds.

A better comparison would be bullets, in which case we do need something establishing that they're super fast for MFTL+ characters being hit by them to not be an anti-feat..

A weapon and a technique of energy used by the user's discretion and skill is clearly not the same thing. That being said, there isn't a single case on this site where we take bullets as always low on the speed totem pole.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Units struck by lightning

Not naturally formed lightning that moves on its own. Lightning attacks from another Unit do not count as a set speed.

Units struck by moon light

Which is another lie by you. Tsukuyomis moon light is and has been reacted and blocked by opponent Units, such as Asaka's in Misaki's literal first battle with her.

Units struck by bullets.

Speed feat for the bullets. Especially for a verse like Vanguard where Cray has stupidly advanced tech and weaponry that their weapons are not at all just ordinary ones like ours.

 

[ProfessorKukui4Life]

Actually what is proving that this is natural lightning again?

As far as the lightning goes that tagged Blaster Blade and 2 others, nothing. The lightning is used by Void, a non-existent nigh omnipresent being who was attacking Cray at that point in the series. Given what Void is and the fact that this electricity didnt come from storm clouds, they are not naturally formed at all.

So nothing says the attacks Void uses wouldn't be able to as fast as the Units would be.

 

[Quangotjokes]

Which is another lie by you. Tsukuyomis moon light is and has been reacted and blocked by opponent Units, such as Asaka's in Misaki's literal first battle with her.

It isn't a lie, she straight up destroys a unit with moonlight.

19:24

 

[DaReaperMan]

It isn't a lie, she straight up destroys a unit with moonlight.

19:24

AP. It was reacting, guarding, and shaking.