DBZ Speed Revisions

[Azathoth_the_Abyssal_Idiot]

Alright then apologies. I seemed to get the impression you were referring to that incident when you were saying "as I learnt recently." My bad. Still users in the thread have also been comparing this to the UT thing, so that was more of a general statement than a direct thing towards you, Azzy.

I still don't see why a canonly stated multiplier can't be used if it has no major contradictions, and going by what Aizen is saying using this may lead to more contradictions.

It's fine. I more meant from checking on different sites and forums to see the overall consensus for what constitutes calc stacking an multipliers.

Perhaps this will be a better way to explain myself.

Currently, we justify FTL DBZ via stacking multipliers multiple times on top of a single feat at the beginning of the series. This is a relatively weak way to present our case, and if someone asks us to validate it with a feat or calc for it, we just can't.

Meanwhile, we have an actual FTL feat we can use to justify FTL - "At least FTL, likely higher" for almost everyone who means anything after the Frieza Saga, which seems like it would be a much, much more solid thing to use. Of course, using this would result in the changes of characters previously ranked as Rel+ due to multipliers from the initial feat, but there's probably other Namek Saga feats that can be calced at higher than Sub-Rel+ and it's a small price to pay for infinitely more valid reasoning on the speed statistics.

After all, IIRC, one of the reasons we refused to use multipliers after the Frieza Saga was fear of creating horribly inflated stats, and this takes away risk of that.

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

Azathoth, can you give an example of stacking, involving around four characters? I need to see the pattern to evaluate.

 

[Azathoth_the_Abyssal_Idiot]

Azathoth, can you give an example of stacking, involving around four characters? I need to see the pattern to evaluate.

Do you mean in this specific instance or in literally any instance?

 

[AidenBrooks999]

I still thinking that Frieza should be "At least FTL+"

And buu saga characters "At least FTL+, likely MFTL" (I mean, they are ridiculous stronger than their Frieza Saga counterpart, so they should be in the MFTL range)

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

Do you mean in this specific instance or in literally any instance?

Two particular instances, with and without involving kaio ken. I want to analyze both cases

 

[Akuto_Sai12]

You know if we use this stacking logic for HST they'd reach light speed ages ago...

 

[Azathoth_the_Abyssal_Idiot]

Two particular instances, with and without involving kaio ken. I want to analyze both cases

I don't think there are any instances in this case without Kaio-ken, since the whole thing is based around Kaio-ken's multiplier.

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

I still thinking that Frieza should be "At least FTL+"
And buu saga characters "At least FTL+, likely MFTL" (I mean, they are ridiculous stronger than their Frieza Saga counterpart, so they should be in the MFTL range)

We haven't allowed any other franchise to scale upwards based on assumption like that, if there's no calc to support it's always "At least FTL+", no need for likely

 

[AidenBrooks999]

We haven't allowed any other franchise to scale upwards based on assumption like that, if there's no calc to support it's always "At least FTL+", no need for likely

you sure?

I saw lots of profiles that add "likely" without a calc

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

I don't think there are any instances in this case without Kaio-ken, since the whole thing is based around Kaio-ken's multiplier.

Ok, just for kaioken then. At least four characters so that I can see how stacking is (if) involved

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

I saw lots of profiles that add "likely" without a calc

Can you give some examples? We really shouldn't be doing that, if we have then we clearly have inconsistency which needs to be sorted out.

 

[Ryukama]

Sorry for somewhat late response @Azzy. Notifications been adding up. Thanks for explaining then.

 

[Azathoth_the_Abyssal_Idiot]

Ok, just for kaioken then. At least four characters so that I can see how stacking is (if) involved

Well, the exact process was

• Piccolo's moon blast beam was calced at 7% SoL

• Piccolo is comparable to Goku

• Therefore, Kaioken x2 Goku is 14% SoL and Kaioken x3 Goku is 21% SoL

• One of the back covers claim Goku became 10x stronger and faster before coming to Namek, so base Namek Goku is 70% SoL

• This scales to base Vegeta, all the Ginyu Force, etc.

• Kaioken x10 Goku must be 7c

• Kaioken x20 Goku must be 14c

• Kaioken x20 Goku kept up with 50% Frieza, who is probably half the speed of 100% Frieza

• SSJ Goku and 100% Frieza are 28c

 

[Azathoth_the_Abyssal_Idiot]

Sorry for somewhat late response @Azzy. Notifications been adding up. Thanks for explaining then.

Not a problem. Just don't want people trying to think I want to mindlessly downgrade a series I love.

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

Well, the exact process was

• Piccolo's moon blast beam was calced at 7% SoL

• Piccolo is comparable to Goku

• Therefore, Kaioken x2 Goku is 14% SoL and Kaioken x3 Goku is 21% SoL

• One of the back covers claim Goku became 10x stronger and faster before coming to Namek, so base Namek Goku is 70% SoL

• This scales to base Vegeta, all the Ginyu Force, etc.

• Kaioken x10 Goku must be 7c

• Kaioken x20 Goku must be 14c

• Kaioken x20 Goku kept up with 50% Frieza, who is probably half the speed of 100% Frieza

• SSJ Goku and 100% Frieza are 28c

I see, the issue comes from stacking Kaioken OVER kaioken. That...definitely looks like calc stacking.

I want the calc team to have a look, but to me this looks like calc stacking to me. Input from calc team members would be highly appreciated

 

[Blahblah9755]

From the looks of your explanation it seems that in that time Goku became capable of using 10x the Kaio-ken, so how do we know that that isn't what it meant by "Goku became 10x stronger and faster", was it explicit about it being base Goku? Also 50% power wouldn't always translate to 50% speed would it?

 

[LordAizenSama]

@Blah I assume because that would mean his training did not increase his base strength at all.

 

[Celestial_Pegasus]

I agree with lordaizen here i dont see how this constitutes being calc stacking as this is an in verse multiplier being kioken which is explicity stated to multiply all stats is given and the speed of piccolo's moon feat was calc to be 7% Sol so i dont see the problem with adding kaioken an in verse multiplier along with a calculated feat its not like a calc was taken and then added to another one its just an in verse technique which is stated to multiple all stats with a calculated feat dont see any issue here.

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

At the end, this will simply come down to whether it's calc stacking method or not. I have asked Dont Talk since he's our veteran.

@Azathoth: Don't worry about it, this is objective analysis nothing more.

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

so kaioken multipliers are now not gonna be used? what???

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

so kaioken multipliers are now not gonna be used? what???

They will be used, if it's stacking then we will have to change how we use it. If it's not stacking nothing will be changed.

 

[The_Living_Tribunal1]

well i mean the only time we used it was in frieza saga....

 

[Faisal_Shourov]

We'll have to see what Dont Talk thinks. If it's calc stacking method we will have to think about something new for the kaioken multiplier so that it doesn't fall under stacking

 

[TheMightyRegulator]

We do use this method in several other places though (post rose Meruem's speed, Lord Boros's sealed AP, and I believe Fate series servants' reactions just to name a few)

Several wrongs don't make a right. They too need revision then, as we don't use multipliers.

 

[LordAizenSama]

I think Ant means just using the SSJ multiplier, not all of them.

 

[SomebodyData]

Look at the talk page too, he states that it wasn't even the fact that it was a multiplier for why he removed ir

 

[Blahblah9755]

I know, the point I was making is that doing this is consistent with our methods used in various situations, which you seemed to be implying it wasn't

 

[TheMightyRegulator]

I see. Guess we'll just have to wait for Don't Talk's response.

 

[TheMightyRegulator]

I know, the point I was making is that doing this is consistent with our methods used in various situations, which you seemed to be implying it wasn't

Do you mean inconsistent? I wasn't implying that at all.

 

[Blahblah9755]

You said that we need to be consistent, which I assumed meant that you were implying this is inconsistent, my apologies if I misunderstood.

 

[TheMightyRegulator]

Am I underestimating the widespread use of multipliers on this wiki? My point was we already decided such things shouldn't be considered as legitimate, it wouldn't do to let DB be an exception. Also, no apologies necessary. This is a discussion.

 

[LordAizenSama]

I don't remember anyone deciding multipliers weren't usable.

 

[Blahblah9755]

But isn't what's being discussed in this thread whether or not it's legitimate? If it is decided to not be legitimate then I'd wholeheartedly agree, but there can't really be an exception to a rule that isn't yet set in stone.

And I wouldn't really call it widespread use, but it certainly isn't too uncommon, so I don't think using it here would be inconsistent.

 

[TheMightyRegulator]

In the Undertale thread we thoroughly discussed that assuming a character being X times g greater than a '''calculated''' value is fallacious and likely to give exaggerated results.

 

[AllanSaiyan]

In the Undertale thread we thoroughly discussed that assuming a character that a character being X times g greater than a calculated value is fallacious and likely to give exaggerated results.

There is no Assumption being made because the value for the Kaioken was stated.

 

[Blahblah9755]

But wasn't that partially because Undertake stats have proven to be non-linear, and were never stated to be actual multipliers, as opposed to the case in question where they are actual multipliers?

 

[TheMightyRegulator]

The terminology assume is clearly a poor choice of word in this situation but, look at this. How can this not be calc stacking?

Well, the exact process was

 

[TheMightyRegulator]

@Blah I must be more tired than I thought. I was referring to the Jojo Bizare adventure thread. Apologies for the undoubted confusion I may have inflicted and in that case yes, they were actual multipliers.

This is the thread I was unwittingly referring to.

 

[LordAizenSama]

I feel this is obvious, but I guess i'll post it anyways.

This is taken directly from our calc stacking page . the first sentence no less.

"Calc stacking refers to the practice of using results from one calculation in order to calculate other feats."

 

[AllanSaiyan]

Well after reading up Calc stacking. This situation doesn't seem the same as calc stacking in the instance it is used but you can read the original blog if you haven't already https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:SchutzenDunkelZiel1217/Goku's_Speed... and tell me what you think Mighty.