Dos and Don'ts of Statistics by Large Size

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Jasonsith]

> This situation doesn't sound unusual since at that size it should be possible. As long as the character and those that could content (if we go by scaling) can support this calculation with their feats/statements then I don't see why not. Yeah, sure for some verses may not work if they have outlines or its too exagerate for the verse.

I agree.

Esp. in usual tokusatsu shows - giant characters usually move like a scaled up normal sized human because those characters are played by normal human actors under the stage of a miniature city.

Of course, if there are evidence where those giants move actually faster or slower, hit stronger or weaker than their scaled up figures from a normal human, then those evidence should prevail.


Feel free to discuss.

 

[Antvasima]

Jason seems to make a good point.

 

[Antvasima]

Agnaa asked me to open this thread.

https://vsbattles.com/profile-posts/2152/

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

I think that happens to be that our durability system is flawed in real life as it isn't a linear quantity, but for higher tiers it's negligible difference considering how higher tiers have large gaps.

The KE of me jogging is also baseline 9-C and I'm clearly not a peak human.

 

[Jasonsith]

True.

Therefore a striking strength amplifier method is implemented in the inverse square law model to give a more realistic approach.

Ultimately it boils down to how that giant is portrayed in the verse. Inverse square law model is good to portray lower limits for giant characters who perform just like suit actors in monster costumes in front of a miniature city background.

 

[Agnaa]

I think that happens to be that our durability system is flawed in real life as it isn't a linear quantity, but for higher tiers it's negligible difference considering how higher tiers have large gaps.

The KE of me jogging is also baseline 9-C and I'm clearly not a peak human.

The difference between PE for a normal human and the border between 10-B/10-A is 6x. This is not negligible. It's higher than the difference we allow for relativistic KE where the gap's too big to be considered reliable. It's getting awfully close to the gap we consider an automatic one-shot (7.5x). This would let you completely jump High 8-C, Low 7-C, High 7-A, 6-A, and 4-C. It would get you from baseline to a + rating in 8-C, 8-B, 8-A, High 7-C, 7-A, High 6-C, Low 6-B, and High 6-B. For many materials, this is a bigger error than using pulverization instead of fragmentation.

I think this is a pretty huge error, especially when it's for an action as casual as standing up.

But that is a fair point about jogging, that has an even bigger error, closer to 45x.

I feel like at this point the errors may be too big to be relevant for this thread, or just too huge to fix. Makes me feel like 10-C to 9-C are theatrics without a solid basis, while the tiering system actually starts making sense and corresponding to real and consistent things at 9-B. It makes me feel like 9-C calcs are probably flawed, and treating characters as being able to one-shot each other from within that tier because they have a 7.5x higher gap as flawed. This calc I did involves KE at a near-human level and a human mass, so it ends up at 9-C. Should he really one-shot someone who ends up at 375 joules, just into street level?

Anyway, my issues feel unsuited for this thread now, so I would suggest a thread closure, but we might wanna leave it up for a day or two for a calc group member to reply.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Let's wait to see what they think.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

One thing though, from our Large Size Calculations page

"An alternative method to calculate Attack Potency from size is from Kinetic Energy. There one takes the mass of the character and uses its running speed to get Kinetic Energy via "Kinetic Energy = 0.5*Mass*(Running speed)^2". Here mass should be in kilogram and running speed in meter per second. The result is in joule."

Isn't this a blatant violation of our Kinetic Energy standards, or is it acceptable when the character is a giant? If so what's the line between giant and non-giant?

 

[Jasonsith]

Well my modification suggests magnification from normal human striking strength.

AKA
Given 1.684 m 62kg 70J "normal human"
If giant height / normal human = ratio
Then giant speed = (normal human speed)^1
giant mass = (normal human mass)^3
giant striking strength = (normal human striking strength)^5

I am not in charge of putting KE = 0.5 m v^2 as AP estimation.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

The issue was that giants tend to move slow on screen and not necessarily proportionate to a human.

However the page seems to suggest that we can measure the speed of the giant and calculate it's KE, which is blatantly against our KE standards unless we make an exception, which if so what should be the line.

 

[KLOL506]

One thing though, from our Large Size Calculations page

"An alternative method to calculate Attack Potency from size is from Kinetic Energy. There one takes the mass of the character and uses its running speed to get Kinetic Energy via "Kinetic Energy = 0.5*Mass*(Running speed)^2". Here mass should be in kilogram and running speed in meter per second. The result is in joule."

Isn't this a blatant violation of our Kinetic Energy standards, or is it acceptable when the character is a giant? If so what's the line between giant and non-giant?

We make exceptions when the object is much larger, as large as, say, a car (Which usually weighs over one ton or 1.5 tons or so), explicitly says so on our KE page. So yes, KE is applicable if the character is big enough to qualify or the human-sized character moves an object of immense mass.

The giants moving slowly proportionally to humans isn't exactly related to this specific issue.

 

[KLOL506]

The issue was that giants tend to move slow on screen and not necessarily proportionate to a human.

However the page seems to suggest that we can measure the speed of the giant and calculate it's KE, which is blatantly against our KE standards unless we make an exception, which if so what should be the line.

Nah, it isn't against our standards, it's perfectly within our standards to accept KE for big-enough objects moving or being tossed at x speed, so all you need to do is figure out the line for it, which can be a bit problematic, since something as large as a washing machine weighs the same as a 150-200 lb human being.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

We don't calculate the KE of speedsters running without pushing/throwing something/an attack, so if giants somehow have an exception then what the line is?

 

[KLOL506]

We don't calculate the KE of speedsters running without pushing/throwing something/an attack, so if giants somehow have an exception then what the line is?

Prolly put the starting line at something around 300 lbs

Plus, speedsters are usually human-sized, which explains why for them to qualify for KE they'd need to something like pushing/throwing/punching or other violent stuff. Whereas with fictional giants they are already big and menacing enough to cause severe damage by merely moving around even if they move slowly.

 

[Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan]

Then shouldn't we make the standard be that they have to cause notable damage/effects like shaking surroundings or cracking the ground when moving?

 

[KLOL506]

Then shouldn't we make the standard be that they have to cause notable damage/effects like shaking surroundings or cracking the ground when moving?

Not always, for example, car crashes don't always completely destroy walls in fiction and only leave small cracks or just plow through steel poles without completely smashing them into pieces even when the exact make-and-model and their travelling speed is usually based on concrete evidence. Same thing for meteors, often times large enough meteors don't completely wreck countries visually despite entering entry speeds of 11 km/s and being large enough to actually cause such damage (Heck, meteors fall as an exception on the KE page due to their sheer size alone). Though for the most part fiction does show giants being able to both shake the ground and cause craters with movements alone but then again it depends on how they move around, like Jasonsith said.

Also, we can't use KE anyway unless we have a solid timeframe to rely upon.

 

[Jasonsith]

Well it boils down to how the fictional character is even portrayed in attacking and moving.

In real life we tag mosquitoes and flies as in tokusatsu and other fictional shows giant monsters (however clumsy they look and are portrayed) tag smaller sized tanks and fighter jets and helicopters.

The original inverse square model and even my revised inverse square model is not a one size fits all solution. Nor are the 4 rules for KE feats.

The cinematic time portrayed in fictional works in front of the audience may mean little in versus debates.

I agree that the statements regarding the KE formula needs to be changed.

And like the KE feat profile, caveats should be added to guide profile makers and editors when to apply different models when assessing a character's stats by virtue of size or mass or speed.

 

[KLOL506]

Well it boils down to how the fictional character is even portrayed in attacking and moving.

In real life we tag mosquitoes and flies as in tokusatsu and other fictional shows giant monsters (however clumsy they look and are portrayed) tag smaller sized tanks and fighter jets and helicopters.

The original inverse square model and even my revised inverse square model is not a one size fits all solution. Nor are the 4 rules for KE feats.

The cinematic time portrayed in fictional works in front of the audience may mean little in versus debates.

I agree that the statements regarding the KE formula needs to be changed.

And like the KE feat profile, caveats should be added to guide profile makers and editors when to apply different models when assessing a character's stats by virtue of size or mass or speed.

This. It really depends on how the character moves. Plus, even with destruction the debris may be punched at a certain speed along with the fist punching it in whatever direction it is being punched, so there's that too. And that giants, while shown to be moving clumsily, can easily tag fighter jets and other fast moving vehicles with ease with their hands.

 

[Antvasima]

I have to unsubscribe from this thread due to time constraints. You can notify me later, if you need my help after you have reached a conclusion.

 

[Damage3245]

Where are we at with this right now?

 

[Ugarik]

if a giant character can't move as swiftly as hormal sized human does, his AP should be calculated as:
Hormal human AP × size ratio^5 × time ratio^-2
For example if a giant is 10 times larger than a hormal human, but it takes him 3 times longer to make a step or land a punch, his AP should be 100000/9 times higher (or 11111 times)

 

[Damage3245]

What if the only thing we have is a characters size?

We just don't calc their AP based on that alone?

 

[Jasonsith]

What if the only thing we have is a characters size?

We just don't calc their AP based on that alone?

AP (Giant) : AP (Normal Human) = (height (Giant) : height (Normal Human))^5 it is.

Any counter feat or superseding feat will supersede this ratio method.

I am fine with AP based on size alone if the model is reasonable to apply.

I am more worried:

By pure inverse square model
Lifting strength (Giant) : Lifting strength (Normal Human) = (height (Giant) : height (Normal Human))^4

But taking the concept of inverse square model on mass and considering "normal human can lift his/her/its/their own mass maximum"
Lifting strength (Giant) : Lifting strength (Normal Human) = Mass (Giant) : Mass (Normal Human) = (height (Giant) : height (Normal Human))^3

I wonder which model should be used. Or more models can be suggested.