• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Dragon Ball Super Speed Downgrade? Or Upgrade???

DarkDragonMedeus said:
Aren't far better feats already being used for scaling?
Click to expand...
I don't think so, the only thing we have is Piccolo destroying the moon, Majin Buu flying and destroying hundreds of planets, and Gas traveling throughout the Universe, but I don't think any feat like that was calculated for the manga

This is the best speed achievement for the manga so far.
 
The scaling is ass but agree with calc for Moro arc Piccolo lv and beyond.

It might be an assumption of a distance, but it is quite literally the lowest possible assumption and anything else would be higher, not lower. Which is to say, that's exactly how we do calcs here, opinion be damned.
 
Chariot190 said:
The scaling is ass
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Not only do we need to do a new scaling based off the currently accepted multipliers, but U6 Piccolo should not be scaling to ToP Piccolo.

Chariot190 said:
It might be an assumption of a distance, but it is quite literally the lowest possible assumption and anything else would be higher, not lower.
Click to expand...
Thank you, that's what I was trying to say.
 
Chariot190 said:
It might be an assumption of a distance, but it is quite literally the lowest possible assumption and anything else would be higher, not lower. Which is to say, that's exactly how we do calcs here, opinion be damned.
Click to expand...
Just because it's a low assumption doesn't necessarily make it a necessary assumption in my view. I think it'd be safer not to assume at all and avoid calcing the speed here.
 
Damage3245 said:
Just because it's a low assumption doesn't necessarily make it a necessary assumption in my view. I think it'd be safer not to assume at all and avoid calcing the speed here.
Click to expand...
There'd only be something safer if there was a reasonable existing lower assumption. Is there?
 
Damage3245 said:
Just because it's a low assumption doesn't necessarily make it a necessary assumption in my view. I think it'd be safer not to assume at all and avoid calcing the speed here.
Click to expand...
If it's the lowest possible assumption, then the mist accurate value would be equal to or higher, wouldn't it?
 
Damage3245 said:
Just because it's a low assumption doesn't necessarily make it a necessary assumption in my view. I think it'd be safer not to assume at all and avoid calcing the speed here.
Click to expand...
Yeah no, that isn't how we do things. Fair and educated assumptions we use all the time.

This is the minimum, it can not be lower than this. This is the benchmark.
Avoiding "calcing" it is just going "hey let's make even MORE assumptions via multipliers, bunch of "upscaling" and other shit to give them a value", instead of just going "hey there's this actual feat that is AT LEAST this fast (it's actually quicker, as pointed out by yourself, the planet in context would be even further), let's use this as a foundation".

This is no different than "omniman flies to Planet #69" or "Supes flies to random solar system with blue sun", feats that have the exact same assumptions, that being the closest irl approximation, and using that as a distance.

Which is to say, I have absolutely no idea why you WOULDN'T want this calced given your precedence of disliking random arbitrary multiplication, high ending, and guesswork that is so utterly rampant within DBZ.
 
Chariot190 said:
Yeah no, that isn't how we do things. Fair and educated assumptions we use all the time.
Click to expand...
When we have to make said assumptions, I agree. I don't agree that we have to make one here though. Fair enough if other Calc Group Members approve of the calc.

Chariot190 said:
This is the minimum, it can not be lower than this. This is the benchmark.
Click to expand...
For all we know, it is not. We have no idea really if this planet is any closer or not. There's nothing in the series to tell us one way or the other.

I have my reasons for disagreeing with it being applied from a scaling perspective too but those seem better suited for a Content Revision thread on the subject so I'll save them.
 
Damage3245 said:
Just because it's a low assumption doesn't necessarily make it a necessary assumption in my view. I think it'd be safer not to assume at all and avoid calcing the speed here.
Click to expand...
So;
ignoring a feat that, for all means and purpose, is relevant to the verse, for virtually no reason other than personal taste, even THOUGHT this very method is approved in 99.9% of all space related calculations?

Yeah, how about no?
This is decent support for MFTL+ in DBS along with some other feats.
 
Damage3245 said:
For all we know, it is not.
Click to expand...
Damage, you're out here trying to argue that the DBS Universe might have a ringed planet that's closer to Earth than a IRL ringed exoplant with no evidence or reasoning behind it, with the exception of narrative-relevant planets, the DBS Universe, or at least the parts of the universe we know about IRL are pretty much 1:1 with real life. For all we know, it is the shortest distance until proven otherwise.

You're failing your burden of proof hard, and I don't mean to be rude here.

Quite literally, this excuse that a planet might be closer than our IRL closest approximation because the universe might be different or anything like that can be applied to virtually ANY other media EVER.
 
I'm in strong agreement with Topaz and Chariot on this, and honestly, this isn't even a matter of personal interpretation or anything of the sort. We just straight up objectively don't say "I'm not a fan of this one aspect of the calc, so let's just not calc the feat at all," and that's not even getting into the fact that the assumption is not only a lowball, but also one with a solid basis
 
Last edited:
@Yellow Topaz; let's agree to disagree on this point. You have other CGM's who can approve the Calc like Clover has just done.
 
Damage3245 said:
When we have to make said assumptions, I agree. I don't agree that we have to make one here though. Fair enough if other Calc Group Members approve of the calc.
Click to expand...
So we don't have to make an assumption? That implies we have a concrete number to use instead, in which case, what is it?
Damage3245 said:
For all we know, it is not. We have no idea really if this planet is any closer or not. There's nothing in the series to tell us one way or the other.
Click to expand...
Not how it works. DBZ isn't some special case, we use IRL universe as a basis in lack of details. There doesn't exist a saturn-like planet till at least like 400ly~ away. Ergo, it is AT LEAST 400ly away, it isn't secretly lower, we know what planets are within our "proximity", literally millions of the damn things. The planet not being SPECIFICALLY that exoplanet doesn't mean it's closer, it means it's actually FURTHER, thus the actual speed value can not be any lower than this. This is the minimum, and it's a hell of a lot better than getting speed from ten fucktillion multipliers and upscales.

You say agree to disagree, but your reasoning for disagreeing is so baffling that it spits in the face of how we do any calc like this.

I have my reasons for disagreeing with it being applied from a scaling perspective too but those seem better suited for a Content Revision thread on the subject so I'll save them.
Click to expand...

Nah you right, the scaling do be kinda ass, no idea why it'd scale to a Piccolo way below the iteration that did the feat too. It'd be like scaling SSJ1 Goku to ******* Saiyan Saga Goku.
 
Chariot190 said:
Nah you right, the scaling do be kinda ass, no idea why it'd scale to a Piccolo way below the iteration that did the feat too.
Click to expand...
I am planning on making a whole new scaling blog CRT just for the manga soon enough, it should fix most of the scaling problems. Thanks to the manga's consistent MFTL+ speed feats, it allows us to justify a lot of stuff.

About the upscaling issue... Well, we have Super Saiyan Vegeta scaling above his Super Saiyan Blue self in the span of a few chapters, so that's the manga's fault really.
 
Damage3245 said:
@Yellow Topaz; let's agree to disagree on this point. You have other CGM's who can approve the Calc like Clover has just done.
Click to expand...
It's hard to agree with your disagreement about the metrics because it seems more like a personal dislike rather than an objective issue.

I'm not sure if your disagreement should heavily influence the decision because it appears to be biased. And by 'biased,' I mean in the typical sense, not as an attempt to discredit you with internet slang like some who use this forum might do.
 
The_Yellow_Topaz said:
It's hard to agree with your disagreement about the metrics because it seems more like a personal dislike rather than an objective issue.

I'm not sure if your disagreement should heavily influence the decision because it appears to be biased. And by 'biased,' I mean in the typical sense, not as an attempt to discredit you with internet slang like some who use this forum might do.
Click to expand...
It's not a bias against Dragon Ball here (one of my favourite series) but just my suspension of disbelief for these types of calcs, though I don't think there is any point in trying to defend it any longer given the asking if objections I'm seeing.

So if it helps speed things along I'll change my stance to neutral for the Calc itself and look forward to the CRT.
 
Last edited:
Damage3245 said:
It's not a bias against Dragon Ball here (one of my favourite series) but just my suspension of disbelief for these types of calcs, though I don't think there is any point in trying to defend it any longer given the asking if objections I'm seeing.
Click to expand...
I didn't mean bias against Dragon Ball specifically. I was actually talking about that very (lack of) suspension of disbelief. Maybe I didn't explain myself well. I was just wondering if a vote based on personal beliefs in a situation where objectivity matters would hold the same weight as any other CGM's vote.
 
Bump, completely forgot about that. I need one more staff to approve of this to add it to the verse page.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Floxy178
One Piece speed downgrade (revised)
6 7 8
Replies
290
Views
17K
Antvasima
Antvasima
SeijiSetto
[Battle for Dream Island] Universe in Planet?
Replies
18
Views
937
Psychomaster35
Psychomaster35
sageof8paths
Snyderverse Motherbox calc
Replies
32
Views
2K
sageof8paths
sageof8paths
Damage3245
Ben 10 - Questionable Armadrillo Calc
2 3
Replies
91
Views
4K
Celestial_Scaler25
Celestial_Scaler25
  • Locked
DBS: Destruction of Planet Vegeta, Frieza Upgrade
2 3 4
Replies
132
Views
11K
Damage3245
Damage3245
Back
Top