Expanding the References for Common Feats page

[KLOL506]

I mean, something like: (okay I am drafting this by myself)

The diameter of the Earth is chosen for the blast diameter as this is the minimal length depicted to have the blast to cover the whole planet surface in one go.

Ah. Okay. That works.

EDIT: Wait, not the diameter, the circumference. The top surface (The face of the planet), you know, the distance you'd cover if you went around the Earth in a straight line instead of digging through straight down.

 

[Jasonsith]

Ah. Okay. That works.

EDIT: Wait, not the diameter, the circumference. The top surface, you know, the distance you'd cover if you went around the Earth in a straight line instead of digging through straight down.

I mean, something like: (okay I am drafting this by myself)

The circumference of the Earth is chosen for the blast diameter as this is the minimal length depicted to have the blast to cover the whole planet surface in one go.

Fixed.

Anyone else okay with this... I am adding the sentence within 24 hours from now.

Sorry but quick question, why aren't amps to strength used for lifting strength?

Well this is a question on its own and little to do with common feats.

I believe this is worth asking and discussing in a separate thread.

 

[KLOL506]

Sorry but quick question, why aren't amps to strength used for lifting strength?

I have no idea who told you that, because they absolutely do. I think you'd better ask the person who said such a thing on the thread where this is being discussed. But ye, not a common feats thing.

 

[Majinere566]

Thanks for the response and sorry for the inconvenience.

 

[Omnificence]

Thanks for the response and sorry for the inconvenience.

No worries. Also, I wanna let everyone here know that I found this going over the required speed to run on water.

 

[Aguywhodoesthings]

I updated my car roof calc with a new thickness a while ago
I only now noticed that the calc is being used on the references page already, so the new version should probly be checked out

 

[Propellus]

And also, can destroying wooden crates be used as a common feat, with these as a source?

 

[Antvasima]

I updated my car roof calc with a new thickness a while ago
I only now noticed that the calc is being used on the references page already, so the new version should probly be checked out

And also, can destroying wooden crates be used as a common feat, with these as a source?

@KLOL506 @Jasonsith @DontTalkDT

 

[KLOL506]

Wasn't there a wooden crate busting calc already made?

 

[Propellus]

Not that I know of

 

[Omnificence]

Wasn't there a wooden crate busting calc already made?

Eh...not really, but we do have one for destroying barrels.

 

[RoTt35]

Hello, the "Digging up from the Underground" calc from the page uses 61 cm to assume the shoulder width of a character, would that be an average? And if it is, does anyone have a source for that?

 

[Chariot190]

Good question, 61cm is average.
Average for buff *************. Like maybe if we're talking Goku or Joseph Joestar-type shoulders, then yeah 60cm is indeed the average according to some body building articles.

Average for the normal not jacked as **** american male is 41cm, female is 37.

 

[Jasonsith]

If one digs up from an underground,one is normally portrayed to be covered in a layer of soil or whatever. Maybe that is counting as well.

 

[Armorchompy]

That calculation should honestly be removed, it's really misleading. It uses rock instead of soil which is what you'd actually dig through, and digging is something that takes more than one action and would as such clearly not be the same as destroying that much volume instantly. So basically it covers like, 1% of "digging out from underground" in fiction.

 

[Jasonsith]

That calculation should honestly be removed, it's really misleading. It uses rock instead of soil which is what you'd actually dig through, and digging is something that takes more than one action and would as such clearly not be the same as destroying that much volume instantly. So basically it covers like, 1% of "digging out from underground" in fiction.

A.
Pulverisation of one whole piece of rock = 214 J/cc
Pulverisation of soil = 1 J/cc
Not even 1% of such.

B.
Rather, the correct formula involves:
1. determine the diameter of hole to dig
2. determine the
3. plug the volume formula
4. determine material of ground and level of destruction
This is more like a standard method of calculating a feat yield rather than one specific yield value.

The formula can stay but the methodology rather than a specific value should be preserved.

 

[Armorchompy]

I mean it just almost never applies to digging in the first place.

 

[Jasonsith]

I mean it just almost never applies to digging in the first place.

So armor is suggesting that

The calculation from specifically here should be totally removed.

While I do not oppose, I would like to replace that with a calculation or rather guideline for how to properly measure digging feats.

In fact, many "common" feats are not quite standard in yield size but are having a standard formula in constructing a calculation and finding the yield.

Should we separate those calculations from the page?

 

[Armorchompy]

While I do not oppose, I would like to replace that with a calculation or rather guideline for how to properly measure digging feats.

I don't really think there is a way.

In fact, many "common" feats are not quite standard in yield size but are having a standard formula in constructing a calculation and finding the yield.

Should we separate those calculations from the page?

There's more issues than that with the digging calc. Tackle that at another time if you'd like.

 

[Omnificence]

No worries. Also, I wanna let everyone here know that I found this going over the required speed to run on water.

So, what're we gonna do about this?

 

[Jasonsith]

So, what're we gonna do about this?

Well what about we think of ourselves as how we could swim?

(Since some human beings can learn swimming with real training, we may as well investigate on the mechanism behind swimming and running on water, then determine a formula instead of set value to determine the speed required to do such.)

 

[Antvasima]

So armor is suggesting that

The calculation from specifically here should be totally removed.

While I do not oppose, I would like to replace that with a calculation or rather guideline for how to properly measure digging feats.

In fact, many "common" feats are not quite standard in yield size but are having a standard formula in constructing a calculation and finding the yield.

Should we separate those calculations from the page?

Your solution sounds better to me, but I am not a good person to ask.

 

[Propellus]

Eh...not really, but we do have one for destroying barrels.

But then again, would it really also account for also destroying crates?

 

[Antvasima]

So armor is suggesting that

The calculation from specifically here should be totally removed.

While I do not oppose, I would like to replace that with a calculation or rather guideline for how to properly measure digging feats.

In fact, many "common" feats are not quite standard in yield size but are having a standard formula in constructing a calculation and finding the yield.

Should we separate those calculations from the page?

Your solution sounds better to me, but I am not a good person to ask.

@Armorchompy @Jasonsith @KLOL506 @Aguywhodoesthings

 

[Armorchompy]

I don't think such a guideline can be easily created, there's too many variables.

 

[Armorchompy]

By the way did we ever reach any conclusion on ripping arms off? There's a couple profiles of mine that'd need downgrading given they're Class 25 based off the Migue calc rn.

 

[KLOL506]

By the way did we ever reach any conclusion on ripping arms off? There's a couple profiles of mine that'd need downgrading given they're Class 25 based off the Migue calc rn.

I think we actually proceeded with accepting it AFAIK. Only issue was whether you'd want to use the shoulder diameter of a guy like me who is beyond suffering from malnutrition (Class 5) or the shoulder diameter of the average dude (Class 25), and I think that was the more acceptable end in the long run.

 

[Armorchompy]

Ah, well I suppose that could be case by case like the ripping off heads standard feat.

 

[Jasonsith]

Well if ripping off a head is having a measurable and/or tested yield, ripping off an arm or leg should be proportionate to the tissues holding the limb or head to the trunk.

 

[Antvasima]

So what are your conclusions here so far? Do you need me to give some form of official acceptance for you to apply a revision here?

 

[Omnificence]

There also seem to be a few feats from here that haven't been discussed yet, like the cloud dissipating and lake melting calculations. If we get these evaluated, can they be added

 

[DontTalkDT]

There also seem to be a few feats from here that haven't been discussed yet, like the cloud dissipating and lake melting calculations. If we get these evaluated, can they be added

I don't think the cloud calc meets the standards of our cloud calculations page and generally I don't think assuming timeframes for common feats is good.

Melting a lake doesn't work as, while there are some not universally accepted definitions suggesting a minimum area of 2 hectar, there is no minimum average depth associated with that.

 

[Omnificence]

I don't think the cloud calc meets the standards of our cloud calculations page and generally I don't think assuming timeframes for common feats is good.

Melting a lake doesn't work as, while there are some not universally accepted definitions suggesting a minimum area of 2 hectar, there is no minimum average depth associated with that.

Fair enough, I suppose.

So, what're we gonna do about this?

So anyway, about this...

 

[DontTalkDT]

So anyway, about this...

Seems better than our calculated values I guess.

 

[Propellus]

And also, can destroying wooden crates be used as a common feat, with these as a source?

So, about this

 

[DontTalkDT]

So, about this

Maybe for the thickness.
Seems wiser to scale the crates in terms of size, as I'm pretty sure crate size varies in fiction quite a lot. (....and in reality for that matter)

 

[Omnificence]

So, what're we gonna do about this?

Seems better than our calculated values I guess.

Then maybe we can make a blog about it along with the crate one?

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out, DontTalk.

So, what're we gonna do about this?

Seems better than our calculated values I guess.

Then maybe we can make a blog about it along with the crate one?

I personally wouldn't mind. Is that fine with you, DontTalk?

 

[Propellus]

And also, can destroying wooden crates be used as a common feat, with these as a source?

Nvm, found this, but it could use more evaluations

 

[Antvasima]

So can somebody summarise what we should currently do here please?