• 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.

Expanding the References for Common Feats page

KingTempest said:
Is it possible if we could get another table on the common feats page, but for compressive strength, tensile strength, and shear stress strength (basically MPA)?
Click to expand...
That may be a good idea, but you should probably send a private message to DontTalk and Executor about the issue.
 
Thank you for helping out.
 
KingTempest said:
Nah, only the destruction values, but for things used for cutting feats and such, it's not on either
Click to expand...
The principle is pretty much the same.

Cut width (Usually Blade thickness) * object width * object length * destruction value.

If it is a clean cut, pulverization. If it isn't, then frag or v. frag depending on severity.
 
KLOL506 said:
The principle is pretty much the same.

Cut width (Usually Blade thickness) * object width * object length * destruction value.

If it is a clean cut, pulverization. If it isn't, then frag or v. frag depending on severity.
Click to expand...
oh, never knew that. thanks
 
Have all of the accepted new additions to it been added already?
 
Okay. Thank you for helping out.
 
Okay. Is the page in question currently properly organised, or should it be improved in that regard?
 
Antvasima said:
Okay. Is the page in question currently properly organised, or should it be improved in that regard?
Click to expand...
Can't really tell for the rest of the page, but I did make sure that the new calcs that I've added are well organized
 
KLOL506 said:
The principle is pretty much the same.

Cut width (Usually Blade thickness) * object width * object length * destruction value.

If it is a clean cut, pulverization. If it isn't, then frag or v. frag depending on severity.
Click to expand...
Well, standard blade thickness is somewhere at 0.225 cm by my findings which is based on bladed and saws available in workshops.

You may refer to my site to find that out.

Saw thicknesses are around 1.5 mm to 3.0 mm. I say 0.225 cm thickness is appropriate.

vsbattles.fandom.com

A page for reference of common feats by Jasonsith

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
 
Jasonsith said:
Well, standard blade thickness is somewhere at 0.225 cm by my findings which is based on bladed and saws available in workshops.

You may refer to my site to find that out.

Saw thicknesses are around 1.5 mm to 3.0 mm. I say 0.225 cm thickness is appropriate.

vsbattles.fandom.com

A page for reference of common feats by Jasonsith

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com
Click to expand...
Sword edge thickness would be more appropriate for sword related feats if it involves slicing them from a distance (Full blade thickness including the spine would be used if you swing the sword through the object, like an axe, or when you go to bisect people in half by driving the blade straight through them).

Saw-related feats would use... saw blade edge.

So honestly, this'd be a case-by-case basis, so feel free to make a list of all edge thicknesses and spine thicknesses of the various edged weaponry that exist.
 
So should I close our "References for Common Feats" page, or is somebody here willing to improve on its organisation, as we talked about here some months ago?
 
Antvasima said:
So should I close our "References for Common Feats" page, or is somebody here willing to improve on its organisation, as we talked about here some months ago?
Click to expand...
For now the page can be closed while we continue discussing new feats in this thread.
 
Okay. I will do so then.
 
Also, there is a note that I wanted to add by the side of the "Shaking the Moon" feat

Note: It is highly encouraged to go over the modified intensity listing based on the Mercalli Scale first before choosing any of these. But if it's clear that the exact intensity cannot really be determined, assume that the scale is either in between 4 or 5 based on typical earthquakes.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Does that seem fine to our calc group members here?
 
It is still Bolin, but this image of him was A.I.-generated.

If people generally do not like it or find it uncomfortable, I will change it back though.
 
Antvasima said:
It is still Bolin, but this image of him was A.I.-generated.

If people generally do not like it or find it uncomfortable, I will change it back though.
Click to expand...
Ah nice good to see you're still keeping him around
 
Okay. So is it fine if Propellus adds that note then?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Agnaa
References for Common Feats Re-organization
2
Replies
54
Views
5K
Agnaa
Agnaa
Flashlight237
Common Feat Fix: Throwing Someone into the Horizon
Replies
4
Views
980
Flashlight237
Flashlight237
Fallen_Angelicx
  • Locked
About Crushing Skulls
Replies
10
Views
3K
KingTempest
KingTempest
MaybeWantsToEdit
Can this calc be used?
Replies
6
Views
2K
KLOL506
KLOL506
GoldenScorpions
Freezing the Earth question
Replies
2
Views
1K
GoldenScorpions
GoldenScorpions
Back
Top