Expanding the References for Common Feats page

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the information.

As long as they have each been evaluated and accepted by at least two of our calc group members, they should probably be fine to add.

 

[Random-Helper323]

This common feat reference is not accurate, at least not usually. As shown here, here, here, here, here, here and here, the doorframe, door jamb, hinges, screws and even the door itself generally break before the latch does.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for the information.

As long as they have each been evaluated and accepted by at least two of our calc group members, they should probably be fine to add.

Is somebody here willing to apply this please? As long as it fulfills the requirements mentioned above that is.

This common feat reference is not accurate, at least not usually. As shown here, here, here, here, here, here and here, the doorframe, door jamb, hinges, screws and even the door itself generally break before the latch does.

It seems like this needs to be handled as well.

@Elizhaa @Starter_Pack @Abstractions @Colonel_Krukov @Just_a_Random_Butler @Dereck03 @Shadowbokunohero @QrowBarr @Crazylatin77 @Zaratthustra @ElixirBlue @Tllmbrg @Nehz_XZX @Therefir @IdiosyncraticLawyer @GarrixianXD @Catzlaflame @Vzearr

 

[Flashlight237]

This common feat reference is not accurate, at least not usually. As shown here, here, here, here, here, here and here, the doorframe, door jamb, hinges, screws and even the door itself generally break before the latch does.

As the guy who calced the feat, I'm pretty sure that's because those guys are doing much more than just slamming the door open. You can't just insinuate that this nobbly thing that is the latch is stronger than any part of the door (which is made of the same material: brass) or even the entire door:

Especially when there is an example of the feat where literally only the latch would have been destroyed by the slam:

 

[Random-Helper323]

As the guy who calced the feat, I'm pretty sure that's because those guys are doing much more than just slamming the door open. You can't just insinuate that this nobbly thing that is the latch is stronger than any part of the door (which is made of the same material: brass) or even the entire door:

In most cases the thing that breaks is the wood on the door jamb in front of the latch, as shown in those images. We're talking about a tiny sliver of wood reinforced by a thin strike plate which is usually held in place by short screws. This page here describes the other items that break when a door is kicked open, and it's generally not the actual bolt that breaks. This video also shows a door kicked in.

Snapping a solid piece of brass is generally harder than snapping a smaller length of wood and knocking out short screws. There's a reason why a prominent advice for strengthening doors against kicks is installing a longer strike plate and using longer screws. The door's latch gets knocked into the strike plate, which is fastened by screws which are in the door jamb. Usually those are short screws in a wooden door jamb. The screws come loose, the strike plate moves, the thin piece of wood the strike plate is over snaps, and the door is forced open, while the latch remains undamaged. That is actually shown in this image, where you can see the latch was forced through the door jamb, ripping the strike plate straight off the jamb. This image also shows the jamb ripped through, although no strike plate is shown. In both those images you can see the door was shoved open, forcing the latch through the door jamb.

I can tell you from real life experience installing, fixing and reinforcing doors, windows and locks, including ones that had been broken into, that breaking doors open very rarely involves shearing the latch in half. It is almost always the door jamb that breaks.

Especially when there is an example of the feat where literally only the latch would have been destroyed by the slam:

If the feat specifically shows the latch snapping, that's different.

 

[McFriesGuy075]

Is there a calc for pulverizing a human (turning them into a blood spray)?

 

[Propellus]

Is there a calc for pulverizing a human (turning them into a blood spray)?

Refer to this

 

[McFriesGuy075]

Refer to this

I'm aware of that one, it would definitely be higher than that, i was just asking if there was a calc for pulverizing humans done somewhere. If it wasn't then it should a good one to include for the page

 

[Vzearr]

For the sake of consistency, we should update the destruction values in this calculation to match the ones on our calculations page. Pretty simple fix (104 to 67.5).

 

[Arkenis]

Is there any calcs for a tree growing fast?

 

[Flashlight237]

Well, I did this: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:Flashlight237/Common_Feat:_Crushing_a_Car

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I did this: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:Flashlight237/Common_Feat:_Crushing_a_Car

Thank you for helping out.

If no other calc group members evaluate it, you can probably ask them for help via our private calc group members discussion thread, as the maintenance of our general feats page is quite important.

 

[Flashlight237]

Welp, I patched up another existing common feat: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:Flashlight237/Common_Feat_Fix:_Breaking_a_Human_Neck

The current version assumed work=force. I calc'd the actual force by determining the stopping force of the drop.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out. Please ask other calc group members to evaluate both that and our currently used official calculation, and to decide which of them that seems most reliable.

 

[Dark-Carioca]

I don't know about using Quora as a source admittedly, unless it features an actual study (though it doesn't)

 

[Antvasima]

I don't know about using Quora as a source admittedly, unless it features an actual study (though it doesn't)

Agreed. That seems very unreliable.

 

[Flashlight237]

Meh. My hand was forced.

 

[SamanPatou]

I'm hijacking this post for a related question.
Would it be possible to expand the Throwing a Person to the Horizon calc to also feature the LS required to do so? As of now, it assumes the target is struck by a blow, but it's pretty common to have characters achieving this trope with a physical throw.

 

[Antvasima]

I'm hijacking this post for a related question.
Would it be possible to expand the Throwing a Person to the Horizon calc to also feature the LS required to do so? As of now, it assumes the target is struck by a blow, but it's pretty common to have characters achieving this trope with a physical throw.

I think that this seems like a good idea.

 

[Dark-Carioca]

I'm hijacking this post for a related question.
Would it be possible to expand the Throwing a Person to the Horizon calc to also feature the LS required to do so? As of now, it assumes the target is struck by a blow, but it's pretty common to have characters achieving this trope with a physical throw.

I believe so, yeah

 

[Dalesean027]

I'm hijacking this post for a related question.
Would it be possible to expand the Throwing a Person to the Horizon calc to also feature the LS required to do so? As of now, it assumes the target is struck by a blow, but it's pretty common to have characters achieving this trope with a physical throw.

Yeah it'd be pretty simple you're just using a length for the work to get the LS

 

[Omnificence]

Wouldn't this just be Average Human class since we're using the average weight of a human (70 kilograms)? Or are we looking to expand it based upon the characters' weights & the speed they're thrown at?

 

[Dalesean027]

Wouldn't this just be Average Human class since we're using the average weight of a human (70 kilograms)? Or are we looking to expand it based upon the characters' weights & the speed they're thrown at?

No? Throwing your average joe the horizon should be Class M

 

[Arkenis]

Wouldn't this just be Average Human class since we're using the average weight of a human (70 kilograms)? Or are we looking to expand it based upon the characters' weights & the speed they're thrown at?

When did you see an average human throw another human to the horizon .

 

[TheShape03]

When did you see an average human throw another human to the horizon .

I do it every day, it should be an Atom level+ feat.

 

[Omnificence]

No? Throwing your average joe the horizon should be Class M

Wait, really? Where's the formula for this?

 

[Dalesean027]

Wait, really? Where's the formula for this?

We already have the energy in joules just get the work by dividing the body/arm movement of the throw

Joules/distance for the work

 

[Dalesean027]

I'm hijacking this post for a related question.
Would it be possible to expand the Throwing a Person to the Horizon calc to also feature the LS required to do so? As of now, it assumes the target is struck by a blow, but it's pretty common to have characters achieving this trope with a physical throw.

Using 1.7m average height in the blog and this human proportions calculator you get an arm length of 0.8 and you're typing throwing at a 45 degree angle so you get 0.628319m arm movement

Normal human vision:
583,690 Joules / 0.628319m = 94728.657901kg or 94.72866 Metric Tons (Class 100)

Peak human vision:
1.4592e6 Joules / 0.628319m = 236817.58807kg or 236.81758807 Metric Tons (Class K)

Superhuman vision:
2.9184e6 Joules / 0.628319m = 473635.17511kg or 473.635175 Metric Tons (Class K)

coulda sworn this would be Class M but here we are

 

[Arkenis]

If I wanted to calc shooting through Earth would it be simple as destruction calcs or is there more? And also how would I do shooting through a star or Jupiter

 

[Omnificence]

We already have the energy in joules just get the work by dividing the body/arm movement of the throw

Joules/distance for the work

Using 1.7m average height in the blog and this human proportions calculator you get an arm length of 0.8 and you're typing throwing at a 45 degree angle so you get 0.628319m arm movement

Normal human vision:
583,690 Joules / 0.628319m = 94728.657901kg or 94.72866 Metric Tons (Class 100)

Peak human vision:
1.4592e6 Joules / 0.628319m = 236817.58807kg or 236.81758807 Metric Tons (Class K)

Superhuman vision:
2.9184e6 Joules / 0.628319m = 473635.17511kg or 473.635175 Metric Tons (Class K)

coulda sworn this would be Class M but here we are

Oh yeah... I forgot about that. Should we add this to the page, then?

 

[SamanPatou]

I admittedly don't know how the procedure to add calcs to the page works, but if we provide a proper evaluation in this thread or a blog for the calc up here then it should be fine, I guess?

 

[Antvasima]

I admittedly don't know how the procedure to add calcs to the page works, but if we provide a proper evaluation in this thread or a blog for the calc up here then it should be fine, I guess?

Yes. For safety reasons we need at least two calc group members evaluating and accepting a calculation before it can be added to our standard feats page though, and if a new calculation is suggested to replace a previous identical feat there, both calculations need to be evaluated in a calc group forum discussion thread as usual.

 

[Omnificence]

Using 1.7m average height in the blog and this human proportions calculator you get an arm length of 0.8 and you're typing throwing at a 45 degree angle so you get 0.628319m arm movement

Normal human vision:
583,690 Joules / 0.628319m = 94728.657901kg or 94.72866 Metric Tons (Class 100)

Peak human vision:
1.4592e6 Joules / 0.628319m = 236817.58807kg or 236.81758807 Metric Tons (Class K)

Superhuman vision:
2.9184e6 Joules / 0.628319m = 473635.17511kg or 473.635175 Metric Tons (Class K)

coulda sworn this would be Class M but here we are

I admittedly don't know how the procedure to add calcs to the page works, but if we provide a proper evaluation in this thread or a blog for the calc up here then it should be fine, I guess?

Yes. For safety reasons we need at least two calc group members evaluating and accepting a calculation before it can be added to our standard feats page though, and if a new calculation is suggested to replace a previous identical feat there, both calculations need to be evaluated in a calc group forum discussion thread as usual.

Well, it looks like Flashlight already did a calc regarding the force needed to do it here, but there doesn't seem to be many evaluations for it. So, which one seems to be the most accurate?

 

[Dark-Carioca]

So, which one seems to be the most accurate?

They're done via different methods, though I think Dale's results make maybe a bit more sense.

 

[Flashlight237]

Well, it looks like Flashlight already did a calc regarding the force needed to do it here, but there doesn't seem to be many evaluations for it. So, which one seems to be the most accurate?

I think it's a hard press myself. Dale's calc basically just ran the KE backwards while I used kinematics equations for my result, but on reflection, would it really take an arm 0.15 seconds to accelerate to the speed needed?

 

[Omnificence]

They're done via different methods, though I think Dale's results make maybe a bit more sense.

I think it's a hard press myself. Dale's calc basically just ran the KE backwards while I used kinematics equations for my result, but on reflection, would it really take an arm 0.15 seconds to accelerate to the speed needed?

Okay, so what's the consensus for this now? Have we reached a conclusion yet?

 

[Flashlight237]

Okay, so what's the consensus for this now? Have we reached a conclusion yet?

I think unless there's a better way to calc this, we go with Dale's calc.

 

[Omnificence]

I think unless there's a better way to calc this, we go with Dale's calc.

Alright, then I guess that's settled.

Using 1.7m average height in the blog and this human proportions calculator you get an arm length of 0.8 and you're typing throwing at a 45 degree angle so you get 0.628319m arm movement

Normal human vision:
583,690 Joules / 0.628319m = 94728.657901kg or 94.72866 Metric Tons (Class 100)

Peak human vision:
1.4592e6 Joules / 0.628319m = 236817.58807kg or 236.81758807 Metric Tons (Class K)

Superhuman vision:
2.9184e6 Joules / 0.628319m = 473635.17511kg or 473.635175 Metric Tons (Class K)

coulda sworn this would be Class M but here we are

Do we also know what the level of speed required to do this is?

 

[Flashlight237]

Alright, then I guess that's settled.

Do we also know what the level of speed required to do this is?

Yes; it's the same speed listed in the original feat.

 

[Omnificence]

Yes; it's the same speed listed in the original feat.

You mean right here [in bold]?

• Normal human vision
  • 1.7 / 10^-3 = 1700
  • V = sqrt(1700*9.81) = 129.14 m/s
  • KE = 129.14^2 x 0.5 x 70 = 583,690 Joules, Wall level
• Peak human vision
  • 1.7 / (4 x 10^-4) = 4250
  • V = sqrt(4250*9.81) = 204.19 m/s
  • KE = 204.19^2 x 0.5 x 70 = 1.4592e6 Joules, Wall level
• Superhuman vision
  • 1.7 / (2 x 10^-4) = 8500
  • V = sqrt(8500*9.81) = 288.77 m/s
  • KE = 288.77^2 x 0.5 x 70 = 2.9184e6 Joules, Wall level

Are we sure there aren't any values that need to be adjusted?