• 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.

Fairy Tail's 6-B calculation is wrong

Status
Not open for further replies.

M3X_2.0

VS Battles
Retired
10,486
9,451
That's the calculation I am talking about

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:DemonGodMitchAubin/Aldoron_Splits_Some_Storm_Clouds

I will say the mistakes and then create topics to talk more a out them and some suggestions to correct the mistake, because I am not just going to say what is wrong and don't help.

  • Stacking pixelscaling
  • Size inconsistency
  • Suggestions
Stacking pixelscaling
To find the size of the storm, first it was calculated the size of a city, a city located on Aldoron's hand. After that, it was scales to his body, and then, the storm. That's the calc of the city size. What is wrong with this?

  • 6 images to find the size of a storm
That's completely unacceptable, as our Calc Stacking page says:

Pixel scaling over several steps is permitted, as long as the size of the scaled objects usually stays constant
And this one below

However, even for these parameters calc stacking is avoided as much as possible. That means that results taking less such steps are usually taken over results that rely on more calc stacking
And let's be honest, 6 pixelscaling images to find the size of a storm isn't the best to do, since in the same calculation, the first scan is completely useless, and can be discarded. The second can be used for the same purpose as the first one. 5 images is better than 6, however, not acceptable at all. What need to be changed is the city calc size, using less images.

Size Inconsistency
Okay, that's the easier one. City was calculated to be ~8500m, and the hand is > this size. After that, the body was measured but how are you going to measure something kilometers away like that? If you think that's not enough, the distance between the eye and the chin is about 5 kilometers, what about the whole body? Well it doesn't work, angle is also iffy for that.

Suggestions
1 - Less pixelscaling for the city size, if possible

2 - Do not use the first scan of the calculation for the storm

3 - Scale the arm/forearm, not the whole body. You can maybe use the tree or something else, but not the whole body.

That's all
 
You didn't need to make a whole thread for this, you could've just posted this on my message wall

1. Less Pixel Scaling for the City

I really tried... but I couldn't find a better way to scale the city, there is literally no way to scale the city of Crocus with less than 3 images, it's not even remotely possible, unless you want super innacurate results, but cutting the whole chain down to 5 images would be better, I think that's likely the minimum amount possible to get an accurate size, maybe I could assume a real life city size, but I don't really like that method as it would actually inflate the calc

2. Size Inconsistency

I guess scaling off the arm would be fine, there's actually a better image for the arm scaling anyways
 
There are like 0 ways besides the one I used to find out the city's size, we get very few shots that actually allow us to scale the city at all, I mean I searched for so many chapters to find a better scaling method, but I couldn't, I would say it's a safe lowball anyways, if we decided to go with an IRL city measurement, the calc would actually probably be a lot higher

In fact, I already checked what these changes suggest, fixing all this stuff did make the calc stronger by like 2x, turns out all my errors were lowballing the calc...
 
Well, we are going to get a few more chapters with Aldoran I hope, so there's the chance we could get some better shots in upcoming chapters.
 
@Damage3245

I mean't Crocus, which isn't on Aldoron's body, there is no way to scale Aldoron's cities properly via pixel scaling, there just aren't any shots that allow it

His cities were stated to be larger than Crocus, which is already renowned for being a big city, hence why scaling off of Crocus is accurate

Once again, this didn't need a full thread, this could have just been put on my message wall, as well the title of this thread is mega clickbaity and even gives the wrong impression when this is only about fixing some small errors
 
I haven't read the 100 Years Quest manga fully, but from my understanding of it, Draseal is the largest city on the continent, but is it stated that each of the 5 towns on Aldoron's body are considered to be separate cities? Don't all 5 of the towns together make up the collective Draseal, which is the reason why it would be so big?
 
That's actually not true, Lucy says the one city they're in, being only the one on his right hand is bigger than Crocus, so just the one city is bigger than Crocus, not all five put together, that wouldn't make much sense
 
That circular wall within Draseal is actually the big tower in the center of the first image, there is still another wall around majority of the city, however you are correct in saying that I should make the scaling larger in terms of the city itself

Once again, this is something that's just a result of transfering the drawing of a huge city from a detailed image to a small one, that's the artist choice not mine, there will always be inevitable inconsistencies with stuff like this
 
I've edited my calcs with the suggested changes that can be made and it's literally almost exactly the same results, so yeah... we done here?

Also the scaling with less than 5 images is just not accurate and quite likely unreasonable
 
I thought this would take longer. Thanks for being understandable Mitch. The results are almost the same but now the calc is more accurate.

@Damage you can close this thread
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top