- 63,529
- 8,506
^Ryuko
-
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.
Fate: 7-A Servants
- Thread starter DragonEmperor23
- Start date
- 1,673
- 289
That match is probably not valid then, don't have the exact quote but IIRC it was only stated that Excalibur's light "touched" every atom of caster's monster, which is not quite the same as "destroy"Schnee One said:
- 18
- 1
like the other anon said, it was the one with ryuoko where the decisive factor was the false atomic destruction (the same thing happened with the one where boros was the enemy, that the guy once one of his limbs was destroyed by the excaliblast he wouldn't be able to regenerate)... something similar happened on a thread on other website, this guy asked if Juggernaut could take on berserker (heracles) or saber, we're talking about both normal/base juggernaut (comics) and " trion juggernaut", almost everyone went full: "well, excaliblast just destroys him because atomization etc." ...something ridiculous because juggernaut's durability is insane (the guy could tank thor's godblast that was able to drove away a weakened Galactus). i mean, for her to retreat into avalon if the adversary is powerful enough to get her into serious trouble is one thing (because there's no confusion on the way it works, don't remember if it can be used indefinitely though lol), but the other one, well...AguilaR101 said:
- 61,177
- 14,747
The match against Ryuko was removed some time ago but i can confirm that the deciding factor was Excalibur being able to atomize opponents
- 21,783
- 4,826
Woe I remember that match... so long ago
- 16,606
- 1,791
Are we still contesting that Excalibur atomizes? I thought it was pretty clear it did
- 21,783
- 4,826
Really the only thing that gives that impression is it's light being stated to touch atoms.
- 16,606
- 1,791
It scorches every atom of its enemy when it attacks, that seems like pretty clear atomization
- 21,783
- 4,826
Not really
Scorching atoms =/= breaking all molecular bonds in what it hits and reducing matter to individual particles
Scorching atoms =/= breaking all molecular bonds in what it hits and reducing matter to individual particles
- 18
- 1
this, the vn just states how it "touches"the atoms that constitute the being that receives the attack, if the contrary were true then we're right back at the classical "doesn't matter if your durability or regen is incredibly high (heracles, Juggernaut, blackheart you name it) it will kill you either way just because...her sword doesn't bypass durability otherwise any excaliblast, even one incredibly weak) should be enough to kill anything (even dudes on 4b tier by the way people use it), heracles included (which by the way it did not).Monarch Laciel said:
- 16,606
- 1,791
Well, the atomization is excalibur's attack doesn't bypass durability, its just a cherry on top
- 18
- 1
atomization:to split into many sections, groups, factions, etc.; fragmentize / to reduce to atomsIapitus The Impaler said:
the word's, which was taken from the VN, meaning isn't the destruction of atoms but rather reduce the target to atoms. In this case those with high regen can come back if they get hit by the beam.(unless of course that one wants to ignore the actual meaning of the word and give it one completely different).
- 6,436
- 1,664
Question: i been following the thread, but im confused... Does this wiki accept artoria being able to "touch atoms" or "reduce someone to atoms" with excalibur?
- 4,630
- 1,615
@Upgrade Sound more like the latter if it is from a weapon.
- 18
- 1
the light beams of excalibur vaporizes the target (and utterly destroy it if the dude/chick isn't strong enough to tank it or his/her durability or regen isn't high enough). there's really no hax attach to it other than the common misuse of the word atomization, which is to reduce something to atoms. this should be pointed out because i have come across discussions where people have come to say that fate zero/UBW arturia can one-shot freaking galactus!!! with the beam , and not just him, Spawn (even God Spawn lol), Dr Doom and ghost rider too despite their stats and abilities , but the one with galactus simply crossed the line).TheUpgradeManHaHaxD said:
- 6,875
- 1,319
exactly what i thought, but most people on "saber vs _____" threads tend to go : "well, her sword destroys atoms (when in reality it only vaporizes) therefore the dude/chick fighting saber is done for no matter how incredibly high his/her regen is, the use of those two words as though they were synonyms make a huge difference because dudes that can regenerate from some molecules left of his/her body ( like cell or higher tier) gets rekt automatically because of that misconception.
