• 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.

Freddy Fazbear Potential downgrade

Buttersamuri

Buttersamuri

Messages
13,321
Reaction score
629
While going over skill crushing feats across in other series, I started to notice a big problem with Freddy Fazbears skull crushing feats. Mainly being that he doesn't actually crush the entire skull. He only crushes part of the front of it, which would have a drastic effect in the results. I think it would be best to attempt to calc the energy to crush the top part of a persons skull assuming I haven't missed anything

I also bring this up as this effects basically every fight Freddy has been in that isn't same series
 
We talking about the crying child feat right?

The feat should be even lower since the skull of a child would weight less then an adult's which is the value the calc uses

Tho I assumed the verse also uses the animatronics killing the player quite easily as supporting feat for wall since in theory they crush his skull and they can staff him a Fazbear suit
 
Iirc. Wasn't there another one where Freddy bites one of the nightguards? Only reason I didn't bring up it was a child's skull.

You don't have to crush ones skull to fit in one of the suits. They can kill the player easily, which probably supports something like Street level, but nothing into wall. This likely is a street downgrade.!
 
Evidence that the skull isn't crushed all the way? Cause we have a few feats that would make them 9-B (Cover a lot of them in my Puppet respect thread). The Bite of 87 (and while you have said it is only part of the skull, it is a large part at the front of the head), Bite of 83 (which while it is a child includes part of the kids torso as well as his head), and the Suit Stuffing (which is so powerful it causes the eyeballs to be shot way out of the skull, which the aftermath is shown in the FNaF 1 death screen). This also wouldn't effect:

  • UCN - Has its own 9-B feats separate from the Canon version.
  • Purple Guy: As he still is able to rip apart animatronics with ease, which would put him above their durability. (Note: Springtrap downscales from PG)
This leads to my last point, FNaF still would have 9-B durability, due to the fact Springtrap's body survived the destruction of Fazbear Fright, although he was slightly damaged, and the animatronics are composed of various metals which would be this level to bend and break.

tl;dr I support 9-B canon FNaF dude to various skull crushing/damaging feats.
 
Evidence is that it only bites off the frontal lobe, not flat out crushed his entire skull, else they would have died instantly. We can't assume it's wall level without actual calc to back it up. And we certainly shouldn't assume the entire skull was crushed. The feats you have on there aren't wall. It's again just the skull crushing which isn't wall since it's only crushing a part of a persons skull, and a child's skull which is much smaller. Making yo eyes and teeth pop out isn't wall either.

It doesn't matter it was a larger part of the head, he bite it off, not broke the entire skull apart. Biting a piece off is vastly different to breaking it apart entirely. Not only does biting it off means less broke, but it wasn't even the entire skull. It wasn't even that large part of the skull. Suit stuffing doesn't help cause we have no calc and reason to believe that 9-B. And both skull breaking instances aren't 9-B without calc to back it up. Breaking part of a skull doesn't equate to Breaking the entire skull. And this feat is not very high into wall, so more reason why this feat needs a calc before we assume wall. And the child feat is an even worse case cause this is a child. Their bones are WAY smaller than a average human. It would largely under scale to already low wall level. And further more underscale since he didn't crush the entire skull.

Being?

Purple guys feat is a bit iffy considering they are pretty broken down animatronics. Regardless, if they don't have wall durability, it doesn't help much at all.

Skull crashing is invalid. Still requires calcs to stay that level since it's such a low level of wall and only part of the skull. At the very best we could assume baseline wall until calced. But it can't and shouldn't be scaled to full skull crushing since it's not. The fire feat may be able to keep them there If it's legit, however this regardless is a downgrade. We certainly can't scale them to entire skull crushing when that's clearly not what they do. Bare minimum skull crushing is Baseline at best, should be calced though.
 
I'm more leaning to Butter's argumenst

Alsocorrection about child's skull, what matters is that they weigh less and not that they're smaller
 
Buttersamuri said:
Evidence is that it only bites off the frontal lobe, not flat out crushed his entire skull, else they would have died instantly. Actually that isn't the case. Also the wording is important. "But then there was The Bite of '87. Yeah. I-It's amazing that the human body can live without the frontal lobe, you know?". Where is your evidence that it was only the frontal lobe? all it is saying only the frontal lobe could not 1. Recover, 2. was removed, 3. damaged beyond repair, etc.

We can't assume it's wall level without actual calc to back it up. And we certainly shouldn't assume the entire skull was crushed. Depends on the feat. I can somewhat get behind that for the "Bite of 87", but not Suit Stuffing.

The feats you have on there aren't wall. It's again just the skull crushing which isn't wall since it's only crushing a part of a persons skull, and a child's skull which is much smaller. Bite of 83 included the child's head and upper torso.

Making yo eyes and teeth pop out isn't wall either. It is if your crushing someone's skull into a metal devise to the point it does so, which is the case.

It doesn't matter it was a larger part of the head, he bite it off, not broke the entire skull apart. Biting a piece off is vastly different to breaking it apart entirely. Not only does biting it off means less broke, but it wasn't even the entire skull. No where does it say the part was bitten off, just that the frontal lobe was damaged beyond repair. Could imply multiple things.

It wasn't even that large part of the skull. Suit stuffing doesn't help cause we have no calc and reason to believe that 9-B. Actually, we do since we have a skull crushing calc. Equal force is applied, don't see why that would be needed to be calced differently.

And both skull breaking instances aren't 9-B without calc to back it up. So all skull crushing in fiction should be calced individually rather than using the common calc? Sorry just a tad confused.

Breaking part of a skull doesn't equate to Breaking the entire skull. True, but again that is only one feat, which is backed up by other feats. A feat mind you, that your interpreting in a different way than I am, so not sure how we can rectify that individually. :/

And this feat is not very high into wall, so more reason why this feat needs a calc before we assume wall. When the feat is a bit up for interpretation (referring to Bite of 87), it should be at least scaled to other feats.

And the child feat is an even worse case cause this is a child. Their bones are WAY smaller than a average human. It would largely under scale to already low wall level. And further more underscale since he didn't crush the entire skull. Crushed the kid's head and upper torso in one bite. And kinda did, issues are with the graphics.

Being? Tearing people apart, which includes head and arms. Head alone is 9-B. Also deal skull damage, but not much. Also the FNaF 1 phone calls are canon to UCN.

Purple guys feat is a bit iffy considering they are pretty broken down animatronics. Evidence of this?

Regardless, if they don't have wall durability, it doesn't help much at all. They do.

Skull crashing is invalid. Still requires calcs to stay that level since it's such a low level of wall and only part of the skull. At the very best we could assume baseline wall until calced. But it can't and shouldn't be scaled to full skull crushing since it's not. Again, you seem to only be focusing on "Bite of 87", and even that is still vague aside from the fact the frontal lobe was damaged.

The fire feat may be able to keep them there if it's legit, however this regardless is a downgrade. It is, it has even been on Springtrap's profile for quite a while.

We certainly can't scale them to entire skull crushing when that's clearly not what they do. Bare minimum skull crushing is Baseline at best, should be calced though. Again, you seem to be taking all the feats and spinning them to the weakest instead of just going the average. Not saying to go with the highest feat, but still.

Also another couple supporting feats for canon even if the downgrade happens (from "Freddy Fazbear's Pizza Simulator" liability animatronics, which likely should somewhat scale to the toys, OGs, etc):
Click to expand...
My apologies if I came off strong. Just trying to get my point across.
 
What are the conclusions here?
 
Actually that isn't the case. Also the wording is important. "But then there was The Bite of '87. Yeah. I-It's amazing that the human body can live without the frontal lobe, you know?". Where is your evidence that it was only the frontal lobe? all it is saying only the frontal lobe could not 1. Recover, 2. was removed, 3. damaged beyond repair, etc.

Yes it is. A person could live with their frontal lobe being crushed sure, that's entirely possible; but that wasn't my point. The point is their entire skull could not be crushed without them dying basically instantly, the fact they concentrated on the frontal lobe so much indicates even more that's around where they bite; not the entire skull, just the frontal part. And while this could get wall depending on how much, it shouldn't be assumed without a calc. Especially since a child's skull would yield much lower results. As well the feat being very low end wall level when crushing the Entire skull rather than part. Still needs a calc and is Baseline at absolute best without one.


Depends on the feat. I can somewhat get behind that for the "Bite of 87", but not Suit Stuffing.

All feats currently have no reason to Dudley scale to full skull crushing. It's only part of the skull, a child's skull is much easier to break, and a calc would be required else we need to assume baseline.


Bite of 83 included the child's head and upper torso.

Which still has no calc. And a child's skull would back scale Pretty heavily on this already low end wall level feat. Again. Calc it needed else baseline should be assumed until then.


It is if your crushing someone's skull into a metal devise to the point it does so, which is the case.

It is not. Breaking someone's skull entirely is not required for their eyes to pop out of their head. It's not very clearly the case. Very clearly would say that's what is happening. It just says their eyes and teeth could out of their head. On top of that, it still would need some sort of calc, as it's not even full skull crushing to do it.

No where does it say the part was bitten off, just that the frontal lobe was damaged beyond repair. Could imply multiple things.

Which means I'm right here because we can't assume the most when nothing even remotely implies it. On top of that your wrong here cause the fact they go over how the frontal lobe was the damaged part, and that's such the concentrated on area. It's MUCH more believable they bite off just the frontal lobe. We shouldn't assume any higher without evidence which this lacks any.


Actually, we do since we have a skull crushing calc. Equal force is applied, don't see why that would be needed to be calced differently.

Except no. We don't. If I punched the top half off a car, I don't scale to the car destruction calc because I obviously destroyed only a part of it and only scale to a fraction of the needed power. This is no different. We aren't and shouldn't scale to skull crushing when it didn't crush the entire skull. It needs a calc to make it proper.

So all skull crushing in fiction should be calced individually rather than using the common calc? Sorry just a tad confused.

No. These skull feats need to be calced as they don't actually crush the entire skull. Only partial crushing and not even a large amount of crushing it. We know the general area it crushed, so it's calcable, so it should be calced so the results are accurate rather than assumed. Any feat that actually crushes the Entire skull is fine to scale to this. Not this one though.

True, but again that is only one feat, which is backed up by other feats. A feat mind you, that your interpreting in a different way than I am, so not sure how we can rectify that individually. :/

That doesn't make it an acceptation. It still needs to follow the same rules so it can be accurate. we know the general area it broke, so that's possible to calc. We can get a much more accurate number if we just take the context it gives us. It was the frontal lobe area. Not the whole skull. So we should assume the frontal lobe and calc that area for the feat.

When the feat is a bit up for interpretation (referring to Bite of 87), it should be at least scaled to other feats.

And we can't assume your end as there's no evidence and a lot more suggestion my end is right. Frontal lobe area. Not entire skull. Calc that and we will be fine and accurate

Crushed the kid's head and upper torso in one bite. And kinda did, issues are with the graphics.

If your talking about when that kid was put inside the Fazbear suit by those other kids, it wasn't the head and torso, it was just his head. And still needs a calc since a child's body is much easier to break. The graphics still don't excuse it. Still needs a calc.

Tearing people apart, which includes head and arms. Head alone is 9-B. Also deal skull damage, but not much. Also the FNaF 1 phone calls are canon to UCN.

No. Crushing the head is wall, ripping heads off is Class 1 and LS. Which differs to AP.

Evidence of this?

That's just common info on them. They weren't exactly well conditioned robots.


They do.

Currently I see none that shouldn't be assumed baseline at the very best.


Again, you seem to only be focusing on "Bite of 87", and even that is still vague aside from the fact the frontal lobe was damaged.

Again, you seem to be taking all the feats and spinning them to the weakest instead of just going the average. Not saying to go with the highest feat, but still.

To cover these both. I'm not using the weaker end. I'm just not making a blind assumption that has no backing evidence. The Game and book is much more clear it attack the Frontal lobe. The front part of the skull. It didn't crush the entire skull. It even specified someone can live without their frontal lobe, not their entire skull or brain. This is much more leveled to reality, so then having their entire skull crushed and surviving is Not realistic at all.


To sum it up.

We do not assume full skull crushing here. The evidence Points Heavily to frontal lobe being crushed. Not the entire skull. It doesn't matter that "it's vague". It hardly is vague about it, it literally concentrated on the part of the skull they bit at, and That's not a standing argument that makes your side valid either. My end actually has something supporting it to be more accurate, it having statements and implications of where the bite happened. Your end does not have such supporting evidence, and tries to fully skull a skull crush when the statements actually point against it. As well does the facts of what would happen if ones skull was crushed.
 
Buttersamuri said:
Yes it is. A person could live with their frontal lobe being crushed sure, that's entirely possible; but that wasn't my point. The point is their entire skull could not be crushed without them dying basically instantly, the fact they concentrated on the frontal lobe so much indicates even more that's around where they bite; not the entire skull, just the frontal part. And while this could get wall depending on how much, it shouldn't be assumed without a calc. Especially since a child's skull would yield much lower results. As well the feat being very low end wall level when crushing the Entire skull rather than part. Still needs a calc and is Baseline at absolute best without one. I think I am finally getting what you are saying, though are you saying the Bo87 was on a child? Cause it usually is assumed it was an adult.

All feats currently have no reason to Dudley scale to full skull crushing. It's only part of the skull, a child's skull is much easier to break, and a calc would be required else we need to assume baseline. Suit Stuffing is done on night guards, not children, but I get what you are saying.

Which still has no calc. And a child's skull would back scale Pretty heavily on this already low end wall level feat. Again. Calc it needed else baseline should be assumed until then. Makes sense.


It is not. Breaking someone's skull entirely is not required for their eyes to pop out of their head. It's not very clearly the case. Very clearly would say that's what is happening. It just says their eyes and teeth could out of their head. On top of that, it still would need some sort of calc, as it's not even full skull crushing to do it. Breaking a majority of it is, and the feat would support that as there is a large amount of metal and computing devises in the head, but yeah calc.

Which means I'm right here because we can't assume the most when nothing even remotely implies it. On top of that your wrong here cause the fact they go over how the frontal lobe was the damaged part, and that's such the concentrated on area. It's MUCH more believable they bite off just the frontal lobe. We shouldn't assume any higher without evidence which this lacks any. I was referring to it being crushed rather than bitten off. Even just based on the majority of the FNaF cast's mouths, those aren't going to be good at ripping things off rather than crushing. But yeah, calc.


Except no. We don't. If I punched the top half off a car, I don't scale to the car destruction calc because I obviously destroyed only a part of it and only scale to a fraction of the needed power. This is no different. We aren't and shouldn't scale to skull crushing when it didn't crush the entire skull. It needs a calc to make it proper. Ah ok

No. These skull feats need to be calced as they don't actually crush the entire skull. Only partial crushing and not even a large amount of crushing it. We know the general area it crushed, so it's calcable, so it should be calced so the results are accurate rather than assumed. Any feat that actually crushes the Entire skull is fine to scale to this. Not this one though. Ok, thanks for clearing that up. Sorry I worded that so poorly. Pretty assholish and I apologize.

Crushed the kid's head and upper torso in one bite. And kinda did, issues are with the graphics.

No. Crushing the head is wall, ripping heads off is Class 1 and LS. Which differs to AP.

Tearing off a head has been calced at 9-B, and that calc has been used on this wiki on multiple profiles: ex. Reptile (Mortal Kombat: Rebirth). Lower than Skull Crushing, but is 9-B.

That's just common info on them. They weren't exactly well conditioned robots. Their endoskeleton is though for the most part, which is what matters.

Currently I see none that shouldn't be assumed baseline at the very best. Ok

To cover these both. I'm not using the weaker end. I'm just not making a blind assumption that has no backing evidence. The Game and book is much more clear it attack the Frontal lobe. The front part of the skull. It didn't crush the entire skull. It even specified someone can live without their frontal lobe, not their entire skull or brain. This is much more leveled to reality, so then having their entire skull crushed and surviving is Not realistic at all. People have survived having their skull crushed before, even hit by speeding cars. But that isn't the point here. I don't recall the novels mentioning Bo87, but ok. Makes sense.


To sum it up. […]

You basically convinced me on most of your points, thanks for being civil. Sorry about my attitude.
Click to expand...
 
Have you reached an agreement now?
 
Seems we agree now that the skull crushing feats on FNAF require a calc and shouldn't be assumed to scale to the common feat. So we remove that link to skull crushing. Try and get the skull feats calced, and in the meantime, this feat would scale to baseline. It appears they scale to being entirely set on fire, so that is where they seem to scale best to atm. This would effect basically all their fights as well that isn't against each other.
 
@Headless

To cover this point real quickly. Scorpions wall level there cause he scales to Johnny Cage who broke a table which is wall. Not via the head ripping off.
 
@Butter

Okay. That seems fine.
 
Right. I forgot about this.

I'll ask around on someone doing it, and try it myself if nobodies interested
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
FNaF Novel Trilogy: An AP/Durability Upgrade (Needs Mod Votes)
2
Replies
47
Views
3K
Ruby_R_Dracula
Ruby_R_Dracula
Ruby_R_Dracula
FNAF: AP Upgrade
Replies
33
Views
2K
Nikito9009
Dark_Soul20189
  • Locked
FNAF 1 scaling chain Rework
Replies
12
Views
3K
FinePoint
FinePoint
Ruby_R_Dracula
  • Locked
FNAF: The Class 25 Upgrade
Replies
18
Views
1K
Reiner04
Reiner04
Perequeliri993
The FNAF Continuities, Remnant Revamp, and more! CRT
2 3
Replies
104
Views
11K
Perequeliri993
Perequeliri993
Back
Top