• 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.

Freezing and Temperature Feats Continued Again

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm aware of the Sun's core feat being Multi-City Block level+; however normal human sized character surviving a blast that vaporized a mountain is not Island level. Because your body doesn't absorb the full heat since most of it is scattered across the AoE. Same goes with stuff like Incineration Cannons or surviving the epic center of a propane tank exploding is only Wall level.
 
thought you said thermal blasts dont have an epicenterThe reason why surviving being in the core of the Sun is 8-A is because of thermal equilibrium. It is NOT because of aoe. We cant assume that equilibrium occurs in cases like the incineration cannon or some other very high temperature attack. These can reach temperatures of millions of degrees celsius (or logically should anyways) and by the time a character reaches thermal equilibrium (by matching their temp with the attack) they probably will have already tanked almost all the energy of the attack.
 
The Incineration Cannon is like 99.9% radiation based and was specifically designed to be used against large amounts of Biomass. It's not as effective against vehicles as it is against fleshy creatures and is the polar opposite the 9-A Anti-Vehicle rockets and 9-B fragmentation grenades that oneshot the same tanks. It's extremely common throughout many military themed verses such as various FPS's and RTS games different weapons are designed for different things. It's only 9-A levels of blunt force trauma at best, and most of the bosses that do take hits from it would only absorb High 8-C levels of heat at best. There's not proof that it has anything beyond 3,287 degrees celcius as it doesn't always instantly vaporize Ceramic Titanium.

Someone could blast a Plasma grenade or plasma rifle without melting a wall, but a fragmentation grenade blows the same wall to smithereens despite having a much lower energy yield. We scale those individual weapons based on their own calculations and not loophole the strongest heavy plasma cannons in the verse and backwards scale to every single weapon that lacks the same calculation.
 
Please stop trying to force discussion when it's going to be lost after the forum move anyway...
 
Sorry about posting more, but I just noticed that DDM said that plasma and gas phase through targets, and that heat only doesn't phase through targets when the heat is solid. Wtf? I get electromagnetic radiation phasing through objects but neither gas nor plasma will phase through an object.
 
Lightning is plasma, that's kind of a universal fact right there. But yes, please stop bumping this thread...
 
One thing I notice is that, I only know how to do that once. Like the previous thread has all by the last 4 posts saved and without any edits to OP or stuff like that, but unsure how add more updates to it shows even more recent versions. But I could save this one as well.

Edit: Nvm, the extension is the way to go.
 
There is a box which says "Save Page Now" further down the front page. You can paste the URL of the page that you wish to save there.
 
Lightning is plasma, that's kind of a universal fact right there.

Dude. The electrical energy in lightning (electrons) are what can phase through stuff (sort of, they just pass through the spaces in between particles iirc). This electrical energy energizes the air it passes through so much that it turns into plasma. This plasma DOES NOT phase through objects. Stop spreading misinformation

I would just like to point out that this isn't just a petty argument. DDM is actually arguing that heat phases through objects and thus we must use an entirely different method of calcing heat dura (radiation energy calculator). There are valid arguments as to why heat doesn't scale to normal AP, but this is NOT one of them.
 
As far as I am aware Jaakubb is probably correct. My apologies Medeus.
 
I don't see anywhere where DDM even mentioned the term "phasing", just that Lightning is plasma.

I only see him mentioning that UV waves go through glass, nothing else.
 
He was using lightning as an example to prove how

gas and plasma does phase through your body. Unless the heat was solid, it does phase.
 
@Antvasima, there's no need to apologize to me, but actually heat does phase through windows. I've heated up my own bedroom before and even with closed doors, windows, and sealed doors, the heat still escaped and reached the rest of the house. So it's not "Misinformation" for gas to slip through solid objects. Still, thermal energy isn't tangible much like the kinetic energy of bullets, or chunks of a bomb; it's just the kinetic energy of the particles much like in a lightning bolt is what thermal energy is. Still, MrKing brought up offsite that a Tier 7 battery detonating does work more like a lightning bolt and not like a nuke. Blasts that are 8-B levels of heat but only 9-B levels of force such as gas ignition feats do very much function exactly the way I mentioned it even if for other details.

Anyway, heat waves are still identical to freeze rays but in reverse direction. So a cooling laser than forms an Ice Berg would still be the same as a gas ignition feat. What Jaakubb is arguing would still implying tanking the epic center of a gas ignation feat would be 8-B which Kepekley and Antoniofer argued against a while back.
 
That doesn't mean the gas is phasing through solid objects. Solids can still be heated and transfer heat. Windows don't have 100% perfect seals. Idk why we're doing this rn when none of it will be saved though, I specifically hadn't said anything yet because I was under the impression we were waiting for the forum movefor this.
 
It isn't "Phasing" per say, more like all solid objects do have holes in them even if really tiny to the point of not being visible. Gas and plasma can slip right through them. Nothing really has "100% seals" really Unless the objects were frozen to AZ temperatures.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
@Antvasima, there's no need to apologize to me, but actually heat does phase through What Jaakubb is arguing would still implying tanking the epic center of a gas ignation feat would be 8-B which Kepekley and Antoniofer argued against a while back.
Click to expand...
What was the argument? I know nothing of gas explosions.
 
Because, the 8-B stuff comes form something called "Chemical energy". I'm a little tied up to dig for the old thread, but Kepekley brought up saying that chemical reacions are not real explosions but rather a blast of thermal energy or radiation that was stored in the gasoline. The amount of heat being produced is 9-B even though. For example this looks like a Tier 8 explosion, but in reality, it's just a chemical reaction where tanking the "Epic center" is simply 9-B at best.

Edit: Here is the thread.
 
IRL gas explosions never show signs of overpressure where they destroy other materials within their range unlike what fictional gas explosions show most of the time.

Which is why when a massive gas explosion happens and there's evidence of the surroundings being blasted to smithereens and everything is sent flying, we use the good old explosion radius calc instead of the chemical yield.
 
For something like, there's 9-A levels of over-pressure but 8-A levels of chemical energy or Ionizing radiation. Only the over-pressure scales to durability, where as the latter needs to be calculated based on how much the energy the body actually absorbs. Which won't generally be any more impressive than the over pressure.
 
Why isn't this closed? This discussion will be deleted and I can't really fathom why its being left open when it was agreed to wait until after the forum move was complete to continue this topic. If you want the spamming of this thread to stop there is a very easy solution to that issue.
 
Wokistan said:
\Idk why we're doing this rn when none of it will be saved though, I specifically hadn't said anything yet because I was under the impression we were waiting for the forum movefor this.
Click to expand...
I much like wok was under the impression we were still going to wait but if thats the case carry on I suppose...
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
For something like, there's 9-A levels of over-pressure but 8-A levels of chemical energy or Ionizing radiation. Only the over-pressure scales to durability, where as the latter needs to be calculated based on how much the energy the body actually absorbs. Which won't generally be any more impressive than the over pressure.
Click to expand...
IIRC we don't really care about the chemical energy part if there's overpressure, we just slap on the explosion yield radius and that's it. We simply ignore the chemical energy in that case and just stick with the overpressure.
 
If there's a specific temperature, that could get decent results; which there usually isn't, then that could also get calculated. But overpressure is more reliable yes.

Speaking of which, I'm surprised the Overpressure calculation method was never added to the Explosion Yield Calculations.
 
Well, I personally prefer if we only focus on minor revisions until after the forum move. The Internet Archive is not a good replacement for actual discussion threads, and we might not get them all properly saved in the first place.
 
@KLOL506, I agree with that 100%, but let's say for example the temperature is outright stated to be a certain degrees Celsius, that can be used. But, we don't assume some Tier 6 Ultravoilet wave was Quintillions of degrees Celsius for instance. Other details such as, "It's hot enough to vaporize certain elements" are also fine to use but not beyond the "Boiling point".
 
@Ant See that's what I thought we were doing as well so I was a bit baffled why people are still discussing things here. If they really can't wait/want to convince another user they can take it to the message walls. Why not just close this until the forum move is done?

If people really want to keep this discussion/revision open I won't fight it/post about it again I just find it odd that we're trying to continue this now when it can be put on hold (something most people seemed to agree with...) until we're situated on the new forum.
 
I'll make a new thread with the same OP after the forum move; I got it saved on a letter.txt file as well. But for now, this thread can be used to boost discussion posts and I can also include a saved link on the new OP.
 
Yes. We cannot pretend that the threads won't be removed, so it is likely best to put a pause to the larger revisions.

It is still a good idea to use the Internet Archive backup feature for future reference though.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
For something like, there's 9-A levels of over-pressure but 8-A levels of chemical energy or Ionizing radiation.
Click to expand...
No there isn't. The claim that the gas explosion produces 8-A levels of chemical energy is based off of a flawed calcing method. Gas explosions aren't the same as normal explosions. As you said earlier, gas explosions only have 9-B levels of energy.

Being in the epicenter of an actual 8-A thermal blast DOES scale to at least half of 8-A dura, or at least 8-A heat dura. Maybe not 8-A normal dura.
 
Except it isn't based on a flawed calc'ing method? Energy density is a very real thing, and gas explosions aren't even explosions in the first place, it's just combustion.
 
DarkDragonMedeus said:
But, we don't assume some Tier 6 Ultravoilet wave was Quintillions of degrees Celsius for instance.
Click to expand...
I half agree and half disagree. We can consider it as a possibility, ruling out the possibility of equilibrium (so we assume that they probably absorbed all of the energy), but we CANNOT use this temperature value in calcs as that would be calc stacking.
 
I have to unsubscribe from this thread due to time constraints. You can notify me later via my message wall if you need my help.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Crabwhale
Quantum Manipulation: A Broken Relic of Old
2
Replies
54
Views
7K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Arkenis
  • Locked
Updating Fear Manipulation
Replies
12
Views
2K
Deagonx
Deagonx
Wankbreaker
  • Locked
Tier 2 hotfix.
Replies
25
Views
4K
DarkDragonMedeus
DarkDragonMedeus
Crabwhale
  • Locked
Power Page Revision Round 3: Radioactively Bad Categorization
Replies
13
Views
1K
Crabwhale
Crabwhale
Flashlight237
Upscaling: Should There Be A Number For It?
Replies
12
Views
1K
Flashlight237
Flashlight237
Back
Top