• 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.

Giant Squid Downgrade

Well supposedly, if we multiply the pressure by the area of their teeth then the displacement of the bite we can get energy? Idk how accurate is that though.
 
I think Anton shot that idea down a few comments ago
 
How about, for example, "10-A via energy output. Constitutes a serious threat to 9-B animals via natural weaponry"?
 
What energy output though?

Also this is an issue for like prehistoric animals, since we don't have much information on what damage they tend to do.
 
True enough, but figuring out some variation on this theme seems like our least bad option.
 
Giant Squids are threatening to 9-B Animals via its venom, not energy output or anything like that. That would just be durability negation if it's via venom.

And yeah, prehistoric Animals are really hard to judge given no one has recorded feats. Stuff like T-Rex, and Triceratops are clearly 9-B.
 
Dinosaurs are obviously 9-B via size alone, and so are most large land mammals (Elephants being a dead giveaway) with most being large enough to easily yield destructive energy results faaaaaaaar higher than their tackles, though some large ones like whales could be suitable candidates for baseline 9-B or being close to it.
 
Another thing is that teeth and claws kind of suffer the same problems as most swords and knives profiles do. It's damaging due to sharpness rather than energy yield. Although, melee weapons also have problems in which they cannot properly be tiered without a wielder.

Adamantium is kind of a different story as that's a supermetal that kind of ignores physics.
 
I think that Spino's suggestion seems fine.
 
That seems like our best option, yes.
 
I think so, yes. Thank you for helping out.
 
I don't think they have KE attributed to them in the first place.
 
IDK, we obviously disregarded bite force from humans so I don't think it'd be applicable for the hominids that don't use teeth to kill either
 
How is slamming a tentacle doing in striking strength and lifting strength?

Like grappling strength as lifting strength and KE divided by its working tentacles to get striking strength per attack group of tentacles? Or an even better model?
 
Underwater stuff is pretty hard to tier properly. It takes more energy to push a body underwater, but at the same time the near lack of gravity and the higher drag force both make what should be 9-B or even higher something a human could survive relatively easily.
 
True, but kinetic energy by swimming is still used sometimes, no? That still comes with the same problems, since under water the same energy is quickly wasted to moving the water away, and not every character can do it above ground.
 
I think that monkeys and gorillas can probably get a higher via bite force rating.
 
Thank you for helping out.
 
Yes. That should be fine.
 
Back
Top