- 12,436
- 4,562
As the title says.
Basically the 3-B values for Asura's Wrath god tiers are just bad, so I'll cover them in the new recalcs I made.
1) Chakravatin's Big Moon: The original calc basically used a formula that uses the radius and not the mass as the basis, resulting in a hilariously low result as the Moon has a faaaaaaaaaar lower Schwarzschild radius for the mass than the respective Black Hole, getting in 4-A. Used the Mass instead and got a result that is around 2 billions times higher than their current 3-B level.
2) Chakravatin exploding: Ok, so... the original calc is a mess.
Basically the 3-B values for Asura's Wrath god tiers are just bad, so I'll cover them in the new recalcs I made.
1) Chakravatin's Big Moon: The original calc basically used a formula that uses the radius and not the mass as the basis, resulting in a hilariously low result as the Moon has a faaaaaaaaaar lower Schwarzschild radius for the mass than the respective Black Hole, getting in 4-A. Used the Mass instead and got a result that is around 2 billions times higher than their current 3-B level.
2) Chakravatin exploding: Ok, so... the original calc is a mess.
- For the cosmic inverse-square formula it uses the galaxy explosion and not the Sun's GBE formula, when not even the baseline 3-B does this.
- The radius is downplayed a lot because apparently there wasn't much the Chakravatin's statue besides those galaxies, HOWEVER:
- The fight clearly happened in an universe and not some empty pocket realm.
- There were clearly stars around Asura while he fought in some visuals and also around the explosion after that Chakravatin died.
- The reason why the space around Chakravatin seemed empty is just... simple. The statue already makes thoe galaxies look tiny, so if you're distant enough from it to the point the statue is a small dot, you wouldn't see the galaxies either. And even then, that seems to be just a graphics limitation than anything, game developing can't be always consistent after all.
- The scans of these 3 points are in the new calc blog. Besides, saying that at least a star wasn't at the edge or close to it simply seems too much of a weird assumption.