Uhm, not really sure why you are trying to convolute the feat. She literally moved her head to the side and caught the bullet by accelerating her hand. This is a basic reaction to something flying by one's hand. Not to mention you are literally harping on what could be a very slight artist error of scaling, which happens across literally all manga.
The bullet panel clearly gives us a distance to work with as that is the panel directly being shown by the author to be the distance it came from hitting her. Literally any movement she made off-panel would still be bare hypersonic given this. This argument comes off as really disingenuous.
Especially
when she literally
parried [2] and
dodged all of the six first bullets from short range with ease, only being taken by surprise by the last one due to it being a real bullet and Maki only accounting for the six rubber in her barrel.
Your last argument makes no sense. Maki is stationary as the bullet approaches her. Anything that happens prior to that explicit zoom in we get matters not, as we have the distance between her and the bullet travelling towards her, and can plug in a speed.
This brings alot of questions:
1- What is the evidence that Maki moved her head first to the side and then caught the bullet, and are you aware of anyone before you who had the same observation?
2- If Maki moved her head to the side and [1] is a representation of reality, then why can't we see Maki's tilted head if it is less than 1 cm away from the bullet?
3- If Maki moved her head away from danger, then what is the point of catching the bullet?
4- What kind of off-screen movements are you hypothesizing Maki did? It sounds like teleportation to me if both [1] and [2] occured in reality. Did she do a backflip away from the bullet and then turn her head to the side and then catch the bullet for example, and are we going to use such hypothesized movements in the calculation?
5- From what I understand, you are saying that Panel [2] doesn't play any role in determining the timeframe and we just plug in from [1]?
Making movement to catch a bullet when it is 1 cm away is different than making movement to parry or dodge it when it is much further away.
You said you want to modify the calc, but I don't see any meaningful difference from your position and the calc itself. It seems that the calc was unaware of the inconsistency, but you are acknowledging the inconsistency and saying we should ignore it anyway.
My position is very simple:
1- Don't ignore the more recent panel where the feat is actually occurring
2- Harmonize between all relevant panels to eliminate inconsistency
None of that has literally anything to do with the context of this argument. The point is that she has to utilize cursed energy with her weapons to affect spirits. Which makes sense, given they are spirits.
That is a completely separate topic from her adding cursed energy to her bullets to hit people she isn't trying to kill. There is literally no indication she utilizes cursed energy with her rubber bullets. Once again, it was brought up to signify that Maki had no cursed energy and was still a much better fighter than her sister, who predominantly just amped her bullets with Cursed energy because that's all she could do. Context.
Your argued that Mai uses rubber bullets for both incapacitating humans and killing Cursed Spirits, implying that adding Cursed Energy to the rubber bullets makes them certified to be lethal.
| Yes, she used cursed energy to kill Curses because her rubber bullets can't interact with curses. This doesn't prove she is utilizing it vs humans especially given that she isn't supposed to kill them. |
But she normally just uses regular bullets against Cursed Spirits and nothing indicates she uses rubber bullets against them, and nothing implies adding her low-level Cursed Energy to rubber bullets makes them unviable for incapacitation.
So that has very much to do with the argument. If you agree that there is nothing incoherent about the rubber bullets being reinforced to incapitate humans, we can move on.
Not really this is an assumption on your part. I could easily make the case that Nobara utilized curse reinforcement when shot from close range, and didn't when caught off guard and attack thus she was impacted much more severely.
Especially when we are given a visual indication as to when cursed energy is amping a projectile such as the case with
Kamo's arrows
Pointing that it is a possibility doesn't challenge my position at all; which is that it is possible the bullets were reinforced and it is possible they weren't (which is an extremely tame position), followed by the position that your conclusion is unsupported in either case.
You are the one proclaiming that the bullets were definitely not reinforced, which means that you need to demonstrate that your position is not an assumption or mere possibility.
I mean we can show panels where larger amped projectiles are not drawn with Cursed Energy
No it's not.
1.) As a matter of practice low ends are used as accurate barometers for various qualities of feats. They are used to establish a realistic feat for low-end performances for things when a more explicit number cannot be gauged. They are defaulted to specifically when no viable comparison is given. This is not at all the case here. We know what the bullets look like, we know what they are comprised of, we know what gun its being shot out of, and we know the gun is used for incapacitation. Given how bullet speed inherently works, it's absolutely ludicrous to say that we should equalize this particular gun's performance with a gun from 50 years ago that suits a completely different purpose than the one here, using completely different ammo. So I whole heartedly disagree with your first statement.
The gun and speed you are referencing are
slugs fired out of low propellant 40mm launchers. You can't equate to any weapon that can propel rubber bullets for
obvious reasons. Here is an example of what that gun looks like and the size of ammo that is fired from it.
I shouldn't have to explain to you why non low propellant, non riot, real magum, conical shaped bullets, would shoot much faster than this.
It is of note that later on you state that you are not trying to gauge an explicit number, yet you imply that you have an explicit number here.
If there is no explicit number or any sort of standardized ammunition, and 60 m/s rubber bullets exists from 50 years ago till today, then that is the low-end.
Also we don't really know what the bullets are composed of. Sometimes rubber bullets are fully made from rubber, sometimes they have a non-rubber core, and sometimes 'rubber bullets' is used as an umbrella term for less letal kinetic impact projectiles which are made from all sort of materials like plastic.
Ironically you had no issue referencing slugs when they had higher speed, but when shown slugs with lower speed you complain about their shape. If you have a database of smaller sized rubber bullet models that shows that the low-end of their velocity as a rule is at a certain speed then that is one thing, but as far as we know so far the general rule for rubber bullets is that the low-end for rubber bullet velocity is 60 m/s (and yes they can be much higher, often with limitations such as rapid loss of velocity or requirement to riochet on the ground, but that is not the low-end). This is the closest thing I could find:
As previously explained, smoke tells us absolutely nothing about the potency of the propellant; you can have a strong propellant with little to no smoke, and a weak propellant the produces lots of smoke. So you have yet to substantiate assumptions about the propellant.
The rubber bullets not having a blunt nose and with smaller surface area increases the risk of penetration, and they have less leeway to be faster.
2.) Except, it is. A bullet's force is directly related to its mass and velocity. I literally explained to you time and time again why the comparison is invalid and you have yet to actually properly address my points outside of "we just use the low end".
Literally the opposite with how we treat fiction in the site.
From the Kinetic Energy Feats page:
| Do not calculate speed from kinetic energy: The kinetic energy an object was calculated to possess, in any way whatsoever, should not be considered as related through its speed. While the formula technically can be used to relate those values in both direction this is disregarded in practice. One reason for this is that fiction in general differentiates between the attack potency and the speed of a character. Another reason is that it returns unrealistic values, as even a Small City level+ punch would already have Relativistic+ speed. Out of similar reasons mass should also not be calculated from it. |
Not sure why you think it is persuasive to point at high-ends as if they invalidate the existence of the low-ends (I can easily bring at least half a dozen examples of rubber bullets with velocities less than 100 m/s), and the exact same dissimilarites used in an attempt to invalidate to low-ends would invalidate the high-ends you are using as an argument.
Let's look at Mai again in light of this information.
- Shooting from a magnum. Check.
- Not low propellant rounds or firing mechanism dictated by the power of the magnum and her utilizing a powder mechanism. Bullets are not sponge padded, or spherical and look exactly like regular bullets. Check.
- Strong enough to knock Nobara off her feet from dozens of meters away. Check.
Rubber bullets are often fired from shotguns which are also capable of firing conventional ammunition.
No info regarding the power of the propellant. Being shaped like regular bullets increases penetration risk, which can be alleviated by reducing the bullet's speed.
There are verses with regular guns with Tier 8 feats, but we can't assume that they fire bullets faster than regular guns.
Good thing I never argued that.
Me: We shouldn't use extra force as evidence for more speed.
You: Except, it is. A bullet's force is directly related to its mass and velocity. |
Saying that you are just using rough guestimation to figure out that the bullet is faster than such and such m/s, instead of using more detailed calculations. makes it worse.
You're strawmanning me. I utilized the Nobara scene to display why 60m/s figure was dumb. Not to derive an explicit KE, or try and directly compare it to a specific speed. That is why I offered the plethora of examples placing the speed well above 200m/s.
It is only dumb if you assume that we can guess the speed from kinetic energy in fiction.
There are also examples of rubber bullets well below 200 m/s. Should we ignore them?
