• 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.

Marvel 9-A Calcs Are Bad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I believe the darker parts are supposed to be sort of the underground parts around the crater seen via "X-Ray" vision. I've seen a few artists do that, though never in a panel like that, that looks very odd.
 
This calculation is giving me anxiety. The thickness ends are blowing me when simply using the thickness of one of the bricks should do fine. This is also very clearly fragmentation. No idea why pulverization was used here. I'm going to recalculate this ad post it here.
"Pulverization" is used for craters as well because pulverization is also compressive strength and the wall was compressed in. For example this calc
 
Anyways I think the issue kinda is that Falcon and Crossbones shouldn't be representative of standard 9-As.

We'll leave this thread open a while for feat gathering, and I'll at least get Crossbones completed until then. Depending on the results we may yeet low-street to 9-B+, we'll see
 
bgH97Ku_d.webp

Here's Moon Knight deforming a car, not sure how much it would be worth or the issue though.
 
Would somebody be willing to calculate the Moon Knight feat, or is it redundant?
 
"Pulverization" is used for craters as well because pulverization is also compressive strength and the wall was compressed in. For example this calc
Usually that'd work if the compression doesn't leave much behind. I can't say it's compressive strength here tho, large fragments are strewn about. Most of the craters I've seen that qualify for pulv via being compressed craters would need to have little to no fragments left.

Also chest depth should be fine to use, since the crater is clearly deep enough to accomodate for DP's body. 10 inches, though DP is a meatier guy and he'd definitely have deeper chest depth.
 
Last edited:
Usually that'd work if the compression doesn't leave much behind. I can't say it's compressive strength here tho, large fragments are strewn about. Most of the craters I've seen that qualify for pulv via being compressed craters would need to have little to no fragments left.

Also chest depth should be fine to use, since the crater is clearly deep enough to accomodate for DP's body. 10 inches, though DP is a meatier guy and he'd definitely have deeper chest depth.
Let's not think about it as "pulverization" and use the standards relating to that because the values we use for pulverization is basically compressive strength, let's think about it as purely compressive strength the physics term itself. Compressive strength is used because the wall caved in which is not accounted for by it breaking into fragments, that would be if the entire crater was shattered into fragments.
 
Let's not think about it as "pulverization" and use the standards relating to that because the values we use for pulverization is basically compressive strength, let's think about it as purely compressive strength the physics term itself. Compressive strength is used because the wall caved in which is not accounted for by it breaking into fragments, that would be if the entire crater was shattered into fragments.
Hmmmm, well, I have seen craters be shattered into fragments similarly like this before so not really sure. Violent frag also uses low-end compressive strength (Mostly where it is found), so who knows?

The center area definitely seems compressed, that's for sure.
 
Last edited:
Would it change if the car was also moving and he stopped it?

w_eRjMytdSHJEkq7coKpxQwfUDb_wYD5QUXWXsQ8WrOnl3drzBku1aMzAkRrlbaswfZRiWqyVi-Z=s0
You'd probably just add the vehicle's KE onto it I think?
But I can almost assure that feat is only 9-B+, I did a calc like two days ago where someone was tossed into military steel leaving a compression a decent bit larger than that (albeit not drastically) and got 9-B+, potentially 9-A (essentially baseline), which all but tells me that won't hit 9-A, at all. But It should be 9-B+ and he also did stop the vehicle's momentum. Would be an extremely straightforward 9-B+ feat, might even make them king of 9-B but shit ain't 9-A and definitely ain't any meaningful bit into it.
 
It would be, I'd suggest doing it, it might end up the highest 9-B feat for them.
 
Okay. Thank you for helping out with making our pages more reliable. It is appreciated.
 
Okay. That is probably fine. He used to be consistently portrayed as almost on par with Captain America.
 
Meh, I mean even nowadays I don’t think Crossbones gets that overpowered by random 9-A characters, outskilled moreso.
Getting outskilled doesn't decrease your durability and Crossbones gets hurt by plenty of people who aren't considered Cap level. So you actually change the way the scaling is presented or you end up downgrading Cross as well, I don't mind either option really.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top