• 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.

MASSIVE Tekken Downgrades

Status
Not open for further replies.
BlackDarkness679 said:
Normally nothing should be happening here, yet some insist on the jack feat to be decided on its tier when it was told already multiple times thats to be tackled in the future, rather then do a change just to again change it for unneeded extra work for no reason other then rush this hellhole of a thread
Click to expand...
Yeah no the Jack feat is perfectly fine. I really don’t understand why the downgrade exist. It’s perfectly fine with other feat in the verse so it wouldn’t really be a stretch to consider it vaild
 
Oleggator said:
Yeah but voice of people also matters or else who makes argument here.
Click to expand...
Well I guess we could let a member know about the vote since that is what will ultimately allow the changes
Oleggator said:
Personally I'm all against to consider Jack-6 feat as an outlier and/or not scaling characters to said feat. Feats and scaling in my opinion is as explicit as possible.
Click to expand...
I don't really consider it an outlier either, but I think the recent calcs for 6-C should be used since a calc member also agrees with it. As for scaling, I think the God Tiers can definitely scale above it, Jack himself would only scale to it with his one attack since it was far above his normal attacks and even shattered his arms.
 
There is no such thing like 6-C via whatever attack, he is scaling to the meteor KE at its best with the value being how dino meteor is rated as
 
Holy ******* shit what did this thread devolve into?

Okay so let's get this out the way, Paul should not scale to 6-C 20 years ago

Like Continuum said nothing said proves for sure that he got weaker, the best you could prove is that he quit his Dojo

Backscaling like this will get us nowhere

In regards to the Meteor feat, if we don't decide it's an outlier and don't go with the 7-A scaling; I am all for downgrading it to 6-C.

From what I understand previous Jack models Jobb after every new game in the series and I believe I remember someone saying someone one-shot a Jack-6 model.
Anyone who scales above that character or dwarf Jack-6 models to the point they 1 shot them should get that rating
 
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
Holy ******* shit what did this thread devolve into?

Okay so let's get this out the way, Paul should not scale to 6-C 20 years ago

Like Continuum said nothing said proves for sure that he got weaker, the best you could prove is that he quit his Dojo

Backscaling like this will get us nowhere

In regards to the Meteor feat, if we don't decide it's an outlier and don't go with the 7-A scaling; I am all for downgrading it to 6-C.

From what I understand previous Jack models Jobb after every new game in the series and I believe I remember someone saying someone one-shot a Jack-6 model.
Anyone who scales above that character or dwarf Jack-6 models to the point they 1 shot them should get that rating
Click to expand...
So Heihachi and Akuma since we see them do that even after fighting each other at the start of Tekken 7. And those who scale to them will the get the 6-C rating.
 
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
Holy ******* shit what did this thread devolve into?

Okay so let's get this out the way, Paul should not scale to 6-C 20 years ago

Like Continuum said nothing said proves for sure that he got weaker, the best you could prove is that he quit his Dojo

Backscaling like this will get us nowhere
Click to expand...
Literally nothing indicates current Paul > prime Paul, and comparing their feats prime one has better showings compared to the one from nowadays, unless you wanna tell Kuma is above his prime when he never beat him ever while current he has a win over and a loss which left his rival unable to continue after

Its ridiculous how you side with that individual over his shit, when scaling says otherwise and the lore says the dojo ran out of business, along him ending on the streets, from where you het the idea he remains as strong as his prime, let slome when Feng is comparable to Young Heihachi, with former being fought by Paul
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
In regards to the Meteor feat, if we don't decide it's an outlier and don't go with the 7-A scaling; I am all for downgrading it to 6-C.

From what I understand previous Jack models Jobb after every new game in the series and I believe I remember someone saying someone one-shot a Jack-6 model.
Anyone who scales above that character or dwarf Jack-6 models to the point they 1 shot them should get that rating
Click to expand...
Im against 6-C, said for nth times now, leave that thing for the future, not gonna accept a rush thread to change the whole verse cuz you it cant be waited
 
Last edited:
By the fact we apply a downgrade by using a lower tier without taking in consideration all else suggesting otherwise in pro for the one at hand thats how

All of this cuz you had to do that stupid downgrade thread and making the other individual run his bullshit later from your bullshit along others, i said for the longest time even in some vs threads, the verse will go revisions
 
BlackDarkness679 said:
By the fact we apply a downgrade by using a lower tier without taking in consideration all else suggesting otherwise in pro for the one at hand thats how
Click to expand...
There are 5 people in this thread (not including you) that aren't in agreement with this thread and there've been discussions with all of them which is why the downgrade hasn't gone through, how can you say that we're not taking any consideration if those arguments have been acknowledged and debated instead of being swept aside?
BlackDarkness679 said:
All of this cuz you had to do that stupid downgrade thread and making the other individual run his bullshit later from your bullshit along others, i said for the longest time even in some vs threads, the verse will go revisions
Click to expand...
If you want to do your own revision, that's fine, but it doesn't change the fact that there was a calc group member who assessed that the original calc for 6-B is incorrect, even though most are in disagreement with speed and lifting strength and that topic can be dropped, AP/Striking Strength/Durability all can be affected by this calc which is why this thread has every right being up. Also, my guy, shifting the blame on me every time doesn't do anything to support your argument. I am not Continuum, his actions aren't a result of my previous thread when all I brought up in my thread was AP and nothing else. Hell, I even conceded to the multiple strikes argument which was the main point of my thread.
BlackDarkness679 said:
Its amazing how we are quick to let a downgrade go on when it misses other things out, yet you dare ask that question, you aint any better then this guy either
Click to expand...
Yeah sure, buddy.
 
RanaProGamer said:
There are 5 people in this thread (not including you) that aren't in agreement with this thread and there've been discussions with all of them which is why the downgrade hasn't gone through, how can you say that we're not taking any consideration if those arguments have been acknowledged and debated instead of being swept aside?
Click to expand...
Im talking of stuff to suggest more then 6-C at best, not the sides for pro and con
RanaProGamer said:
If you want to do your own revision, that's fine, but it doesn't change the fact that there was a calc group member who assessed that the original calc for 6-B is incorrect, even though most are in disagreement with speed and lifting strength and that topic can be dropped, AP/Striking Strength/Durability all can be affected by this calc which is why this thread has every right being up.
Click to expand...
And i pointed previously comments ago to have the dino meteor value vs wiki has for it used in its place over the old calc, even though thats also rushed as well, you people really cant ******* leave the rating for the time being as it is till it changes or has all shit with it presented in the future at all

i seen threads that let off these things till a better revision goes over them, whats with this mindset of changing a rating that affects most of the verse from a calc made recently that has not even been accepted, let alone doesnt even consider things on the character power level suggesting more then simply 6-C, along comparable characters with feats likely above just 6-C
RanaProGamer said:
Also, my guy, shifting the blame on me every time doesn't do anything to support your argument.
Click to expand...
Im not doing it for supporting anything, i speak of them cuz you are at faulr with the last thread
RanaProGamer said:
I am not Continuum, his actions aren't a result of my previous thread when all I brought up in my thread was AP and nothing else.
Click to expand...
You must be as blind as him, he literally used your comments as arguments in here, let alone of othee people in previous one and your thread had him make very soon after another half assed like you did, yet you wanna claim you aint at fault here
RanaProGamer said:
Hell, I even conceded to the multiple strikes argument which was the main point of my thread.
Click to expand...
Which this individual still used as counters against it, you still brought up bs that someone else pushed with them to desperately downgrade
RanaProGamer said:
Yeah sure, buddy.
Click to expand...
Dont yeah sure, you arent any better either in the slightest, typical reddit/discord debater, both at debating and personality, awful individuals
RanaProGamer said:
ONE BEEF!!! THE ONE BEEF IS REAL!!!
Click to expand...
Dead, non-funny and stupid meme, shut up
 
In regards to the calculations, for one, you need to use the 6 miles diameter for the volume of the meteor, so the 6-B calc is inherently wrong for using the 28 miles for that. Assuming it's a sphere is probably a safe assumption based on the shape of the meteor. As for whether to use frag or violent frag, that would most definitely be frag and not violent frag, however it appears he does hault the movement of the meteor for a second after his last attack. Now the explosion afterwards sends the debris of the meteor falling back down to Earth again, so I'm not entirely against using KE.

Meteor Diameter = 6 Miles

Meteor Radius = 3 Miles = 4828.03 Meters

Volume of Meteor (Sphere) = 471409673000 Meters^3 = 4.71409673e+17 Cm^3

Fragementation of Rock is 8 Joules/CC

Fragmentation = (4.71409673e+17)*(8) = 901.36 Megatons (Mountain level+)

Speed of Atmospheric re-entry is 11,000 m/s

KE = (0.5)(471409673000)(11000^2) = 6.8 Gigatons (Island level)

You can make him "At least Mountain level+, likely/possibly Island level (At least 901.36, possibly 6.8 Gigatons)" as a compromise if you desire
 
Input from other experienced and knowledgeable members is also appreciated of course.
 
DemonGodMitchAubin said:
In regards to the calculations, for one, you need to use the 6 miles diameter for the volume of the meteor, so the 6-B calc is inherently wrong for using the 28 miles for that. Assuming it's a sphere is probably a safe assumption based on the shape of the meteor. As for whether to use frag or violent frag, that would most definitely be frag and not violent frag, however it appears he does hault the movement of the meteor for a second after his last attack. Now the explosion afterwards sends the debris of the meteor falling back down to Earth again, so I'm not entirely against using KE.

Meteor Diameter = 6 Miles

Meteor Radius = 3 Miles = 4828.03 Meters

Volume of Meteor (Sphere) = 471409673000 Meters^3 = 4.71409673e+17 Cm^3

Fragementation of Rock is 8 Joules/CC

Fragmentation = (4.71409673e+17)*(8) = 901.36 Megatons (Mountain level+)

Speed of Atmospheric re-entry is 11,000 m/s

KE = (0.5)(471409673000)(11000^2) = 6.8 Gigatons (Island level)

You can make him "At least Mountain level+, likely/possibly Island level (At least 901.36, possibly 6.8 Gigatons)" as a compromise if you desire
Click to expand...
Thank you for helping out. 🙏🙏🙏
 
Antvasima said:
I haven't followed the discussion here. What is going on exactly?
Also, what do we currently need to do here, @SamanPatou and @Hellbeast ?
Click to expand...
I kinda stopped following when people started bickering on scaling and decided to come back once the main issue, i.e. the calc, was reaching a turning point, which is now.

I can say we all agree that this thread has gone long enough and it absolutely derailed.
Scaling will be discussed in the future and in its own thread, hopefully with more calc and info.

Now just focus on ending the debate on the calc, as Mitch contributed greatly and I'm very thankful to him for that.
 
Okay. Thank you to both you and Mitch for helping out then. 🙏🙏🙏

So do we need any further staff help here regarding the bickering and derailing, or did it not go far enough for any warnings to be issued?
 
DemonGodMitchAubin said:
In regards to the calculations, for one, you need to use the 6 miles diameter for the volume of the meteor, so the 6-B calc is inherently wrong for using the 28 miles for that. Assuming it's a sphere is probably a safe assumption based on the shape of the meteor. As for whether to use frag or violent frag, that would most definitely be frag and not violent frag, however it appears he does hault the movement of the meteor for a second after his last attack. Now the explosion afterwards sends the debris of the meteor falling back down to Earth again, so I'm not entirely against using KE.

Meteor Diameter = 6 Miles

Meteor Radius = 3 Miles = 4828.03 Meters

Volume of Meteor (Sphere) = 471409673000 Meters^3 = 4.71409673e+17 Cm^3

Fragementation of Rock is 8 Joules/CC

Fragmentation = (4.71409673e+17)*(8) = 901.36 Megatons (Mountain level+)

Speed of Atmospheric re-entry is 11,000 m/s

KE = (0.5)(471409673000)(11000^2) = 6.8 Gigatons (Island level)

You can make him "At least Mountain level+, likely/possibly Island level (At least 901.36, possibly 6.8 Gigatons)" as a compromise if you desire
Click to expand...
Are you sure it's fragmentation and not violent fragmentation?
 
DemonGodMitchAubin said:
In regards to the calculations, for one, you need to use the 6 miles diameter for the volume of the meteor, so the 6-B calc is inherently wrong for using the 28 miles for that.
Click to expand...
Makes me wonder: How did this calc pass to begin with ?
Didn't the staff member who agreed to the CRt that applied this bother to double check ?

Makes me also wonder about all the other stuffs that were blindly accepted without proper quality check on Tekken here.
 
DemonGodMitchAubin said:
In regards to the calculations, for one, you need to use the 6 miles diameter for the volume of the meteor, so the 6-B calc is inherently wrong for using the 28 miles for that. Assuming it's a sphere is probably a safe assumption based on the shape of the meteor. As for whether to use frag or violent frag, that would most definitely be frag and not violent frag, however it appears he does hault the movement of the meteor for a second after his last attack. Now the explosion afterwards sends the debris of the meteor falling back down to Earth again, so I'm not entirely against using KE.

Meteor Diameter = 6 Miles

Meteor Radius = 3 Miles = 4828.03 Meters

Volume of Meteor (Sphere) = 471409673000 Meters^3 = 4.71409673e+17 Cm^3

Fragementation of Rock is 8 Joules/CC

Fragmentation = (4.71409673e+17)*(8) = 901.36 Megatons (Mountain level+)

Speed of Atmospheric re-entry is 11,000 m/s

KE = (0.5)(471409673000)(11000^2) = 6.8 Gigatons (Island level)

You can make him "At least Mountain level+, likely/possibly Island level (At least 901.36, possibly 6.8 Gigatons)" as a compromise if you desire
Click to expand...
@DemonGodMitchAubin

Would you be willing to write down your calculations in a wiki blog and get it evaluated please?
 
DemonGodMitchAubin said:
In regards to the calculations, for one, you need to use the 6 miles diameter for the volume of the meteor, so the 6-B calc is inherently wrong for using the 28 miles for that. Assuming it's a sphere is probably a safe assumption based on the shape of the meteor. As for whether to use frag or violent frag, that would most definitely be frag and not violent frag, however it appears he does hault the movement of the meteor for a second after his last attack. Now the explosion afterwards sends the debris of the meteor falling back down to Earth again, so I'm not entirely against using KE.

Meteor Diameter = 6 Miles

Meteor Radius = 3 Miles = 4828.03 Meters

Volume of Meteor (Sphere) = 471409673000 Meters^3 = 4.71409673e+17 Cm^3

Fragementation of Rock is 8 Joules/CC

Fragmentation = (4.71409673e+17)*(8) = 901.36 Megatons (Mountain level+)

Speed of Atmospheric re-entry is 11,000 m/s

KE = (0.5)(471409673000)(11000^2) = 6.8 Gigatons (Island level)

You can make him "At least Mountain level+, likely/possibly Island level (At least 901.36, possibly 6.8 Gigatons)" as a compromise if you desire
Click to expand...
I disagree about using Frag

The aftermath shows the meteor being explosively fragmented as well as the fragments being around the size of Jack himself, which when compared with a meteor of that size would be akin to dust.

Fragmentation would mean large chunks would still be left over and we simply do not see that in the aftermath

I'm firm in my stance that if we do accept this we should use the 6-C end
 
Yeah 6-C looks good, I also agree we need to talk about other stuff with TEKKEN scaling if the past calc made it but thats a different thread
 
BlackDarkness679 said:
Im talking of stuff to suggest more then 6-C at best, not the sides for pro and con
Click to expand...
Ah ok, that’s what you meant.
BlackDarkness679 said:
And i pointed previously comments ago to have the dino meteor value vs wiki has for it used in its place over the old calc, even though thats also rushed as well, you people really cant ******* leave the rating for the time being as it is till it changes or has all shit with it presented in the future at all
Click to expand...
Well we did just had CGM evaluate the calc. If it’s done now, I don’t see why it’s an issue.
BlackDarkness679 said:
i seen threads that let off these things till a better revision goes over them, whats with this mindset of changing a rating that affects most of the verse from a calc made recently that has not even been accepted, let alone doesnt even consider things on the character power level suggesting more then simply 6-C, along comparable characters with feats likely above just 6-C
Click to expand...
Then those feats need to be calced if you believe that they would yield beyond 6-C results. Otherwise it’s just assumption that they would yield that much. The issue is that the old calc is flawed and it’s redone since majority of the verse scales off of that, making it the most reasonable solution. So unless the other possible 6-C or beyond 6-C feats gets calced, it’s literally an opinion if you think they all yield around or higher than 6-C
BlackDarkness679 said:
Im not doing it for supporting anything, i speak of them cuz you are at faulr with the last thread
Click to expand...
The same thread where I conceded my original argument? How am I at fault again?
BlackDarkness679 said:
You must be as blind as him, he literally used your comments as arguments in here, let alone of othee people in previous one and your thread had him make very soon after another half assed like you did, yet you wanna claim you aint at fault here
Click to expand...
So you’re saying it’s my fault that another person is using the same argument as my old thread as well as the arguments of other people (that aren’t me) that were in my thread.

I seriously want you to think about that for one second. That’s the equivalent of me blaming SethTheProgrammer simply because some dude on the wiki used his arguments from his video.
BlackDarkness679 said:
Which this individual still used as counters against it, you still brought up bs that someone else pushed with them to desperately downgrade
Click to expand...
I didn’t bring up the multiple strikes argument in this thread even once. That was the main argument of my previous thread, not here, where’s the desperation?
BlackDarkness679 said:
Dont yeah sure, you arent any better either in the slightest, typical reddit/discord debater, both at debating and personality, awful individuals
Click to expand...
Personality? Really? Sure Buddy keep believing whatever you want and keep thinking that belittling others is a justifiable action for you.
BlackDarkness679 said:
Dead, non-funny and stupid meme, shut up
Click to expand...
Wasn’t even responding to you, was having fun with my mate Deceived.
 
Downgrades seem fine, if not more accurate feeling given everything else displayed in the verse.
Surprised this thread went like it did, but it should probably serve as a forewarning for the eventual scaling thread.
Saving any thoughts regarding, for when that thread eventually pops up.
 
Shmeatywerbenmanjenson said:
Someone should start a tally of who agrees with the 6-C downgrades
Click to expand...
I'm on it.

I went through the entire thread and this is what I found.

Tekken 6-C downgrade

Agree: 7 (Armorchompy, LIFE OF_KING, RanaProGamer, Shmeatywerbenmanjenson, Hellbeast, JohnConquest1, DaReaperMan)

Disagree: 1 (BlackDarkness79)

Unless I missed someone BlackDarkness is the only person in this thread who disagrees with 6-C Tekken downgrades seperate from everything else.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Continuum19
MASSIVE Tekken Upgrades
2
Replies
58
Views
6K
Antvasima
Antvasima
BlackDarkness679
Tekken minor additions and few scaling changes
Replies
6
Views
897
BlackDarkness679
BlackDarkness679
CloverDragon03
Tekken CRT: Some Issues in Kazuya's Scaling
2 3 4
Replies
128
Views
6K
CloverDragon03
CloverDragon03
The_Web_Adventurer
Another Content Revision Thread Regarding Tekken Scalings.
Replies
18
Views
3K
Continuum19
Continuum19
Valiant_Abyss
  • Locked
Tekken 6-C scan issue
Replies
2
Views
2K
Valiant_Abyss
Valiant_Abyss
Back
Top