- 31,590
- 28,052
Well, I wouldn't say I have no problem whatsoever - but what is the counter-proposal for what we do instead?
-
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.
My Hero Academia: Sniper Rifle
- Thread starter Onelixy
- Start date
- Status
- 9,682
- 8,734
Stop bothering people about a calc that probably isn't even going to be used in the profiles.
The thread has already reached a consensus, but clearly you can't stop bumping the thread and repeating the same arguments as before.
@Damage3245 I think this thread should be closed, it was a waste of time since the beginning.
The thread has already reached a consensus, but clearly you can't stop bumping the thread and repeating the same arguments as before.
@Damage3245 I think this thread should be closed, it was a waste of time since the beginning.
- 31,590
- 28,052
- 182
- 155
- Thread starter
- #45
Either an acknowledgment implemented in the calculation(s) that explains this is based on and assumes the bullet is fired and Shigaraki's hand is first seen at the same time. Maybe include that's the interpretation and consensus this community arrived at, and direct it to this page, or something akin to that.
Or, we figure out a different way to achieve a timeframe if possible. And, if none of that is viable, dismiss the calculation as a whole.
That's what I think would've been appropriate.
I guess you can close the thread now if that's what's wanted. I've said my piece, and I hope not to deaf ears.
@Therefir I'm not trying to bother or annoy, but I think there's a legitimate issue with people jumping on certain interpretations when there's a lack of substantiation. While it's entirely possible this feat is fine as is, I think there should be an acknowledgment in the calculation (which people outside of this community rely on) that this is only one of several ways the feat could've played out, and shouldn't be treated as a fact.
- 31,590
- 28,052
Yeah, the calculation may not even end up as the primary one for the character in question.
OP seems fine for the thread to be closed so I'll close it now.
OP seems fine for the thread to be closed so I'll close it now.
- Status
Similar threads
