Isshiki Rod to Reactions Blitzing

[Romeu08]

Our Calc Stacking page says that doing this is not allowed, and gives an example of a character dodging bullets, and then using their reaction speed as "bullet speed" in a later calc is against the rules. I see no substantive difference between that, what is being done here, and what is being done with OP. Statements and blitzing aren't much better than dodging.

.

You're not understanding what's stated in the page, dodging a bullet and them using the speed of the bullet as reaction speed is calc stack

Being stated to have reaction speed superior to a bullet speed and them calculating a reaction speed blitz is not calc stack, its a empirical fact of the verse and unless antifeats exist it is what will be followed

 

[HADES]

I understand that, but @HADES was talking about the Thunder Bagua calc, which is accepted and uses lightspeed as a basis for it to work.

yes right, I discussed the calculation.

and if indeed the calculation is accepted, so I think this person's calculation about naruto doesn't matter if it is accepted, or both should be considered stacking.

I'm just expressing my opinion✌

 

[KingTempest]

The difference is that luffy reaction speed is stated

And Light Fang's stated to be SoL.

No.

Luffy has reactions of SOL.

Naruto has a feat of dodging something which is SOL.

You can dodge SOL and not have SOL reactions. There's a complete difference.

One has no backing on SOL except a calc, the other pretty much has canon SOL reactions, which we're using for a timeframe.

I already responded to this idea.

Your response was folly, all you did was quote the calc stacking page which says nothing about reactions.

This is a character saying an attack is slow, and we have a timeframe which can be used for the specific speed. That's different from someone dodging something with a stated speed, then using the 1/speed for their reactions when it isn't that simple, especially when that's the main thing slapped in the reactions page.

Reaction speed has both a distance and a timeframe component, so all calculations that are completed for reaction speed cannot simply be a timeframe by itself. Do not randomly assume a 1 meter distance for each timeframe and use that speed for the reaction speed. Other way around, perception time is just a timeframe and by that not proportional to a speed value alone. Do not assume that a character with a certain speed will have a perception time of 1 meter divided by that speed. Such calculations need a feat that demonstrates perception time and a suitable distance determined from that feat.

You can't compare dodging something and giving it a timeframe (which is calc stacking) vs someone saying an attack is slow when we have a value we use for that specific attack's speed's conversion to reactions.

 

[Romeu08]

The difference is that luffy reaction speed is stated

And Light Fang's stated to be SoL.

One has no backing on SOL except a calc, the other pretty much has canon SOL reactions, which we're using for a timeframe.

I already responded to this idea.



Neither you, nor anyone else advocating for that not being calc stacking has engaged with that point.

You're making a fallacy now, LUFFY REACTION SPEED IS STATED TO BE SUPERIOR TO THE BEAMS, while Naruto does not get the same treatment
Naruto scenario was completely different, he dodged a ls attacks but his reaction speed was not stated so we calc it and them someone attempted to calc stack the other calc

Luffy is simply stated to have superior reaction speed with his haki, not contradicted in anyway, after a massive scaling chain making his reaction speed even faster he states Kaidou is too fast for him, there is no calc stack its just following the stated empirical facts of the narrative

 

[Romeu08]

Anyways this is off topics, if you have any problems with the thunder bagua talk make a crt and we will deal with you there
The isshiki calc is calc stack and invalid, so this should be closed

 

[Agnaa]

Since most of this is just boiling down to "I think statements of scaling are fine, but feats of scaling aren't", I won't be responding to most of it.

Your response was folly, all you did was quote the calc stacking page which says nothing about reactions.

That is not all that I did. I will quote the relevant section from my previous post:

Seeing something as slow is something that can be calced. Blitzing someone is something that can be calced. You are ignoring/lowballing those calcs.

 

[Ren1999]

Luffy has reactions of SOL.

What is the achievements of Luffy Reaction Sol, and also you can show the feats

 

[KingTempest]

What is the achievements of Luffy Reaction Sol, and also you can show the feats

When he looked at a beam of light fly by his head and say "too slow" referring to the beam

Since most of this is just boiling down to "I think statements of scaling are fine, but feats of scaling aren't", I won't be responding to most of it.

Because. Like I said.
You can dodge SOL and not have SOL REACTIONS.
"Feats of scaling" with like 3 different calculation results ranging from rel to FTL isn't something you can say "oh SOL reaction time"

Your response was folly, all you did was quote the calc stacking page which says nothing about reactions.

That is not all that I did. I will quote the relevant section from my previous post:

"You are ignoring/lowballing those calcs." no. I'm (or rather we) are using the canon lowballed value instead of calcing anything (which is what the Isshiki calc is).

All because it can be calced doesn't mean that using a different value outside of calculating it is calc stacking

 

[KLOL506]

When he looked at a beam of light fly by his head and say "too slow" referring to the beam

Because. Like I said.
You can dodge SOL and not have SOL REACTIONS.
"Feats of scaling" with like 3 different calculation results ranging from rel to FTL isn't something you can say "oh SOL reaction time"

"You are ignoring/lowballing those calcs." no. I'm (or rather we) are using the canon lowballed value instead of calcing anything (which is what the Isshiki calc is).

All because it can be calced doesn't mean that using a different value outside of calculating it is calc stacking

I think this entire topic should be handled in a site-wide CRT because this doesn't just affect One Piece, this affects all verses on the site.

 

[Ren1999]

better make a thread about Kaidou's Thunder Bagua calc.

because this is naruto thread not one piece

 

[KingTempest]

No, make a thread for this logic in general

Stop trying to say "Naruto can't have it so tackle One Piece". This is like the 3rd or 4th thread for this topic alone

 

[Agnaa]

When he looked at a beam of light fly by his head and say "too slow" referring to the beam

You don't think that's just him bragging about dodging it?

That sort of statement is miles away from "I see this beam of light as moving in slow motion".

"You are ignoring/lowballing those calcs." no. I'm (or rather we) are using the canon lowballed value instead of calcing anything (which is what the Isshiki calc is).

So you're not lowballing or ignoring calculations, instead you're lowballing and not performing calculations. Got it.

 

[KingTempest]

When he looked at a beam of light fly by his head and say "too slow" referring to the beam

You don't think that's just him bragging about dodging it?

That sort of statement is miles away from "I see this beam of light as moving in slow motion".

Go read the context.

"You are ignoring/lowballing those calcs." no. I'm (or rather we) are using the canon lowballed value instead of calcing anything (which is what the Isshiki calc is).

So you're not lowballing or ignoring calculations, instead you're lowballing and not performing calculations. Got it.

If someone destroys a building of an unknown size, and we rate the character as "building level", is there an issue now since we didn't calc it?

 

[KLOL506]

If someone destroys a building of an unknown size, and we rate the character as "building level", is there an issue now since we didn't calc it?

Technically speaking, yes, we're no longer allowed to give tiers based on visuals alone, we need to calc the energy value of it. It's why mountain-busting isn't always 7-A.

 

[Agnaa]

Go read the context.

The only scan provided in those calcs was a single panel. The chapter it came from was not mentioned. I cannot read the context because it has not been provided.

If someone destroys a building of an unknown size, and we rate the character as "building level", is there an issue now since we didn't calc it?

Yes, that is explicitly against our rules. From Attack Potency

Characters with tiers between 9-A and 3-B are required to reach those tiers through accepted calculations, multipliers, and/or reliably stated precise Joule values. These calculations can be specific to the feat, or standard calculations. The lower borders of 5-B, 4-C, 4-B, 4-A, 3-C, and 3-B can be considered calculations for destroying a planet, a star, a solar system, two or more solar systems, a galaxy, and two or more galaxies respectively.

 

[KingTempest]

Go read the context.

The only scan provided in those calcs was a single panel. The chapter it came from was not mentioned. I cannot read the context because it has not been provided.

Chapter 601

If someone destroys a building of an unknown size, and we rate the character as "building level", is there an issue now since we didn't calc it?

Yes, that is explicitly against our rules. From Attack Potency

That must be recent. hmph

 

[KLOL506]

Yes, that is explicitly against our rules. From Attack Potency

The rules are however, specifically lax once you reach the realm of Tier 5 and above, since already have standardized sizes for those assuming the feats do genuinely show complete destruction of said celestial bodies.

 

[KLOL506]

That must be recent. hmph

Nah, it's quite old, years old I'd say. I was around when the rule was set up. 2018-2019 it was IIRC.

 

[Agnaa]

That specific wording was added to the AP page very recently. But there has been something similar on the Tiering System page for a while.

Actually, I just realized that the two conflict (still, both of them exclude building level), so I should try to get that fixed up.

 

[Duedate8898]

No, make a thread for this logic in general

Stop trying to say "Naruto can't have it so tackle One Piece". This is like the 3rd or 4th thread for this topic alone

I think its more that there isn't as big a difference as you're making between these two situations, so people are calling it hypocritical to let it pass with one verse but not another. That's why One Piece is brought up at all.

To consider luffy calling a light attack slow that came at him from a distance good enough evidence to assume that Kaidou was going lightspeed, and then say Naruto who was able to react to the speed of light attack but struggled to react against the rods doesn't make sense. Cause the thing is, both of them reacting to something lightspeed. There isn't any difference except a single line of dialogue calling the light slow which is the weakest support possible to try and differentiate these two situations.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

Rare Agnaa L with him saying the Thunder Bagua Calc ain't valid

Luffy's Kenbunshoku Haki has CANONICAL Light Speed Reactions

There's no calc stacking here

 

[Agnaa]

After reading the context on Chapter 601, it still seems like the usual thing of a character bragging about being able to dodge an attack. "Too slow" does not mean "I saw the projectile that you shot me with in slow motion", it means "That was too slow to hit me".

Hell, the laser's far behind him by the time he says that. If he said it while it was still coming towards him, I'd be more willing to buy the statement being interpreted as you do.

Luffy's Kenbunshoku Haki has CANONICAL Light Speed Reactions

Could you post a statement of Thunder Bagua being light speed?

 

[KingTempest]

After reading the context on Chapter 601, it still seems like the usual thing of a character bragging about being able to dodge an attack. "Too slow" does not mean "I saw the projectile that you shot me with in slow motion", it means "That was too slow to hit me".

Hell, the laser's far behind him by the time he says that. If he said it while it was still coming towards him, I'd be more willing to buy the statement being interpreted as you do.

Laser's quite literally right next to his face when he said that yk that right?

Luffy's Kenbunshoku Haki has CANONICAL Light Speed Reactions

Could you post a statement of Thunder Bagua being light speed?

We don't need anything of Thunder Bagua being SOL

If you mean FTL, calling one thing slow and calling another thing fast is pretty much justification for something else being faster than that object moving at a certain speed.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

After reading the context on Chapter 601, it still seems like the usual thing of a character bragging about being able to dodge an attack. "Too slow" does not mean "I saw the projectile that you shot me with in slow motion", it means "That was too slow to hit me".

Hell, the laser's far behind him by the time he says that. If he said it while it was still coming towards him, I'd be more willing to buy the statement being interpreted as you do.

Luffy's Kenbunshoku Haki has CANONICAL Light Speed Reactions

Could you post a statement of Thunder Bagua being light speed?

Bruh... You clearly don't know One Piece if you're saying that...

 

[Agnaa]

Laser's quite literally right next to his face when he said that yk that right?

Judging by the perspective, I'd say that the red line I drew is roughly the part of the laser that's right next to his face. You can see by it getting smaller that it continued to go past his face and into the distance.

Do you think that the small end drawn near his neck is just 2mm to the right of his neck or smth?

Bruh... You clearly don't know One Piece if you're saying that...

I don't. I have never read an entire chapter or watched any of the anime.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

The calc is still very valid... I disagree entirely with any decision to discredit it

Luffy's Kenbun can easily react to constant light speed attacks and call them slow, then he gets EVEN BETTER Kenbun that can see the future, and then Thunder Bagua basically blitzes that very same Future Sight, that's not calc stacking, that's using basic information from the Manga

I swear it's like people don't know what Calc Stacking is...

 

[KingTempest]

Unfortunately, not using a calc and using someone's word is "stacking" a calc.

Can't blame anybody in this thread for that.

 

[Agnaa]

The calc is still very valid... I disagree entirely with any decision to discredit it

Luffy's Kenbun can easily react to constant light speed attacks and call them slow, then he gets EVEN BETTER Kenbun that can see the future, and then Thunder Bagua basically blitzes that very same Future Sight, that's not calc stacking, that's using basic information from the Manga

I swear it's like people don't know what Calc Stacking is...

So, you think that because Character A blitzes Character/Object B, that Character A should be able to use Character/Object B's stated speed in calcs, without it being considered calc stacking.

I think the Calc Stacking page considers that to not be allowed.

Hiding calculations is the practice of trying to avoid calculating a feat in order to be able to use the result in another calculation. In other words it is the practice of trying to fool people into not noticing that calc stacking is being used.

This usually occurs if a feat is quantified per a rule of thumb instead of precisely calculated. A typical example would be a character dodging a bullet from a short distance being ranked as "Supersonic" and then using that ranking to calculate the speed of another character, whose speed one can compare to the former in some feat.

Do you think that blitzing is so different from dodging that this doesn't apply?

 

[KingTempest]

I mean when the mf calls one thing slow and gets drastically blitzed in unrealistic ways and calls the other thing fast, we can use the first one, especially when we have a timeframe for it, 0.000000003336 seconds

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

So, you think that because Character A blitzes Character/Object B, that Character A should be able to use Character/Object B's stated speed in calcs, without it being considered calc stacking.

It’s not calc stacking, there’s no calcs being stacked…

I think the Calc Stacking page considers that to not be allowed.

If that’s the case, then it needs to be changed, cause that’s dumb as hell. This flat out isn’t calc stacking. If this is calc stacking, then 90% of all calcs that use a statement from the Manga as a variable for a calc need to be nuked

Do you think that blitzing is so different from dodging that this doesn't apply?

We have a direct comparison between light and Kaidou’s speed, the fact you don’t know this just proves your ignorance when it comes to the feats

 

[KingTempest]

Aye Mitch relax

 

[Agnaa]

It’s not calc stacking, there’s no calcs being stacked…

If that’s the case, then it needs to be changed, cause that’s dumb as hell

I think it's hiding the calculation, and I think that's a reasonable standard to have.

If you disagree and wanna change it, fair enough.

We have a direct comparison between light and Kaidou’s speed, the fact you don’t know this just proves your ignorance when it comes to the feats

Yeah, I am ignorant about the feats, I'm just going off of the information provided to me. More information could change my mind. But with what I currently know, I'd reject it.

Aye Mitch relax

I think Mitch's tone right now is fine. I can see the playfulness in it.

 

[DemonGodMitchAubin]

Aye Mitch relax

I am calm, but this ain’t calc stacking

This is the same think we do for all blitzing calcs

 

[Megaraptor149]

the calc looks familiar to me

 

[KingTempest]

It’s not calc stacking, there’s no calcs being stacked…

If that’s the case, then it needs to be changed, cause that’s dumb as hell

I think it's hiding the calculation, and I think that's a reasonable standard to have.

If you disagree and wanna change it, fair enough.

I think this is a fair approach to have, disagree or not

Aye Mitch relax

I think Mitch's tone right now is fine. I can see the playfulness in it.

I am calm, but this ain’t calc stacking

This is the same think we do for all blitzing calcs

My bad

 

[Agnaa]

@ King I ain't responding to some of your recent stuff, since we've already gone over it I don't think there's anything productive there. But I do still think there's room for discussion with the stuff I brought up here.

EDIT: You tagged the wrong King fam

****, I tried to shorten the name to not ping anyone, like @KLOL, but there just had to be a user actually called "King".

 

[KLOL506]

@King I ain't responding to some of your recent stuff, since we've already gone over it I don't think there's anything productive there. But I do still think there's room for discussion with the stuff I brought up here.

You tagged the wrong King fam

 

[KingTempest]

You tagged the wrong King fam

there's a mf named "King" on this wiki?
I want his name

 

[Agnaa]

Can disco mods edit the titles of threads?

If so, can one of you make this title not just a full-stop? That made this thread pretty annoying to click on.

Also

especially when we have a timeframe for it, 0.000000003336 seconds

Just to clarify, was this timeframe stated, or derived from 1/c?

 

[KingTempest]

Can disco mods edit the titles of threads?

If so, can one of you make this title not just a full-stop? That made this thread pretty annoying to click on.

Done

Also

especially when we have a timeframe for it, 0.000000003336 seconds

Just to clarify, was this timeframe stated, or derived from 1/c?

Reactions and Perceptions

In fiction, movement over long distances and movement over short distances - which can be dubbed "combat distances" - tend to be remarkably different for different characters, resulting in serious discrepancies when considering their overall speed. On this wiki, we therefore differentiate...

vsbattles.fandom.com