Ultimately I agree but I will say that saying something got erased usually refers to pretty fast acting destruction more often than not
I mean not really? Erase just means he completely destroyed it, effectively annihilated, crushed utterly. Speed isn’t really a factor for “erasing” something as nebulous as “a country.”
Fair, and I mostly skimmed the thread so it looks like i was missing some context if that’s actually the argument here
And Luffy survived Garp's haki hits.
Enel's appearance in the Skypiea arc ends with him departing to the Moon.
Maybe because the moon is far away from earth, might take some time to get there idk.
IRL spacehips take like 3 days to get to the moon
So...
That calc is not accurate. That calc does not work anymore. We have discussed this.
vsbattles.fandom.com
vsbattles.fandom.com
So is the argument that he got stronger and became 5-C? In that case why would anyone scale to him if he’s an unknown amount stronger with his devil fruit? What if he’s just way stronger than Whitebeard and would one shot him? If he trained and got stronger, how can anything he does be added as support for others? If he has one of the strongest logias and then trains it then his ceiling for power doesn’t exist, no?
Calling it PIS when he actively tried to kill Usopp and hit Sanji but Sanji didn’t get vaporized out of existence by an attack trillions of times stronger than him is, quite frankly, hard to believe. How is claiming PIS more factual than claiming outlier?
Using what, rockets? He's using a literal boat
The dude who's stated to have the strongest devil fruit and the dude who's stated to be on the level of the strongest logias after his showings of fighting the moon guys would scale to him.
Because Enel killed people on their level.
Akainu put a hole through Luffy with a punch and left his fist there when the same hit killed Ace who's stronger than Luffy.
If he doesn’t have the AoE to destroy an island, how did he erase a country?So...
"I'm not sure about this dude being 5-C" that's fair
"Erasing a country" that is a counter against everyone saying he's small city level.
"He can't even one shot everyone he fights unless he's holding back trillions of times despite being pretty pissed off in some of the attacks on others" Literally everybody outside of Luffy that he fought got one shot by his higher lightning outputs.
"Why is his strongest attack 6-C and requires him to pull from external energy to perform" because he doesn't have the AOE to do so, and he took advantage of using the flying ship he was going to use to get to the moon to produce a ginormous ball that would easily incinerate the island instead of wasting time and energy to do so.
"Why is he not vaporizing tier 7 fodder even with casual attacks?" You do not know what you are talking about.
"How is _____ alive" that is a shit counter. They all got one shot. It just means the mangaka doesn't want to kill his peeps, just like when people who should logically kill fodder with single strikes don't.
"5-C seems strange" that's okay. He was one shotting guys who blew up the moon when upset. If he has the right feats and proper scaling then he can scale
That calc is not accurate. That calc does not work anymore. We have discussed this.
The plan is to implement these
One Piece: Bajrang Gun KT Version
One Piece: Bajrang Gun KT Version Part 2
That just seems like the Admirals could kill luffy in an instant but he just kinda survived off luck. Akainu and Aokiji would one shot kill him if they got better hits off though I presume the heat from Akainu mattered more if it was a normal punch with no Haki.
They’re both countries. In one piece islands and countries vary in size, which is why a continent a character split is accepted to be the size of my city block
Straw Hat plot armor. How you think Aokiji broke off Jozu’s arm by freezing him but Luffy got away scot free
Yes.
Akainu buried his fist in his chest and blasted a beam of magma from his hand.
This denial. Half of them didn’t use blunt attacks and the other half are Haki users.
Straw
If the crater is producing debris that is nearly 6000 km in diameter, the minimum depth would be 6000 km.
Not that.
Why is the epicenter minimum what you say it is? What’s substantiating that claim?
the explosion is theorized to be sourced from a bomb.
Why would the bomb be placed on/at the tool? Where’s the logical consistency in that? In no forms of bomb testing do people place the bomb near the equipment. It’s normally launched or placed much further away and then remotely detonated. So why are we going to assume that these people are blowing their tools up outside of “big durability number”? Because you’re presupposing that they’re essentially detonating the bomb on top of themselves (or I guess below more literally) without substantiating that claim with any logic or evidence.
We literally see the weapons placed over the crater.
KT being on the surface does not matter here… we know the crater must span at least ~6000 km to have kicked up a rock debris that large from it. We also know any equipment must not be occupying those ~6000 km or they would have gotten kicked out into space on top of that rock. The bomb being on the surface is not proof of the bomb being right next to the tool.
Who said that rock was part of the crater? All we know is that a rock got uplifted from the explosion. Could’ve rested on the surface, could be anywhere.
By your very logic of “who knows where the rock was” that rock could’ve just been meteorite floating in orbit around the moon. If you’re going to claim the piece of rock could have been anywhere, then you have no grounds to assume it was blasted off like it was. Let’s not do this, the most logical deduction is that the rock was blown out from the crater, on this very flat landscape we see. Furthermore, we can just blatantly eyeball that a crater to produce a dust cloud that’s comparable to the moon would not be merely 22-30 meters. We aren’t dealing with some tiny crater here, and you still haven’t provided any evidence to back your claim that they just dropped the bomb on/next to the tool.
Alright, how does one prove the after effects of the planet-wide range Earthquake isn't what causes the world to crumble?
Arc.
In that instance the tool can be closer to the crater cuz there is no threat/a reduced threat. For example, you’re not going to be worried about tiny fire crackers going off near your feet, but if it’s a grenade you bet your ass you’re going to get as far away as possible. It’s all about relativity, being 22 m away from like a tier 8-7 explosion is not grounds to say “yeah they’re 30 m away from a 5-C explosion”.
If that’s truly all we know, then there’s even less reason to arbitrarily assume some kind of distance from the epicenter. Especially, by your own concession here we do not know where the epicenter is located with respect to the tool.
This is an attempt to shift the burden; however, you made the claim in the calc itself that because a much smaller explosion had a depth of 22 m that the tool would only be 30 m away from the 5-C explosion. The onus is on you to substantiate that claim, elsewise it is merely a baseless claim with no support.
You do realize that they're not putting a bomb in a crater. They're putting a bomb on a surface to MAKE A CRATER
Directly under.
I said because that's apparently wrong, we can use the initial logical claim that they placed "the tool used to create the explosive" above "the explosive that the tool dropped"
They didn't keep their tools nearby a fire cracker in this instance.
You do know if it's magnitude 3 on the outside that the people on the outside wouldn't feel the damn effects, which counters the main point that got accepted in the last thread
I know… that doesn’t address my issue whatsoever…
Again you’ve yet to prove that the 5-C explosion epicenter was sitting right under/next to/whatever you want to call it.
No your logic is, they detonate explosives that create far smaller explosions (tier 8-7 eyeballing it) by detonating the explosive directly beneath the tool; therefore, they must be detonating a 5-C explosive directly beneath the same type of tool. There is nothing logically sound about that. It’s like saying so-and-so didn’t bother dodging a town level attack so they aren’t going to bother dodging a moon level attack. You’re equating two scenarios that are inherently different.
This falls under what I said about assuming that just because it’s done X way with tier 8-7 explosions doesn’t mean it’s done X way with tier 5 explosions. You’re far overgeneralizing one thing you see to everything without actually substantiating why that has to be the case. Your argument is still “but they did it this way with an insanely smaller explosive”, you don’t deal with a lion like you deal with a house cat.They didn't keep their tools nearby a fire cracker in this instance.
The tools were what set off the fire cracker.
How do you know that those machines there are what set off the explosion?
So you're saying "cause they did it with the tier 7 one, doesn't mean that they did it with the tier 5 one"
You waited for me to say that? Okay.
