One Piece Thunder Bagua Calc Stacking

[Arc7Kuroi]

Calc
This calc calculates Kaido's speed using a timeframe of 1 m / speed of light in m/s.

Calc Stacking
From my understanding, taking a stated speed from a separate scene than the feat in question, and using that to calculate a time frame to use that in a separate feat is calc stacking. As such this calc should probably get removed from the verse page. Knowledgeable CGM can clarify further.

Agree:
Neutral:
Disagree:

 

[CloverDragon03]

So not only is a general calc thread already ongoing that seeks to resolve matters like this, but I'm pretty sure this was already rejected and nothing new has come up in the meantime

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

but I'm pretty sure this was already rejected

Did it just not get removed from the verse page?

 

[CloverDragon03]

What do you mean?

 

[Agnaa]

I agree with Clover FRA.

This sounds like a clerical error that can get resolved without CGM meddling.

The calc is still linked to on the OP verse page, and 3 profiles.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Like it was supposed to be removed but wasn't removed?

 

[Agnaa]

That's what it sounds like Clover's saying, but I wasn't there last time so I'm not super sure.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Like it was supposed to be removed but wasn't removed?

No, the proposal to remove it was rejected

 

[Sasukesama0492]

No, the proposal to remove it was rejected

Why?

 

[Damage3245]

Yeah, this is Calc Stacking and it should be removed. Same reason that these speed calculations for the Seven Deadly Sins are an issue.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Agnaa said it’s only on 3 profiles and I don’t think it changes the tiering so should be an easy fix

 

[CloverDragon03]

So we’re having this discussion again despite nothing new being brought up since the last rejected thread?

Well, like the last thread, I disagree with this. I find no issue with using this sorta thing (hell, light speed perception is a lowball if anything since it comes from Luffy referring to light speed as “too slow”)

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

I don’t disagree with that principle in concept, I’m just pretty sure it’s against site standards. At least that’s what I garnered when I talked to DontTalk prolly a year or so ago when I made the argument involving 1m / stated speed = reasonable reaction time and I was told by him and many other calc members that that is calc stacking.

 

[CloverDragon03]

There’s a thread going on about a similar concept and whether or not it’s calc stacking so I feel like that should be settled first. I just gave my take on this matter for future reference

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah, I'm hoping that related thread would also tackle whether 1m / stated speed can be used for reaction time.

 

[Arc7Kuroi]

Aight this can wait then

 

[Raiden38]

Disagree

 

[Ped2018]

Ok

This should be closed then

 

[Damage3245]

Yeah, I'm hoping that related thread would also tackle whether 1m / stated speed can be used for reaction time.

DT clarified here why we don't use 1 m / stated speed. Speed alone is not sufficient and it would still lead to calc stacking.

 

[Agnaa]

DT clarified here why we don't use 1 m / stated speed. Speed alone is not sufficient and it would still lead to calc stacking.

But we've got 4 CGMs in the thread endorsing a change in our standards to allow that.