• 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.

One Piece Zanpa Recalc

I added one last method as per Kachon's suggestion, using the mountain, and it's decently consistent with Snook's method, same ballpark of megatons. I think it is safe to conclude that the water height being 53 km is not consistent at all. I think Snook's method is probably best, given it doesn't undersell the water's size, and finds it using comparisons to the ship which has a known size, not suffering any issues from the travel distance statement.
 
There is no more consistency for the island being hundreds of km leading to the water being 50 km than there is for the water being 100s of meters. Y’all have one calc for the water being 50 km, that’s not consistency for that size.
We're not saying that they're relative in size to Merville.

We're saying they're relative in size to the water, which is shown in multiple shots.
Luffy is also shown relative to his Bajrang Gun, but we still use that as discussed here.
 
Luffy is also shown relative to his Bajrang Gun, but we still use that as discussed here.
Ok.

Difference here is that there are 5 different methods all drastically lower than the original calc. It’s not consistent, but that isn’t my main argument anyway. My main argument is that the path the mammoth takes is not a flat path. Therefore, the original distance is over-estimated. That’s not up for debate, that’s just objectively true, since we see the mammoth traverse very hilly grounds. Which KT seemingly conceded to when he proposed that only 30% of the path be used.

Also, I’m sure circumstances are different with the Wano scene.
 
My main argument is that the path the mammoth takes is not a flat path. Therefore, the original distance is over-estimated. That’s not up for debate, that’s just objectively true,
But how do we know that it won't travel in a straight path when its being steered? You've provided no proof that the mammoth moves other than arbitrary points(i.e even roads built to be straight aren't straight) And you haven't proven that the group is taking short cuts or anything.
I see a lot of shots not showing anywhere near the entire grounds being used to justify it being almost all flat ground. I still disagree it inherently traveled only straight as well, it's not like we are shown the entire trip. There doesn't appear to be strong reasoning outside we see it traverse a couple short distances in a straight line.
 
 
Moron you have to fulfill the burden that it only walked in a straight line, I don’t have to fulfill the negative.
 
Distance traveled is the same, displacement is shorter. Like traveling 2 miles in a straight line displaces you further from the starting point than if you travel 1 mile up and 1 mile left (still 2 miles), you’d only be like ~1.41 miles away from the starting point.
 
Then a smaller part of the island takes that long. Wouldn't that make the full distance longer?
That isn't a smaller part of the island taking that long

That's the whole island from a longer route in the same timeframe
 
🤦‍♂️ it’s not about intentionally taking the long way, it’s that the path is objectively not a flat path, it’s hilly, it could curve, etc etc, all of which would make the assumption of a flat path wrong.
 
Well this thread has been opened longer than a week and I've DMed other CGM message walls, Damage has pinged other CGM, and I've sent pings to other CGM in discord to CGM. So, I think I'm just going to update the page with the accepted calc since there isn't really any debate left to be had over whether the original calc is misrepresentative or not, it appears we all agree it is an inconsistent highball, as the water height is more consistently on the order of thousands of meters rather than tens of thousands of meters. However, if CGM are active in the future and someone wants to resume the debate over whether or not liger's method is more optimal, or Kachon's, or Snook's, or KT's new method, etc etc., that is more than fine as well.
 
I think that seems for the best. If any new method comes up, we can always revisit this topic in another thread.
 
Back
Top