• 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-Punch Man: Flashy Flash Speed Upgrade

Kachon123

Kachon123

19,329
16,947
Last edited:
End 1 uses the baseline timeframe for subsonic reactions, while End 2 uses the high timeframe for subsonic reactions.
Click to expand...

Comment on the calc for that, but I don't see the justification for either of those timeframes here.
 
Kachon123 said:
Making afterimages qualifies for Subsonic speeds and timeframes.
Click to expand...
Subsonic speed is what is needed to generate afterimages, sure, but I don't see how that applies to timeframes here. Just because somebody creates an afterimage doesn't mean that the movement they performed always has to take place over 0.00583 seconds.
 
KingTempest said:
Flashy Flash has this on his profile


Which means that this is heavy support for Flashy Flash being flat out Rel+., especially when his Sub-Rel feat

End 2 looks good
Click to expand...
and, actual saitama is vastly superior to that saitama who fought gery due his evolution.
in other words, flashy impressed a much faster saitama.
 
Damage3245 said:
Subsonic speed is what is needed to generate afterimages, sure, but I don't see how that applies to timeframes here. Just because somebody creates an afterimage doesn't mean that the movement they performed always has to take place over 0.00583 seconds.
Click to expand...
The 0.00583 seconds end is the extreme end. Usually we stick with the baseline of 0.0291 seconds.
 
Both ends for the speed aren't justified in the calc itself and has no justification other than them generating afterimages. But for the calc I wouldn't use some randomly selected timeframe. If there is a useable timeframe the most I'd suggest is 0.1 seconds since we know that's a previously used timeframe for Garou's in-universe reaction speed. Its also how we treated Saitama's Io jump in terms of useable timeframe.
 
Qawsedf234 said:
Both ends for the speed aren't justified in the calc itself and has no justification other than them generating afterimages. But for the calc I wouldn't use some randomly selected timeframe. If there is a useable timeframe the most I'd suggest is 0.1 seconds since we know that's a previously used timeframe for Garou's in-universe reaction speed. Its also how we treated Saitama's Io jump in terms of useable timeframe.
Click to expand...
Isn't Garou's feat 1.3 milliseconds?

EDIT: YEP, it's 0.0013 seconds. Says so in the manga scan for his feat.
 
Anyway, Kachon found a new size for the crater, may massively upgrade this feat and Garou vs Platinum Sperm's feat.
 
KLOL506 said:
a new size for the crater
Click to expand...
No he didn't, he used the same sized crater as with the currently accepted Garou vs PS calc. Is just that more distance was covered in the first showing compared to the second showing.
 
Qawsedf234 said:
No he didn't, he used the same sized crater as with the currently accepted Garou vs PS calc. Is just that more distance was covered in the first showing compared to the second showing.
Click to expand...
You might wanna check the blog again, he edited it in with the new diameter for the crater.
 
Qawsedf234 said:
You used scans from two different manga chapters to get a crater size. That's calc stacking.

He got a size by taking images from different chapters and getting a size that way. That breaks our calc stacking rules.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure our calc stacking rules say pixel-scaling over multiple scans is accepted as long as the size of the objects remain consistent.
 
KLOL506 said:
Pretty sure our calc stacking rules say pixel-scaling over multiple scans is accepted as long as the size of the objects remain consistent.
Click to expand...
I made sure that the cracks are at the same area too. In the first scan, I pixel scaled a crack that was right next to the tower (which became the hole after Tatsumaki pulled it up). In the second scan, I did the same.
 
If we were to ignore that, majority of all the calcs on the wiki would be axed since a lot of them use different shots of objects to find various different dimensions shown at different points in the series or so, like with movies which usually show multiple angles of destruction, or with many anime regarding finding the size of various mecha, etc. That's practically why the rule was made by DontTalkDT to begin with.
 
KLOL506 said:
the size of the objects remain consistent.
Click to expand...
It doesn't. He's also using a undefined crack to scale to the hole. Its just gets radically different results depending on which crack you assume it represents.

Not to mention by changing it every previously option about the calc is no voided.

Overall I say just use the current accepted figure which uses a single scan to get a diameter and then use the known canon timeframe. The speed is still fine and superior to what he's currently scaled to afaik.
KLOL506 said:
If we were to ignore that, majority of all the calcs on the wiki would be axed
Click to expand...
Then they should be axed. What you're saying is that we're wrong, its to hard to fix so lets ignore the issue. The calc uses a random crack to get a size, the hole will change sized and crack position based on the panel and the OP is uses images drawn years apart from each other. There's nothing warranting it being more valid than a single page scale that uses the diameter of the spear.
 
Kachon123 said:
It's the clearest crack shown. Every other one is at a weird angle.
Click to expand...
So like I said, you're choosing a random crack from an object that changes size and crack positions. Its just inconsistent art that leads to an inflated result. The original is using a single page and one panel to get everything.
 
Qawsedf234 said:
Then they should be axed. What you're saying is that we're wrong, its to hard to fix so lets ignore the issue. The calc uses a random crack to get a size, the hole will change sized and crack position based on the panel and the OP is uses images drawn years apart from each other. There's nothing warranting it being more valid than a single page scale that uses the diameter of the spear.
Click to expand...
When I made the comment I didn't make the assumption that this would be a random crack, nor was I talking about using random parts. I was talking about using the length of one part of the machinery compared to a character (Like say, arm of a robot), then using that part of the machinery (The arm) in another shot where the full machine is visible to find the size of the entire machine (The entire robot), and we know for a fact that that specific part of the machinery could not have and cannot change size randomly. This has nothing to do with "Too hard to fix" but rather "the parts here are all consistent in size and could not have possibly changed size so radically and thus should be fine for use to find the full size of the object". I wasn't specifically talking about the crack.
 
Qawsedf234 said:
So like I said, you're choosing a random crack from an object that changes size and crack positions. Its just inconsistent art that leads to an inflated result. The original is using a single page and one panel to get everything.
Click to expand...
Kachon123 said:
I made sure that the cracks are at the same area too. In the first scan, I pixel scaled a crack that was right next to the tower (which became the hole after Tatsumaki pulled it up). In the second scan, I did the same.
Click to expand...
They are both in the same area. I see no issue in using that crack.
 
Kachon123 said:
They are both in the same area. I see no issue in using that crack.
Click to expand...
They're not in the same area or at least they're not consistently drawn the same in terms of thickness and in length.
KLOL506 said:
When I made the comment I didn't make the assumption that this would be a random crack
Click to expand...
But it is. The OP just admitted they used a crack that looked the best on an object they admitted has issues with crack consistency. It breaks the rule
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kachon123
  • Locked
One-Punch Man: Psykos Upgrade
Replies
37
Views
4K
Kachon123
Kachon123
Kachon123
One-Punch Man: Boros Speed Upgrade
Replies
13
Views
2K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
Goshtama
Made only Saitama on the Moon IO Review and recalculation
Replies
20
Views
3K
Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
MrTayman616
OPM Orochi minor speed upgrade
Replies
12
Views
1K
MrTayman616
MrTayman616
Kachon123
One-Punch Man: Genos Profile Rework
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
WizardPowers101
Back
Top