-
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: Mid-High Speed Upgrades
- Thread starter Kachon123
- Start date
- 6,775
- 3,686
I was going to Agree FRA, but I'll wait for Damage first
Also hi guys
- 23,430
- 21,172
- Thread starter
- #43
You're misunderstanding the feat.
The calc is calcing a move that blitzed the explosions that resulted from the destruction of the rocks Tatsumaki was throwing.
- 19,734
- 21,211
Why are you even calcing it that way tho.
Wouldn't it make more sense to calc the explosion's width, and divide it by the distance the beam moved on that panel, after all, the explosion itself didn't actually occur till it was hit obviously.
If it was me, I'd take the distance between the rock and the beam on panel (which you seemed to have done already by angsizing the distance between the two rocks?), but from there, given we know the explosion must have covered the whole distance we seen in the time it took the beam to sweep that distance between the two, just divide the beam's movement by that explosion, to get the beam sweep speed.
You seem to be using frozen snail speed stuff, but imo that doesn't check out, correct me if I'm wrong in understanding your calc tho.
Wouldn't it make more sense to calc the explosion's width, and divide it by the distance the beam moved on that panel, after all, the explosion itself didn't actually occur till it was hit obviously.
If it was me, I'd take the distance between the rock and the beam on panel (which you seemed to have done already by angsizing the distance between the two rocks?), but from there, given we know the explosion must have covered the whole distance we seen in the time it took the beam to sweep that distance between the two, just divide the beam's movement by that explosion, to get the beam sweep speed.
You seem to be using frozen snail speed stuff, but imo that doesn't check out, correct me if I'm wrong in understanding your calc tho.
- 23,430
- 21,172
- Thread starter
- #45
The shot where we see all the rock explosions is an after shot. We all see them go off, meaning that it was frozen in the time it took to reach where it was.
Similar to this calc: https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:USklaverei/Damn_fast_ninjas
- 19,734
- 21,211
That isn't what it means? I'm aware it's an aftershot, but the explosion we see only begins after it was struck (obviously, not like it'd be exploding before getting hit).
And we see the distance the beam is from it, while still being swept.
It goes beam is launched, swept along, hits boulder, it explodes, destroys a few more boulders, and that's where the panel resumes (it's still being swept though as evidenced by a bunch of rocks still being intact behind it, and the motion blur and lines indicating constant motion).
You'd find the distance the beam crossed after hitting rock 1, and where it is when the panel resumes, then divide that distance by the distance the explosion covered in that same span of time (so after it hit it to cause the blast, and where it is in the panel), and get speed that way.
Assuming it's frozen is unfounded, and I'd argue outright impossible as there would be no visible explosion to begin with it was actually frozen compared to it.
Unless you're arguing the distance it moved towards Tats, not the sweep, but your blog doesn't seem to be calcing that (and still wouldn't be frozen speed, but I'd think that would be way higher given hoe much further the beam would have moved compared to the explosion, probably rel+ anyway).
also two wrong calcs don't make a right, though that one makes more sense given context and the fact we see the blasts explicitly resume movement after they're done the whole exchange
And we see the distance the beam is from it, while still being swept.
It goes beam is launched, swept along, hits boulder, it explodes, destroys a few more boulders, and that's where the panel resumes (it's still being swept though as evidenced by a bunch of rocks still being intact behind it, and the motion blur and lines indicating constant motion).
You'd find the distance the beam crossed after hitting rock 1, and where it is when the panel resumes, then divide that distance by the distance the explosion covered in that same span of time (so after it hit it to cause the blast, and where it is in the panel), and get speed that way.
Assuming it's frozen is unfounded, and I'd argue outright impossible as there would be no visible explosion to begin with it was actually frozen compared to it.
Unless you're arguing the distance it moved towards Tats, not the sweep, but your blog doesn't seem to be calcing that (and still wouldn't be frozen speed, but I'd think that would be way higher given hoe much further the beam would have moved compared to the explosion, probably rel+ anyway).
- 34,583
- 35,018
Yeah, this is what I'm getting at when I commented on the calc.
The calc sadly does not appear to be valid as there is no indication the explosions were frozen.
- 19,734
- 21,211
if you calc the beam attempting to reach tats you'd get wacky results, but that's assuming the beam didn't reach or get close before hitting the rock in the first place, or if we see it reach her between Point A and B. If so that could get rel, but this calc idk if it really checks out, like mathwise it's ok, but it's more the context and feat taking place doesn't line up exactly with the calc method imo.
- 13,905
- 5,420
Another Boros W
- 8,155
- 4,141
Boros bros we up
- 6,775
- 3,686
The Ninja Calc has a far better demonstration of frozen explosions, there are literall panels with the ninjas moving while the same explosion is, purposely, designed in the same way
- 34,583
- 35,018
Yeah, calc doesn't look valid to me.
- 8,997
- 9,728
Seems like the calc has been rejected
