• 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.

Ouma's Shoulder Charge

RatherClueless said:
seeing that its almost a 50/50, this is a pretty big issue (I assume)
Think about it this way. You have 10 calcs like this one (preferably of a less known verse, since in that case its usually just one member commenting). Depending on which calc group member comments your calc will get accepted or rejected, this means that either (depending on wether this is calc stacking or not):

5 of the calcs get rejected for no rason

or (even worse):

5 of the calcs get accepted, while being invalid
Click to expand...
This already happened to me; I made a calc with certain thing with its pixelscaling and the CGM rejected the calc for that thing, while other calc that had the very same thing was accepted by other CGM.

The only answer I got when I showed the other calc to the CGM that was evaluating mine was: "I won't comment on that one as I haven't reviewed it, but this calc is unusable as is, regardless of the statuses of other calculations."

So yeah, that.
 
@Alex So u agree it's an issue that should be talked about? Since it's a general thing I honestly don't get why we aren't making a staff only thread for this. You don't need to know math or physics to say "this meets our standards and seems accurate (or not)"
 
I'm not mad at you I am mad at the fact that you're trying to joke who when this is a serious thread that has been going in circles for far too long and joking does not make this go faster it just makes it go slower. So please let's actually try to give ideas as to how this can be solved instead of just stalling the thread more that it has already been stalled. That is my point. So yes technically im getting mad but I mean cut me some slack I've been working for this revision for like over 2 months and this CRT alone has been going on for a literal month. So it is just stressing me to see things go back and forth in circles with literally no conclusion. I mean after all this time we are still at the starting point quite literally there has been 0 progress and this thread has been stuck in limbo for a literal month. It's not being rejected it's not being accepted it is just not getting anything just more war between the calculation group to the point where some of them don't even want to reply anymore.

So like we can chat somewhere else like any other thread in discord anywhere you want just please not here, even I'm sick of this at this point it's way too tiring.
 
Yes but the flash as we know it refers to the return stroke.

Fiction doesn't follow real life. Everything from Avatar, the Naruto, to Marvel, to Fairy Tail has bright lightning for the downward stroke. Its a common element in fiction just like how every weapons called a laser isn't necessarily light speed.

All of the text indicates the downward stroke. Your calc's speed is just based on an incorrect assumption. Damage also agreed with me on that point. Anyone who scales to be Rel on that logic should also be downgraded.
 
@Fire can you give the exact quote/a scan of the quote? The way you're describing it makes it seem like it's no different to statments like 'lightning fast' etc, which generally aren't usable due to being flowery language.
 
@Cluemore

Discussed about, yeah. I remade the very same calc just making another picture trasparent so both things can be seem in the same panel and was accepted like it was nothing when the stuff were literally the same.
 
AlexSoloVaAlFuturo said:
@Cluemore

Discussed about, yeah. I remade the very same calc just making another picture trasparent so both things can be seem in the same panel and was accepted like it was nothing when the stuff were literally the same.
Click to expand...
What?
 
GyroNutz said:
Ok, upon seeing the quotes, it seems to be stated enough to be literal.
Click to expand...
That was never a problem as it's the mechanics to her abilities. Example normal light speed statements can be flowery writing. If the ability is literally about using light things change.
 
That isn't true; you can't derive light speed from light manipulation unless there's further proof (at minimum, a statement calling it light etc).

I'll drop this though since my original point no longer stands.
 
So you're saying the text says a return stroke, art implies a return stroke, the authors have no idea there is a downward stroke to begin with and think it's flash right away. Yet we say it's downward stroke.

Also what part of the text implies downward stroke?
 
"So you're saying the text says a return stroke, art implies a return stroke, the authors have no idea there is a downward stroke to begin with and think it's flash right away. Yet we say it's downward stroke."

If thats how we deal with it here, than thats what you have to accept (unless you convince everyone otherwise in a revision)

"Also what part of the text implies downward stroke?"

That I cant answer ovo
 
There is actually not a rule on that. Just we assume that due to how real life lightning works. Something fiction doesn't seem to know or care about most of the time.
 
"The speed of lightning can vary mostly in the range of 1.0-14×10^5 m/s. For the purpose of calculating speed feats we use the average lightning speed of 4.4×10^5 m/s (Mach 1294), which is suggested by this study. Similar studies have found average speeds within the same order of magnitude, albeit lower. [1][2][3]"

Unless you can factually prove otherwise, this is what you have to go with o.o
 
That's for downward stroke. If the statement says it's return stroke things change. We assume that for stuff like dodging lightning and stuff cus dodging lightning would require dodging the downward stroke.
 
It's stated "she uses the power of lightning" and it creates a lightning trail aswell as actual f*cking lightning coming from the sky. I wasn't joking at all.
 
Thor doesn't use "the power of lightning to stimulate his muscles" to move. That's a false equivalency. And no, it hasn't been accepted since Qa and damage disagree. Noone ever said "that reasoning for the speed is fine" (at least no staff as far as I know). There is only staff that says this can't be used, so it is very much a topic that needs to be debated
 
Raikiri itself is a sword slash created by electromagnetism. Not a lightning descending from the sky. It creating a lightning trail is usable to get the speed doesn't make it actual lightning.
 
An electromagnetic wave has speed -_- speed of light in vaccuum for example. In copper it's roughly C*0.97something. for human flesh it would likely be far less
 
RatherClueless said:
An electromagnetic wave has speed -_- speed of light in vaccuum for example. In copper it's roughly C*0.97something. for human flesh it would likely be far less
Click to expand...
A wave, not a force. We could use that but it'd be like 99% SoL. The problem is it's not the wave moving here, it's just creating force to unsheathe the scabard.
 
It's described as being similar to lightning and we default to downward stroke without in-universe statements confirming a higher speed or the return stroke. There's no evidence present that proves it's the return stroke and it being bright means nothing since lightning is always bright in the first place. The calc is just based on a flawed method and just isn't usable.
 
Yes, but like you completely dodged the point. Flash of lightning doesn't mean bright. It's literally a synonym to return stroke. The quote wasn't bright as a flash but fast as a flash of lightning.
 
Its a synonym to return stroke in fiction? That's what I think Qaw is pointing out and that you don't seem to understand. Leaving aside that the downward stroke can be bright as well, lightning is showcasen as bright all through the spawn of its existence in fiction all of the time. Flash wouldn't indicate anything unless we had reason to assume the author knows of, and is implying about, the return stroke.
 
I think that's what i was tying to say. If we say the author has no idea about the fact that there are 2 strokes why do we assume they refer to the downward one when that's least known and literally every other characteristic is that of the return stroke. Also again bright =/= flash. Downward stroke isn't as fast and can remain bright for quite some time, the flash always refers to the sudden momentary brightness produced by the return stroke.

It's like "Yeah, they are calling it a flash of lightning, they are portraying it as a return stroke, they don't even know a downward stroke exists to begin with, but yeah this is clearly the downward stroke that they are referring to".
 
Because... that's the normal assumption we take because we never have any reason to assume the higher values? This isn't even a lightning issue, we assume lower values unless we are made to think otherwise based on context.

And we are supposed to assume the author knows about this and was impliying this... how? What makes this description any different from lightning in fiction #sixtillion when they are all uniformally depicted as bright with the few exceptions, which this certainly doesn't seem to be?

So the author or anybody else would know that the moment of brightness refers to return stroke despite not knowing of downward stroke and we should assume he refers to the higher rating because of one word that is just as synonymous with all lightning shown in fiction since a distinction in the level of brightness is almost never, if not never talked about and this is no different? Sounds to me like not enough information for an unnecessarily higher rating. Curiously, Negima directly references the return stroke of lightning when talking about Negi's technique, unlike this, but it was still found insufficient proof.
 
I was gonna point out that you keep missing the point of what "flash" means. Cus it's not brightness that lasts like the downward stroke. And the fact that lightnings are mostly known for the fact that they flash, so that's why people know of the "fast" lightning but not of the slow one. But more importantly

Curiously, Negima directly references the return stroke of lightning when talking about Negi's technique, unlike this, but it was still found insufficient proof.

Im sorry..what now?!
 
And I am gonna point out that you keep missing the point that flash doesn't mean anything fiction wise unless there's more context to support this, because flash describes the entirety of the lightning in almost all of fiction. YOU have to prove this isn't the case for Rakudai.

Acknowledgement of the existence of return stroke doesn't equate to its use. Hence, again, more context and information.
 
Btw full context on how Raikiri works.

Indeed, having fought up to now in a close-ranged sword clash, it could only have led to Raikiri being used. Raikiri was a sword draw that emitted intense electrical energy through imbuing electromagnetic force into the sword blade. The explosive propulsion brought forth by intense electrical energy was something Touka herself could not stop. It was a technique that could not cancel the unsheathing once started

This is the mechanics of the "lightning speed attack".
 
Like @LSirLancelotDuLacl said none of that information is enough to back a return stroke rating. Even if you think its downplay, that is how the wiki handles all lightning related speed feats. Its not a relativistic justification and can't be used as one.
 
I wouldn't know. If it is considered calc stacking then it's based on the rush and the speed scaling presumably not being in the same encounter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Flashlight237
In Regards to Acceleration and Calculations
Replies
0
Views
327
Flashlight237
Flashlight237
VersusJunkie54
Mass Effect calculations
Replies
35
Views
2K
LegendariumOfLies
LegendariumOfLies
Epyriel
Tanjiro’s Flowing Dance Slo-Mo Calc Issues
Replies
12
Views
2K
Epyriel
Epyriel
IGunProFan2341
1 low-end 7-A Character vs 600+ low-end High 7-C characters
Replies
2
Views
440
IGunProFan2341
IGunProFan2341
TISSG7Redgrave
  • Locked
Rakudai: Wtf is this???
Replies
26
Views
4K
TISSG7Redgrave
TISSG7Redgrave
Back
Top