- 15,276
- 7,007
Pokémon doesen't really work like this. It work with "more powerful = bigger", like always.Wouldn't a weaker attack have less energy to travel farther with?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Pokémon doesen't really work like this. It work with "more powerful = bigger", like always.Wouldn't a weaker attack have less energy to travel farther with?
And how?? This doesn't make much sense, can you actually show me this like ever happening? A more intense attack is obviously going to have greater range than a less intense one. This is simple physics.Pretty sure your missing his point. If a lesser intense move doesn't require as much, that gives the user of the move more room to give that lesser intense move the same range as what they would do with a more intense move.
According to this thread the feat is still wrong but another thread was meant to be made for it. So again it's not really the best support to use.No, the calc for it is being used at this time now.
So Pokémon just says **** physics? Gotcha.Pokémon doesen't really work like this. It work with "more powerful = bigger", like always.
Actually it makes a lot of sense. A more intense move and the range that move operates at requires a certain level of exertion put into it's use. So for a lower level move that doesn't need so much exertion as the former, it is easier for the user to do what they do with the former move with the latter move, since the latter doesnt require as much for it's use.And how?? This doesn't make much sense, can you actually show me this like ever happening? A more intense attack is obviously going to have greater range than a less intense one. This is simple physics.
And that thread was debunked, by yours truly. Even if the feat needs more looking at (assuming thats the case), the feat in and of itself is still perfectly valid and is not getting thrown out entirely.According to this thread the feat is still wrong but another thread was meant to be made for it.
Nope. As Strym pointed out already, the attack will do better when the user exerts more into the move. That should be fairly simple.Wouldn't a weaker attack have less energy to travel farther with?
To use thunderbolt vs thunder as an example, has the former ever traveled comparably as far as the latter? Afaik, only thunder has generated clouds or reached their height, and consistently at that. Does thunderbolt consistently reach those heights? If so, what you're saying holds just fine, but I don't know and need clarification.Actually it makes a lot of sense. A more intense move and the range that move operates at requires a certain level of exertion put into it's use. So for a lower level move that doesn't need so much exertion as the former, it is easier for the user to do what they do with the former move with the latter move, since the latter doesnt require as much for it's use.
Id say so. One example that comes to mind for this would be Ash's Pikachu, who actually used to know both thunderbolt and thunder in the earlier sagas of the anime.To use thunderbolt vs thunder as an example, has the former ever traveled comparably as far as the latter? Afaik, only thunder has generated clouds or reached their height, and consistently at that. Does thunderbolt consistently reach those heights? if so, what you're saying holds just fine, but I don't know and need clarification.
I agree, a calc would be nice.My only issue with this is again, it needs to have a calculation before we give it a random label for range.
IIRC, we use Pokemon at their peak, because they're species profiles.And how exactly do we know they use the same moves to the same exact degree as other Pokémon? Further elaborate would be nice.
Using attacks, or most kinds of powers, energy projection included, requires expending energy, obviously. Generally, energy can not be projected an infinite distance away, & fictional characters having arbitrary limits on their ranges in fiction isn't unheard of.If the other moves aren't using as intensity then that's just more of a reason why they shouldn't have that range. I've never seen a verse that handles range in such a fashion. If one attack using significantly more intensity and show cases range, then logically an attack with a lesser intensity would have lessee range.
Except when they do it, setting up the weather is deliberate; It is the intended effect of the action.So the weather would be an indirect consequence, and that seems more like a chain reaction at that point. So I'm not sure how that's applicable to direct attacks.
I did say "often". & often, Pokemon that can use Hail or use Blizzard can manipulate Ice or Cold. Pokemon that can set up Sunny Day often have similar abilities, like projecting heat from their bodies, or knowing moves like Heat Wave.That's a case by case basis, depending on the context.
I wouldn't assume the exact range, but I might assume similar range until given evidence to the contrary, since moves of the same types tend to seem to have very similar or identical power sources, & while the power of moves may vary, an individual Pokemon's level of power should stay relatively consistent even when using moves of varied power; A Blastoise isn't gonna be multiple tiers weaker while using Bubble or Rapid Spin.This has a little bit more logical evidence, but how exactly do we know that all electrical (and so on and so forth.) all have the same exact range?
We have calculations & estimates for a variety of moves & some feats. Not for all of the moves, & feats, of course, & while I can agree on a desire for more calcs/estimates.... but we often assume some level of comparability across groups of Pokemon species.The issue here is what we need to figure what kind of distance.
Fiction breaks physics regularly. In real world physics, IIRC, fast enough movement generates explosions (Potentially nuclear ones, & by extension, radiation.), intense heat, among other effects, often to the point that durability becomes a lot less relevant as you approach higher speed.So Pokémon just says **** physics? Gotcha.
Which again, doesn't make sense unless we assume that all Pokemon just don't follow the laws of physics for whatever reason. An attack with more intensity and force is going to be traveling at a further distance that one with less force and intensity. It's being pushed with a a lot more force, in turn increasing the distance it's going to be traveling. The greater release of speed and strength the greater the distance traveled.Actually it makes a lot of sense. A more intense move and the range that move operates at requires a certain level of exertion put into it's use.
And I've already explained why this doesn't work. This ignores physics to an unimaginable degree and while you can argue "it's fiction." we still apply physics to fiction here. Unless Pokemon just ignore laws like that then I don't see how this acceptable.So for a lower level move that doesn't need so much exertion as the former, it is easier for the user to do what they do with the former move with the latter move, since the latter doesnt require as much for it's use.
No, not at all. To say otherwise is asking you for direct proof that all of their attacks have the same range. As I said above the greater the release of speed and strength the greater the distance traveled.To say otherwise on this, is to basically ask us to prove that one can take what they put into a higher-costing move and use it in a lower-costing one.
And that thread didn't really seem to end, especially nearing the end. It doesn't look concluded, but rather forgotten about.And that thread was debunked, by yours truly. Even if the feat needs more looking at (assuming thats the case), the feat in and of itself is still perfectly valid and is not getting thrown out entirely.
But how often did thunderbolt specifically reach the clouds?Id say so. One example that comes to mind for this would be Ash's Pikachu, who actually used to know both thunderbolt and thunder in the earlier sagas of the anime.
What's the episode name? The only video I found was in a different language making it harder to tell the moves. Also, it hurt my eyes because the screen kept strobing, and I ain't watching four minutes of that.Or that one battle Pikachu had with Spiritomb in d/p, where even when Pikachu was incredibly exhausted and could only unleash a small spark of thunderbolt, it reached cloud height in a matter of seconds.
I'm asking for examples of thunderbolt reaching the clouds, not thunder.
I got confused, it doesen't lolI'm asking for examples of thunderbolt reaching the clouds, not thunder.
I believe it's this episode? https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/DP056But how often did thunderbolt specifically reach the clouds?
What's the episode name? The only video I found was in a different language making it harder to tell the moves. Also, it hurt my eyes because the screen kept strobing, and I ain't watching four minutes of that.
Agreed.I agree, a calc would be nice.
Would that also be applicable to range as well?IIRC, we use Pokemon at their peak, because they're species profiles.
If we used them at their weakest, we'd be scaling fully evolved to the jobbers of their species, & it's a little counterintuitive for a Versus-relevant ability indexing to index them at their weakest, as opposed to at their most capable.
In terms of speed and attack potency? Yes I can see that, but in terms of range scaling? I don't see how that's allowed, but feel free to enlighten me.If we use them at their Average, we get the question of "What's average?", because not only is there Pokemon that lose to lower stages or seemingly very weak Pokemon, but there are ALSO Pokemon that win in battles we'd assume they have no business winning. Beating Legendaries, or 1st stages beating fully evolved Pokemon. The "average" would be very unclear & nebulous.
So peak meaning peak of all stats, including abilities, presets, range etc? Also if that were the case wouldn't they all have the same stats despite evolutions?Hence, using them at their peak; Often, users want to know how capable something is at its peak -For the given form- hence, we assume very, if not the most capable versions of the species. Untrained because Trainer's Pokemon are notedly stronger than typical AND have all kinds of screwy wins & losses, so we have to be careful.
The only issue I'm seeing here again is the correlation between stats and range. And also again, a lack of citation. Not to say that your being dishonest, but scans are highly appreciated in cases like this.By this logic, if we're to assume them at their most capable, it can be assumed they should be capable of similar level of ranges.
And those cases are usually stated to be like that directly. Pokemon isn't really one of those verses.Using attacks, or most kinds of powers, energy projection included, requires expending energy, obviously. Generally, energy can not be projected an infinite distance away, & fictional characters having arbitrary limits on their ranges in fiction isn't unheard of.
That's now how it works, an attack with more intensity behind it is going to travel a further distance than one without as much intensity behind it.Likewise for more difficulty to project further away.
Often, more energy density means more power, & thus, more energy concentrated into a limited area; Ergo, something involving more energy concentrated in an area, something more intense, will have to be closer; Ergo, it could be easier to project lower intensity stuff further away.
And it's not the direct effect, and obviously its not like they can use cloud creation to attack with. Perhaps use clouds to attack with via using it as a medium of the sorts, that I can see. But this is still a bit different than Me snipping someone from a range.Except when they do it, setting up the weather is deliberate; It is the intended effect of the action.
If they needed to create a cloud to attack with then I don't see them being able to attack with the same range with their Electricity, at least for direct attack such as from Point A to point B. This example is attacking from point A, to point B to point C with B being the medium used to travel through.As an example, using Electricity Manipulation to create a storm cloud a KM away is still using Electricity Manipulation, & if you can simeultaneously create a bunch more clouds in this manner at similar distances, it's reasonable to assume they can use that Electricity Manipulation to attack.
I get where your coming from, but if they need to utilize clouds to attack from a distance then it isn't normal range, as they need to create some type of medium for their attacks to travel to.Especially if the point of setting up the weather is to set up an attack, or we've already seen them use this type of Manipulation to attack, especially if it's to attack with that kind of Manipulation.
Can their body heat also reach up to kilometers now?I did say "often". & often, Pokemon that can use Hail or use Blizzard can manipulate Ice or Cold. Pokemon that can set up Sunny Day often have similar abilities, like projecting heat from their bodies, or knowing moves like Heat Wave.
So then again this should be a case by case basis and not all the time.Pokemon that can use Hurricane often know other Wind Manipulation moves like Gust, Whirlwind, Twister, etc.
It isn't always the case, but it frequently is.
That'd Attack Potency not range so I fail to see the comparison there.I wouldn't assume the exact range, but I might assume similar range until given evidence to the contrary, since moves of the same types tend to seem to have very similar or identical power sources, & while the power of moves may vary, an individual Pokemon's level of power should stay relatively consistent even when using moves of varied power; A Blastoise isn't gonna be multiple tiers weaker while using Bubble or Rapid Spin.
I've already reasoned to this, this has to do with attack potency, not range.A strong character's weak attacks are still roughly on the level of that character, & the character is often a big influence on the power just as much as the technique is.
And why would we assume as much? You haven't posted as to why they'd be comparable across all Pokémon species.We have calculations & estimates for a variety of moves & some feats. Not for all of the moves, & feats, of course, & while I can agree on a desire for more calcs/estimates.... but we often assume some level of comparability across groups of Pokemon species.
The type of distance traveled, not sure how I can make that more clear for you.So if you say what "kind" of distance, I want to know what kind(s) of distance you think are missing.
Breaking =/= outright ignoring, and as much as fiction can break physics we still apply physics to them. We still appropriate light standards based upon physics done in fiction.Fiction breaks physics regularly. In real world physics, IIRC, fast enough movement generates explosions (Potentially nuclear ones, & by extension, radiation.), intense heat, among other effects, often to the point that durability becomes a lot less relevant as you approach higher speed.
Actually Oda does a very good job at explaining his Logia stuff, I have a bunch of raw scans going into finer details from various databooks so this isn't a great comparison.Similarly, making cold from nothing is impossible IRL because it's the absence of heat; Aokiji would need to heat, if not superheat areas in removing their heat & move that heat somewhere else to cool things down.
Luffy's stretching & inflating probably violates some kind of conservation of matter laws. Not to mention I bet Haki screws with hardness/density.
That much we ignore, and again this isn't dealing with an unconventional haxxed ability so lets not change the topic here.& unless I'm mistaken becoming perfectly intangible should kill your physical body, on the assumption that your cells or molecules or atoms or whatever are no longer attached or such, similar to why some fiction analysts would argue teleporters are death traps.
Which is irrelevant, your trying to apply something that only happens on a base by base basis to quite literally everything in Pokemon. Fiction can break physics at time, but for a verse like Pokemon to be able to outright ignore basic physics is simply laughable with all due respect. They're very clearly bound by the laws of physics for the majority of the cast.Given fiction's abundant tendencies to not depict the consequences of real world physics, I don't understand your point in the quoted part of your post this part of my post is responding to.
This is a verse where fictional creatures based on either real world animals or are just entirely made up extraterrestrials hold elemental and supernatural abilities with a bunch of 10 year olds walking around fighting and collecting them. Id say we're well beyond the realm of where our physics can and cannot apply to them, but thats besides the main point.Which again, doesn't make sense unless we assume that all Pokemon just don't follow the laws of physics for whatever reason.
Yes, we know this already.An attack with more intensity and force is going to be traveling at a further distance that one with less force and intensity. It's being pushed with a a lot more force, in turn increasing the distance it's going to be traveling. The greater release of speed and strength the greater the distance traveled.
Because this is somehow a random and, quite frankly, a silly interpretation to have to think that moves with less intensity and less requiring exertion cannot have more exertion applied to them than normally needed, if the user chooses to do so. And yes, we apply physics to fiction, where it makes sense to. But we also obviously have a clear line to draw in the sand to where it doesn't apply.And I've already explained why this doesn't work. This ignores physics to an unimaginable degree and while you can argue "it's fiction." we still apply physics to fiction here. Unless Pokemon just ignore laws like that then I don't see how this acceptable.
Yes, very much so. Covering it up with "Asking if their attacks have the same range" is just a cover up way to ask us to prove more force and exertion used for higher costing moves can be applied to lower-costing moves. Which s ridiculous.No, not at all. To say otherwise is asking you for direct proof that all of their attacks have the same range.
No, but the conclusion on whether or not the feat in and of itself stays was in fact concluded.And that thread didn't really seem to end, especially nearing the end. It doesn't look concluded, but rather forgotten about.
Gonna ignore this part as a whole, if you wanna argue that Pokemon are immune to physics Manipulation then make a CRT. not gonna argue this anymore.This is a verse where fictional creatures based on either real world animals or are just entirely made up extraterrestrials hold elemental and supernatural abilities with a bunch of 10 year olds walking around fighting and collecting them. Id say we're well beyond the realm of where our physics can and cannot apply to them, but thats besides the main point.
Seemingly we don't.Yes, we know this already.
And thankfully this isn't what I was arguing, I'm arguing on behalf of them attacking with weaker attacks having the same exact range as their strongest attacks. They can obviously apply more force behind it, but do you have proof that applying more force makes it = a much stronger attack with evidently higher range?Because this is somehow a random and, quite frankly, a silly interpretation to have to think that moves with less intensity and less requiring exertion cannot have more exertion applied to them than normally needed, if the user chooses to do so.
And it wouldn't make sense just to ignore it here either, your just making empty blanket statements at this point that aren't even applicable to the topic at hand. Pokemon Cleary don't break the laws of physics or ignore drag, speed loss, etc. They're still bound to said laws, so unless you have literal scans of Pokémon outright ignoring physics then we're done here.And yes, we apply physics to fiction, where it makes sense to. But we also obviously have a clear line to draw in the sand to where it doesn't apply.
A Kamehameha has more range and AoE than his Ki Blasts so this example doesn't make sense. And what did I say about whatabouttism's earlier? Especially if they aren't even comparable.And Pokemon by no means is the only verse to do this sort of thing either. Not unless you find it strange for Goku to put more force behind non-Kamehameha KI blasts. Or Naruto putting more exertion into ordinary Rasengans. The list goes on, and on, and on, and on from here.
The Burden of Proof is literally on you, you made the claim and now you need to prove it with factual evidence. Don't get upset at me for asking you to prove a positive, this is how the wiki works.Yes, very much so. Covering it up with "Asking if their attacks have the same range" is just a cover up way to ask us to prove more force and exertion used for higher costing moves can be applied to lower-costing moves. Which s ridiculous.
Asking for evidence about a claim you made =/= nitpicking. Earlier you said it was a witch hunt, so now I suppose Asking for proof is the same thing as an organized attack? You're definitely overreacting here to be frank.And even then, asking for direct proof for everything every single step of the way is nitpicking.
And at the end there was several variants of the calculation, and then the thread died. None of which you debunked. You debunked the OP, you didn't at all respond to the recalculations.No, but the conclusion on whether or not the feat in and of itself stays was in fact concluded.
this has pokemon using moves and hitting from 100+ meters
?? You're the only one here who mentioned anything about them "resisting" physics when thats obviously not what I said or suggested. Dont put words in my mouth please.Gonna ignore this part as a whole, if you wanna argue that Pokemon are immune to physics Manipulation then make a CRT. not gonna argue this anymore.
We do.Seemingly we don't.
And we are saying they logically would when applying more exertion into said weaker attacks. To disagree with this, is to argue exactly that interpretation.And thankfully this isn't what I was arguing, I'm arguing on behalf of them attacking with weaker attacks having the same exact range as their strongest attacks.
Is this an actual serious question?They can obviously apply more force behind it, but do you have proof that applying more force makes it = a much stronger attack with evidently higher range?
Bound to laws =/= bound to our laws. I dunno where you keep getting this random thinking that me, or anyone else here, was suggesting they resist or break the laws of physics, but you can kindly throw that out the window since that isn't what we're saying here. Or rather, what im saying here.And it wouldn't make sense just to ignore it here either, your just making empty blanket statements at this point that aren't even applicable to the topic at hand. Pokemon Cleary don't break the laws of physics or ignore drag, speed loss, etc. They're still bound to said laws, so unless you have literal scans of Pokémon outright ignoring physics then we're done here.
This isn't even whataboutism since you blatantly missed the point I was trying to make. The point here is that a regular KI attack from Goku isn't going to be inferior to a Kamehameha, or a regular Rasengan from Naruto wouldnt be inferior to a more advanced form of the technique, if they apply more exertion into them.A Kamehameha has more range and AoE than his Ki Blasts so this example doesn't make sense. And what did I say about whatabouttism's earlier? Especially if they aren't even comparable.
Yes, asking to prove a positive for sensible things is how this wiki works. Not holding your hand and spoon feeding you every bit of information for literally anything that common sense by itself doesnt answer for you.The Burden of Proof is literally on you, you made the claim and now you need to prove it with factual evidence. Don't get upset at me for asking you to prove a positive, this is how the wiki works.
Downplaying and changing what I said doesnt mean you have a point Gin. I never said asking for evidence is nitpicking. I said asking for evidence for literally every little thing is nitpicking.Asking for evidence about a claim you made =/= nitpicking. Earlier you said it was a witch hunt, so now I suppose Asking for proof is the same thing as an organized attack? You're definitely overreacting here to be frank.
And okay? Means nothing about what I said before. Recalcing the feat and altering the result is one thing, but whether the feat in and of itself is actually usable is what im saying was debunked. The feat stays.And at the end there was several variants of the calculation, and then the thread died. None of which you debunked. You debunked the OP, you didn't at all respond to the recalculations.
I think it's mostly just a matter of actually having evidence for the current range ratings. I did a calculation resulting in hundreds of meters for middle and final stage Pokemon, but beyond that, I'm not sure.109 comments
What's the TLDR so far?
Im good with this but I still personally think Strym's interpretation earlier should have this apply to all of the types (or most).I believe that range should be rated like this:
Standard/extended meelee range, hundreds of meters, up to multiple kilometers with moves.
Electric ranged moves, psychic moves, beam moves such as hyper beam and so, weather manipulating moves, light based moves, earthquake inducing moves, those at least need to scale to kilometers (2-10+ as all those reach from cloud layers and up to dozens of kilometers away, such as piloswine's earthquake wiping out cities, lightning reaching clouds in seconds, casual psychic moves moving clouds around freely, light being light)
Basic ranged moves such as blast burn or razor plant, bullet seed or whatever all should scale to "at least hundreds of meters" as it is damb clear that the moves could've reached far more if there wasn't a bigass zygarde over there.
Overall:
-melee range
-hundreds of meters+ for basic ranged feats
-kilometers for psychic and electric types as well as beam moves and ground moves such as earthquake.
He said beam moves, which basically includes beam moves of whatever type.Im good with this but I still personally think Strym's interpretation earlier should have this apply to all of the types (or most).
If multiple types all give moves that have big range, there shouldn't be any reason why the other typings would be any different when they have moves that are all very similar power sets.
AhhHe said beam moves, which basically includes beam moves of whatever type.
I'm using Dragonair as reference. Basically beam moves such as Hyper beam are the ones i mean. Basically dark pulse, flash canon, signal beam (which is already light), solar beam (also light), dragon pulse. Overall beams that have the same mechanic as hyper beam and are made of energy. They have the exact same mechanic most of the time, aka, shooting once and then having to re-charge before firing again. They are pretty much the hyper beam of their typing and are of about the same power so it would make a lot of sense to scale them to thatHe said beam moves, which basically includes beam moves of whatever type.
Currently, I find no issue with this proposal.I'm using Dragonair as reference. Basically beam moves such as Hyper beam are the ones i mean. Basically dark pulse, flash canon, signal beam (which is already light), solar beam (also light), dragon pulse. Overall beams that have the same mechanic as hyper beam and are made of energy. They have the exact same mechanic most of the time, aka, shooting once and then having to re-charge before firing again. They are pretty much the hyper beam of their typing and are of about the same power so it would make a lot of sense to scale them to that