- 26,408
- 3,144
Not the pointMrKingOfNegativity said:
the point is that the size of the explosion shows that granade wasn't a normal granade, but packed a lot of punch
-
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.
- Status
the point is that the size of the explosion shows that granade wasn't a normal granade, but packed a lot of punch
- 64,025
- 16,076
Scaling exists for a reason
Dvas mech explosion was calced to be 8-A my guy
How so? He's been hurt by high 8-Cs and can hurt high 8-Cs, how is it contradictory?
It was actually calced at high 8-C a while back iirc
Dvas mech explosion was calced to be 8-A my guy
How so? He's been hurt by high 8-Cs and can hurt high 8-Cs, how is it contradictory?
It was actually calced at high 8-C a while back iirc
- 64,025
- 16,076
Also 76 was not critically harmed by reapers shotgun, he was harmed long after the fact due to it being laced with powerful poison and a Regenerationn nullifying agent that prevented him from healing. Hell after he got shot he immediately got up and fought reaper in h2h combat
- 9,994
- 2,031
That's stamina not durability, and nullifying regen do not decrease durability. Also, take into account that a High 8-C explosion would have destroyed any concrete structure within a radius of 40 m, and damaged others more within 60 m. This explosion do not damage anything beyond that street (explosions are calculated by radius not height, and that was mostly smoke).
- 9,755
- 4,393
Scaling does exist for a reason. But that doesn't mean that one character with no evidence of High 8-C (and evidence against High 8-C) is suddenly that level because he scales to a bunch of people who, outside of gameplay, only have direct scaling to him and each other.
1.883 tons of TNT
He was hurt by having a heavy piece of equipment fall on him, and the only potential High 8-C he's fought in the cinematics is Doomfist.
I'd have you find and post a link to that, because I have my doubt that an explosion comparable to civilian houses (it doesn't even destroy any of them, mind you) would result in High 8-C AP. Especially when I've seen other explosions much bigger and wider in radius than that calc'd to much lower levels.
1.883 tons of TNT
He was hurt by having a heavy piece of equipment fall on him, and the only potential High 8-C he's fought in the cinematics is Doomfist.
I'd have you find and post a link to that, because I have my doubt that an explosion comparable to civilian houses (it doesn't even destroy any of them, mind you) would result in High 8-C AP. Especially when I've seen other explosions much bigger and wider in radius than that calc'd to much lower levels.
- 26,408
- 3,144
The explosion not causing the surronding buildings to collapse is clear PIS, as it would have been completly against the point of the video aka the Overwatch agents being a simbol of hope
- 1,461
- 764
I don't think you can simply handwave explosion physics while using explosion physics to explain why the calc is what it's asserted to be; you're eschewing the integrity of the entire calc by doing so.Overlord775 said:
You either are honest with it, or you accept your presumptions are incorrect and that it is, indeed, weaker than originally posited.
- 64,025
- 16,076
Attack potency and destructive capacity are two different things, youve been here long enough to know thisAntoniofer said:
- 9,994
- 2,031
That only apply when one scale, not when calculating an explosion. You can say that the explosion have High 8-C by scaling, but if originally being calculated then no, as AoE do not apply to the equation.
- 10,758
- 6,501
I don't think you can ignore an explosion's destructive effects when those destructive effects is what would prove the explosion's yield in the first place. If it was actually proven to be of a certain yield then the AP vs DC idea would be relevant
- 26,408
- 3,144
it's a cartoony serie, you can't expect that everything works 1-to-1 to real life
- 64,025
- 16,076
Look, im at work right now so I can't make a full argument but the notion that they can't be high 8-C because they get hurt by things that would instead logically scale to them instead is demonstrably false
- 9,994
- 2,031
What type of justification is that? So neither of our calculations are valid? So one belive one feat is 7-C, once calculated results to be 8-B, but since people belive its 7-C their assume that's the result and disregard physics and assume the feat its PIS just cuz they believe so? Regardless, I think there's a misunderstanding here, but either way, that grenade do not justify tier 8 ratings.
- 1,461
- 764
I think the issue being raised isn't what you're claiming:WeeklyBattles said:
1. The scaling in question is being stated to be roundabout or circuitous for any variety of reasons
2. Anti-feats have been introduced which further support the notion of 1.
3. As such, the scaling itself is called further into question since there now exists solid evidence that these characters are, in fact, harmed by things massively below their alleged scaled tiering
Any attempt to simply upscale the anti-feat is eating your cake and having it too at this point. The scaling needs reinforced when all the anti-feats presented would be calc'd at a much lower tier than the scaling presumes.
- 9,755
- 4,393
Overlord775 said:
- 64,025
- 16,076
I think the issue being raised isn't what you're claiming:
1. The scaling in question is being stated to be roundabout or circuitous for any variety of reasons
2. Anti-feats have been introduced which further support the notion of 1.
3. As such, the scaling itself is called further into question since there now exists solid evidence that these characters are, in fact, harmed by things massively below their alleged scaled tiering
Any attempt to simply upscale the anti-feat is eating your cake and having it too at this point. The scaling needs reinforced when all the anti-feats presented would be calc'd at a much lower tier than the scaling presumes.
1. Except its not, every character in the verse scales to a high 8-C feat in some way in a concise, logical, and non-contradictory manor
2. Anti- feats do not delegitimize the high 8-C feats, and all of the anti feats that have been broight up thus far have been debunked
3. Except they have not been harmed by things massively below their tiering
1. The scaling in question is being stated to be roundabout or circuitous for any variety of reasons
2. Anti-feats have been introduced which further support the notion of 1.
3. As such, the scaling itself is called further into question since there now exists solid evidence that these characters are, in fact, harmed by things massively below their alleged scaled tiering
Any attempt to simply upscale the anti-feat is eating your cake and having it too at this point. The scaling needs reinforced when all the anti-feats presented would be calc'd at a much lower tier than the scaling presumes.
1. Except its not, every character in the verse scales to a high 8-C feat in some way in a concise, logical, and non-contradictory manor
2. Anti- feats do not delegitimize the high 8-C feats, and all of the anti feats that have been broight up thus far have been debunked
3. Except they have not been harmed by things massively below their tiering
- 9,755
- 4,393
Except, at this point, there's evidence against that.
They haven't been debunked, though. Not successfully.
Except they have been harmed by things massively below their tiering. That's the issue, and saying "those things clearly just scale to the characters" is not a way to fix it, only an attempt to dismiss it.
They haven't been debunked, though. Not successfully.
Except they have been harmed by things massively below their tiering. That's the issue, and saying "those things clearly just scale to the characters" is not a way to fix it, only an attempt to dismiss it.
- 5,510
- 718
Just gonna get my popcorn for this
- 64,025
- 16,076
@King And just what is this evidence? Which arguments haven't been debunked? And what have they been harmed by that wouldn't simply scale to them instead? Please explain, im genuinely curious.
- 9,755
- 4,393
The whole idea of things "simply scaling to them" is flawed on its face within this context, first of all.
Which arguments haven't been debunked? Try all of them. You've been countered at pretty much every turn by almost everyone here. Even the argument regarding the explosion being "building sized" ended with everyone else pointing out that those buildings aren't very large and were also left unharmed, and when you mentioned it being calc'd at High 8-C, a person who regularly does calcs came in and explained why that result is patently inaccurate.
You mentioned D.Va's self-destruct being calc'd at 8-A, and that was proven wrong right away.
And every other point made, you've either avoided entirely (Where's your response to "nullifying regen doesn't decrease durability?", as just one example of several) or tried to handwave with the same repetitive "scaling" comments without actually addressing anything. I see no debunking whatsoever. All you've done is try to turn this into a war of attrition.
Of course, one can just scroll up and see all of this for themselves, but I don't think that's what you really want.
- A grenade that explicitly fails to destroy several typical houses shouldn't "scale" to a man's supposedly High 8-C dura just because it badly hurts him, especially in a case where that's the only thing the character has tanked outside of bullets from guy whose rating is also not backed up by feats.
- A falling piece of equipment shouldn't "scale" to a supposedly High 8-C character if it hurts them.
- A completely random street sign ripped out of the ground shouldn't "scale" to supposedly High 8-C bullets if they fail to penetrate it.
- A falling train car shouldn't "scale" to a supposedly High 8-C character's dura if said character has to dodge it to avoid being killed.
Which arguments haven't been debunked? Try all of them. You've been countered at pretty much every turn by almost everyone here. Even the argument regarding the explosion being "building sized" ended with everyone else pointing out that those buildings aren't very large and were also left unharmed, and when you mentioned it being calc'd at High 8-C, a person who regularly does calcs came in and explained why that result is patently inaccurate.
You mentioned D.Va's self-destruct being calc'd at 8-A, and that was proven wrong right away.
And every other point made, you've either avoided entirely (Where's your response to "nullifying regen doesn't decrease durability?", as just one example of several) or tried to handwave with the same repetitive "scaling" comments without actually addressing anything. I see no debunking whatsoever. All you've done is try to turn this into a war of attrition.
Of course, one can just scroll up and see all of this for themselves, but I don't think that's what you really want.
- 64,025
- 16,076
It didn't badly hurt 76, it sent him flying due to him purposely taking the brunt of the blast to protect a little girl but the most damage it did was singe his jacket, then he got up, dusted himself off, and went on his way like nothing happened. 76 has also tanked punched from reaper as well as the explosion of the overwatch headquarters at point blank range.
Yourr really cherrypicking a character dodging something falling on them to try to discredit this? There are so many verses above tier 8 that dodge stuff falling on them its bot even funny, so i guess their tiers are wrong too. Because dodging stuff you cant lift off of yourself isnt something an intelligent person would do.
Id still like a list if which arguments havent been debunked, because i will gladly restate and further expand on explanations if needed.
Dvas feat WAS calced at 8-A, twice actuslly, dunno how you could exsctly prove that wrong.
So basically youre just dodging the question and using ad homenim instead of trying to debate this or actually explain why it's wrong. Really.
Yourr really cherrypicking a character dodging something falling on them to try to discredit this? There are so many verses above tier 8 that dodge stuff falling on them its bot even funny, so i guess their tiers are wrong too. Because dodging stuff you cant lift off of yourself isnt something an intelligent person would do.
Id still like a list if which arguments havent been debunked, because i will gladly restate and further expand on explanations if needed.
Dvas feat WAS calced at 8-A, twice actuslly, dunno how you could exsctly prove that wrong.
So basically youre just dodging the question and using ad homenim instead of trying to debate this or actually explain why it's wrong. Really.
- 9,755
- 4,393
He was limping afterwards. And groaning in pain with almost every movement he made. And holding his ribs as if they'd been shattered. But sure, he wasn't badly hurt or anything. Just playing it up for the audience.
That, or he would die from it falling on him, which is much more logical a conclusion. Especially since a supposedly much stronger character (Winston) was legitimately hurt by something nowhere near as large falling on him from nowhere near as high.
I just gave them to you, and look where we are. Three of my points in that reply mentioned out of how many?
And I suppose you forgot about me posting this, right?
There is no dodging on my end, because I don't need to do so. Hence why everything I've said has been as direct as I can make it.
That, or he would die from it falling on him, which is much more logical a conclusion. Especially since a supposedly much stronger character (Winston) was legitimately hurt by something nowhere near as large falling on him from nowhere near as high.
I just gave them to you, and look where we are. Three of my points in that reply mentioned out of how many?
And I suppose you forgot about me posting this, right?
There is no dodging on my end, because I don't need to do so. Hence why everything I've said has been as direct as I can make it.
- 64,025
- 16,076
Prove he would have died from it falling on him. Should be easy to do if you think that's the logical conclusion here.
Which ones? You have yet to prove any of what you're saying, you're just making massive and unfounded assumptions and treating them as fact when there is significantly more evidence that contradicts what you're saying then supports it.
Yeah, and that feat was recalced later to be 8-A
You need to actually say something direct for it to be treates as direct.
Which ones? You have yet to prove any of what you're saying, you're just making massive and unfounded assumptions and treating them as fact when there is significantly more evidence that contradicts what you're saying then supports it.
Yeah, and that feat was recalced later to be 8-A
You need to actually say something direct for it to be treates as direct.
- 9,755
- 4,393
I'll assume you've conceded on the grenade explosion, then.
Stronger/much more durable guy got legitimately hurt by a considerably smaller thing falling on him from a considerably smaller distance, which I've already pointed out. That, and his own bullets failed to penetrate a street sign. (Unless you're saying his gun is immensely weaker than he is durable, which is...kind of hilarious to imagine.)
You want me to point out the things you've ignored? I can do that.
I'll even throw in one that was made by someone else.
Oh hey, here're the ones that caused you to switch an entire chunk of your argument from "that grenade was calc'd at High 8-C" to "well, 76 is High 8-C, so it should just scale to him":
Recalc'd to be 8-A? Shame the profile doesn't say that. In fact, the profile seems to reflect what was accepted within the blog I just linked. So I guess it's your turn to do some explaining now.
>"You need to actually say something direct for it to be treate(d) as direct."
I couldn't agree more.
Stronger/much more durable guy got legitimately hurt by a considerably smaller thing falling on him from a considerably smaller distance, which I've already pointed out. That, and his own bullets failed to penetrate a street sign. (Unless you're saying his gun is immensely weaker than he is durable, which is...kind of hilarious to imagine.)
You want me to point out the things you've ignored? I can do that.
I'll even throw in one that was made by someone else.
Oh hey, here're the ones that caused you to switch an entire chunk of your argument from "that grenade was calc'd at High 8-C" to "well, 76 is High 8-C, so it should just scale to him":
Recalc'd to be 8-A? Shame the profile doesn't say that. In fact, the profile seems to reflect what was accepted within the blog I just linked. So I guess it's your turn to do some explaining now.
>"You need to actually say something direct for it to be treate(d) as direct."
I couldn't agree more.
- 9,755
- 4,393
Just as a notice, I'll be going to bed for now. I'm definitely not dropping this anytime soon, so I'll come back to it when I've got the time on my hands again.
- 64,025
- 16,076
Let's take dvas feat into evaluation for example. You're argument is that she can't be high 8-C because the explosion of her self destruct was only calced at 8-C+ (Which is mathematically wrong but for this hypothetical we'll just assume that it's correct). Now, if looked at from a purely outside view your argument would be correct, but when given context it it factually impossible. The omnics she was fighting in thatvscene were Giwishin, omnics that spent years evolving to become stronger, faster, and overall superior to outdated models ofnomnics from the onmic crisis such as Bastio and Orisa. The MEKA was able to take numerous hits from these omnics without being destroyed as well as damaged them with both its weapons and its physical blows, thus the meka scales to the omnics physically as per newtons third law. With this in mind it is physically impossible for the explosion to only be 8-C+ when it destroyed things that are canonically vastly stronger than omnics that scale directly to high 8-C feats.
- 64,025
- 16,076
I will explain stuff like the grenade explosion and the like when I get home
- 64,025
- 16,076
Before i post the full argument, fun fact, McCree was actually present during the Omnic Crisis and canonically fought and killed Omnics comparable to Bastio
Reaper and 76 also fought and defeated omnics of this level in canon
Reaper and 76 also fought and defeated omnics of this level in canon
- 9,755
- 4,393
>Bastion
>Orisa
"Oh, this Reinhardt fellow looks promising."
*Attack Potency: Large Building level (Capable of harming characters like Winsto)
"............................."
So all of your characters are ultimately scaled off...one guy. Two guys if you count Doomfist, but we'll get to that in a second.
This is part of the problem. Scaling literally every character to one or two characters based on gameplay (and most of the above is based on gameplay) is not the correct way to go about things, as pretty much anyone who's had to deal with fighting game profiles can tell you.
And the character, Winston, was hurt by a piece of equipment falling on him. You can write that off as PIS, but considering all of the other characters scaling off him apparently have no other evidence of High 8-C besides...scaling off him, what does that leave?
Then there's Doomfist. This where the scaling really breaks, because all evidence points to him being the only guy with full-on High 8-C evidence of any kind (the few other combat-applicable calcs left are 8-C+), and he's clearly above just about everyone listed. Not just because he was flatout teambusting most of the Overwatch members by himself in his animation, but also because:
And that brings us back to D.Va and the Omnics she fought. Being vastly superior to Orisa means little when the one potentially legit High 8-C character has no trouble destroying them with his bare hands. They don't scale either, and the aforementioned calc of the explosion only solidifies that.
- Attack Potency: Large Building level (As a combat-model Omnic, Bastion should be stronger than most humans and somewhat comparable to Winsto--)
>Orisa
"Oh, this Reinhardt fellow looks promising."
- Attack Potency: Large Building level (Spars with Brigitte on a daily basis. Can KO almost every non-"Tank" character in the game with a single tackle. Should be at least comparable to Winsto, Can casually destroy Bastio units and fight OR15s)
- Attack Potency: Large Building level (Should be comparable to Reinhardt, Capable of harming characters like Winsto, Roadhog, and Junkrat--)
- Attack Potency: Large Building level (Capable of harming characters like Reinhardt, Winsto, Junkrat--)
*Attack Potency: Large Building level (Capable of harming characters like Winsto)
"............................."
So all of your characters are ultimately scaled off...one guy. Two guys if you count Doomfist, but we'll get to that in a second.
This is part of the problem. Scaling literally every character to one or two characters based on gameplay (and most of the above is based on gameplay) is not the correct way to go about things, as pretty much anyone who's had to deal with fighting game profiles can tell you.
And the character, Winston, was hurt by a piece of equipment falling on him. You can write that off as PIS, but considering all of the other characters scaling off him apparently have no other evidence of High 8-C besides...scaling off him, what does that leave?
Then there's Doomfist. This where the scaling really breaks, because all evidence points to him being the only guy with full-on High 8-C evidence of any kind (the few other combat-applicable calcs left are 8-C+), and he's clearly above just about everyone listed. Not just because he was flatout teambusting most of the Overwatch members by himself in his animation, but also because:
- Attack Potency: Large Building level (Destroyed multiple prototype OR15 units with his bare hands. Killed the previous Doomfist, whose gauntlet was considered powerful enough to topple skyscrapers, and upgraded his to be much more powerful.--)
And that brings us back to D.Va and the Omnics she fought. Being vastly superior to Orisa means little when the one potentially legit High 8-C character has no trouble destroying them with his bare hands. They don't scale either, and the aforementioned calc of the explosion only solidifies that.
- 9,755
- 4,393
I'm going to be at work for the next several hours, so I'll be silent for a while. Again.
- 64,025
- 16,076
Dont worry king, i'm in the process of debunking everything youve said thus far in this thread
- 9,755
- 4,393
Good to know. I'll be sure to bring my best reading glasses when I come back.
- 64,025
- 16,076
Its completely fine to useWokistan said:
- 9,057
- 1,815
Just gonna watch this standoff, seems very entertaining
- 9,755
- 4,393
Far as I've seen with how we handle video games, it's done in a case-by-case basis.Wokistan said:
This would be a case where, yes, it's entirely contradictory to how the cinematics and lore present everything. So no, I don't believe it's reliable here.
- 9,755
- 4,393
Before I disappear for now, I want to also point out that Winston actually beating Doomfist happened off-screen. We don't know how it was accomplished, how long it took, or what other factors may have come into play, so scaling the latter to the former based on that is rather dubious. Especially since, as we see, he (Winston) was harmed by something decidedly not High 8-C.
I'll be back later.
I'll be back later.
- 64,025
- 16,076
It was confirmed in the first animation of the series that Winston beat him in Primal Rage mode, from the kid who actually watched the fight. Its not dubious in any way shape or form.MrKingOfNegativity said:
- Status
