Psykorochi and Tatsumaki "upgrade"

[LordTracer]

I believe @Damage3245 accepted the original calc.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

@Damage3245

Would you be willing to help evaluate Ugarik's calculation please? He is one of our most skilled calc group members, so I think that it should be reliable.

Another Psykos Calc

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Antvasima]

Also, given what recently happened LordTracer, it is probably not the best idea to use an avatar image that looks like a two-faced sociopath.

 

[LordTracer]

What? It’s just Haku from Naruto.

 

[Newendigo]

There seems to be a continuous disagreement between Ugarik and Matt over the calc.

 

[Antvasima]

What? It’s just Haku from Naruto.

Okay. My apologies. It gave very creepy wibes to me.

 

[Antvasima]

There seems to be a disagreement a continuous disagreement between Ugarik and Matt over the calc.

Should I move this thread to the calc group forum, so several of them can discuss here which version to use?

 

[Newendigo]

Yeah, it seems the best for everyone, I guess.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay.

 

[Antvasima]

@Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Mr._Bambu @Therefir @Ugarik @DMUA @Damage3245 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Jasonsith @Wokistan @Armorchompy @KieranH10 @Migue79

Can you evaluate which of the following calculations that you think seems best to use please?

Another Psykos Calc

vsbattles.fandom.com

One punch man - Psykos Lift the Ocean Up

vsbattles.fandom.com

 

[Migue79]

I guess I’ll re-iterate my thoughts on which calc to use again and say Ugarik’s high-end is more accurate.

I know I said I had some problems with using the sun’s pixelscaling, but after fidgeting with the pixelscaling on my own, I realized that the difference in results wouldn’t be as large as I initially thought it would be (thought by just halving it it would drop the results down to low double-digit Petatons or something like that, but it wasn’t the case when I did it on my own). So I don’t have a problem with that anymore.

But even that aside, Ugarik’s calc makes lesser assumptions than KLOL’s original one by calculating all the variables and assuming constant variables as well (FOV, depth of the piece of crust, height of elevation, etc). And I personally believe the calc that makes lesser assumptions is usually more reliable (unless the one with lesser assumptions is, of course, outrageous or the like).

I also don’t think it’s the method’s fault for the calc getting the results it got. The AP not equating to the environmental damage it’s supposed to realistically give is just fiction being fiction lol

Anywho, that is my input which I was asked to give.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out. Unless other calc group members have any objections, I think that we can use Ugarik's version then.

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

Aight then, looks like I'll just, apply the revisions later on and this can be closed

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

I've added the calcs, this can be closed