• 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.

Rakudai AP CRT Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Firephoenixearl

Firephoenixearl

20,509
1,590
Ok so i'll start with the new things first then continue with what we left off in the previous thread. These calcs scale to obviously all Excessive awakening people like Nasseem, Nene and Tendou (with the exception of Stella as she hasn't shown to be on a level of power similar to these 3), and people above them, meaning then top 4 (Top 3 + Edelweiss)

6-A+
So first there is a new calc for Rakudai coming from Tendou Harima's earthquake feat:

User blog:Firephoenixearl/Tendou Harima does some shaking

The calc is already accepted.

Likely High 6-A
There is a statement.

Tendou then raises his sword towards the sky and his whole body releases green light which passes through the tip of his sword. The pillar of light launched to the sky causes clouds to gather and become a huge thundercloud that darkens the sky. Touka can tell the amount of power in the black cloud is probably a million times of the power of her "Raikiri"

Under normal circumstances yes, a multiplier such as a million wouldn't be accepted, but hear me out on this one. So:

1) This is already rather close to a feat done by the same guy which is the above mentioned 6-A+ earthquake.

2) The amount of magic power he gathered was enough to keep a dark thundercloud that kept launching lightnings for over 5 days. Just for context, Touka in that very same fight attacked Tendou with Raikiri (a strike of lightning basically) "hundreds of times" in at most 5 minutes. If we assume that same density for the thundercloud with was launching several bolts in several cities. Then for 5 days there would have been over 400'000 lightning strikes. Making the 1'000'000 times of power very very likely.

So for these 2 reasons i find the High 6-A to be a pretty plausable tier.


So all in all what i propose is that the current tier for the top tiers should be:

At least 6-A+, likely High 6-A

The knowledgeable members can place votes on whether they agree or disagree with the tier.
 
How was the earthquake calc even accepted when the entire premise of the calc is wrong. The calc assumes that one earthquake destroyed all those cities but that is wrong. The text earl posted in the blog outright disproves it was only one earthquake.

It's been 5 days and since then the entire Fukuoka and Saga, part of Oita, Nagasaki and Kumamoto Prefectures have been destroyed by lightnings, rainfalls and earthquakes.


As you can see, the text clearly says that those cities were destroyed over multiple days by multiple storms and earthquakes, not just one.
 
You know my oppinion on this: I'll agreed on 6-A and High 6-A, but I'll need more input regarding the 5-B.
 
I believe you missed the point of the calc. It's "causing the earthquake" that is a feat. The destruction just serves to deduce the magnitude of the earthquake. And to give magnitude 9 even assuming the amount of damage that was caused in the first quote (right after the earthquake started) is enough.

Causing an earthquake is always what's calced in earthquake feats, not calcing the amount of destruction it produces, which is why time is not part of earthquake feats.
 
Ionliosite said:
You know my oppinion on this: I'll agreed on 6-A and High 6-A, but I'll need more input regarding the 5-B.
Click to expand...
Ok vote counted.

Though i love how everyone is like "i'll need more input regarding 5-B", so it just ends up with no input. xD
 
I believe you missed the point of the calc. It's "causing the earthquake" that is a feat. The destruction just serves to deduce the magnitude of the earthquake. And to give magnitude 9 even assuming the amount of damage that was caused in the first quote (right after the earthquake started) is enough.

Causing an earthquake is always what's calced in earthquake feats, not calcing the amount of destruction it produces, which is why time is not part of earthquake feats.

Except you got the magnitude of 10.5 off the assumption that one earthquake had a radius large enough to affect all those cities, which isn't true. All those cities were destroyed by different earthquakes not one, therefore the radius you used to get the magnitude of the earthquake in your calc is wrong.
 
Actually even in the quotes i posted it says that the very same earthquake reached even other cities.

And there were no pauses in the whole feat.
 
Firephoenixearl said:
Actually even in the quotes i posted it says that the very same earthquake reached even other cities.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't.

tremors that gradually become bigger are formed on the surrounding mountain. The mountain collapses into a landslide that crushes and washes away everything in the area including burning forests, highland residential areas and the student-knights that had just escaped from Tendou. The tremors also spread to the nearby city, with the grounds sinking or rising and the buildings breaking down one after another. Lightnings also keep striking, creating fires and explosions everywhere. In just one hour, the entire Fukuoka City collapses.

The first paragraph only talks abut the destruction Fukuoka City and nothing else.

It's been 5 days and since then the entire Fukuoka and Saga, part of Oita, Nagasaki and Kumamoto Prefectures have been destroyed by lightnings, rainfalls and earthquakes.

The next Paragraph talks about those other cites being destroyed over 5 days by other storms and earthquakes. I don't know how you can get one that there was only one earthquake when the text itself says there was more than one.
 
Ok so first of all:

1. It doesn't change the result as my result is lowballed.

2. The earthquake's centre was where the guy was standing, for your explanation to make sense he would have to have moved to 4 different cities to cause the same amount of damage all while the earthquake in Fukuoka didn't stop. And it took people iirc couple of days to move from 1 city to the other in that kind of crisis. So just not happening.

3. "Earthquakes" being in plural doesn't mean much as it means the "quakes" of the "earth" it can mean several earthquakes but that's not what happened, and there would be tons of assumptions in there not to mention the calc would have to be calculating the energy of each earthquake. Which again wouldn't really change the value.
 
Firephoenixearl said:
Though i love how everyone is like "i'll need more input regarding 5-B", so it just ends up with no input. xD
Click to expand...
That's because no one wants to be the guy who accepts 5-B Rakudai
 
@earl

1. It does change the result as then calc is based on an assumption that isn't true, meaning the entire calc is wrong.

2. My explanation is what the what the text itself said, so prove it wrong.

3. This is just nonsense, in what universe does the word earthquakes not mean more than one earthquake. And calculating each earthquake would change the result since you can at best say that each earthquake is magnitude 9 based on the damage with is only about 9 teratons for each one, which even together wouldn't be 6-A
 
Reminder that Japanese has no plurals, so the original could perfectly mean just 1 earthquake as much as it could mean many.
 
1. Range doesn't affect it all that much.

2. I did, it is basically impossible for that to happen the way you're implying it to be. He has never shown capabilities of creating several earthquakes at the same time and keep them up for 5 days. And him moving to other cities is plainly contradicted by the series in terms of time.

3. What Ion said. Those are just summaries not the actual words so we do take them with a grain of salt when it comes to "exact wording", not to mention how we have had the plural problem with the very same series which we stuck with the singular. And based on the magnitude, it would still be added to the radius of the whole city Which would still be in the mag 10.whatever. And based on the damage that can actually even be a mag 10 earthquake because of the ground sinking and causing total destruction (whereas 9 is not on that level of destruction), The calc is lowballed on its own.
 
And it would be your job to prove that not mine, I am just going by what the text earl posted said.

To prove what? Japanese not having plurals is basic grammar of the language.
 
Japanese only doesn't have plurals in an English sense, they still have ways to indicate something is pluralized.For example repeating a Kanji multiple time is one of the ways Japan use to indicate something is plural.
 
SnowFlame556 said:
Japanese only doesn't have plurals in an English sense, they still have ways to pluralize words, for example repeating a Kanji multiple time is one of the ways Japan use to indicate something is plural.
Click to expand...
You keep missing the points, those aren't true translations, just summaries. Clinging on words that lead to significantly out of context scenarios is not advised, unless you have a reason for why that single word is as you're saying a reapeat of kanji instead of just well...summary, it's not exact wording and there have been grammar mistakes in that novel.
 
Even if that is true, it still doesn't support your version of events. Because there could have been one or many earthquakes, you still have to prove your version of events. Prove it was only one and that it spread to multiple cities, if your right there should be something in the text that supports that assumption, some line about how it kept spreading one cities to another, if there isn't there is no reason to take your version of events over mine.
 
By virtue that:

1. There was only one earthquake

2. Moving to other cities is impossible within the time limit

3. The earthquake was happening for 5 days straight without stop.

4. He has never shown to be able to create more than 1 earthquake.

5. He was still in fukuoka at the end of it all.

So your assumption would require:

1. Things that have never been mentioned

2. Giving him new abilities.

3. Contradict the story's time limit for moving from 1 city to another. And him not being in fukuoka.
 
If it was only one earthquake then your calc is still wrong because it couldn't have been a real one. Since:

1. Real magnitude 9 earthquakes don't last for five days,they last a couple minutes at best, and earthquakes that do last that long aren't even strong enough to be felt.

2. It spread way slower than a real earthquake would.
 
1. It's caused by magic and besides whether it lasts 1 second or 1 day it wouldn't change the value of the calc.

2. I don't see why that is an argument. It took a little while to spread to all cities. How does that make the value smaller or higher?
 
1. It put the idea that it is a real earthquake into question because it doesn't behave like a real one. It being magic makes put it even more into question. If the earthquake doesn't behave like a real one there is no reason to treat it like it is a real one. Just like black holes in fiction that don't behave like real ones aren't consider real.

2. Real earthquake spread way faster, so it puts its realness into question.
 
To both of those:

It is an earthquake caused by the conceptual ability to cause natural disasters it is by nature of the concept natural.

Second it doesn't behave perfectly for reasons unimportant to earthquake feats.

It doesn't behave like any other form of fake earthquake or any kind of shaking or tremor at all.

So it all just boils down to the author isn't the most knowledgeable guy on the duration of earthquakes or some other reason unimportant to us as it doesn't affect the feat itself. The black hole thing is just because ppl can interpret any kind of sucking as black hole cus they may seem similar. This is not the case here
 
Similar cases to this would be example biscuit oliva smacking a dude so hard he shook the earth. He would've made a 2km deep hole from the impact instead of shaking the earth but it doesn't behave to physical rules important to the calculation or feat itself. There are plenty of cases like this, newton's 3rd law not applying, the recent cold and heat calc revision etc.
 
Firephoenixearl said:
To both of those:

It is an earthquake caused by the conceptual ability to cause natural disasters it is by nature of the concept natural.

Second it doesn't behave perfectly for reasons unimportant to earthquake feats.

It doesn't behave like any other form of fake earthquake or any kind of shaking or tremor at all.

So it all just boils down to the author isn't the most knowledgeable guy on the duration of earthquakes or some other reason unimportant to us as it doesn't affect the feat itself. The black hole thing is just because ppl can interpret any kind of sucking as black hole cus they may seem similar. This is not the case here
Click to expand...
Someone having the ability to cause "natural disasters" is vague and meaningless, conceptual or not; especially when they don't behave like real ones.

And yes it does have to behave like a real earthquake, because all real earthquakes behave and work the same way, so if it doesn't behave like a real one than it is not real. And just because it doesn't behave like other fake earthquakes doesn't mean it is real, it only means it is a different kind of fake.

There is also the fact that real earthquakes occur on fault lines and spread from there, and the magnitude is partly determined by the length of the fault lines involved, and the only fault lines near japan that can even theoretically produce a magnitude 10 earthquake, let alone a 10.5, exist on the other side of the country from Fukuoka, and in the ocean, so a real earthquake of that magnitude starting in Fukuoka and spreading from there is impossible. Therefore the earthquake can't be real.

Hell a fault line near Fukuoka, the Kego fault, can only produce a earthquake with a maximum magnitude of 7.
 
That's not even taken into account. You think every kind of earthquake feat has all those lined up? Especially knowing exactly where the fault lines are and how big of an earthquake they can maximally produce?

You're just being unreasonable no calcs work like that these guys are writers, not scientists. Nothing behaves perfectly.
 
News on the 5-B calculation.

It seems to be currently disagreed regarding the "the attack was fully reflected". So i guess i will drop the 5-B currently and maybe bring it up once i have more proof on the reflection.

So the proposed tier is:

At least 6-A+, likely High 6-A
 
What are the summarised conclusions here?
 
Well aside from me, Ionsite agrees to the "likely High 6-A".

The 6-A calc is already accepted.

As for the 5-B calc, calc group members weren't convinced regarding the validity of "reflecting the full force". Rendering the calculation invalid. So i will just drop it and bring it up another time once i have more proof on it.

tl;dr

6-A was accepted by the calc group

No one seems to oppose High 6-A currently.

The 5-B is not valid.
 
Okay. I am afraid that I am not following this discussion well, so I am not much help here.
 
Schnee One said:
What proof is being close to 6A+? And the second is calc stacking
Click to expand...
Being close to 6-A+ makes it not a random statement, as in "believable".

The 2nd isn't calc stacking, im not stacking anything, just math trying to see if 1 mil makes sense. Im not using 400'000 multiplier on the calc, im using the statement.
 
What does that even mean?

You're saying that by tanking 400,000 attacks that 1 million would be legit and that's completely false
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

TISSG7Redgrave
  • Locked
Rakudai: Wtf is this???
Replies
26
Views
4K
TISSG7Redgrave
TISSG7Redgrave
Experiment12
  • Article
1A Chavalry of a failed knight
Replies
8
Views
2K
Shereen
Shereen
AshMcXuelan23
H1C Rakudai Kishi no Cavalry
2 3 4
Replies
128
Views
10K
AshMcXuelan23
AshMcXuelan23
Apeironaxim
  • Locked
Worm CRT: Endbringer Edition Part 2 (Which also ended up including Eidolon, which is fitting tbh)
Replies
8
Views
679
Apeironaxim
Apeironaxim
Tatsumi504
  • Locked
Maou Gakuin no Futekigousha: UES and Scaling Part 2
Replies
16
Views
3K
Dog3352
Dog3352
Back
Top