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.
He said that the first calculation is good now, nothing about the second. I'll ask him.He asked why the clouds would be split in tandem with the sword swing. The reason why is stated in the OP. He said the calc itself was fine.
The OP proposals look good.
Phantom updated the calc, but has a calc member relooked at it? Doesn't look like that to me.
Excluding that the scaling is fine, and specifically i support the 7-B, High 6-C by using all his Mana at once, option for Puck.
I also support 7-B, High 6-C by using all his Mana at once for Puck as the better option; the rest seem fine.
Apparently, the calculation was not accepted.He asked why the clouds would be split in tandem with the sword swing. The reason why is stated in the OP. He said the calc itself was fine.
No, I didn't, I approved the first and realized that the .35 second assumption was just a strange point to use at all given the contextReinhard and Reid should have their 6-C values changed to High 6-A.
So what time frame should be appropriate?No, I didn't, I approved the first and realized that the .35 second assumption was just a strange point to use at all given the context
Probably 5 secondsSo what time frame should be appropriate?
That's pretty ridiculous, I think.Probably 5 seconds
Not "done by," I mean "done within."It was done by a sword slash, that doesn't mean the clouds crossed the entire distance within .35 seconds.
Just use this value.Anime is 54 frames at 24fps, 2.416666s (unless it was counted wrong in the anime ver. of the calc)
@PhantomØ4 Can you update the calc?That's just not what I'm seeing from the original context, and the visual representation seems to support that.
Just use this value.
I did. I was supposed to update it like a month ago but Zabazab got me to read chainsawman instead and then JJK.@PhantomØ4 Can you update the calc?
I am sorryyyy I added an extra zero on the distance that I only noticed RIGHT after I posted thisSo, this turned into an upgrade
I think the assumptions are fine.
Essentially Base Puck with all his magic becomes High 6-C, Beast of the End Puck becomes 6-A, and Reinhard becomes 5-B
Which blog has the value?Vaguely under half of the 5-C value.
You should really put down that you're using the average cloud height of a cumulonimbus in your blog.I did. I was supposed to update it like a month ago but Zabazab got me to read chainsawman instead and then JJK.
I believe the nimbostratus values are being used, 3000m thickness & 1828.8m height.However, where are you getting the 3000 m thickness for the clouds in your calculation? I don't see anything like that on our page for a cumulonimbus cloud.
@PhantomØ4You should really put down that you're using the average cloud height of a cumulonimbus in your blog.
It took me quite a bit if time to find out where you were getting any kind of height to use in the calculator.
However, where are you getting the 3000 m thickness for the clouds in your calculation? I don't see anything like that on our page for a cumulonimbus cloud.
It'd be great to source as much information as you can.
Lastly, spreading clouds from a center point like Reinhard does in the video requires this formula. Kinetic Energy = 1/12*cloud mass*(Speed of cloud movement)^2
You can't use the standard KE formula.
Bro woke up 🗣Good news, Phantom says he'll be able to fix stuff in like 1h30m.
Calc has been updated.You should really put down that you're using the average cloud height of a cumulonimbus in your blog.
It took me quite a bit if time to find out where you were getting any kind of height to use in the calculator.
However, where are you getting the 3000 m thickness for the clouds in your calculation? I don't see anything like that on our page for a cumulonimbus cloud.
It'd be great to source as much information as you can.
Lastly, spreading clouds from a center point like Reinhard does in the video requires this formula. Kinetic Energy = 1/12*cloud mass*(Speed of cloud movement)^2
You can't use the standard KE formula.
(Admittedly I'm now realizing that my proposition just results in the original calc that the new one sourced from and I just blanked on them not actually calculating the volume in favor of my eyes scrolling over it and going "wait .35 seconds seems off")
Shouldn't be using different types of cloud values for the same storm.
I said cumulonimbus cloud since that's the height they're using in the calculation, which took me way too long to find.
But I'm going wait for the calc creator to respond, since they might have a different reason.
.
@PhantomØ4
Shouldn't be using different types of cloud values for the same storm.
I said cumulonimbus cloud since that's the height they're using in the calculation, which took me way too long to find.
But I'm going wait for the calc creator to respond, since they might have a different reason.