• 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.

Request about our Star Wars calculations

Antvasima

Maintenance worker
He/Him
VS Battles
Bureaucrat
Administrator
165,669
73,377
FanofRPGs made the following request:

https://community.wikia.com/wiki/Thread:1628575

"Could you ask the calculations group to relook at these two calcs? They are currently used on your wiki for laser cannon justification for Star Wars.

https://www.narutoforums.org/xfa-bl...at-kanan-and-ezra-throw-some-asteroids.36058/

http://web.archive.org/web/20170209...ility-of-d-squads-ship-without-shields.33602/

I have critiques on the calcs:

1. For the first one, these asteroids were from a planet's rings and thus would be made of ice, but the calc assumes they are made of rock. Also, the speeds assumed are kinda weird.

2. The second calc uses the high end speed of a comet, 70 km/s, but they range from 10-70 km/s and average out at 40 km/s, but the calc doesn't take that in mind.

3. For both calcs, they also assumed the meteors hit the ships dead on, which didn't happen. They merely grazed or bumped into the side of the ship, and thus the ship didn't take the brunt of the energy. They need to be recalced based on the total surface area hit, though I am not sure how to do it totally.

May you ask the calc group to look at the calcs and fix them given these issues? It would be very helpful. Thanks in advance."
 
I also got the message. I remember people were against the first calc when it was first posted here, so idk why it was accepted. No opinion on the second since all the images and videos are gone on it.
 
Back
Top