• 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.

Revised Attack Potency Chart

DontTalk said:
The Living Tribunal1 said:
r u going to use r136a1 as an upper benchmark for large star level?
Click to expand...
I don't think Large star level needs a upper benchmark. After Large star level follows solar system level and its close enough to large star level anyways. So an additional category between Large star level and Solar system level isn't necessary, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
ok then, but which star will u pick for large star lvl ?
 
The Living Tribunal1 said:
that depends on what values for mass and radius u take if u take the mean values, then i think it comes out as 4.86 foes
Click to expand...
I prefer if we go by the highest possible (As long as it does not surpass the needed number for 4-B)

Since Don't Talk calced SS level to be 22 foe, the highaball would not be a problem
 
FanofRPGs said:
I prefer if we go by the highest possible (As long as it does not surpass the needed number for 4-B)
Since Don't Talk calced SS level to be 22 foe, the highaball would not be a problem
Click to expand...
using mass of 265 solar masses and radius of 28.8 suns, it still comes out as 5.55 foe..... ( i ussed exact numbers)
 
Here is what I have

Low 4-C: The minimum (I do not know what it is) to 2.27398655644e41 joules

4-C: 2.27398655644e41 joules to 1.21710219e42 joules

High 4-C: 1.21710219e42 joules to 7.78671246e44 joules

4-C+ (Do not know what to call it): 7.78671246e44 joules to 2.2445168668266464e45 joules

Also, the Milky Way is pretty large for a galaxy, wouldn't something like the Triangulum Galaxy be better?


I got the upper limit of high 4-C by this

The upper limit of R135a1's radius is 35.4 solar radii

Its gravity is 10000 cm/s^2

Its mass is 265 solar masses

(0.6*10000 cm/s^2*265 solar masses)*24620700 km = 7.78671246e44 joules
 
The Living Tribunal1 said:
using mass of 265 solar masses and radius of 28.8 suns, it still comes out as 5.55 foe..... ( i ussed exact numbers)
Click to expand...
You used the low end estimate for the radius
 
mass of sun (high end) = 1.9888*10^30 KG (link)

radius of sun = 6.955*10^8 meters (link )


formula = (3/5)*(G(M^2)/R)


answer using low end radius+ high end mass = 5.55 foes

answer using high end mass + high end radius = 4.5149 foes
 
Ok, my current problem is setting the border between dwarf level and small star level. Why?

Because our sun is a dwarf star, a yellow dwarf to be specific.

Maybe a subdwarf would be an appropiate border? (after that formally the stars are referred to as main sequence stars, so that would make sense I believe).

So the smallest normal subdwarf in the list of notable subdwarfs is the Kapteyn's Star.

0.274*(1.98855*10^(30)) = mass

0.291*695500000 = radius

GBE: (3* (6.674*10^-11)*(0.274*(1.98855*10^(30)))^2)/(5*(0.291*695500000)) = 5.8738315236995099868817953411844923551253640857648950914198047833e40 J


That would be my suggestion for small star level. It has a reasonable distance from Dwarf Star level and from Star level and the point makes sense to set a border.
 
Well, Dwarf Star is simply used because it sounded better than Brown dwarf (so perhaps we should change the designation), but I am not well-versed enough in astronomy to know if that makes any difference?
 
I am not well versed either, per the diagram Red dwarf stars likely lie inbetween Subdwarfs and Brown dwarfs. If we rename Dwarf level to brown dwarf level I could look for a red dwarf as border. That would likely (as far as I can tell) yield a lower result.

Proxima centauri would be an easy choice for that, as the star closest to the sun. It falls in the lower middle of thetypical characteristics of Red dwarfs. So maybe we should take it?
 
I personally don't mind your suggestion, but this is Lord Kavpeny's project, and he usually has considerably better judgement than I do, so I afraid that my hands are a bit tied. He has to make the final decisions.
 
um guys what about this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_dwarf


the page has a table, the low end of the table can be the star of small star level

and the 0.49 solar mass value red dwarf can be our high end for small star level range? ( ignored the 0.6 solar mass value since i read that red dwarfs are up oto 0.5 solar mass, but if u want u can include the highest value in the table- that is 0.6 solar masses to be a high end for small star level)
 
Well, in this case I will do proxima centauri as well, if he has a better suggestion I will take it as soon as its brought up.
 
I think that we can use LT1's suggestion in the meantime. I apologise for things getting messy. I have repeatedly tried to reach LK, but he seems to be busy with real life.
 
Ok, for the lowest end of the red dwarf table:

0.075*(1.98855*10^(30)) = mass

0.08*695500000 = radius

GBE: (3* (6.674*10^-11)*(0.075*(1.98855*10^(30)))^2)/(5*(0.08*695500000)) = 1.6e40 J

That is actually a very good value. I think I will leave it at that, until Lord Kavpeny gives his suggestion on this.
 
Okay. Again, thank you for all of your help and patience.
 
CrossverseCrisis said:
What about profiles that have tiers like Low 7-B and Low 5-B? How do we deal with them?
Click to expand...
Low 5-B is Small Planet level, right? They'd probably get moved to 'High 5-C' or 'at least High 5-C', depending on the character.
 
Promestein said:
CrossverseCrisis said:
What about profiles that have tiers like Low 7-B and Low 5-B? How do we deal with them?
Click to expand...
Low 5-B is Small Planet level, right? They'd probably get moved to 'High 5-C' or 'at least High 5-C', depending on the character.
Click to expand...
Aye. Going by Kavpeny's new chart here, that would work. Characters like Blossom has a Low 5-B on her tier, so when the revision is finally made, she and others like her will need to be changed accordingly to that then. *Nods*
 
I've been pretty flexible with the energy levels discussion, but it seems all that has achieved is a massive amount of confusion.

So let me be a little more direct:

5-A/High 5-A is taken from here, and the values makes sense. Small Star level will be starting from 2.998 tenatons, which is the GBE of the VB 10, and also what the OBD follows. Same for Star level (slightly less than GBE of the Sun), and Large Star level (approximately the GBE of Rigel).

In short, the values for tier 5-A/4-C are fine, and not up for debate. Kindly stop making a mess regarding them.


Now, for Solar System level, DontTalk's blog post value is fine, although I prefer to see the source for OBD's Solar System busting calc.


@DontTalk: I hope you are fine with the starting point of 4-C, since I have listed the starting point to consider (aka, VB 10).

That said, it is awkward to use spherical for SS and Galaxy, while cylindrical for MSS and Multi-Galaxy. We should consider a spherical blast for both. If you could please calc values for a spherical blast...?
 
Oh, you are back now. I just created a notification thread because i was worried about this. Should I remove it?
 
@Antvasima: I have been active on chat for a while, discussing DBZ stat revision with SDZ. I should have responded to the AP thread first to alert you. I apologize for needlessly worrying you.
 
@DontTalk: Could you take a look here, and tell me what you think?

It seems to be the source for OBD wiki's current Solar System level rating.
 
Lord Kavpeny said:
@DontTalk: Could you take a look here, and tell me what you think?
It seems to be the source for OBD wiki's current Solar System level rating.
Click to expand...
They use the surface area of Neptune instead of frontal area. That is wrong, as far as I know. I believe it should be frontal area. (see what I wrote in my blog post concerning frontal area)


That said, I have no problem with the values.

One thing to note may be that Dwarf Star level is technically not well-defined. The main-sequence stars are synonymously called "dwarf stars" and the sun just happens to be the typical example of a main-sequence star.


Lastly in order to calculate the values of Galaxy level, Multi-Galaxy level and Multi-Solar system level I would need the GBE of the sun (at least that is what I used until now) and there was some uncertainty on my side which value to use (see my blog post). Which of the two values should I use? Or should I use the GBE of VB10 for them?
 
If it's wrong, then I'll go with your value instead. Let's wait for ChaosTheory123's input, though. He made that blog post.

I'll be explicit: Brown Dwarfs are smaller than Red Dwarfs. I listed it as Dwarf Star for aesthetic purpose, and because it is not entirely misleading. A note will be attached on the bottom, specifying that Dwarf refers to Brown Dwarf. I don't think we need to be more clear than that, or confuse ourselves.

Use the wikipedia value for Sun's GBE. But if you can make it work with VB 10, then so be it.

Also, I noticed that the MSS and Multi-Galaxy values utilize the old values for SS and Galaxy level. Could you please re-calc MSS and Multi-Galaxy, with new values you have obtained and a spherical blast radius?
 
Lord Kavpeny said:
Use the wikipedia value for Sun's GBE. But if you can make it work with VB 10, then so be it.
Click to expand...
I can make it work with both, what would be preferred? (sorry I am sometimes bad at understanding)

Lord Kavpeny said:
Also, I noticed that the MSS and Multi-Galaxy values utilize the old values for SS and Galaxy level. Could you please re-calc MSS, with new value you obtained and spherical blast radius?
Click to expand...
Actually I use neither the values for SS level nor Galaxy level in the calcs, but use the GBE of the Sun to this point. (The assumption I use is blast strong enough to destroy all stars over the given distance) Should I do it differently?

EDIT: Given the way we calculate Galaxy and SS level doing it differently (as in using the values from SS and galaxy level for it) likely is a bad idea.
 
To clarify: What would be preferred is what you're more confident about. If you're more confident about using the Sun's GBE, go with that, or if more confident about VB 10's GBE, go with that instead.

The method to use, for SS, is to calculate the energy required to produce a spherical clast enough to obliterate the mass of two solar systems, kept at a distance equivalent to sun and the proxima centauri from each other. Same for Multi-Galaxy, only the distance being that between Milky Way and Andromeda.

A bad idea? How so?
 
Basically, because the methods don't work as a sum.

Lets take Multi Galaxy level as an example:

Galaxy level is the energy of a blast from the center of a galaxy to destroy all stars and planets in that galaxy.

So if I now say I want to do a blast that happens between two galaxys, that has so much energy that the energy that reaches the galaxy is as much energy as is required to archieve galaxy level, what I am calculating is the energy of an explosion that sends so much energy to a galaxy, that by collecting all energy that passes through the galaxy or hits it I could make a blast from the center of a galaxy strong enough to destroy all stars and planets in that galaxy.

While what I want to calculate is the energy required to make a blast between two galaxy that is so strong that all stars and planets in both galaxys are destroyed.


I hope the explanation somehow makes sense.
 
Hmm...I understand the difference. The preferred value is the one obtained in the second scenario, but I would like Antvasima to confirm.
 
If you mean a character being situated in-between the two galaxies and performing an omnidirectional blast that consumes both, then that is the scenario that I think we are looking for.
 
Thank you.

Did you only use the distances between the outermost limits of the galaxies, or add/include their respective diameters to/in the calculation? Although I suppose that it would not make a considerable difference.
 
@DontTalk: Looks fine to me.

@Antvasima: It wouldn't matter significantly, since the radius of the galaxy is in a hundredth of the order of the distance between two galazies.

Coincidentally, that might also the reason for the astoundingly low multiplier.

SS:

  • Intra-distance for Solar System: Order of 10^9
  • Inter-distance for Solar System: Order of 10^16
  • Difference of order: 10^7
Galaxy:

  • Intra-distance for Galaxy: Order of 10^20
  • Inter-distance for Galaxy: Order of 10^22
  • Difference of order: 10^2
Should explain the massive discrepancy.
 
It's obvious but I still felt the need to say it out loud. Large Country or Small Continent level is High 6-B instead of just 6-B right?
 
Fixed.

All input is welcome, obvious or otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Spider_Kaiju
A Supernatural Isekai Role Play - Recruiting
Replies
7
Views
1K
Spider_Kaiju
Spider_Kaiju
Continuum19
The King of Fighters 15: Kim Kaphwan Stamina, Attack Potency & Lifting Strength Additions
Replies
15
Views
1K
Lonkitt
Lonkitt
William_Joee
Doraemon 2-B Attack Potency Upgrade
Replies
37
Views
2K
William_Joee
William_Joee
Lloydblitzed
  • Locked
Ninjago Attack Potency update
7 8 9
Replies
331
Views
16K
Lloydblitzed
Lloydblitzed
Frxwins
Unconventional Existance Classification
Replies
1
Views
1K
Frxwins
Frxwins
Back
Top