-
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
- Thread starter Kavpeny
- Start date
-
- Tags
- attack potency
- 4,268
- 284
wait no posts by members? that means my 147 day streak will get broken? are there any threads where i can make like one post a day?
- 1,099
- 47
I think the comment you post in this thread will keep your streak.The Living Tribunal1 said:
- 4,268
- 284
wait so this thing lasts for only 2 days?GTgokussj4 said:
- 14,188
- 2,554
i think the streak isnt as important as the revision...The Living Tribunal1 said:
- 4,268
- 284
i know i was just concernedSomebodyStupid said:
- 196
- 10
Ok... I must say I'm loving the new chart. However... I'm still thinking that, with the Gigantic gap between Multi-Solar System and Galaxy... Is it really that difficult to insert a Small Galaxy level somewhere along the Giga-foe range?
- 11,582
- 548
That's what Antvasima, Lord Kavpeny, and DontTalk are trying to do.
- 165,694
- 73,428
@LT1 I think that you can still do posts about things not concerning Content revisions and the like. I mean, the fun & games board, and similar things that do not interfere with our work should be fine, but you have to check with Lord Kavpeny.
@GohanLSSJ2 We start galaxy at the Milky Way, which is a small galaxy as far as I know.
@GohanLSSJ2 We start galaxy at the Milky Way, which is a small galaxy as far as I know.
- 4,268
- 284
milky way is average tbhAntvasima said:
smaller ones are like the large magalenic cloud and small magalenic cloud
in fact i think there are even smaller galaxies than that
iirc the smallest one is segue 2 with 550,000 solar masses
but for a standard small galaxy, we shud use one of the magalenic clouds
- 589
- 12
Shouldn't the Dragon Ball characters who get upgraded to Small Planet level be low 5-B instead of high 5-C?
- 151
- 5
First?
Can someone summarize the current topic of discussion?
This is basically a hobby for me (much like it is for you all to I figure), and I'm technically on a wiki I'm not affliated with in terms of working on it.
Thread's just too long for me to feel like sifting through the whole discussion. Just feels like work.
Also?
From this page
Figured I'd clear this up before anything else... assuming this wasn't pointed out yet.
There seems to be confusion regarding the value for Galaxy level. This is because another well established VS community, the OBD wiki, formerly listed Galaxy level value as 100 PetaFoe, and currently lists Galaxy level as 10 GigaFoe.
Yeah, that's our bad. We misread a paper where we got our original "10^61 joules" value from
Because the paper actually said it was "10^61 ergs"
Hence the revision.
The current value is obtained by calculating the mass-energy of the supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy. Destroying said black hole would lead to loss of the gravitational force required to bind the galaxy, and subsequent "dissociation" of the galaxy.
IIRC, it was just the paper we found equating GBE = Mass Energy of Black Hole.
So nothing actually changed with the revision, just that we caught an error
Can someone summarize the current topic of discussion?
This is basically a hobby for me (much like it is for you all to I figure), and I'm technically on a wiki I'm not affliated with in terms of working on it.
Thread's just too long for me to feel like sifting through the whole discussion. Just feels like work.
Also?
From this page
Figured I'd clear this up before anything else... assuming this wasn't pointed out yet.
There seems to be confusion regarding the value for Galaxy level. This is because another well established VS community, the OBD wiki, formerly listed Galaxy level value as 100 PetaFoe, and currently lists Galaxy level as 10 GigaFoe.
Yeah, that's our bad. We misread a paper where we got our original "10^61 joules" value from
Because the paper actually said it was "10^61 ergs"
Hence the revision.
The current value is obtained by calculating the mass-energy of the supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy. Destroying said black hole would lead to loss of the gravitational force required to bind the galaxy, and subsequent "dissociation" of the galaxy.
IIRC, it was just the paper we found equating GBE = Mass Energy of Black Hole.
So nothing actually changed with the revision, just that we caught an error
- 815
- 570
- 151
- 5
WellLord Kavpeny said:
What do you use "small" for so far?
Like, if you're still using multi city block and small town?
The redundancy is the same, just a smaller scale as Willvereb overyonder would probably point out (he's been trying to phase out multi for a couple years now actually)
- 165,694
- 73,428
I have now updated the striking strength chart a little bit. Since the Joules values are no longer straightforward, I removed the mentions of them in each of the categories to make them more generalised, and as such easier for the staff to apply.
- 2,512
- 261
@KamiYasha:
The one currently accepted. If that can't be figured out take the save low end for now.
If that isn't correct people will complain about it, I hope.
The one currently accepted. If that can't be figured out take the save low end for now.
If that isn't correct people will complain about it, I hope.
- 815
- 570
- Thread starter
- #182
@ChaosTheory123: Hmm...noted.
However, with a spherical explosion, an alternative value was obtained. Your thoughts?
Additionally, if it's not too much trouble, could you provide a link to the article which served as the source for your 10^61 erg energy value?
@Antvasima: DontTalk's blog post seems accurate to me for the most part. Your opinion?
However, with a spherical explosion, an alternative value was obtained. Your thoughts?
Additionally, if it's not too much trouble, could you provide a link to the article which served as the source for your 10^61 erg energy value?
@Antvasima: DontTalk's blog post seems accurate to me for the most part. Your opinion?
