-
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.
Revison Naruto's durability
- Thread starter DodoNova2
- Start date
- 15,181
- 1,535
There are going to be revisions for the verse so it's best to wait. Though I think KCM Naruto's durability will still be upgraded regardless, like his BSM version was.
- 61,177
- 14,747
Its going to be a good while, a few of the major feats are going through a pretty big rework and one of the guys working on it is literally going through the entire series to see how they should be revised.
- 2,490
- 229
Actually from what I gather Narutoverse is getting a huuuuge NERF.
- 15,181
- 1,535
Not sure about that again as Toneri's feat was recalculated. Naruto's durability will depend on where the Juubi ends up in.
- 2,490
- 229
Are you talking to me or the lad? Also are you referring to the recalc that put it at small countryBurning Full Fingers said:
- 15,181
- 1,535
Last I checked, Toneri's feat was recalculated to be Small Planet level. Not sure what the final value will be though.
- 10,053
- 9,313
Read the comments of calc, it was deemed incorrectBurning Full Fingers said:
- 15,181
- 1,535
Oh, haven't checked it in some time. So, what did it result in?
- 193
- 7
@Joseph619
As far as I understand, it got such high results not by virtue of the moon cut itself, but by how far away from each other the pieces of the moon drifted off. As LordXcano said: "It's like how pushing the Earth tends to get Large Planet to Small Star level results". The reason the calc. was debunked was because the final energy was higher than the moon's GBE which would have meant that the parts would have drifted off into space indefinitely.
@Aizenishere
The Small Country calc. was also debunked because the 18km moon was far too inconsistent with other calcs. (i.e. Nagato's CT was ~20km, the moon debris was ~100km e.t.c) and Lina himself thinks he may have had some perspective issues when making the calc.
Anyways, last I've heard Lina was going to recalculate the feat using real moon size and Earth gravity, but that was a couple of days ago. We also may have to wait for Gwynbleiddd to be done with his revision since he seems to want to take a look at this feat as well (namely how hollow the moon is).
As far as I understand, it got such high results not by virtue of the moon cut itself, but by how far away from each other the pieces of the moon drifted off. As LordXcano said: "It's like how pushing the Earth tends to get Large Planet to Small Star level results". The reason the calc. was debunked was because the final energy was higher than the moon's GBE which would have meant that the parts would have drifted off into space indefinitely.
@Aizenishere
The Small Country calc. was also debunked because the 18km moon was far too inconsistent with other calcs. (i.e. Nagato's CT was ~20km, the moon debris was ~100km e.t.c) and Lina himself thinks he may have had some perspective issues when making the calc.
Anyways, last I've heard Lina was going to recalculate the feat using real moon size and Earth gravity, but that was a couple of days ago. We also may have to wait for Gwynbleiddd to be done with his revision since he seems to want to take a look at this feat as well (namely how hollow the moon is).
- 2,490
- 229
@Aizenishere
The Small Country calc. was also debunked because the 18km moon was far too inconsistent with other calcs. (i.e. Nagato's CT was ~20km, the moon debris was ~100km e.t.c) and Lina himself thinks he may have had some perspective issues when making the calc.
Anyways, last I've heard Lina was going to recalculate the feat using real moon size and Earth gravity, but that was a couple of days ago. We also may have to wait for Gwynbleiddd to be done with his revision since he seems to want to take a look at this feat as well (namely how hollow the moon is).
Ahh ty. Yea I read something about that that, didn't know it pulled through though. Guess I'll just have to wait then.
What do you think the moon cutting feat is gonna end up being tiered at?
The Small Country calc. was also debunked because the 18km moon was far too inconsistent with other calcs. (i.e. Nagato's CT was ~20km, the moon debris was ~100km e.t.c) and Lina himself thinks he may have had some perspective issues when making the calc.
Anyways, last I've heard Lina was going to recalculate the feat using real moon size and Earth gravity, but that was a couple of days ago. We also may have to wait for Gwynbleiddd to be done with his revision since he seems to want to take a look at this feat as well (namely how hollow the moon is).
Ahh ty. Yea I read something about that that, didn't know it pulled through though. Guess I'll just have to wait then.
What do you think the moon cutting feat is gonna end up being tiered at?
- 15,181
- 1,535
Gwyn said it's Moon level at best and LordXcano said something about Multi Continent+. Though I'm not sure. I'll check it later.
- 2,490
- 229
So essentially... as it is.
- 2,443
- 316
Since the feat got so much attention i'm prepering a calc right now.
- 2,490
- 229
Gwynbleiddd said:
tyvm for all your hard work man. It's highly appreciated
Even though it may end in nerferino.
Will the calc be posted on your blog?
