Some Fate Changes

[PhantasmalGreatsword]

Naval fleet thing is a feat made by Ramses. The US navy found Ramesseum Tentyris and attacked it with missiles but Ozymandias fired suppressed Dendera's eletric bulb which have power equal to Anti-fortress NP to vaporize the entire Aegis fleet.

 

[Alakabamm]

@Raven

It looks to me as if that conversation instead went on to a conversation about NP effects. I am not convinced the quote is saying that it would vaporize the city.

 

[RavenSupreme]

well we have a quote of it stating it can vaporize. and we have the comparison with solar flare, which also vaporizes. intentionally seeking for another method of destruction despite we have these two things in the very same description of the attack should not let us assume its anything other than vaporization

 

[Alakabamm]

It's not always about the type of energy used, it is the conversion that matters. Yes, solar flares are made of heat energy, but they also carry radiation as well. Furthermore, something like an explosion (which carries a not insignificant heat component) is never assumed to vape unless there is evidence it does so.

 

[RavenSupreme]

the thing is: his NP does carry a heat component. otherwise it would not be possible to vaporize the naval feat. the comparison to solar flare is just the icing of the cake.

why should we assume the properties of the attack suddenly change?

 

[Alakabamm]

Carrying heat energy does not automatically make something vaporization based though. Most higher level KE feats should have tremendous heat generated but that is never the basis for a claim of vaporization.

 

[RavenSupreme]

this aint a KE feat tho. this is a simple and mere destrctutive feat and the method of destruction used is vaporization. reason for that are stated vaporization when used, the one-shot capabilities and the comparison to solar flare, all from the same noble phantasm

thats really more than enough reasons to validate it in my book

 

[Alakabamm]

It doesn't say in the quote "he can vaporize the city," it says he can one-shot it. Just because an attack can vaporize, does not mean its full scale of destruction is entirely vaporization.

 

[RavenSupreme]

can you bring some example of the fate series where for example a noble phantasm has different methods of destruction shown with the same attack?

 

[Alakabamm]

Any explosion based attack - Caladblog II and Gae Bulg, for example.

 

[RavenSupreme]

Hold on - where do you get the idea it is an explosion based attack? Also: if the attacks have different names then they are not the same attack...

 

[Alakabamm]

Because that is how it is described in the VN and shown in the anime?

Caladbolg II is Caladbolg II as well...

 

[RavenSupreme]

Ramses attack is shown in the anime? Where?

 

[Alakabamm]

No, not Ramses. You asked me for an NP that can do multiple types of destruction.

 

[RavenSupreme]

alright then im sorry for the bad wording. my question was where you think that ramses is an explosion.

i thought you have a clear panel etc. for it when you said "it was shown in the anime" which would make the entire thread pointless. but yeha. ozy just appears in the fate/prototype fragment route (blue/silver) which is a light novel.

and there is nothing which would let us suggest it to be just an explosions. i mean its also compared to protocalibur which also is no mere explosion

we have the state of its attack being able to oneshot, the similarity with solar flare, the vaporization statement of a naval fleet, it being superior to protocalibur which is no mere explosion ( see here for reference also http://i.imgur.com/utQhEtQ.gif ) and it not being contradicted otherwise...

i mean...there is not much more we can actually ask for except the author repeatedly stating " vape , vape vape " which obviously no author would do...

 

[PhantasmalGreatsword]

Actual Japanese description of the statement was "þé¡Õîû(lit. carbonize)" not "vaporize" and "Fully charged Dendera's Electric Bulb has enough heat to carbonize(burn down?) the entire Tokyo"

 

[Alakabamm]

Carbonize? That sounds like break down to constituent elements (which would be much more energetic). Lmao.

But if you are saying that the same wording is used for both, then vaporization is fine.

 

[KamiYasha]

^ Lmao.

 

[RavenSupreme]

now this came out of nowhere lol

like hell i am going to redo this shit with breakdown on elements

 

[Alakabamm]

Yea...but if the translation is wrong and both use the exact same verb, then I guess applying the same method to both is fine.

 

[Yamatohime]

Carbonizing is usually means burned down. But not to ashes (vaporization). More like to chars...