The Desert Spada and Ground Death calcs

[Nami_Kami]

I still disagree with the size allegedly being wrong. It's clear that a 5 km diameter explosion will not go past this elevated space. That is what's shown to us, whereas using a fan calc will make the explosion go way past said space. And I will always prefer using things given to us by the manga itself over fan calculations.

Crocodile actually says that the explosion would also blow away the castle, and Zoro and the rest say the ENTIRE city will be blown away. So this panel could simply depict the explosion as it's expanding, not in it's final state.

Also, on the very panel used in the calculation we see that the pathway, which is approximately 5 meters, isn't much thinner than the building. This method makes the castle much smaller than an imaginary red line that's up to interpretation.


If we use the headcanonish red line argument, that'd just mean the buildings aren't meant to scale, as otherwise the pathway would have to be 70 meters wide, and we know that's not true.


Another fact that stands is that there is consistency to the castle being much smaller, as seen by 5 different panels all showing it's nowhere near as big. Even ignoring everything said above, we have to go after what's consistent.

 

[Nami_Kami]

As for the non-size related issues:

• For the Ground Death issue, I agree with what you're saying. I think the way this could be fixed is by finding the height of the tiles and using that as the depth, and then doing fragmentation.

Okay, so the current Ground Death calculation is invalid as far as you're saying?

 

[CloverDragon03]

Okay, so the current Ground Death calculation is invalid as far as you're saying?

In its current state, it's not usable, yes.

 

[Damage3245]

@Nami_Kami Finding those scans where they say both the castle and the whole city will be destroyed is very useful. Good find.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Crocodile actually says that the explosion would also blow away the castle, and Zoro and the rest say the ENTIRE city will be blown away. So this panel could simply depict the explosion as it's expanding, not in it's final state.

That's an unsupported assumption. A static panel would more likely show the explosion's final state as opposed to while it's in the middle of expanding. At the most, I'd support the idea that the entire city is 5 km wide

Also, on the very panel used in the calculation we see that the pathway, which is approximately 5 meters, isn't much thinner than the building. This method makes the castle much smaller than an imaginary red line that's up to interpretation.


If we use the headcanonish red line argument, that'd just mean the buildings aren't meant to scale, as otherwise the pathway would have to be 70 meters wide, and we know that's not true.


Another fact that stands is that there is consistency to the castle being much smaller, as seen by 5 different panels all showing it's nowhere near as big. Even ignoring everything said above, we have to go after what's consistent.

See, this is sort of an ongoing stance with me when it comes to size calculations: I'm more willing to overlook art that's inconsistent with stated sizes considering that mangaka usually aren't trying to keep things super one-to-one in their art. And I maintain that stance here, hence why I believe it's much more important to use what's stated

 

[Nami_Kami]

That's an unsupported assumption. A static panel would more likely show the explosion's final state as opposed to while it's in the middle of expanding. At the most, I'd support the idea that the entire city is 5 km wide

Crocodile literally says that the lawn will be blown away, and the characters say the entire town will be blown away. This is enough evidence to put to question whether the panel depicts the explosion in it's final state. It's just as much of an assumption to say that it's reached it's final state. If not moreso given the evidence that came to light.

See, this is sort of an ongoing stance with me when it comes to size calculations: I'm more willing to overlook art that's inconsistent with stated sizes considering that mangaka usually aren't trying to keep things super one-to-one in their art. And I maintain that stance here, hence why I believe it's much more important to use what's stated

Except we have to look at what's consistent. Otherwise I can just as easily make a recalculation where the castle is, say, 57 meters. What's stated does bot support the size, since 1. The statements are that the castle will be blown away too to begin with, and 2. Even if the explosion won't reach the castle it doesn't change the possibility the buildings are inconsistently drawn and appear bigger than usual. Why is it proper to scale how big the castle's size appears next to an imaginary red line which is up to interpretation, and why is it not proper to use the half a dozen+ direct panels where the castle is seen smaller? I think consistency matters.

 

[DaReaperMan]

Except we have to look at what's consistent. Otherwise I can just as easily make a recalculation where the castle is, say, 57 meters. What's stated does bot support the size, since 1. The statements are that the castle will be blown away too to begin with, and 2. Even if the explosion won't reach the castle it doesn't change the possibility the buildings are inconsistently drawn and appear bigger than usual. Why is it proper to scale the castle's size to an imaginary red line which is up to interpretation, and why is it not proper to use the half a dozen+ direct panels where the castle is seen smaller? Does consistency not matter?

Now get me an exact consistent size in each of those panels

Then tell me Oda gives two dicks about size consistency. Statements>showings in this rare instance.

 

[Nami_Kami]

Now get me an exact consistent size in each of those panels

Then tell me Oda gives two dicks about size consistency. Statements>showings in this rare instance.

Except the calculation is based on a SHOWING. Lol. On the visual panel which it uses to PIXEL SCALE how big the castle APPEARS. You'd have a point only if the castle itself was given a direct statement on it's size, which it wasn't. The entire calc is based on a NITPICKED way to VISUALLY scale how big the calculation appears, and it's also based on headcanon to begin with as I've explained. So yeah. The higher amount of panels showing the castle being smaller have more consistency.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Crocodile literally says that the lawn will be blown away, and the characters say the entire town will be blown away. This is enough evidence to put to question whether the panel depicts the explosion in it's final state. It's just as much of an assumption to say that it's reached it's final state. If not moreso given the evidence that came to light.

Even still, all that would support is that the entire city is 5 km. Nothing suggests the explosion would go past the city

Except we have to look at what's consistent. Otherwise I can just as easily make a recalculation where the castle is, say, 57 meters. What's stated does bot support the size, since 1. The statements are that the castle will be blown away too to begin with, and 2. Even if the explosion won't reach the castle it doesn't change the possibility the buildings are inconsistently drawn and appear bigger than usual. Why is it proper to scale how big the castle's size appears next to an imaginary red line which is up to interpretation, and why is it not proper to use the half a dozen+ direct panels where the castle is seen smaller? I think consistency matters.

Which can be chalked up to art not being one-to-one with size, which is a very common thing in manga and absolutely not something I'd consider to be used over a direct statement of size. That's just straight up my stance

 

[DaReaperMan]

Except the calculation is based on a SHOWING. Lol. On the visual panel which it uses to PIXEL SCALE how big the castle APPEARS. You'd have a point only if the castle itself was given a direct statement on it's size, which it wasn't. The entire calc is based on a NITPICKED way to VISUALLY scale how big the calculation appears, and it's also based on headcanon to begin with as I've explained. So yeah. The higher amount of panels showing the castle being smaller have more consistency.

Hey Nami, point out in my comment where I said I agree with the calculation!

 

[Nami_Kami]

Even still, all that would support is that the entire city is 5 km. Nothing suggests the explosion would go past the city

Nothing suggests that the explosion is only as big as the city too. That'd need justification. And even if you did somehow prove it, that'd still mean the size is wrong in the original calculation.

Which can be chalked up to art not being one-to-one with size, which is a very common thing in manga and absolutely not something I'd consider to be used over a direct statement of size. That's just straight up my stance

The panel used in the calculation too can be chalked up to the art not being one-to-one with size. This argument works both ways. The difference is that I have shown consistency.

 

[Damage3245]

Hey Nami, point out in my comment where I said I agree with the calculation!

Nothing in Nami Kami's post says that you agree with the calculation.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Nothing suggests that the explosion is only as big as the city too. That'd need justification. And even if you did somehow prove it, that'd still mean the size is wrong in the original calculation.

I disagree with the notion that the explosion depicted as only encompassing the city is going past the city. Also, I don't mind if the calc's changed to reflect that, I just don't think it's accurate to say it's going past the city

The panel used in the calculation too can be chalked up to the art not being one-to-one with size. This argument works both ways. The difference is that I have shown consistency.

What you're talking about isn't the explosion size, though? And for size, statements > art any day. The difference would be that any further pixel scaling would be based on a statement from the series rather than something we made up. Otherwise we'd be making our own personal caricature of the series

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

Crocodile literally says that the lawn will be blown away, and the characters say the entire town will be blown away. This is enough evidence to put to question whether the panel depicts the explosion in it's final state. It's just as much of an assumption to say that it's reached it's final state. If not moreso given the evidence that came to light.

That's via shockwaves and other side effects of the explosion

The actual explosion diameter itself clearly only covers the thing that's shown and wouldn't cover the palace as crocodile said

 

[Nami_Kami]

I disagree with the notion that the explosion depicted as only encompassing the city is going past the city. Also, I don't mind if the calc's changed to reflect that, I just don't think it's accurate to say it's going past the city

Do you have any reasoning to say that the explosion is only limited to the city? This is a claim you made. All I did was prove the graph did not depict it in it's final state, I never made a claim on just how far it'd extend, so the Burden of Proof lies with you. We could easily just say it's unknown how far it'd extend.

What you're talking about isn't the explosion size, though? And for size, statements > art any day. The difference would be that any further pixel scaling would be based on a statement from the series rather than something we made up

The building has no statements on it's sized. It's simply visually compared to something else's ASSUMED size based on a statement. We have characters with STATED height compared the the building, which I've shown. So again, I can very easily say the buidings on the panel you used are not meant to be 1-to-1. Something I've proven already anyway:

 

[Nami_Kami]

That's via shockwaves and other side effects of the explosion

The actual explosion diameter itself clearly only covers the thing that's shown and wouldn't cover the palace as crocodile said

That's based on speculation. The fact of the matter is that you haven't proven this panel depicts the explosion in it's final stage. The very fact that your evidence requires you to make so many assumptions alone shows it's questionable and direct panels have more weight.

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

That's based on speculation.

no it isn't. As crocodile literally says the palace would still be there from the destruction and would be viewed from the palace

The fact of the matter is that you haven't proven this panel depicts the explosion in it's final stage.

The explosion would create a crater of 5km... Which literally is it's final state and beyond

 

[Nami_Kami]

no it isn't. As crocodile literally says the palace would still be there and would be viewed from the palace

The explosion would create a crater of 5km... Which literally is it's final state and beyond

You're assuming it means the palace won't be destroyed, which is false as I've already shown him saying that the palace will be blown away too, and the characters saying the entire city will be destroyed.

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

You're assuming it means the palace won't be destroyed, which is false as I've already shown him saying that the palace will be blown away too, and the characters saying the entire city will be destroyed.

does not say the palace would be blown away... The entire city will be destroyed doesn't mean the blast/crater diameter will reach the whole city

Altering the view? If you get hit by an explosion naturally the view will be changed. Lol

Completely altering the landscape (景色) all the way to the point of the palace is what it says... Meaning the blast diameter doesn't reach the palace

 

[Nami_Kami]

does not say the palace would be blown away... The entire city will be destroyed doesn't mean the blast/crater diameter will reach the whole city


Completely altering the landscape all the way to the point of the palace is what it says... Meaning the blast diameter doesn't reach the palace

The lawn, which is as wide as the whole building and is part of it, is verbatim going to be blown sky high. The entire city includes the entire palace. So yes. The palace will be destroyed. Croc's statement does not mean the palace and everything past it will stand. Which is your entire premise. The rest is headcanon.

And let's not forget that for this entire thing to even be relevant there needs to be an argument for why the buildings are meant-to-scale on that panel given the amount of evidence the castle is smaller and how many panels contradict it.

 

[CloverDragon03]

Do you have any reasoning to say that the explosion is only limited to the city? This is a claim you made. All I did was prove the graph did not depict it in it's final state, I never made a claim on just how far it'd extend, so the Burden of Proof lies with you. We could easily just say it's unknown how far it'd extend.

Well the visual helps for one, but on top of that, Crocodile states (as MonkeyOfLife mentioned) that it would "alter the view from the palace", implying that the palace would not be affected. That's far more support as opposed to simple art problems that I take issue with using over direct statements

The building has no statements on it's sized. It's simply visually compared to something else's ASSUMED size based on a statement. We have characters with STATED height compared the the building, which I've shown. So again, I can very easily say the buidings on the panel you used are not meant to be 1-to-1. Something I've proven already anyway:

No, the statement's clear as day. You're assuming castle size via multiple steps of pixel scaling as opposed to a single step done via a stated size. If this is how it'll continue, I don't see my stance changing

 

[CloverDragon03]

You're assuming it means the palace won't be destroyed, which is false as I've already shown him saying that the palace will be blown away too, and the characters saying the entire city will be destroyed.

This says the "palace square," aka the land right outside the palace, not the palace itself

 

[MonkeyOfLife]

The lawn, which is as wide as the whole building and is part of it, is verbatim going to be blown sky high. The entire city includes the entire palace. So yes. The palace will be destroyed.

Your making completely headcanon assumptions that gets completely debunked by crocodile's statement of saying it will leave a crator of 5km that's visable from the palace

This is clearly what it says... Again the lawn does not mean the palace

 

[Nami_Kami]

Well the visual helps for one, but on top of that, Crocodile states (as MonkeyOfLife mentioned) that it would "alter the view from the palace", implying that the palace would not be affected. That's far more support as opposed to simple art problems that I take issue with using over direct statements

He also states the palace will be blown sky high. All this means is that from the location the palace is, the view would change. That doesn't mean the palace and what's past it is immune to the destruction. If the explosion goes past the palace the view from where it was would change too.

No, the statement's clear as day. You're assuming castle size via multiple steps of pixel scaling as opposed to a single step done via a stated size. If this is how it'll continue, I don't see my stance changing

The statement is irrelevant to whether the buildings are one-to-one. Also, I've provided 2 one-step methods that go against the current calculation, backed by several 2-step methods. Which does have more weight than a single 1-step method I've shown is inconsistent.

 

[Nami_Kami]

This says the "palace square," aka the land right outside the palace, not the palace itself

"The palace square along with this lawn."

 

[Nami_Kami]

Your making completely headcanon assumptions that gets completely debunked by crocodile's statement of saying it will leave a crator of 5km that's visable from the palace

This is clearly what it says... Again the lawn does not mean the palace

If the palace is within the crater it'd still be visible?

So the lawn, which is as wide as the rest of the building, would be blown sky-high? This means that the rest will be destroyed too. The explosion won't magically only blow away the lawn and leave everything else out. Also, there is still the statement saying the entire city will be destroyed. Meaning the palace too.

 

[CloverDragon03]

"The palace square along with this lawn."

Yes, that's all outside the palace. The palace square is not equivalent to the palace itself, otherwise he wouldn't be saying you could see the altered view from the palace

 

[Nami_Kami]

Yes, that's all outside the palace. The palace square is not equivalent to the palace itself, otherwise he wouldn't be saying you could see the altered view from the palace

The lawn is outside of the palace? The lawn that's literally a part of the building and is about as wide as it?

 

[CloverDragon03]

He also states the palace will be blown sky high. All this means is that from the location the palace is, the view would change. That doesn't mean the palace and what's past it is immune to the destruction. If the explosion goes past the palace the view from where it was would change too.

You're creating alternative explanations of what this means so it can be consistent with your argument, when the simple fact of the matter is that it's not consistent with your point because the meaning is clear

The statement is irrelevant to whether the buildings are one-to-one. Also, I've provided 2 one-step methods that go against the current calculation, backed by several 2-step methods. Which does have more weight than a single 1-step method I've shown is inconsistent.

As much as you can keep saying "I've shown this" "I've proven this" it all comes down to if people are convinced. And I'm not, hence why I disagree with removing the use of the 5 km statement

The lawn is outside of the palace? The lawn that's literally a part of the building and is about as wide as it?

Of course the lawn is outside the palace. What lawn isn't outside it's respective building? My lawn isn't inside my house

 

[Nami_Kami]

( for some reason my comment was posted twice )

 

[Nami_Kami]

As much as you can keep saying "I've shown this" "I've proven this" it all comes down to if people are convinced. And I'm not, hence why I disagree with removing the use of the 5 km statement

You may say you're not convinced but do you have an argument for why the nit-picked 1-step scale is above 2 1-step scales + several 2-step scales?

Of course the lawn is outside the palace. What lawn isn't outside it's respective building? My lawn isn't inside my house

The lawn is literally in the building.

 

[Nami_Kami]

You can repeat you're not convinced on the size all you want, but is there any substance behind that decision?

I've posted this already and I'm still yet to get a counter: The buildings aren't one-to-one, as proven by the fact that on the very panel the pathway would be 70 meters if so:

Which we know is false:

( just a few of the things I've shown )

So is there an actual argument for why you're defending the pixel-scale so much?

 

[CloverDragon03]

I've explained already why above, so you can cool it with this "do you actually have an argument" nonsense. Stuff like this is why I don't do HST threads anymore.

And on that note, I'll be taking my leave from this thread. I gave my opinion on the matter, and even proposed how the non-size related issues could be fixed. I think I've done my share, so peace out and please never ask me to evaluate a HST thread again