• 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.

The Real World Discussion Thread

Are there any 9-A animals throughout history?
Would have thought extremely large animals like sauropods and marine reptiles and mammals (mostly land animals given the context of terrestrial/land constructions, but marine animals could damage naval/marine constructions that could scale to 9-A) would have been able to, but depends how they could leverage their weight and what the rooms and small buildings are made out of (I at least would think sauropods could damage buildings if the sauropods were large enough and the buildings were small enough for the sauropod to utilise their full weight to damage the buildings by rearing on their rear legs and stomping with their front legs)...
But welp.

Speaking of which, I'm surprised no one made articles/pages of aircraft carriers and larger nuclear submarines, we need to expand on vehicles considering both new and old record holders in terms of size, payload/weapons, etc.
 
I'm unsure if aerial animals can damage aerial constructions (mostly thinking of vehicles in this context) that scale to 9-A, considering that even large pterosaurs and flying prehistoric extinct and extant birds are much more lightly built and weigh much less than aerial vehicles...
But it might be possible to an extent with pterosaurs and prehistoric birds.
Perhaps also with kinetic energy it might be possible for aerial animals to also damage terrestrial/land constructions that scale to 9-A, but I think it'd be easier to damage aerial constructions than terrestrial/land constructions.
 
I wonder if Composite Human can be given 6-C, possibly 5-B with long enough prep time if they can build even the hypothetical 10 gigaton Sundial bomb or stuff that can affect the state and motion of Earth and other cosmic bodies.
 
I wonder if Composite Human can be given 6-C, possibly 5-B with long enough prep time if they can build even the hypothetical 10 gigaton Sundial bomb or stuff that can affect the state and motion of Earth and other cosmic bodies.
Potentially is also appropriate for replacing the possibly word. Still I sort of agree. However, even though we do have an idea of how to make such objects, it should be really noted that objects like this are hypothetical and even with enough time and resources, there may be constraints that prevent the invention of such objects. Like if a caveman from 100000 had all the knowledge in the world at the time, and yet they still can't build a Skyscraper.
 
Is there a reason why Lions don't scale to their AP? (9B AP, but 9C dura)
 
Last edited:
Is there a reason why Lions don't scale to their AP? (9B AP, but 9A dura)
9-C, 9-B via KE but 9-C dura


There are like no living 9-A things irl
 
Remember that Nosey profile I made?
I think I should make one for Vommited Thoughts' Mimic, Alex Labs' Iron Man Suit, and DeathTempler's Cyn.
 
 

Wondering what the physical characteristics/traits of the composite human would be like if we weren't using the average human measurements.
The biggest thing about composite human is that even for users during it's prime, CH is known to have contradictory characteristics that somehow work together. So you'd pretty much have an above average height, intersex gender person with physics-defying bulk and flexibility with CH living as normal even if CH could exist.

That's not mentioning, it would revolutionize science if such a person were to exist.
 
The biggest thing about composite human is that even for users during it's prime, CH is known to have contradictory characteristics that somehow work together. So you'd pretty much have an above average height, intersex gender person with physics-defying bulk and flexibility with CH living as normal even if CH could exist.

That's not mentioning, it would revolutionize science if such a person were to exist.

We should add the Lancaster example by Simon Ford, that's 2000 tons with the ship alone and then there's the crew as well

Perhaps could find other stuff moved by one person alone.
 
it seems bro pixelscaled real-life characters
you're NOT SUPOSSED TO DO THAT-
Unfortunately I don't have Unitree R1 lying around, and I can't measure it with tape or ruler. And official volume only have it's overall surface, not separate parts. Other than that, are there any problems or not?
 
Unfortunately I don't have Unitree R1 lying around, and I can't measure it with tape or ruler. And official volume only have it's overall surface, not separate parts. Other than that, are there any problems or not?
you should put "Standard Equipment" above intelligence. and make sure the "E" is uppercased. Other than that, it's fine
 
I made profile of Unitree R1, what do you think of it?
Peak, we were gonna make profiles for ATLAS and SPOT from boston dynamics as well, there's actually a calc I can pull for them as well but it looks good
 
Peak, we were gonna make profiles for ATLAS and SPOT from boston dynamics as well, there's actually a calc I can pull for them as well but it looks good
If they are below 9-B - I'm gonna fight them
Anyways, are there any info about materials they made of and their build/volume/size?
 
Also I hope H3110l12345I20 sees this profile I made and give me some feedback about it
 
what do you think of this?
 
what do you think of this?
Why quantum immortality was removed though? Also I agree that extraordinary genius intelligence fits CH more than just genius, since CH have lots of contradictory characteristics and basically all knowledge and skills of humanity
 

So human perception speed is many times faster than we thought.
Dreams feel much longer. The extent is not specified, but since humans already perceive stuff at 13 ms, I'll use that as a low end.
Now, the thing said that when you die, the thing is 2000x faster.
So 0.0000065 seconds.
So 153846.153846 fps.
Most frames are 48 mm.
So 7384.61538461 m/s.
Hypersonic+

I'm gonna have to find the actual source of what the thing said before I can officially confirm it.
 

So human perception speed is many times faster than we thought.
Dreams feel much longer. The extent is not specified, but since humans already perceive stuff at 13 ms, I'll use that as a low end.
Now, the thing said that when you die, the thing is 2000x faster.
So 0.0000065 seconds.
So 153846.153846 fps.
Most frames are 48 mm.
So 7384.61538461 m/s.
Hypersonic+

That scenario sounds way too specific to be usable ngl. Humans normally don't experience near death conditions that often and even rarer they are capable of actively using it
 
Why quantum immortality was removed though? Also I agree that extraordinary genius intelligence fits CH more than just genius, since CH have lots of contradictory characteristics and basically all knowledge and skills of humanity
In regards to the Unitree R1 calc, the reasoning doesn't make any sense from a critical thinking standpoint.

Anyone can look up the definition of durability right now. It needs to withstand a certain amount of force to where even punching a hard wall only yields a minor fracture. If most people says "hmmm... this robot doesn't seem fine after X amount of force," that is not durability even if we leniently lowered the standards to unimpacted by damage.

CH is by definition the peaks of every human not stacking every peak, I've briefly seen Tugia's version. The profile is fineish, but I need to point out one thing. CH isn't combining and stacking stuff, it just yields the smartest things out of every smartest human. It's debatable of course in some vague areas, but the precedent is judged by the smartest human. Combined human in comparison is what you get when you stack every peak into one human to get more intelligence, CH doesn't stack, it combines.
 
In regards to the Unitree R1 calc, the reasoning doesn't make any sense from a critical thinking standpoint.

Anyone can look up the definition of durability right now. It needs to withstand a certain amount of force to where even punching a hard wall only yields a minor fracture. If most people says "hmmm... this robot doesn't seem fine after X amount of force," that is not durability even if we leniently lowered the standards to unimpacted by damage.
So, how do I calculate this?
 
Back
Top