- 8,846
- 9,507
- Thread starter
- #241
I asked the same thing off site but I was told large human bodies don’t warrant GBE.
-
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.
Titanic Asura's Wrath Revisions!
- Thread starter Zamasu_Chan
- Start date
- Status
- 16,121
- 12,620
They do, it's just ******' impossible to calculate. Speaking from experience.
- 3,029
- 2,664
Giant Humanoid Bodies technically shouldn't have a logically valid GBE because of their shape, anything with enough GBE is pulled into a sphere. That is the reason it's essentially impossible to calculate.
If we somehow got the volume of their body, applied that to a sphere to get the radius of a sphere with the same volume and mass, then that would technically be a really strange but more valid way something like this could maybe be applied. But again it's a super weird way to do it that likely wouldn't get accepted as an official method.
Or alternatively the Mass Table for creation feats should go higher which could potentially scale because fiction has cosmic objects like this which would achieve a tier like this through size alone that aren't spherical.
If we somehow got the volume of their body, applied that to a sphere to get the radius of a sphere with the same volume and mass, then that would technically be a really strange but more valid way something like this could maybe be applied. But again it's a super weird way to do it that likely wouldn't get accepted as an official method.
- 11,135
- 14,120
I am not sure if this was answered, but since I was pinged:
Why aren't we using the frame with Asura and Moon to calculate the size? Especially when it seems like the Moon is much closer to the camera than Chakravartin in the frame where they are in, so perspective can be a issue there. And in scenarios of inconsistency, I'd think we'd prefer the lower end unless there is good reason to go with the higher one?
Why aren't we using the frame with Asura and Moon to calculate the size? Especially when it seems like the Moon is much closer to the camera than Chakravartin in the frame where they are in, so perspective can be a issue there. And in scenarios of inconsistency, I'd think we'd prefer the lower end unless there is good reason to go with the higher one?
- 8,846
- 9,507
- Thread starter
- #246
Why would it be an outlier when it’s from Asura's strongest enemy?
- 6,605
- 4,155
Because outliers aren't just that? None of Chakravartin or Asura's feats are anywhere near that in both plot and gameplay; and the only way to apparently get this tier is by calcing an inconsistent moon.
Mb if I missed something, but I really don't see why one would try to calc too hard smth which is a lot of trouble rather than rely on consistency.
- 8,846
- 9,507
- Thread starter
- #248
I swear there's this warped perception on what outliers are. This isn’t even an argument, it's stone walling. A feat is too high for your liking so you automatically call it an outlier.
We explained multiple times why the moon has to be scaled down for memory. Please don’t argue from willful ignorance.
- 6,605
- 4,155
You seem pretty agressive about this. It's just a game, yknow?
I'm just raising legit concern over everything I've read so far. This "memory" argument really seems dishonest to me, and so far I just see the exact opposite, which is to just have a high feat because it's high.
- 8,855
- 4,132
Getting a massive boost in AP by a feat isnt a outlier you know???
Last edited:
- 17,276
- 27,078
Not just memory it's literally about inherent game design, budget, memory and etc. And assuming it's dishonest just fit your arguement is literally ignoring valid points about the impossible things you're asking to have happen in the game that being having models to scale and be billions and trillions to times larger, being fully rendered, animated, and optimized something that's not even possible today with the best engines. So the only dishonest part is ignoring the technical limitations to plague the size inconsistencies that have been explained and do so in a way that ignores everything about how it works in a technical and common sense.
This also seems kinda patronizing to him and it's not a proper agruement to his point in general as Zamasu brings up a valid point. So far you've just said it's an outlier, is inconsistent, and essentially dishonest to assume games have technical and budget limitations. Soo yeah hopefully I didn't sound rude that's just all I have to say about what you've said so far. I'll pop back out of the discussion though to see where things go
- 16,121
- 12,620
But, like, you genuinely couldn't render a model that big. It's just not possible.
Last edited:
- 16,121
- 12,620
(And it would be a huge waste of time since only a minuscule part of it would be shown, either that or you'd zoom back so much that Asura would not be visible at all, which makes the action more confusing)
- 6,605
- 4,155
Except we don't use technical limitations as a reason to ignore what is being portrayed. I don't see why this specific game should be an exception.
You may use technical limitations as an argument, but games with far lower budget can show you a galaxy no problem and a guy being thrown into it. Calling it impossible in the first place is straight up wrong given the unlimited amount of cheap trick one can use (perspective, zoom in, etc...).
If you take an equivalent in manga/comics it would be like deciding "that guy is that size on that panel and the rest is just the author's artstyle being weird".
I don't really care about the verse in itself, but I don't see why you would bother yourselves with so much trouble.
My first sentence was more in reaction to the general antagonism in their answer. I can understand getting angry over someone clearly showing bias, but I litteraly commented once without targetting the game itself.
- 16,121
- 12,620
But "technical limitations" isn't the argument, "technical limitations" is the debunk to the counterargument, with the original argument being "look the moon is big in this scene" and the counterargument being "look the moon is not so big in this scene", and the idea is that the scene in which the Moon looks smaller is not meant to showcase the moon's size as much as the other one.
How would you suggest perspective be used to make something look bigger in respect to a character that is right in front of it? And zoom wouldn't be smart either since it would highlight the low-res textures on the Moon.
... Yeah that is something some manga verses often take into account, even. I'm pretty sure there was some One Piece drama regarding the height of some character and what should be used for it. And I am 100% sure that Beefcake does not have his GPE calculated because his size is massively inconsistent. And I am 101% sure that if you were to take a certain panel of the latest One Punch Man chapter literally, Garou (who is human-sized) would be several kilometers tall.
AkumaNoHissatsu
He/Him- 321
- 220
Hold it dawg
It's just Titanic asura CRT with 3-A chakravartin calc, not asura 1-A Revisions
Why do you think it's an outlier when chakravartin himself has been proclaimed many times as the creator of the world, which means it could be a valid reason why chakravartin could create objects hundreds of light years away with universal mass
- 1,690
- 1,191
The guy who is calced to be 6229.43258131 light years tall is going to throw a regular sized or smaller moon? Just using common sense the moon should be massive. It not being rendered that big has already been explained above.
Yeah this actually happens literally all the time in op and other manga. It’s almost universally accepted that with giant objects it’s impossible to portray it being that size in front of a character while still being accurate. I really don’t know why this is a point of contention especially for so freaking long…
XSOULOFCINDERX
They/Them- 21,389
- 9,050
Bump.
- 11,135
- 14,120
Since I have not received an answer to this I am assuming it was already covered earlier? If so, can somebody link those comments where this was addressed?
- 8,846
- 9,507
- Thread starter
- #260
All of page 2 and onward I believe.
- 6,075
- 8,802
Jeez it's been almost a month already on this CRT? Good to know time flies faster than galaxy brain moons.
At this point a bullet point summary of this CRT and a concise list of everyone's views on this would likely move things along to a feasible conclusion.
Obviously I still agree with the upgrades (Even after reading the counterarguments, which to be honest is mostly based on splitting hairs imo).
At this point a bullet point summary of this CRT and a concise list of everyone's views on this would likely move things along to a feasible conclusion.
Obviously I still agree with the upgrades (Even after reading the counterarguments, which to be honest is mostly based on splitting hairs imo).
AkumaNoHissatsu
He/Him- 321
- 220
Likely 3-A
Yeah fine with that
Yeah fine with that
XSOULOFCINDERX
They/Them- 21,389
- 9,050
Agreed.
- 11,135
- 14,120
After reading the arguments, I'm still of the opinion that the Moon being scaled to Chakravartin has perspective related problems because the Moon appears to be well into the foreground. One could say that the galaxies around him are closer to him than the Moon is. It's hard to tell the distances. I'd go with the lower, more realistic, and more consistent option and say that it should be scaled to Asura instead. I believe the margin of error is less with that method.
- 16,121
- 12,620
You all do realize that Chakra's GBE would also be 3-A, right? And higher into it. It's just impossible to calculate without lowballing it by a lot since the GBE formula is meant for spheres.
- 16,121
- 12,620
- 2,283
- 2,745
Beautiful
XSOULOFCINDERX
They/Them- 21,389
- 9,050
Big Chankrus Calc is Based.
- 8,846
- 9,507
- Thread starter
- #269
Bump.
- 11,135
- 14,120
I am not sure if the method of calculating GBE that is meant for spherical celestial bodies should be applied to sentient beings, but this is out of my expertise. The other calc group members should be called in.
- 3,029
- 2,664
I cant personally agree with Chakravartin's GBE, since we cant prove that the proportions even out. The high end would not be a lowball however, a sphere that is 6ft across would have a massively higher volume than a person, which is what's being proposed.
I stand by my opinion though that there's absolutely nothing wrong with the Giant Moon calc. The math checks out, the scaling checks out. It's fine. Whether it would be possible irl has zero relevance here at all.
I stand by my opinion though that there's absolutely nothing wrong with the Giant Moon calc. The math checks out, the scaling checks out. It's fine. Whether it would be possible irl has zero relevance here at all.
- 16,121
- 12,620
That's the point, the ratio between volume and radius is way skewed against the calculation, which means that its result would be higher if the equivalent of the radius of a non-spherical object could be calculated (maybe it can but it's definitely out of my paygrade). Remember that the radius divides the result, it doesn't multiply it.
- 16,121
- 12,620
Maybe you're misunderstanding what I did because I did not calculate the would be volume of a sphere with the diameter of Chakra's height, I just calculated Chakra's volume
- 3,029
- 2,664
I misunderstood the calculation, my bad. I thought that you had assumed a sphere with Chakravartin's size for the calculation, which would be much higher results. Since you used Chakra's estimated volume and mass, then applied that to the GBE formula, yes, it would be a lowball.
However as has been stated, this likely isn't a good way to calculate something like this, as it's not how the equation works.
However as has been stated, this likely isn't a good way to calculate something like this, as it's not how the equation works.
AkumaNoHissatsu
He/Him- 321
- 220
When this CRT is accepted
- 16,121
- 12,620
Well I agree that it's inaccurate, but the result could only possibly be higher, so I think rating the character based on this lowball would still be more accurate than having them at 4-B or whatever tier the moon would give when compared to Asura.
This is like saying that since a mostly off-screen feat that has been calculated at Low 7-B cannot estimate most of the area affected, it would be better to ignore it and rate the character that performed it as 8-C based on their second highest feat.
Last edited:
- 39,668
- 15,591
Just be patient pls
AkumaNoHissatsu
He/Him- 321
- 220
Actually, everyone agreed with this upgrade but people above us arguing about Chakravartin GBE
XSOULOFCINDERX
They/Them- 21,389
- 9,050
I can't blame him for being impatient though considering this was a super straight forward CRT and it's been going for god knows how long at this point.
- 3,949
- 5,760
- Status
