Two Powerful Goofballs: Amethyst vs Teen Goku

[Kepekley23]

You are using arguments that only scale to her "likely 6-B" form. If we used your arguments, she would be 6-B, but this match-up restricts her to Low 6-B. Therefore, you can't use that argument, because it would put her at 6-B and break the rules this thread establishes.

How does someone whose best feat is 100 megatons have feats that place he or she at High 7-A? You contradicted yourself here. If Ryuko has feats that put her at High 7-A, logically her best feat isn't 100 megatons.

The upper limit of her Low 6-B form, if we were to go by your logic, would be high-end Country level, and not borderline. 50 teratons is easily almost Country level++, while the baseline for Country level is only 7 teratons. That is restricted.

 

[Kepekley23]

To sum it up; the feat you're using to "quantify" how much stronger she is at FP is restricted in this match-up. If you really believe she is anywhere near 50 teratons, you'd pretty much putting her at 6-B; except this match up clearly states Low 6-B.

And before you say you're not trying to put her at 6-B, the only feat you can use to possibly justify a higher AP (that is in the profiles, of fourse) is the 50 teratons one, and that'd make her Country level, so it's restricted by default.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Kep Okay, youre obviously confused here. Maybe it would just be easier to remove the Low 6-B key altogether. I'll ask on the revision thread we had because it would make more sense for heer to just be a lower level of 6-B.

Also, Ryuko's best calculated feat is only 100 megatons. She has scaling that puts her at borderline High 7-A. The same thing applies here.

 

[Assaltwaffle]

If she scales to 6-Bs and her feat near that level was casual, why is she not just plain 6-B? We only use "at least" for casual feats if they don't show anything higher when serious.

 

[Kepekley23]

If she has a 6-B feat, it's best to simply remove Low 6-B from her profile altogether.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

If she scales to 6-Bs and her feat near that level was casual, why is she not just plain 6-B? We only use "at least" for casual feats if they don't show anything higher when serious.

Check the revision thread, i just posted about it there

 

[Desmiondo]

@WeeklyBattes The episode where bismuth comes back shows bismuth show off a gem smasher that thing is not country level the gem on the gems is a consistent weak spot on their body.

 

[Kepekley23]

Remove it, then.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@WeeklyBattes The episode where bismuth comes back shows bismuth shows off a gem smasher that thing is not country level the gem on the gems is a consistent weak spot on their body.

I'd like you to take a look at Bismuth's profile because Bismuth is High 6-A using the Breaking Point

 

[Desmiondo]

@weeklybattles That is still assuming that the light body and gem are as durable as each other. They thought rose shattered a diamond easily with a sword. Whenever they take country level attacks it's on their body not gem. It's easier to kill then knock out

 

[WeeklyBattles]

There's no reason whatsoever to assume their Gem is any less durable than their body

 

[Assaltwaffle]

I'm not an expert in the series at all, but there is a reason to assume such if the primary Gem is depicted as a weak point.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

@Assault Garnet's Gems are literally located in the palms of her hands and her main method of attack is punching, same with Ruby's. Her gems take the full brunt of her attacks and are no worse for wear. Jasper's gem is on her face and her attacks involve head-first charges and headbutts. Gems' gemstones are no less durable than their bodies

 

[Assaltwaffle]

Well that seems pretty solid. Shouldn't be a weak point if they are located in combat areas.

 

[Gojira1234]

I'm not an expert in the series at all, but there is a reason to assume such if the primary Gem is depicted as a weak point.

The only reason they're considered a weak point is bc once they're broken, they're gone. If a Gem's body is damaged it can just reform, if the gem itself is damaged it can't. But there's nothing to imply the gem itself is weaker than the body.

 

[Desmiondo]

@Assault Garnet's Gems are literally located in the palms of her hands and her main method of attack is punching, same with Ruby's. Her gems take the full brunt of her attacks and are no worse for wear. Jasper's gem is on her face and her attacks involve head-first charges and headbutts. Gems' gemstones are no less durable than their bodies

In both examples that gems weapon is very heavy in armor with jasper's large extended head piece and garnets large heavy gauntlets and rubies are just fusion warriors that get gems everywhere when they fuse and shown by pearl proofing there giant fusion there just glass canons.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

>Glass cannons

Nothing implies any gem other than Lapis and Aquamarine are glass cannons

 

[Desmiondo]

True but the rubies are fodder and some have different gem locations, But the one with a gem in their hand had a heavy gauntlet.

 

[WeeklyBattles]

Rubies being fodder doesnt mean their glass cannons, it just means theyre weaker than most Gems. The Ruby youre refering to is the one with the Crystal Gems and its by no means a heavy gauntlet, its basically just a boxing glove

 

[Desmiondo]

Point is there's something there to protect it's gem. Plus I just said true they aren't glass canons

 

[Gojira1234]

So we can probably close this now that Amethyst is no longer on the Low 6-B scale