Universal Energy Systems

[Antvasima]

Just gotta decide on a name for the page now and any redirect links.

Well, as I mentioned above, the following solution seems good to me, but we can create more redirect links if you wish.

Universal Energy Systems, with redirect links from Universal Power Systems and Universal Power Sources, seems fine to me.

 

[Wokistan]

Was told that this was gonna go through soon, was typing a thing but it's taking way longer than I'd expected. I'd like to request a min delay of a day or two, it's 6/7/22 where I'm at rn, so the end of 6/8 or a normal time at 6/9 should work at worst.

 

[Hellbeast]

Tbh I kind of want to just wrap this up at this point

All due respect we’ve been going around in circles on this for months and I’m unsure if we can afford to do this again, especially when you consider the initial thread I made last year. At this point we’ve had months to discuss issues so I don’t know why we’d need to take another day so you can have your peace

again no disrespect but this thread has been going on for so long I want it done and I don’t think we really have Much more to address at this point. If you didn’t weigh in before that’s not my issue and frankly you’ve had opportunity. This subject is dragged out enough as is and I think we should start making moves to conclude this either way

EDIT: also if anyone brings up ice feats imma scream, that’s not at all the topic of this thread and we’ve gone through this before

 

[Hellbeast]

Either way, do we think the page is good?

 

[Agnaa]

Either way, do we think the page is good?

From having talked to Woki on Discord, I believe the things he's bringing up are concerns with the page itself, and with how applicable the criteria are to verses. But I don't really know the specifics since he was saving it for a post.

 

[Hellbeast]

Either way, do we think the page is good?

From having talked to Woki on Discord, I believe the things he's bringing up are concerns with the page itself, and with how applicable the criteria are to verses. But I don't really know the specifics since he was saving it for a post.

I mean that’s well and good but point stands, if you neglect to post for 6 months you probably shouldn’t be able to make requests on holding up discussion or not. If you fail to comment in a timely manner that’s really not my concern and I don’t see why you’d need that extra accomodation in this setting

realistically this has been ongoing for likely 8 months or so if you count my initial thread so it’s not like this was a short term thing. Months of opportunities have passed by

I have the minor nitpick that

should use "a" instead of "an", "universal" is pronounced "yuniversal" so it gets preceded by an "a".

Hmm we should fix that, thanks

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

While I'm not a big fan of last second notices, or people just popping up randomly when they've been uninvolved since the beginning. And furthermore, I also get really sick when a giant U-turn happens though I can't predict that will happen. But he's allowed to have his opinion be heard even if it may be controversial.

IIRC however, he doesn't particularly like UES scaling in general, but he also sounded implied it's not something he cares about too much regarding whether or not it's a thing; especially if it's something prevalent in Anime/Manga verses which he has self admitted to not caring about based on feedback from other users/staff. Though he has taken issues with things like Mana scaling; like assuming certain techniques have more energy output because it depletes more mana/MP; especially if things like healing arts are thrown in and being compared to attack arts.

I know at minimum, based on his Discord comments, he thinks the definition explained in the Limited Energy systems has a very weird definition; which I have agree because the example used in paragraph just sounds like someone having a generic Fire Manipulation ability that doesn't scale to any other power in general. As that doesn't really sound like an energy system. And I have spoken that other comments such as "Level 10 spells scale to other Level 10 spells by level 9 and below spells do not downscale" sounds more like an issue with Final Attacks vs Casual Attacks than it does any given energy system. And I think a better example of a what a limited energy manipulation looks like is someone who can bend a specific type of element and has near full control with applying it's shape of whether slowing down or speeding up specific element in question. Or a better description would be something like "They can actively control fire not just produce it" as a minimum to really be an energy system IMO.

I would also hope to get this over with soon, and really hope no giant U-turns. Which by the sound of it, he's probably not the type who wants a page like this to be made due to there being a lot of "Verse specifics" and what not despite there being a lot of staff support already. But whatever happens, so be it. He's allowed to take the time he needs to come up with his post.

 

[Antvasima]

So what about this, to talk about something in the meantime?

https://vsbattles.com/threads/universal-energy-systems.126331/post-4804018

 

[Wokistan]

The wiki is down so I'm working off a screenshot, idk if shit changed since then.

Limited Energy Systems

In order to qualify for a Limited Energy System and do scaling according to it, a character or the system they are using must have explanations or showings that indicate that the powers which should scale to each other draw from the same source of power (or can convert between the different kinds of power) and use up a similar amount of power to each other. Alternatively, it would also suffice to show that the user can invest similar amounts of power into any given technique, should they want to.

For the sake of scaling it would also suffice if powers are shown to use a larger amount of the common power than the technique which produced the feat in question did, although in that case one wouldn't talk about a Limited Energy System as the inverse doesn't hold. (i.e. feats of those techniques that need more power wouldn't scale to the techniques that need notably less)

Broadly speaking, I think these terms are too lenient. When looking for a default standard, I would think we would first want to see what's up with reality or the closest analogue. This is talking about magic, which doesn't exist, so there's not really a version of that there, but what we do have is all sorts of systems of energy transfer, and oh boy does that not match up with this. I really don't like the idea of using energy cost as a method of scaling if we're going to make the real life comparison, because that just eliminates the entire idea of different usages of energy having different amounts of efficiency, which is just ridiculous. There's the obvious things, like how it'll take a lot less energy to kill a person using electricity than it will with something like blunt force because electricity can interfere with nerves easily, or how it may be easier to destroy an object with heat than force if it has a low specific heat or much harder if the specific heat is higher, or so on. Tiering a character based on how much energy they use up to do something is rather misleading, because that isn't necessarily the quantity that actually impacts the world. If I'm a terrible electrician and I make a very inefficient circuit and I hook it up to a reader, that reader isn't going to give the "tier" of what I put into it, because a lot more things than that impact output. If we're going to try and equate something to reality, we shouldn't make the default assumption that a difference in efficiency of radically different processes cannot be in effect, because that would be denying reality itself.

Of course, maybe you don't agree with the idea of trying to get some sort of "closest to reality" sort of standard for a baseline, in which case I'd say that I'm not even really sure that this holds true over media. Now, full disclosure, I don't really care about anime. It's entirely possible that this sort of perfect equivalence is super common in anime and I just don't know about it. Feel free to bring it up, I'm just admitting a blind spot here. As far as I'm aware, the places you most commonly see these explicit resource costs in are games, both of the tabletop and video variety, and I don't think this idea of everything having the same efficiency really exists.

From a gameplay perspective, I'd say it ends up going against what seem to be widespread game design philosophies. Avoiding straight upgrades often seems to be a priority in game design, which seems to result in high cost stuff often being less efficient in terms of a cost to damage ratio, or higher cost stuff having that higher cost due to effects which are more esoteric. It's also a way to make upgrades more exciting than just bigger number, and keep difficulty throughout the game by not just having options that are objectively superior to others. I can't really think of anything where the only variation you have in a system like this is just straight power, and especially not one that has some sort of linear scaling between input and output. Games tend to add complexity as things move forwards, and that is not something that one does just by adding a few zeroes at the end of every number all the way through. Furthermore, efficiency itself is often of consideration for these sorts of things, and that doesn't really work if everything with the same input must have a similar output. This idea of just pretending that different applications of energy cannot be of different efficiency levels and that this is apparently widespread in media is a rather far out one, especially when the page isn't even really going to elaborate on how this is supposedly common enough to be elevated to a standard similar to the restrictions on calculations that would work with real life physics but don't work because fiction is inconsistent.

TL;DR
I don't like the idea of allowing for this just by assuming that similar input necessarily results in similar output, as it's something that's flat out untrue in real life and does not appear to be true on a widespread enough level as far as media goes.

Non-physical Energy Systems

In order to qualify for a Non-physical Energy System and do scaling according to it, a character or the system they are using needs to fulfill all criteria for a Limited Energy System, but for all techniques. Additionally, they have to demonstrate or have reliable statements that all their supernatural or otherwise non-physical powers scale to each other in Attack Potency. Hence an increase in power / energy should correspond to a proportional increase in the potency of their powers and abilities.

That means in particular that either the user makes use of only one system of power (e.g. magic powered by mana) or that the user uses several different ones (e.g. magic and chi) but they draw from the same underlying power source or can convert their power between the different kinds of power sources.

We've gone over how I dislike the limited criteria, so no point in retreading that.

This bit about needing to prove that things scale to one another is weird to include. It's something I agree with, but it's also something that I feel works a lot better as an argument against this sort of thing. If you've already got proof that someone's weird stuff scales to their punching power or whatever, then I'm not sure exactly what sort of purpose it serves to try and invent some explanation outside the work itself. It's also weird because this sort of proof wasn't required on the previous level, so what about this one in particular suddenly necessitates the elevated standard?

The second sentence doesn't really seem all that related to the first part, to be honest. I'm not sure how simply using a similar power source would immediately serve as proof of very different things being of comparable levels, especially when the whole point of having a source is that it's a repository that you'll take what you need from as opposed to just dumping the whole thing at once. Even if we are to assume that they just share the criteria from the limited energy systems and that the Wokbros got too cocky, it doesn't even seem to meet them. This just mentions needing to have the same highest order source and not even needing similar amounts of input. It seems inconsistent with itself. You get the same problem as the first one did too with the whole "not every use of a similar source is the same" but I'm not going to go through that again.
TL;DR
Mostly similar issues to Limited Energy Systems, seems a little redundant with the whole "in order to be proven to scale, you must have proof you scale," doesn't even really outline what this proof should look like which is the only real point I could see to something like that, also seems inconsistent with itself, site precedent, and reality on how power sources work.

Universal Energy Systems

Universal Energy Systems​

In order to qualify for a Universal Energy System and do scaling according to it, a character or the system they are using needs to fulfill all criteria for a Non-physical Energy System. Additionally, they have to demonstrate that they can channel their power through their own bodies in a way that quantifiably enhances them or otherwise allows scaling of their supernatural powers through their physicals. Hence there should be evidence that an increase in power / energy should correspond to a proportional increase in the potency of their physical statistics. In the rare case that it is relevant for scaling the reverse should also be demonstrated: That a feat of non-empowered physical strength applies to the amount of supernatural power.

Visual evidence of amplification is not considered necessary.

If the power source or universal energy system should be removed from a user by some means that should result in a notable loss in physical strength or alternatively even in physical harm or death. That doesn't necessarily mean that they should be reduced to the level of regular humans, though. Note that removal of energy sources can also have detrimental effects if they are not universal and as such negative effects of removal do not necessarily imply universalness.

It should be noted that systems don't need to be continously active. Some systems might only enhance statistics while the character physically channels energy though their body, while other systems do so passively as long as energy is available.

Yada yada didn't like the first two and don't like that bit by default

As far as the first paragraph goes, this really is just problems I've already talked about. Why does having the same source necessarily mean that they're just as strong when this doesn't seem to follow in either reality or fiction, why bother saying "in order to be proven, you need proof" without elaborating on what such proof should be, why throw in a random line about how visual evidence is not the only evidence, yeah yeah it's similar reasoning to before. If someone was to dispute this one but not the others I'd be fine to elaborate, but we're already kind of overtime.

Parts 3 and 4 is stuff that I personally think is too verse specific to really say like that specifically on the power page, but it's not a big deal. Not tldr-ing this section it wasn't very long.

To summarize the overall points, I don't think that these standards match up with either the real world or fictional trends on a widespread enough scale that they should be assumed to be the default rather than just proven on an individual level. I believe this attempt at standardizing something incredibly nonstandard and universe specific is ultimately fruitless at best, and misleading at worst. I think what would be much more useful would be just outlining what sort of things can serve as proof of scaling rather than trying to force everything into some specific system, and to also not assume that there is never any variance in efficiency and that input is the literal only factor determining output.

Edit: Received some criticism, may as well put it on this thing. The argument about differing forms of efficiency from input to output works better when it's the same basic method of energy transfer, so here are some examples. A lot of things are hard but brittle, with a prominent example being diamonds. You can't really scratch them with anything naturally occurring, which makes them heavily resistant to that sort of application of force, and diamonds preform well under consistent pressure, being formed from incredibly high pressures to begin with, but they'll preform poorly against sudden impacts. Hardness and brittleness are very different characteristics of an object, despite both of them being measurements of how well an object can stand up to force. Applying the same amount of force trying to cut a diamond and trying to hammer it wouldn't produce the same results. Another example of this is with electrical appliances, an example suggested to me being that of light bulbs of varying efficiency. Some bulbs are wasteful and convert a lot of energy to heat in the process of creating light, and as such don't shine all that brightly compared to a more efficient bulb. The heat being produced by the bulb still exists, but it's not very useful to anything, meaning that in terms of useful output, you can end up with differing results despite the same input. I feel like it would be pretty misleading to call something 8-B for example when in reality it takes 10 tons of tnt equivalent energy to preform and has a useful output of only 5 tons and then 5 is wasted.

(Also, a 50% inefficiency like that may seem large but that's actually really good in the real world. Most power plants would kill to be bumped up to 50% efficient and sit more in the 30-40 range.)

 

[Antvasima]

What do the rest of you think about Wokistan's latest post above?

@DontTalkDT

 

[KLOL506]

What do the rest of you think about Wokistan's latest post above?

@DontTalkDT

DarkDragonMedeus has major disagreements with Wokistan's comment. He will post them in due time once he is free. GilverTheProtoAngelo and Hellbeast have also professed issues with Wokistan's comment, and both Gilver and Hellbeast have been incredibly essential in the formation of the page, having provided key details for the draft (Hellbeast and I being the original progenitors of the initial draft which was later modified by DT in its final current form). Gilver is currently busy with his exams up until the 30th, but he will also try to respond if he gets the free time.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you to everybody who are helping out here.

 

[DontTalkDT]

Pretty sure Wokistan is wrong about site precedence. We never expected all spells of a character to separately be proven to approximately scale to the AP of spells with lesser or equal energy requirements.
Would be kinda ridiculous to do so tbh. Each magic caster would basically need a separate tier for every spell they ever used.

In general, while efficiency is a factor to account for, there are places where it makes sense and places where not. Every spell has an efficiency loss, but would two basic spells really have vastly different efficiency? It's not just net energy loss, but comparable energy loss we are talking about here. If we take the lightbulb analogy, then a fireball spell vs a water spell from the same caster is essentially like using two lightbulbs of the same manufacturer. It would be weird for one to have orders of magnitude worse efficiency.

Exceptions may exist if there are good arguments for it, such as a reason for vastly different efficiency, but generally I think a 30MP spell should scale to a 20MP spell from the same caster.

 

[Agnaa]

Exceptions may exist if there are good arguments for it, such as a reason for vastly different efficiency

Would you consider a character specializing or being incompetent in a certain type of technique to be enough to assume vastly different efficiency, or would you want something a lot more explicit?

 

[DontTalkDT]

Exceptions may exist if there are good arguments for it, such as a reason for vastly different efficiency

Would you consider a character specializing or being incompetent in a certain type of technique to be enough to assume vastly different efficiency, or would you want something a lot more explicit?

Nah, different skill in different techniques would be a valid reason for me.

Like, I wouldn't expect Aang at the point where he only knows the water whip technique to have as powerful water bending as he has air bending. However, once he has mastered both air and water bending they probably are comparable in power.

 

[Hellbeast]

I'm not entirely sure how to react to Woki's comment since that seems to have far wider reaching implications then just the viability of the page me and KLOL are proposing. Some of the things he's brought up could risk shifting much of our standards regarding use of superpowers

 

[KLOL506]

I'm not entirely sure how to react to Woki's comment since that seems to have far wider reaching implications then just the viability of the page me and KLOL are proposing. Some of the things he's brought up could risk shifting much of our standards regarding use of superpowers

Worse still, it could even alter Attack Potency and its definition. Which I'm pretty sure none of us want.

 

[Hellbeast]

Yeah I’m almost inclined to call it ridiculous since it asks for modifications to most of the systems we have for evaluating on the wiki

which is bizarre

 

[Agnaa]

Each magic caster would basically need a separate tier for every spell they ever used.

Isn't this something that would need to be done for some characters anyway, since there are requirements for limited energy systems? It would of course take more effort to do that with more verses, but you say it as a knock against Wokistan's suggestion even though it would still come up under yours.

 

[KLOL506]

Each magic caster would basically need a separate tier for every spell they ever used.

Isn't this something that would need to be done for some characters anyway, since there are requirements for limited energy systems? It would of course take more effort to do that with more verses, but you say it as a knock against Wokistan's suggestion even though it would still come up under yours.

Don't we already do that to a degree where we're sure the spell doesn't scale to physicals or other abilities? MHA comes to mind, I know it's Quirks and not magic but you get the point.

Also this seems like a "Limited Energy System" issue, not necessarily a "Non-Physical" or "Universal" energy system issue.

 

[Agnaa]

Yeah, I know that it already happens once or twice on a few profiles due to us separating out big final attacks and different tech, but if people start taking the "limited energy system" stuff seriously, it could crop up more. And yeah, this isn't much of a concern for non-physical or universal energy systems.

I'm personally fine with it since it's how you'd accurately describe the series. I'm just pointing out the strangeness of using the possibility of that, to argue for a system which also has the possibility of that.

 

[KLOL506]

Yeah, I know that it already happens once or twice on a few profiles due to us separating out big final attacks and different tech, but if people start taking the "limited energy system" stuff seriously, it could crop up more. And yeah, this isn't much of a concern for non-physical or universal energy systems.

It already went underway ever since those ice feats and creation feats threads popped up and such, like, two to three years ago I think, 2019 or so.

 

[Antvasima]

So what has DontTalk accepted to be applied and what do we still need to do here?

 

[KLOL506]

So what has DontTalk accepted to be applied and what do we still need to do here?

DDM still has yet to post his disagreements on Wokistan's comment.

Also everything that has been accepted is already in DontTalk's finalized draft.

 

[Antvasima]

Okay. Thank you for the information.

 

[KLOL506]

Bump

We would still appreciate your input @DarkDragonMedeus

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Yes, still working on my critiques, though DontTalkDT already tackled some parts. But going to do a weekly gaming session with a friend for the next few hours.

 

[KLOL506]

Yes, still working on my critiques, though DontTalkDT already tackled some parts. But going to do a weekly gaming session with a friend for the next few hours.

'Kay.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Broadly speaking, I think these terms are too lenient. When looking for a default standard, I would think we would first want to see what's up with reality or the closest analogue. This is talking about magic, which doesn't exist, so there's not really a version of that there, but what we do have is all sorts of systems of energy transfer, and oh boy does that not match up with this.

I understand that the basic wording/definition and kind of agree some prefers more specific; such as a pyromancer being able to manipulate/control fire or other elements respectively, not just generate it, but that's only scraping a surface and not really tackling the point.

I really don't like the idea of using energy cost as a method of scaling if we're going to make the real life comparison, because that just eliminates the entire idea of different usages of energy having different amounts of efficiency, which is just ridiculous.

That's more of an issue with game mechanics about "MP cost" to do certain things like status/healing spells being mixed with elemental spells, and not an argument against systems not being a thing.

There's the obvious things, like how it'll take a lot less energy to kill a person using electricity than it will with something like blunt force because electricity can interfere with nerves easily, or how it may be easier to destroy an object with heat than force if it has a low specific heat or much harder if the specific heat is higher, or so on.

This is a issue with durability, not an issue with AP scaling. And there are other holes to tackle in a different thread, but there's only some half correctness here.

I don't need to quote the giant wall of text, but magic not being a thing IRL isn't a counter-argument against its capabilities. Not everything is 100% pure hax, and a lot of it still involves using a supernatural method to simply alter some natural elements, flow of energy with 100% efficiency. And even then, most fictions do say one needs to be much more focused, spiritually enlightened, or much smarter than an average human in order to magic in the first place. It's still channeling energy with full efficiency. Magic for a lot of characters is simply the ability to replicate futuristic technology without even needing a technological to and can just use their imagination to alter/control a flow of energy. But that's still X tier levels of energy manipulation at the end of the day and still X tier Attack Potency. Also we already discussed using watts or joules/second for conductive current related feats instead of just using "Joules regardless of timeframe" such as taking a thousand years for a superheated laser to vaporize a mountain.

I'll keep Non-Physical Energy systems part brief and a while back when Dargoo was an Admin and was my main opponent, at least voiced keeping that consistent. But the energy systems have less to do with coming from the same pool of energy, and more to do with having the power to harness the energy in flexible varieties regardless of it being internal or external. Or some people can draw from multiple different pools of energy and it still being the same energy substance and having flexible varieties, and others who can do the same thing but can only draw from one specific pool but still meets criteria. While others can also either draw from multiple different pools or are restricted to only one specific pool but have limitations to what they can do with it.

And lastly, for full on Universal stuff. I know they sound verse specific individually, but it is still a fairly common trope in fiction. And DontTalkDT already elaborated and there appears to be some strawman statements. But no one is suggesting that Saitama's 100% serious punch should scale to his various casual series punches and kicks which is what a lot of Universal Power Sources eventually translate to albeit in the form of using magic/ki/ect attacks and not just melee attacks. But I think using magic/spell ranks is better than using MP cost. I know Fire Emblem is different from JRPGs where instead of MP, it's just each tome as as set amount of ammunition, but in the end it's the casters magic power stat that effects the damage output more than anything with the respective magic animations simply being a baseline to how potent they are and are often times much stronger than calculated under the influence of the caster. And other JRPGs have similar shenanigans of magic power stat effecting damage output. And both are often times backed up by lore, such as monsters one can summon have been stated to have gotten much stronger via traveling with your party.

I basically noted that things like C-rank attack spells should scale to other C-rank attack spells with A-rank upscaling from them rather than using 60 MP cost spells upscaling from 30 MP cost spells. But again, there still other issues to tackle such as game mechanics. But power efficiency isn't really a counterargument against UES scaling given that most inherently have 100% efficacy for everything, and even those with less would argue characters in question are actually stronger than their feats AP wise but just have weaker minds to make use of it unless they train more. And there are other things to talk about when it comes to the many different subcategories of durability such as the many different forms of Fusion energy that effects specific heat capacity, density, specific melting/boiling points, conductivity, insulation, hardness vs toughness, ect. But those are all for a completely different topic.

I'm also aware humans don't have 100% efficiency either; some people produce Wall levels of thermal energy in their bodily fluids, which is also only heat generation and not blunt force trauma. But those are also different issues and machines with much more fuel efficiency can also make better use of those. But it's not on par with the metaphysical abilities that enable one to transfer energy from one form to the other and especially if comparing same energy process to another or energy type to another or combination of both even more especially.

I still think DontTalkDT's draft is good even if Limited Energy System needs some tweaking and some more examples for each form should be used for others. I suggested Quirks from MHA for Non-Physical, and Alchemy from FMA for Limited. Bending looks like it could be depending on which character something that varies between Limited and Non-Physical.

 

[Antvasima]

Medeus makes sense to me above.

 

[KLOL506]

I am inclined to agree with Medeus's take as well.

 

[Agnaa]

I don't like Medeus' assertion that most verses have 100% energy efficiency for this sort of thing. I have never seen that mentioned explicitly, and I don't think inferences can get us there.

 

[KLOL506]

I don't like Medeus' assertion that most verses have 100% energy efficiency for this sort of thing. I have never seen that mentioned explicitly, and I don't think inferences can get us there.

As DontTalk said, it's more of about how much skill you have with each technique. Better mastery and control means higher efficiency in the long run. Also applying efficiency to fictional power sources meant for fully controlling the elements around you in a manner that defies IRL laws makes no sense to begin with, you're not dealing with internal factors of parasitic power losses like heat if you can have full mastery over said energy source, as is usually the case with well-enough training in most verses.

 

[Agnaa]

That's why I'm fine with DontTalk's argument of "There may be some energy loss, but unless there's a really large skill gap, it's probably not enough to change the tier."; I just don't like DDM's presumption of 100% efficiency.

If we can't compare it to anything IRL, we can't really assume anything by default. I would absolutely not want to assume "Everyone with an energy source has full mastery over their energy source and has zero energy loss or waste, even when using it to affect real-world objects". In fact, I seriously doubt you could prove that for any of the verses you have in mind.

 

[KLOL506]

That's why I'm fine with DontTalk's argument of "There may be some energy loss, but unless there's a really large skill gap, it's probably not enough to change the tier."; I just don't like DDM's presumption of 100% efficiency.

The ones without 100% efficiency would be idiots having never faced combat who have little to no control over the energy source and are blindly using it without any prior training to master it.

I would absolutely not want to assume "Everyone with an energy source has full mastery over their energy source and has zero energy loss or waste, even when using it to affect real-world objects". In fact, I seriously doubt you could prove that for any of the verses you have in mind.

Thing is tho, we're not just gonna use rando-ass civilians having slight access to the power source to have 100% efficiency to begin with. This is exclusively for people who actually trained to have mastery over said energy source.

DDM was also explicitly gonna say that 100% efficiency would apply in full to those who have actually trained to achieve such a status to actually be allowed to use it in active duty. He'll explain it later, but bottom line, we won't give 100% efficiency to just about anyone.

 

[Agnaa]

The ones without 100% efficiency would be idiots having never faced combat who have little to no control over the energy source and are blindly using it without any prior training to master it.

Where do you get that idea from? That seems even harder to prove.

 

[KLOL506]

The ones without 100% efficiency would be idiots having never faced combat who have little to no control over the energy source and are blindly using it without any prior training to master it.

Where do you get that idea from? That seems even harder to prove.

What even

How would it be harder to prove that a guy with full mastery over an energy source to use it in active duty for combat has 100% efficiency?

 

[Agnaa]

"Some users have 100% efficiency" is definitionally harder to prove than "Experts have 100% efficiency, and novices have less than 100% efficiency" because the second adds an extra condition.

Proving the latter proves the former, but proving the former does not prove the latter.

"Some people wear hats" is easier to prove than "People only wear hats when the sun is out".

 

[KLOL506]

"Some users have 100% efficiency" is definitionally harder to prove than "Experts have 100% efficiency, and novices have less than 100% efficiency" because the second adds an extra condition.

Proving the latter proves the former, but proving the former does not prove the latter.

"Some people wear hats" is easier to prove than "People only wear hats when the sun is out".

No, here's the thing, only experts have 100% efficiency because they learned the techniques required to control said energy source properly that doesn't burn them out so quickly, novices don't because they're not trained well enough on how to conserve and control it when they need it the most.

"Some users" would imply people other than experts have full mastery and 100% efficiency over their attacks. Which clearly can't happen if you're not trained well enough to achieve said level of mastery, control and conservation over your energy reserves.

 

[Agnaa]

No, here's the thing, only experts have 100% efficiency because they learned the techniques required to control said energy source properly that doesn't burn them out so quickly, novices don't because they're not trained well enough on how to conserve and control it when they need it the most.

Better =/= Perfect.

Even perfect control may be limited in the setting to a certain level of efficiency below 100%

Please stop trying to defend this indefensible position and just stick with DT's argument of it probably not being big enough to worry about.

"Some users" would imply people other than experts have full mastery and 100% efficiency over their attacks.

Not what I meant, but that explains where the confusion comes from.