correct Inazuma eleven

[Shadow_x007x]

Hello
due to a recalculation We will recall

topic for change​

this calculation.
= 4.32 Gigatons of TNT (6C)
and change to this calculation
= 13.9818195507 Petaton of TNT (High 6-A)
and change to this calculation
=241 Megatons Of TNT (Mountain level)
=87.306417304 megatons of TNT (City level+)
Of course, this will definitely affect this CTR.
which is the old accepted CTR But since I'm still not sure about its success, so I'm going to characterize Inazuma eleven go into High6A all first.

 

[Jinx666]

This looks cool to me, idk calcs but if others are fine with that, High 6-A Inazuma would actually be the base level from Go.

The rest of the characters who have showcased power beyond this Hakuryuu feat (like in Chrono Stone) are scaled futher through safe multipliers from this thread: https://vsbattles.com/threads/inazuma-eleven-go-chrono-stone-discussions.72037/

Dont have the time right now, but if i run this number from the calc through it again, then it could bump up characters to Tier 5 levels.

 

[M3X_2.0]

Fine by me

 

[Shadow_x007x]

This is working now, right? Or do I need to do something more? This is my first time so I'm not quite sure.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

bump so quiet

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Looks fine

 

[Shadow_x007x]

This is working now, right? Or do I need to do something more? This is my first time so I'm not quite sure.

 

[Abstractly_a_Protagonist]

Sounds good to me, tho you probably need 1 or 2 more thread moderator or admin approval (excluding DDM which already give their vote).

Universal Inazuma Eleven when?

 

[Shadow_x007x]

thank you

 

[Shadow_x007x]

bump

 

[Shadow_x007x]

Bump

 

[Antvasima]

It is explicitly against our wiki rules to change from one accepted calculation of a few to another without a preceding calc group forum thread in which our calc group members evaluate and decide which of them that seems most reliable to use.

@Damage3245 @Migue79 @KLOL506 @DemonGodMitchAubin

Are any of you willing to take a look please?

 

[Shadow_x007x]

Oh? I thought that just having 2 staff agreeing, one of them is already a calculation group, so I thought it would work.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Yeah I'm looking at the calculation and there's definitely faults in the new one. For starters, you've wildly widened the diameter of the hurricane, well outside of proper bounds. The first calc handles this part fine.

The second issue is one I'm less familiar with dealing with: It seems to me the main adjustment you've made is just... upscaling the image, to appear larger compared to Earth?

There's also no reason whatsoever to not use standard hurricane speeds. As it is, you're every unit of air within the hurricane is rotating around the hurricane every time it spins on screen- this doesn't really need to be the case. 70 m/s is fine and far more acceptable than, from what I can gather, 201,000 m/s+.

There's no reason for a lot of these changes. Absolutely going to hard disagree with the recalc.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

thanks for the comment

 

[Antvasima]

It seems like the new calculation has been rejected and we should continue to use the old one then.

Thank you for helping out.

 

[Second22]

Normally, when the full size of the Earth is not seen, should Planet Curvature Scaling be used? If it is used, the old Calc is still not available.

 

[Antvasima]

Normally, when the full size of the Earth is not seen, should Planet Curvature Scaling be used? If it is used, the old Calc is still not available.

@Mr._Bambu @M3X_2.0

 

[M3X_2.0]

@Mr._Bambu @M3X_2.0

Yes, it should be used as long as we can't see the full planet from a certain distance.

 

[Antvasima]

Thank you for helping out.

 

[Second22]

Recalculate The same image was used, but the cloud mass was fixed and Planet Curvature Scaling was added.

The result is 7-A.

 

[Antvasima]

Recalculate The same image was used, but the cloud mass was fixed and Planet Curvature Scaling was added.

The result is 7-A.

@Mr._Bambu @M3X_2.0

What do you think?

 

[Second22]

DMUA. Accept my calc.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

Bump
I am now the subject of Also trade this to be used for Downgrade.

 

[KLOL506]

I had some stuff to say about the calc.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

@Second22

 

[Second22]

I had some stuff to say about the calc.

Damn, I forgot to read the Note. I wrote the formula directly without any Deg. Thanks for the correction. I fixed it

 

[Shadow_x007x]

@KLOL506 What do you think now?

 

[Second22]

@KLOL506 What do you think now?

He already replied on my blog.

 

[Shadow_x007x]

OK, so I can change it now, right?

 

[Antvasima]

I think so, yes.