Yes, it is the Power Graph chart calculation

[ZillertheBucko]

Again, Agnaa was arguing for the multipler is not useable due to the fact they never directly stated the multiplers in question.

I see too many ppl insisting on that being accepted when it is not the case.

still seems like grey area in the standards, as long as we’re able to agree on the graph’s logic, then it should count as a narrator statement as it was directly narrator provided, and can be considered to be “a picture of a number of a multiplier”
This seems to be the first time something like this has happened with a major verse here so I don’t think that cases like these were intended to be suppressed

 

[HammerStrikes219]

still seems like grey area in the standards, as long as we’re able to agree on the graph’s logic, then it should count as a narrator statement as it was directly narrator provided, and can be considered to be “a picture of a number of a multiplier”
This seems to be the first time something like this has happened with a major verse here so I don’t think that cases like these were intended to be suppressed

No, that is incorrect. We don’t try to assign a multipler on a graph ie. Guesstimate the multiplers when we have zero statements about how that exponential growths works in a mathematical sense.

This point is not even a grey idea

 

[Agnaa]

Meh, it’s quite negligible
if anything it’s just a minor inconsistency, since regardless of the graph’s system garou still should’ve been equal to Saitama
even going by the first point where it perfectly lines up with Saitama’s peak, the multiplier is virtually unchanged due to how minor it is
But you’re still correct, I’ll look into it a little more later

If the graph does have an inconsistency like that, shouldn't that call its usage into question? :v

 

[Qawsedf234]

If the graph does have an inconsistency like that, shouldn't that call its usage into question? :v

Well, that aspect of it doesn't have much to do with anything. The Saitama part of the calc is measuring his current position to his previous position and the Garou part is measuring his position to Saitama's original position.

Garou's original graph position is only used for one thing: Context of when the graph started measurement wise. The first time Garou was ever that close to Saitama was after he copied his serious mode and right after they did the clash.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Well, that aspect of it doesn't have much to do with anything. The Saitama part of the calc is measuring his current position to his previous position and the Garou part is measuring his position to Saitama's original position.

Garou's original graph position is only used for one thing: Context of when the graph started measurement wise. The first time Garou was ever that close to Saitama was after he copied his serious mode and right after they did the clash.

Yes, but we really in the dark about whatever or not it truly should been x58 since we all know that is a lowball/guesstimate from the calc itself.
I am actually even cautious to use it as I doubt the author intended for someone in measuring the graph and trying to get a multiplier out of it.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Corrected my wording, but there we go.

 

[Agnaa]

Well, that aspect of it doesn't have much to do with anything. The Saitama part of the calc is measuring his current position to his previous position and the Garou part is measuring his position to Saitama's original position.

Garou's original graph position is only used for one thing: Context of when the graph started measurement wise. The first time Garou was ever that close to Saitama was after he copied his serious mode and right after they did the clash.

I'm not very familiar with OPM here so correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't Garou have been equal to Saitama at that point? But the graph shows them never having been equal, with Garou's copying only catching up after Saitama had gotten much stronger. Although ig you could argue that the graph had only started long into the fight, or smth.

I'd also point out that they wouldn't necessarily be close at that point, since the scale is vague as hell. Saitama could be 10x more powerful with the gap visually seeming that small. While this would imply that Saitama was even more powerful than the calc in the OP, it'd also make the graph's usage a bit more tenuous.

 

[Qawsedf234]

but shouldn't Garou have been equal to Saitama at that point?

Garou always lagged slightly behind Saitama due to the latter's better AD.

I'd also point out that they wouldn't necessarily be close at that point, since the scale is vague as hell.

They'd be within within 2x gap going by the same chart ratio.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Garou always lagged slightly behind Saitama due to the latter's better AD.

They'd be within within 2x gap going by the same chart ratio.

Btw, what is your current stance right now? Still neutral or agree?

 

[Qawsedf234]

I'm neutral, but I'm fine with it being used.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Okay, let me edit that in.

 

[Agnaa]

They'd be within within 2x gap going by the same chart ratio.

My point's just that it's hard to represent large gaps if there's even larger gaps elsewhere on the same chart. I know that if you look at the representation it's within 2x, but that could be because it's difficult to represent anything more extreme.

 

[IRizz21]

looks like you still haven't found the final result

can i give a calculation that my friend did here, and can you guys evaluate the calculation?

 

[Antvasima]

Well, we already have a calculation for this feat. What would be done differently in your new calculation for it?

 

[IRizz21]

maybe you want to see it first

 

[HammerStrikes219]

maybe you want to see it first

Ngl, I don’t think we need two calcs for this one especially if it involves a different result at this point.

 

[IRizz21]

the calculation done by my friend, is to find out how much saitama's strength and speed have increased, seems a little different

 

[HammerStrikes219]

the calculation done by my friend, is to find out how much saitama's strength and speed have increased, seems a little different

It is only related to strength though mainly.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I suppose that it wouldn't cause any harm. It is possible that Qawsedf234 might get some ideas for his own calculation blog.

 

[IRizz21]

should I put this calculation into the blog and create my own thread?

or I will share it here and you can evaluate the calculation

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Well, I suppose that it wouldn't cause any harm. It is possible that Qawsedf234 might get some ideas for his own calculation blog.

Again, we will been requiring to make a different thread and it is technically derailing from the original topic too

 

[ZillertheBucko]

So what’s the current counterarguments

 

[HammerStrikes219]

Also it does if the result is relying on that same multipliers and also same results

 

[IRizz21]

and also my friend has calculated if saitama fights for 1 hour with stable emotions like when he fought garou

 

[IRizz21]

maybe i'll put this in the blog

 

[HammerStrikes219]

So what’s the current counterarguments

1. The multipliers can not been used as it is only a estimate from using the graph
2. We don’t have a in verse statement/WOG statements regarding the specifics of the exponential growth
3. The gap was increasing drastically during their fight
4. It is definitely not Y = 0

Also as far as I am aware, the counter arguments for not using the multiplier calculated of a graph isn’t debunked at all and only reinforces their main point.

It doesn’t help the multiplers isn’t actually accepted, but is being contested anyway

 

[Antvasima]

maybe i'll put this in the blog

You would need to place it all in a wiki blog and link to it here, yes.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

You would need to place it all in a wiki blog and link to it here, yes.

This will actually cause us to not able to focus on the calc by @Qawsedf234 and I consider it disrespectful after a few days of discussion if not more so for doing so.

 

[Antvasima]

Well, I suppose that it is up to him to decide then.

 

[IRizz21]

ok i will save it first and wait for the qawsed calculation

 

[ZillertheBucko]

1. The multipliers can not been used as it is only a estimate from using the graph
2. We don’t have a in verse statement/WOG statements regarding the specifics of the exponential growth
3. The gap was increasing drastically during their fight
4. It is definitely not Y = 0

Also as far as I am aware, the counter arguments isn’t debunked at all and only reinforces their main point.

It doesn’t help the multiplers isn’t actually accepted, but is being contested anyway

I don’t see how 3 and 1 are counterarguments.

 

[HammerStrikes219]

I don’t see how 3 and 1 are counterarguments.

1. It is from this part:
“Multipliers come from direct statements instead of being reasoned from something else. That means, for example, that if a verse has powerlevels or statistics, the doubling of a statistic or power level should not be concluded to correspond to the power of the character doubling, unless it is clearly specified to work that way.”

Ie. We need further elaboration on that.

Which is where 3 comes in. The gaps are there to represent the massive spike of Saitama’s growth against Garou without any numbers as it is clearly not just doubling, but goes beyond that. This goes back what @Agnaa say

My point's just that it's hard to represent large gaps if there's even larger gaps elsewhere on the same chart. I know that if you look at the representation it's within 2x, but that could be because it's difficult to represent anything more extreme.

 

[IRizz21]

I've finished my blog, now just waiting

 

[HammerStrikes219]

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/U...lification_saitama_via_Accelerate_development

Oh boi

 

[IRizz21]

per second looks better

 

[HammerStrikes219]

per second looks better

And this is why we don’t try to calculate a multipler from a graph.

 

[IRizz21]

it doesn't matter, because we basically do that calculation to find the value of the multiplier

 

[HammerStrikes219]

It does when this entire contention was in regards to whatever the multiplier is accepted or rejected.

 

[ZillertheBucko]

Judging by the graphs, Garou’s copying just takes a few moments, and by the time it’s finished Saitama has already left him in the dust, even more so when garou actually throws his punch
It’s a bit confusing but it works. This isn’t that relevant anyways but still just putting this idea here

 

[ZillertheBucko]

Ok so essentially
We know the starting point of the x axis is no earlier than the sp^2 due to an upsurge in emotions, and Garou being relative with Saitama even if not perfectly aligned
And we can conclude that the y starts at 0, due to the fact that it has no units for that to be worth doing for the graph, and 58 times multiplier is the most consistent regardless
basically, I don’t see any reason to disagree at this point regarding those two issues