• 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.

Yes, it is the Power Graph chart calculation

Status
Not open for further replies.
Antvasima said:
Well, you keep moving me to neutral, even though I have repeatedly stated that I agree with this, so I am not sure if you mishandle any other votes as well
Click to expand...
I only moved you to neutral once because you did agree with @Qawsedf234 because he mentioned he is neutral overall on whatever or not the calc should been applied or not.
 
Also when did you repeatedly say you agree with this? Even that does overlook the fact I am also confused on what exactly is your stance as it doesn’t address the counter arguments anyway.

Edit: Never mind.
 
Last edited:
Also while I am at this, we currently have two staff members that is actually unclear on what exactly is their stance overall as the debate was mostly between regular members, @Agnaa , @Ayewale , @GodlyCharmander, and @Tago238 plus some other members here that actually make the voting tally a bit difficult to go through as I have to sort out the regular members and staff members opinions.
 
Antvasima said:
Anyway, even though I would personally prefer if this upgrade is applied, we unfortunately do not seem to have achieved nearly sufficient support for doing so.

@Ultima_Reality

Would you be willing to make an attempt to convince other staff members here of this revision? If not, we seem to have reached a stalemate, and that is obviously not enough to apply this.
Click to expand...
We've reached a stalemate on the original proposition, but a "possibly 3-C" rating is still in the ballpark considering the counterarguments and arguments have both reached a point in which it's based on "what is the most likely" and "the author probably did...."
I would be open to having more discussion on this outcome, since at this point I agree that a solid 3-C rating is impossible, thanks to some arguments by Charmander and Agnaa, but I am quite certain that the 3-C should be represented on the profile as a likely possibility
 
ZillertheBucko said:
We've reached a stalemate on the original proposition, but a "possibly 3-C" rating is still in the ballpark considering the counterarguments and arguments have both reached a point in which it's based on "what is the most likely" and "the author probably did...."
I would be open to having more discussion on this outcome, since at this point I agree that a solid 3-C rating is impossible, thanks to some arguments by Charmander and Agnaa, but I am quite certain that the 3-C should be represented on the profile as a likely possibility
Click to expand...
I agree with possibly concept.
 
I would be open to having more discussion on this outcome, since at this point I agree that a solid 3-C rating is impossible, thanks to some arguments by Charmander and Agnaa, but I am quite certain that the 3-C should be represented on the profile as a likely possibility

I did consider offering something like this a few posts ago, but I still take too much issue with the intentionality to readily agree with that.
 
ZillertheBucko said:
you know you're still doing the thing where "because I said it, then it must be true"
Click to expand...
Again, I going by the fact we were told explicitly in Chapter 168 in the manga, that Saitama was growing exponentially strong and then no one will been able to measure his actual growing strength. You acting like I don’t have the evidence to back it up when I clearly posted scans and evidence in this thread multiple times.
 
HammerStrikes219 said:
Again, I going by the fact we were told explicitly in Chapter 168 in the manga, that Saitama was growing exponentially strong and then no one will been able to measure his actual growing strength. You acting like I don’t have the evidence to back it up when I clearly posted scans and evidence in this thread multiple times.
Click to expand...
this isn't even a counterpoint, what the hell does him growing exponentially strong debunk about the graph showing exponential growth
sorry but if you keep this up then I can't really see myself taking your points seriously
 
ZillertheBucko said:
this isn't even a counterpoint, what the hell does him growing exponentially strong debunk about the graph showing exponential growth
sorry but if you keep this up then I can't really see myself taking your points seriously
Click to expand...
The fact you don’t understand where the opposition is coming from completely is actually getting a bit redundant.

Also it is a point in the fact there is no official multipliers stated in any of the scans and evidence which was pointed out to you by @GodlyCharmander and @Agnaa for that matter.
 
HammerStrikes219 said:
The fact you don’t understand where the opposition is coming from completely is actually getting a bit redundant.

Also it is a point in the fact there is no official multipliers stated in any of the scans and evidence which was pointed out to you by @GodlyCharmander and @Agnaa for that matter.
Click to expand...
something which had also been done to death
even several staff agree that a narration provided image of a multiplier is effectively the same as a statement, especially since the standard was clearly not intended to restrict a situation like this
 
Chill out and stop repeating arguments.

Ziller's aware that there's no direct statement of a multiplier; the people who support using the chart think that the chart's enough.

(Also, Ziller, you may have missed this post I made just before one of yours)
 
Pointing out that multiple staff members disagree does not contradict Ziller's point that multiple staff members agree.

Can we just leave this for more evaluations instead of repeating the same 3 points 600 times?
 
Agnaa said:
Pointing out that multiple staff members disagree does not contradict Ziller's point that multiple staff members agree.

Can we just leave this for more evaluations instead of repeating the same 3 points 600 times?
Click to expand...
Yes, but only like 4 staff members agree off memory.
That is off by one anyway.
 
Antvasima said:
HammerStrikes219, please stop spamming nearly every single thread that you participate in. Systematically turning many of them time-wasting and incomprehensible is the main reason why we had to ban you several years ago.
Click to expand...
While fair, I don’t recall that many as Sera was also involved in that too IIRC.

Other than that, if we don’t get anymore consensus, we have to do something for a rating on Saitama’s profile.
 
Okay, but please keep your posts to just what is relevant, and stop repeating yourself over and over in the future.
 
Agnaa said:
Chill out and stop repeating arguments.

Ziller's aware that there's no direct statement of a multiplier; the people who support using the chart think that the chart's enough.

(Also, Ziller, you may have missed this post I made just before one of yours)
Click to expand...
yeah, I actually did see that one and just didnt get around to responding to it
I actually need to think about the best way I can go about this for a moment, since of course debating about author intentions can get a bit difficult, outside of the arguments I've already put out I'm not sure about this one yet
also I'm gaming, so I'll need a moment
 
HammerStrikes219 said:
I will try, but you know I have two mental conditions of being a ADHD and autism person.

Still I will see what I can do on my end.
Click to expand...
So do I, but through hard work I keep it under much better control. You cannot derail everything you participate in, and take up many hours of time with completely unnecessary work for other members every day.
 
Antvasima said:
So do I, but through hard work I keep it under much better control. You cannot derail everything you participate in, and take up many hours of time with completely unnecessary work for other members every day.
Click to expand...
Can we just do DMs on this wiki? I did not appreciate the fact I feel regret over my past actions because of that.
 
We can send private messages to other members in this forum, yes, but I do not have the time to spend on you right now, especially if you will talk for hours. Sorry.
 
Anyway, here is the current consensus
HammerStrikes219 said:
vsbattles.fandom.com

One Punch Man - That one power graph

vsbattles.fandom.com vsbattles.fandom.com

Should this calc been accepted in regard to multiplers and exponential growth?

Edit: Tally updated again.

Disagree with the calc’s multiplers specifically: @DontTalkDT, @Andytrenom,
@Jasonsith,

Agree with it: @KLOL506, @Ultima_Reality, @Phoenks, @Antvasima

Neutral: @Qawsedf234 (Say he is neutral, but is fine with the calc being used) @Maverick_Zero_X

Unclear: @CrimsonStarFallen (Did agree with specific points made by regular members, but also didn’t elaborate if they agree with the calc or not due to confusing stances between regular members)
@Damage3245 (Didn’t elaborate if he agree with it or not due to one of the more recent reply)
Click to expand...
Here is the current consensus aside from us derailing the thread with specific topics that comes up.
 
Well, it doesn't seem like this will be accepted then, so I suppose that we should close this thread.

You are not allowed to participate if somebody else brings up this topic in another thread, as it would be completely derailed again.

Also, if you continue to constantly spam nonsense that wastes the time of other members, we will unfortunately likely have to ban you again, out of consideration for said other members.
 
Antvasima said:
Well, it doesn't seem like this will be accepted then, so I suppose that we should close this thread.

You are not allowed to participate if somebody else brings up this topic in another thread, as it would be completely derailed again.

Also, if you continue to constantly spam nonsense that wastes the time of other members, we will unfortunately likely have to ban you again, out of consideration for said other members.
Click to expand...
In this thread, I was actually technically repeating the same points. Not derailing the thread, just spamming points from the opposition and I do apologize for that as I actually did repeatedly say that throughout this thread
 
Antvasima said:
Well, it doesn't seem like this will be accepted then, so I suppose that we should close this thread.
Click to expand...
What about the suggestion that Agnaa once suggested? With possible rating, it would make fair to everyone.
Also, it is just that most people don't want to comment anymore. And I think most of the calculation group members already accept it.
 
HammerStrikes219 said:
Only off by 1s. We have to take into consideration of those unclear or neutral actions.
Click to expand...
For the Neutrals, Qaws is okay with it being used. Mav is completely neutral.

For the Unclears, Crimson more likely agrees than disagree due to agreeing with those who agree. Damage no idea.
 
Dread said:
What about the suggestion that Agnaa once suggested? With possible rating, it would make fair to everyone.
Also, it is just that most people don't want to comment anymore. And I think most of the calculation group members already accept it.
Click to expand...
No, @ZillertheBucko suggest it first.
Agnaa said:
I would be open to having more discussion on this outcome, since at this point I agree that a solid 3-C rating is impossible, thanks to some arguments by Charmander and Agnaa, but I am quite certain that the 3-C should be represented on the profile as a likely possibility

I did consider offering something like this a few posts ago, but I still take too much issue with the intentionality to readily agree with that.
Click to expand...
 
Kachon123 said:
For the Neutrals, Qaws is okay with it being used. Mav is completely neutral.

For the Unclears, Crimson more likely agrees than disagree due to agreeing with those who agree. Damage no idea.
Click to expand...
I have to inform Crimson about it as they only agree with two other regular members points which I also not too sure on.
 
Kachon123 said:
More staff have agreed to it than disagreed.
Click to expand...
Yes, but not to a sufficient degree to reach a consensus.

However, given that this thread was spammed and derailed so much, no proper discussion was possible to be had, so if somebody recreates the thread, HammerStrikes219 is thread-banned from it, and all of the staff members who responded here are reinvited to participate, that might be an acceptable solution.
 
Antvasima said:
Yes, but not to a sufficient degree to reach a consensus.

However, given that this thread was spammed and derailed so much, no proper discussion was possible to be had, so if somebody recreates the thread, HammerStrikes219 is thread-banned from it, and all of the staff members who responded here are reinvited to participate, that might be an acceptable solution.
Click to expand...
May I do it? If you give me permission, I am free to create CRT and insert all necessary information.
 
Antvasima said:
Yes, but not to a sufficient degree to reach a consensus.

However, given that this thread was spammed and derailed so much, no proper discussion was possible to be had, so if somebody recreates the thread, HammerStrikes219 is thread-banned from it, and all of the staff members who responded here are reinvited to participate, that might be an acceptable solution.
Click to expand...
Tbf, we were having a debate on whatever or not the multipliers is acceptable or not too.
 
I would prefer if a staff or very experienced member handles it, so no mistakes are made this time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Phoenks
  • Locked
The OPM Power Graph
2 3
Replies
82
Views
10K
Phoenks
Phoenks
Phoenks
One-Punch Man: Faster and Stronger!
2
Replies
67
Views
9K
SatellaTheWoE
SatellaTheWoE
Phoenks
  • Locked
Saitama VS Goku • (1-1-0)
6 7 8
Replies
301
Views
23K
TheGodOfICE777
TheGodOfICE777
Shadow_x007x
  • Locked
Adjusted Tier Boros and Saitama
Replies
5
Views
2K
Shadow_x007x
Shadow_x007x
Kachon123
  • Locked
One-Punch Man: Garou and Saitama Graph Discussion (Cleaned and Continued)
6 7 8
Replies
290
Views
19K
Antvasima
Antvasima
Back
Top