• 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.

Naruto God Tiers Speed Issue

Status
Not open for further replies.
Damage3245

Damage3245

He/Him
VS Battles
Administrator
Calculation Group
29,817
24,912
Currently all of the Sub-Relativistic speed ratings for the God Tier Naruto characters come from this calc.

It uses a timeframe of 0.44 seconds based on this calc which claims that there only 11 images / frame in the span of time that it takes Toneri to extend his golden energy blade.

However examining a slowed down video of the feat shows that there are easily 58 frames between Toneri launching the attack and the blade being fully extended.

Using the same formula from the calc: (1/25) * 58 = 2.32 seconds

And using the same distance from the currently accepted calc: 4800.92 km / 2.32 seconds = 6033.12557 Mach (Massively Hypersonic+)

Basically the current timeframe is wrong, the actual result is MHS+, not Sub-Relativistic.

The actual final result of the calc could be slightly different, since I think the method used to find the distance for the beam is also questionable, but this is just to illustrate that even with the currently used distance, the speed should not be Sub-Relativistic.
 
I should also point out that my comment in that calc went ignored by Tata due to my points, so I will copy paste my comment here: This calc is invalid because the GWR doesnt possess a constant consistent speed, it actually accelerates.

As seen in this thread, the GWR is slower at the start and accelerates after having moved slow in several frames. Naruto actually reacts to the slower end which does not have the actual speed of the calc, its slower than it. This debunks the calc, but it's not the only debunking factor.

You linked this calc to justify you using a 0.44 second timeframe since its about the moon slice. What you fail to realize is this calc uses a different moon size then the ond which you are using. It's not consistent and contradicts your juatification in using the timeframe.

So your point is valid, Damage; however, my point is as well. In all honesty I think the feat is unviable due to the inconsistent speed of the GWR as it blatantly accelerates and Naruto reacted to the slower end.
 
So to TL;DR this:

  • The accepted-calc utilizes the wrong amount of frames for its math and is provably inflated as a result of that genuine mistake.
  • The GWR beam has provable acceleration, per IMade's point.
  • The accepted-calc utilizes reference from a different-sized moon to fulfill the calc, per IMade's point.
I actually see no reason the current calc should stand in the face of this evidence? These are some damning objections to continued utilization of the calc. Damage's quick math replacement ought to be used for MHS+ for now until he properly re-calcs it accounting for moon-size, and his own view on the distance for the beam he alludes to.
 
It depends how slow someone make the video though....of course people r gonna get different timeframes

EDI: how did u even get 58 timeframes?
 
Call me crazy, while I normally agree with you guys, I am a little iffy on the acceleration argument. Maybe because I've seen it before to downplay Superman or because of something about frame counting being lower than any feat above subsonic, but I'm just uncertain on that argument. Probably just me tho.
 
BlackeJan said:
It depends how slow someone make the video though....of course people r gonna get different timeframes

EDI: how did u even get 58 timeframes?
Click to expand...
Changing the speed of the video doesn't alter how many distinct frames there are. It just makes it easier to count the individual frames.
 
Changing the speed of the video doesn't alter how many distinct frames there are. It just makes it easier to count the individual frames.

Well when did U start counting? while idk about 11 timeframes i know that 58 is TOO much
 
u are saying we cant have problem with his never ending downgrades CRT. and low balling everything is fine then make it for all verse do not just apply it on naruto.
 
@Omimi; you must be new here. I've done revisions threads for several verses; just ask any fan of One Piece and they'll tell you how much I've downgraded the verse.

Fact is, I wouldn't have to downgrade anything if profiles were accurate in the first place.
 
i am not new u know that well

u want accurate that fine

but that does not mean it always has to be lowest result
 
All verses don't have this amount of questionable calcs that got rushed through so easy..however i disagree with imade that dfferent moons size got nothing to do with the amount of frames and the time that the feat was done in
 
@Damage

Someone on here is also good with timeframes. U mind waiting for him?

EDIT: also we should wait for @M3X cause he's the one that done it and I'm hines curious on how he got 11 timeframes myself
 
While the exact value of the calc will need to be verified in a blog post later on, the fact remains that the result will be Massively Hypersonic+ no matter what.

Is everyone okay with updating the ratings to Massively Hypersonic+ and removing the old calc from the verse page?
 
Are you guys using watchframebyframe? If not, it'd help a lot to get a specific timeframe.

Edit: you need to post the revision in a blog and get it accepted with all the proof. We can't change ratings without having the proper explanations accepted beforehand.
 
'''anyone''' has the right to make a CRT in order to downgrade a verse as long as the logic is reasonable. You can simply complain about downgrade threads just because they'll downgrade a certain verse. That's all all say regarding this subject but some people need to learn not to take everything that happens here to heart or get annoyed by it.
 
@Calaca; okay, I'll put the info into a blog post first and post it on this thread once it has been evaluated.
 
Omimi said:
i am not new u know that well

u want accurate that fine

but that does not mean it always has to be lowest result
Click to expand...
If there are constant, logical downgrades that obviously aren't done out of spite, have you considered that the current ratings might actually be wrong?
 
@Omimi; it doesn't really matter what original calcs there were.

I'm responding to the currently used calc.
 
Btw, is the actual number of frames important here? Whenever I want a precise timeframe I just go to this site and look at the timestamp for both the beginning and ending frame of the scene.
 
@Andy; I'll use that when I create the blog post re-calcing this. Should have it up in about 3 to 4 hours, depending on when I get home.
 
I suppose this seems fine, but it would be a good idea to ask TataHakai.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ednaxel2
Roshi's Kamehameha: Slight speed upgrade
Replies
10
Views
986
KingTempest
KingTempest
Her4cl3s14
Naruto's Planet size update
Replies
36
Views
3K
sageof8paths
sageof8paths
karo_senpaii
  • Locked
Small but maybe big issue with kirin calc
Replies
4
Views
936
karo_senpaii
karo_senpaii
Sonoftanavast9
Willverse (Cradle) Statistics Revision 1 [Speed and Lift Strength]
Replies
4
Views
515
Sonoftanavast9
Sonoftanavast9
MinatoSparkle
The KCM Minato upgrade y'all knew was coming
2 3 4
Replies
135
Views
8K
MinatoSparkle
MinatoSparkle
Back
Top