- 5,107
- 1,786
There are presently three factors that make this calculation invalid for Doflamingo.
1) In short: when using speed feats regarding meteorite falling speeds, we only accept meteorite speeds from 11km/s~17km/s.
The calculation we use has a low, mid, and high end. The low end is the only acceptable speed, being 14 km/s. I suggest reading the calc. The calculator also ignored a required arm movement between Doflamingo's 1st and 2nd arm swipes.
2) The calculator states: "Taking the angle from Law" to find Doflamingo's swiping angle. The 70 degrees was assumed and would be, in no way, enough to completely slice apart the half of the meteorite that is falling towards Doflamingo.
3) The distance between Doflamingo and the meteorite at the start of the time-frame does not make sense. he scaled based off of the mini-craters found all over the meteorite and used the average. I don't understand how that helps.
I did the calculation myself and got MHS results here.
I think the way I did it was acceptable, and I'll post it in the calc evaluation's thread for feedback, but until then, I think we should remove the currently used calculation.
1) In short: when using speed feats regarding meteorite falling speeds, we only accept meteorite speeds from 11km/s~17km/s.
The calculation we use has a low, mid, and high end. The low end is the only acceptable speed, being 14 km/s. I suggest reading the calc. The calculator also ignored a required arm movement between Doflamingo's 1st and 2nd arm swipes.
2) The calculator states: "Taking the angle from Law" to find Doflamingo's swiping angle. The 70 degrees was assumed and would be, in no way, enough to completely slice apart the half of the meteorite that is falling towards Doflamingo.
3) The distance between Doflamingo and the meteorite at the start of the time-frame does not make sense. he scaled based off of the mini-craters found all over the meteorite and used the average. I don't understand how that helps.
I did the calculation myself and got MHS results here.
I think the way I did it was acceptable, and I'll post it in the calc evaluation's thread for feedback, but until then, I think we should remove the currently used calculation.