• 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.

Pokemon AP/Durability upgrade (All Tier 7s)

The_real_cal_howard

The_real_cal_howard

Read my comic
VS Battles
Retired
40,470
12,953
So, there's this calc I made.

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:The_real_cal_howard/Pokemon_use_Thunder

I can't really upgrade without a true consensus, and the results were mixed. The math was accepted. If accepted logically, then it scales to all Pokemon that are currently tier 7 (except Porygon 2), and push them to High 7-A, as the Low End is what everyone wanted. Would likely push Mega Pokemon into 6-C, and would definitely push all legendaries to 6-C at the very least.

For it: Myself, Matt, PaChi2, CP, Executor N0, Overlord, SomebodyData, Weekly, TMR, Dragon, Kaltias, Seed, GKS, Antvasima, Darkanine, Ever, Aridwolverine, and Azzy (Azzy confirmed that he's perfectly fine with it on my wall.)

Iffy: Saik, Imaginym, and AN (their only problem is the scaling, but Saik doesn't mind it. AN seems to be changing his mind). Prom also doesn't think it's outlandish, but she believes it's fair to be skeptical.

Against it: Xcano, Aiden, Dark649, LordAizenSama, Blue, Assaltwaffle, Grudgeman1706, Arigarmy, Antoniofer, and Kuuichigo
 
I'm alright with it, it helps explain the Tyranitar problem (finally). Though I'm curious, is there any more High 7-A feats?
 
Not to my knowledge (closest thing is Tyranitar's casual thing), not counting Moltres' latent energy, but this has been High 7-A from Gens III to VII, regardless of the incarnation of the animation. Hurricane might be able to get around this, but not sure.
 
@Seed. Idk, though a lot of Pokemon should get At least High 7-A.

Tbh, best end would be to use 4 foot 8 as the height, as that's the height of Lucas, the trainer. But I greatly prefer this result.

Hence the "At least"
 
As awesome and appealing as Large Mountain Level+ Porygon-Z would be for my childhood self...

We're already being generous enough with our Pokemon ratings here. Yes our "lolfeats" attitude was pretty ridiculous, but we don't want our "lolscaling" attitude to be just as bad. We need some sort of balance.

Although 7-B to High 7-A+ shouldn't be that big of a gap, so I wouldn't call it an outlier. I'm 50/50 on this, trapped between incredulity and hype.
 
@Cal I see.. Wait, is there a calc for Zap Cannon ? And to what pokemons does the move scale to ? Sorry if i seem overbearing with the multitude of questions.

@Dragon I agree completely

@Arbitrary I agree to an extent. But... this isn't as ridiculous as it seems to be. If it is consistent enough, i don't see how it cannot be accepted. I would like to hear more new opinions before this ends, though ?
 
I gotta say, that I totally disagree with this scaling. Specially when Thunder either comes from the user, or the cloud is already formed. Also, the damaging part is the Thunder. Or you actually believe the creators take info consideration the power of the cloud forming? Of course not.
 
For starters, no cloud feat takes into consideration the power of cloud forming/dispersing. Second, here's what Azzy said about that:

"What do you want me to say? I don't see a problem with the math, and the way Thunder is described makes it sound like legit lightning.

"A wicked thunderbolt is dropped on the target to inflict damage."

Note use of "dropped". As in, actually from the sky and not directly from the Pokemon itself."
 
I agree with Xcanos post in the blog (That is to say, I disagree with the upgrade) Attack animations tend to be dodgy, especially in these sorts of games. Galaxy level Fate ccc Gilgamesh comes to mind.

Also what Aiden said.
 
@Aiden An author's interpretation of their own character is no more relevant than that of the audience's. It's better to go by the information that's present than to make baseless assumptions on what the author intended to convey, especially if what the author says is blatantly contradicted by what's shown.
 
@LAS. We had a whole thread recently about attack animation scrutiny, in which the consensus was that that idea was pure bias against JRPGs.

@Aiden. There are dozens of calcs like that, along with dispersion, both on here and the OBD. That's not a good reason.
 
Prety much what Arbitrary said. If Author statements / what they thought about feats mattered over consistent feats and statements in said series, most characters wouldn't be where they are currently in terms of tier.
 
@Cal yeah, but if my whole intention its to hit you with lightning, and you calc the Energy of the f***ing cloud formation: What I'm supposed to think?


Also, in against this. But this technically would only scale to those able to learned naturally... So High 7-A Jolteon and Pikachu. Man, red got lucky with that starter. Seriously, this is ridiculous. I Can maybe accept it for said... Raikou. But anybody else is just... Wank everyone.
 
Case by case, yes, but said case is basically your Gil example, in which it wouldn't be counted, and majority of the time, it's not really gonna be like that.
 
Forgive me & please correct me if i am wrong. This would scale ONLY to the following :

Third evolution line pokemon , Psuedo-Legendaries , Legendaries (OBVIOUSLY) , Gym Leaders ( Likely mid-journey and end-journey ) , Rival Trainers ( between Mid-Journey Gyms, End-Journey Gyms and right before Elite 4 ) , Elite Fours , Champions , Anime trainers ( Gym Trainers , Elite 4 level trainers , League level trainers , etc... ) , Those participating in the Battle Tree , World Championship contestants , Title Defense Trainers
 
Even though I have a character who's main feat comes from cloud formation (Sarah Kerriga), I am against this.

Animations changes from game to game. Sprites change from game to game. Using horizon scaling from a sprite-based game and adding cloud formation on top of that is just getting ridiculous.

If there is a Thunder user in the anime that uses it I would much MUCH prefer to get a calc from that, rather than use sprite scaling in the animation of an attack from a more than decade old game. I am a huge fan of Pokemon but this seems too far.
 
@Aiden, that is completely against the scaling you came up with. Not all Pokémon that can learn Hurricane or Twister or Earth Power are 8-A, and I'm still unsure why you put Horsea there. Don't use that argument, let alone strawmanning my argument by saying Pikachu scales, and the Argument from Incredulity.

@LAS. That was dropped ages ago. So many of us have stated that at this point.

@Seed. Untrue.

@Assalt. Despite the fact that it would get the same result for every generation past II... We also, as Aiden's clear to point out, don't scale anime to games.
 
Might it be worth mentioning that on occassions such as Pokemon origins Thunder has come from the pokemon's body rather than the sky, meaning they shouldn't scale to the cloud formation?
 
@Cal I guess I should be more specific to why I dislike sprite scaling. Wailord is similar in size to a Vileplume via sprite, yet, in actuality, is many times larger. Sprites aren't consistent in the slightest when compared to one another; even Pokemon in the same evolution line don't scale to each other in size. Lairon is supposed to be nearly 3x smaller than Aggron given Pokedex, but it is almost as large as it given the sprite.
 
That's why we're using the low end by using the mascot (Pikachu), which technically would be lower, as we should be using the static height of Lucas, the trainer, who is 4 foot 8 and would give higher results.
 
Also, if the method is indeed wrong (the scaling and whatnot,and lets face it, it is) then the calc isnt usable whatsoever. Lowends and all. Because that can be a absurd highball still and be wrong.
 
"That's why we're using the low end by using the mascot (Pikachu), which technically would be lower, as we should be using the static height of Lucas, the trainer, who is 4 foot 8 and would give higher results."

You know I hate it when people uses arguments like this, it doesn't matter if you purposely use the low end because it still upgrades the character. The sprite are inconsistent and just because you're using the low end doesn't change a thing Cal. I'm of course disagreeing with this. I have nothing against Pokemon, I'm a supporter of it actually, but this is just not logical to me.
 
Sorry in advance, because I'm about to snap. This argument is getting under my skin.

You guys don't get it, do you? For starters, the inconsistent sprite size means nothing, as I'm not measuring sprites. These are confirmed sizes. Pikachu is the shortest Pokemon that can learn the move naturally at the time (Dedenne is shorter), at one foot four (Plusle and Minun are that tall as well). It's not a matter of inconsistency, or me just randomly choosing a Pokemon. I'm not scaling the heights of Pokemon. You want something that's not inconsistent? Again, use Lucas' height (or Ethan's/Gold's. Only ones with confirmed heights.) Doesn't change with the sprite. He's four foot eight. Use that. I edited the calc to account for that. Results are island level. Stop claiming sprite stuff as an argument against it. I accounted for that.
 
It doesn't matter if you use the shortest pokemon, the sprites are inconsistent if you just switch the Pokemon/Trainers whatever. Your so called "accounting" for it, is using the lowend to make the feat looks like it's more acceptable when it's not doing anything to prove your point. How did you account for it? Because Cal just using the smallest pokemon doesn't account for crap. The sprite are inconsistent, the attack animations shouldn't be used, can you explain to me in detail? How does using the smallest pokemon in the game who can use the move fix any of that? And don't try to do the "I already explained it' cause you haven't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top