• 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.

New profile posts

Hi could I please get your input here please? I just need one more mod to give an okay.

It's a blog to help make a confusing series much easier to follow

You are a Kung Fu Panda supporter. Can you look at this match?

Can you remove abstract existence type 2 on them? Bc i cant i think 2 admin are enough to make a thread accepted right?.
I mean
"Their Abstract Existence is non-combat applicable, as despite they can returns, they need human to help as they can't do it on their own"
Hello, could you please review this thread whenever's best for you?
check this out

Take a look. Very short. Its a sort of retro game.

Hi, we need at least 1 more vote for this. Can you give your input please?
Hello Bambu, sorry to bother you again.
I have a small question about KE.
For some reason a member here stated that the calculation was invalid due to destruction not being equal to KE. (this rule does not exist on the KE page either).

But earlier here, he accepts a calculation where no destruction occurred, and putting in a blast site the yield, it should have destroyed an area 60 meters in diameter...

He previously also accepted a mountain level calculation without showing comparable destruction, I don't understand, if you need a destruction equal to KE, shouldn't we calculate the destruction instead?

By the way, if you could evaluate the calculation, I would really appreciate it 🙏🏻
Mr. Bambu
Mr. Bambu
This is a rule on the Kinetic Energy Feats page.

There is a destruction/AP calculation contradicting a kinetic energy calculation. The destruction/AP calculation would take priority over the kinetic energy calculation in this case as the AP calculation would be a better proof in regards to how much damage he/she is capable of in an attack.
  • For example, if a character launches a 200kg metal ball against a common wall at Mach 300, but the wall remains largely undamaged, the energy required to cause the minor damage on the wall would take priority over the kinetic energy derived from speed in this case.
  • Keep in mind that this destruction should be compared to the energy lost by the object during the event. A ball travelling at relativistic speeds creating a hole its size, and continuing to move at nearly the same speed afterwards, would not be considered a contradiction. While a similar feat, with the ball falling to the ground a few meters afterwards, would be cause for concern.
It is not so much that destruction must match KE- it is that in instances where both occur, if they are heavily inconsistent, we will prioritize destruction over kinetic energy.
Xaropadob3ta
Xaropadob3ta
"This isn't valid via our KE rules and the guts calc shouldn't work either since it doesn't showcase any equivalent destruction"

The "equivalent of destruction" does not exist, but then? The calculation is refused on your part?
It's as if he wanted to equalize the energy between both in destruction, which doesn't happen in any of the examples shown in the blog comment and the one shown in the previous comment (of your profile).

By the way, thanks for the help, I don't think we should prioritize destruction here, the Nichirins had no problem cutting the bombs...
Mr. Bambu
Mr. Bambu
No, I haven't really looked at that other one, I thought you just wanted to know about the rule. I haven't been on much today, I'll try to get to going over it.
Hi Firestorm can you give me your opinion on this if it is enough to be proof of CM Type 2.
Mana is a concept of the hidden mystic life energy that permeates all of nature:
Alpha Rune in the verse act as a source and embodiment of legerdomain as Charmcaster says, 'It is an object as old as time itself, through which all magic flows. It is the keeper of the true name of my realm; source of ultimate power! And it is mine!', and this is the secret true name of magic is known as 'Alpha Rune' in the show. The shifting of Alpha Rune causes something, as show, without Alpha Rune, Legerdomain began to destroying. Celestialsapiens shifting mana so they can manipulate him, poses a change in nature and everything, causing the entire universe to be changed. Verdona describes mana are life-energy that is present in all known living things, and that mana can never be fully absorbed. In Conclusion, Mana is a concept of life-energy are always in everything and are fundamental to the universe, shifting mana could cause the total changing of the entire universe, Paradox should get Conceptual Manipulation due to being able to created Alpha Rune (the embodiment of concept of mana), and also Charmcaster with Alpha Rune should get Concept Manip type 2 due to can control the nature of mana. So it should look
somthing like this
Professor Paradox:
Conceptual Manipulation (Type 2 - Created Alpha Rune, which is embodiment of mana, which acts as a force over universe, causing their changing entire universe if shifted)
Charmcaster with Alpha Rune:
can u give ur input

Sorry for the inconvenience, could you please review this?

Would you check this out if I gave a summary outlining the main points of the proposal? I need 2 more staff to give this a look.

Hey Bambu,
I know you’re probably busy, but when you have the time, I would really appreciate it if you could provide some input here so we can continue the discussion regarding my calcs.
Thanks : )
Hello! I had a question, and I honestly do not know who to ask. Can you answer this question from me in this thread? Basically about whether the things there qualify for conceptual manipulation.
Hello, Bambu! I hope I’m not bothering you. If it’s not too much trouble, could you take a look at this CRT?
Can I get your vote for a DC Thread?
Can u check this DC Thread?
Hey Ultima can you check out this 1-A revision

important 1-A revision

Qawsedf234
Qawsedf234
That CRT is already closed from two years ago.
Ar1216789
Ar1216789
Wrong link 😭
Ar1216789
Ar1216789
i fixed the link, i'm in desperate need for votes, please check it out.
Back
Top