• 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 you give your input on this CRT? It has been ongoing for quite a while and still needs one more staff vote to be resolved, please 🙏
Hi, could you give your input on this CRT? It has been ongoing for quite a while and still needs one more staff vote to be resolved, please 🙏

Hello, I have a question about the usage of depth-to-Diameter (d/D) ratios to calculate the depth of a crater using its diameter due to the lack of a good depth angle (Examples here: 1 and 2; it's manhwa, but that's just because I'm most familiar with manhwa, but I've seen blogs from other mediums use this ratio too). I'm also guilty of using it too for one of my calculations, so willing to change it. Originally, the argument about its usage was talked about on this thread here, but as I'm thinking about it, due to its rapid usage in a bunch of other calculations, I thought it could be a possible wiki-wide staff discussion.

My argument (TLDR) was against its usage due to: The d/D ratio of 0.11, 0.17, 0.25, etc., is borrowed from meteor impact studies where even under controlled conditions the ratio varies widely from 0.08 to 0.215 with no confident trend, as acknowledged by both these two articles: Hoover et al. and Stopar et al (Full PDF locked in a paywall but main points can still be read). Neither paper can identify which factors — velocity, target properties, impactor properties, degradation — dominate the final ratio, making it unreliable as a fixed value. Especially applying it to a way below 40m punch crater, where no data exists, and the trend suggests the ratio would be even lower, means many calculations likely overestimate depth and therefore energy. I believe it shouldn't be used at all due to the different creating conditions (high velocity meteorite impacts), and especially ratios like 0.17 and above shouldn't be used for craters with diameters below 40 meters. Seeing it be used on like 1-5 meter craters and using those ratios to say it’s 0.17-0.85 meters deep when they genuinely don’t even look a cm or 2 deep often inflates the calculations (I can give some examples I’ve seen but don’t want to seem like I’m targeting people).

The opposing argument (feel like it should be brought up) TLDR: The crater visually resembles a simple bowl-shaped crater, and since lunar simple crater research documents d/D ratios in the 0.11–0.17 range, applying 0.17 is a reasonable approximation regardless of formation mechanism and diameter size. The speed difference between a meteor and a punch is a minor factor that doesn't significantly change the final energy values and geometric outcome of a simple crater. Since the ratio doesn't change dramatically even across large diameter ranges (a sample size of 930 (the Stopar one I sent above), a 3.77× size difference won't meaningfully shift it either.
Hello qawsedf.

This crt seems pretty important as it deals with wiki standards about 1-A character’s speed ratings. You’re knowledgable about 1-A so whenever you get the chance would you mind checking it out?
Mind checking this CRT when you have time?
about this match of yours, we actually have bruno vs jotaro in eyes of heaven, jotaro just blitzes him and buruno rans away actually a peak scene
I believe you were in the previous CRT. Maybe not? Can you help out here?

dii3t03-5f6c2256-f77f-4886-82cd-bdc3fbfe1266.png


Do you think I can use this for Adam's image, think its unofficial though
Eden_Warlock99
Eden_Warlock99
Ain't Vox's renders also unofficial? Think it's fine.
ShionAH
ShionAH
No like I am not sure if this is the official design
Eden_Warlock99
Eden_Warlock99
Doesn't seem like it added anything new to his show's design, at least from what I'm seeing.
Please;

Hi, can you please give your vote here, your help will be appreciated.

SomebodyData
SomebodyData
What am I needed for? Sorry, not sure I understood the issue.
Could you leave some input on this thread?
Please;

SomebodyData
SomebodyData
Sorry, didn't comment in time haha
XxZetsuxX
XxZetsuxX
No problem friend xd, then, do you think you could do it here by chance?

XxZetsuxX
XxZetsuxX
bump
Just gonna give you a heads up, Azerty doesn't care about arguments that go against his views, and will just repeat the same arguments. He will also comment on staff threads without permissions. (So it's better to just ignore him if he starts spamming)

Also, regarding the AI, he aprantly dosen't know English, so he usage a AI to translate things... (from what I understand from his defence in the reports against him)
When possible please;

Mind check this? Might be a case of sneaking adding unapproved abilities.
Greetings Planck. If you got nothing better to do could you take a peek here?
Greetings, if you’re not too busy. Mind taking a peek at this thread (yeah I know more Honkai)
SomebodyData
SomebodyData
Sorry, looks like I didn't respond in time
Yo, could you take a look at this thread?
Elizio

Pls take a look at this thread on DC upgrade for new 52 continuity to get high 3A rating🙏

Care to check this threath please?
Care to check this threath please?
Care to check this threath please?
Do you mind taking a look at this thread?
Hello. I once saw a CGM mention that if the depth of a crater cannot be determined directly from the image, it can instead be estimated as 1/4 of the crater’s diameter.

Do you happen to have a source or reference for this 1/4 value? I am quite interested in obtaining the original reference for it.

The reason I am not asking Drite directly is because he is currently not in a very good situation, so I do not really want to bother him too m
uch.
TheRustyOne
TheRustyOne
I have no idea.

I've never done that because I don't know the source, either.
Hello. I once saw a CGM mention that if the depth of a crater cannot be determined directly from the image, it can instead be estimated as 1/4 of the crater’s diameter.

Do you happen to have a source or reference for this 1/4 value? I am quite interested in obtaining the original reference for it.

The reason I am not asking Drite directly is because he is currently not in a very good situation, so I do not really want to bother him too m
uch.
Mr. Bambu
Mr. Bambu
I have no idea where that might have originally come from. I have seen the idea floated, and accepted, but never sourced. Sorry.
Pxnd_013
Pxnd_013
No problem, thanks for the answer 🙏
Hello. I once saw a CGM mention that if the depth of a crater cannot be determined directly from the image, it can instead be estimated as 1/4 of the crater’s diameter.

Do you happen to have a source or reference for this 1/4 value? I am quite interested in obtaining the original reference for it.

The reason I am not asking Drite directly is because he is currently not in a very good situation, so I do not really want to bother him too m
uch.
Back
Top