New profile posts

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 staff discussion.

My argument (TLDR) was against its usage due to: The d/D ratio 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 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.

Hi

Good day to you Damage. I see that you are part of the calculation group. I wanted to ask you which website or app you use to measure pixels for your calculations and also what you use to view a video frame by frame. Thank you

Is this fine ?
Rendered Img

Hello. Could you evalute my friend's calculation when you have the time please?






Thank you in advance!

Can you check this CRT please ?

Hey can you check out this CRT please. It has 1 vote and needs 2 more

Hey can you check out this CRT please. It has 1 vote and needs 2 more

Hello there, I'm sorry for acting passive-aggressive and snarky towards you on the Dragon Ball LS CRT. It wasn't helpful and I apologize.

Hey can you check out this CRT please. It has 1 vote and needs 2 more

Hellooo Damage,

Can you check these out when you get a chance?
And ping staff if you can?

Helloo



Can you check these out when you get a chance?

can you take a look at this? 2 thread mods agree so far and I think I need 1 more

Hi qaw, there's no problem with making a thread in the news section about Eid al-Adha (a Muslim event)?

could u give ur opinion here please

Hello, would you mind evaluating the linked calc if able? It’s needed for verse creation.

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:TheLav69/Tome4_Tile_Size

Hello, would you mind evaluating the linked calc if able? It’s needed for verse creation.

https://vsbattles.fandom.com/wiki/User_blog:TheLav69/Tome4_Tile_Size

Could you review this CRT? When you have time. It just needs approval.

Hi! Might you be able to evaluate this CGM Disc thread real fast so we can get the CRT rolling?

Could you please evaluate these.
They waited a bit too long in evaluation thread:

Could you evaluate this CRT?:

Could you evaluate this CRT?:

Could you evaluate this CRT?:

I want to ask, when the NNT downgrade happens, will this affect Lancelot's High 3-A/ Low 2-C rating or is that something you're not going to touch at all or something you'll do later?

I promise I sent this to like 5 other staffs . Can you check out this crt please. It's Welt jobbing

Hello vietthai. They’re only 1 page dont kill me would you mind giving your opinion tho emirp already voted on both

Can you check?

Você já leu a HQ Rei de Lata?

Mind checking this quick CRT when you have time? Only needs one more vote.

Hi! When you have time, come and check out this CRT pls
It's just a level update, nothing that requires deep knowledge of the verse

chibi mei

Greetings, if you’re free. Would you mind checking this CRT

Hello, this CRT is a Hi3 L1-C CRT (Only 1 page, dw) and requires an admin to evaluate. I would be extremely grateful if you could help out here.

https://vsbattles.com/threads/hi3-scaling-chain-rework.191597/

(sorry, the other post was a misclick)

Lemme ask you this:

Buzz can't resist Liz' latest key's passive.
Its activation depends on looking at her
It wouldn't be illegal to matchmake putting Buzz backwards, facing the other direction
He has infinite speed so his attack will hit

So incon?

Can you evaluate this calc please?

Would you like to vote here?

I would be grateful if you could help to evaluate this CRT

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 staff discussion due to its usage in many other manga/manhwa calculations.

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.

Hey Psycho, hope you've been doing good. Could you evaluate this calc whenever you get the chance? You accepted the old version, but there's a new accepted value for one of the figures used which changed the results slightly.

Hey can you check out this crt please