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.
Is there any evidence that Planet Vegeta is an unstable planet in such a manner that an imbalance in energy input (as per Frieza’s attack) would create a chain reaction blowing up the planet? Cuz if not I find the logic of the OP to be flimsy at best.
Planet’s do not simply enter some kind of...
Depends on what it’s reading. If it’s reading the highest single source of energy applied to it (which is what matters for like durability scaling) it’d read 100, if it summed up every individual attack then it would read 900. But we are not concerned with the sum of individual attacks hitting...
Being hit with 900 TT in one area =/= being hit with 100 TT in nine different areas. It’s the same principle for why tanking an explosion doesn’t guarantee you scale to the full yield, it’s all about the area over which the damage is distributed.
I think we only accept that as true if the attacks fuse together. I think we explicitly do not accept that multiple separate attacks occurring concurrently is a multiplier.
Yeah unfortunately higher durability on wiki doesn't enable you to resist heat hax. So this point means nothing here. They would still need something to make them resist the high temperatures, which is called heat resistance.
Bijuudama vaporizing in mountain to multi mountain sized areas does not mean they’d vaporize on a planetary scale. So I don’t see why we’d assume he’s vaporizing the entire surface.
If you’ve got a good argument for “compositing” (not really compositing but for a lack of better words) the Momoshiki arc adaptations. Cuz while there are minor differences between the adaptations, the majority remains the same.
Her strongest jutsu already scales above it.
Right so if the nursery is a planet. I don’t see how that can be used for support of the stellar metas. Rather that can be used in support of Momo having like 5-B overtime creation hax (more conservatively) to 5-B support (more liberally).
I’m like 99% sure that in context a nursery in Naruto is like a planet that an Otsutsuki owns that they “nurse” chakra from. Like iirc Kaguya’s nursery was Earth.
🤷♂️ you’d have to kinda scour everything we got to see if there’s something good.
What would the proof of Kaguya’s physicals being > Hagoromo’s TK be?
🗿
But more seriously, 1000+ means that 1000 years would be a highball. So that’s probably why we don’t arbitrarily assume 1000 years.
Naw if they did they’d scale physically to the SPCT, which characters like Hagoromo do not. Also, we’ve seen Otsutsuki with like amps and whatnot so there’s no real reason to assume every technique of theirs = their punches.
Well not entirely depends on how big and how long it took to construct. It could vary from solid support to a potential upgrade. Regardless, finding a way to scale it to his physicals now that Naruto is no longer a UES verse will be a challenge.
It’ll come in my Cour 3 scaling thread. I work a full time job now, so my time is allocated elsewhere.
But yeah I got a 5-C Unohana upgrade in the works.
That seems like a rather unsubstantiated claim to make. The only real reason to say that absorbing chakra steals all the GBE from a planet with a fruit is just to say they’re 5-B. You might be able to make an argument that a planet’s chakra energy and rotational KE are proportional given how...
Oh naw I wasn’t meaning to imply that a statement that isn’t backed is wrong, I may have worded that poorly, I’m saying more like “is it supported, is it contradicted” etc etc, statements can indeed stand fine on their own. And extra backing can just be logic checks rather than manga panel evidence.
If you find new arguments that you believe are backed by evidence, you can make a CRT. Discussion rules are meant to stop the repeated spamming of old news in this case.
Yeah obviously it’s context dependent. If the character statement is supported it’s likely literal and fine to take it as such. If not then it likely isn’t literal/is just wrong. Either way characters can be written to be fallible so there is never a catch all they’re always reliable. Gotta...