- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #81
You can implement this unless Damage has more to say. I've notified him in advance a while ago so idk where everyone stands on this currently.
-
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.
Boros's Ship Rating Justification
- Thread starter Golden_Void
- Start date
- 29,817
- 24,912
This is fine.
- 13,900
- 5,395
Me when I get ignored
- 13,900
- 5,395
There still has been no counter to the fact that the ground directly under saitama’s feet did not break
there has never been a more ridiculously obvious case of downscaling
there has never been a more ridiculously obvious case of downscaling
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #85
Also, I realized that doing this would downgrade / remove reasoning from everyone using the ship as their prime justification for high 6-A.
I am of the mindset that there is no way you can tell me that Saitama busting holes through the ship for four minutes is a High 6-A feat because his moon jump didn't. That just makes it an anti-feat, and a very bad and blatant one at that. Even Saitama redirecting the ship's bullets back at it blew a hole in the ship, so I don't know why we would take an obvious outlier and use it like it is valid.
It isn't even about the durability of the ship anymore because the durability was out the window long before the jump came around, literally every other panel.
- 8,997
- 9,713
- 13,900
- 5,395
Because saitama is a 4-A character genius, he can go from 10-C to 4-A attacks whenever he wants to and it literally doesn’t mean anything
your entire counterargument is based on the absolutely nonsensical premise of “well saitama has shown to break through it before so there’s no way it can scale to saitama’s high 6-A calculated feat” when we know that saitama can already destroy it when he pleases. The moon jump isn’t even supposed to be an attack in the first place, it’s literally just him jumping back to earth, so there’s your logic for why it would be weaker than his punches from before anyways.
- 19,633
- 15,981
Being broken by Saitama isn't an anti-feat. Especially when we know that his true strength is in the Tier 4 range.
In my view just make the ship "At most High 6-A" durability wise. It fits better imo.
- 13,900
- 5,395
Hard agree
If something endures an attack but takes a notable/medium level of damage, it downscales, this has always been the case and it is gonna have to apply here too. Otherwise we might as well remove downscaling from the wiki since having any visible damage from an attack automatically disqualifies you from even being in the same tier.
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #90
His tier 4 feats have no bearing at all on his Boros feats. Most of his serious punches were high 6-A, at most moon level before that.
And not being broken by Saitama is an anti-feat. He was casually blasting holes in the ship before he got on the ship; a calculated effort being less than that is an outlier. That is literally the definition of an outlier when every feat prior broke the ship and a concentrated effort did not. It isn't about whether it was a jump or a punch, its an outlier for the durability of the ship.
- 13,900
- 5,395
…it not being broken is an anti feat? What are you even talking about anymore. Do you know what an anti feat means?
- 13,900
- 5,395
I think you meant to say that the ship being broken by saitama is an anti feat….and I can only hope that you can grasp how saitama breaking something isn’t an anti feat for it.
- 13,900
- 5,395
I mean I’m all for saying that saitama’s punches against opponents he doesn’t intend to let live are consistently high 6-A+ or whatever, but he didn’t even throw a punch to begin with, he literally just JUMPED
he wasn’t aiming to destroy the moon, he was just jumping, that’s not a ******* attack. Of course his punches are stronger than his jump.
he wasn’t aiming to destroy the moon, he was just jumping, that’s not a ******* attack. Of course his punches are stronger than his jump.
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #94
Obviously, you don't since I keep repeating myself. The fact that the ship is casually broken for 4 minutes while a force spanning 2000 kilometers only heavily warps it (sends violently fragmented pieces of the ship flying everywhere though) is a textbook outlier that is being purported as a valid feat to scale under said casual feats. Like, if the force of the jump scales under 99% of the fight, then the jump shouldn't have been the only move knocking the ship around. But that observation will be handwaved.
On top of which, as I said earlier, the feat implies the ship can take over 300,000 times its mass in force in a single point and only tip down and not break at the impact site, but it was breaking/cracking under its own weight as it was falling to the ground.
Well considering his jump is scaled below his casual punches, you just argued against yourself here.
Saying his punches are stronger than his jumps is based nowhere on stated fact, just your opinion. His kick deflecting the ship's bullet made more damage at one time than any of his punches did besides serious punch. He even casually kicked his way out of the ship.
- 13,900
- 5,395
It’s not an outlier, because saitama can willingly go from 10-C to 4-A whenever he feels like
I’m seriously concerned that literally everything you just sent relies on the idea that saitama’s jump must be weaker than his punches, which has no basis whatsoever despite how much you’ve been talking
this barely even warrants a response
I’m seriously concerned that literally everything you just sent relies on the idea that saitama’s jump must be weaker than his punches, which has no basis whatsoever despite how much you’ve been talking
this barely even warrants a response
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #96
That's literally the justification for the current scaling on Boros's profile, please keep up.
Also like I've been saying, material durability isn't treated the same as beings are.
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #97
If we are truly treating every part of the ship as High 6-A then Geryuganshoop turning fragments of the throne room door into powder when he threw them at Saitama only makes the effect of the jump even more of an outlier since it's a 6-C feat, considering what little effort the ship has broken under. The fact that you stated Saitama can be tier 10 or tier 4 gives this argument strength since you admit he isn't constantly outputting damage at a set tier.
Last edited:
- 13,900
- 5,395
Geryuganshoop breaking it isn’t an anti feat, it’s called scaling
and he would only downscale, since he broke small chunks and the ship downscales from the moon jump to begin with
and he would only downscale, since he broke small chunks and the ship downscales from the moon jump to begin with
- 13,900
- 5,395
Also the feat being 6-C is an estimation based on the “near light speed” kinetic energy statement, it could potentially be exponentially more powerful than that since there’s an infinite AP gap between 75% lightspeed and 100% lightspeed
you seriously don’t know much about scaling, do you?
you seriously don’t know much about scaling, do you?
- 7,897
- 3,856
I was asked to comment here. In short, I've always hated treating Boros' ship durability as if its durability is likened to how we apply it to a character/creature and not a structure/building. I never agreed with the idea that every quarter inch of the ship has 6-A or whatever tier the durability is placed at now. That's all I have to say on the matter as I don't care to talk about OPM manga anymore.
- 13,900
- 5,395
The entire ship is made out of the same purple alien metal, even the insides of it.
The material it’s made of is relative to itself, it’s very different from like an irl airplane where it uses a bunch of different materials.
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #102
But it's based on the result we accepted, not what you think it should be, so these are meaningless words.
Isn't an anti-feat...considering the difference between 6-C and High 6-A is over 40000 times. Your bias is clear when you can only accept that feats can be weaker than the highest value, but not the lower value. The ship was broken far below the moon jump, I'm not going to spend further time arguing in circles with you when all of this was already mentioned several times.
- 13,900
- 5,395
Can someone explain to this guy that feats calculated on a vague statement with an actual infinite margin of error leave room for scaling them to high 6-A if they perform a high 6-A feat?
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #104
The feat was accepted based on the numbers that were agreed upon. Cope.
Also, Geryuganshoop downscaling from High 6-A makes no sense, considering both himself and Groribas (stated to be the strongest commander) were one-shot like side characters, and were comparable to Metzalgald who was getting abused by the other S-Class heroes and was damaged by A-Class heroes and only stayed in the fight due to his regeneration.
- 29,817
- 24,912
Given how the size of the impact crater that Saitama creates when he lands on the ship changes every panel, I don't think the argument that "Saitama's High 6-A jump didn't damage the ship" is a solid case for arguing its durability.
And when it comes to Psykos possibly scaling to the ship because "Tatsumaki used more effort on Psykos than she did when destroying the ship", I think that should be removed. Saitama's "High 6-A jump" completely tilted the ship and almost brought it crashing to the ground which is something that Tatsumaki didn't accomplish after a barrage of hundreds of attacks, so Psykos has no basis for scaling to "Possibly High 6-A".
And when it comes to Psykos possibly scaling to the ship because "Tatsumaki used more effort on Psykos than she did when destroying the ship", I think that should be removed. Saitama's "High 6-A jump" completely tilted the ship and almost brought it crashing to the ground which is something that Tatsumaki didn't accomplish after a barrage of hundreds of attacks, so Psykos has no basis for scaling to "Possibly High 6-A".
- 13,900
- 5,395
Jesus Christ, I’ve never seen such an absolutey gross lack of understanding of how powerscaling works on this website ever before
When a guy performs a 6-C feat and then does a high 6-A feat, we scale him to high 6-A. If that wasn’t a rule then we’d downgrade saitama to like 9-C because the shockwaves of his serious punches while fighting Garou weren’t enough to destroy the solar system every time he punched him. If we downgraded someone every time they performed a feat lower than their highest feat, then we literally wouldn’t have any characters past tier 9
this is ridiculous
- 29,817
- 24,912
That's not quite the definition of an Outlier.
If a cast of characters is consistently depicted as 6-C (through numerous feats & statements) then one character inexplicably does a High 6-A feat, then we'd need a very good reason to disregard the established powerscaling and use the High 6-A feat instead.
Defaulting to the highest possible value is not exactly demonstrating consistency.
- 13,900
- 5,395
Melz is literally stated to be vastly weaker when he isn’t merged, and every time he hits someone while merged they get instantly killed
And his durability doesn’t even scale to his AP to begin with, have you even read his profile? Jesus man.
- 13,900
- 5,395
The 6-C feat is via a statement with an infinite margin of error, there is no “consistently shown as 6-C” there
And you already know this, so why even bring it up?
- 29,817
- 24,912
I was just correcting information that I saw in your post.
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #111
Honestly, I didn't want to say this because I know the feedback I would get but....
Tatsumaki getting backward-scaled to this specific feat makes no sense to me. The context of her fight with Psykos shows she put actual effort (sweat, blood,etc) into that fight than she did simply returning shells back to the ship. That being said, there's no evidence that Tatsumaki was hitting the ship with more energy than the bullets themselves had. As Ziller said, there's nothing stating they're hitting with a certain amount of force at all times, and per the OPM timeline, the feat didn't happen yet.
This makes no sense. Geryuganshoop's feat took the strength of the material into account - only being unquantifiably stronger than steel. The feat doesn't become High 6-A because you determined that Saitama's jump is the benchmark for durability when I've proven to you 10,000 times, and will have to prove to you 10,000 times more, that the durability of the ship is far below the result of the jump, which is an anti-feat/outlier for the ship's durability.
Also, your Tier 4 Saitama comment is a false equivalence because it was explicitly shown that their power was increasing exponentially, without increasing their destructive capacity.
Melzalgard literally got minced by Class A Iaian while he was merged. He was also hit and wasn't instantly killed, though he lost an arm. And Melzalgard's durability isn't the point, the point is all the commanders are relative to each other and would easily be abused by middle to low-tier Class S heroes (read: Not High 6-A). Also, Melzalgard is at least durable enough to take the impact of his own force. Unknown does not mean he has no durability at all.
Make a CRT if you think the result should be infinitely higher otherwise....doesn't matter what the margin of error is.
- 13,900
- 5,395
You literally haven’t proven anything.
Your argument is that a 4-A character being able to destroy a high 6-A thing proves that his casual jump specifically calculated at high 6-A didn’t break it, while casual punches that could have ranged from high 6-A to 4-A had broken it earlier
The absolute lack of logic here is testing my patience.
Almost as if a character performing a single lesser feat isn’t an automatic disqualifier for scaling them to their higher feat
Unknown means his durability is not quantifiable
if you want to scale him to the strength of his own attacks make a crt, but maybe if you read the profile you’d see that we are very specifically not scaling him to the force of his own attacks.
You have no idea what margin of error means.
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #113
Idk why tier 4 anything is even being mentioned when we are discussing a feat that didn't even happen yet. The same serious punch Saitama used against Boros was used against Garou - characters get stronger. The serious punch used here by your logic should be half of the 4-A feat, which it obviously isn't.
Almost as if several consistent feats below the tier you're suggesting exist.
Not interested. However, I see the cherry-picking in the verse is real when that logic doesn't apply to Melzalgard, but it applies to the ship.
This comment truly displays your complete grasp of the concept, I'm sorry I have offended you.
Tbh this thread was needlessly extended because you insult me every other post, have tons of circular arguments and backpedaling, and maintain your bias with ad nauseam arguments. I would like this thread to go somewhere.
- 13,900
- 5,395
I am baffled by the fact that you posted this at all but here we go
Saitama was directly stated to have been casual during the entire fight against Boros, while he was very explicitly using his full power when he punched Garou. The two serious punches were completely different, Damage could also explain this to you.
Geryuganshoop literally did one thing and died immediately, these “several feats” are objectively a figment of your imagination.
Okay so Melz dura doesn’t scale to his AP, cool.
You’re not offending me, you’re just wasting my time with this.This comment truly displays your complete grasp of the concept, I'm sorry I have offended you.
Yes, I too would like this thread to go somewhere else, because this is clearly not the place for half baked crts.
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #115
Took the bait. If they're different then why are you comparing them? The fact that you know that Saitama maxed out here at High 6-A shows you know how irrelevant bringing up tier 4 feats are.
Nobody said Geryuganshoop exclusively, re-read the thread. He also threw rocks on two occasions.
I said his durability wasn't the point, re-read the thread.
I need staff evaluation, not yours. I could care less how you use your time.
Nobody asked you to come, nobody asked you to stay.
- 13,900
- 5,395
“Maxed out at”
after I told you he was casual
,
????
By two occasions, you mean he did the same thing, two times, two seconds apart, which is still a high 6-A feat the first and second time he did it. Okay.
Your basis is literally that characters were able to damage merged Melza, which is irrelevant because his durability has no quanitifiability.
You clearly care more about responding to me as fast as possible than coming up with a logical argument.
This is the beauty of a crt being open to the public, nobody needs your permission to come explain to you why a character doing high 6-A feats twice in a row isn’t an outlier of the 0 other feats they performed.
- 13,900
- 5,395
I think he’s saying that enduring the moon jump is an outlier because saitama was shown to be able to break it before, so the moon jump not breaking it is an outlier
- 6,894
- 1,979
- Thread starter
- #119
The point is the jump is an anti-feat for the ship's durability. The first issue is using the jump as a benchmark for the durability of the ship <- take this away and everything falls apart contextually.
- 9,385
- 8,180
Saitama was just using casual High 6-A attacks on the ship, I don't see the issue.
