• 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.

Expanding the References for Common Feats page

I personally do not mind, but would appreciate further input in this regard first.
 
Can somebody list links to all of the accepted and seemingly useful calculations that have been suggested to be added quite recently here, please? So I can then ask DontTalkDT to evaluate if they seem good to add.
 
This seems interesting. How thick of a rope are we talking here?
Seems you're to calculate that yourself from this portion of it as seen below:


(900 lbs. X circumference 2 = breaking strength)

As an example, if you had a piece of ½” manila line and wanted to find the breaking strength, you would first calculate the circumference. (.5 X 3.14 = 1.57) Then using the formula above:

1.57 2 X 900 = 2,218 pounds of breaking strength
 
Seems you're to calculate that yourself from this portion of it as seen below:


(900 lbs. X circumference 2 = breaking strength)

As an example, if you had a piece of ½” manila line and wanted to find the breaking strength, you would first calculate the circumference. (.5 X 3.14 = 1.57) Then using the formula above:

1.57 2 X 900 = 2,218 pounds of breaking strength
What would the units for circumference be here?
 
Can somebody list links to all of the accepted and seemingly useful calculations that have been suggested to be added quite recently here, please? So I can then ask DontTalkDT to evaluate if they seem good to add.
I would still greatly appreciate if somebody here is willing to help out with this.
 
One common occurrence is getting a toaster bath. A field test by the Mythbusters puts a toaster bath at 12 milliamps (0.012 Coulombs per second):


Based on what I could tell, a volt is a joule per coulomb: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampere

Which is basically this: kg*m²*s^-3*A^-1

kg=kilograms
m=meters
s=seconds
A=amperes

Based on 1.8 m² for the surface area of an average man and 62 kg for the average human, I got 9300 volts out of it. At the same time, at 12 milliamps, I got 111.6 watts, or 111.6 joules per second. It's a pretty barebones Athlete level deal through AP alone.
 
One common occurrence is getting a toaster bath. A field test by the Mythbusters puts a toaster bath at 12 milliamps (0.012 Coulombs per second):


Based on what I could tell, a volt is a joule per coulomb: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampere

Which is basically this: kg*m²*s^-3*A^-1

kg=kilograms
m=meters
s=seconds
A=amperes

Based on 1.8 m² for the surface area of an average man and 62 kg for the average human, I got 9300 volts out of it. At the same time, at 12 milliamps, I got 111.6 watts, or 111.6 joules per second. It's a pretty barebones Athlete level deal through AP alone.

LMAO what the ****
 
More like, why would anyone consider something this ******-up eligible for common feats? Just... too dark.
Considering we have skull crushing and crushing a person whole as a common feat and we have flipping Berserk on this wiki... Lmao.
 
Considering we have skull crushing and crushing a person whole as a common feat and we have flipping Berserk on this wiki... Lmao.
Yes... well... game-ending yourself is considered a tad bit darker than the above on Fandom. IDK why but I'd still suggest caution.
 
Yes... well... game-ending yourself is considered a tad bit darker than the above on Fandom. IDK why but I'd still suggest caution.
Okay but when did Chucky use a toaster (yes, he used one in the movies) to do that to himself?
 
Can somebody list links to all of the accepted and seemingly useful calculations that have been suggested to be added quite recently here, please? So I can then ask DontTalkDT to evaluate if they seem good to add.
I would still greatly appreciate if somebody here is willing to help out with this.
Anyone? We need to do this in order to get some productive work done here.
 
Can somebody list links to all of the accepted and seemingly useful calculations that have been suggested to be added quite recently here, please? So I can then ask DontTalkDT to evaluate if they seem good to add.
I would still greatly appreciate if somebody here is willing to help out with this.
@DontTalkDT @Executor_N0 @Spinosaurus75DinosaurFan @Mr._Bambu @Therefir @DMUA @Damage3245 @DemonGodMitchAubin @Jasonsith @Wokistan @Armorchompy @Migue79 @Psychomaster35 @CloverDragon03 @KLOL506 @M3X_2.0 @Dark-Carioca @AbaddonTheDisappointment @Aguywhodoesthings @Dalesean027 @DemiiPowa @Flashlight237

Your help would be very appreciated in this thread.
 
Okay. That is unfortunate, as this thread is very important.
 
What was the last feat added?
 

This is the appearance the page will take once sections have been transformed into collapsible content. My goal was to make individual feats collapsible to avoid excessive page length.

However, I have a concern about the level 2 heading section named "Attacking a Person such that The Person Flew across a Distance before falling onto the Ground." It looks really weird as a collapsible content. Perhaps it would fit better as a level 3 heading and, if that's the case, under which level 2 heading should it be categorized under, perhaps "Miscellaneous Feats"?
Thank you extremely much for the help. 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

However, wouldn't it be much better if all of the sections are automatically collapsed until somebody clicks on them?

That seems like a very badly worded and overly long title. Does anybody here have better suggestions to replace it with please?
I am suggesting, this: “Throwing someone to the ground”.
The old title is extremely long and specific, this can be added in the description.
But here are my alternatives:
  • Knocking a person back a distance before they fall to the ground.
  • Hurling a person through the air before they hit the ground.
  • Propelling a person across a distance before they land on the ground.
  • Launching a person into the air before they crash to the ground.
  • Throwing a person some distance before they drop to the ground.
  • Catapulting a person before they plummet to the ground.
Also, I know this one's old but this particular feat ought to be classified under a specific category of feats. For instance, if a feat of "Destroying/Creating a forest" is grouped under the category of "Forest Feats," then the "Hurling somebody... .." feat should also be assigned to a relevant feat category instead of being a standalone feat. Or is it just me? [Refer to the text with the red underline].

a9753bae2589563e18334870f12833da.png
 
I also have an additional inquiry, were newly added feats been incorporated into the actual page? If so, there may be numerous revisions that need to be made to the draft as well.
 
Also, I know this one's old but this particular feat ought to be classified under a specific category of feats. For instance, if a feat of "Destroying/Creating a forest" is grouped under the category of "Forest Feats," then the "Hurling somebody... .." feat should also be assigned to a relevant feat category instead of being a standalone feat. Or is it just me? [Refer to the text with the red underline].

a9753bae2589563e18334870f12833da.png
So it's been a bit.

Honestly, if DontTalk can't keep up with this, it may be pertinent to vet this thread a bit more before sending it to him? I'd be willing to wager that while everything that gets submitted is general, it might not be common, and thus not entirely necessary to put onto the page. Food for thought.

Regardless, I'll get to work on a list of calcs submitted to be looked over.
 
Back
Top