- 17,055
- 22,948
Intro
So, I made a recalc of Shiki's Zanpa using the water scaling to Shiki's size here, as opposed to the size of his islands calculated from the Mammoth walking statement. This thread is to discuss, the validity of the calcs, or anything else that pertains to more accurately calculating this feat. I'll explain my issues with the original calc below.
Issues
The original calc predicates itself on the island size, which is obtained from this girl saying it'd take half a day to cross the tundra on mammoth back. It assumes a couple of things: 1) the Mammoth walks in a straight line and 2) the Mammoth walks nonstop all 12 hours.
The mammoth is crossing a tundra/wintery zone, there's no reason to assume it'd be traversing in a straight line. Assuming such does nothing but inflate the size. Realistically the mammoth would be traversing some well traveled path that twists and turns as is the case with many natural paths. Even paved roads, designed to transport people from point A to B aren't perfectly straight lines, they wind, twist, and turn. As such, I believe that invalidates the tundra width alone, but there's more.
Many animals cannot/do not travel for such long periods (like 12 hours) non-stop usually. Even horses, known for being able to work themselves to death, on average can only walk for 8 hours before they have to rest for the night. So, a creature like a mammoth that has to lug around a lot more mass would have an even harder time than the horse. Likely the mammoth would be taking rest breaks, drink breaks, etc. It also seems uncharacteristically cruel for the strawhats to force an animal that's helping them to walk 12 hours without allowing it to rest at all. Given that is far more probable that the mammoth would be resting intermittently, I believe this invalidates the usage of the full timeframe.
For those two primary reasons, I believe Shiki's island size is far over-estimated and vastly inflates the value of Shiki's Zanpa. Which I believe is inherent when you compare the size of the water to Shiki vs to the highballed island size. When compared to Shiki's size the feat becomes like a trillion times weaker. I'm not going to argue my recalc is exactly objective, but I do believe it goes to show that the highballed size of the island is vastly inconsistent with the Zanpa feat itself.
Conclusion
The original Zanpa calc should be removed based on the island size it predicates itself on being vastly over-estimated. Whether or not it's replaced/my recalc is optimal is more secondary concern, and I'm open to seeing other methods for the feat. But again, I disagree with the current mammoth distance calc method. I'll list the different ends we concluded with here to be voted upon. Liger made an end as well.
Shiki's base method (6-C):
Character size method (8-A):
Shiki's ship method (7-B): Damage
30% method (High 6-C+):
Mountain method (Low 7-B):
None:
Original method (High 6-B):
So, I made a recalc of Shiki's Zanpa using the water scaling to Shiki's size here, as opposed to the size of his islands calculated from the Mammoth walking statement. This thread is to discuss, the validity of the calcs, or anything else that pertains to more accurately calculating this feat. I'll explain my issues with the original calc below.
Issues
The original calc predicates itself on the island size, which is obtained from this girl saying it'd take half a day to cross the tundra on mammoth back. It assumes a couple of things: 1) the Mammoth walks in a straight line and 2) the Mammoth walks nonstop all 12 hours.
The mammoth is crossing a tundra/wintery zone, there's no reason to assume it'd be traversing in a straight line. Assuming such does nothing but inflate the size. Realistically the mammoth would be traversing some well traveled path that twists and turns as is the case with many natural paths. Even paved roads, designed to transport people from point A to B aren't perfectly straight lines, they wind, twist, and turn. As such, I believe that invalidates the tundra width alone, but there's more.
For those two primary reasons, I believe Shiki's island size is far over-estimated and vastly inflates the value of Shiki's Zanpa. Which I believe is inherent when you compare the size of the water to Shiki vs to the highballed island size. When compared to Shiki's size the feat becomes like a trillion times weaker. I'm not going to argue my recalc is exactly objective, but I do believe it goes to show that the highballed size of the island is vastly inconsistent with the Zanpa feat itself.
Conclusion
The original Zanpa calc should be removed based on the island size it predicates itself on being vastly over-estimated. Whether or not it's replaced/my recalc is optimal is more secondary concern, and I'm open to seeing other methods for the feat. But again, I disagree with the current mammoth distance calc method. I'll list the different ends we concluded with here to be voted upon. Liger made an end as well.
Shiki's base method (6-C):
Character size method (8-A):
Shiki's ship method (7-B): Damage
30% method (High 6-C+):
Mountain method (Low 7-B):
None:
Original method (High 6-B):
Last edited: