View Single Post
Old 2010-09-09, 08:30   Link #993
prescience
Friendly Satanist
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by arkhangelsk View Post
That will be true on the speed axis. Unfortunately, it is not, and my original statement primarily centered on their velocity performance.
Wait, what?

Quote:
Actually, the side that wants to assert that mages can block the attacks really has the burden of proof in establishing the shield's defensive capacity and its magnitude. But as a bonus: considering the way that Vita's relatively low speed hammer can apparently penetrate, that Nanoha and Fate were wincing at those (not awfully powerful) small-caliber missiles slamming into their shield, that it takes 4 people shielding just to survive a makeshift exploding Gadget drone ... the indications would, IMO, indicate that while mages shielding would be infinitely better at resisting kinetic attacks, they are far from invulnerable.
No one is claiming that mages are invulnerable to kinetic attacks (or at least, I'm not). But the fact of the matter is that they are shown to be able to defend against these attacks is sufficient to establish the defensive value of magical shields. And the point about "Vita's relatively low speed hammer" is entirely irrelevant, since Graf Eisen is powered by magic, so we can't speculate about the principles behind it's operation unless we have canon information about them.

Quote:
Besides, considering that mages basically either move & attack (and often only move OR attack) or defend, to overemphasize the whole shield part would be improper in the tactical decision, even if one optimistically assumes they are perfectly safe if only they turn the shield on. Eventually, the mage would want to actually ATTACK rather than get into a stalemate contest and he'll be holed...
And eventually the mass-based-weapon user will run out of ammo. In any case, you are presupposing a 1-on-1 situation; if there are multiple mages, some can defend the group which the others attack.

In any case, this point is entirely tangential; the fact of the matter is that magical defenses can protect mages against mass-based weapons (at least to some substantial extent). The tactical implications are a different topic altogether.

Quote:
It was point blank, to be fair to the barrier jacket.
That's not what it looks like to me, watching it frame-by-frame. Earlier in the thread you actually tried to use this as further evidence of how OMG ridiculously weak barrier jackets are.

Quote:
Trying to disprove b is a exercise in proving the negative, and thus scientifically unsubstantiable.
It's not a matter of disproving one or the other. It's a matter of deciding which explanation is more plausible. And you've failed to address my point that explanation (a) is grossly implausible.

Quote:
You are ignoring the true fundamental assymetry, which is that you (collective) have a tendency to find excuses (which you are even doing now) to explain away the poor performers, while finding excuses to accept the high performers as gold. Even a moron can easily tell that such systematic biases is no formula for an accurate solution to any problem.
Systematic biases? You mean like your refusal to accept magic as an explanation of anything that doesn't glow like a neon advertising board?

Quote:
For the specific example, the fact that a realistic baseball would likely not have survived the launch and cruise stresses of a Mach 3 flight would be a nice scientific countercue. But we all know that it'll be washed away with shouts of "It's MAGIC!" (read: brain stopped functioning).
Nice ad hominem there. Depending on who was throwing it, it could well have been magic. Perhaps you've forgotten what the title of the series is?
I see you conveniently contradict yourself a little bit further on, as well...

Quote:
Interesting. OK, suppose the ball was launched in a way that you do not think it could be travelling at Mach 3 (say it was hand-thrown). Yet the available observational evidence says with high confidence its speed is such. Yet according to you it could not have been visually speeded up (so the ball cannot be slower). Now what.
Like I said, the assertion that screen time = real time must be justified, and is therefore contingent on the surrounding circumstances. I did not say that time is never speeded up; I just said that in the absence of supporting evidence I consider it an implausible explanation.

Quote:
Or, to match our current situation a little better, suppose you cannot seriously estimate the plausibility based on its launch method (this would apply to basically all our Nanoverse launches, since the launch mechanism is magical or unknown - we have no mechanism, no real basis for saying the observed speed is even dubious; our personal wishes don't count).
Except that when we are talking about mass-based weapons, the launch mechanism is known. Unless you want to speculate that what they call "mass-based weapons" are actually some other, special, unexplained form of magic...

Quote:
As for the whole screen time = real time is one of the most basic assertions in anime, just as learning to draw in perspective is one of the most fundamental skills. If one needs extra confirmation, it requires only the first line of dialog. After that, shifts are the exception and require special signals because the audience assumes that it is in real time. This is all the more true in a audio-only medium, because there is no possibility of using the many visual techniques used to signify the application of time compression / dilation.
I'm sorry, but I don't buy this. With projectile weapons, there is always room for artistic license, especially considering the high speeds that they usually travel at.
prescience is offline