Final Blaxican
Restricted
Originally posted by ThunderGodEneru
1. I know that the weapon is a futuristic weapon that has two gatling guns on each wing.
You don't know what type of gun it actually is. You don't know what it's classification is. You don't know what materials it's made of. You don't know what type of bullets it uses. You don't know what the material of the bullets itself is. You don't know what the range of the gun is.
And considering the fact that the very thing is made of top line tech along with being heavily armor plated, you think it would have shit guns? And this is human Raiden.
I never said it has "shit guns". Still doesn't change the fact that you're employing gross speculation into your argument, ignoring all the variables in the process. This isn't a habit you've always had. Don't let the debating tactics of certain people rub off on you.
Copout, it would classify as a "big gun," which according to the source I provided, can shoot at about 1,500 mps.which is more than three times the speed of sound, the guns Ray was using are logically more advanced and larger guns, and they are automatic, Raiden can block them.
And your source is over a decade old and is fallacious in itself. It was written by students for gods sake. Hardly matters though. Your entire point is contradicted by your own weak decade old source.
"With modern propulsion techniques, the projectile's initial velocity may be as high as 4000 feet (1200 meters) per second for some rifles and 5000 feet (1500 meters) per second for some large guns."
Your own source states that this isn't an absolute. The size of a weapon doesn't determine it's speed. It's the materials and the classification that does. And no. "Gatling gun" is not a classification, it's just a type of machine gun clip.
So, prove up. You have a lot of variables to cover here. Get to quantifying.
2. And all of that equals him being able to take hits from a guy who while injured, missing one arm, although with a bit of leverage, stopped a giant ship that easily weighs multiples of 1,000 tons?
Yeah, it does, considering for all we know Raiden could have been using all the strength he possibly had to keep that thing in the air, including all the strength in his arms and his legs and his torso, which is something that you don't have the luxury of having when attacking with just your hands, first off. Second off, as noted already Wesker will be literally running in circles around him, meaning that if Raiden wants to tag him at all he needs to do quick calculated light strikes like jabs, not massive haymakers. He doesn't move fast enough to do a one-hit punch, which would involve throwing his entire body into the punch, and if he were to miss he'd be completely and utterly exposed and overextended.
His body was not crushed by Arsenal Gear. Wesker is not doing shit to him.
There's a difference between using every muscle in your body to keep something from falling on you, and taking a concentrated blow to only one part of your body, rendering all the resistance in every other part of your body useless. When you're lifting something heavy over your head the weight is distributed evenly throughout your body, from your two hands to your shoulders all the way down to your calves. It's completely different from a concentrated impact.
Now, if Raiden had been laying down on his back and all of the weight from the Gear was put on only his stomach, and he was fine, then you'd have a point.
3. Only Wesker's feats cannot be quantified. The calculations for how fast you have to be to disappear from sight have already been done.
No they haven't, because you did them wrong.
It is about 200 miles per hour for a human sized object.
You forgot something.
Wesker's fastest reflex feats were dodging sniper shots I believe, and gatling shots, which though impressive, does not make him faster than Raiden by any long shot.
This doesn't really make any sense. You're saying that Wesker dodging a Gatling gun is a lesser feat than Raiden dodging a Gatling gun?
Or are you going to bring out the "But MG's Gatling looks bigger so it shoots faster" argument again?
I did the calculations,
Your calculations are just as wrong as EA's were. Because you're not taking everything into account. I can tell you what they are, ebcause I'm pretty sure you haven't noticed them because yu're not mentally retarded like me and you don't obscess over certain small details like I do.
how's about you do some of your own?
Why?
It's common knowledge that in a debate you don't bring real world physics like numbers into a debate about fictional characters. It's doomed to fail and it makes your entire argument look silly, not good. I don't feel the need to attempt to make myself look smart by posting big numbers written in scientific ntoation. I'm not saying thats your intent, and I'm sorry if I sound like a dick, but, I'm just saying. It's pointless.