Michael. Enough already.

Fleets is making very good points, but I kind of agree with Michael. Even if the chances are increased by .5% it is still an increase.

---

Credit for the avatar and sig go to Nic. THANK YOU!

START LIVING BEFORE YOU START DYING

Fleets is making very good points, but I kind of agree with Michael. Even if the chances are increased by .5% it is still an increase.

I don't know, it's basically like saying, "If you flip a coin 10 times as opposed to flipping it 5 times, you have a higher chance of flipping more heads!" Well, duh. However, the chances are the same as playing two individual matches.

The more you do something, the more likely you are to get a specific outcome. This is obvious. A Beyblade part could break during its first battle, or it could never break at all. This is reliant on so many factors, one of the least of which is how many Beyblades it's fighting at a time.

To be honest, a part breaking has absolutely nothing to do with how many battles it's had. If you stand in the middle of the street often, you have a higher chance of being hit by a car at some point in your life the more you do it. However, the amount of times you do this doesn't affect the likelihood of you being hit EACH TIME you do it.

Well despite how often parts break, I do agree it would increase the chance of breaking since there's more hits involved.

With that 3 way vs 1 v 1 thing, wouldn't the amount of force taken from like 2 Beys at the same time be higher than taking one hit from one Bey?

G, the only way that it would increase the force is if they both hit the other Beyblade at the exact same time at two points that were so directly correlated that they would increase the likelihood of a breakage. However, these freak accidents are about as likely as a freak accident in a 1-1 battle, and are therefore negligible. Do we really have to discuss negligible differences?

Well despite how often parts break, I do agree it would increase the chance of breaking since there's more hits involved.

With that 3 way vs 1 v 1 thing, wouldn't the amount of force taken from like 2 Beys at the same time be higher than taking one hit from one Bey?

yes i covered that but the chances of it occurring at the exact same time is very improbable. most of the time one blade hits it in the direction of another and then they hit.

and if you have 3 blades fighting 1 blade will hit a certain amount of times. the only way to compare this to a single battle would be if you played an equal number of matches against BOTH blades. in that case the potential for number of collisions is the same

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

That's all I asked! It just sounded like people are saying this never happens, which is does at a low %. But yes, it's really unneeded to consider it happening.

I think the point Michael is trying to make is that a beyblade would be likely to break QUICKER if you're using it in three way battles. Obviously, this is true - the more battering it takes, the quicker it will break.

More beyblades = More collision
More collision = More damages

We didn't really need a full-blown logic and physics discussion, LOL.

I think the point Michael is trying to make is that a beyblade would be likely to break QUICKER if you're using it in three way battles. Obviously, this is true - the more battering it takes, the quicker it will break.

More beyblades = More collision
More collision = More damages

We didn't really need a full-blown logic and physics discussion, LOL.

No, this is not necessarily true at all. The amount of times it gets hit has nothing to do with how likely it is to break. A part being hit repeatedly has very little to do with it breaking. It is a single freak hit that causes it to break.

More damage sure, but not necessarily breaking (there's still that chance though). It'd mostly come off as wear.

the only time the blade would experience "damage" would be if the force applied is over the amount of stress the part can take. but there are measure to prevent this. you know how on the bottom of the AR there are sometimes holes? this is so that when it gets hit it allows for some compression of the plastic to absorb the impact and reduce the force on it

---

Engineers: If it wasn't for us there'd be no mechs for emo pilots to fly

I always wondered what those were for.

I'm locking this topic now considering this seems to be all that anyone talks about. In summary:

Michael is wrong, Fleets is right, just because it "makes sense" to you doesn't mean you get to completely ignore scientific evidence.