646406
Because the amount of energy required to create the ionization channel that lightning flows through (assuming I'm remembering my class correctly) is stupid-high. The same energy could be applied to, I don't know, launch boulders all over the place. And that effect is REQUIRED before you can even start putting energy through the channel to deal damage.

So, yeah... Regardless of his skill, energy is energy is energy, and that amount of power coming from his mana reserves should be exhausting in and of itself.

646412
Again, that's NATURAL lightning. This is magicial lighting. Not all lightning are going to be applied.

Also, sure, energy is energy. But the more you use magic at a certain, the more efficent you are going to become at it. Even if energy is energy, you'll be able to use less of your own energy for the same result.

646471
Okay, sure, you have magical pseudo-lightning. If the lightning isn't being transferred through an ionized channel like regular lightning, however, then it's not going to be moving, or behaving, like regular lightning at all. It could very well be moving at a measly one meter per second for all we know. If you aren't paying for the natural means of transmittance, then you can't assume ANY behavior inherent to lightning would apply to whatever magical pseudo-lightning you've cooked up.

And sure, you can be more efficient. But to cook a pie, you need to apply a certain amount of thermal energy to the pie-- you can brush off the waste, but the pie needs a set amount of energy and nothing you can do will change that. To established the ionized channel of air which lightning flows through, that core energy cost is IMMENSE-- you need to electrify an entire channel of air, after all. No amount of skill or efficiency will reduce that cost.

646471 All the enhanced efficiency would do is make you quicker.

646482
... Trixie didn't look tired like, at all after calling down a lightning bolt against the Ursa. And that was a full force lightning bolt - well, as powerful as she could make it - from the sky if I remember correctly. Trixie is NOT a storm mage, she's a showmare. Arcantos is a Storm Mage. He'll be able to make lightning bolts for minimal mana. 5% means he can make 20 such lightning bolts, which is a very small number. Considering that Gatling Twi was able to make multipule bolts that could one shot changeling without feelng tired.

646490
... Efficency means your doing things for less energy. Saying it doesn't let you do things using less energy goes against its very meaning.

646497 I prefer to interpret it as more power, not less energy; power, as you know, is change in energy divided by time.

646502
Yes well. That's wrong. Effiency is performing the task with minal waste of energy. That's is exact definition.

646506 Efficiency is the ratio of work input to work output, OR the ratio of power input to power output.
EDIT: I got that backwards.

646497
And you're not using a stormcloud. Beyond that, Trixie's little shock was nowhere near a full lightning bolt-- it was hardly even a shock.

And no, being a storm mage doesn't make your lightning bolts cheaper, I'm sorry. I mean, it would reduce the waste, so I guess they'd become somewhat cheaper, but you're not applying 10000 joules for 100 joules of mana. He might be more skilled at controlling it, and be able to call them down more quickly, and not waste as much energy using them, but like I said, energy is energy is energy, and there's no way in hell you're able to make energy magically appear just because you're really good at it. The mana-> electricity tradeoff is 1:1 at best.

If you want to argue balance on the 5% cost, sure. 20 lightning bolts means you could cast a lightning bolt per turn for 20 turns, which is way longer than a fight has ever lasted. Furthermore, at 10-15% damage, you'd only actually need 7 of them, especially since it's been ruled they can't be dodged.

Just my two cents.

646517
1:1 magic-to-energy conversation doesn't really work for me... doesn't really say 'magic'... unless magic capacity is far greater then physical energy can ever be.

646572
I see no reason to negate the conservation of energy.

646572
You COULD say that the ratio of magic to energy is some other ratio. To do so, you need to post your mathematical and physical derivation of such matters into this thread. ALTERNATIVELY, you could screen cap scenes that you believe prove your point and present an organized argument for why they prove your point, with relevant citations from scientifically credible sources.

Failing all that, you cannot say "but magic!". For all intents and purposes for the existence of the universe, energy is energy is energy. Energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted from Type A to Type B. Creating a lightning strike* would require you to build up the necessary charge to overcome the barrier of air being a very very strong resistor, which requires a buttload of energy#. If we were strictly going by physics, summoning a lightning bolt of any kind would drain all your mana.

Furthermore, perfect conservation of energy implies perfect efficiency, which is a physically impossible thing, due to the interaction of the System with the Environment. Even if you're 90% efficient in MAKING the lightning, you still have to account for the lightning loosing energy as soon as it leaves your horn and progresses towards the target, mostly due to heat and light. This requires MORE energy as you're firing to keep up the power over the firing distance. So it might take 5% to make the lightning, but you still need to account for energy loss over time, which is exponential due to Coulomb's Law** and the conversion of Volts to Joules (which is a linear relationship)***.

Therefore:
Unless you can complete a physics experiment OR provide a mathematical proof OR present an organized argument with screen-caps and source citations, you must follow Physics As We Know It. One does not simply zap ponies with lightning.

Footnotes:
*To make lightning that behaves as per the current understanding, you need to go through all the steps outlined in this link. Alternatively, this animation. Failing to do so means you fail to form the necessary potential difference to cause a lightning strike.
**http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb%27s_law
***http://rapidtables.com/convert/electric/Volt_to_Joule.htm
#"The electrical discharge (averaging 30 kA for negative or 300 kA for positive lightning, and travelling at around 1×108 m/s[37]) rapidly superheats the discharge channel, causing the air to expand rapidly and produce a shock wave heard as thunder. The rolling and gradually dissipating rumble of thunder is caused by the time delay of sound coming from different portions of a long stroke." - Wikipedia, above linked article.

Look. I am NOT going to argue about the physics of magic. Because their is simply NO. POINT.

646679
No need to get touchy, we're just trying to sort things out. If you want to drop the issue, that's fine. Just expect higher mana costs if you try and shoot lightning from your horn again.

...and possible retcon on the previous mana cost. We haven't decided how to handle that sort of situation.

646687
Yes well. Like I said, it depends of just how much mana one normally has. Even if it does require a lot of energy, other ponies have been performing similar or greater feats (Okay, in the show and my memory isn't that good) without appearing tired. Okay, one is a super-mage but still...

646693
I'd have to disagree on your analysis of "greater." From a physics standpoint, I don't think anyone has done anything in this tournament that requires more energy than a lightning strike. As far as the show... well, I can't think of an example that would exceed the energy requirements. Then again, my memory isn't fabulous.

If you feel adamant about this, you can always talk to Razor. He holds a fair amount of clout over us judges. :P

646700
Teleportation takes WAY more energy then a lighting strike ever will.

And Trixie did call down a lightning bolt and hardly looked tired...

646703
Do you have a Youtube link or a screencap of this event?

646703
Trufax. In the case of teleportation, I assume there are magical shenanigans that make it less energy intensive than current theories allow. It's something that doesn't make sense, and so we just try to rationalize it as much as possible.

And again, Trixie's lightning bolt was hardly a lightning bolt-- barely even a shock, really. Further, that's calling down a lightning bolt from a cloud, not conjuring it directly from your horn.

646708
... We've. Seen. Twilight. Teleport. Plenty. Of. Times. It happened in the FIRST EPISODE

646711
Still a lightning bolt through, and I doubt there was handy storm cloud fully ready with a lightning bolt... and also. How do we know that it wasn't a proper full power lightning bolt? Not to mention the fact that if its not a full-power lighting bolt... well. Neither if Arcantos.

Also, what you said about teleportation could easily be applied to ALL. OVER. MAGIC.

646716
Meant the Trixie Bolt, sorry.

646716
You need to chillax, good sir. We're trying to evaluate magic in a physical framework-- this isn't easy.

We know that Trixie's bolt wasn't a proper lightning bolt because there was no musculature effect on the bear. At all.

The distance in question would be the factor that would mess up Arcantos using a low-power bolt. Like ShadowBro said, resistance increases exponentially with distance. There was about a meter between the cloud and the ursa in Trixie's situation.

646719

Check the 2:03 to the 2:19 mark.

646726
And an Ursa is a gigantic bear named after a constellation. With a etheral looking pelt & stars. Looks to be magicial to me. Also, it DID flinch when struck by the lightning, showing it had a muscular reaction.

646737
It flinched; it did not spasm. I flinch if I am slapped in the face. This doesn't mean I am being shocked.

And what does it being magical have to do with it? Unless it's resistant to shock or something, which isn't stated either implicitly or explicitly, I don't know why that would matter.

646755
Who knows what affects magic could do to it? It could make it more resistance to shock, or more resistance to damage, etc. Lots of things that could make it flinch instead of spasm.

646760
Yeah I guess... I just can't see how a 1:1 magic-to-natural-energy is justified without super amounts of magical energy when we see teleportation being used so easily...

.... Actually. Just how much natural energy would Spike's transport-fire require?

646774
A lot. But math can solve a lot of problems. My assumption has and will continue to be that quantum mechanics and math will show that it's actually not that bad.

646187, 646406
Kapuchu is more or less correct about this, and being that I'm at work I don't have the time to expand on any of it more than the following.

A couple points:
-Magically, think of your lightning like a fireball, or a gust of wind. You can aim it, but once you let go of it it's gone and you just get to deal with where it goes. You can't steer it around.

-Magical lightning is going to go where you say, not where it should. This means that if, for some god-awful reason, you decide to aim at a rubber tire, and your opponent is wearing plate mail 5 feet away... doesn't matter. You picked the tire and, conductive or not, that's where the lightning is going to go.

-Actual, all-by-itself lightning is obviously going to do the opposite. It's going to jump to the armored opponent, and not hit the tire.

So can it be dodged? If they can reasonably assume where it's going to go, anticipate it, and get out of the way in time, yes. They can. They're less likely to dodge natural lightning, but then you're much less likely to even encounter it in this tournament.

646799
How much Int & Agility would you say it takes to dodge a lightning attack Razor? And how much energy does a magical lightning bolt use?

646804
How much int do you have? And how much time do they have to react? Not to be rude, but since you can't put solid numbers on either (I did that on purpose), you have no way of knowing, and I have no way of explaining it to you. It will come down to whether the judges say your opponent can or not, and so long as you take into account what has been said by myself, and the other judges, you'll probably realize that your lightning is like an arrow in a lot of ways:

1) It's going to go where you point it.
2) It's going to go there quickly.
3) After you fire it, it's out of your hands and up to the judges.

646810
Hmmm... I see... Except an arrow follows a trajectory and doesn't go in a straight line. But your point is clear at least

Still, I think it'll take at least A Int & A agi to dodge, considering how fast lightning is...

646804
As for how much energy, that completely depends on how much mana you decide to put into it. You can do hardly any and get a spark, or you can do a lot and get a bolt. You can electrocute by touch also.

Lightning's not like air or dirt. Like fire, it doesn't exist to begin with. Unlike fire, it can't just consume something to generate energy. Sure, everything has electrons, but you can't just go ripping them off of shit. If it were that easy, they wouldn't be attached. It can be reasonably inferred, then, that the vast majority of the energy in/behind your bolt of lightning has to come from somewhere, and that somewhere is your mana pool.

Long story short, if you want incredibly powerful bolts of lightning, you won't be buying them with mana pennies. It will cost you.

646823
I get that more power = more cost, but I do get that even the weakest lightning bolts - at current range - would probably cost quite a bit as well.

646814
Regardless of what you predict it will take to dodge, please realize that the vast majority of judging isn't so ideal. It's all situational. If it were so easy to say whether or not something hits before it even actually happens, I would have calculated a tournament winner a long time ago.

646831
... ... ... ...
Who would of won if you could do that?

646828
It's magic based. No matter how weak you make them, it will cost you mana.

646835
I never said it didn't.

646834
How would I know? There's a damned good reason it didn't happen: because it's not possible, lol.

Not without and incredible amount of bias, and then the entire purpose goes out the window at that point.

646841
Haha, true enough!

Now, I think I'll leave you to your work... going soon...

646841
I think Gearrick would have won. Obviously.

646852
Yes. Only my own OCs can win this tournament. Otherwise, how will they ever be canon in this universe?

You've figured me out.

646810
As a point of inquiry, is it accurate to assume that physics up to and including AP Physics level is relevant to these discussions? This would encompass trigonometric descriptions of Standard Kinematics, Simple Harmonic Motion, and Electromagnetism, but exclude Quantum Mechanics and Particle Physics.

644318>>646168
Yeah, there's no way I could dodge that. As for the blast, I didn't read as thoroughly as I should have. I apologize for making you all go through all of this for my mistake.
Now, the parts I'd argue:
No signs of charging: How is this even possible? The sheer amount of energy needed to generate lightning, magical or otherwise, would be huge. So, no, I wouldn't be able to dodge it if there was no warning, but there should've been. Even when ponies use telekinesis, something that appears to be elementary, their horn glows.
Name one time we've seen somepony use magic without their horn glowing.
Also, back to the energy point, only 5% of your mana? That's what lobbing a rock would cost, not generating lightning. Then again, these are just my opinions and the judges' words are final. Just debating the validity of the attack itself, because it's obvious I couldn't dodge an attack that was 1) Too fast and 2) had literally no tells.

647502
Okay, first. The 5% thing. The rules of magic are fricking crazy and no one can agree on it, either how much magic is used to replicate effects, or just how much magical energy one normally has. But as my character is specialized in this type of magic, it makes sense that what for him is a pretty basic attack. It doesn't cost that much mana.

As for the no show? Well... your forgetting that not only is Arcantos a storm-mage, but he's also a fighter. So he'll want to get better at fighting. He notices that his bright horn warns his enemy, so he'll train to reduce it and make it go away. If you still don't like that... well, changeling's are naturally skilled at illusionary magic, so he can probably use his changeling magic to make an illusion to hide the glow. And having trained so much in doing so, the mana required to do so is minimal.

Admittedly, this is just my thoughts and reasons behind this, its up for the judge to decide in the end.

647993
Actually, all of the judges more or less agree on magic costs and rules.

The no show... Well, I know basically nothing about horn glow and whatever policies we've had established on that topic. I asked Razorbeam, and he ruled that eliminating horn glow just isn't possible-- it's an integral part of magic or something. And illusions to hide it are similarly a no-go. :/

649418
... Well. That's a problem. I made my horn glow not appear at all because I had noticed somehow else puling such a trick.

.Admittedly, all the horn glow does is show that magic is being used. Doesn't say what type of magic... so I still don't think my opponent could dodge this attack even if I have to have the horn glow.

649430
*shrug*
I'll try and get word around to judges that it's apparently not cool. Retconning all sorts of things, especially back into Round 1, would be silly and ridiculous, so I figure we'll solve problems as they arise.

649434
Point taken.

I'll edit my post so the horn glows.

Okay, something else has come up.

My character adapted a lightning bolt into a close-range stunning spell. 5-10 seconds stun for 8% of mana. This was used after my opponent launched his character at me and I took a hit to grab him, unleash the spell which had been prepared last move, then spin - conserving the momentum of my opponent's character and adding to it - to throw the character in the direction of the lava-streams.

Now here's the thing, I figured it took about 4-5 seconds for the launched character to reach my character, so by adding to the momentum - as well as gravity taking hold - I said it will take 3-4 seconds for him to hit the lava stream.

No one disagreed with this, no objections from either judges or opponent. That means if I managed to do the plan I had specified, it would take that amount of time, and my enemy would be stunned for that much time.

So, I was shocked when my opponent managed to recover before hitting the lava, and still have time to switch the mode of his weapon - which took .75 of a second - and then position his weapon so the blast from the tip would knock him away from the lava steam.

Something about his tough body being able to recover quickly... excuse me, but isn't it Int Vs Will when it comes to spells like this, NOT Vit? And even if Vit is taken into account, Will is still applied isn't it? And the S in Vit and D in Will neutralize each other don't they? And even if he does manage to recover quickly, wouldn't it make sense that he recovers in the within the time-frame I gave? I mean, doesn't it make sense that the variation of the stun-time depends on how quickly the opponent recovers from it as well they resist the spell itself?

And even if he did manage to recover a second early, that'll still be 4 seconds, which means he simply won't have enough time to react before he would 'hit' the lava

658544 Looking into it now. Sorry if I made a mistake on that.

658785
Well, your not the only one that approved it it seems...