LMFAO; these two countrymen are just too funny, arguing totally different things without even realizing it, lol.
One is giving reasons why bounty generally increases or goes up, the other is more or less saying getting a bounty of 500mil and above means you're somewhat that strong to at least deserve the bounty... Kinda like, how the hell can one progressively accumulate their bounty up to 500mil if they're not strong enough to actually get involved in major incidents that would increase it to that level in the first place? With his fall-to point being no weak person have reached 500mil so far, right?
IMO, the both of you are correct in your own right; just needs to listen to what the other person is saying, or at least trying to say
@kcd you obviously get the point.
I was never concerned with what HP considered bounty to relate to cos I already understood the bulk of it in the first place.
He just kept baiting me to debate him and I should've ended the discussion quite early sincerely.
It's no wonder we had the latest chapter with Roger and not WB having the highest bounty.
Roger was seen as the strongest pirate and not WB in their era. It'd not reflect who is stronger if WB had the higher bounty of the two.
However, Roger's bounty likely wasn't just attributed to his strength but his goal of becoming the Pirate King and getting to Raftel, which the World Government likely feared due to information on the Void Century there and on the poneglyphs to get there. If it was just about strength, then Whitebeard's bounty should have been higher because he's been alive longer AND has the power to destroy the world, along with having one of the biggest crews ever.
Im simply going to stop at this, agree if you will disagree if you will.
Crime and Incident are not the only measures of bounties or only reason bounties increase. As Kcd mentioned, Luffy's actions in WCI are not as direct a threat or an incident (that involved the WG) as the Marineford, Impel down, Sabaody or Enis Lobby. Luffy had to prove his strength in order to get such a high bounty increase. You are not receiving a YC level bounty without showing that you can actually fight in that level.
If you are saying its the scale of crime, then again, majority of what Luffy did in WCI was not a crime and he has been involved in bigger incidents that directly challenge or pose a threat to the WG and did not get such an increase.
Im not about to argue till one of us is blue in the face over a fact that neither of us have absolute knowledge on. For me the manga has shown that a number of factors come into play in deciding a bounty or an increase in bounty. Not just 2 things.
One is giving reasons why bounty generally increases or goes up, the other is more or less saying getting a bounty of 500mil and above means you're somewhat that strong to at least deserve the bounty.
He's dismissing the fact that bounty simply goes up for crimes or incident as if after 500m... bounties go up for a different reason.
So what if someone with a 500m bounty is strong? doesn't change the fact the bounty got to that level because of the crimes they committed accumulated over time to reach that value, not because they got that value instantly.
Law didn't get a 500m bounty in a day, he got it overtime as a result of all the incidents he'd committed and been part of overtime.
If crimes are what raise bounties from 0 to 1 beri, the idea it's not the same stimulus that increases a bounty to 500m is silly.
What he can't understand is that just because you can make a somewhat true association about a thing doesn't mean that association is what resulted in that thing, lol.
Just to put into analogical form how bastardised his reasoning is:
How big someone is depends on their genetics.
He'd look for a somewhat true association about big people.
An example of a somewhat true association would be big people are strong.
He'd say something absurd like... because big people are strong, they're big because they're strong.
That's the same thing he's doing here.
He doesn't grasp the fundamental truth and is confusing an associative generalisation as a fundamental truth as a stimulus for something, lol.
Just because big people are strong doesn't mean their genes aren't why they're big in the first place just like a 500m+ beri person being strong doesn't mean it's now down to the accumulation of crimes and incidents, lol.
He's struggling to understand that just because you can make an association doesn't mean the association is responsible for the thing.
Whatever bounty anyone gets is because they deserve it, that's not what he was saying, he's saying that strength is what gets one a bounty of 500m which is simply and completely wrong.
He lacks the ability to distinguish that association doesn't mean causation.
It's like saying that people with low bounties have low bounties for being weak, low bounties are not low because of being weak, lol. They're low for low level crimes in comparison.
Burgess who was recruited by Blackbeard had only 20m bounty. Is he weak? No, confirmed as a Haki user too pre-skip. Hardly doubt his bounty is at that level for just weakness.
Like I said, not everyone commits crimes or is involved in incidents on big scales.
As Kcd mentioned, Luffy's actions in WCI are not as direct a threat or an incident (that involved the WG) as the Marineford, Impel down, Sabaody or Enis Lobby.
If you are saying its the scale of crime, then again, majority of what Luffy did in WCI was not a crime and he has been involved in bigger incidents that directly challenge or pose a threat to the WG and did not get such an increase.
Perhaps, you missed where I said "Incident", not just "Crimes". Crime & Incident. Crimes are events against the WG and Incidents are events not against the WG.
Again, it's simply fact that these are what have increased bounties regardless of what anyone wants to say.
In fact, pretty sure when I made this thread was before WCI. I remember saying I'm not sure events not against the WG warrant bounties, but this arc will answer that.
Not for me to determine what the Manga does, it's for me to simply accept what it does.
Incidents and Crimes. Anything else? No evidence.
--- Double Post Merged, ---
Someone with a 100m must have done some terrible deeds...
Infamous deeds (crimes/Incidents) to obtain Bounties.
This is not just correlation, it's causation. Almost anything can have correlation.
He's dismissing the fact that bounty simply goes up for crimes or incident as if after 500m... bounties go up for a different reason.
So what if someone with a 500m bounty is strong? doesn't change the fact the bounty got to that level because of the crimes they committed accumulated over time to reach that value, not because they got that value instantly.
Law didn't get a 500m bounty in a day, he got it overtime as a result of all the incidents he'd committed and been part of overtime.
If crimes are what raise bounties from 0 to 1 beri, the idea it's not the same stimulus that increases a bounty to 500m is silly.
What he can't understand is that just because you can make a somewhat true association about a thing doesn't mean that association is what resulted in that thing, lol.
Just to put into analogical form how bastardised his reasoning is:
How big someone is depends on their genetics.
He'd look for a somewhat true association about big people.
An example of a somewhat true association would be big people are strong.
He'd say something absurd like... because big people are strong, they're big because they're strong.
That's the same thing he's doing here.
He doesn't grasp the fundamental truth and is confusing an associative generalisation as a fundamental truth as a stimulus for something, lol.
Just because big people are strong doesn't mean their genes aren't why they're big in the first place just like a 500m+ beri person being strong doesn't mean it's now down to the accumulation of crimes and incidents, lol.
He's struggling to understand that just because you can make an association doesn't mean the association is responsible for the thing.
Whatever bounty anyone gets is because they deserve it, that's not what he was saying, he's saying that strength is what gets one a bounty of 500m which is simply and completely wrong.
He lacks the ability to distinguish that association doesn't mean causation.
It's like saying that people with low bounties have low bounties for being weak, low bounties are not low because of being weak, lol. They're low for low level crimes in comparison.
Burgess who was recruited by Blackbeard had only 20m bounty. Is he weak? No, confirmed as a Haki user too pre-skip. Hardly doubt his bounty is at that level for just weakness.
Like I said, not everyone commits crimes or is involved in incidents on big scales.
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
But then, you've yet to prove anything else other than crime or incident that has raised a bounty. But sure.
--- Double Post Merged, ---
We don't determine what raise bounties, the manga establishes that.
We can only accept what the Manga provides.
These are the only things that have provoked any bounty increase: Crime & Incident.
What is this other stimulus that incites an increase? You're yet to name one other than just conclude other things does without any evidence.
Doesn't matter what anyone says or think, if a belief can't be proven with evidence consistently, it's not a valid answer or a valid belief.
Perhaps, you missed where I said "Incident", not just "Crimes". Crime & Incident. Crimes are events against the WG and Incidents are events not against the WG.
Again, it's simply fact that these are what have increased bounties regardless of what anyone wants to say.
In fact, pretty sure when I made this thread was before WCI. I remember saying I'm not sure events not against the WG warrant bounties, but this arc will answer that.
Not for me to determine what the Manga does, it's for me to simply accept what it does.
Incidents and Crimes. Anything else? No evidence.
--- Double Post Merged, ---
Someone with a 100m must have done some terrible deeds...
Infamous deeds (crimes/Incidents) to obtain Bounties.
This is not just correlation, it's causation. Almost anything can have correlation.
Well while we all get what you mean about why bounties are given and increased, have you thought about, or perhaps have you figured out why 'X' amount of bounty is given after an incident instead of 'Y' amount?
The first thing that comes to mind is the gravity of the incident and the people at play. Personally, I initially thought the gravity of the incident ranked higher than every other factor, kinda like it straight up determines what should be given.
But after Luffy caused many havocs like punching a celestial dragon, breaking in and out of impel down, openly picking a fight with the WG at Ennis lobby, participating in the summit war... Can you imagine that after all these, he accumulated a measely 400mil or so. It's unbelievable, right? Those were heaven defying incidents he was involved in. At least, If not for anything else, he should be getting 1bil plus for punching and knocking a celestial dragon unconscious.
This definitely means other factors are involved when determining the amount should be given. Don't get me wrong, crimes and incidents are indeed the causation for the increment as you're saying, but what do you think now actually determines 'by what extent' the bounty should be raised?
Personally, I'll say the gravity of the crime committed and the strength displayed when commiting the crime, or carrying out the deed. The incident with BM at wholecake shouldn't be getting 1bil increment while all other achievements all summed up together amounted to 500mil. This hints that other factors may be involved of which strength displayed is most likely included. I guess maybe this is where all the confusion and disagreement stemmed from. That's my opinion on the matter.
You claimed that Robin was given a bounty because of a crime she committed but she didn't actually commit a crime. There was no evidence of her reading any poneglyphs and if being born from Ohara was a crime worthy of any bounty, then the fabrication was not necessary as they had all they needed. She was a percieved threat and they had to justify why she is a percieved threat by fabricating an incident/crime in order to give her a bounty.
Percieved threat --> fabricating crime --> bounty
Another example, defeating a Warlord. It is both a crime against the WG and a show of strength. If you go against the Warlords but don't actually do anything, you've caused an incident/committed a crime but are you going to get a bounty for simply mouthing off without anything to back it up?
This will go round in circles because unlike everyone else who is open to the idea of different attributes, you are rigid in that you feel you are right therefor everyone else is wrong. No. There are no absolutes when it comes to bounties unless we actually get a breakdown.
Luffy at WCI committed no crime against the WG and the incident was not enough to cause such an increase. That is a literal example of different factors contributing to an increase in bounty. Luffy did worse against the WG and only when he has shown the capacity to actually be a physical threat in the NW does he get such a ridiculous increase.
If you are adamant that crime and incident are the only thing that prompt the WG to increase a bounty then I disagree and do not wish to continue this never ending you are right/wrong dance. I agree that they are part of the calculation, just not the be all and end all as you make it out to be.
You've been adamant in the past to the point of turning blue (i.e. BM vs Luffy or BM having to go down in WCI at the time, with manga panels apparently proving the point) and came out wrong. Have the grace to atleast accept that it is not always the absolutes you like to work with.
Luffy at WCI committed no crime against the WG and the incident was not enough to cause such an increase. That is a literal example of different factors contributing to an increase in bounty.
He attacked other pirates. Said pirates also rule a country, so there was collateral damage.
It may be odd, and you could argue that many of the Big Mom Pirates have bounties on their heads, and a bounty hunter could kill them and even be awarded. However the same goes in real life. If gangs kill members of a rival gang, they may get life sentences, even if the people they killed committed crimes worth the death sentence. Or in a more accurate analogy, terrorist organizations attacking each other.
Im simply going to stop at this, agree if you will disagree if you will.
Crime and Incident are not the only measures of bounties or only reason bounties increase. As Kcd mentioned, Luffy's actions in WCI are not as direct a threat or an incident (that involved the WG) as the Marineford, Impel down, Sabaody or Enis Lobby. Luffy had to prove his strength in order to get such a high bounty increase. You are not receiving a YC level bounty without showing that you can actually fight in that level.
If you are saying its the scale of crime, then again, majority of what Luffy did in WCI was not a crime and he has been involved in bigger incidents that directly challenge or pose a threat to the WG and did not get such an increase.
Im not about to argue till one of us is blue in the face over a fact that neither of us have absolute knowledge on. For me the manga has shown that a number of factors come into play in deciding a bounty or an increase in bounty. Not just 2 things.
It wasn't about proving his strength, Luffy literally had to be strong enough to survive those events. What he did was prove how dangerous he is to the world, from breaking to places like Impel Down and Enies Lobby and making it out alive to almost changing the course of the Paramount War, freeing Ace, and having his heritage revealed.
Majority of what Luffy did in WCI did show how much of a threat he is and would become as he invaded the territory of one of the most powerful people on the seas and made it out alive, beating at least two commanders on his way. He may not have committed a crime, but he did defy common sense and challenged a Yonkou and survived, and Emperors are seen as powerful beings. Had Luffy been seen as someone who consistently got help to survive, despite the opposite, then his bounty wouldn't rise much, if at all. I think it was him being considered the fifth emperor that helped increase his bounty?
Well while we all get what you mean about why bounties are given and increased, have you thought about, or perhaps have you figured out why 'X' amount of bounty is given after an incident instead of 'Y' amount?
The first thing that comes to mind is the gravity of the incident and the people at play. Personally, I initially thought the gravity of the incident ranked higher than every other factor, kinda like it straight up determines what should be given.
But after Luffy caused many havocs like punching a celestial dragon, breaking in and out of impel down, openly picking a fight with the WG at Ennis lobby, participating in the summit war... Can you imagine that after all these, he accumulated a measely 400mil or so. It's unbelievable, right? Those were heaven defying incidents he was involved in. At least, If not for anything else, he should be getting 1bil plus for punching and knocking a celestial dragon unconscious.
People are just obsessed with strength when there's no evidence for said claim.
Nami got a 50m bounty increase for doing what exactly that was strength based?
As Oda said, it's difficult to appraise strength, so they simply base it on the scale of the incident.
If you follow boxing, the conclusion doesn't tell you the details of the fight. So, guy A defeated guy B. Could be that Guy B was winning until the 12 round and got knocked out buy Guy A due to a lucky punch. Does that mean Guy B is weaker than Guy A? No, the conclusion doesn't give out those details.
Marines are not there seeing the details of the fight, they only know the conclusion and give bounties based on conclusions.
Did they see Luffy defeat Cracker or Katakuri? Did they see how? They have no idea if he poisoned or used underhanded tactics. Only thing they can go on is the conclusion.
How people can claim strength is a factor without proof, sure, lol.
Another example, defeating a Warlord. It is both a crime against the WG and a show of strength. If you go against the Warlords but don't actually do anything, you've caused an incident/committed a crime but are you going to get a bounty for simply mouthing off without anything to back it up?
You're free to say that, but you can't show an instance where anything other than those 2 led to crimes.
Find me a panel where someone got a bounty for simply growing stronger without committing a crime or partaking in an incident, and then you might have a valid argument.
Punching an CD which is supposedly the biggest crime ever didn’t get him a killer bounty increase so No man that’s bull
You lost this one ngl
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
The guys argument is always gojng tk sound valid. Why? Because this is a story about pirates. They are always committing crime/ involved in incidents across the world the story is set in.
However someone like Don krieg in East blue had an armada, seemed to be well known for his crimes and all, Buggy (before impel down) is also a similar example where him being on the PK’s should have gotten him major Bounty increase as obviously PK was the centre of incidents.
But hey was buggy know by anyone? Nope cos his clown ass was weak.
If he was strong he’d have gajned fame and bounty increase as he’d have been recognised...
Wouldn't Buggy stay low-key though? He's so far been quite low-key, apart from trying to publicly execute Luffy. but he should be well-known enough as Shanks' former crewmate and someone who sailed with Roger.
And it's not like the WG would raise bounties every time, otherwise that'd show the person is an immense threat and would get attention. The WG initially planned on staying quiet about the Level 6 prisoners escaping, and the last thing they probably want people to know is that a Tenryuubito got punched. Imagine if citizens knew that for a fact, it'd probably inspire them to fight back.
The WG obviously need tangible reasons like crimes to increase bounties but the amount given is nearly always reflective of the assumed strength at the time the crime was committed. It needs to factor in strength if it's supposed to attract bounty hunters otherwise it defeats the purpose. A bounty system that only takes level of crimes into account is useless to the public and the WG might as well make a most wanted list instead. And with the exception of a young Robin, every known bounty head in the manga has always been at least as strong as what their bounties suggest.
Wouldn't Buggy stay low-key though? He's so far been quite low-key, apart from trying to publicly execute Luffy. but he should be well-known enough as Shanks' former crewmate and someone who sailed with Roger.
And it's not like the WG would raise bounties every time, otherwise that'd show the person is an immense threat and would get attention. The WG initially planned on staying quiet about the Level 6 prisoners escaping, and the last thing they probably want people to know is that a Tenryuubito got punched. Imagine if citizens knew that for a fact, it'd probably inspire them to fight back.
Yeah but there were witnesses at the auction house so that is silly to say... WG wanted to keep quite but a Buster call was invoked?
Mate that’s BS reasoning
Fact still stands that Luffy was involved in the most crazy events starting from sahbondy Arc till his training arc.... multiple crimes with multiple witnesses. Fair enough they coulda pinned the Impel down Prison break in BB but funny enough BB went to the war with the Marine being there and pirates too, so how can they cover that up and luffy pretty much did exactly the same.
You think anyone with common sense will not question why the bounties of these dangerous criminals are active again since they were captured?
So now that Crocodile is out you think they can hide that?
Or the Captains of BB?
In regards to buggy him staying lowkey is as a result of him being weak. Hence why he was first met in the EB arc. Now he’s gain infamy as a warlord
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
You know how news of Luffy beating Katakuri Goes up, if it was Nami that was said to have defeated Katakuri do you think he bounty increase will still be that low?
No it woulda shot up.
The WG obviously need tangible reasons like crimes to increase bounties but the amount given is nearly always reflective of the assumed strength at the time the crime was committed.
Sanji and Zoro defeated characters whose Doriki (actual strength level) were more or less the same.
Sanji got a 79m bounty increase from 0.
Zoro got a 60m bounty despite having fought a stronger opponent by a mere 20 Doriki.
Ended up with Zoro being 120m and Sanji beign 79m.
That's by no definition and by no form of common logical sense a reflection of strength.
If bounty was meant to reflect strength, Zoro and Sanji's bounty should both have been around the 120m mark given that Zoro's was increased to 120 after defeating opponents of relatively equal strength. 53m discrepancy is by no means a standard that implies similar strength.
Burgess' bounty was 20m pre-skip despite being an Armament Haki user. In fact, pre-skip, Nami's bounty was 16m. It's Laughable that their strength can be remotely said to be remotely in the same category in the least. Even Brook's bounty surpassed Burgess.
Nami's bounty is 66m, yet she's in nowhere as powerful as Zoro was when he was 60m.
Luffy's abilities at 300-400m pre-skip are far surpassed by both Sanji and Zoro who are now over 300m. If bounty reflected strength, Zoro and Sanji are as strong as Luffy was pre-skip? No.
Heck, Daifuku and Oven are just 300m. They're certainly stronger than Luffy was when he had 300m or 400m before the time-skip.
Weevil's bounty is 480m, yet is said to have strength that rivals Whitebeard in his youth. Law, Kid, both are around 500m, yet are nowhere near that level of power.
Luffy barely defeated Katakuri, yet he got a bounty that assumed he was almost twice as powerful as Katakuri? That fight could have gone either way.
Bounty doesn't standardise strength. Bounties simply do not reflect the level of strength a character has.
The idea is just an archaic one that was never proven to begin with and is why readers are always surprised by bounty values when it doesn't seem to make sense in regards to strength.
Bounties aren't equivalent right down to the unit of berry but they suggest relative strength. As long as X is stronger than Y, you can be sure than the person who beats X will have a higher bounty than the person that beats Y, which was the case for Sanji and Zoro in the CP9 arc. If strength wasn't factored at all then Sanji and Zoro should have gotten the same bounty.
Burgess was at least as strong as his 20 million bounty. Blackbeard's initial crew kept a low profile, so the government didn't have enough information about them to assign higher bounties. A strong pirate who stays under the radar and commits low level crimes won't get high bounties because there's no evidence of strength. High level crime is evidence of strength and Burgess had presumably not committed one. There's not been a single character other than Robin in the series who wasn't at least as strong as their bounty suggested.
Moderator Notice: Remember to remain respectful when discussing these topics. Taking shots against others logic/reasoning or intelligence will result in your post being deleted.~ Aizen
As long as X is stronger than Y, you can be sure than the person who beats X will have a higher bounty than the person that beats Y, which was the case for Sanji and Zoro in the CP9 arc. If strength wasn't factored at all then Sanji and Zoro should have gotten the same bounty.
Yeah but there were witnesses at the auction house so that is silly to say... WG wanted to keep quite but a Buster call was invoked?
Mate that’s BS reasoning
Fact still stands that Luffy was involved in the most crazy events starting from sahbondy Arc till his training arc.... multiple crimes with multiple witnesses. Fair enough they coulda pinned the Impel down Prison break in BB but funny enough BB went to the war with the Marine being there and pirates too, so how can they cover that up and luffy pretty much did exactly the same.
You think anyone with common sense will not question why the bounties of these dangerous criminals are active again since they were captured?
So now that Crocodile is out you think they can hide that?
Or the Captains of BB?
In regards to buggy him staying lowkey is as a result of him being weak. Hence why he was first met in the EB arc. Now he’s gain infamy as a warlord
--- Double Post Merged, , Original Post Date: ---
You know how news of Luffy beating Katakuri Goes up, if it was Nami that was said to have defeated Katakuri do you think he bounty increase will still be that low?
No it woulda shot up.
When was a buster call invoked? Why would they invoke it on Mariejoas just for few pirates? And yes, I know there were witnesses, but how many people really know about Luffy punching a Tenryuubito like it actually happened and not as hearsay?
And didn't Luffy's bounty increase? And I don't see how they could pin anything on Blackbeard given Luffy would eventually be known as the guy who broke INTO and out of Impel Down, probably being the first crazy fucker ever to do that.
Yes, IF the bounties are active or were active at the time. Hell, given how someone said that the level 6 prisoners were supposed to be removed from history, it wouldn't be shocking if a lot of citizens didn't know or remember the prisoner who have been in there for a long time.
With Crocodile, certainly if Crocodile stays low-key enough.
If it was Zoro who was said to have defeated Katakuri even though he's on Wano, then his bounty would have shot up because it'd have showed he's even more dangerous than thought previously. Strength plays a factor, no one is disagreeing with that, but it takes more than just strength. heck, it may be a side effect because you can't beat fighters like Katakuri and even Luffy without being strong enough.
As long as X is stronger than Y, you can be sure than the person who beats X will have a higher bounty than the person that beats Y, which was the case for Sanji and Zoro in the CP9 arc.
Flaw in your absurd claim here is how can there be a 53m gap when the only difference between Zoro and Sanji was 20 Doriki? Lol, that's a somewhat silly thing.
If they're of equal strength, they should have had similar bounties. They didn't despite defeating people of literally the same strength.
Nami got a 50m bounty increase at Dressrosa despite not having fought a single person; Brook's bounty increased by 50m despite doing nothing significant strength-wise.
Burgess was at least as strong as his 20 million bounty. Blackbeard's initial crew kept a low profile, so the government didn't have enough information about them to assign higher bounties.
20m was given for the crimes he committed. Not a reflection of strength, lol.
Burgess alone could argualbly have wiped the entire SH crew himself pre-skip given that they weren't strong at all. Burgess was a Haki user who was highly ranked and is highly ranked amongst the BB Pirates.
Hilarious argument given that even Brook was 30m, yet Burgess who was many time stronger was only 20m? Doesn't make sense that Brook pre-skip would be of a higher bounty if it were based on strength, lol.
Even the fact that Luffy with a 30m beri in his first escapades is higher than Burgess who was definitely stronger than Luffy was when he first set out. If bounty reflects strength.
Arlong had a 20m bounty. It would be delusional to think Arlong was the same strength tier as Burgess.
High level crime is evidence of strength and Burgess had presumably not committed one. There's not been a single character other than Robin in the series who wasn't at least as strong as their bounty suggested.
Bounty only increases as the magnitude of crime increases.
80m wouldn't reflect the strength of someone like Hancock given that she has all forms of Haki.
Many bounties do not reflect strength.
Luffy had a pre-skip bounty of 400m, and arguably anyone we know now would have defeated him have less. Cavendish is a Haki user and strong enough to deflect Chinjao's attacks with a mere 280m whereas Luffy couldn't do a thing to a Pacifista.
Strength cannot be appraised if the fight is not seen. WG barely ever see the fights any of the SHs get into:
Crocodile vs Luffy was underground
Katakur vs Luffy was in an inaccessible place
Cracker vs Luffy was unseen by anyone
The WG have no idea how Luffy won whether it was by poisoning or he allied or he used underhanded tactics. All that is known is the conclusion. Conclusions aren't proof of details (strength), it's only proof of the result.
They can only appraise the scale of the incident, they can't appraise the strength because they saw nothing of it.
If it was Zoro who was said to have defeated Katakuri even though he's on Wano, then his bounty would have shot up because it'd have showed he's even more dangerous than thought previously. Strength plays a factor, no one is disagreeing with that, but it takes more than just strength. heck, it may be a side effect because you can't beat fighters like Katakuri and even Luffy without being strong enough
Tell this to HP haha
All we are saying is strength is a major factor. Obviously if two big pirates clash, it become an incident and lives of innocents might get caught in it which becomes a crime so yeah. He’s right but he just needs to understand that strength of the people fighting is taken into factor.
When was a buster call invoked? Why would they invoke it on Mariejoas just for few pirates? And yes, I know there were witnesses, but how many people really know about Luffy punching a Tenryuubito like it actually happened and not as hearsay?
Buster call was invoked when Luffy punched the Tenryubito, that was why Kizaru and Sentomaru went to the archeipology.
So how is that keeping you the fact that a CD got punched quite? It’s not.
There were loads of people in the auction house... the family of the CD that was punched surely musta wanted revenge too. So they coulda increased the bounty in his head, but that didn’t happen.
And didn't Luffy's bounty increase? And I don't see how they could pin anything on Blackbeard given Luffy would eventually be known as the guy who broke INTO and out of Impel Down, probably being the first crazy fucker ever to do that.
No I was giving you excuses to use since you seemed to be claiming that the incidents luffy was involved in from shanbondy to Nee world arc shout have warranted a bigger bounty..
If bounty was calculated by crimes and incident the luffy should have gotten at least 700-800mil by time skip time but he didn’t.
And I can list his crimes just to get a context
Punching CD.
Breaking into ID to free ace,freed 5k Prisoners and 2warlords. (I was sayin Government coulda pinned this in BB)
Went to Marineford to stop ACE’s execution.
Broke back into the same government grounds to pay respects and pass secret info to his crew mates.
And all he got for that was a 100 mil bounty increase
Now he fought cracker and beat him and also beat Katakuri and suddenly he gets about a billion bounty increase?
If you don’t think strength is a major factor then you’re just being stubborn.
But I read the last paragraph and I know you do think that so it’s cool
Even the fact that Luffy with a 30m beri in his first escapades is higher than Burgess who was definitely stronger than Luffy was when he first set out. If bounty reflects strength.
