Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Has this been done already?

Superman basically owned the guy who took on Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Flash and Cyborg (Batman was also there)

Can Thor take him?

No Parademons (for either side)

Thor wins, though with difficulty.

Thor wins over this weak villain.

Thor

Steppen

Thor won;t have a problem

Pretty good battle. Thor should win because of firepower.

SW is not a weakling and will get some hits in.

If Thor is smart, he can just keep his distance and spam SW with lightning. Steppenwolf won't have an answer for ranged strikes.

Originally posted by FrothByte
If Thor is smart, he can just keep his distance and spam SW with lightning. Steppenwolf won't have an answer for ranged strikes.

Agreed. Lightning and weather tactics give Thor the advantage. Thor needs to stay ranged and spam. Mjolnir throws might prove effective too (if Stepp doesn't dodge it).

Stepp

Thor doesn't need his lightning. He could straight out brawl him if he wanted to. I've watched Justice League twice and aside from his little intro fight with Zeus and the Lanterns I wasn't that amazed with him.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Thor doesn't need his lightning. He could straight out brawl him if he wanted to. I've watched Justice League twice and aside from his little intro fight with Zeus and the Lanterns I wasn't that amazed with him.

Yes Thor does. Any type of melee fight will go to Step

Originally posted by h1a8
Yes Thor does. Any type of melee fight will go to Step

Wouldn't be too sure about that. Steppenwolf hasn't fought anyone yet with Thor's melee skill and striking power.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Wouldn't be too sure about that. Steppenwolf hasn't fought anyone yet with Thor's melee skill and striking power. He has the speed, perception and skill to get the better of it. Thor wins but it's because of his ranged attacks.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Wouldn't be too sure about that. Steppenwolf hasn't fought anyone yet with Thor's melee skill and striking power.

Superman has much greater striking power; honestly as far as punching goes Thor is closer to Wonder Woman

Thor, because he's not made out of pixels.

Originally posted by relentless1
Superman has much greater striking power; honestly as far as punching goes Thor is closer to Wonder Woman

Lol. What? Thor has caused more destruction with one hammer strike than DCEU Superman has in all of his movies combined. Even if we take the Sokovia strike and say only half of that was Thor, then the only person who even comes close is Doomsday.

Would Thor beat Superman? No. To fast and I believe Superman to be stronger. But Thor has the best damage output out of anybody minus Surtur and Dormammu.

Sokovia strike is a non-feat...

Even if you just count the initial shockwave, which was all Thor. it was greater than any 10 Superman striking feats.

Originally posted by relentless1
Superman has much greater striking power; honestly as far as punching goes Thor is closer to Wonder Woman

A pure punch yes, but Thor has the ability to amp his strikes with lightning and Superman doesn't have the same striking feats Thor does.

Besides, even ifThor only hits as hard as Superman, we all know how Stepp got messed up from a single Superman punch.

Thor beats the shit out of him.

SSJ Thor wins pretty decisively, classic Thor wins, but after a good fight.

I in no way think Thor can punch as hard as Superman. With Mjolnir though, by actual on screen feats, Thor's damage output dwarfs anything we've seen from the DCEU.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
I in no way think Thor can punch as hard as Superman. With Mjolnir though, by actual on screen feats, Thor's damage output dwarfs anything we've seen from the DCEU.
No.

Yes

Originally posted by abhilegend
No.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes

Then it is decided!

Huzzah!

Originally posted by abhilegend
No.

Name a single attack that has done more damage.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Name a single attack that has done more damage.
Superman and Zod shattered entire buildings with their clash. Superman shattered a hill top with just falling. Superman overpowered and oneshotted world engine.

The only hammer shot worth mentioning from Thor is his striking Malekith creating a Shockwave. Rest are just lightning strikes (Jotunheim attack) or non feats like Sokovia where vibranium magnified his attacks.

Lol at noon feat. You can still clearly see the damage done by the initial blast. Funny how every good Thor feat is a non-feat all of the sudden.

The vibranium didn't amp anything and you know it. It was clearly stated in the movie what happened. Even if it amped it by two times that is still multiple times more devastating than what Zod and Clark did. He atomized entire blocks, they never even destroyed one building with their punches, they did do heavy damage though.

Regardless, I have said Superman beats Avengers in the other thread, this is Steppenwolf.

By on screen feats, which we use here, Thor wins.

Tony himself said the vibranium magnified the blast.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Tony himself said the vibranium magnified the blast.

Do you mind quoting what he said?

When I get home I'll cite him textually, but he basically explained that <his> and Thor's energy would bounce back and forth with the vibranium as a catalyst, to then burst outward amped up.

He said that by creating a heat seal that Thor's power would double back.

Uhm.... Ok... that doesn't explain the gigantic shockwave we got from Thor's initial hit. That only explains the explosion that followed.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Lol at noon feat. You can still clearly see the damage done by the initial blast. Funny how every good Thor feat is a non-feat all of the sudden.


Yes, because it was clearly stated to bd so. You don't like it, not my problem.

The ****? Cap's shield amped Thor's striking every time. Tony flat out says Thor hitting the spire will only crack the spire and nothing else.

He didn't atomize shit. Doomsday atomized buildings and Superman tanked it like minor breeze.

Yes, it is.

Not happening.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Do you mind quoting what he said?
Tenth time's the charm, maybe.

Friday: The anti-gravs are rigged to (fit?). Touch them and they go full reverse thrust. The city's not coming down soon.
Tony: It's (part?) vibranium. If I get Thor to hit it....
Friday: It'll crack. That's not enough. The impact would still be devastating.
Tony: Maybe I could cap the other end. Keep the atomic action doubling back.
Friday: That could vaporize the city. And everyone on it.

And Thor's attacks were magnified by Cap's shield everytime he hit it.

Steppenwolf

Superman needed the JLA to help him take him down.
Steppenwolf will need the JLA to keep Thor from beating him senseless with Mjolnir

Not really. Thor is not on Supes level.

TBH this is an interesting fight. Stepp is a bit underrated imho, but godmode!Thor may have an edge due to range attacks. Very close fight, regardless.

Thor isn't as strong or fast, but he has Superman beat in damage output.

Originally posted by Stigma
Not really. Thor is not on Supes level.

TBH this is an interesting fight. Stepp is a bit underrated imho, but godmode!Thor may have an edge due to range attacks. Very close fight, regardless.

Not in strength and speed but he has Clark beat in skill and overall damage output. He also has Clark beat in tactics and experience.

And damage soak.Dude lost an eye and skewered twide by hela and acted like it didn't happened

Thor's striking feats are a bit over rated. I don't believe he hits as hard as Supes. That said, Thor beats Steppenwolf. Steppy can get some hits in and knock Thor around a bit, but in the end Thor is going to kick his ass.

Then you need to watch the movies again because Thor clearly has far better striking feats.

Thor wins.

He's far more skilled, with superior damage soak than Superman and greater striking power/overall power. Superman is stronger, faster and more invulnerable but Thor has his own advantages that will let him whoop Steppenwolf's ass.

Taking on scrubs Aquaman and Wonder Woman is nothing like taking on Thor. Especially when he's not hampered by fellow Avengers.

^ stealing lines from Stifler in the Rundown Thor?? thats a new low even for you lmao

.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Then you need to watch the movies again because Thor clearly has far better striking feats.

Well, I think perhaps you should watch the scenes again so you can get the context behind those striking feats. I know people would love to believe it's all Thor's striking power, but deep down we all know it's not. That said, Thor is no slouch. He beats Steppenwolf here. Everyone reasonable knows that. As for Superman comparisons, come on now, we all know that Supes is on a different level currently. Thor is not beating him.

IMO Supes > Thor > Steppenwolf >= WW

Originally posted by emporerpants
Well, I think perhaps you should watch the scenes again so you can get the context behind those striking feats. I know people would love to believe it's all Thor's striking power, but deep down we all know it's not. That said, Thor is no slouch. He beats Steppenwolf here. Everyone reasonable knows that. As for Superman comparisons, come on now, we all know that Supes is on a different level currently. Thor is not beating him.

IMO Supes > Thor > Steppenwolf >= WW

If it's not Thor's striking power, what is it?

Originally posted by emporerpants
Well, I think perhaps you should watch the scenes again so you can get the context behind those striking feats. I know people would love to believe it's all Thor's striking power, but deep down we all know it's not. That said, Thor is no slouch. He beats Steppenwolf here. Everyone reasonable knows that. As for Superman comparisons, come on now, we all know that Supes is on a different level currently. Thor is not beating him.

IMO Supes > Thor > Steppenwolf >= WW

Would you agree though that Thor has better damage output and fighting skill than Superman?

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Thor wins.

He's far more skilled, with superior damage soak than Superman and greater striking power/overall power. Superman is stronger, faster and more invulnerable but Thor has his own advantages that will let him whoop Steppenwolf's ass.

Taking on scrubs Aquaman and Wonder Woman is nothing like taking on Thor. Especially when he's not hampered by fellow Avengers. Lol at WW being a scrub. You're taking it too far, friend.

Thor fries him

Originally posted by FrothByte
Would you agree though that Thor has better damage output and fighting skill than Superman?

I would agree that he as better skill. That is undeniable. I would also agree that the overall damage that was done by him in his big striking feats is greater than the damage done by Superman. HOWEVER, it was not all Thor. The feat in Age of Ultron has already been talked about by Adam Grimes. I agree with him. It was clearly not just Thor's strike. His feat in Avengers of hitting Cap's shield is also a bit suspect. The force was clearly amplified by Cap's shield. Those are his biggest striking feats yes? They both have extenuating circumstances. Because of these circumstances I feel it is a big stretch to give him the nod in the striking power.

Originally posted by emporerpants
I would agree that he as better skill. That is undeniable. I would also agree that the overall damage that was done by him in his big striking feats is greater than the damage done by Superman. HOWEVER, it was not all Thor. The feat in Age of Ultron has already been talked about by Adam Grimes. I agree with him. It was clearly not just Thor's strike. His feat in Avengers of hitting Cap's shield is also a bit suspect. The force was clearly amplified by Cap's shield. Those are his biggest striking feats yes? They both have extenuating circumstances. Because of these circumstances I feel it is a big stretch to give him the nod in the striking power.

Even if you only gave Thor credit for 10% of those strikes, they'd still be better than anything Superman has.

Originally posted by emporerpants
I would agree that he as better skill. That is undeniable. I would also agree that the overall damage that was done by him in his big striking feats is greater than the damage done by Superman. HOWEVER, it was not all Thor. The feat in Age of Ultron has already been talked about by Adam Grimes. I agree with him. It was clearly not just Thor's strike. His feat in Avengers of hitting Cap's shield is also a bit suspect. The force was clearly amplified by Cap's shield. Those are his biggest striking feats yes? They both have extenuating circumstances. Because of these circumstances I feel it is a big stretch to give him the nod in the striking power.

Last time I checked, Cap's shield is not an amplifier. It was able to redirect the shock from the hammer into a shockwave but the initial force is all from Thor. I mean, Cap's shield doesn't have energy of its own, how do you explain it being able to amplify Thor's attack.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Last time I checked, Cap's shield is not an amplifier. It was able to redirect the shock from the hammer into a shockwave but the initial force is all from Thor. I mean, Cap's shield doesn't have energy of its own, how do you explain it being able to amplify Thor's attack.

Like abhi and Adam, he'll probably mention the dialogue from AOU about making Thor's energy double back in order to cause the explosion.

They obviously don't know that doubling back is a specific term meaning to send something back in the direction it came from. They just saw the word double and went OMG, it amped Thor's power.

Basically, they misunderstood what was actually being said

So after Thor 1 where Thor became worthy again, he was essentially going to kill Cap for trying to break up a fight by going overboard with that much energy? He's really that blood thirsty and still worthy? Wasn't the whole point of the first movie that he became worthy by learning humility and controlling his temper? So he then unleashes something like that on someone who he knows would basically instantly die? For trying to break up a fight? I thought the implication was that vibranium had a strange effect on his hammer. If that is just a leap in logic, then fine, but it's no more a leap in logic than what some other posters have said.

Also, silent master, why did Thor need that machine in Age of Ultron then if he was strong enough to one shot the whole island? Why bother with it? Why not just hit the island until it broke?

Originally posted by emporerpants
So after Thor 1 where Thor became worthy again, he was essentially going to kill Cap for trying to break up a fight by going overboard with that much energy? He's really that blood thirsty and still worthy? Wasn't the whole point of the first movie that he became worthy by learning humility and controlling his temper? So he then unleashes something like that on someone who he knows would basically instantly die? For trying to break up a fight? I thought the implication was that vibranium had a strange effect on his hammer.

Also, silent master, why did Thor need that machine in Age of Ultron then if he was strong enough to one shot the whole island? Why bother with it? Why not just hit the island until it broke?

People get pissed off. When warriors and soldiers get pissed off, it can end up being deadly. Thor learned humility, he didn't learn to be a pacifist. As far as he was concerned, there were some earthlings meddling around with his brother and the tesseract. I'm not saying Thor was right to go for a killing blow against Cap, but let's not pretend that he was only going for a love tap.

As for Cap's shield reacting "weirdly" to Thor's hammer, all it seems to me is that the shield redirects the energy from the blow into a shockwave instead getting redirected to the wielder, because otherwise Cap's arm would have broken. We know the shield doesn't absorb the shock completely, because otherwise there wouldn't be any shockwave. We know the shield doesn't have energy of its own to amplify an energy/shock applied to it, because otherwise it should have done so every time it was hit, shot, slashed, etc.

So the only explanation left is that it merely redirects the energy away from the bearer. It just so happens that Thor's blow is so strong that the shockwave that results from it is that big. It's really not that complicated, we've seen Thor create shockwaves by simply hitting the ground, and the ground would absorb shock a lot more than a metal shield. So if Thor can make such a shockwave from a ground slam it makes sense that hitting the shield causes a bigger shockwave.

The machine didn't amp his power, I've already explained what the term "doubling back" means.

Originally posted by FrothByte
People get pissed off. When warriors and soldiers get pissed off, it can end up being deadly. Thor learned humility, he didn't learn to be a pacifist. As far as he was concerned, there were some earthlings meddling around with his brother and the tesseract. I'm not saying Thor was right to go for a killing blow against Cap, but let's not pretend that he was only going for a love tap.

As for Cap's shield reacting "weirdly" to Thor's hammer, all it seems to me is that the shield redirects the energy from the blow into a shockwave instead getting redirected to the wielder, because otherwise Cap's arm would have broken. We know the shield doesn't absorb the shock completely, because otherwise there wouldn't be any shockwave. We know the shield doesn't have energy of its own to amplify an energy/shock applied to it, because otherwise it should have done so every time it was hit, shot, slashed, etc.

So the only explanation left is that it merely redirects the energy away from the bearer. It just so happens that Thor's blow is so strong that the shockwave that results from it is that big. It's really not that complicated, we've seen Thor create shockwaves by simply hitting the ground, and the ground would absorb shock a lot more than a metal shield. So if Thor can make such a shockwave from a ground slam it makes sense that hitting the shield causes a bigger shockwave.

I can see that. I still don't think it was totally Thor, but anything on my end with that is simply conjecture, so we are left with just the feat. I will agree the feat is impressive and has more destructive output than what Superman has done thus far, but I think that is simply because Superman hasn't tried to do anything like that yet, but I am not going to debate on what Supes hasn't done yet. So for now, I will agree that the feat is > damage output wise than what Supes has currently shown. Even though my gut feeling tells me different and that warrior or no he wouldn't put that much energy into an attack on someone he sees as essentially helpless, we don't debate gut feelings.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The machine didn't amp his power, I've already explained what the term "doubling back" means.

Again, why bother with the machine at all? Why not just obliterate the island straight up then?

If it wasn't totally Thor, give us a % for how much was Thor and tell us what provided the rest.

Originally posted by emporerpants
Again, why bother with the machine at all? Why not just obliterate the island straight up then?

Don't care, my only interest in this part of the debate is to debunk that the vibranium amped Thor's power.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Don't care, my only interest in this part of the debate is to debunk that the vibranium amped Thor's power.

It's because he couldn't dude. Stop being obtuse. He CLEARLY needed the machine to destroy the island. Are you really going to sit there and say he didn't? Seriously? This is why the feat is a wash. There are too many factors in play to say it was purely Thor's striking power that destroyed the island.

Originally posted by emporerpants
It's because he couldn't dude. Stop being obtuse. He CLEARLY needed the machine to destroy the island. Are you really going to sit there and say he didn't? Seriously? This is why the feat is a wash. There are too many factors in play to say it was purely Thor's striking power that destroyed the island.

If you're going to claim that it amped his power, explain how.

Originally posted by Silent Master
If you're going to claim that it amped his power, explain how.

Sure, as soon as you explain why doubling back the energy would cause the explosion. Why did the energy need to be doubled back? How and why did doubling it back cause the explosion if his strike alone could have done it? Why did they have to overload the machine in order to destroy the island? Can you answer those questions? The feat is a wash. It can't be quantified and there are too many factors in play. You know it, and I know it.

I mean, if you want to argue that blast radius of Thor's actual hit was impressive that is one thing, ok, we can talk about that. But to imply that it was purely Thor's striking power that destroyed the island and that he could have done it in one hit without the machine is...well...quite frankly its astounding that anyone would put forth that idea with a straight face. The fact of the matter is he needed the machine to destroy the island. How much or how little he needed is unknown. Which is what makes the feat a wash.

Originally posted by emporerpants
Sure, as soon as you explain why doubling back the energy would cause the explosion. Why did the energy need to be doubled back? How and why did doubling it back cause the explosion if his strike alone could have done it? Why did they have to overload the machine in order to destroy the island? Can you answer those questions? The feat is a wash. It can't be quantified and there are too many factors in play. You know it, and I know it.

I don't have to explain anything, you made the claim.

I am claiming the feat is a wash and can't be used as a gauge of Thor's striking power because there are too many unknowns. If you disagree, then you DO have to answer those questions.

Originally posted by emporerpants
It's because he couldn't dude. Stop being obtuse. He CLEARLY needed the machine to destroy the island. Are you really going to sit there and say he didn't? Seriously? This is why the feat is a wash. There are too many factors in play to say it was purely Thor's striking power that destroyed the island.

I don't think he had the power to destroy the entire island, not with just one hit anyway, but I do think he could destroy the surface, or at least a good chunk of it. He already had a similar feat in Jotunheim with lightning and it's not such a stretch to think he can combine lightning with a hammer strike to accomplish something similar if not greater.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I don't think he had the power to destroy the entire island, not with just one hit anyway, but I do think he could destroy the surface, or at least a good chunk of it. He already had a similar feat in Jotunheim with lightning and it's not such a stretch to think he can combine lightning with a hammer strike to accomplish something similar if not greater.

I agree, I think he could destroy a decent portion of it as well. Just not the whole thing, and it is impossible to say how much of the island would be destroyed. Which is why the feat is a wash, as he needed the machine to accomplish what was shown.

Originally posted by emporerpants
I am claiming the feat is a wash and can't be used as a gauge of Thor's striking power because there are too many unknowns. If you disagree, then you DO have to answer those questions.

We know Thor's power wasn't amped.

Originally posted by emporerpants
I agree, I think he could destroy a decent portion of it as well. Just not the whole thing, and it is impossible to say how much of the island would be destroyed. Which is why the feat is a wash, as he needed the machine to accomplish what was shown.

I don't think any of us ever claimed he destroyed the entire island, just the city on the surface.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I don't think any of us ever claimed he destroyed the entire island, just the city on the surface.

Like I've said before, even if you only give Thor 10% of the credit, it's still multiple times better than anything Superman has ever done.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I don't think any of us ever claimed he destroyed the entire island, just the city on the surface.

Silent Master implied it, several times. The feat is a wash. Too many variables to know how much was Thor and how much was the machine.

But in any event, Thor beats Steppenwolf, and Supes beats Thor. I think we are in agreement on that yes?

Originally posted by emporerpants
Silent Master implied it, several times. The feat is a wash. Too many variables to know how much was Thor and how much was the machine.

No, I didn't. I just said that Thor's power wasn't amped. because it wasn't.

Originally posted by emporerpants
But in any event, Thor beats Steppenwolf, and Supes beats Thor. I think we are in agreement on that yes? Thor beats Superman as well. Don't go off topic and try to troll.

Originally posted by Silent Master
No, I didn't. I just said that Thor's power wasn't amped. because it wasn't.

Then what were we arguing about? The feat is a wash. Can't really say how much of the destruction was due to Thor and how much was due to the machine, so we can't really use it as a striking feat.

Anyway, looks like we are all in agreement that Thor beats stepy and Supes beats Thor.

Lol y'all don't like his feats so make shit up. Complete garbage posts. Trash. Straight up.

Originally posted by emporerpants
Then what were we arguing about? The feat is a wash. Can't really say how much of the destruction was due to Thor and how much was due to the machine, so we can't really use it as a striking feat.

Anyway, looks like we are all in agreement that Thor beats stepy and Supes beats Thor.

The feat isn't a wash, we may not have all the varaibles, but we have enough to get a rough idea of the low-end for the power Thor used and it's >> Superman's best damage output.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The feat isn't a wash, we may not have all the varaibles, but we have enough to get a rough idea of the low-end for the power Thor used and it's >> Superman's best damage output.

Hmm. I'm willing to agree that it is a good showing for Thor, and that it is impressive. Looks like we just happen to disagree with to what extent Thor was responsible for the destruction of the island. I can live that. Like I said, I am just uncomfortable using it as a gauge for Thor due to the variables, with you attributing more power to Thor than I. So while I disagree with you on this, at least we are both being reasonable, and at least we both agree that it is impressive and that he beats Stepy.

We know how much power is in lightning and we know how long Thor was summoning lightning. so just using those two known variables.

We know that Thor's power output was >>> Superman's best striking feat.