Ares (DCEU) vs. Hela (MCU)

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



robotflug
Two Dark Gods, and biological siblings of two heroic gods, are about to clash in a fight to the death. The Older Half-Brother of Wonder Woman, faces off against the Older Sister of Thor.

Battle Location: Los Padres National Forest.

riv6672
Bane dies.

So does Ares. Hela was way more impressive.

Josh_Alexander
Originally posted by robotflug
Two Dark Gods, and biological siblings of two heroic gods, are about to clash in a fight to the death. The Older Half-Brother of Wonder Woman, faces off against the Older Sister of Thor.

Battle Location: Los Padres National Forest.

Hela would demolish, she is just on another level.

Adam Grimes
Diana has a much better chance at beating Hela than Lupin tbh

Psychotron
Ares was pathetic. He dies quckly.

carthage
Hela destroys

BrolyBlack
Ares gets one shotted

h1a8
Ares wins eventually. Hela has no defense against lightning, TK, and his teleportation.

BrolyBlack

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Ares wins eventually. Hela has no defense against lightning, TK, and his teleportation.

Her defense would be that Ares' tk isn't strong enough to hold her and his lightning isn't strong enough to ko her.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Her defense would be that Ares' tk isn't strong enough to hold her and his lightning isn't strong enough to ko her.

She cant fly. He can hold her in the air indefinitely. But I was referring to Ares controlling her weapons via TK.
His lightning is strong enough to eventually ko her.

h1a8

Josh_Alexander
Originally posted by h1a8
She cant fly. He can hold her in the air indefinitely. But I was referring to Ares controlling her weapons via TK.
His lightning is strong enough to eventually ko her.

Thor's lightning》》》》Ares

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
She cant fly. He can hold her in the air indefinitely. But I was referring to Ares controlling her weapons via TK.
His lightning is strong enough to eventually ko her.

Show him using that tactic.

Prove it.

BruceSkywalker
as per usual bane dies...


ares dies, he has no way of stopping hela

Josh_Alexander
How did the Bane thing came to be?

BrolyBlack
Originally posted by h1a8
She cant fly. He can hold her in the air indefinitely. But I was referring to Ares controlling her weapons via TK.
His lightning is strong enough to eventually ko her.

When did he hold Wonder Woman indefinitely?

Eon Blue

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Show him using that tactic.

Prove it.

I don't have to, as my other points weren't countered.

h1a8
Originally posted by BrolyBlack
When did he hold Wonder Woman indefinitely?

When my other points still stand.

h1a8

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
I don't have to, as my other points weren't countered.

Your concession is accepted.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Your concession is accepted.

For that point, but not the others.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
For that point, but not the others.

Before we move on, do debates on this forum go by how a character is shown to act or what is potentially possible with their power set?

Psychotron
In what reality is Ares going to restrain someone strong enough to crush Mjolnir with smile?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Before we move on, do debates on this forum go by how a character is shown to act or what is potentially possible with their power set?

Most here go by potentially possible.

For me it goes by both to an extent based off the totality of the circumstances. We let common sense be our guide and disregard any CIS.

Also, just because a character wasn't put in a unique circumstance in a movie doesn't mean that if they were put in that situation in a forum that they wouldn't perform certain actions.

For instance, if Hela throws blades at Ares, then Ares is going to use TK, wind, etc to deflect them or send them back at her. He's not just going to sit there and do nothing.

Ares will use lightning (as he did against the God's thousands of years ago as he did against WW).

But if you like then we can argue who would win if we controlled the characters and possess all their skill and abilities.

And we can argue who would win if they fought in character (but doesn't suffer under CIS)

h1a8
Originally posted by Psychotron
In what reality is Ares going to restrain someone strong enough to crush Mjolnir with smile?
Restrain? No. Lift in the air. Hela can't fly so it bypasses her strength.

But Ares probably won't do that a lot (or hardly) since that is borderline OOC.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Most here go by potentially possible.

For me it goes by both to an extent based off the totality of the circumstances. We let common sense be our guide and disregard any CIS.

Also, just because a character wasn't put in a unique circumstance in a movie doesn't mean that if they were put in that situation in a forum that they wouldn't perform certain actions.

For instance, if Hela throws blades at Ares, then Ares is going to use TK, wind, etc to deflect them or send them back at her. He's not just going to sit there and do nothing.

Ares will use lightning (as he did against the God's thousands of years ago as he did against WW).

But if you like then we can argue who would win if we controlled the characters and possess all their skill and abilities.

And we can argue who would win if they fought in character (but doesn't suffer under CIS)

Wrong, we argue in-character. only you try and go by power-set.

If I'm wrong, feel free to post examples of "most" other people arguing powerset.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Wrong, we argue in-character. only you try and go by power-set.

If I'm wrong, feel free to post examples of "most" other people arguing powerset.

Your first sentence is a false statement. The word "we" makes it false. There are at least several argued potential, including Nibedicus.

To prove you wrong, I just need to show 1 person doing it (not most).

P. S. I stated that we argue in character. But that wasn't your original question.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Your first sentence is a false statement. The word "we" makes it false. There are at least several argued potential, including Nibedicus.

To prove you wrong, I just need to show 1 person doing it (not most).

P. S. I stated that we argue in character. But that wasn't your original question.

You realize that I just got you to admit to being a troll, right? as I got you to admit that you use both and you even mentioned Nib. the poster I was going to use in order to prove that when other people argue powerset/protentional, you call them out and act like it doesn't count.

Thank you for showcasing your double-standard to the entire board.

*Drops mic

Psychotron
Originally posted by h1a8
Restrain? No. Lift in the air. Hela can't fly so it bypasses her strength.

But Ares probably won't do that a lot (or hardly) since that is borderline OOC.

He didn't do it to Diana so I doubt it.

FrothByte
Originally posted by h1a8
Most here go by potentially possible.

For me it goes by both to an extent based off the totality of the circumstances. We let common sense be our guide and disregard any CIS.

Also, just because a character wasn't put in a unique circumstance in a movie doesn't mean that if they were put in that situation in a forum that they wouldn't perform certain actions.

For instance, if Hela throws blades at Ares, then Ares is going to use TK, wind, etc to deflect them or send them back at her. He's not just going to sit there and do nothing.

Ares will use lightning (as he did against the God's thousands of years ago as he did against WW).

But if you like then we can argue who would win if we controlled the characters and possess all their skill and abilities.

And we can argue who would win if they fought in character (but doesn't suffer under CIS)

We debate using feats. If Ares has a feat of holding WW in the air for at least a good amount of time then your argument has merit. If he doesn't then you're basically just making stuff up.

Silent Master
Originally posted by FrothByte
We debate using feats. If Ares has a feat of holding WW in the air for at least a good amount of time then your argument has merit. If he doesn't then you're basically just making stuff up.

h1 is a hypocrite, he uses the "Cap doesn't fight like that" argument in his rebuttal to Nib. but when I use the same argument against Ozy, he claims it's irrelevant.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
You realize that I just got you to admit to being a troll, right? as I got you to admit that you use both and you even mentioned Nib. the poster I was going to use in order to prove that when other people argue powerset/protentional, you call them out and act like it doesn't count.

Thank you for showcasing your double-standard to the entire board.

*Drops mic

Wrong

Originally posted by Silent Master
Wrong, we argue in-character. only you try and go by power-set.

If I'm wrong, feel free to post examples of "most" other people arguing powerset.


Originally posted by h1a8
Your first sentence is a false statement. The word "we" makes it false. There are at least several argued potential, including Nibedicus.

To prove you wrong, I just need to show 1 person doing it (not most).

P. S. I stated that we argue in character. But that wasn't your original question.

h1a8
Originally posted by FrothByte
We debate using feats. If Ares has a feat of holding WW in the air for at least a good amount of time then your argument has merit. If he doesn't then you're basically just making stuff up.

He has the capability but not the character. So he most likely will not do such a tactic. I been dropped that. Why bring it up?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
h1 is a hypocrite, he uses the "Cap doesn't fight like that" argument in his rebuttal to Nib. but when I use the same argument against Ozy, he claims it's irrelevant.

You didn't use the same argument against Ozy. You are using a red herring argument (something that's irrelevant to my argument). You are basically forcing me to have a particular argument (when that's not my argument) and then you are trying to defeat it.

Basically, you are trying to defeat an argument that I don't have.

Strawman right?

Silent Master
Yes I did, we both used a form of "he doesn't fight that way" argument.

So which is it, is that argument valid or is it irrelevant?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes I did, we both used a form of "he doesn't fight that way" argument.

So which is it, is that argument valid or is it irrelevant?

No, you created a strawman (Ozy doesn't fight at bullet speed) when that wasn't my argument at all.

Silent Master
Yes or no.

Is the argument "they don't fight thay way" valid?

FrothByte
Originally posted by h1a8
He has the capability but not the character. So he most likely will not do such a tactic. I been dropped that. Why bring it up?

Just pointing out that we don't debate with an argument that isn't supported by feats.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
No, you created a strawman (Ozy doesn't fight at bullet speed) when that wasn't my argument at all.

We both used a form of "he doesn't fight that way" argument. That being said, this is a general question, meant to apply to future debates, not past ones.

Yes or no.

Is "they don't fight that way" a valid argument.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
We both used a form of "he doesn't fight that way" argument. That being said, this is a general question, meant to apply to future debates, not past ones.

Yes or no.

Is "they don't fight that way" a valid argument.

If it can be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is out of character (barring CIS) for a character to perform actions that is within their capacity AND it is relevant to the debate then, yes, it is a valid argument.

Be careful, "yes" is the answer only under these stipulations. Otherwise, the answer is "no".

For example, your argument that Ozy does not fight that way is irrelevant due to it not addressing that argument that is on the table.

h1a8
Originally posted by FrothByte
Just pointing out that we don't debate with an argument that isn't supported by feats.

Who is "we"?
This is because different members have debated all types of different ways.

With that said, your statement is irrelevant as no one in this thread does that. You might as well state that people breath air to survive.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
If it can be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is out of character (barring CIS) for a character to perform actions that is within their capacity AND it is relevant to the debate then, yes, it is a valid argument.

Be careful, "yes" is the answer only under these stipulations. Otherwise, the answer is "no".

For example, your argument that Ozy does not fight that way is irrelevant due to it not addressing that argument that is on the table.

So, when you used that argument against Nib. what proof did you provide that using that tactic was out of character?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
So, when you used that argument against Nib. what proof did you provide that using that tactic was out of character?

I prefer you to make your point without the questions (since you are known to twist answers).

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
I prefer you to make your point without the questions (since you are known to twist answers).

My point is that you didn't provide any proof that Nib's argument would be OOC for Cap, IOW, your standards only seem to apply to other people.

If I'm wrong, feel free to provide the proof you used to prove Nib was using an OOC tactic for Cap.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
My point is that you didn't provide any proof that Nib's argument would be OOC for Cap, IOW, your standards only seem to apply to other people.

If I'm wrong, feel free to provide the proof you used to prove Nib was using an OOC tactic for Cap.

I didn't?

1. The burden is for Nib to prove his case.


2. I stated that EVERY time Cap fought someone he didn't tackle them (whether he never thought about it or its not his style) and take them to the ground. Rather, he punched and kicked, etc. This is with weaker opponents, equal opponents, and superior opponents.

Silent Master
No, you didn't.

So your claim is now that since Nib didn't back up his claim, that makes your argument of "he doesn't fight like that" valid?

Surtur
I think it's pointless to have fights with Hela and take her out of Asgard because Asgard empowers her and 99% of her feats take place there.

Though she wasn't on Asgard when she destroyed Thor's hammer and defeated them. But all her best durability feats are on Asgard.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
No, you didn't.

So your claim is now that since Nib didn't back up his claim, that makes your argument of "he doesn't fight like that" valid?

Read 2.
That proves it. That is what I wrote in reply.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Read 2.
That proves it. That is what I wrote in reply.

2 was just you making claims, but providing no proof to back them up.

Are you saying that all claims are 100% true unless proven otherwise?

Nibedicus

FrothByte
Regarding this match, it will be extremely long I think. Hela doesn't have the ability to redirect Ares' lightning which is what killed him and Ares doesn't have the ability to destroy Asgard to kill Hela.

I do think Hela gets the better out of Ares though, as Ares is neither as strong, as skilled or as quick on the draw as Hela.

h1a8

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
2 was just you making claims, but providing no proof to back them up.

Are you saying that all claims are 100% true unless proven otherwise?

Do you know that 2. was me listing facts?

NemeBro

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Do you know that 2. was me listing facts?

No, it was you listing your opinion. as I can name at least two fights where Cap does use the type of tactics Nib was talking about.

You have a bad habit of confusing your opinion with facts.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
No, it was you listing your opinion. as I can name at least two fights where Cap does use the type of tactics Nib was talking about.

You have a bad habit of confusing your opinion with facts.

False statements aren't opinions. You need to go back to grammar school and relearn "opinion".

Sure go ahead and list 2 times Cap tackled someone, got them to the ground, and fought them on the ground.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
False statements aren't opinions. You need to go back to grammar school and relearn "opinion".

Ok, you didn't list your opinion. you lied.

There, feel better now?

Josh_Alexander
How did this thread turned to be so loongg?

Hela is a couple of tiers above Ares!

h1a8
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
How did this thread turned to be so loongg?

Hela is a couple of tiers above Ares!

Unofficial (or official) Tiers are meaningless in determining who wins a fight.

Lower tiers can beat higher tiers with the right powerset and skill.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Ok, you didn't list your opinion. you lied.

There, feel better now?

You need to relearn what telling "lie" is.
Hint: It's not a false statement.

Also, my statement isnt false unless you can prove it to be.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
You need to relearn what telling "lie" is.
Hint: It's not a false statement.

Also, my statement isnt false unless you can prove it to be.

Easily done, He grappled with his younger self during their fight in Endgame and he slammed Red Skull into the flight chair in his first movie. done.

So, were you mistaken or did you lie?

Josh_Alexander
Originally posted by h1a8
Unofficial (or official) Tiers are meaningless in determining who wins a fight.

Lower tiers can beat higher tiers with the right powerset and skill.

Hela was slaying thousands of Valkyries, who have similar stats to WW.

Ares was killed by a lightning, whereas Hela is immune to Thor's most powerful lightning.

Hela>>>Ares.

Darth Thor
Oh jeez Hela stomps.

h1a8
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Hela was slaying thousands of Valkyries, who have similar stats to WW.

Ares was killed by a lightning, whereas Hela is immune to Thor's most powerful lightning.

Hela>>>Ares.
Irrelevant. Hela could have killed zillions of powerful beings while Ares killed by a paperclip and Ares can still win.

h1a8
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Oh jeez Hela stomps.

Ares can deflect and send her blades back at her, Ares can attack her with lightning. Ares can teleport anywhere and instantly disintegrate strong metal with a touch.

How would she win (let alone stomp)?

Josh_Alexander
Originally posted by h1a8
Irrelevant. Hela could have killed zillions of powerful beings while Ares killed by a paperclip and Ares can still win.

What the hell are you talking about now?

MCU Valkyrie is as good as Diana.

Thor's Lightning》》》》》》》Diana. That's enough to draw a victory conclusion on Hela's behalf.

h1a8
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
What the hell are you talking about now?

MCU Valkyrie is as good as Diana.

Thor's Lightning》》》》》》》Diana. That's enough to draw a victory conclusion on Hela's behalf.

WW beat Ares by redirecting lightning. This doesn't apply to Hela, therefore the abc logic is faulty.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Easily done, He grappled with his younger self during their fight in Endgame and he slammed Red Skull into the flight chair in his first movie. done.

So, were you mistaken or did you lie?
Look at my post

Originally posted by h1a8
False statements aren't opinions. You need to go back to grammar school and relearn "opinion".

Sure go ahead and list 2 times Cap tackled someone, got them to the ground, and fought them on the ground.

Tackled + take to ground + fought on ground

Red skull example is Cap pushing Red skull into chair with shield.
No take down and no fight on the ground there.

Endgame example has Cap counter a punch with a judo throw. He didn't tackle and take to the ground.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Look at my post



Tackled + take to ground + fought on ground

Red skull example is Cap pushing Red skull into chair with shield.
No take down and no fight on the ground there.

Endgame example has Cap counter a punch with a judo throw. He didn't tackle and take to the ground.

No, this is about whether or not Cap has ever used the tactics Nib was talking about, the ones you claimed were OOC. My examples prove that Nib wasn't using OOC tactics.

So, were you mistaken or were you lying?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
No, this is about whether or not Cap has ever used the tactics Nib was talking about, the ones you claimed were OOC. My examples prove that Nib wasn't using OOC tactics.

So, were you mistaken or were you lying?

The tactic NIB mentions is in my post. Tackles + take down + fight on ground. Cap never fought like that.

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
The tactic NIB mentions is in my post. Tackles + take down + fight on ground. Cap never fought like that.

Wrong, Nib's stated tactics, that you claimed were OOC were not restricted to Tackles + take down + fight. Nib brought up multiple things including clinch and grappling, Nib then said and this is a direct quote from "Then Cap wins via choke/submission/ground and ground" he later edited that he meant ground and pound.

You claimed that Nib tactics were OOC, I've just proven via actual feats that Cap has indeed fought like Nib was talking about.

So, were you mistaken or did you lie?

Darth Thor
Originally posted by h1a8
Ares can deflect and send her blades back at her,

Only in your own head canon.

Originally posted by h1a8
Ares can attack her with lightning.

Yeah because that worked so well for Thor.

h1a8
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Only in your own head canon.



Yeah because that worked so well for Thor.

TK? Teleportation? Did you watch the movie?

There is no evidence to suggest that she resist lightning indefinitely as she was affected by Thor's lightning but recovered.

carthage

Darth Thor
Originally posted by h1a8
TK? Teleportation? Did you watch the movie?

There is no evidence to suggest that she resist lightning indefinitely as she was affected by Thor's lightning but recovered

Yeah I saw a far inferior combatant in Wonder Woman stomping his butt.

His TK wasnt very impressive. Not compared to arguably the most powerful Marvel villain.

No she wasnt effected. Thor outright stated it did nothing to her.

You can keep accusing me of not seeing the film, but its just a desperate attempt on your end to ignore a major lack of feats from Ares to put him anywhere near Thor level, let alone Hela.

Nibedicus

Josh_Alexander
Originally posted by h1a8
WW beat Ares by redirecting lightning. This doesn't apply to Hela, therefore the abc logic is faulty.

And? Thor's lightning 》》》》》any lightning produced by Ares.

And Hela can still just impale Ares EASILY.

h1a8

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
There is no double standard. If a character's shows something at least once then it is a viable tactic. You were saying that a character will do shit he hasn't shown once.

Wrong, I posted two different fights where Cap used the tactics Nib mentioned.

So, when you claimed the tactics were OOC. were you mistaken or lying?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Wrong, I posted two different fights where Cap used the tactics Nib mentioned.

So, when you claimed the tactics were OOC. were you mistaken or lying?

Wrong. You posted shit that wasn't the tactics he stated.

Originally posted by h1a8
Look at my post



Tackled + take to ground + fought on ground

Red skull example is Cap pushing Red skull into chair with shield.
No take down and no fight on the ground there.

Endgame example has Cap counter a punch with a judo throw. He didn't tackle and take to the ground.

Silent Master
Incorrect, that quote is what you stated, not nib. Nib listed and again this is a direct quote "Anyone with a casual understanding of MMA (those who watch MMA fights for example) would know that this leaves you open to shots/tackles/grapples/grabs/takedowns/etc" and "Then Cap wins via choke/submission/ground and ground."

I then provided two fights where Cap used those tactics. so were you mistaken or lying when you claimed that Nib was using OOC tactics?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
Incorrect, that quote is what you stated, not nib. Nib listed and again this is a direct quote "Anyone with a casual understanding of MMA (those who watch MMA fights for example) would know that this leaves you open to shots/tackles/grapples/grabs/takedowns/etc" and "Then Cap wins via choke/submission/ground and ground."

I then provided two fights where Cap used those tactics. so were you mistaken or lying when you claimed that Nib was using OOC tactics?


You left out something important. This is what he said



Basically Cap wins by tackling Ozy to the ground, then submission or ground and pound. Cap never did that.

In one scene he pushed Red skull away (not tackle him).
In another scene he caught a punch from Cap and Judo threw him down.

Nowhere did Cap tackle someone to the ground or even tackle someone period.

It's the combination NIB was arguing.

Silent Master
Once again, the examples I provided show Captain America using the tactis nib mentioned.

So once again, were you merely mistaken or did you lie when you claimed those tactics were out of character?

FrothByte
Cap has feats of tackling someone to the ground and also has feats of ground and pounding. I don't see what the issue here is.

h1a8
Originally posted by FrothByte
Cap has feats of tackling someone to the ground and also has feats of ground and pounding. I don't see what the issue here is.

Show a clip of him tackling someone to the ground.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Once again, the examples I provided show Captain America using the tactis nib mentioned.

So once again, were you merely mistaken or did you lie when you claimed those tactics were out of character?

I'm done. You have no idea what you are talking about. Just another one of your trolling mind games.

h1a8
Anyway, not to derail the thread. Ares wins. Hela won't be able to touch him. He can teleport, use TK and send the blades back at her, use lightning on her, etc.

Nibedicus
Cap tackles Batroc to the ground and KOs him with a punch.

I await the goalposts that will surely be moved from this.

big grin

Silent Master
Here we go, first the two I've already mentioned

1. Cap tackles Red Skull into the flight chair
2. Cap grapples with his younger self

Now, some new ones
3. Cap tackles a soldier off an armored vehicle in his first movie
4. Cap grabs a chitauri in a headlock and then throws him over a railing in Avengers
5. Cap tackles Batroc in Winter Soldier
6-9. Cap uses throws against four people in Winter Soldier
10. Cap throws Iron-man to the ground and then procedes to ground and pound him with the shield in Civil War.

/Thread over.

tkitna
Another thread ruined by H1 and his inability to grasp common sense.

h1a8
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Cap tackles Batroc to the ground and KOs him with a punch.

I await the goalposts that will surely be moved from this.

big grin
thumb up
I'll accept that.
Nothing wrong with a little proof without the need of trolling /flaming.

I can see if you gave proof and I denied it.

With that said, tactic won't work on Ozy for the reasons I gave.


Originally posted by Silent Master
Here we go, first the two I've already mentioned

1. Cap tackles Red Skull into the flight chair
2. Cap grapples with his younger self

Now, some new ones
3. Cap tackles a soldier off an armored vehicle in his first movie
4. Cap grabs a chitauri in a headlock and then throws him over a railing in Avengers
5. Cap tackles Batroc in Winter Soldier
6-9. Cap uses throws against four people in Winter Soldier
10. Cap throws Iron-man to the ground and then procedes to ground and pound him with the shield in Civil War.

/Thread over.

We are talking about tackling someone to the ground and then either submission or ground and pound. That entire combination. Everything else is irrelevant.

The closest we have is Cap tackling Batroc through a door onto the ground (after Batroc is basically out of it) and punching him. That would count as proving in character.

Silent Master
No, we are talking about the tactics Nib listed, which you claimed were OOC. again Nib listed "shots/tackles/grapples/grabs/takedowns/etc" all my examples qualify.

/Thread

Edit: However even following your strawman. the Batroc and Iron-man examples qualify. which means your claim of OOC was wrong. plus, all the throws count for taking people to the ground.

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
No, we are talking about the tactics Nib listed, which you claimed were OOC. again Nib listed "shots/tackles/grapples/grabs/takedowns/etc" all my examples qualify.

/Thread

Edit: However even following your strawman. the Batroc and Iron-man examples qualify. which means your claim of OOC was wrong. plus, all the throws count for taking people to the ground.
No, my argument is that Ozy won't get tagged (punched, kicked, etc).

He pointed out comedian tackling Ozy.
His point was that Cap can do the same with additional submission or ground and pound. This is a specific combination that's relevant to the discussion. Your initial examples showed none of that.
If you don't understand that then too bad.

Throws don't count because that would require Ozy to be grabbed without defense. Remember, my argument is that Ozy won't get touched. Tackling is relevant (but faulty) since Ozy was shown to be pushed into the wall.

Silent Master
This isn't about your argument, it's about Nib's argument that you falsely labeled OOC. and Nib listed multiple tactics, tactis that I've proven Cap has used multiple times.

However even if we restrict this to your strawnan of Nib's argument. the Batroc and Iron-man examples prove that you're wrong about it being OOC.

Nibedicus

h1a8

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
This is wrong. If I knew it was in character for Cap to do then I would have just argued that the tactic will fail (I did actually since I argued multiple rebuttals). Wouldn't have even argued the OOC angle at all.

Do you see how quickly I conceded once you gave the right example?
That proves there was no double standard present at all. If it were then I wouldn't have argued against clear onscreen evidence. I even asked for proof many posts ago.

So you can focus on anything that you like.
Fact is that Ares wins here.

That doesn't address your double standard though. why argue using potential for Ares but require absolute specificity vs Cap. after all. all 10 of my examples would qualify under potential for Cap. yet you only accepted two of them.

h1a8

Silent Master
If it's just about fighting style then all 10 of my examples qualify, thanks for the concession.

Josh_Alexander

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
If it's just about fighting style then all 10 of my examples qualify, thanks for the concession.

Because none of them have Cap tackling someone to the ground, and doing a submission or ground and pound. None of them even had Cap tackling someone to the ground at all. Your examples were plain stupid and irrelevant. Nib gave the proper example.

Remember, Cap doesn't have to suffer CIS to choose not to tackle and submit/pound. So arguing in character is vital. Ares has to suffer from CiS to not do the things I stated. It's a totally big difference.

Silent Master
You can't have it both ways. either it's about potentional or it's about absolute specificity, which is it?

h1a8
Originally posted by Silent Master
You can't have it both ways. either it's about potentional or it's about absolute specificity, which is it?

Silent trolls again when he's losing. This has been explained to you multiple times.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by h1a8
Ares has to suffer from CiS to not do the things I stated.


Except his power level is what you are imagining it to be here.

Hela is just in a while other league.

Thor would stomp Ares, even easier than Wonder Woman did.

FrothByte
Originally posted by h1a8
No, my argument is that Ozy won't get tagged (punched, kicked, etc).

He pointed out comedian tackling Ozy.
His point was that Cap can do the same with additional submission or ground and pound. This is a specific combination that's relevant to the discussion. Your initial examples showed none of that.
If you don't understand that then too bad.

Throws don't count because that would require Ozy to be grabbed without defense. Remember, my argument is that Ozy won't get touched. Tackling is relevant (but faulty) since Ozy was shown to be pushed into the wall.

Stop being a jerk H1. Cap tackled Batroc then knocked him out with a punch. That's a perfectly valid tackled + ground n pound example. Comedian was able to tackle Ozy. If you want to claim that tackling is somehow faulty then you're just being a jerk at this point.

Nibedicus

Silent Master
Originally posted by h1a8
Silent trolls again when he's losing. This has been explained to you multiple times.

Yes, you want to hold Cap and Hela to absolute specificity while Ozy and Ares get the benefit of protentional.

IOW, you employ massive double standards.

Silent Master
Just to be clear, all 10 of these examples show Cap using tactics other than striking(punching/kicking). thus they're valid examples that it's not OOC for Cap to use non-strike based tactics.


Originally posted by Silent Master
Here we go, first the two I've already mentioned

1. Cap tackles Red Skull into the flight chair
2. Cap grapples with his younger self

Now, some new ones
3. Cap tackles a soldier off an armored vehicle in his first movie
4. Cap grabs a chitauri in a headlock and then throws him over a railing in Avengers
5. Cap tackles Batroc in Winter Soldier
6-9. Cap uses throws against four people in Winter Soldier
10. Cap throws Iron-man to the ground and then procedes to ground and pound him with the shield in Civil War.

/Thread over.

Quoted it so Imp will have an easy time finding it. BTW, the point of bringing this up was to demonstrate h1's double standards in regards to proof.

Nibedicus

h1a8
I guess you guys miss the multiple posts where I said the batroc feat proves it is in character? Cap is allowed to attempt to tackle someone to the ground if and when he decides.

What's the purpose of all this extra posts derailing the thread?

Nibedicus

Silent Master
Exactly, when it's a Marvel character H1 not only demands you provide examples of them using that specific technique, but that your examples show them using the techniques in a specific order, or it doesn't count.

When it's a character he supports, he goes by potential. No actual examples needed.

h1a8

Nibedicus

Silent Master
Style of fighting is something you made up in order to give yourself an excuse to claim Nib's argument wasn't valid.

h1a8

FrothByte
Originally posted by h1a8
Skill and fighting style are two different things. A striker will not have the propensity to tackle someone to the ground unless you show them doing it.
If there were NO scenes showing Cap tackling someone to the ground then you can't argue that he will in a forum fight. That's the end of story.

Clearly I agree that if Cap is shown tackling someone to the ground in one scene and using ground fighting techniques in another scene then he can string the two together in a forum fight. My main objection WAS that Cap wasn't shown to tackle someone to the ground. But since you provided a scene where he did then there is no more an argument. You are just wasting time arguing for no reason at all. Your elaborate attempt to move goalposts or argue around that is nothing but trolling.

As far as Ares, he was shown to teleport effortlessly and instantly (probably quicker and easier than nightcrawler). He was shown to use TK in all sorts of ways (controlling many swords, lifting huge chunks of concrete off the ground, ripping a tank's track off, etc). So it's not a matter of skill of whether he can use TK or teleportation defensively but a matter of choice. And he will choose to do such tactics if that is the only way to avoid being hit by something (assuming he can respond to the attack).

This is flat out stupid. Tackling someone and pounding them while they are on the ground are extremely basic maneuvers that an untrained schoolyard bully knows how to do. They may not do it well but you don't need some kind of special skill or training to know the basic concept.

Equating this to someone using powers in a way that's more complicated than they had shown before is pure trolling at this point.

Nibedicus

Silent Master
BTW, those are simple yes or no questions, they don't require multiple paragraphs to answer.

h1a8

Nibedicus
Originally posted by h1a8
My intention was primarily showing Cap tackling someone to the ground. Silent didn't provide any scenes where that occurred. He provided a lot of irrelevant scenes (Cap fighting on the ground, Cap striking someone with a shield push hit, Cap getting someone on the ground that didn't consist of tackling them to the ground). That's what I meant when I argued the proper combination (not necessarily sequence). He had to first establish Cap tackling someone to the ground (as this stems from the original argument about Comedian).

In summary, Silent was arguing shit whose spirit does not stem from Comedian tackling Ozy.

Answer the questions. 3 questions yes or no.

h1a8
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Answer the questions. 3 questions yes or no.

My statement answers the questions.
Your questions are misleading and leads someone to a false conclusion.
They paint a one sided picture that doesn't convey the full picture.
Also asking setup questions instead of getting to the point is rather deceiving.

Also, it does not matter what my argument WAS or WAS PERCEIVED TO Be, but what MY CURRENT argument is.

Nibedicus

h1a8

Nibedicus

Silent Master
Originally posted by Nibedicus
^ can't even answer 3 simple questions.

Obvious liar-troll caught.

/thread.

Agreed.

BrolyBlack
Originally posted by h1a8
For you to insist on getting me to answer loaded questions KNOWING that my statement paints the full picture proves that it is your intention to flame and troll me via being deceitful.

You suck, you and Cuck Alexander are the reason no one posts here anymore

Eon Blue
The last three posts are on target.

H1 is a troll.

Hela wins.

BruceSkywalker
i'll bet anyone this thread will last until the nfl draft

FrothByte
Originally posted by h1a8
My statement answers the questions.
Your questions are misleading and leads someone to a false conclusion.
They paint a one sided picture that doesn't convey the full picture.
Also asking setup questions instead of getting to the point is rather deceiving.

Also, it does not matter what my argument WAS or WAS PERCEIVED TO Be, but what MY CURRENT argument is.

I read the questions Nib asked, there's nothing misleading about them. They're very straightforward and unbiased.



^There's nothing misleading about that. If you think that's a misleading question then you have no idea what a misleading question is.

Rather, it seems to show that you're refusing to answer the question because it will highlight how dumb your stance is.

BrolyBlack
Originally posted by h1a8
For you to insist on getting me to answer loaded questions KNOWING that my statement paints the full picture proves that it is your intention to flame and troll me via being deceitful.

When everyone says you are wrong, you are wrong.

h1a8
Originally posted by FrothByte
I read the questions Nib asked, there's nothing misleading about them. They're very straightforward and unbiased.



^There's nothing misleading about that. If you think that's a misleading question then you have no idea what a misleading question is.

Rather, it seems to show that you're refusing to answer the question because it will highlight how dumb your stance is.

I disagree. My stance is fairly simple and very logical.

If you disagree then clearly explain why you think so.

FrothByte
Originally posted by h1a8
I disagree. My stance is fairly simple and very logical.

If you disagree then clearly explain why you think so.

My post mentioned nothing about your "stance".

My post was about pointing out your inability to answer a simple question.

Silent Master
Originally posted by FrothByte
My post mentioned nothing about your "stance".

My post was about pointing out your inability to answer a simple question.

Agreed, h1 is just too scared to answer them.

BrolyBlack
H1 should have been banned a long time.

Josh_Alexander
Originally posted by BrolyBlack
You suck, you and Cuck Alexander are the reason no one posts here anymore

Reported for baiting. Take any personal comments to the Off Topic Circle Jerk.

Thanks.

h1a8
Originally posted by FrothByte
My post mentioned nothing about your "stance".

My post was about pointing out your inability to answer a simple question. That's because they are loaded questions. My post explained EVERYTHING ABOUT THE SITUATION. Anyone could read it and answer any relevant questions. The fact that he's asking is a trap.


My point is just be direct and say what you think. Enough with the baiting.

Nibedicus

FrothByte
Originally posted by h1a8
That's because they are loaded questions. My post explained EVERYTHING ABOUT THE SITUATION. Anyone could read it and answer any relevant questions. The fact that he's asking is a trap.


My point is just be direct and say what you think. Enough with the baiting.

No dude, it seems apparent that you don't know what a loaded question is. Just because someone asks a question you don't want to answer doesn't mean it's a loaded question.

Now, are you going to answer the simple questions or are you going to continue being a troll?

h1a8
Originally posted by FrothByte
No dude, it seems apparent that you don't know what a loaded question is. Just because someone asks a question you don't want to answer doesn't mean it's a loaded question.

Now, are you going to answer the simple questions or are you going to continue being a troll?

This is my post.

Originally posted by h1a8
My intention was primarily showing Cap tackling someone to the ground. Silent didn't provide any scenes where that occurred. He provided a lot of irrelevant scenes (Cap fighting on the ground, Cap striking someone with a shield push hit, Cap getting someone on the ground that didn't consist of tackling them to the ground). That's what I meant when I argued the proper combination (not necessarily sequence). He had to first establish Cap tackling someone to the ground (as this stems from the original argument about Comedian).

In summary, Silent was arguing shit whose spirit does not stem from Comedian tackling Ozy.

Here are the questions.
Originally posted by Nibedicus

1. Were you or were you not shown that Cap can do advanced grappling techniques by SM? (Y/N)

2. Are the techniques shown by SM techniques a pure striker would use? (Y/N)

3. Did you and did you not still insist that a specific sequence of tackling is required before you would accept it AFTER SM has already shown you the techniques Cap used? (Y/N)


Let's analyze the questions with the post.

1. Is answered in the post. "Cap fighting on the ground" "Cap getting someone on the ground that didn't consist of tackling" These imply Cap using grappling techniques. "Advanced" is debatable and relative.
2. Is loaded as Cap was implied grappling as stated in the post. I never used the term "pure". So Nib basically created a strawman with the question and hence a loaded question. Cap is primarily a striker as with some MMA fighters. Now I originally stated that Cap would solely punch or kick in reply to Nib's original ground and pound argument. But after it was mentioned that Cap has grappled then I never argued that Cap would solely punch or kick anymore. My argument became Cap tackling (which is in line with the original Comedian argument).

3.
Is explained in the post. I used the term "combination" not "sequence" and hence its a loaded question (because if I say no to the question then Nib accuses me of lying). The point is that Cap never was shown tackling someone to the ground by Silent. This is vital as it stems from Nib argument of how Cap will beat Ozy via Comedian showing.

How does it look if someone stated Cap will beat Ozy by tackling him to the ground and another poster comes in defending that argument by NOT showing Cap tackling someone to the ground?
Silent was trolling very clearly.

Silent Master
Answer the questions

Nibedicus

h1a8

Silent Master
Just answer the questions.

BrolyBlack
Reported H1 for taking this off topic into a closed topic by Imp

Nibedicus
Originally posted by Silent Master
Just answer the questions.

FrothByte
Anyway back to topic: Ares has never shown the ability to hold someone stationary via TK. Since H1 has not shown any scenes where Ares does this then he can't do it. This is using h1's own logic about needing specific video evidence of Cap tackling someone followed by a ground and pound.

h1a8
Originally posted by FrothByte
Anyway back to topic: Ares has never shown the ability to hold someone stationary via TK. Since H1 has not shown any scenes where Ares does this then he can't do it. This is using h1's own logic about needing specific video evidence of Cap tackling someone followed by a ground and pound. No one is arguing that tactic.

Eon Blue
Reported H1 for blatant trolling.

Hela wins. Spite thread.

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>