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

Same scenario in Endgame, except instead of fighting Cap, Thor and IM, Thanos is instead facing off against Wonder Woman, Aquaman and Cyborg.

Everyone has their standard weaponry. Thanos has his twin swords. No IG.

Can the DCEU team defeat Thanos?

Nope.

Cyborg drops Thanos into the ocean, then Aquaman has 10 trillion krill attack Thanos.

cyborg dies pretty easy...


diana and arthur put up a fight but they eventually lose

Thanos. These match pretty sums up to Thanos vs WW.

WW doesn't have the stats to face the Mad Titan.

WW slices his head off faster than he can respond

Thanos pummels them fairly quickly.

Originally posted by h1a8
WW slices his head off faster than he can respond

Feats of WW slicing someone's head off?

The Titan pummels them

Diana uses her lazo on Thanos and says, "Thanos, last son of Titan.." Then Thanos breaks the lazo an rapes her. /thread.

Originally posted by tkitna
Thanos pummels them fairly quickly.

Prove that Thanos can respond to someone moving almost as fast a bullet Or Thanos being able to hit someone viewing him as a statue.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Feats of WW slicing someone's head off?

It's not against her character to do so. It's not like a different fighting style. At worst she slices off his limbs. So Thanos gets his arms hacked off.

Originally posted by h1a8
It's not against her character to do so. It's not like a different fighting style. At worst she slices off his limbs. So Thanos gets his arms hacked off.

According to your rules, if you can't provide an exact feat. it doesn't count.

WW speed blitzes and decapitates Thanos.

She is fast enough to swing on lightning.

Originally posted by h1a8
WW slices his head off faster than he can respond Originally posted by playa1258
WW speed blitzes and decapitates Thanos.


Just like she did to Steppenwolf right

Originally posted by Inhuman
Just like she did to Steppenwolf right

And like she did to Luddendorf and Ares.

Originally posted by FrothByte
And like she did to Luddendorf and Ares.

Yeah I forgot they also got blitzed and decapitated.

H1 makes his own rules as he goes along
Thanos slaughters these clowns

Thanos wins. Easily.

Thanos would kick their ass. I' I love WW but even with Aquaman and Cyborg they would lose. IMO of course.

Thanos reigns supreme.

Thanos FTW.

Originally posted by Inhuman
Just like she did to Steppenwolf right

This is a forum fight. PIS is not allowed. Unless you claim Steppenwolf is as fast a bullet then it's not PIS. Characters fight at their best, not worst.

Originally posted by h1a8
This is a forum fight. PIS is not allowed. Unless you claim Steppenwolf is as fast a bullet then it's not PIS. Characters fight at their best, not worst.

Wrong, people fight in character. if you want to claim they will fight a certain way, you have to provide feats.

Plus, per your own stated rules, the feats have to be extremely specific or they don't count.

Thanos gets his arm chopped off by WW and they beat him to death with it.

Originally posted by h1a8
This is a forum fight. PIS is not allowed. Unless you claim Steppenwolf is as fast a bullet then it's not PIS. Characters fight at their best, not worst.

It wasn't PIS. Also that was the way WW regularly fights. If anything the DD thing was PIS.
The only people she has speed blitzed have been regular humans.
She didnt blitz and cut the heads off of Stepppenwolf, Luddendorf or Ares.
The WW you have in your head isnt the standard WW that is fighting like the flash and cutting people heads off. She has never done that.
You are doing your usual nonsense of speculating, making up a fantasy scenarios based on small bits of information in the movies of your favorite characters.

Originally posted by Inhuman
It wasn't PIS. Also that was the way WW regularly fights. If anything the DD thing was PIS.
The only people she has speed blitzed have been regular humans.
She didnt blitz and cut the heads off of Stepppenwolf, Luddendorf or Ares.
The WW you have in your head isnt the standard WW that is fighting like the flash and cutting people heads off. She has never done that.
You are doing your usual nonsense of speculating, making up a fantasy scenarios based on small bits of information in the movies of your favorite characters. It's called plot induced stupidity.
You can't be faster than bullets in multiple scenes and be as slow as a human in others. Unless you believe those characters she fought were fast as bullets too the there is no PIS.

Originally posted by h1a8
It's called plot induced stupidity.
You can't be faster than bullets in multiple scenes and be as slow as a human in others. Unless you believe those characters she fought were fast as bullets too the there is no PIS.

No, it would be called CIS.

Originally posted by h1a8
It's called plot induced stupidity.
You can't be faster than bullets in multiple scenes and be as slow as a human in others. Unless you believe those characters she fought were fast as bullets too the there is no PIS.

The fact of the matter is that when she fights non humans she is not speed blitzing and cutting heads off.
Post the scene(s) that prove your point.

Originally posted by Inhuman
The fact of the matter is that when she fights non humans she is not speed blitzing and cutting heads off.
Post the scene(s) that prove your point.

For the sake of the plot. It happens all the time in fiction. That's why it's called plot induced stupidity.
Its induced for the sake of the plot and it is stupid because it contradicts the actual truth of things.


Originally posted by Silent Master
No, it would be called CIS.

No it is PIS because she is not choosing to move slower than she has before, she is literally written to move slower for the plot.

CIS only implies if a character is literally that stupid. Smart characters will not do insanely stupid things. And dumb characters will not do incredibly smart things.

Exactly, she was written that way. IOW, fighting like that goes against how she was written.

Thanks for agreeing with us.

Edit: Or to put it in terms h1 will understand, thanks for admitting that the writer's intent is for her not to fight that way and we all know how you feel about the writer's intent.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Exactly, she was written that way. IOW, fighting like that goes against how she was written.

Thanks for agreeing with us.

She was written that way in those scenes for the sake of the plot which contradict the truth. Therefore those scenes were PIS by definition. She was written to fight like that (bullet speed)in other scenes.

Originally posted by h1a8
She was written that way in those scenes for the sake of the plot which contradict the truth. Therefore those scenes were PIS by definition. She was written to fight like that in other scenes.

Yes, thank you for telling us that the writer's intent is for her not to fight that way and we all know how you view "writer's intent"

Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes, thank you for telling us that the writer's intent is for her not to fight that way and we all know how you view "writer's intent"

This is a forum fight. Characters fight to the best of their abilities. PIS is not allowed. PIS = writers intent isn't allowed in a forum fight.

First of all you were wrong about CIS.Thats shows that you have no idea of what you are talking about here. You are now just arguing against a character for bias reasons. Therefore you do not have a say in this thread. Argue from an objective position (admit when you are wrong) and you will have a say. Til then you don't.

They fight to the best of their shown abilities, so thank you for admitting that WW was shown to not fight that way, per feats and writer's intent.

Originally posted by Silent Master
They fight to the best of their shown abilities, so thank you for admitting that WW was shown to not fight that way, per feats and writer's intent. PIS wouldn't exist if she didn't fight that way. She obviously did.

Note: "That way" is defined as with super speed.

No, "that way" is defind as slicing off head's or other body parts at super-speed.

Why must you lie so much?

Originally posted by Silent Master
No, "that way" is defind as slicing off head's or other body parts at super-speed.

Why must you lie so much?

She has the character to do so (she will choose to do so). She has the speed to do so. In a forum, there is no plot stopping her.

For you to say that she will not do that means
1. She will not choose to do so even if she is capable
Or
2. She doesn't have the capacity to do it.

Which one is it?

Originally posted by h1a8
She has the character to do so (she will choose to do so). She has the speed to do so. In a forum, there is no plot stopping her.

For you to say that she will not do that means
1. She will not choose to do so even if she is capable
Or
2. She doesn't have the capacity to do it.

Which one is it?

Then post feats of her doing so.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Then post feats of her doing so.

First answer the question
For you to say that she will not do that means
1. She will not choose to do so even if she is capable
Or
2. She doesn't have the capacity to do it.

Which one is it?

Originally posted by h1a8
First answer the question
For you to say that she will not do that means
1. She will not choose to do so even if she is capable
Or
2. She doesn't have the capacity to do it.

Which one is it?

Per your own stated rules when debating with Nib, if you can't provide a feat where WW performs the exact tactic we are talking about. she can't do it.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Per your own stated rules when debating with Nib, if you can't provide a feat where WW performs the exact tactic we are talking about. she can't do it.

Concession accepted. WW wins

Originally posted by h1a8
Concession accepted. WW wins

Nobody conceded, so you just proved you're a liar.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Nobody conceded, so you just proved you're a liar.

Me being a liar or not or my my character has nothing to do with the argument for why WW wins.

It's either true or false. If true then she wins. If false then you have to answer the question that explains why.

Failure to do so is automatically a concession by refusing to debate the actual argument.

Originally posted by h1a8
Me being a liar or not or my my character has nothing to do with the argument for why WW wins.

It's either true or false. If true then she wins. If false then you have to answer the question that explains why.

Failure to do so is automatically a concession by refusing to debate the actual argument.

By your own rules, you haven't proven she'll win.

Originally posted by Silent Master
By your own rules, you haven't proven she'll win.

My so called rules are irrelevant. Either she wins or not for the reasons given. It's about what you think is the truth, not my alleged rules. If you are going to debate then do so. Trolling is not debating. Arguing my character is a fallacy.

Again, wrong. rules are very important in a debate and by your own rules you have provided no evidence, thus there is nothing for anyone to refute. Until you provide evidence for your claim, it's worthless.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Again, wrong. rules are very important in a debate and by your own rules you have provided no evidence, thus there is nothing for anyone to refute. Until you provide evidence for your claim, it's worthless.
Concession accepted. Your post is not a debate against the argument itself.

Only trolls use the term, concession accepted. Conception accepted.

Originally posted by h1a8
Concession accepted. Your post is not a debate against the argument itself.

Again, thank you for proving that you're a liar

Originally posted by h1a8
Concession accepted. WW wins

How does she win if you haven't posted a feat of her decapitating someone?

Here is a video of Wonder Woman speedblitzing and decapitating German soldiers (1:15).

https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ

Originally posted by FrothByte
How does she win if you haven't posted a feat of her decapitating someone?

It's not against her character to do so. She also can slice off limbs. That's a win too.
If someone has two ways to win then arguing against one of the ways is dumb. Why? Because it doesn't defeat the argument that they win.

Team wins. Aquaman too durable. Ww too skilled

Originally posted by h1a8
It's not against her character to do so. She also can slice off limbs. That's a win too.
If someone has two ways to win then arguing against one of the ways is dumb. Why? Because it doesn't defeat the argument that they win.

You keep saying that, yet you've not posted a single feat to back it up.

Originally posted by h1a8
Concession accepted. Your post is not a debate against the argument itself.

Loser

Originally posted by Silent Master
You keep saying that, yet you've not posted a single feat to back it up.

Originally posted by h1a8
First answer the question
For you to say that she will not do that means
1. She will not choose to do so even if she is capable
Or
2. She doesn't have the capacity to do it.

Which one is it?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Feats of WW slicing someone's head off?


Are you suggesting Wonder Woman is against killing or against slicing off heads?

Either way, she has the ability to do both, and has done the former. Saying she wouldn't is saying she would purposely hold back doing something she clearly has the ability to do (provided there is an opening to do so, though if not, it would be contingent on the opponent's skill, not her lack of ability).

For example, I don't hit woman, but if we were to discuss a hypothetical scenario where I would, then, in most cases, I have what it takes to absolutely hurt her (unless the woman is someone like Ronda Rousey or Cris Cyborg lol).

Originally posted by Dominis
Are you suggesting Wonder Woman is against killing or against slicing off heads?

Either way, she has the ability to do both, and has done the former. Saying she wouldn't is saying she would purposely hold back doing something she clearly has the ability to do (provided there is an opening to do so, though if not, it would be contingent on the opponent's skill, not her lack of ability).

For example, I don't hit woman, but if we were to discuss a hypothetical scenario where I would, then, in most cases, I have what it takes to absolutely hurt her (unless the woman is someone like Ronda Rousey or Cris Cyborg lol).

According to h1, if you want to suggest a tactic for a character, you have to provide a feat of them performing that exact tactic or it doesn't count.

I'm just holding h1 to his own standards.

Originally posted by h1a8


You keep saying that, yet you've not posted a single feat to back it up.

Originally posted by h1a8
It's not against her character to do so. She also can slice off limbs. That's a win too.
If someone has two ways to win then arguing against one of the ways is dumb. Why? Because it doesn't defeat the argument that they win.

It wasn't against Cap's character to tackle someone yet you still asked for an exact example of Cap tackling someone. So I ask the same from you: please provide an instance where WW decapitated someone otherwise your claim has no bearing.

Originally posted by Dominis
Are you suggesting Wonder Woman is against killing or against slicing off heads?

Either way, she has the ability to do both, and has done the former. Saying she wouldn't is saying she would purposely hold back doing something she clearly has the ability to do (provided there is an opening to do so, though if not, it would be contingent on the opponent's skill, not her lack of ability).


So why do you think she never used the said tactic against Luddendorf or Ares or Steppenwolf?

Originally posted by FrothByte
It wasn't against Cap's character to tackle someone yet you still asked for an exact example of Cap tackling someone. So I ask the same from you: please provide an instance where WW decapitated someone otherwise your claim has no bearing.

I gave two possible scenarios where WW wins. Trying to defeat one of them doesn't defeat the other. You have to defeat both in order to have a rebuttal. Otherwise you are just trolling the thread.

Originally posted by FrothByte
So why do you think she never used the said tactic against Luddendorf or Ares or Steppenwolf?


Walk up and slice off their heads? I'm sure she would have if they made it that easy and left such an opening.

I'm not arguing whether or not she can simply do that to Thanos, but if he lacks the speed and skill to prevent it, well...

What I'm saying is that just because we don't see her slicing off heads doesn't mean it's something she would never be willing to do. That's the logic I do often see in vs debates tho, so I didn't know if Silent Master was serious, until he said he was just calling out h1a8 on his supposed double standard.

Originally posted by h1a8
I gave two possible scenarios where WW wins. Trying to defeat one of them doesn't defeat the other. You have to defeat both in order to have a rebuttal. Otherwise you are just trolling the thread.

Where are your feats where WW uses those exact tactics?

Originally posted by h1a8
I gave two possible scenarios where WW wins. Trying to defeat one of them doesn't defeat the other. You have to defeat both in order to have a rebuttal. Otherwise you are just trolling the thread.

You're dodging the question. Why do you need specific examples for Cap but not for WW?

Let's cut to the chase.
These 3 already got their shit pushed in at the same time and were helpless against Steppenwolf. And Stepp would get curb stomped by Thanos or even Endgame/Infinity War Thor.

Originally posted by Inhuman
Let's cut to the chase.
These 3 already got their shit pushed in at the same time and were helpless against Steppenwolf. And Stepp would get curb stomped by Thanos or even Endgame/Infinity War Thor.

This is a forum fight.
WW has superspeed as a power. She will use her powers to the best of her ability. So either she didn't use superspeed on Steppenwolf and it is PIS or Steppenwolf is superfast (as she is).

Originally posted by FrothByte
You're dodging the question. Why do you need specific examples for Cap but not for WW?

WW wins by the argument I gave. You either agree or disagree. Anything else is derailing the thread.

P.S. WW has sliced off limbs and will do so. Cap has tackled and will attempt to do so if he feels he has to.

Originally posted by h1a8
This is a forum fight.
WW has superspeed as a power. She will use her powers to the best of her ability. So either she didn't use superspeed on Steppenwolf and it is PIS or Steppenwolf is superfast (as she is).

IOW, you were trolling Nib when you demanded exact feats for Cap?

Originally posted by h1a8
WW wins by the argument I gave. You either agree or disagree. Anything else is derailing the thread.

P.S. WW has sliced off limbs and will do so. Cap has tackled and will attempt to do so if he feels he has to.

Was this in reply to me? Because I don't see any answer to my question at all. It's like you're talking about a completely different topic. So let me repeat my question: why did you ask for a specific tackling feat for Cap but refuse to give a beheading feat for WW?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Was this in reply to me? Because I don't see any answer to my question at all. It's like you're talking about a completely different topic. So let me repeat my question: why did you ask for a specific tackling feat for Cap but refuse to give a beheading feat for WW?
So you are not arguing who wins here but derailing the thread in investigating my alleged double standard? Fine.


All trolling aside. I ask for objectivity (no bias) in reply to this post.
Failure will result in loss of discussion about the topic. I'll just continue to argue WW wins.


Here goes.
To me, it is reasonable that if a person is willing to cut off limbs and also kill then they will have the propensity to attempt to behead. Perhaps not right away. Now I could be wrong here. But that's just my feeling. Now if you honestly disagree that WW will ever try to behead then I can accept that and we can argue around it. But be honest.


Nib stated Cap will shoot and tackle Ozy to the ground and submit him.
I never recalled Cap ever tackling someone to the ground (I was wrong). I recalled that he was a pure stand up fighter like IPman. Would asking for proof that IP man will tshoot and tackle someone to the ground if someone is caiming he will reasonable? In other words, Should we ask for proof that Ip man will tackle or just accept it if someone claim it? And is tackling someone to the ground for Ip man as improbable as WW trying to behead eventually?

In conclusion, slicing off limbs combined with the willingness to kill implies a possibility to attempt to behead in my eyes. But nothing IP man did suggests that he will ever tackle someone to the ground and submit them. There is nothing to infer from. It's completely out of character while beheading is not. They are simply not comparable in a reasonable sense. But again, I could be wrong.

What do you think? Again be objective as possible. Easier said than done I know.


Originally posted by Silent Master
IOW, you were trolling Nib when you demanded exact feats for Cap?
The exact feat is to shoot and tackle to the ground. That's all. No more and no less.

So would you accept that a pure stand up fighter (like Ip man) would suddenly shoot and tackle someone to the ground if they never was shown to (in that case they wouldn't be a pure striker anymore)?

If that were true, then the 10 examples I posted of Cap using tactics other than "stand up fighting" would have been enough proof, yet you claimed they weren't(even though they included both tackles and ground and pound). only Nib posting a feat where Cap used the specific tactics in the correct order counted.

So again, why does Cap need exact feats, but WW doesn't?

Originally posted by Silent Master
If that were true, then the 10 examples I posted of Cap using tactics other than "stand up fighting" would have been enough proof, yet you claimed they weren't(even though they included both tackles and ground and pound). only Nib posting a feat where Cap used the specific tactics in the correct order counted.

So again, why does Cap need exact feats, but WW doesn't?

No the examples you posted were shit. They had nothing to do with Cap shooting and tackling someone to the ground in a h2h fight. You suck at logic. Nib posted the required feat.

I edited the other post too. I replied to your post at the bottom.

Originally posted by h1a8
No the examples you posted were shit. They had nothing to do with Cap shooting and tackling someone to the ground in a h2h fight. You suck at logic. Nib posted the required feat.

Wrong, I listed the Batroc example, which you later admitted counted, I also listed Cap tackling someone off an armored vehicle.

Also if only "shooting and tackling someone to the ground in a h2h fight" counts, then where is the example of WW cutting someone's head off in a h2h fight?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Wrong, I listed the Batroc example, which you later admitted counted, I also listed Cap tackling someone off an armored vehicle.

Also if only "shooting and tackling someone to the ground in a h2h fight" counts, then where is the example of WW cutting someone's head off in a h2h fight?

You did not list the Batroc example. You listed shitty examples.
All you had to do is post that one.

The others do not even remotely show that Cap will shoot and tackle someone to the ground as in Nibvs claim.

As far as the rest of your post. I addressed this in the previous post in detail.

Originally posted by h1a8
You did not list the Batroc example. You listed shitty examples.
All you had to do is post that one.

The others do not even remotely show that Cap will shoot and tackle someone to the ground as in Nibvs claim.

As far as the rest of your post. I addressed this in the previous post in detail.

Proof that h1 is a liar.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Proof that h1 is a liar.

Proof that Silent Master is a liar and a troll.
Nibedicus posted the Batroc example before you did. By that time it was too late. I accepted his example. You just copied off him.

You never gave relevant examples prior to him.

Even if I did copy him, which I didn't(I didn't see Nib's post until after I posted my list) I still posted it and your claim was that I never mentioned it.

However, even without that one, I still posted this

Originally posted by Silent Master
3. Cap tackles a soldier off an armored vehicle in his first movie

Originally posted by Silent Master
Even if I did copy him, which I didn't(I didn't see Nib's post until after I posted my list) I still posted it and your claim was that I never mentioned it.

However, even without that one, I still posted this

You mentioning it after the fact is irrelevant as you claimed I disregarded your examples. I did not ignore the Batroc example as it was given before you did. I disregarded your previous posted examples.

Cap tackling some off a vehicle. I could not find anything but Cap hitting someone with his shield. Post the scene.

Why lie?

Originally posted by h1a8
You did not list the Batroc example.

Originally posted by Silent Master
5. Cap tackles Batroc in Winter Soldier

Originally posted by Silent Master
Why lie?

The point is you claimed I disregarded your Batroc example.
This is false as you didn't post it until after Nib did. By that time I already accepted Nibs post. So I couldn't have disregarded your copied example.

That is what is meant when I stated that you did not mention it. You did not mention it before I accepted it from Nib.

And the other feat is not Cap shooting and tackling someone to the ground. Unless I have the wrong scene. In that case post the scene.

Here is your claim

Originally posted by h1a8
You did not list the Batroc example.

Here is me proving you wrong.

Originally posted by Silent Master
5. Cap tackles Batroc in Winter Soldier

BTW, this is another lie

Originally posted by h1a8
By that time I already accepted Nibs post.

You didn't accept Nib's post until over 2 hours after I posted my list.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Here is your claim



Here is me proving you wrong.

Troll post. Every one who can read can clearly see you are trolling.

Silent: I listed the Batroc feat and you only accepted it after Nib posted

H1a8: You never mentioned the Batroc feat.

Again listing the feat after it was already listed is not listing it.

You are a liar and a troll. Everyone sees it.

You're trying to move the goalpost, your original claim was

Originally posted by h1a8
You did not list the Batroc example.

Here is me proving you wrong.

Originally posted by Silent Master
5. Cap tackles Batroc in Winter Soldier

WW wins solo. She cuts Thanos up.

Originally posted by h1a8
WW wins solo. She cuts Thanos up.

Define "cuts Thanos up".

Originally posted by Silent Master
Define "cuts Thanos up".

It's defined however you think it's true.
It's open ended.

Originally posted by h1a8
It's defined however you think it's true.
It's open ended.


Ok, then provide examples of WW defeating opponents by "cutting them up".

Originally posted by Silent Master
Ok, then provide examples of WW defeating opponents by "cutting them up".

Why?

Originally posted by h1a8
Why?

Like you told Nib, if he can't provide specific examples, then the tactic isn't valid.

I'm just following your stated rules.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Like you told Nib, if he can't provide specific examples, then the tactic isn't valid.

I'm just following your stated rules.

Trolling me?
Ok. You can keep going. I'm not going to respond.

Originally posted by h1a8
Trolling me?
Ok. You can keep going. I'm not going to respond.

Using your rules is trolling?

Originally posted by h1a8
So you are not arguing who wins here but derailing the thread in investigating my alleged double standard? Fine.


All trolling aside. I ask for objectivity (no bias) in reply to this post.
Failure will result in loss of discussion about the topic. I'll just continue to argue WW wins.


Here goes.
To me, it is reasonable that if a person is willing to cut off limbs and also kill then they will have the propensity to attempt to behead. Perhaps not right away. Now I could be wrong here. But that's just my feeling. Now if you honestly disagree that WW will ever try to behead then I can accept that and we can argue around it. But be honest.


Nib stated Cap will shoot and tackle Ozy to the ground and submit him.
I never recalled Cap ever tackling someone to the ground (I was wrong). I recalled that he was a pure stand up fighter like IPman. Would asking for proof that IP man will tshoot and tackle someone to the ground if someone is caiming he will reasonable? In other words, Should we ask for proof that Ip man will tackle or just accept it if someone claim it? And is tackling someone to the ground for Ip man as improbable as WW trying to behead eventually?

In conclusion, slicing off limbs combined with the willingness to kill implies a possibility to attempt to behead in my eyes. But nothing IP man did suggests that he will ever tackle someone to the ground and submit them. There is nothing to infer from. It's completely out of character while beheading is not. They are simply not comparable in a reasonable sense. But again, I could be wrong.

What do you think? Again be objective as possible. Easier said than done I know.



The exact feat is to shoot and tackle to the ground. That's all. No more and no less.

So would you accept that a pure stand up fighter (like Ip man) would suddenly shoot and tackle someone to the ground if they never was shown to (in that case they wouldn't be a pure striker anymore)?

Asking for clarification why a poster is inconsistent with proof is not trolling.

You asked for specific feats of Cap tackling someone even though Silent already posted a clip of him grappling and fighting on the ground. You were insistent that he needed to post a clip of him tackling someone specifically.

So I'm asking why you're not applying a similar standard to yourself and provide exact proof of WW beheading someone?

Originally posted by h1a8
I recalled that he was a pure stand up fighter like IPman.

Only your "recall" is faulty, as my 10 examples proved that Cap isn't and never was a pure stand up fighter.


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.

It's rather telling that your "faulty" memory is always in your favor.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Asking for clarification why a poster is inconsistent with proof is not trolling.

You asked for specific feats of Cap tackling someone even though Silent already posted a clip of him grappling and fighting on the ground. You were insistent that he needed to post a clip of him tackling someone specifically.

So I'm asking why you're not applying a similar standard to yourself and provide exact proof of WW beheading someone?

Omfg
Why cant you understand English?
I DIDN'T ASK FOR EXAMPLES OF CAP GRAPPLING!

NIBEDICUS STATED CAP WILL SHOOT AND TACKLE OZY TO THE GROUND AND THEN SUBMIT HIM (OR GROUND AND POUND). This is because Comedian was shown pushing Ozy back to the wall.

I didn't recall Cap ever tackling someone to the ground. I only remember Cap bring a pure striker. I told Nib that was OOC.

Silent brings stupid ass examples where none of them show Cap tackling someone to the ground. Nibedicus then gives the correct example (Batroc). Silent then piggyback off Nib. I agree with Nib.
Silent lies and states he has been gave the Batroc example (he didn't). He gave dumb illogical examples instead.


Do you understand now?

And I explained the beheading logic in a previous post.

Originally posted by h1a8

To me, it is reasonable that if a person is willing to cut off limbs and also kill then they will have the propensity to attempt to behead. Perhaps not right away. Now I could be wrong here. But that's just my feeling. Now if you honestly disagree that WW will ever try to behead then I can accept that and we can argue around it. But be honest.

In conclusion, slicing off limbs combined with the willingness to kill implies a possibility to attempt to behead in my eyes. But nothing IP man did suggests that he will ever tackle someone to the ground and submit them. There is nothing to infer from. It's completely out of character while beheading is not. They are simply not comparable in a reasonable sense. But again, I could be wrong.

What do you think? Again be objective as possible. Easier said than done I know.

So would you accept that a pure stand up fighter (like Ip man) would suddenly shoot and tackle someone to the ground if they never was shown to (in that case they wouldn't be a pure striker anymore)?

You didn't answer the questions.

Originally posted by h1a8
Omfg
Why cant you understand English?
I DIDN'T ASK FOR EXAMPLES OF CAP GRAPPLING!

NIBEDICUS STATED CAP WILL SHOOT AND TACKLE OZY TO THE GROUND AND THEN SUBMIT HIM (OR GROUND AND POUND). This is because Comedian was shown pushing Ozy back to the wall.

I didn't recall Cap ever tackling someone to the ground. I only remember Cap bring a pure striker. I told Nib that was OOC.

Silent brings stupid ass examples where non of them show Cap tackling someone to the ground. Nibedicus then gives the correct example (Batroc). Silent then piggyback off Nib. I agree with Nib.
Silent lies and states he has been gave the Batroc example (he didn't). He gave dumb illogical examples instead.


Do you understand now?

And I explained the beheading logic in a previous post.



You didn't answer the questions.

See, you say you only remember Cap being a pure striker, yet Silent gave you some examples of Cap grappling yet you still consider him a pure striker?

Originally posted by h1a8

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

Originally posted by h1a8

In another scene he caught a punch from Cap and Judo threw him down.


In fact, you were very adamant that, regardless of the logic multiple people gave you on why Cap can tackle and ground and pound (a very basic move that even a schoolyard bully knows how to do) you refuse to acknowledge that he can do it unless someone gave you a specific example of him doing so:

Originally posted by h1a8



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


So I ask again, why are you unwilling to apply the same logic for yourself and provide a specific example of WW beheading someone? In your own words, it should be the entire combination of the move. Everything else is irrelevant.

Originally posted by FrothByte
See, you say you only remember Cap being a pure striker, yet Silent gave you some examples of Cap grappling yet you still consider him a pure striker?

You ignored my post that explains how beheading can be inferred from WW's actions. IP man tackling someone to the ground (via a shoot) can not be inferred in any way.




In fact, you were very adamant that, regardless of the logic multiple people gave you on why Cap can tackle and ground and pound (a very basic move that even a schoolyard bully knows how to do) you refuse to acknowledge that he can do it unless someone gave you a specific example of him doing so:



So I ask again, why are you unwilling to apply the same logic for yourself and provide a specific example of WW beheading someone? In your own words, it should be the entire combination of the move. Everything else is irrelevant.

I wasn't arguing that Cap doesn't know how to tackle. I was arguing that he wouldn't choose to even attempt to tackle (no propensity to tackle).
Pure strikers (like IP man) don't suddenly attempt to tackle someone to the ground.

I gave why we can infer that WW can attempt to behead based off her actions. We can't ever infer that IP man will shoot and tackle someone to the ground. They are not comparable in the least.

AND I DID USE THE SAME LOGIC. I STATED THAT WW PROBABLY WON'T BEHEAD (AT LEAST RIGHT AWAY). BUT SHE WILL ATTEMPT TO CUT OFF LIMBS.

Originally posted by h1a8
I wasn't arguing that Cap doesn't know how to tackle. I was arguing that he wouldn't choose to even attempt to tackle (no propensity to tackle).
Pure strikers (like IP man) don't suddenly attempt to tackle someone to the ground.

I gave why we can infer that WW can attempt to behead based off her actions. We can't ever infer that IP man will shoot and tackle someone to the ground. They are not comparable in the least.

AND I DID USE THE SAME LOGIC. I STATED THAT WW PROBABLY WON'T BEHEAD (AT LEAST RIGHT AWAY). BUT SHE WILL ATTEMPT TO CUT OFF LIMBS.

Except that Cap is not a pure striker and has grappled on numerous occasions. Besides, you didn't just want a feat of him tackling somebody, you wanted a feat of him tackling and then ground and pounding specifically, in that exact combination. Your words, not mine.

So I ask again, why aren't you providing proof of WW blitzing someone then beheading them in that exact combination?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Except that Cap is not a pure striker and has grappled on numerous occasions. Besides, you didn't just want a feat of him tackling somebody, you wanted a feat of him tackling and then ground and pounding specifically, in that exact combination. Your words, not mine.

So I ask again, why aren't you providing proof of WW blitzing someone then beheading them in that exact combination?

Cap grappling isn't the same as shooting and tackling someone to the ground. Ip man has grappled. But he never tackled someone to the ground. You are pretty stupid if you think Ip man will tackle someone to the ground and submit them or ground and pound them.

If I didn't want a feat of him tackling someone didn't I wouldn't have accepted the Batroc feat. I would still argue against it. You know I accepted Cap both tackling and ground and pound/submission right away? I didn't argue the showing at all.

In a minute, I'm about to give up this discussion. You keep ignoring my post. Read where I gave the reasoning behind the beheading. I even stated that WW won't try to behead multiple times. You keep insisting that is my argument. WW will attempt to slice off limbs before she ever tries to behead.

Your reasoning boils down to, I didn't want to accept the tactic, so I made up a BS excuse to demand Nib post a specific feat for Cap vs I wanted WW to use a certain tactic, so no specific feats needed.

Originally posted by h1a8
Cap grappling isn't the same as shooting and tackling someone to the ground. Ip man has grappled. But he never tackled someone to the ground. You are pretty stupid if you think Ip man will tackle someone to the ground and submit them or ground and pound them.

If I didn't want a feat of him tackling someone didn't I wouldn't have accepted the Batroc feat. I would still argue against it. You know I accepted Cap both tackling and ground and pound/submission right away? I didn't argue the showing at all.

In a minute, I'm about to give up this discussion. You keep ignoring my post. Read where I gave the reasoning behind the beheading. I even stated that WW won't try to behead multiple times. You keep insisting that is my argument. WW will attempt to slice off limbs before she ever tries to behead.

And as I've said before: tackling someone and then ground and pounding him is a very basic maneuver that almost anybody can do. And yes, that includes Ip Man. Just because he can do fancy chain punches doesn't mean he's above tackling someone if he needs to.

Matter of fact, trying to cut someone's head off is far more difficult than simply tackling someone. So if you're unwilling to assume that Cap can tackle then ground n pound despite him showing the capacity to grapple, then all the more you should be of the opinion that WW can't just behead someone just because she's cut off a hand... simply because cutting off the head is far more complicated than cutting off a hand.

Still, you're missing the point. You wanted an example of Cap doing exactly what you were asking, in the exact same order. So I ask again: Where is your proof of WW doing exactly what you were stating?

Or are you willing to admit that you can't provide that proof and thus will no longer claim that she can do so?

Originally posted by FrothByte
And as I've said before: tackling someone and then ground and pounding him is a very basic maneuver that almost anybody can do. And yes, that includes Ip Man. Just because he can do fancy chain punches doesn't mean he's above tackling someone if he needs to.

Matter of fact, trying to cut someone's head off is far more difficult than simply tackling someone. So if you're unwilling to assume that Cap can tackle then ground n pound despite him showing the capacity to grapple, then all the more you should be of the opinion that WW can't just behead someone just because she's cut off a hand... simply because cutting off the head is far more complicated than cutting off a hand.

Still, you're missing the point. You wanted an example of Cap doing exactly what you were asking, in the exact same order. So I ask again: Where is your proof of WW doing exactly what you were stating?

Or are you willing to admit that you can't provide that proof and thus will no longer claim that she can do so?
No, I wanted proof that Cap tackles someone to the ground. I corrected myself and stated that's what I meant.

Cap will tackle if he needs to? Well Cap was getting beat down by Loki. He didn't try to tackle. Ip man was getting beat down and never resorted to tackling someone. You are reaching here by saying they will tackle if they need to. That's BS. Cap will because of the Batroc scene but not IP man.

I studied kung fu many years ago. We learned lots of grappling. But never tackling someone to the ground. In the few fights I had I never had the propensity to tackle someone and neither did the people I fought.

Now WW viewing Thanos as a statue and just slicing his head off would be the most easiest thing to do. Why? Because Thanos isn't moving. But again, I conceded that she most likely will not attempt that. So what is your point?

If it's such an easy thing for her to do, why has WW never cut off anyone's head?

Originally posted by Silent Master
If it's such an easy thing for her to do, why has WW never cut off anyone's head?

PIS

Originally posted by h1a8
No, I wanted proof that Cap tackles someone to the ground. I corrected myself and stated that's what I meant.

Cap will tackle if he needs to? Well Cap was getting beat down by Loki. He didn't try to tackle. Ip man was getting beat down and never resorted to tackling someone. You are reaching here by saying they will tackle if they need to. That's BS. Cap will because of the Batroc scene but not IP man.

I studied kung fu many years ago. We learned lots of grappling. But never tackling someone to the ground. In the few fights I had I never had the propensity to tackle someone and neither did the people I fought.

Now WW viewing Thanos as a statue and just slicing his head off would be the most easiest thing to do. Why? Because Thanos isn't moving. But again, I conceded that she most likely will not attempt that. So what is your point?

So you want Cap to tackle Loki, Loki who was so strong that he wasn't even getting knocked back by Cap's flying kicks? Hah! You must know nothing about fighting if you think tackling someone massively stronger than you is the smart thing to do when you already have the speed and skill advantage on your feet. Ditto for IP man. The times he was getting beat up he was either fighting multiple opponents or bigger opponents than himself. Why would he go for a tackle?

We already know from your previous posts that you know nothing about martial arts, so I'll spare you the embarrassment and pretend that you didn't just claim to know kung fu.

So do you agree that since you can't provide a feat of WW cutting someone's head off that she won't be able to do so against Thanos?

Originally posted by h1a8
PIS

In order for it to be PIS, it would have to be something that is in-character, yet she doesn't do it for the sake of plot.

So, prove that cutting someone's head off is in character for WW.

Originally posted by h1a8
PIS

Troll harder

why is h1 peeing on himself

Originally posted by FrothByte
So you want Cap to tackle Loki, Loki who was so strong that he wasn't even getting knocked back by Cap's flying kicks? Hah! You must know nothing about fighting if you think tackling someone massively stronger than you is the smart thing to do when you already have the speed and skill advantage on your feet. Ditto for IP man. The times he was getting beat up he was either fighting multiple opponents or bigger opponents than himself. Why would he go for a tackle?

We already know from your previous posts that you know nothing about martial arts, so I'll spare you the embarrassment and pretend that you didn't just claim to know kung fu.

So do you agree that since you can't provide a feat of WW cutting someone's head off that she won't be able to do so against Thanos?

You claimed that IP man will tackle someone to the ground if he needed to. This is BS and you know it. IP man would die before that happens.

WW will see Thanos as a statue. She could either choose to cut his head off or a limb off. Either way she wins. This thread is spite.

Originally posted by Silent Master
In order for it to be PIS, it would have to be something that is in-character, yet she doesn't do it for the sake of plot.

So, prove that cutting someone's head off is in character for WW.

I did. She cut off limbs. She has killed. She has the ability to to see others as a statue. Altogether gives her the propensity to cut off Thanos head. Does that mean she will? No, but it's certainly in her character to do so. She could win countless ways.
She could slice his throat, lop off a limp, stab him in the chest, etc.

Originally posted by h1a8
I did. She cut off limbs. She has killed. She has the ability to to see others as a statue. Altogether gives her the propensity to cut off Thanos head. Does that mean she will? No, but it's certainly in her character to do so. She could win countless ways.
She could slice his throat, lop off a limp, stab him in the chest, etc.

First, she cut off one limb, not limbs. If you have to exaggerate to try and make your point stronger. it's not much of a point. 2nd you can't combine two separate feats to claim something is in-character.

Here is an example to illustrate your faulty logic, WW has hit people. WW has killed. therefore it's in-character for her to punch Batman's head off in a forum fight.

Originally posted by h1a8
You claimed that IP man will tackle someone to the ground if he needed to. This is BS and you know it. IP man would die before that happens.

WW will see Thanos as a statue. She could either choose to cut his head off or a limb off. Either way she wins. This thread is spite.

Don't think I'm not noticing your dodging tactics. But I'm nice and I'll let you get away with it.

I'm curious though why you think it's impossible for IP man to tackle someone if he needs to? You think this is above his skillset?

Also, please show me a clip of WW speedblitzing a skilled opponent and cutting a limb off. Remember that we debate using feats here.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Don't think I'm not noticing your dodging tactics. But I'm nice and I'll let you get away with it.

I'm curious though why you think it's impossible for IP man to tackle someone if he needs to? You think this is above his skillset?

Also, please show me a clip of WW speedblitzing a skilled opponent and cutting a limb off. Remember that we debate using feats here.

Skill and propensity are two different things.

It does not take skill to attempt to try to tackle.

Me showing you a clip has nothing to do with a forum fight.
Characters fight to the best of their ability.
WW would fight using her top speed and perceptions at all times.
That means Thanos would be a statue and he will be killed right after the bell. That's my argument and it won't change.

Originally posted by h1a8
.

Me showing you a clip has nothing to do with a forum fight.
Characters fight to the best of their ability.

Seems you need to be reminded of the mvf golden rule:



So I ask again, does WW have any feat where she speedblitzed a skilled opponent, making them look like a statue, then chopped a limb off?

Originally posted by h1a8
Skill and propensity are two different things.

It does not take skill to attempt to try to tackle.

Me showing you a clip has nothing to do with a forum fight.
Characters fight to the best of their ability.
WW would fight using her top speed and perceptions at all times.
That means Thanos would be a statue and he will be killed right after the bell. That's my argument and it won't change.

Feats of Wonder Woman fighting someone like you're claiming.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Seems you need to be reminded of the mvf golden rule:



So I ask again, does WW have any feat where she speedblitzed a skilled opponent, making them look like a statue, then chopped a limb off?

She can perceive bullets in slow motion. This is a movie feat.
She can move fast enough to block blocks from close range. This is a movie feat.
She has used the sword in slicing actions. This is a movie feat.

Therefore, WW perceives Thanos as a statue and gets to hacking.

Originally posted by h1a8
She can perceive bullets in slow motion. This is a movie feat.
She can move fast enough to block blocks from close range. This is a movie feat.
She has used the sword in slicing actions. This is a movie feat.

Therefore, WW perceives Thanos as a statue and gets to hacking.

Uhm... ok? Nothing you said there shows her hacking off a limb from a skilled fighter while making them look like statues. Do you understand english?


WW never perceived Luddendorf as a statue or hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
WW never perceived Ares as a statue and hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
WW never perceived Steppenwolf as a statue and hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.

The only feat where she actually chops off a limb is against DD and she certainly didn't move fast enough to make him look like a statue.

So again. where is your movie feat/clip that shows her chopping off limbs from a skilled fighter and making them look like statues?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Uhm... ok? Nothing you said there shows her hacking off a limb from a skilled fighter while making them look like statues. Do you understand english?


WW never perceived Luddendorf as a statue or hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
WW never perceived Ares as a statue and hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
WW never perceived Steppenwolf as a statue and hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.

The only feat where she actually chops off a limb is against DD and she certainly didn't move fast enough to make him look like a statue.

So again. where is your movie feat/clip that shows her chopping off limbs from a skilled fighter and making them look like statues?

This is a forum fight. Characters fight to the best of their ability.
A character having superspeed and perception in one scene but not in another doesn't take away that they will use superspeed and perception in the forum fight.

It's called PIS. WW didn't use speed (that she has) for the sake of the plot. It's stupid since it doesn't make sense. Therefore, it is called PLOT INDUCED STUPIDITY.

Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE to use her speed and perception ability in this fight.

Is that what you are claiming?

Originally posted by h1a8
This is a forum fight. Characters fight to the best of their ability.
A character having superspeed and perception in one scene but not in another doesn't take away that they will use superspeed and perception in the forum fight.

It's called PIS. WW didn't use speed (that she has) for the sake of the plot. It's stupid since it doesn't make sense. Therefore, it is called PLOT INDUCED STUPIDITY.

Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE to use her speed and perception ability in this fight.

Is that what you are claiming?

I'm claiming that you yourself asked for specific clips to show a character being able to do something on screen, regardless of whether or not they're capable of doing so or not (ie. Cap being able to tackle someone then proceed with ground and pound).

Here's what you told Silent in the other thread:



Now I'm not as unreasonable as you, I don't need you to post 2 instances, I just need you to post one instance where WW used her superspeed to make a skilled opponent look like a statue then chop one of their limbs off. Notice I'm not even asking proof that she beheads someone as you earlier claimed.

Couple of things

1) You're leaving out the most important part of a fourm fight, we argue in-character.
2) You're breaking your own rules again, if the Cap side had to provide feats where Cap uses specific tactics in a certain order or it doesn't count. then you have to do the same for WW.


So, go ahead and post examples of WW cutting someone's head/limbs off at superspeed.

Cutting off DD arm was PIS tbh. It was done with a regular sword as well. There only reason it happened was to show DD's regeneration powers. That's it.

Thanos was only ever cut by a magical axe that was forged in a star. Wonder woman doesn't have that.
We see strong characters slice at Thanos with knives to no effect, like Drax trying to cut Thanos's leg on Titan. Also Nebula's sword had no effect on cutting Thanos as well. Both using space swords not just a regular Earth sword like WW has.

Just because Wonder woman cut Doomsday in a PIS showing does not mean she will do the same to Thanos. Nothing other than a magical axe was able to cut him. Drawing a drop of blood on Thanos by Iron Man with his most advanced suit, giving it all he's got, is not the same as cutting off a limb or stabbing him.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I'm claiming that you yourself asked for specific clips to show a character being able to do something on screen, regardless of whether or not they're capable of doing so or not (ie. Cap being able to tackle someone then proceed with ground and pound).

Here's what you told Silent in the other thread:



Now I'm not as unreasonable as you, I don't need you to post 2 instances, I just need you to post one instance where WW used her superspeed to make a skilled opponent look like a statue then chop one of their limbs off. Notice I'm not even asking proof that she beheads someone as you earlier claimed.
It seems Silent is PMing you at the very least. You two are in collaboration. Interesting!

Silent claimed that Cap did it multiple times (at least 2). I told him to go ahead and list the 2. I didn't need 2 as 1 is enough. If I needed 2 then why did I accept that Cap has the propensity to do it with just the Batroc showing?

A character can choose not to tackle someone to the ground and it not be PIS.

A character choosing to not use their speed when they are trying to win is PIS.

This is the main difference. Your logic fails.

Originally posted by Inhuman
Cutting off DD arm was PIS tbh. It was done with a regular sword as well. There only reason it happened was to show DD's regeneration powers. That's it.

Thanos was only ever cut by a magical axe that was forged in a star. Wonder woman doesn't have that.
We see strong characters slice at Thanos with knives to no effect, like Drax trying to cut Thanos's leg on Titan. Also Nebula's sword had no effect on cutting Thanos as well. Both using space swords not just a regular Earth sword like WW has.

Just because Wonder woman cut Doomsday in a PIS showing does not mean she will do the same to Thanos. Nothing other than a magical axe was able to cut him. Drawing a drop of blood on Thanos by Iron Man with his most advanced suit, giving it all he's got, is not the same as cutting off a limb or stabbing him.

It wasn't done with a regular sword. It sliced a huge ass multi-ton boulder in half with ease after being thrown with the strength of Superman without being damaged in the least. It glowed from magic right afterward. Now explain what regular sword can do that?

According to many, you can't assign a special attribute to a character without proof. In other words, some will argue that Thanos needs cut resistant feats to show that he is more cut resistant than DD because they believe that blunt force durability is not correlated to cut force durability.

Originally posted by h1a8
It seems Silent is PMing you at the very least. You two are in collaboration. Interesting!

Silent claimed that Cap did it multiple times (at least 2). I told him to go ahead and list the 2. I didn't need 2 as 1 is enough. If I needed 2 then why did I accept that Cap has the propensity to do it with just the Batroc showing?

A character can choose not to tackle someone to the ground and it not be PIS.

A character choosing to not use their speed when they are trying to win is PIS.

This is the main difference. Your logic fails.

You're deflecting, post an examples of WW cutting someone's head/limbs off at superspeed, like you're claiming.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You're deflecting, post an examples of WW cutting someone's head/limbs off at superspeed, like you're claiming.

You always deflect. Double standards?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Couple of things

1) You're leaving out the most important part of a fourm fight, we argue in-character.
2) You're breaking your own rules again, if the Cap side had to provide feats where Cap uses specific tactics in a certain order or it doesn't count. then you have to do the same for WW.


So, go ahead and post examples of WW cutting someone's head/limbs off at superspeed.

1) Basically you are claiming that WW is so stupid that she will purposely not use her speed and perceptions to try to win in a forum fight?

2) Cap had to show it because it is NOT PIS to choose to not tackle someone.
WW doesn't have to because it is PIS to choose not to use speed and perceptions to try to win.

This is the big difference.

That was another attempted deflection.

1) I'm going by forum rules, that is. we argue in character.
2) Using that logic, WW has to show it because it's not PIS to choose not to cut someone's head off at superspeed.

So, go ahead and post the feats required by your stated rules.

Originally posted by Silent Master
That was another attempted deflection.

1) I'm going by forum rules, that is. we argue in character.
2) Using that logic, WW has to show it because it's not PIS to choose not to cut someone's head off at superspeed.

So, go ahead and post the feats required by your stated rules.

1. My post proved it was in character for her to do. Unless you want to argue that she is that stupid.

2. Correct. She can do many different things besides attempt to cut his his head. Either way she wins.

Originally posted by h1a8
It seems Silent is PMing you at the very least. You two are in collaboration. Interesting!

Silent claimed that Cap did it multiple times (at least 2). I told him to go ahead and list the 2. I didn't need 2 as 1 is enough. If I needed 2 then why did I accept that Cap has the propensity to do it with just the Batroc showing?

A character can choose not to tackle someone to the ground and it not be PIS.

A character choosing to not use their speed when they are trying to win is PIS.

This is the main difference. Your logic fails.


What, you don't think I'm capable of browsing through your old posts on my own?

Doesn't matter if you asked him for 1 or 2 or 10 examples, fact is you asked him for a specific example of him doing exactly what you were asking. Didn't matter that he's proven Cap is capable of grappling and fighting on the ground. You want specific examples of Cap doing things in a certain order (i.e. tackling someone and ground and pounding them).

I'm asking you to do the same and provide a specific example of WW doing exactly what you claimed: Speed blitzing a skilled opponent and chopping a limb off.

I don't care about your logic (no one does to be honest) because it's nothing but your opinion. Now back it up with some actual feats.

Originally posted by FrothByte
What, you don't think I'm capable of browsing through your old posts on my own?

Doesn't matter if you asked him for 1 or 2 or 10 examples, fact is you asked him for a specific example of him doing exactly what you were asking. Didn't matter that he's proven Cap is capable of grappling and fighting on the ground. You want specific examples of Cap doing things in a certain order (i.e. tackling someone and ground and pounding them).

I'm asking you to do the same and provide a specific example of WW doing exactly what you claimed: Speed blitzing a skilled opponent and chopping a limb off.

I don't care about your logic (no one does to be honest) because it's nothing but your opinion. Now back it up with some actual feats. please address my post. You are basically doing Silent trolling tricks. Ignore the post and continue to restate your post.

Originally posted by h1a8
please address my post. You are basically doing Silent trolling tricks. Ignore the post and continue to restate your post.

Why should I address your post when you're not even addressing my post? All I'm asking is for you to provide proof that WW speedblitzes a skilled opponent and chops a limb off like you claim. It's pretty straightforward. If you can't provide that proof then just admit that you can't prove it.

Now I ask again: Do you or do you not have a feat where WW speedblitzed a skilled opponent and chopped their limbs off?

It's a yes or no question.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Why should I address your post when you're not even addressing my post? All I'm asking is for you to provide proof that WW speedblitzes a skilled opponent and chops a limb off like you claim. It's pretty straightforward. If you can't provide that proof then just admit that you can't prove it.

Now I ask again: Do you or do you not have a feat where WW speedblitzed a skilled opponent and chopped their limbs off?

It's a yes or no question.

Originally posted by h1a8


Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE to use her speed and perception ability in this fight.

Is that what you are claiming?

I addressed your post. My last post explains everything. It's up to you to rebut it now. Failure results in a concession. I have nothing new to say.

WW still wins in spite.

Originally posted by h1a8
I addressed your post. My last post explains everything. It's up to you to rebut it now. Failure results in a concession. I have nothing new to say.

WW still wins in spite.

So when I ask a question that goes "Do you have a clip that proves..."

You think you're addressing this by answering with something like "Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE..."


Man, your English comprehension really sucks huh? It's a yes or no question dude. The only reason why you'd keep trying to avoid that is because you know you're wrong and will be proven wrong once you answer.

Because before you can insist that WW can choose to do something, you first need to prove that she can actually do what you're saying. So far you haven't proved that. Once you've actually proved it then you can ask me about your logic. Without proof, your supposed "logic" is nothing more than made up stuff.

Originally posted by h1a8
1. My post proved it was in character for her to do. Unless you want to argue that she is that stupid.

2. Correct. She can do many different things besides attempt to cut his his head. Either way she wins.

1) No, it didn't and I explained why.

2) None of which you've provided feats for.

So, if you're done dodging. please provide feats that show WW using the tactics you're claiming.

Originally posted by FrothByte
So when I ask a question that goes "Do you have a clip that proves..."

You think you're addressing this by answering with something like "Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE..."


Man, your English comprehension really sucks huh? It's a yes or no question dude. The only reason why you'd keep trying to avoid that is because you know you're wrong and will be proven wrong once you answer.

Because before you can insist that WW can choose to do something, you first need to prove that she can actually do what you're saying. So far you haven't proved that. Once you've actually proved it then you can ask me about your logic. Without proof, your supposed "logic" is nothing more than made up stuff.

1. You are asking rhetorical questions which are loaded. For example, if I answer "There is no scene that shows it." Then you would say that well WW wouldn't do it. This is trolling. Just simply state there is no scene where WW does x action and therefore she wouldn't do it in a forum fight. Argue directly and stop asking loaded rhetorical questions.

2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character. We use common sense. It's up to the debater to articulate it being in character when another debater is claiming it isn't.


In summary, "a character must show the exact action as the only acceptable proof of in character" is faulty and incorrect.

Originally posted by h1a8
2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character.

So, you demanding proof that Nib's stated tactics were in-character for Cap was just you trolling?


Originally posted by h1a8


In summary, "a character must show the exact action as the only acceptable proof of in character" is faulty and incorrect.

That was your standard, why the change of heart?

Originally posted by h1a8
1. You are asking rhetorical questions which are loaded. For example, if I answer "There is no scene that shows it." Then you would say that well WW wouldn't do it. This is trolling. Just simply state there is no scene where WW does x action and therefore she wouldn't do it in a forum fight. Argue directly and stop asking loaded rhetorical questions.

Thank you for admitting that there is actually no proof that WW can do the things you claim she will do.

Originally posted by h1a8

2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character. We use common sense. It's up to the debater to articulate it being in character when another debater is claiming it isn't.


In summary, "a character must show the exact action as the only acceptable proof of in character" is faulty and incorrect.

Thank you for admitting that you were faulty and incorrect by insisting for exact clips of Cap doing a very basic h2h maneuver.


See, that wasn't so hard was it? Now we can move on to other discussions.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Thank you for admitting that there is actually no proof that WW can do the things you claim she will do.



Thank you for admitting that you were faulty and incorrect by insisting for exact clips of Cap doing a very basic h2h maneuver.


See, that wasn't so hard was it? Now we can move on to other discussions.

1. I never admitted that. It's your faulty reasoning that suggests there is only one form of proof. I already proven how WW will fight.

2. Again arguing propensity is not the same as arguing ability. I argued that Cap WILL NOT CHOOSE to do the action.

Again, WW wins in spite.

Loser

Originally posted by Silent Master
So, you demanding proof that Nib's stated tactics were in-character for Cap was just you trolling?




That was your standard, why the change of heart?

How could it be trolling after the fact it was proven? You are stupid.

That wasn't anyone's standard. If you could have strongly articulated how Cap could have attempted to tackle Ozy to the ground without showing him doing it is also acceptable. But this is most likely impossible in that case (as with any pure striker), so you pretty much had to give a scene.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Loser Loser little Fooser

Originally posted by h1a8
1. I never admitted that. It's your faulty reasoning that suggests there is only one form of proof. I already proven how WW will fight.

2. Again arguing propensity is not the same as arguing ability. I argued that Cap WILL NOT CHOOSE to do the action.

Again, WW wins in spite.

Meh, too late. You already admitted you didn't have onscreen feats of WW speeblitz chopping someone and you admitted that your previous tactic was incorrect and false. Your words, not mine.

Anyway, my job here is done. I'm glad I finally got you to be honest about something. Have a good day.

Originally posted by h1a8
It wasn't done with a regular sword. It sliced a huge ass multi-ton boulder in half with ease after being thrown with the strength of Superman without being damaged in the least. It glowed from magic right afterward. Now explain what regular sword can do that?
With the friction of cutting the boulder the sword glowed because it heated up. Besides dont take my word for it. They tell you her sword isnt anything special in her movie. Its a strong well crafted sword, but there is no mention of it being magical. What is stated in the movie about her sword >>>> your assumption of it being magical.
If you have a scene that states that it is magical , post it.

Originally posted by h1a8
Thanos needs cut resistant feats to show that he is more cut resistant than DD because they believe that blunt force durability is not correlated to cut force durability.
Go re read my post . I gave you 2 separate examples of Thanos being cut resistant.
1. Drax not being able to cut him with his blades.
2. Nebula not being able to cut him with her sword.

The only thing that cut Thanos was a magical ax forged in a star, swung by Thor who is much stronger than WW. Wonder Woman doesnt have the magical axe or the strength of Thor to replicate that.



And here is WW trying to slice/cut at Steppenwol's leg 2:02 mark, and failing to do anything.

5LoBx812Ujs?t=122



I posted 2 examples of Thanos not being able to be cut by WW and 1 example (with video) of WW failing to cut someone weaker than Thanos.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Meh, too late. You already admitted you didn't have onscreen feats of WW speeblitz chopping someone and you admitted that your previous tactic was incorrect and false. Your words, not mine.

Anyway, my job here is done. I'm glad I finally got you to be honest about something. Have a good day.

Uhm no. I did not admit to anything. Read the post again. Quote it if you want. Your reading comprehension sucks or you are just trolling. So you admit it was a, loaded question?

Doesn't matter what you say. All that matters is that WW wins. If you feel like you made any progress in whatever you tried to achieve then I don't mind. As long as WW wins you can have anything you want.

Originally posted by Inhuman
With the friction of cutting the boulder the sword glowed because it heated up. Besides dont take my word for it. They tell you her sword isnt anything special in her movie. Its a strong well crafted sword, but there is no mention of it being magical. What is stated in the movie about her sword >>>> your assumption of it being magical.
If you have a scene that states that it is magical , post it.



Go re read my post . I gave you 2 separate examples of Thanos being cut resistant.
1. Drax not being able to cut him with his blades.
2. Nebula not being able to cut him with her sword.

The only thing that cut Thanos was a magical ax forged in a star, swung by Thor who is much stronger than WW. Wonder Woman doesnt have the magical axe or the strength of Thor to replicate that.



And here is WW trying to slice/cut at Steppenwol's leg 2:02 mark, and failing to do anything.

5LoBx812Ujs?t=122



I posted 2 examples of Thanos not being able to be cut by WW and 1 example (with video) of WW failing to cut someone weaker than Thanos.

Swords don't heat up to the point that the whole sword glows a bright color AFTER slicing something in half with one swipe. Nowhere did the movie state it was a regular sword. And swords cant cut through multiton boulders without being severely damaged or simply failing to do it at all. Nice try.

You didn't post any examples of Thanos not able to be cut.

If Step wasn't able to be cut by WW then that's a good feat for him, not a bad feat for WW since we know what the sword can do. Plus step wears armor on his legs.

Originally posted by h1a8
Nowhere did the movie state it was a regular sword.
You really dont watch the movies do you. ****ing Christ.
You have yet to post anything besides just stating your opinions and assumptions.
I've posted actual feats seen in the movies. No assumptions. No retarded opinions.

Here is the scene 0:58, where Ares tells WW that her sword isnt the "God Killer" ( a special magical sword), that she is. All while he destroys the sword with no effort.
Even if she gets a new sword afterwards, its by all accounts just an Amazonian sword. Strong and well made but not magical. If you have a scene where it is stated that it is magical , post it. I dont want to hear retarded assumptions.

K8A9UAqA4Ks


Originally posted by h1a8
You didn't post any examples of Thanos not able to be cut.
Again you dont watch the fuking movies, you have to be spoon fed the feats.

0:36 - Drax fails to cut Thanos leg with his blade.
2:00 - Gamora fails to cut Thanos with 2 strikes to his face and 2 strikes to his arm. No damage. and this further shows you cannot just cut Thanos's head off.
KN7P5fpjLFA

Originally posted by h1a8
If Step wasn't able to be cut by WW then that's a good feat for him, not a bad feat for WW since we know what the sword can do. Plus step wears armor on his legs.

Of coarse you would say something like this to try to save your argument.
So Stepp's armor >>>>>Doomsday?
Also the Doomsday limb cut was a PIS feat. No where else has she ever been able to cut anyone. Not Stepp, not Ludendorff, not Ares.
So in all her battles she has never done this over and over. Its not her norm. Its not a bad feat for WW. Its how she normally performs against non human foes. The one time she did it was PIS because she never has done anything of like that in her other fights.
She has never speed blitzed anyone besides normal humans. And i posted a feat of her failing to cut someone weaker than Thanos.



All my points and arguments have been backed up by feats with videos.
All your rebuttals are personal opinions and assumptions as usual.
You haven't posted shit as far as feats or evidence to back up your claims.

Originally posted by h1a8
As long as WW wins you can have anything you want.

You sure?

Tell you what. You admit that you're a hypocrite and that you apply a double standard to serve your own bias and I'll declare to everyone here that Wonder Woman wins. How about that?