I only joined KMC Forums at the end of last year, but I've looked over the past few years of forums with the most views and/or replies, plus I'm sure we've all noticed some recent trends with the current plethora of "Bane vs >insert character here<" threads.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss what characters are the worst to put in a vs thread. I don't mean the character that would be beaten the easiest, I mean what characters are too abstract, don't have enough feats, get hyped too much, etc.
For example, an h1a8 backed Bane vs a Quan backed Khan could potentially crash the server for our fair forum here at KMC.
Any other candidates?
[SPOILER - highlight to read]: Everyone have a nice day, including h1 and Quan
Well it's like you said, abstracts, people who don't have enough feats, etc.
For example I don't think all of the "Endless" have feats, though they are all said to be immensely powerful.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Ya the obvious ones like Odin, Thanos from MCU. Origins in another form of media, but haven't really shown too much (Odin) or anything yet (Thanos).
For example, I was thinking more like a Harry Potter kinda character: no experience of combat outside of their universe's specialty (dueling/multiple opponent magic).
Well, three characters that I think are problem characters in debates are Hancock, Dr Manhattan and Dormammu. And the issue is that we have no real idea of what their limits are, especially with regards to what it would actually take to hurt/defeat them.
For example, Hancock was portrayed as virtually invulnerable unless he had prolonged exposure to Mary. But we don't know if he genuinely is invulnerable, or if it is simply a case of needing someone on a higher power level to do the job.
Similar with Dr Manhattan. He was pretty much god-like in his universe, but he was also the only legitimate full-blown superhuman in his universe, so no one else really posed a threat.
And Dormammu had to get trolled by Strange into leaving, so we don't actually know of he can be defeated through sheer raw power.
__________________ Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Bane is a bad character for the VS. forums because people want to seem to defend Bane based on what he 'Should" be capable of more than what is "shown" in the actual movie.
So it becomes an argument based on the Bane's lore or implied/assumed skills and specs.
What is actually shown is that Bane is a slow not so skilled brawler that was bested by an over-the-hill, slow and not so skilled Batman.
So its hard to give Bane a win vs anyone that is highly skilled because of Bane's movie feats.
Same goes for Baleman.
__________________
Last edited by Inhuman on Jun 19th, 2017 at 07:59 PM
Fox QS, Adam West Batman and Reeve Superman are all also too OP for vs. matches. I've also found Dr. Strange with time stone very hard to debate on.
I've also had such a headache when debating against characters who have both live action and cartoon counterparts. For example, Star Wars characters. Because the cartoon counterparts are almost always a lot more powerful than their live movie versions, and it makes it very hard to gauge what they can and can't do.
It's almost pointless to argue for characters that use intelligence rather than power to defeat their enemies. Lex Luthor in his various incarnations, Zemo etc even though they've arguably done better against their opponents than many super powered adversaries.
Thanks for all the responses guys. All are great examples so far, IMO.
Yep I was going to mention Star Wars Sith and Jedi specifically as well, Froth. The cartoon vs movie feats issue, plus the ability to TK means that they should insta-kill/KO about any foe barring someone that is just really uber (e.g., Superman) or has anti-TK abilities (e.g., another Force user).
Ya Bane and Baleman come to mind. Really great trilogy with really great characters, but not good for vs fights unless
A) everyone properly debates according to the MvF screen feats only rule, and
B) the stipulations are set up in a very specific manner. Making a thread that simply asks, "Baleman vs >insert character here< who wins?" = Baleman losing a lot of matches.
Yeah, it's a pain to debate with Jedi or Sith simply because it's assumed that:
1. Lightsaber will cut through anything
2. Force TK means insta-choke/neck snap
3. Force precog means force user never gets hit
4. Force TK means anyone without flight is levitated and held in the air while said force user proceeds to carve them up with lightsabers
And it's hard to debate like this because these force users have never been shown to always fight like this, yet they do have feats suggesting they can.
Agreed here with Hancock and Dormammu, but Jon Osterman might indeed be the character who is the WORST for a vs fight because of the reasons you listed Vault.
Bane and Baleman are fine for vs threads, as they have plenty of feats. they're just not good for winning vs fights, as their feats suck.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
On a different note, at least no movie character I know of is as frustrating to debate against as trying to debate with batman fans regarding comicbook Batman. I've had comicbook fans tell me that Batman can defeat living Tribunal as long as he has prep time.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
KMC Community Forums
Jun 19th, 2017 07:28 PM
