What can make you change your views on a battle in which you have a definite winner ?
What is the lowest feat that the character you'd think would lose in a given match would have to perform (other than a direct confrontation ) in order for you to think he'd win in a fight ?
Say you're of opinion that Thor beats Surfer. Or Captain America beats Batman. Or.. you get the point. Specify the fight and what the other character would have to do in order to change your views.
__________________
“Perhaps this is the ultimate freedom. The freedom to leave.”
c'mon, phil. you've been around more than long enough to know that opinions rarely change. if someone goes into a thread with a decided winner already in their mind, the chance of that predetermined choice changing... is slim to none.
I can attest to the fact that its nearly impossible to change your mind if you get into a debate.
The best I can hope to do is stop debating if its a hopeless argument.
__________________
“Where the longleaf pines are whispering
to him who loved them so.
Where the faint murmurs now dwindling
echo o’er tide and shore."
-A Grave Epitaph in Santa Rosa County, Florida; I wish I could remember the man's name.
I know when i first joined this board in 04, i thought Superman would likely be top dog since i only read his comics and didn't own a single marvel book.
After reading more and buying old books, i learned how mistaken i was.
Likely why i give Surfer the edge in most top tier fights against bricks, great or small.
Yes, that's true. But hypotetically, say you think Firestorm would beat Skulk Waver (random name). If a comic would show him resisting transmutation from a high-end user, or wading through certain type of attacks, would you change your mind? And what would those attacks be?
You think Captain America would beat say.. Batman. What is the lowest feat(s) the latter would have to do in order to convince you otherwise ? I say lowest because it will be too simple to have you say a ridiculous thing "have him overpower The General" or something similar. That's essentially the question.
And I mean current views. Not some blabbering on how "oh, I was so uninformed years ago until I discovered how much that character sucks and the other one rules!!" like the baiting post above.
__________________
“Perhaps this is the ultimate freedom. The freedom to leave.”
Last edited by Philosophía on Nov 21st, 2009 at 07:55 PM
if i were arguing solely for firestorm being able to transmute 'skulk', and i was shown an instance of 'skulk' resisting a direct transmutational attack from a *proven* character on firestorm's level [where transmutation prowess is concerned] - i would have to abstain my argument. anything further pertaining to that side of things would be completely baseless.
I disagree with the majority here. If you have a character with a intensely dense fanbase, then yes they are going to argue to the death, and no amount of scans, logic, or common sense is going to change their mind. As we speak Im debating Lobo vs Wolverine....
However, if you take characters who's fans dont have such a vested interest, you'll see opinions change from time to time. You wont see many Super Skrull posts going over 100 pages long.
It was just an example but, why not just start right here. Could you give an example of what character Firestorm would beat in a battle in your opinion and what that character would have to do in order to change your views ? Or not Firestorm, but any other match.
__________________
“Perhaps this is the ultimate freedom. The freedom to leave.”
Last edited by Philosophía on Nov 21st, 2009 at 09:22 PM
^ for instance: for me to believe surfer could defend himself against zoom, i would first need to see him reacting [in battle] to an opponent on zoom's speed level.
Actually...I did have a sloowww change of heart regarding two characters based on the visual evidence (no, not them). The on-panel evidence was just too, well, consistently evident that what I always used to think...was wrong.
And as far as two other characters go (now them), I've been in a reconsideration state of mind, oddly enough because of something I myself wrote in yet another debate featuring one of those characters whom I was defending.
__________________
Shinier than a speeding bullet.
Re: What can make you change your views on a battle in which you have a definite winner ?
Can one have an 100% stance on such things?
I do believe that Superman should take 50%-50% against Thor or Surfer. Do you want me to list what a char has to do to change my opinion that say Surfer would beat him to 100%?
Is this for those fight we are 100% sure our char cannot lose?
Say, like Colossus beating Superman? Or LT beating Batman w/prep?
I'm not asking you to come up with insane scenarios/feats for what are obvious loopsided battle in order for the underdog to take it.
I'm asking you to tell me what would a specific character have to do within a comicbook (a specific feat, or a fight against another character) in order to swoop your opinion on his performance in a battle that you currently consider him to lose. You can do it for 50/50 fights aswell, if you like.
__________________
“Perhaps this is the ultimate freedom. The freedom to leave.”
Thor speedblitzing Gladiator. Means fighting superfast against glads, similar to flash fights if you get what i mean. Glads can do it, when Thor would fight him while using superspeed, all over some planet, i would change my opinion to Thor 60%-40% Superman.
I don't think that Daredevil can beat Batman, but i don't know the char good enugh. I used to collect them after Miller took over and Romita draw them but he wasn't that impressive. I wouldn't give him more then 2 out of 10. When i would see him beating CA, i would change my stance to 4 or if he has more wins then CA, 5 out of 10.
__________________
Sig made by my mate, the one and only One_Angry_Scot
my current stance is that superman's speed is vastly superior to thor and as such superman would handily beat thor if both performed to par
what would convince me otherwise is if someone shows clear evidence of thor being able to attack at blitz level super speed as well as defend against a almost flash-level speed blitz
I've never said Superman sucks. Have i shown contempt in my esteem of his more dense fans(which includes writers), sure.
But i've never attacked the character, because it is just a character.
Nothing in my post implies what you said it does, so kindly off yourself.
And to again approach, like i said, more knowledge of the characters involved changes opinions.
Hulk would beat Magneto because Magneto can just through metal things, whereas Hulk can punch his head off.
Only to find out Magneto can manipulate pretty much the em spectrum at will and as such, gives him the key advantage over Hulk on paper.
You see it all the time here.
Someone who's obviously never read anything about one character tearing him/her to bits, only to have scans or references dropped by those more knowledgeable and then backtrakking ensues and they start to branch out more.
Phoenix vs Superman = Superman icebreathes the big fire bird for the win.
GalacticStorm comes in, drops the payload, opinions change.
Case in point, no baiting so have you offed yourself yet?
__________________
Last edited by UniOmni on Nov 21st, 2009 at 10:50 PM
KMC Community Forums
Nov 21st, 2009 07:23 PM
