Not ludicrous but not entirely untrue. Loki is more agile and more dextrous, nimble as well. In comicsworld and the people who argue it looking cool,spinny,flashy stuff=skill.
I think they are both equally skilled specifically to their own natural abilities.
Equalized stats- Loki vs. Thor in a knife fight. Whose winning?
Same as above. Large Warhammer
Weapon of choice can play a role in the perception of skill as well. Even without the worthy enchantment a Mjolnir like battle hammer would probably weigh 30 lbs? Maybe more? I couldn't imagine a more difficult, cumbersome weapon to use in a melee, the skill imo would be somehow not getting tagged by your opponent 5-6 times in between swings.
Knives, looks cooler for obvious reasons. Looking cool = skill. ( I would bring 2 12 inch blades to a fight before I'd ever bring a sledgehammer.)
Watch Thor easily take out Shield Agents with no powers.
Watch Thor dodg and evade all of Hulks hits, including ducking back when that Jet wing was thrown at him, and then tell me with a straight face that Loki is faster, more nimble and a better combatant.
FYI Thor tells Loki in TDW that he always went easy on him.
Thor only ever used his powers on Loki once and it was in response to Loki using his powers of illusion.
That said, I rewatched the 2 Thor vs. Loki fights and you might have a point. In their first fight, Loki did land way more hits on Thor. Though to be fair, Thor was very reluctant to fight Loki.
Their 2nd fight was more even, with Loki dodging more hits whereas Thor blocked more hits. Loki landed the first hits but Thor had better combinations.
It reinforces my point that Loki is the nimbler, more agile fighter but not necessarily the better fighter.
Why is Loki the better fighter? Just because he has fancier moves? If Loki chooses to dodge and Thor chooses to block, that doesn't make one fighter better than the other. It simply means they have different styles and techniques.
At this point it's near impossible to tell who's the better fighter between the two of them, since Thor doesn't go all out on Loki. Loki doesn't have the kind of fighting feats Thor does like blocking laser fire or dodging hits from Hulk.
The fairest assumption we can give is that they'r equally good fighters, with Loki being faster and Thor being stronger.
Are you sure Loki is more agile, emember in the last movie Thor did a jump spin move to avoid one of Hulk's attacks and on the bridge he did a move where he spun through the air like a top.
I don't recall Loki ever doing anything to match either of those.
__________________ 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.
See, you almost had me convinced that Loki is faster and nimbler, but then you had to go and ruin it with a statement like this: "In both cases Loki was beating Thor before he either used his powers or the battle was interrupted."
Uh, no, Loki was definitely not beating Thor. We both know that in a straight up h2h fight with no powers, Thor would beat Loki up.
You do realize that speed and agility are also physical stats right? So when you say "if stats were equalized" then you're basically also removing Loki's speed and agility advantage if there was any.
So getting hit twice now constitutes to someone losing? Also it should be noted that Loki had started using firepower against Thor whereas Thor only stuck to melee.
You're half-right, the videos are clear. Loki only does that well because Thor has always held back when fighting his brother.
__________________ 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.