Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Hawk isn't even peak human in strength, he's "athlete" level. Silly Bendispower.
Although its a super feat I don't know if its a true superhuman feat.
Ever hear about the old lady that moved a car to save her child?
Clearly the old lady had a major adrenaline burst and probably struggled as Hawkeye did that some what easy.
But this is a fictional universe were the athletes there can do some amazing things. My boy Daredevil is classified as a athlete and yet he can KO adult male tigers no problem.
Look at all the regular humans in animes.....LOL.
Originally posted by SamZED
This an example of Marvel bias I was talking about. Love the double standarts. So basically if Captain America performs a strength feat that is SLIGHTLY (if at all) above peak human level he's superhuman. But if Batgirl performs a clear superhuman feat on KMC we go "Meh it's not that impressive" or "Bah it should happen more often otherwise it doesn't count!". I'm sorry, Srank but that is exactly what's happening here. In you first passage you subjectively label characters with titles like "peak" or "super" regardles of what they've actually done in comics. We have an example of Batgirl (with her back turned) DODGE a sniper bullet after it was fired and that was INCHES away from her body. She physically overpowered Slade in one of their encounter, and yeah I know Slade is not as skilled as Cap, doesn't change the fact that he's an enhanced human and she physically pinned him down. You can't just highlight feats you like for one character and dismiss feats of another just so he or she would fall under the peak human category you labeled her with. It's a one way road. You either accept that Cap's feats do not put him on a completely different level compared to someone like Batman or you accept that anyone who does something remotely more impressive than other peak humans automatically moves to the "above peak human" category.
Captain America's strength feats place him between two and four times above Batman's strength... and Batman has the best and widest stable of peak human strength feats to draw from. Batgirl's speed feats place her at slightly faster than most streets, and not quite as fast as the top of the heap like Daredevil. Where is the double standard exactly? I don't think that Cap being two - four times physically superior to Batman is a slight difference. Captain America is superhuman, and that isn't something I've decided arbitrarily based on his feats (although it would still be a completely accurate assessment if I had considering the things he has done), we've been told that Cap has superhuman strength. We've been told that he has the strength of 10 men, we've been told he has the strength of 20 men, we've been told he has the strength of half a platoon of fighting men, we've been told he is four times stronger than Bucky, we've been told he's stronger than Cable, and we've been told he is stronger than Codename: Bravo (who is 2x peak human himself). How much more do you need? That, along with the fact that he pulls helicopters out of the air, drags broke supply trucks through the desert, can stop a speeding car dead in it's tracks by grabbing it's back bumper, ect ect ect should paint a pretty clear picture of the difference between Batman and Captain America... and it isn't "slight."
Also Batgirl has never over powered Slade. She's tackled him twice, and the first time Slade pinned her instantly and Jericho had to save her, and the second he smacked her in the face with a dumb bell.
difference is... Superman ISN'T as versatile as Captain Marvel OR Thor.. Those are the areas where the difference is clearly made up, and even by Supes own admission (when referencing marvel) the edge goes to Marvel. That differences doesn't apply here.. If Batman had his gagets.. kinda like versatility... sure... but that isn't the case. There is no clear skill edge like there is in verstatility and weakness explotations for Marvel and Thor against Supes. Point is, it's not a sound analogy.. not even close.
Originally posted by cdtm
His analogy is relevant to this topic.By feats, Superman is stronger than Captain Marvel.
By feats, Superman is stronger than Thor.
By feats, Captain America is stronger than any street.
Strength does not = auto win.
Well there's one thing to this.
Batman and Cap are in completely different universes. And thus you can't call them equal without comparing feats to say so, seeing as they can't consistently fight and be called equal in every regard for pretty much every encounter they have.
Apples to Oranges.
This is why I don't adhere to the idea that Thor vs Superman or Hulk vs Superman, have to be close fights at all. As they are not in the same universe and there is no written rule that they have to match up well against him. If they don't have the feats to say they can beat him (complete and utter lack of the speed to do so), then I'm not going say they can beat him just because a lot of people make the sentimental judgement to say that they can, which just seems to stem from Marvel and DC both being 'big guns' and for some unspoken reason their respective top tiers are expected to be competitive with each other just on that 'principle'.
It's not popular, but I don't give a shit. It's closer to being truly objective. And that is the reason why I give Cap a 10/10 over Batman in just h2h; for the same reason I give Superman a 10/10 over either Thor or Hulk with CIS off.
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
difference is... Superman ISN'T as versatile as Captain Marvel OR Thor.. Those are the areas where the difference is clearly made up, and even by Supes own admission (when referencing marvel) the edge goes to Marvel. That differences doesn't apply here.. If Batman had his gagets.. kinda like versatility... sure... but that isn't the case. There is no clear skill edge like there is in verstatility and weakness explotations for Marvel and Thor against Supes. Point is, it's not a sound analogy.. not even close.
Originally posted by CosmicComet
Well there's one thing to this.Batman and Cap are in completely different universes. And thus you can't call them equal without comparing feats to say so, seeing as they can't consistently fight and be called equal in every regard for pretty much every encounter they have.
Apples to Oranges.
This is why I don't adhere to the idea that Thor vs Superman or Hulk vs Superman, have to be close fights at all. As they are not in the same universe and there is no written rule that they have to match up well against him. If they don't have the feats to say they can beat him (complete and utter lack of the speed to do so), then I'm not going say they can beat him just because a lot of people make the sentimental judgement to say that they can, which just seems to stem from Marvel and DC both being 'big guns' and for some unspoken reason their respective top tiers are expected to be competitive with each other just on that 'principle'.
It's not popular, but I don't give a shit. It's closer to being truly objective. And that is the reason why I give Cap a 10/10 over Batman in just h2h; for the same reason I give Superman a 10/10 over either Thor or Hulk with CIS off.
QFT
I have to agree with you on this. The notion that there is some inherent parity between the two companies and that the top streets / metas / heralds / sky fathers, from both companies must be more or less equal via some unseen transitive property is absurd. Upholding the idea that every character must be equal to appeal to some fabricated subjective company neutrality is pointless. Thor and Hulk don't have the speed to contend with Superman in a forum match. I', sorry, but its true. On average DC's high metas and heralds are better than Marvels. On average Marvels streets are better than DC. Chalk it up to different priorities from each company, but that's how it is.
Originally posted by cdtm
His analogy is relevant to this topic.By feats, Superman is stronger than Captain Marvel.
By feats, Superman is stronger than Thor.
By feats, Captain America is stronger than any street.
Strength does not = auto win.
His analogy isn't relevant to this thread, because nobody is saying that Cap's strength is the only reason he wins....people are saying that Cap wins because he has comparable skill and better physical stats.
Originally posted by abhilegend
Superman not as versatile as cap? He only said that cap had an advantage due to his magical nature while he was weakened by kryptonite. I only gave an analogy to say that feats aren't everything. Its off-topic though.
If your point was that lifting feats aren't everything.. I totally agree... Thanos doesn't have any.. but you'll never convince me he isn't stronger than Superman or Thor or Marvel or any herald really. So, I agree there... I just don't agree that the analogy works when comparing it to this fight.
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
QFTI have to agree with you on this. The notion that there is some inherent parity between the two companies and that the top streets / metas / heralds / sky fathers, from both companies must be more or less equal via some unseen transitive property is absurd. Upholding the idea that every character must be equal to appeal to some fabricated subjective company neutrality is pointless. Thor and Hulk don't have the speed to contend with Superman in a forum match. I', sorry, but its true. On average DC's high metas and heralds are better than Marvels. On average Marvels streets are better than DC. Chalk it up to different priorities from each company, but that's how it is.
Perfect.
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
If your point was that lifting feats aren't everything.. I totally agree... Thanos doesn't have any.. but you'll never convince me he isn't stronger than Superman or Thor or Marvel or any herald really. So, I agree there... I just don't agree that the analogy works when comparing it to this fight.
Originally posted by Silent Master
His analogy isn't relevant to this thread, because nobody is saying that Cap's strength is the only reason he wins....people are saying that Cap wins because he has comparable skill and better physical stats.
Agreed. Strength feats are just probably easier to quantify compared to the streets speed feats.
The only time its easy is when said street character states the other is faster.
Pound for pound in stats Steve looks physically superior to Bruce, Cass, Daredevil etc etc. But I give them the nod in skill.
Originally posted by Daredevil1
Agreed. Strength feats are just probably easier to quantify compared to the streets speed feats.The only time its easy is when said street character states the other is faster.
Pound for pound in stats Steve looks physically superior to Bruce, Cass, Daredevil etc etc. But I give them the nod in skill.
Give who the nod? 😒: