Ozymandias vs Captain America

Originally posted by Silent Master
None of them were shown firing a handgun at Cap, that leaves the energy weapons, thus you have no proof that the shield was made of a thin metal, which means the feat stands.

Lol@ the example of Wing Chun.

Try asking an average girl to use it against a drunken 20 stone rugby player on the streets. Let's see how that goes.

Martial arts only take you so far. There's a reason you have weight classes in competitions....

The soldiers we see are armed with energy weapons, therefore unless you can show someone shooting at him with a normal handgun/rifle, the damage must have been done by the energy weapons.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The soldiers we see are armed with energy weapons, therefore unless you can show someone shooting at him with a normal handgun/rifle, the damage must have been done by the energy weapons.

You see both type of soldiers though. Also you don't see the energy weapons soldiers firing either. So you can't assume that either. Remember you made the claim it was steel, not me.

Originally posted by h1a8
You see both type of soldiers though. Also you don't see the energy weapons soldiers firing either. So you can't assume that either. Remember you made the claim it was steel, not me.

Actually, your argument is that the feat isn't impressive because the shield is made of some kind of extremely weak metal. however you have yet to prove this.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Actually, your argument is that the feat isn't impressive because the shield is made of some kind of extremely weak metal. however you have yet to prove this.

No you said it was steel. I pointed out that there is evidence it isn't. I showed the evidence and you didn't provide any for it being steel.

Originally posted by h1a8
No you said it was steel. I pointed out that there is evidence it isn't. I showed the evidence and you didn't provide any for it being steel.

Your "evidence" was that something made a hole in it, how exactly does that prove that 1) it wasn't steel or 2) the metal was thin/weak?

Originally posted by Silent Master
Your "evidence" was that something made a hole in it, how exactly does that prove that 1) it wasn't steel or 2) the metal was thin/weak?

1) a bullet penetrated it,
2) it was used as a costume prop for a show

This is evidence my friend or plausible rebuttal against your claim.

evidence=/=proof
evidence >>>>>>>>no evidence
You made the claim it was steel yet you not only didn't provide proof but no evidence (double wrong).

Prove that it was a bullet and not one of the energy weapons.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Prove that it was a bullet and not one of the energy weapons.

Energy weapon's blast radius was much larger than the tiny bullet hole shown. They usually disintegrate huge chunks of mass in whatever they hit, from whole humans to huge gaping holes of concrete walls. One of those weapons would have obliterated the shield (steel or not).

Wait, this is movie versions?

The thread itelf is about comic Cap, but everyone seems to agree that comic Cap would destroy comic Ozy. Hence the tangent about their movie versions.

BTW, movie Cap also took a couple of punches from Loki, Loki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone that Ozy has ever fought, combined.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The thread itelf is about comic Cap, but everyone seems to agree that comic Cap would destroy comic Ozy. Hence the tangent about their movie versions.

BTW, movie Cap also took a couple of punches from Loki, Loki >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone that Ozy has ever fought, combined.

Ugh. The movie versions is an even more unbalanced fight, imo.

Really?

Because Comic Cap >>>>>> Movie Cap.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
Really?

Because Comic Cap >>>>>> Movie Cap.

I meant the gap between them.

I'd say the comic fight would be closer because in the comic Ozy looked far more impressive to me than he did the movie.

Cap would steamroll either way, but still.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I meant the gap between them.

I'd say the comic fight would be closer because in the comic Ozy looked far more impressive to me than he did the movie.

Cap would steamroll either way, but still.

Literally every showing the characters of Watchmen have in the movie is superior to their comic counterparts in terms of sheer power.

Originally posted by NemeBro
... How?

Literally every showing the characters of Watchmen have in the movie is superior to their comic counterparts in terms of sheer power.

shrug I just really liked the Ozzy stuff in Before Watchmen, I guess.

That, and movie Cap, to me, was more superhuman than I was expecting.

Ah, I haven't read Before Watchmen.

I am also not entirely positive it is canon. Alan Moore would probably say no, but Alan Moore is a pompous fathead.

Originally posted by NemeBro
Ah, I haven't read Before Watchmen.

I am also not entirely positive it is canon. Alan Moore would probably say no, but Alan Moore is a pompous fathead.

On that we agree.

Too many Cap fanboys in here. Makes me sick.