Hercules vs. Wolverine

Started by namorsubby21 pages

Originally posted by Battlehammer
Seeing how it took WWH Hulk 7 repeated hits to the head before wolverine went out I think not. WWh>Herc.

Herc is less skilled then wolverine and Logan has a reach advantage.........

okay i guess i'll stop at herc is less skilled. inreconcilable differences of opinion i guess

7 hits from wwh might be a little high if he was downed in 3 from namor don't you think? don't answer that, i know you don't .lol

Originally posted by namorsubby

wolvie is the better fighter????? thousands of years of experience? inventing the 1st fighting discipline? come on


Yes he is. Nice for herc and yet he still only uses the same out of dated style. Wolverine knows that style and then some. He knows more styles then herc and has master them. Wolverine is a top tier fighter and has proven him self time and again, herc has not proven to be a top tier fighter, hell herc be lucky if he 2nd tier.

Originally posted by namorsubby
okay i guess i'll stop at herc is less skilled. inreconcilable differences of opinion i guess

7 hits from wwh might be a little high if he was downed in 3 from namor don't you think? don't answer that, i know you don't .lol

Originally posted by namorsubby
7 hits from wwh might be a little high if he was downed in 3 from namor don't you think? don't answer that, i know you don't .lol

WWH didn't fight "I just got fried down" Wolverine.

Yes my opinion is based of stated facts, and feats.....yours is not.

Why do you down play everything? Logan was not hit just three times by namor, He heal from a skeleton, he healed his entire nervous system, then fought junas who had superhuman strength, Then took 3 punches from namor. But of courses you keep ignoring that.........

he is doing it again... why not just ignore him he has no evidence, argument or on panel feats to defend his position all he is doing is ignoring what happen on panel and stating his own false opinion as a fact. ppl like him should be ignored like i stated earlier he is baiting and trolling and again it is the same argument from his last page. he should be reported instead of being engaged in a argument. 🤨 🤪

I have a more likely scenario:

They meet up. Hercules hands Logan some wine and makes him his wingman for a night on the town at some local bars. They both score later on.

The end.

Logan doesn't like wine.

Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Logan doesn't like wine.

How can you not like non-diluted Greek wine?

HERC...piece of cake

Originally posted by Battlehammer
Yes my opinion is based of stated facts, and feats.....yours is not.

Why do you down play everything? Logan was not hit just three times by namor, He heal from a skeleton, he healed his entire nervous system, then fought junas who had superhuman strength, Then took 3 punches from namor. But of courses you keep ignoring that.........

i'm sorry, i guess that equals seven hits from wwh, who is in one of the very top positions of the strongest beings in the MU.

he is doing it again... why not just ignore him he has no evidence, argument or on panel feats to defend his position all he is doing is ignoring what happen on panel and stating his own false opinion as a fact. ppl like him should be ignored like i stated earlier he is baiting and trolling and again it is the same argument from his last page. he should be reported instead of being engaged in a argument.

what did i tell you guys about piggybacking?....you sound just like a certain someone, which is to be expected, like i said, you're like-minded, almost indistinguishable from each other. don't simply reinterate what your own team says......it's already out there, let it be. find some individuality also

reported? give me a break

edit:


WWH didn't fight "I just got fried down" Wolverine.

see, this is an example of one of you making sense. you could learn a lot from this

that was something i didn't know(or did know since i read the issue but i guess forgot), thanks for clueing me in without the unneccesary often implicative gibberish

Originally posted by Battlehammer
Yes my opinion is based of stated facts, and feats.....yours is not.

i forgot to address this

answer this:

I know 2 fighting styles. i have been using and practicing these styles for thousands upon thousands of years, time you can scarely comprehend, then comes you. You know 127 styles of fighting, but you been using and applying them for a fraction of the time. who's the better fighter? experience is often not taken as seriously as it should be. even if those extra fighting styles address areas of fighting not addressed with my limited styles, after so many years using it i will have undoubtedly learn to address areas with my given style that may not have been meant to be addressed upon it's origination.

also, don't act as if highly variable and particular points such as these are simply mere matters of right and wrong to be aknowledged or denied. If i don't agree with you on such a particular thing, that in no way means that i am simply denying the truth.........it is possible that others don't see everything your way. that's the very reason why many are slightly opposed to you guys.