Superman vs Mangog

Originally posted by Deadline
Im not even sure exactly what you're talking about but you do seem to be taking the piss. There are exceptions when it comes to durability and strength but by and large the stronger you are the more durable you are and there is consistency.

Class 100s and 80s are stronger and more durable than people in class 10. Luke Cage is more durable than hes strong and can punch above his weight but hes an exception. By and large when you got two bricks fighting each other and one gets pummeled to the ground the victor is stronger. What on earth are you talking about?

You must be talking about the unwritten comic rules and not about logical sense.

There are more exceptions (like Emma Frost). But to prove a theory wrong only 1 counterexample is needed. Since we have one then the theory 'in general' is wrong. Thus durability doesn't necessarily show strength.

Lastly I'm pretty sure Thing, She-Hulk, etc. has put down stronger bricks before.

Originally posted by h1a8
You must be talking about the unwritten comic rules and not about logical sense.

There are more exceptions (like Emma Frost). But to prove a theory wrong only 1 counterexample is needed. Since we have one then the theory 'in general' is wrong. Thus durability doesn't necessarily show strength.

Lastly I'm pretty sure Thing, She-Hulk, etc. has put down stronger bricks before.

in most cases, a character will have comparable durability to their strength. when they have a vast difference between them (like juggernaut) it's the exception, not the rule.

Originally posted by h1a8
But my point is that Thor is not in Superman's league in the strength department.

Please explain this.

Originally posted by quanchi112
What makes you think Thor can't do so?

By feats

There are two things that render someone stronger than another in comics.

1. Feats

2. By official definition and description (like Galactus).

On average they're are far too many showings of both Thor and Superman that makes one genuinely feel that Thor is a lot weaker than Superman. Even the outliers (the best feats) are astronomically apart.

Originally posted by OneDumbG0
You're conflating concepts and putting words into my mouth. I never said durability equated to strength.

You're also creating a false distinction. Mangog's durability is superior in general. You've somehow suggested with no reason and quite falsely I might add, that Mangog's superior durability only applies to magic/energy attacks. His ability to tank those attacks doesn't have to do with some specific magical/energy resistance, it has to do with having a stronger physical hide. This has been referred to on-panel. This attribute would also lend itself to blunt force durability.

Magic is Superman's kryptonite. If Superman was not weak to magic he would tank those attacks too. If Mangog uses magic before Superman can ko him then he can win the majority. But in straight h2h Superman wins easily.

Countless times I've seen characters tank immense energy blasts but fall quite convincingly when struck by a seeming less impressive physical punch. Maybe it's because some characters can absorb energy or their hides have different properties. Some mirrors and surfaces can deflect or absorb the strongest of lasers but will break with small blunt force.

Originally posted by Knowsbleed33
Please explain this.

Supes have shown strength in the many multi planetary range.
Thor from what I've read has shown strength only in the thousands of tons range (not even in the millions). Assuming only quantifiable feats of course.

Originally posted by -Pr-
in most cases, a character will have comparable durability to their strength. when they have a vast difference between them (like juggernaut) it's the exception, not the rule.

Like I said, unwritten rule.
PIS examples are exceptions too (like Spider-man and Firelord).

Originally posted by h1a8
Like I said, unwritten rule.
PIS examples are exceptions too (like Spider-man and Firelord).

that doesn't fall under the same criteria though, and there are far too many examples of characters having similar strength to their durability for it to be writer error or PIS.

even if say, Superman has more strength than durability, it's not by a huge margin.

Originally posted by -Pr-
that doesn't fall under the same criteria though, and there are far too many examples of characters having similar strength to their durability for it to be writer error or PIS.

even if say, Superman has more strength than durability, it's not by a huge margin.

When you say this I believe you mean it takes a little less than Superman type strength to override Superman's durability. Because the term "having more strength than durability" is not well defined.

I agree 100% with you and you are right. My argument is of the nitpick type (since I'm trying to rid this forum of some of its dominating Marvel bias).

Strength does imply a minimal blunt force durability though. Since the area of two humanoids hand's range from about 40in^2 to 50in^2 then the minimal pressure the front a humanoid being's hands can resist is the maximum weight they can support above their head divided by the sum of area of the both hands. For example, a 7ft 100,000 ton being can resist a minimum of 2000tons per square inch to the front of their hand. Usually, the front of the hands are more durable than say the chest and face and less than say the fist.

With that said,
I argue that since there are exceptions then who's to know when the exception isn't the case.

Originally posted by h1a8
Magic is Superman's kryptonite.

Originally posted by h1a8
Supes have shown strength in the many multi planetary range.
Thor from what I've read has shown strength only in the thousands of tons range (not even in the millions). Assuming only quantifiable feats of course.

Originally posted by Knowsbleed33
Please explain this.

because...

Originally posted by h1a8
Thor can indeed lift millions of tons and not thousands as I previous thought. This feat of lifting 1 paw off the ground proves it.

Originally posted by psycho gundam
profiled

because...

Very creative. I admire you.

actually, you're the creative one.

forming opinions with minimal thor knowledge is a talent for sure

Originally posted by h1a8
You must be talking about the unwritten comic rules and not about logical sense.

There are more exceptions (like Emma Frost). But to prove a theory wrong only 1 counterexample is needed. Since we have one then the theory 'in general' is wrong. Thus durability doesn't necessarily show strength.

What are you talking about? If for the most part durability is consistent to strength that means we assume it is, unless there is an exception. You need to prove that Mangog is the exception to the rule. For the most part if you go into the Australian bush unprepared you'll die, ok because there are excetpions that means were not going to prepare?

😬

Originally posted by h1a8

Lastly I'm pretty sure Thing, She-Hulk, etc. has put down stronger bricks before.

Skill, intelligence etc?

Originally posted by Deadline
For the most part if you go into the Australian bush unprepared you'll die, ok because there are excetpions that means were not going to prepare?

For a second i was about to point out how wong that statement is....then I remembered other races can't rip apart crocodiles barehanded.

Originally posted by Deadline
What are you talking about? If for the most part durability is consistent to strength that means we assume it is, unless there is an exception. You need to prove that Mangog is the exception to the rule. For the most part if you go into the Australian bush unprepared you'll die, ok because there are excetpions that means were not going to prepare?

😬

For each strength level there is a minimal physical durability one must have. The minimum durability is what's consistent, not the maximum. 2 beings could have the same strength but one could have 1.6 times better physical durability than the other.

There is no rule. If so then point me to where it is written officially. Thing is strong enough to knock the hell out of WW Hulk. Does that means he is just as strong? If WW Hulk would have stood there and let Thing pummel him til his hearts content then Hulk would have been koed, guaranteed fact.

Here are a few more examples off the top of my head.
Colossus, Juggernaut, Emma Frost, Ultron, Captain America, etc.

Originally posted by h1a8
For each strength level there is a minimal physical durability one must have. The minimum durability is what's consistent, not the maximum. 2 beings could have the same strength but one could have 1.6 times better physical durability than the other.

What one earth are you talking about, nobody calculates anything, you just look at showings and estimate.

Originally posted by h1a8

There is no rule. If so then point me to where it is written officially. Thing is strong enough to knock the hell out of WW Hulk. Does that means he is just as strong? If WW Hulk would have stood there and let Thing pummel him til his hearts content then Hulk would have been koed, guaranteed fact.

Its not written officially its just common sense. Its not written officially that Elektra has mental powers, guess its not true.

Originally posted by h1a8

Here are a few more examples off the top of my head.
Colossus, Juggernaut, Emma Frost, Ultron, Captain America, etc.

Heres a big list off the top of my head Power Broker's wrestler's, Olympians and Asagardians. Asagradians are possibly more durable than Olympians because they are more combat orientated but the principle stays the same. However as far as I know there strength level and durability seem to be the same.

Incredible Hulk, Thing, Namor, Hercules, Ares, Mr Hyde, Abomination etc. Emma and Collosus are terrible examples if you're made up of steel or diamond you tend to be more durable who are flesh.

Originally posted by Deadline
What one earth are you talking about, nobody calculates anything, you just look at showings and estimate.

Its not written officially its just common sense. Its not written officially that Elektra has mental powers, guess its not true.

Heres a big list off the top of my head Power Broker's wrestler's, Olympians and Asagardians. Asagradians are possibly more durable than Olympians because they are more combat orientated but the principle stays the same. However as far as I know there strength level and durability seem to be the same.

Incredible Hulk, Thing, Namor, Hercules, Ares, Mr Hyde, Abomination etc. Emma and Collosus are terrible examples if you're made up of steel or diamond you tend to be more durable who are flesh.

Originally posted by h1a8
By feats

There are two things that render someone stronger than another in comics.

1. Feats

2. By official definition and description (like Galactus).

On average they're are far too many showings of both Thor and Superman that makes one genuinely feel that Thor is [b]a lot weaker than Superman. Even the outliers (the best feats) are astronomically apart. [/B]

Originally posted by psycho gundam
actually, you're the creative one.

forming opinions with minimal thor knowledge is a talent for sure

He does have four Thor comics with Mangog in it. So you better watch your step with him. I think he is getting ready to drop the proverbial hammer at any moment on the lot of us.

This thread has been going on for way too long. Mangog wins this 9/10:

1. Mangog can one-shot supes with magic. Recall what he did to Loki.

2. Mangog's strength has already been described as far in excess of supes. As someone else pointed out in another thread, I think, the fact that he has the strength of a billion billion beings (whose base strength is unknown, and could be class 50 for all we know) puts him at planetary levels even without further augmentation from magic. Since he has physically humbled everyone who has engaged him in melee, including Thor, I think this puts the burden of proof on h1a8 for establishing that superman is both a) physically superior to Thor, and b) SO superior that he can hang with Mangog. The repeated claim that "Mangog just hasn't done anything that makes him look as strong as supes" assumes that the outcome of a versus debate shouldn't take into account descriptions of strength, non-strength-based feats, the rough equivalence of strength to durability, or outcomes of prior battles; in fact it seems to reduce the debate to who lifts more or throws farther. By this logic, one might also ask what DP Tyrant has done that shows he could beat supes — sure, he one-shotted BRB, but when has he thrown someone into space, huh?

3. Supes gets one win in ten, and that's through the surfer approach.

Odin is waaay over class 90 if he amps. He just doesn't have to because he usually kicks ass with a wave of his hand.