Originally posted by thadarknite84
He is not a "normal" human by any means of the word. You don't seem to understand Batman for one, because if you did, you wouldn't be talking nonsense. Who cares how much you think that it is BS. You can't change or do anything about that. And your opinion is irrelevant. You didn't crate Batman, Bob Kane did. So why should I care that you think it's BS. It is a fact that he is peak human so get over it. And don't complain to me, tell that to DC.
In the DC verse Bats is a normal man. Just like Shang Chi or Punisher etc etc
Yes these three are exceptional but normal none the less ie not enhanced or not true superhuman by there universe category.
Originally posted by thadarknite84
He is not a "normal" human by any means of the word. You don't seem to understand Batman for one, because if you did, you wouldn't be talking nonsense. Who cares how much you think that it is BS. You can't change or do anything about that. And your opinion is irrelevant. You didn't crate Batman, Bob Kane did. So why should I care that you think it's BS. It is a fact that he is peak human so get over it. And don't complain to me, tell that to DC.
What part of what I said was nonsense. I am critiquing the statement that he is peak human. What I do know about batman is that DC claims he is a normal guy. A normal 6'2" 210lb guy cannot at the same time be the strongets normal human in the world and the best martial artist in the world it's just not not possible. I know that this is a comic book but it is a world based roughly along the same lines as ours. Bob Kane certainly didn't make any assertions when he created Batman that he could bench 800lbs. Any claims that he has any where near this level of strength is just bollox unless there a scan anywhere that shows bats benching 800lbs and if there is then I can only conclude somehow inexplicably batman has turned into more than human?? If not then I would guess we have to assume he is pretty damn strong but not peak human like cap. In which case what is to say DD isn't nearly as strong as bats
Originally posted by Soljer
what's that say on the side of the barbell - that's what you want me to look at right? If i was being generous I would might concede it says 500lbs. I am not being generous it is unclear what it says on theside on the barbell and since barbell plates come in 45lb variety I can't see how it would say 500lbs.
Originally posted by Phantom Zone
To be fair Batman does not always show senses on that level and I think Bullseyes would really come out on top with accuracy.
Again, read my post.
There is a part I say that Bullseye would emerge tops in accuracy, BUT ONLY in OBSCENELY DIFFICULT targeting situations (as in, situations that are even stupid for comic books).
In all other 'normal' situations, you would NOT be able to tell the difference between Batman, Bullseye, Daredevil and Green Arrow (you can add any number of other characters here, e.g Deadshot, Hawkeye, etc). All are PERFECT shots, and will hit CONSTANT dead-eye aims.
Constantly.
It is like you trying to judge a 100m footrace between Superman, Mr. Majestic, Martian Manhunter, WonderWoman, and the Flash. While to comicbook readers it is known that the Flash is the fastest, to an observer all would seem to be the same speed. There would be no difference in time ......the only way to see a difference would be to have them race across the Galaxy, in which case you'd notice that the Flash is faster.
In terms of accuracy, there is no difference between Batman, Daredevil, Bullseye and any number of other sharp-shooters out there. None whatsoever. All of them are perfect (absolutely perfect) shots.
Only when you make it ridiculous do differences emerge.
And, to get back on target, what you had said about Batman being at a disadvantage was so totally wrong.
The reason DD has the edge here is because of his radar sense. He can sense heart beat changes, nerve impulses, etc. This makes him know what you are going to do before you do it (somewhat like a Spider-sense).
Also, the amount of styles one knows doesn't make them a better fighter. If one has mastered a style that is superior to all other styles then he/she is a better fighter than the one who has mastered
all the inferior styles. I believe, IMO, the DD's style is equal to or superior to any and all the styles Batman has mastered.
Lastly, these two have peak human feats so thus we can say that they are about even in physicality (DD might be slightly more agile though) so let's assume even here.
But giving Batman the benefit of the doubt, let's say that he is a slightly better fighter than DD. DD's radar sense, which is a larger advantage than batman's slightly better fighting, tips the scales in favor of DD.
Well off the top of my head there is the 630 lb boulder that he couldn’t lift that lead to him using venom and the ceiling that was being lowered with 1,000 pounds of force, then there is the fact that of all the times he has been shown training, this is the only time the he has ever been shown lifting even close to that amount.
Originally posted by spetznaz
Again, read my post.There is a part I say that Bullseye would emerge tops in accuracy, BUT ONLY in OBSCENELY DIFFICULT targeting situations (as in, situations that are even stupid for comic books).
In all other 'normal' situations, you would NOT be able to tell the difference between Batman, Bullseye, Daredevil and Green Arrow (you can add any number of other characters here, e.g Deadshot, Hawkeye, etc). All are PERFECT shots, and will hit CONSTANT dead-eye aims.
Constantly.
Yeah and?
Originally posted by spetznaz
It is like you trying to judge a 100m footrace between Superman, Mr. Majestic, Martian Manhunter, WonderWoman, and the Flash. While to comicbook readers it is known that the Flash is the fastest, to an observer all would seem to be the same speed. There would be no difference in time ......the only way to see a difference would be to have them race across the Galaxy, in which case you'd notice that the Flash is faster.In terms of accuracy, there is no difference between Batman, Daredevil, Bullseye and any number of other sharp-shooters out there. None whatsoever. All of them are perfect (absolutely perfect) shots.
Only when you make it ridiculous do differences emerge.
You could be right there, but I still would have expected Bullseye to be slightly better.
Originally posted by spetznaz
And, to get back on target, what you had said about Batman being at a disadvantage was so totally wrong.
I cant remember exactly what I said.