Optimus Prime vs. King Kong

Originally posted by Newjak
The cybertronian got shot by an RPG and was still able to use the arm that got hit and fire back.

i presented clear and irrefutable evidence from both films and their respective characters being hit with a rifle round.

painfully obvious comparative effects of kinetic energy on TF vs Kong.

the rounds which hit kong were far more powerful and he was barely shoved. the transformer violently recoiled.

so keep furiously tapping your clownshoes and distracting with fallacious backflipping

ACR:

BGM 50:

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Crap Deceps, Prime augmented with enhanced weaponry and manoeuvrability via trailer parts, surprise was on his side.
Same he couldn't win against 3 in ROTF...

They clearly saw him coming, he didn't even use his flight against them. He was on the ground and literally running and sliding through them as he fought. His Jetfire enhancements had nothing to do with it.

You're convenietnly forgetting to elaborate on how he killed 1 of them, heavily damaged Starscream, and beat Megatron down. He only lost, and you know this is true, because he blatantly ignored them and went to check on Sam.

But yeah, I'm surprised we've let this go on this long.

Prime Wins.

Kong loses.

Anyone who says different is a troll or a monkey wanker.

Running and sliding from landing from flight.

He was getting clocked before that point too. Without the Sam distraction. Kong dealt with his situation better.

Nope no trolling or monkey wanking involved..

We cant help it if some many are fooled by shiny things.

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
Yeah. Its called running/moving not being a sitting duck.

Did you seriously just argue that a giant ape can evade automatic gunfire?

From a distance of more than 5 meters, the greatest martial artist ever to have lived would take 0 out of 10 fights against a moderately competent guy with a drawn assault rifle. Indeed, create a composite perfect human, make him a real life Batman, and he'd still lose 1000 out of 1000 fights.

You think King Kong can defeat a Prime armed with heavy, automatic weaponry, and who can also ****ing fly, because he's "fast and agile"?

Sorry, I didn't mean to put quotations around those phrases, since that isn't the "evidence" you used to convey your point. It was actually because of Kong's "instinct". 🤣

How is his primitive brain even supposed to register that he should run from weapons he would not recognize as a threat, before a missile is lodged into his cranium?

Translation: "Prime hides again behind Melee and Range weapons"

Exactly.

If someone were to ask you "who would win: you, or a guy with a gun?", is the correct answer "the guy, because he has a gun", or "me, because it would be cowardly for him to use the gun"? 🙄

more dodging.

pathetic clowns.

You'll note that Sadako is talking about Kong like he's actually taken on an Optimus level threat, when all 3 of those V-Rexes were immobile as hell and completely unagile.

...your group-think posse will also note that you are deliberately avoiding concrete evidence that kong was far less effected by kinetic energy, which was much greater than required to make a TF violently recoil.

but please: spend the next 30 pages pontificating and agreeing with eachother, asserting speculation, and posting silly memes to avoid the embarrassing fact of your obviously evasive cowardice. clown

I'll note that Focus seems to only focus on a TF recoiling when shot in the eye. Not when heavier ordinance was used to shoot them in the body, which yielded nothing.

While he'll point out that Kong didn't react much when shot in the body, but won't point out that if the same ammo used against the TF's was used to shoot Kong in the eyes, he wouldn't have eyes anymore and would react far more violently.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
kong was far less effected by kinetic energy, which was much greater than required to make a TF violently recoil.

Who gives a shit?

Can King Kong survive a high-penetrating explosive round to the face? Prove that he can, please. Go ahead, we'll all gladly retract our low opinion of you if you can.

In contrast, why does it even matter how durable Prime is to bullets? Does King Kong have a gun?

We've only brought it into question as a kind concession to your attempt to ignore Prime's built-in heavy guns and swords.

Originally posted by KingD19
Not when heavier ordinance was used to shoot them in the body, which yielded nothing.

another lie. but dont let that stop you from repeating your false assertion that he was not damaged.

Originally posted by KingD19
While he'll point out that Kong didn't react much when shot in the body, but won't point out that if the same ammo used against the TF's was used to shoot Kong in the eyes, he wouldn't have eyes anymore and would react far more violently.

oh i get it. you dont know what 'kinetic energy' means and you're just wasting my time with your evidence-evading clown act.

Originally posted by Master Han
[b]Who gives a shit?

Can King Kong survive a high-penetrating explosive round to the face? Prove that he can, please. Go ahead, we'll all gladly retract our low opinion of you if you can. [/B]

yeah wtf does mass of bullets and subsequent kinetic energy have to do with bullets?

Originally posted by Master Han
😆 Buddy, I don't think anyone believes here for a second that you have any respectable understanding of physics, so please don't try pulling this bluffing tactic. We will call you out on it.

good so you have no contradictory evidence and are just spewing nonsensical rhetoric.

kinetic energy was TOTALLY relevant when you were arguing 30mm rounds vs 50 cal, but now its not.

you are pathetic.

Originally posted by focus4chumps
oh i get it. you dont know what 'kinetic energy' means [/B]

😆 Buddy, I don't think anyone believes here for a second that you have any respectable understanding of physics, so please don't try pulling this bluffing tactic. We will call you out on it.

Jesus Christ!

Why don't all of you just strip naked and pile into a gang bang and get it over with?!

^That would not be very fun. I'm afraid Sadako and Chumps have a thing for bestiality. And should we get mugged, or something, they'll probably think they can dodge the bullets by "instinct"*.

*actual argument

more of your cowardly evidence-avoiding distraction tactics.

you have nothing to refute it. nothing at all.

get madder 🙂

Butthole to titties bag of shitties.

smh@ this bullshit forced meme you people keep trying to shove down the throats of others while high-fiving eachother and ignoring glaring contradictory evidence.

every 'old vs new' topic indirectly involving military hardware has to be systematically and aggressively ruined with this opinion-enforcing evidence-free adolescent posturing.

"modern weapons are carte-blanche insta-win against pre-2000 fictional character, based on some sweeping indeterminable and unique powers which didnt exist pre-1980's

and why have we had to endure pages of your dancing around a completely valid retort? because it made you feel like you were not only correct but also popular at the same time? i expected it from obvious sock troll but the rest you are pathetic.

Originally posted by Master Han
^That would not be very fun. I'm afraid Sadako and Chumps have a thing for bestiality. And should we get mugged, or something, they'll probably think they can dodge the bullets by "instinct"*.

*actual argument

*poorly put and totally infactual and irrelevant 'argument'

And the 2013 full of shit award goes to 'Han the truth challenged man'.

You have nothing. Between your ears, or on this thread.
You didn't even make sense in your rushed and crude attempt to come off as clever.

"Should WE get mugged/THEY'll probably think THEY can dodge bullets by instinct" lol

Your tears are both noted and delicious.

Pure adolescent knobbery on your part.
But i'm sure you'll get there one day.

focus4chumps, you can't possibly expect to play the dodge card, when you've literally responded to posts containing hundreds of words with:
[list]
[*]gifs
[*]random images
[*]A one liner statement that the poster is wrong
[*]addressing the most minor points, and snipping the most important portions
[/list]

The reason why Optimus Prime wins, is because he has explosive bullets demonstrably more potent than missiles and tank rounds.

Do you think King Kong could take a depleted uranium tank round to the face?

------------

*poorly put and totally infactual and irrelevant 'argument'

😆

Did you honestly admit that your own argument was "totally infactual and irrelevant"?

Because I was quoting verbatim your own contention; in response to a demand for proof that Kong can dodge bullets, you replied with one word: "instinct".

When did Prime take that?

No you weren't. You were attempting to put words in my mouth.
I could attempt to do the same to you, but theres no room in your hole, what with it being occupied by BayPrime's knob and all..

Does Kong have a weapon?

No? Then how is your question remotely relevant?

and why have we had to endure pages of your dancing around a completely valid retort?

On the contrary, in a rather hilarious fit of irony, another poster had produced evidence to counter your argument, and you literally pretended that the post did not exist. I brought the evidence back up; and you responded by posting a random image.

Do you think King Kong could survive a depleted uranium tank round to the face?