Originally posted by quanchi112
Iron man made those comments I thought when he had the odinforce.
he did, but thor would probably said something like, "aye, the odinforce now be mine" or something like that. but he just said that he wasn't holding back which leads me to believe that he wacked ironman without any use of the odin force and just his god of thunder powers
Originally posted by quanchi112
That only further adds to my point. They were all wrong and only Odin found this out later on in closer inspection.He was wrong about the warrior madness so why take his word on him amping himself. He was nuts and talking to himself and nowhere in this story was he ever talked about receiving a powerup until he received the power gem. You're basing your entire case off of one character who was also incorrect about him having warrior madness saying he was drawing strength from somewhere let alone he meant it in a figurative way.
K, I'll be waiting.
That's the kind of power Thor contains anyways. Any godblast it seems is more powerful than any silver surfer blast anyways. 😂
The writer was making a statement about his period of influence.
I have never seen the interview, but it looked like a godblast to me without his hammer. Either way like I said it's more powerful than I have ever seen the Surfer do with one of his blasts.
Feel free.
This thread isn't about how much power they contain, remember? It's about how much energy output both have. And since Thor can't repeat his feat against the Celestial without his Belt of Strength, that particular showing doesn't mean anything in this thread.
Which is not supported on panel.
You haven't even seen the interview and you're trying to use it as evidence? And I say the blackhole's more impressive. Feel free to disagree for now if you want, we can take it up if and when our BZ ever actually goes down and let the judges decide who's "right".
Originally posted by gogogadgetgoThat's a tough sell. There is no way Thor wasn't more powerful then than he is now. The odinforce doesn't make you just as powerful as he is when completely without it.
he did, but thor would probably said something like, "aye, the odinforce now be mine" or something like that. but he just said that he wasn't holding back which leads me to believe that he wacked ironman without any use of the odin force and just his god of thunder powers
Originally posted by darthgooberThat's such a weak argument. He wasn't in a warrior's madness that's the whole thing. Had it been warrior's madness then you'd have a case.
The fact that everyone thought it was Warrior Madness supports the notion that Thor was amped, as Warrior Madness is an amped state. Warlock even commented on his being faster than he was in their first fight, which further supports his being amped since he was in Warrior Madness during their first fight. So we have BRB stating that he's drawing strength from his madness, Warlock talking about how he's worse than he was when he was in Warrior Madness, and his performance against 3 Herald level heroes to support his being amped.Feel free.
This thread isn't about how much power they contain, remember? It's about how much energy output both have. And since Thor can't repeat his feat against the Celestial without his Belt of Strength, that particular showing doesn't mean anything in this thread.
Which is not supported on panel.
You haven't even seen the interview and you're trying to use it as evidence? And I say the blackhole's more impressive. Feel free to disagree for now if you want, we can take it up if and when our BZ ever actually goes down and let the judges decide who's "right".
The only character who fought Thor one on one with an amp was Surfer in their first fight.
That only supports the notion he was fighting more effectively while giving his enemies no quarter. He was trying to execute them. He wanted to go back to asgard and burn it down. He wasn't amp he was just extremely ferocious/pissed. The comic later clears up everyone's misconception of it being warrior's madness.
Yes, it does. The power he let loose wasn't amped in any way. It was just a reinforced hammer which still blew up. That attack is still fair game. He demonstrated the feat under his own power so if you want to beat him you have to trump the feat. We go by what happens in comics on here.
What isn't supported on panel? Just a minute ago you tried citing the Thing punching Galactus and then when asked about it proclaimed ignorance. It's typical of you to reach for anything as Thor has demonstrated on panel to be superior to Surfer in combat and in power.
The interview is besides the point. I never said I saw it I simply shared together someone else's experience with you. I always have maintained either way he took out durok with one blast whether it's a godblast or not. 🙂
You can continue to proclaim the Surfer is more powerful by a blackhole over a godblast which ran off the guy responsible for the Surfer's power. It's hysterical.
Originally posted by quanchi112
That's such a weak argument. He wasn't in a warrior's madness that's the whole thing. Had it been warrior's madness then you'd have a case.The only character who fought Thor one on one with an amp was Surfer in their first fight.
That only supports the notion he was fighting more effectively while giving his enemies no quarter. He was trying to execute them. He wanted to go back to asgard and burn it down. He wasn't amp he was just extremely ferocious/pissed. The comic later clears up everyone's misconception of it being warrior's madness.
Yes, it does. The power he let loose wasn't amped in any way. It was just a reinforced hammer which still blew up. That attack is still fair game. He demonstrated the feat under his own power so if you want to beat him you have to trump the feat. We go by what happens in comics on here.
What isn't supported on panel? Just a minute ago you tried citing the Thing punching Galactus and then when asked about it proclaimed ignorance. It's typical of you to reach for anything as Thor has demonstrated on panel to be superior to Surfer in combat and in power.
The interview is besides the point. I never said I saw it I simply shared together someone else's experience with you. I always have maintained either way he took out durok with one blast whether it's a godblast or not. 🙂
You can continue to proclaim the Surfer is more powerful by a blackhole over a godblast which ran off the guy responsible for the Surfer's power. It's hysterical.
I never said anything about the people fighting him ever going against him while they were amped, I said that Warrior had already fought him while THOR was amped. Warlock fought Thor in Warrior Madness in THEIR first fight back in the day when Warlock kidnapped Sif. And Warlock commented on Thor being faster in the more recent fight than the one where he was actually in Warrior Madness as well as being even more dangerous. It may not have been Warrior Madness, but there were definitely similar effects.
I'm not saying that he was in Warrior Madness, I'm saying he was amped because he was insane(just as it's not uncommon for insane people in the real world to be stronger).
It doesn't matter that the power he unleashed against the Celestial wasn't amped because he can't unleash that kind of power without his belt. Without his belt to reinforce the hammer it would shatter before releasing the same amount of energy that shattered it while it was reinforced.
A Godblast against Durok.
I thought you were using Durok as an example of Thor using the Godblast without his hammer?
He ran off an extremely weakened Galactus, that's not all that impressive given some of Galactus's low showings and inconsistent history against Magic.
Originally posted by darthgooberThis amp wasn't described to amp him at all. BrB said it was in a figurative way and even if he thought it was amping him literally it was due to him falsely thinking it warrior's madness.
Was Lightray in Warrior Madness? No he was just Insane. Warrior Madness isn't the only possible amp for characters.I never said anything about the people fighting him ever going against him while they were amped, I said that Warrior had already fought him while THOR was amped. Warlock fought Thor in Warrior Madness in THEIR first fight back in the day when Warlock kidnapped Sif. And Warlock commented on Thor being faster in the more recent fight than the one where he was actually in Warrior Madness as well as being even more dangerous. It may not have been Warrior Madness, but there were definitely similar effects.
I'm not saying that he was in Warrior Madness, I'm saying he was amped because he was insane(just as it's not uncommon for insane people in the real world to be stronger).
It doesn't matter that the power he unleashed against the Celestial wasn't amped because he can't unleash that kind of power without his belt. Without his belt to reinforce the hammer it would shatter before releasing the same amount of energy that shattered it while it was reinforced.
A Godblast against Durok.
I thought you were using Durok as an example of Thor using the Godblast without his hammer?
He ran off an extremely weakened Galactus, that's not all that impressive given some of Galactus's low showings and inconsistent history against Magic.
No, he was just more dangerous. Being faster doesn't equate being more powerful anyways.
You can feel free to have your opinion and one that completely goes against what happened in the comic. Adrenaline can also amp someone's strength so I guess every time someone gets an adrenaline boost they are also amped. Your logic is terrible.
They aren't releasing it on each other we are basing this of past power feats thus making it fair game. 🙂
Yes, I said that it was I thought it was personally but either way it's a blast that contained as much power to take out durok who he struggled with before along with the Surfer. Go Thor. Even if it isn't a blast it's still an attack that powerful.
Even a weakened Galactus has easily owned Surfer before. He was very weak in Galactus the devourer.
Originally posted by Kris BlazeIf I ever run across the interview I'll post it here. It's my opinion it was, but like I said either way it was a powerful attack nonetheless.
There was no godblast against Durok.The godblast has never been lightning, it has always required Thor to mix his life-force with something, it has never been that widespread and it has never come from anywhere but him/mjolnir.
Originally posted by quanchi112
This amp wasn't described to amp him at all. BrB said it was in a figurative way and even if he thought it was amping him literally it was due to him falsely thinking it warrior's madness.No, he was just more dangerous. Being faster doesn't equate being more powerful anyways.
You can feel free to have your opinion and one that completely goes against what happened in the comic. Adrenaline can also amp someone's strength so I guess every time someone gets an adrenaline boost they are also amped. Your logic is terrible.
They aren't releasing it on each other we are basing this of past power feats thus making it fair game. 🙂
Yes, I said that it was I thought it was personally but either way it's a blast that contained as much power to take out durok who he struggled with before along with the Surfer. Go Thor. Even if it isn't a blast it's still an attack that powerful.
Even a weakened Galactus has easily owned Surfer before. He was very weak in Galactus the devourer.
How'd he be more dangerous than himself with 10x strength? And being faster than an amped state supports him being in an amped state.
My opinion goes right along with what was featured in the comic because he was portrayed as being more powerful than he usually is.
Only if he's got his Belt of Strength in this thread. Without the Belt, he can't unleash a GB like that.
Sure it was powerful, but I say that a blast that can create a black hole is more powerful.
Galactus's showings go up and down, the fact that he has good feats while extremely weakened doesn't mean that Thor's "sucker blast" against him while he was extremely weakened is all that impressive because he's still got those low end showings while weakened too.
Originally posted by darthgooberHe also thought he knew it was due to warrior's madness making his statement even less credible.
You say it was figurative, I say it was literal. You say it was because he was misinformed, I say it was because he knows how strong Thor normally is.How'd he be more dangerous than himself with 10x strength? And being faster than an amped state supports him being in an amped state.
My opinion goes right along with what was featured in the comic because he was portrayed as being more powerful than he usually is.
Only if he's got his Belt of Strength in this thread. Without the Belt, he can't unleash a GB like that.
Sure it was powerful, but I say that a blast that can create a black hole is more powerful.
Galactus's showings go up and down, the fact that he has good feats while extremely weakened doesn't mean that Thor's "sucker blast" against him while he was extremely weakened is all that impressive because he's still got those low end showings while weakened too.
He was certainly written that way. Thor can still kick the crap out of you at normal strength.
No, he was being more ruthless than he normally is to his friends.
This is based on power feats not repeating the feat itself in this thread. I am the thread starter and I have explained this.
Yes, it does. Surfer has never been able to do anything like this and has faced him while incredibly weak and with aid. Don't try to make excuses to cover up Thor's decisive power advantage. Maybe surfer should have used his all powerful blackhole that you keep referring to. 😂
Originally posted by quanchi112
This amp wasn't described to amp him at all. BrB said it was in a figurative way and even if he thought it was amping him literally it was due to him falsely thinking it warrior's madness.No, he was just more dangerous. Being faster doesn't equate being more powerful anyways.
There is also what Goober pointed out regarding Warlock statement..
Think about it for a sec.. If Warlock thought that Insane Thor was a lot more stronger/faster than WM Thor (Both meet first encounter) that would make this version of Thor > WM version and since WM is amp, this version is likely one too... just commonsense man..
Originally posted by AmbientThor wasn't displaying anywhere near close to ten times his strength.
Again it was no assumption on Brb's part, he was wrong about true WM but the unusual strength displayed by Thor is sound after all his got quite familiarity with Thor's mental ap. and physical prowess , that surely lead him to that conclusion (WM).. Literal is word you should be lookin for..lolThere is also what Goober pointed out regarding Warlock statement..
Think about it for a sec.. If Warlock thought that Insane Thor was a lot more stronger/faster than WM Thor (Both meet first encounter) that would make this version of Thor > WM version and since WM is amp, this version is likely one too... just commonsense man..
Thor was simply being more savage. You can't pin all your hopes on one guy's statement who was also wrong about the warrior madness part.
So what if he was faster? Do you really think he was ten times as strong? He was just owning them with his hammer and his overall power not snapping their limbs like twigs. BrB momentarily got the better of him and failed to finish him when he had the chance. Thor gathered his bearings and crushed him again.
If you feel he was amped you have to prove it.
Originally posted by quanchi112
He also thought he knew it was due to warrior's madness making his statement even less credible.He was certainly written that way. Thor can still kick the crap out of you at normal strength.
No, he was being more ruthless than he normally is to his friends.
This is based on power feats not repeating the feat itself in this thread. I am the thread starter and I have explained this.
Yes, it does. Surfer has never been able to do anything like this and has faced him while incredibly weak and with aid. Don't try to make excuses to cover up Thor's decisive power advantage. Maybe surfer should have used his all powerful blackhole that you keep referring to. 😂
Which means that he was written at a higher level than he is at Warrior Madness, which means that either he was amped or it was a BS showing.
And more powerful.
Does Thor have his belt in this thread? If not, it's not valid because it's not the Thor that's being discussed in this thread.
Again, using a sucker punch to drive off an extremely weakened Galactus who'd just gone through Hell against Ego isn't that impressive. I know YOU think it is, but I'm content to let the judges make the call during our BZ. 3 months should be more than enough time to track down the scans featuring Thing.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Thor wasn't displaying anywhere near close to ten times his strength.Thor was simply being more savage. You can't pin all your hopes on one guy's statement who was also wrong about the warrior madness part.
So what if he was faster? Do you really think he was ten times as strong? He was just owning them with his hammer and his overall power not snapping their limbs like twigs. BrB momentarily got the better of him and failed to finish him when he had the chance. Thor gathered his bearings and crushed him again.
If you feel he was amped you have to prove it.
One actual statement, a indirect comparison of physical attribute between Insane and WM, and feat for Valkyrie outside a mere MC..
Leading me to this conclusion..
I think we've covered/proven more i can say about your points..
nighttynight..lols
Originally posted by darthgooberThor wasn't more powerful? What did he do to suggest an increase in power?
He thought it was Warrior Madness because Thor was more powerful. Being wrong about the cause doesn't mean that he's wrong about the effect.Which means that he was written at a higher level than he is at Warrior Madness, which means that either he was amped or it was a BS showing.
And more powerful.
Does Thor have his belt in this thread? If not, it's not valid because it's not the Thor that's being discussed in this thread.
Again, using a sucker punch to drive off an extremely weakened Galactus who'd just gone through Hell against Ego isn't that impressive. I know YOU think it is, but I'm content to let the judges make the call during our BZ. 3 months should be more than enough time to track down the scans featuring Thing.
No, it means two different writers can interpret thing completely different. Some writers have Thor less powerful than others.
Proof?
The belt didn't amp the blast making it valid. Nothing you say will change that.
Yes, it is considering a weakened Galactus easily crushed the Surfer and earth's resistance.
You'll need a lot more than that.
Originally posted by AmbientThen how can you even have a case if you yourself don't even believe it amps him this much?
10x strength is a myth, never been proven..One actual statement, a indirect comparison of physical attribute between Insane and WM, and feat for Valkyrie outside a mere MC..
Leading me to this conclusion..I think we've covered/proven more i can say about your points..
nighttynight..lols
BrB was incorrect and he would lose against Thor if he got hit relentlessly with no mercy at all from thor in any old fight.
No, you are basing your entire argument off of one misinterpreted statement from BrB. It's no surprise only two surfer fans are here fighting a losing battle.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Thor wasn't more powerful? What did he do to suggest an increase in power?No, it means two different writers can interpret thing completely different. Some writers have Thor less powerful than others.
Proof?
The belt didn't amp the blast making it valid. Nothing you say will change that.
Yes, it is considering a weakened Galactus easily crushed the Surfer and earth's resistance.
You'll need a lot more than that.
It means that he was being written as more dangerous than himself in Warrior Madness. Further supporting his being amped.
He walked over BRB, Surfer, and Warlock as well as BRB and Warlock's comments. If you're claim is that he can do that without an amp, then it's up to you to find proof outside of Blood and Thunder to support the notion since a single piece of evidence can't be used to support itself.
He can't generate that blast without the belt, making it invalid unless he has the belt in this thread.
And has been put down by far less.
Nah, I'm confident the judges will look at the entirety of the characters history rather than picking and choosing showings the way you're wanting to.