Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yea, Thor was in true Warrior Madness during that fight after the big reveal. He beat the utter shit out of him and had won in the fist fight after like 3 punches only but yea, it took way too long to put him down. Even a page or two is too long.I don't think he has any showings of strength besides his original fight with Thor. It's been a long time since I've read those books and correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't HIM revamped into Adam Warlock in Marvel's Premiere #1 right after his fight with Thor?
One major thing to take into account was back then, Warrior Madness was simply Thor going berserk as I understood it at least. It wasn't until Thor #502 in 1996 where the Berserker's Rage (It was referred to as that and not the Warrior's Madness.) was actually stated to amp Thor's strength nearly that much. I don't recall any other instance other than Bill's Thor draws strength from the Madness statement to indicate any amp at all.
Even in Blood and Thunder, when Sif thought Thor was under Warrior Madness, she specifically told Zeus, it was a malady of the mind.
Originally posted by Enyalus
So, I understood everything you just said and agree with it...except whatever point you were trying to make, lol. What was the argument behind what you just said?
😮
Hmm, it seems I accidentally erased the mini paragraph before the last sentence. That's what I get for being so damn long winded at times.
Anyways to sum it up:
In their first fight, it isn't really fair to Thor to state that he was amped 10x as it wasn't until much later on that it was even suggested that Warrior Madness gave any sort of amp and it wasn't until years after that it stated that there was a 10x increase (Unless I've not come across or forgotten an instance.).
Originally posted by psycho gundamI can argue featwise that he isn't.
thor's like 50 times stronger than her
For the sake of argument let's assume he is 50 times stronger. How does this make a difference when he will never touch her? He may not even get a chance to act.
CA, Spider-man, etc. have beat beings more than 50 times stronger than them.
Originally posted by h1a8pulling a 3rd (benifit of the doubt) of a planet with all her might?
I can argue featwise that he isn't.For the sake of argument let's assume he is 50 times stronger. How does this make a difference when he will never touch her? He may not even get a chance to act.
CA, Spider-man, etc. have beat beings more than 50 times stronger than them.
try not to use that gem.
Originally posted by h1a8you forgot to mention batman
CA, Spider-man, etc. have beat beings more than 50 times stronger than them.
Originally posted by psycho gundam
pulling a 3rd (benifit of the doubt) of a planet with all her might?try not to use that gem.
Not just pulling the planet but with enough acceleration that equates to her alone exerting the force of the weight of the entire Earth. And this is assuming she is 100 times weaker. Assuming she was pulling with 1/3 of the force (or 3 times weaker) equates to over 50 Earth weights of force.
Originally posted by h1a8
Thor loses to 1. change the order on the list.WW combos him to ko. If Thor is lucky then he gets to attack once. Diana will block/evade and then counter with a combo and simply ko him.
How can you possibly believe the crap you're spewing?
Seriously, nearly every time you come into a thread, you basically spout things that either label you as ignorant to all parties involved at best, or a raving fanboy at worst. The simple fact that you basically dismiss any feat or showing that doesn't support you as PIS or the whole "high showings only, so it doesn't count" further drive this point home. I don't think any objective comic fan who has actually READ Thor comics as well as Superman (and in this case, Wonder Woman) can accurately claim that either beat him every single time, let alone Warrior Madness Thor. Hell, I'll be the first to admit Thor's, bar none, my favorite Marvel hero with Diana being my favorite DC Heroine, but your deliberate skewing of their powers and abilities is beyond outrageous.
Hardly anyone ever agrees or can see where the hell your psycho babble is coming from, and I think, for the most part, this forum has some pretty open minded people. I mean, your whole "combo to ko" stance has become a running joke here, and for obvious reasons. I for one do understand the difference between comic and forum battles, but the disparity between the two in your eyes is extremely excessive. I mean, you've claimed Superman pretty much shit stomps Thor 10/10 when it's obvious to writers and fans alike that an encounter between the two would be one of the closest ever, comic or forum. Taking into account EVERYTHING each character brings to the table, I can't see how a sane person can argue even half of the rigid and often baseless stances you make.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
How can you possibly believe the crap you're spewing?Seriously, nearly every time you come into a thread, you basically spout things that either label you as ignorant to all parties involved at best, or a raving fanboy at worst. The simple fact that you basically dismiss any feat or showing that doesn't support you as PIS or the whole "high showings only, so it doesn't count" further drive this point home. I don't think any objective comic fan who has actually READ Thor comics as well as Superman (and in this case, Wonder Woman) can accurately claim that either beat him every single time, let alone Warrior Madness Thor. Hell, I'll be the first to admit Thor's, bar none, my favorite Marvel hero with Diana being my favorite DC Heroine, but your deliberate skewing of their powers and abilities is beyond outrageous.
Hardly anyone ever agrees or can see where the hell your psycho babble is coming from, and I think, for the most part, this forum has some pretty open minded people. I mean, your whole "combo to ko" stance has become a running joke here, and for obvious reasons. I for one do understand the difference between comic and forum battles, but the disparity between the two in your eyes is extremely excessive. I mean, you've claimed Superman pretty much shit stomps Thor 10/10 when it's obvious to writers and fans alike that an encounter between the two would be one of the closest ever, comic or forum. Taking into account EVERYTHING each character brings to the table, I can't see how a sane person can argue even half of the rigid and often baseless stances you make.
👆 I apologised once for stating he was a rabid fanboy. And he lost the plot bigtime! I revoke it now.
Originally posted by JakeTheBank
How can you possibly believe the crap you're spewing?Seriously, nearly every time you come into a thread, you basically spout things that either label you as ignorant to all parties involved at best, or a raving fanboy at worst. The simple fact that you basically dismiss any feat or showing that doesn't support you as PIS or the whole "high showings only, so it doesn't count" further drive this point home. I don't think any objective comic fan who has actually READ Thor comics as well as Superman (and in this case, Wonder Woman) can accurately claim that either beat him every single time, let alone Warrior Madness Thor. Hell, I'll be the first to admit Thor's, bar none, my favorite Marvel hero with Diana being my favorite DC Heroine, but your deliberate skewing of their powers and abilities is beyond outrageous.
Hardly anyone ever agrees or can see where the hell your psycho babble is coming from, and I think, for the most part, this forum has some pretty open minded people. I mean, your whole "combo to ko" stance has become a running joke here, and for obvious reasons. I for one do understand the difference between comic and forum battles, but the disparity between the two in your eyes is extremely excessive. I mean, you've claimed Superman pretty much shit stomps Thor 10/10 when it's obvious to writers and fans alike that an encounter between the two would be one of the closest ever, comic or forum. Taking into account EVERYTHING each character brings to the table, I can't see how a sane person can argue even half of the rigid and often baseless stances you make.
I'm not a follower. I don't care who says what. If something goes against common sense and logic then I don't accept it. I don't care if the great Albert Einstein spews it.
I go by logic only, comic fights second. Diana is not only capable of having faster than light reflexes but she can move at flash like speeds and have unequaled skill. She can simply counter the first Thor attack with a hit, then chaining that hit with others to form a combo until Thor is koed.
If we are arguing how would this fight go in a comic then WM Thor would win everytime and Thor vs. Superman would indeed be a close fight.
Forum fights takes most of the nonsense and inconsistency out of actual comic fights, or comic logic. Spider-man dodging bullets after they are fired and detecting attacks before they are launched contradicts him getting hit by slower moving enemies. Arguing with contradictions will lead to nowhere and is a total waste of time.
Originally posted by psycho gundam
weight isn't the appropriate unit of measure here lol?there are too many unknowns to even think that's the case....
kinda puts the jormangand feat into perspective though, that gl chain wasn't even resisting.
You don't understand. Imagine lifting something, while standing on Earth, that weighed the actually weight of an Earth. You would be lifting about 6.6E21 tons of force.
Net Force = Mass times Acceleration
Pulling 1/100 of the Earth's mass with enough acceleration and one will be exerting a force greater than that of the Earth's weight on another Earth.
It is not what you are pulling, but what you are pulling and how fast you are pulling it that determines the force.
With that said, Diana exerted enough force that equals the weight of the Earth (6.6E21 tons).
I can post the calculations if you like.
Originally posted by h1a8
I'm not a follower. I don't care who says what. If something goes against common sense and logic then I don't accept it. I don't care if the great Albert Einstein spews it.I go by logic only, comic fights second. Diana is not only capable of having faster than light reflexes but she can move at flash like speeds and have unequaled skill. She can simply counter the first Thor attack with a hit, then chaining that hit with others to form a combo until Thor is koed.
If we are arguing how would this fight go in a comic then WM Thor would win everytime and Thor vs. Superman would indeed be a close fight.
Forum fights takes most of the nonsense and inconsistency out of actual comic fights, or comic logic. Spider-man dodging bullets after they are fired and detecting attacks before they are launched contradicts him getting hit by slower moving enemies. Arguing with contradictions will lead to nowhere and is a total waste of time.
And this is where you're wrong.
You can't bring real world logic into forum fights. You just can't. Regardless of the scenario/stipulations, these are all COMIC BOOK CHARACTERS and unless otherwise stated FIGHTING IN CHARACTER WITHOUT PLOT MANIPULATION.
I don't know how further to break it down to you. If we use "real logic", where does it end? Where you want it to? Even with "real logic", when does a consecutive chain of strikes equal = auto win? ESPECIALLY when dealing with people with high end reflexes, durability, and god damn superpowers to back them up? You can't assume that, if WW and Thor were real (I mean seriously, WTF?) and if they were to fight in the real world under real world logic than _______ would win 10/10.
Real world logic has no place here, and trying to make it so only makes even debating about comic characters is a farce in of itself. The fact you assume that a combo is the end-all of fights is beyond ridiculous.
-We use optimal levels of characters (unless a specific version is stated).
-Characters fight in character (unless otherwise stated).
-We bar PIS (unless otherwise stated).
-We sure as hell don't try to cram in actual science and critical logic for fictional characters that make them their tricks. We use the logic that makes the characters even remotely feasible, which is comic-pseudo logic.
Unless I'm grossly mistaken, I don't see how to better explain this.
Originally posted by JakeTheBankOf course we must bring up real world logic in forum fights. Otherwise, Spider-man is far stronger than the Hulk. This is because real world logic suggests that Hulk is stronger than Spidey. Disregarding real world logic and everything is fair game; including that Aunt May will stomp Eternity and LT combined.
And this is where you're wrong.You can't bring real world logic into forum fights. You just can't. Regardless of the scenario/stipulations, these are all COMIC BOOK CHARACTERS and unless otherwise stated FIGHTING IN CHARACTER WITHOUT PLOT MANIPULATION.
I don't know how further to break it down to you. If we use "real logic", where does it end? Where you want it to? Even with "real logic", when does a consecutive chain of strikes equal = auto win? ESPECIALLY when dealing with people with high end reflexes, durability, and god damn superpowers to back them up? You can't assume that, if WW and Thor were real (I mean seriously, WTF?) and if they were to fight in the real world under real world logic than _______ would win 10/10.
Real world logic has no place here, and trying to make it so only makes even debating about comic characters is a farce in of itself. The fact you assume that a combo is the end-all of fights is beyond ridiculous.
-We use optimal levels of characters (unless a specific version is stated).
-Characters fight in character (unless otherwise stated).
-We bar PIS (unless otherwise stated).
-We sure as hell don't try to cram in actual science and critical logic for fictional characters that make them their tricks. We use the logic that makes the characters even remotely feasible, which is comic-pseudo logic.Unless I'm grossly mistaken, I don't see how to better explain this.
Comics are built off of real world logic the same as handbooks are built on comics. Handbooks indeed have errors (things not consistent with the comics) and well as comics have errors (things not consistent with real world logic). Should we throw all comic talk away just because some of it have errors in logic? Should we throw away all handbook talk because a few parts have errors in it?
Originally posted by h1a8
Of course we must bring up real world logic in forum fights. Otherwise, Spider-man is far stronger than the Hulk. This is because real world logic suggests that Hulk is stronger than Spidey. Disregarding real world logic and everything is fair game; including that Aunt May will stomp Eternity and LT combined.Comics are built off of real world logic the same as handbooks are built on comics. Handbooks indeed have errors (things not consistent with the comics) and well as comics have errors (things not consistent with real world logic). Should we throw all comic talk away just because some of it have errors in logic? Should we throw away all handbook talk because a few parts have errors in it?
What?
Comic book logic says "Hulk is obviously stronger than Spider-Man based off of feats, showings, and what we're consistantly shown in comics." Real world logic says "Bruce Banner would have died upon being caught at a ground zero gamma bomb explosion" and "Provided a spider actually survived being exposed to such high levels of radiation and had time to bite Peter Parker, Peter would have either gotten deathly ill or died".
Comic book logic is loose (at times, very loose) "real world logic" deconstructed and modified for these characters to exist, let alone continue to do so.
So that argument is pretty irrelevant.
Originally posted by psycho gundamWonder Woman's towing feat
sure you want to do that?you're already wrong as it is, now you'll prove your foolishness with calculations.
Here I use:
1. F=ma
2. The underestimation of most figures. That means that since I underestimate the entire feat the true feat was done with more power.
Now the Earth weighs about 5.9736E24 kg (6.58E21 tons) against its own gravity. So lifting the Earth against Earth's gravity is equivalent to accelerating a 6.58E21 ton object in space at 9.8m/s^2 in the absence of any outside gravity (like the Sun). Now accelerating this mass even faster is equivalent to lifting a heavier object (since F=ma).
But 9.8m/s^2 isn't even noticable after a few minutes. So let's assume the three accelerated Earth at a very small 1 mi per s^2. So this is equivalent to lifting a 1.08E24 ton object against Earth's gravity.
Let's assume that WW was pulling with 1/164th of the combined force (Many would disagree here and say that WW is much closer to the other two in strength than this). This means that she was alone pulling with a force that equals the weight of the entire Earth. That means this feat shows that he is capable of at least lifting 6.58E21 tons.
Adding in pulling against the Sun's gravity/centripetal force, assuming she is closer in strength to other other two, and averaging the previous underestimate with a small overestimate makes her able to lift astronomical amounts of weight. She is strong indeed.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
In their first fight, it isn't really fair to Thor to state that he was amped 10x as it wasn't until much later on that it was even suggested that Warrior Madness gave any sort of amp and it wasn't until years after that it stated that there was a 10x increase (Unless I've not come across or forgotten an instance.).
But hey, for argument's sake, let's say I'm generous, and agree that Thor's strength in B&T and in Warrior's Madness is the same as Classic Thor's. And then add in the x10 strength afterwards for the, shall we say, #502 retcon. I certainly won't be able to argue that Thanos is 10 times stronger than Classic Thor. Wouldn't even dream of it. But I still wouldn't say that this new WM Thor would stomp over Thanos, when not even his father could stomp over Thanos. Sure, he'd have the edge in strength. About 6-7 times over, IMO...And yes, most of Thanos' blasts would be useless. But the 10x strength amp doesn't say anything about 10x durability amp. Thor would take the hits. And so would Thanos. And while I know that Thor's will power is off the charts, so is Thanos' durability. Not to mention Thanos' shielding (tech and energy) and his telepathic abilities. I'd give the new WM Thor about a split...possibly a slim majority.
'Bout it.