Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
I don't even think he read the comic anyways. These are the facts... the clear presentation of the comic make it clear that Ultimator was more powerful. Period.
I did 😉 LOL I love it when people like you make an ass out of yourselves by assuming.
Anyway, I don't see how you can be more powerful or one-up what Mxy did...
Originally posted by TheGame17
I did 😉 LOL I love it when people like you make an ass out of yourselves by assuming.
Anyway, I don't see how you can be more powerful or one-up what Mxy did...
You're right... I do love it when people make ASSumptions and look like tards. I wasn't talking to you, I was talking to blackbolt. Question... did the clear presentation of the comic and via narration make it clear Ultimator was more powerful, in fact, considerably more powerful.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiIt's obvious he didn't read the comic nor did he even know which comic Ultimator appeared in. He argues in various threads with little to no info which makes his opinion null and void.
I don't even think he read the comic anyways. These are the facts... the clear presentation of the comic make it clear that Ultimator was more powerful. Period.
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
You're right... I do love it when people make ASSumptions and look like tards. I wasn't talking to you, I was talking to blackbolt. Question... did the clear presentation of the comic and via narration make it clear Ultimator was more powerful, in fact, considerably more powerful.
Oh my mistake.
I understand the portrayal, but considering Mxy's feat in WF, I don't see any one topping that. At best, it would be a stalemate.
Originally posted by quanchi112No hes not.
If a portrayal implies a character is superior then they are despite not having the feats. Get it now ?
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
You're right... I do love it when people make ASSumptions and look like tards. I wasn't talking to you, I was talking to blackbolt. Question... did the clear presentation of the comic and via narration make it clear Ultimator was more powerful, in fact, considerably more powerful.
Originally posted by quanchi112It doesn't matter if hes portrayed. Feats show who is more powerful.
It's obvious he didn't read the comic nor did he even know which comic Ultimator appeared in. He argues in various threads with little to no info which makes his opinion null and void.
cause you have no clue about these characters.... if you did you would realize that Odin's on panel feats and victories as a whole are more impressive than Eternity. Yet, we all know Eternity is significantly higher up on the pecking order... An example of how feats don't mean auto win. Just like we know Superman has lifted crazy stuff showing everybody his strength.. I can never recall galactus ever lifting a thing.. Thus using your stupid theory.. Superman must be stronger.. when in fact we know.. if Galactus wanted to he could lift anything Superman could a lot easier. Those are just two examples...
Originally posted by Black bolt zNo, this isn't the case otherwise more appearances generally means more impressive feats.
No hes not. It doesn't matter if hes portrayed. Feats show who is more powerful.
Originally posted by Black bolt zBy your logic Odin is superior to Eternity and the Celestials.
You still have yet to prove that they are.
Originally posted by quanchi112Not always. But most of the times yes.
No, this isn't the case otherwise more appearances generally means more impressive feats. By your logic Odin is superior to Eternity and the Celestials.
once you prove to me that Odin is superior to abstracts then I will concede the point. But the thing is you have to use his....feats. So prove Odin is superior to eternity and celestials.
Originally posted by KuRuPT ThanosiExcept you still have to prove these are true.
cause you have no clue about these characters.... if you did you would realize that Odin's on panel feats and victories as a whole are more impressive than Eternity. Yet, we all know Eternity is significantly higher up on the pecking order... An example of how feats don't mean auto win. Just like we know Superman has lifted crazy stuff showing everybody his strength.. I can never recall galactus ever lifting a thing.. Thus using your stupid theory.. Superman must be stronger.. when in fact we know.. if Galactus wanted to he could lift anything Superman could a lot easier. Those are just two examples...
Based on feats we know Galactus is stronger then Supeman. Based on feats we know eternity is stronger then Odin. Stop making these claims that feats show heralds as superior to abstracts as they aren't true. Odin and Superman have ridiculous feats for being their level but they still aren't galactus level.
Originally posted by Black bolt zYour logic states Odin is superior. He has better feats but is portrayed as far weaker. I use the same logic so I go by portrayals and not based on superior feats. So based on your logic you believe Odin wins and is more powerful based off of his superior feats.
Not always. But most of the times yes.once you prove to me that Odin is superior to abstracts then I will concede the point. But the thing is you have to use his....feats. So prove Odin is superior to eternity and celestials. Except you still have to prove these are true.
Based on feats we know Galactus is stronger then Supeman. Based on feats we know eternity is stronger then Odin. Stop making these claims that feats show heralds as superior to abstracts as they aren't true. Odin and Superman have ridiculous feats for being their level but they still aren't galactus level.