Superman with GL Ring vs Thanos

Originally posted by TheTyrant
Nope, his heat-vision didn't brush Furies aside; it only destroyed the ground near them which made their dogs lose balance. Of course, that's only my interpretation, but if you want to argue that his heat-vision DID hit them, then it must've been some weak shit to not even burn those little dogs.

So ridiculously high-end showings and feats count nowadays? I guess Superman is > to Zeus then.

wheres shoko when u need him

Originally posted by TheTyrant
High-end showings shouldn't be considered in KMC debates, Jake. Using them would be just as bad as low-balling imo.

(and fixed my previous post)

Well, I see where you're getting at, but I think high-end showings are important to characters as it shows the upper limits of their capabilities when placed in certain situations. Superman has his typical power levels and his levels when he gradually pours more and more effort and power to get the job done. Thor has his typical level and his not holding back levels. Surfer has typical pacifist/cleanly ending fights before they progress levels and his cosmic fueled rages.

Constant high-balling is bad, yes, but high end feats are valid so long as the context makes sense and it's plausible that said context/circumstances can be duplicated, matched, or exceeded in a forum setting. Bringing up low-end feats isn't always bad in the general sense, provided said context is used and it doesn't contradict with that character's history as a whole. It's when average and high end feats are completely ignored in favor of low (or exclusively high) feats that it becomes a problem.

Best of ability rule clause should eliminate lowballing, period, but it's still a problem on the forum and for pretty much every character that somebody doesn't like.

I thought we were suppose to use average showings.

Originally posted by vince_slice
I thought we were suppose to use average showings.

Originally posted by vince_slice
I thought we were suppose to use average showings.

We're supposed to have characters operate at the best of their ability and by default, eliminate PIS and jobbing (CIS is still in effect, however). Now, as far as that goes, I believe you can average out a character's "best of their ability" feats. I don't think we should only use high end, one time feats? But I definitely don't think we should ignore high end feats in general as these characters as a rule have the capacity to dig deep and pull off the extraordinary depending on context and circumstance.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
How do you define average showings?

I'm not sure, but I remember -Pr- lecturing people about using averages when it comes to feats in the versus forum. Maybe it means averaging high end feats with low end feats? Or how a character is typically displayed power wise on average in most of his appearances?

Superman with ring doesnt even have to get his hands dirty. All he has to do is replicate this

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

And without the Infinty Gauntlet its going to take at least a 10 count before Death throws him back to the living like a fisherman does to a small catch

Originally posted by paisapower
Superman with ring doesnt even have to get his hands dirty. All he has to do is replicate this

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

And without the Infinty Gauntlet its going to take at least a 10 count before Death throws him back to the living like a fisherman does to a small catch

🤨 What was the point of those scans?

I guess it's a classic scan-misrepresentation-blitz. 😛

That, or too much hashish while sitting beside a few random comics, his PC and a scanner?

I refuse to let the honor of the noble practice of pot smoking be impinged by this grotesque slander and libel.

durpot
Besides, if he was going to post while high, I'm sure he could come up with something better than that. Hell, I would. durlaugh

high-end showings are valid, when used properly.

Low-end ones aren't.

Basically you have to look at all there feats as a whole.

Originally posted by D_Dude1210
I guess it's a classic scan-misrepresentation-blitz. 😛

That, or too much hashish while sitting beside a few random comics, his PC and a scanner?

That obvious, except w/brew not hash. Anyways, isnt Quasar a GL type and isnt this a supes w/ring thread ?

And what am I misrepresenting? The scans clearly show Thanos disintegrated by a big blast point blank which supes would duplicate

Originally posted by -Pr-
high-end showings are valid, when used properly.

Low-end ones aren't.

How are high end feats valid and low end feats not? Both give you a ballpark on the high's and low's of a character.

Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
How are high end feats valid and low end feats not? Both give you a ballpark on the high's and low's of a character.

i'm not talking about establishing a baseline. i'm talking about low showings.

once a character's average has been established, you can use high feats in some cases to show what they're capable of when put under sufficient stress/pressure. low showings that are usually occuring because of PIS and CIS (or just plain inconsistent writing) aren't allowed.

Originally posted by paisapower
That obvious, except w/brew not hash. Anyways, isnt Quasar a GL type and isnt this a supes w/ring thread ?

And what am I misrepresenting? The scans clearly show Thanos disintegrated by a big blast point blank which supes would duplicate

facepalm

Originally posted by -Pr-
i'm not talking about establishing a baseline. i'm talking about low showings.

once a character's average has been established, you can use high feats in some cases to show what they're capable of when put under sufficient stress/pressure. low showings that are usually occuring because of PIS and CIS (or just plain inconsistent writing) aren't allowed.

I understand but that isn't how we judge everyday things, and it's not the most logical way to go about it PR. For example every boxer, MMA fighter, basketball team etc etc have BAD games. It could be because they just had an off night, mentally weren't there or confident, intimidated by the opposition. We don't go.. well we'll only judge Pac based on all his exceptional fights and forget about the style matchups that posed him problems. We don't judge The Lakers based upon all the awesome games or okay games.. we also look at their poor games and why they had those games.. matchups.. styles... etc etc. They are ALL taken into consideration when judging pretty much everything in life. Why is it different here. Just because somebody has a not so good showing.. it doesn't mean we should just exclude those as if they never happened or hide behind it was CIS or PIS. Sure in some cases, I do agree, but to discount them totally.. that just seems illogical as we don't judge most things in this way.

Originally posted by D_Dude1210
facepalm

Dont be so down on yourself, you'll get it