Marvel speed vs DC speed

Originally posted by kgkg
All Dc statements are hyperbole while Marvel only tells the truth.

True story.

Lol... naah, I see where you are going with this.

If that was the case, iif marvel was accepted, I would have been said that Hulk could crush a planet since it was stated numerous of times throughout his arc.

I also don't think Thor could fight anywhere CLOSE to the speed of light and I SURE as hell don't think Surfer combat speed is on Supermans level... no matter how many times he fly past Galaxies.

An attosecond... that's just unbelievable.

Originally posted by Existere
I don't know why the forum seems to apply the common sense of limiting a character's capabilities according to their portrayal in comics (ie, their personality, habits, etc) in every aspect of a debate save the speed angle.

Yes, I realize that Flash doesn't go as fast as possible in every instance because the story would be short.

We don't change his character to what we believe would be realistic though. That's how Flash is -- he's always faster than his opponent, but never enough to avoid the fight whatsoever.

A reasonable argument for Flash vs. whoever would be to see how Flash usually operates around opponents of a similar speed level to his opponent in the thread.

Originally posted by 753
dude, apocalypse isn't even close to the strongest mutant. franklin richards, scarlet witch, legion, mad jim jaspers, proteus are all cosmic beings. there are lot of mutant high heralds as well.

I forgot about all those guys......reality warpers High heralds exodus, x-man, cable etc....still dc is way more powerful and has more people like that.

That's a very true statement existere... very true and I agree and that relies on CIS but CIS kind of bump heads with "fighting to the best of their abilities".

The whole problem arises when a feat or so overshadows or distorts how a character is consistently portrayed.

Originally posted by kgkg
Yes but when 99% of the time people you consider statue fight back and win. We have to question the ability of the speedsters, and chances are in comic book fight he won't be winning as easily as people make it out to be.

Might as well have character Y turns person X to salt debate.

The writer limits the character's speed at times to prolong the story. It has nothing to do with a character not being able to move faster, because they can as they have shown to do so multiple times.
This is why statues fight back and become un statues in comics. But in a forum fight, we don't use this device. Because we are not trying to sell comics and create a long enough story for the audience. We are to read between the lines as when the writer is downplaying someone's abilities so that the story can be long enough vs. when a character is actually performing as they should. That's why we use FULL CAPACITY.

Originally posted by kgkg
All Dc statements are hyperbole while Marvel only tells the truth.

True story.

Originally posted by quanchi112
The whole problem arises when a feat or so overshadows or distorts how a character is consistently portrayed.

Yep, and that's when people basically need to balance things out and focus more on "consistent showings" vs high showings. If we were to base things completely off of high showings, Hulk wouldn't be able to even touch Wolverine or Spiderman, let alone seeing them.

Average showings should be the source but again, that where EVERYONE would basically have to come to an agreement and accept the average... especially from well known characters that show up 5 times a month in a comic (aka Wolverine, etc, etc..).

Originally posted by dmills
lulz. I don't think anyone is saying that. Marvel has its fair share of bullshyte too.

Originally posted by quanchi112
The whole problem arises when a feat or so overshadows or distorts how a character is consistently portrayed.

But character's are a lot of times portrayed bogusly in order to have a story. It has nothing to do with their abilities. Just because you see Spider-man get hit by a slow moving enemy doesn't mean he can't consistently dodge bullets and other fast moving attacks.

Originally posted by carver9
Hhhmmm...

I think consistency would "hurt" a lot of characters vs helping them ESPECIALLY when discussing speed.

I don't see how.

Originally posted by h1a8
The writer limits the character's speed at times to prolong the story. It has nothing to do with a character not being able to move faster, because they can as they have shown to do so multiple times.
This is why statues fight back and become un statues in comics. But in a forum fight, we don't use this device. Because we are not trying to sell comics and create a long enough story for the audience. We are to read between the lines as when the writer is downplaying someone's abilities so that the story can be long enough vs. when a character is actually performing as they should. That's why we use FULL CAPACITY.

But what I don't understand is why is this only relevant to speedsters.... Why don't we use it with other power set.

Say..
Character X turns charter Y to salt
Character X stops time etc etc

and we can't ignore 99% of comics...If a speedsters is constantly getting tagged than chances are he will get tagged in forum battle. CIS is still active.

We ignore PIS showings but we can't ignore everything and label it PIS when a majority of showing shows the opposite.

Originally posted by carver9
Yep, and that's when people basically need to balance things out and focus more on "consistent showings" vs high showings. If we were to base things completely off of high showings, Hulk wouldn't be able to even touch Wolverine or Spiderman, let alone seeing them.

Average showings should be the source but again, that where EVERYONE would basically have to come to an agreement and accept the average... especially from well known characters that show up 5 times a month in a comic (aka Wolverine, etc, etc..).

Originally posted by dmills
At some point the shyte's all relative. I think that people put too much thought into the speed thing, 99% of it is hyperbole. In regards to a forum battle, save for high end feats, it all tends to average out in the end.

Smurf: No. The full capacity rule entirely negates your arguement.

Originally posted by h1a8
But character's are a lot of times portrayed bogusly in order to have a story. It has nothing to do with their abilities. Just because you see Spider-man get hit by a slow moving enemy doesn't mean he can't consistently dodge bullets and other fast moving attacks.

This is kinda how kurt busiek the writer sees feats and how they relate as well. He admitted most writers don't take into account the weight of said object anyways.

Originally posted by quanchi112
He can but he can't always toss tanks with ease or any other feats which are contradictory to his history. Someone will see something like this and act like spiderman can lift said weight with ease or can juggle buicks as the norm.

This is kinda how kurt busiek the writer sees feats and how they relate as well. He admitted most writers don't take into account the weight of said object anyways.

Originally posted by Uriel005
just to say a buick is about 2.5 tons and spidey is a 10-15 tonner depending on how he's being written so him juggling them isn't too much of a stretch.

Originally posted by quanchi112
You won't ever catch me dodging someone's style of debating. I just don't like when a feat skews an entire character's history or is abused as what that said character is capable of every time.

I agree with that... you don't dodge a way a person debates. I don't know HOW you do it because h1 drives me CRAZY 90% of the time.

Originally posted by TricksterPriest
No. No it doesn't. One side clearly has a large advantage on speed. You don't like it? Tough.

Smurf: No. The full capacity rule entirely negates your arguement.

Originally posted by TricksterPriest

Smurf: No. The full capacity rule entirely negates your arguement.

Why should the rules reinforce ignoring how a character behaves in 99% of their appearances?