Originally posted by Allankles
Why is destroying a planet that important? Most DC heroes are not so callous as to destroy a planet, there's people who actually take care of balance and order of the systems and galaxies.They have other strength related feats, like using brute strength to move the mill wheels of Mageddon, shifting Earth out of orbit etc.
Huh?
I'm not even going to respond to this because it is so much wrong.
Originally posted by Allankles
Why is destroying a planet that important? Most DC heroes are not so callous as to destroy a planet, there's people who actually take care of balance and order of the systems and galaxies.They have other strength related feats, like using brute strength to move the mill wheels of Mageddon, shifting Earth out of orbit etc.
Don't bother. Its like trying to convince Pat Robertson to join Al Qaeda. Even though Superman HAS destroyed a planet, and has feats well BEYOND that. And he clings to one feat of Gladiator destroying a planet of unknown size with several punches to convince himself that Gladiator "pwns Superman."
But because I don't believe that, I don't read comics. Something he's told me about 100 times now. It makes a lot of sense for someone who doesn't read comics to spend their time here also. Of course reading comics only helps if you own comics besides WWH....
Originally posted by PhilosophíaNo, as Thanos' reflexes have been shown to be up to the task with characters with blazing speed when he so chooses to negate said speed.
Would you agree that Thanos is a statue to Superman, and the latter would be able to spend relative weeks before Thanos even registers he's in a fight?
Thanos having faster than light speed is ridiculous. The Superman in comics is vastly different than how you portray him. Go to cbr and tell me if superman wins because he's faster than Thanos and tell me what the general consensus is. That's just powerset debating over there so his highest feats count and you can toss out his crappy ones. Tell me what they say and get back to me.
Originally posted by carver9
Huh?I'm not even going to respond to this because it is so much wrong.
You keep insisting on planet busting as if that's something standard for heroes. The fact is no DC hero is going to bust a planet except if its by accident.
They generally tend to protect planets, as Superman did against Starro and other threats, by towing Earth.
He's also pulled the mill wheels of Mageddon, which iirc was the size of a solar system.
Originally posted by quanchi112So Thanos negates high-end superspeed, without having superspeed, by using superspeed? Genius, quan.
No, as [b]Thanos' reflexes have been shown to be up to the task with characters with blazing speed when he so chooses to negate said speed.[/B]
😂 @ CBR. That's the worst comic battles forum on the net, and every other site agrees.
Originally posted by MindsetYah.
Nah.
Originally posted by PillarofOsiris
Don't bother. Its like trying to convince Pat Robertson to join Al Qaeda. Even though Superman HAS destroyed a planet, and has feats well BEYOND that. And he clings to one feat of Gladiator destroying a planet of unknown size with several punches to convince himself that Gladiator "pwns Superman."But because I don't believe that, I don't read comics. Something he's told me about 100 times now. It makes a lot of sense for someone who doesn't read comics to spend their time here also. Of course reading comics only helps if you own comics besides WWH....
Show me these planet destroying feats please. I might missed reading a book, so I don't want to not give a guy credit... show me these planet destroying feats.
And by the way, you "don't" read comics and I have caught and proven this at least 8 or 9 times.
Originally posted by Galan007
Developing a fictional dimension (the speed force) from which those connected to it can a.) harness nigh-infinite amounts of speed, and b.) defy any/all 'rules' normally associated with moving at the speeds they do, is one of the best ideas DC ever had. The speed force gives them a quick and easy answer as to how/why their speedsters can casually shatter the laws of physics on any given day.Marvel tends to abide by the rules a lot more where speed is concerned, imo. That's likely one of the main reasons why their speedsters are, in general, thought of as inferior to DC's.
👆
In general, DC heralds are just faster in most cases in terms of reflexes than Marvel ones.
That's not to say Marvel heralds aren't fast, some are pretty decent when it comes to down to it, DC's higher tier characters just tend to be faster and in larger numbers.
Also, guys, leave strength and durability out of this. there's a couple of people in this thread I was about to reply to (and possibly warn), but i'll just leave it at telling you all not to go off topic.
Originally posted by Allankles
You keep insisting on planet busting as if that's something standard for heroes. The fact is no DC hero is going to bust a planet except if its by accident.They generally tend to protect planets, as Superman did against Starro and other threats, by towing Earth.
He's also pulled the mill wheels of Mageddon, which iirc was the size of a solar system.
Why do you keep bringing up Superman and why are you bringing up the wheel?
He was an engine to it, nothing more, nothing less. Its a unquantified feat... we don't know how much he was pulling.
Originally posted by PhilosophíaYes, because his reflexes are up to it he doesn't have to have super speed itself to raise his hand. Even if Superman lands the first blow he can't beat up before he raises his shields so I don't see how you can argue he beats Thanos even if that is the case.
So Thanos negates high-end superspeed, without having superspeed, by using superspeed? Genius, quan.😂 @ CBR. That's the worst comic battles forum on the net, and every other site agrees. Yah.
You also seem to bring up marvel/dc crossovers when it suits you so let's do it here. Superman didn't have the reflexes to avoid a hammer toss yet Thanos easily waved down the hammer before it touched him. That's a direct comparison and look who looked superior despite Superman's massive speed advantage.
I agree cbr is quite terrible but they argue based off of high feats alone and even there they still don't side with superman or faster characters than Thanos because of Thanos' history and his feats.
This topic is just a timebomb waiting to happen when you compare two companies like this. One poster is all it takes to attack one company and then everyone starts doing so.
okay, so the discussion began because pr and i were discussing superman. it seems whenever he comes up against a marvel guy, the first thing brought up is his speed. because of the dearth of marvel speed-related feats, it is difficult to defend against the very over-used speed blitz. if, for example, no one attacks thor at the speeds superman is capable of, does that necessarily prove thor can't defend against said speed? and no--do NOT turn this into thor-superman, that was just one example.
fact of the matter is--MOST marvel characters will HAVE no feats or evidence to support being able to contend with dc's differences in speed. does it necessarily follow then that the dc side will win because of this lack of evidence? generally it seems to come down to a comparison and systematic disection of marvel's ability to deal with speed. i'm the first to admit that in general those feats do not exist so we are forced to infer, use common sense or simply base an argument on perceived understanding of a character. FEATS THAT ARE ASKED FOR DO NOT EXIST. usually. and CERTAINLY not in the amounts dc guys ask for.
so, since marvel handles speed different it therefore follows that basing debates strictly on on-panel proof is inherently flawed in some instances--or at the least inherently unbalanced. how do you propose the marvel side deal with this disparity?
Originally posted by leonidas
okay, so the discussion began because pr and i were discussing superman. it seems whenever he comes up against a marvel guy, the first thing brought up is his speed. because of the dearth of marvel speed-related feats, it is difficult to defend against the very over-used speed blitz. if, for example, no one attacks thor at the speeds superman is capable of, does that necessarily prove thor can't defend against said speed? and no--do NOT turn this into thor-superman, that was just one example.fact of the matter is--MOST marvel characters will HAVE no feats or evidence to support being able to contend with dc's differences in speed. does it necessarily follow then that the dc side will win because of this lack of evidence? generally it seems to come down to a comparison and systematic disection of marvel's ability to deal with speed. i'm the first to admit that in general those feats do not exist so we are forced to infer, use common sense or simply base an argument on perceived understanding of a character. FEATS THAT ARE ASKED FOR DO NOT EXIST. usually. and CERTAINLY not in the amounts dc guys ask for.
so, since marvel handles speed different it therefore follows that basing debates strictly on on-panel proof is inherently flawed in some instances--or at the least inherently unbalanced. how do you propose the marvel side deal with this disparity?
Do you not simply take it that if a character hasn't shown a reasonable amount of fast, reflexive actions, that they simply can't?
If not, why not?
Originally posted by carver9
Why do you keep bringing up Superman and why are you bringing up the wheel?He was an engine to it, nothing more, nothing less. Its a unquantified feat... we don't know how much he was pulling.
He was powering the engines btw. And the engines were powering the Mageddon weapon which was the size of a solar system. It was a shocking feat to his peers.
I used him because he was used as an example in this thread earlier. I'm not even arguing one way or the other with regards to strength and durability, I just disagreed with your generalizations and your insistence on planet busting, which would be considered a callous act by many DC heroes.
Originally posted by -Pr-
👆In general, DC heralds are just faster in most cases in terms of reflexes than Marvel ones.
but THAT is the point--i'm not sure it's fair to say that when marvel itself just doesn't use speed the way dc does. i can't see thor going to dc and suddenly getting smacked around by every speedster. or ss. or quasar. or thanos. etc..... i could be wrong, but if i am, it seems to say that speed would trump all as many have said, and make the point of debating the characters pointless in some regards. 😬
Originally posted by -Pr-Because the character can't lose, dammit!
Do you not simply take it that if a character hasn't shown a reasonable amount of fast, reflexive actions, that they simply can't?If not, why not?
If he doesn't have feats, we use " common sense or simply base an argument on perceived understanding of a character. " because we are right, and it's the DC side who's evil for asking things we can't provide!
The superspeed is there, Raoul, you just have to feel it!
Originally posted by -Pr-
Do you not simply take it that if a character hasn't shown a reasonable amount of fast, reflexive actions, that they simply can't?If not, why not?
that is certainly the logical end. what i'm saying is, if marvel, as a whole, doesn't portray characters at such speeds, and therefore equal feats do not exist, do we simply default to the assumption that said marvel characters are NECESSARILY slower?