Originally posted by PhilosophíaI was pushing because they advanced the arguments that it's wholly reasonable to assume Zoom can land billions upon billions of planet-busting blows on a human speed Odin and demanding evidence that Odin could react to that. For whatever reason, you're trying to hold me accountable for countering feat cheese when the ridiculous extrapolation situation presents itself. What don't you get? I didn't start the ridiculous feat cheese.
You were pushing people into admitting that based on their stance of Zoom's feats, he'd be capable of delivering zilions of punches to Odin before he could react, and even capable of taking as far as 10s of Odins. You were pushing people to owe up to the ridiculousness of what his level of speed feats implies, to undermine their argument and stretch it until it becomes unacceptable from a logical point of view. Now (and far before that, like in Thor's nanosecond fighting ability stance) that you're in the same position, you won't admit to what the feats imply. You won't admit that they imply that Surfer has infinite durability. Or that Captain America is supersonic. And worst of all, you're using all of these feats on the same level of relevancy with actual direct comparisons of combat performance.
Originally posted by PhilosophíaSo are you an insane nonsensical hypocritical jerk for accepting Cass' bullet-timing feats in a reasonable fashion that would bear out in comics (Cass has clear advantage over projectile throwing Bullseye) and not literally extrapolating to preposterous results (Cass would blitz Bullseye like Yo-Yo did with dozens of punches before he could react unless Bullseye has bonified superspeed)? No, you are not an insane nonsensical hypocrtical jerk.
You're using hypocritical, cop-out illogical methods of debating, instead of following a rational, comic-based line of thought.Your blatant attempt at deflecting your hypocrisy onto me by saying that I'm a hypocrite too so I should shut up, did you even read the debate I've had with Srank? Relying completly on the bullet-timing feats to defeat Bullseye? They weren't even a crucial part of the discussion - I mentioned them in the initial post of speed feats, but at no point in my debate with him did I say that since Bullseye doesn't have bullet-timing speed feats he has no chance, or treated the bullet-time feats as the be all end all. [b]The battle was actually oriented towards Bullseye's battle-performances, what I'm right now saying is the main judge of a characters' ability, and thus the discussion of his combat prowess against the likes of Daredevil, Elektra and Punisher - the crux of my argument, which he couldn't counter because they were true.
For anybody doubting any of that:
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=497150&pagenumber=1Want to know what the worst part is? Even if I did, that wouldn't make me a hypocrite. Because I didn't go into threads right before doing that, telling people to owe up to their represented characters' feats and their implication in order to undermine their position, and then 'if' Srank asked me to owe up to my ridiculous position of saying that Bullseye has to have feats of going supersonic in order to stand up to Batgirl, I'd say that they shouldn't be put up under scrutinity.
The even worst part: That discussion is from 3 years ago. I'm not even sure I spent that much time on herochat where the cosmic cheese is taken as not that significant in judging of characters capabilities in battle (and for good reason), and from where I formed my opinion on how battles should be analyzed, otherwise we get to ridiculous proportions and implications. So even if you would have managed to find a contradiction, which you didn't, you'd have only showed that I disagree with my 2009 self when analyzing comic battles.
Good job. 👆 [/B]
You did what makes sense and argued what probably would happen in a comic. Bullseye throws shit, Cass dodges with frightening ease. Bullseye is in trouble. You didn't need to go further than that because comics don't go further than that, and that's reasonable behavior.
Yet somehow, you're accusing me of being a nonsensical hypocrite for that very same behavior: that makes you a hypocrite.
Originally posted by PhilosophíaI don't even understand what kind of quaneuver or quanchiwaffle you're setting yourself up for here. Suffice it to say, if you're saying that behavior might be unreasonable in the first place: that makes you an idiot.
The even worst part: That discussion is from 3 years ago. I'm not even sure I spent that much time on herochat where the cosmic cheese is taken as not that significant in judging of characters capabilities in battle (and for good reason), and from where I formed my opinion on how battles should be analyzed, otherwise we get to ridiculous proportions and implications. So even if you would have managed to find a contradiction, which you didn't, you'd have only showed that I disagree with my 2009 self when analyzing comic battles.Good job. 👆
You've twisted yourself up.
Pr already posted. I will give warnings to everyone who has ever posted in this thread...aside from mods, Mindset and Carver.
Seriously, Philo and ODG, please take this discussion out of the CB Vs Forum. I don't feel like closing threads or giving warnings.
Zack, you're on thin ice making Guy Gardner look bad. sneer
Originally posted by Badabing
😂I'm sure Ush and Rex would like that. ohno
Originally posted by Galan007Damn you for bringing up one of the ace in the holes before I did. uhuh
Exactly. That being said, it strikes me as extremely impressive that Hal was able to effortlessly whip up a planet-sized construct strong enough to endure the forces of Starbreaker's vortex AND the counter-forces PC Superman was exerting on the construct in return (Supes was pulling with "everything he had", after all.)
Originally posted by Cogito
Late to get into the party but..Can anyone provide an example of a GL doing something that Hal couldn't do in a battle? (other than Kyle freeing the new Guardians from the Book)
Just for a point of reference, this construct was sufficient to:
a.) Fully encase the moon of Earth 2.
b.) Imprison the entire CSA (ie. Ultraman, Power Ring, Johnny Quick, Superwoman, and Owlman) against their will for 48 hours.
You might also note that the CSA's version of Green Lantern (Power Ring) had his ring analyze Kyle's construct... The ring stated it was "impenetrable".
---
Not saying Hal would be unable to preform a similar feat, I just don't think it's right to assume he can without supportive evidence. Where versus battles are concerned- if it didn't happen on panel, it didn't happen at all. Imo.
Originally posted by Philosophíahe
Damn you for bringing up one of the ace in the holes before I did. uhuh
Originally posted by Galan007
Just for a point of reference, this construct was sufficient to:
hours.
a.) Fully encase the moon of Earth 2.
b.) Imprison the entire CSA (ie. Ultraman, Power Ring, Johnny Quick, Superwoman, and Owlman) against their will for [b]48You might also note that the CSA's version of Green Lantern (Power Ring) had his ring analyze Kyle's construct... The ring stated it was "impenetrable".
---
Not saying Hal would be unable to preform a similar feat, I just don't think it's right to assume he can without supportive evidence. Where versus battles are concerned- if it didn't happen on panel, it didn't happen at all. Imo.
he [/B]
Well, it's not exactly like that, but here is a cool PC Hal feat.
Hal created a prison that was capable of holding Ultra-Man, the Crime Syndicate’s version of Superman (Less powerful, more than likely, but still…). Power Girl also proves incapable of shattering the construct, and it takes the combined power of Dr. Fate and Starman to do the job.
