Well, even Guy is allowed to have a legitimate herald level feat, any herald who is worth a dime has some herald busting showings under their belt. It depends in how characters are portrayed during a certain arc.
Also, I don't mean take anything from Guy -because really, non-Hal lanterns need their time to shine-, but Red Lantern light is strong against green constructs. Just as a clarification.
Originally posted by Bentley... this doesn't answer my question at all.
Well, even Guy is allowed to have a legitimate herald level feat, any herald who is worth a dime has some herald busting showings under their belt. It depends in how characters are portrayed during a certain arc.Also, I don't mean take anything from Guy -because really, non-Hal lanterns need their time to shine-, but Red Lantern light is strong against green constructs. Just as a clarification.
The Red Lantern light is good against everything. GL energy isn't especially susceptible to it in the slightest. So Red Lantern Guy Gardner for high Trans?
I'm just saying, two Green Lanterns isn't an easy auto-win over a high herald, let alone some of the highest heralds. Otherwise you inflate characters like Weaponer, Red Lantern Guy and dozens of other characters that have taken on more than one premier GL simultaneously into high trans characters. I don't even see Sinestro being overwhelmed 10/10 by Hal and Kyle. And this isn't just about GLs. Obviously Surfer + BRB won't take 10/10 from Thor... since they didn't do so on-panel. Same with Surfer + Warlock. Nul + Angrir. Etc., etc. You can point to all the marquee heralds across both companies for such examples.
^ Thor beating BRB and Surfer isn't inverse ninja law. Neither was Thor taking on Nul and Angrir. Or Superman stomping on Ultraman and Superwoman. Or Bullseye taking on Daredevil and Elektra. Or Carnage taking on Venom and Spiderman. Or etc., etc., etc. Inverse ninja law isn't anywhere near as expansive you think it is.
And I don't know what imaginary forum rule you have in mind, but you can't have it both ways. By arguing against inverse ninja law as applied to Prime and then applying inverse ninja law to RL Guy Gardner by suggesting that the combined Lantern team all suffered from low feats. Pick one or the other.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
... this doesn't answer my question at all.The Red Lantern light is good against everything. GL energy isn't especially susceptible to it in the slightest. So Red Lantern Guy Gardner for high Trans?
I'm just saying, two Green Lanterns isn't an easy auto-win over a high herald, let alone some of the highest heralds. Otherwise you inflate characters like Weaponer, Red Lantern Guy and dozens of other characters that have taken on more than one premier GL simultaneously into high trans characters. I don't even see Sinestro being overwhelmed 10/10 by Hal and Kyle. And this isn't just about GLs. Obviously Surfer + BRB won't take 10/10 from Thor... since they didn't do so on-panel. Same with Surfer + Warlock. Nul + Angrir. Etc., etc. You can point to all the marquee heralds across both companies for such examples.
IIRC, didn't Blue Light resist it?
^ Blue light heals it. Blue light might resist it but I don't remember Saint Walker ever doing so. He seemed to be in as much danger when Hal was going bonkers as anybody. In any case, red light eats through green light, yellow light, sapphire light, etc. equally. It's hurt Anti-Monitor and Spectre. Lobo's like the only character that's no-sold it but that's Lobo.
So green light isn't especially weak to it by any means.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
^ Blue light heals it. Blue light might resist it but I don't remember Saint Walker ever doing so. He seemed to be in as much danger when Hal was going bonkers as anybody. In any case, red light eats through green light, yellow light, sapphire light, etc. equally. It's hurt Anti-Monitor and Spectre. Lobo's like the only character that's no-sold it but that's Lobo.So green light isn't especially weak to it by any means.
Oh, yeah, I'd agree on that point. Green is no worse off than the others.
The forum rule I was thinking was "characters uset their powers at their best".
For me there are high showings, low showings and simply circumstances in may of the examples you cite. Heralds beat other heralds in numbers, easily at times, depending in different depictions of the characters. This is nothing new nor poses any radical divergence of how we all chose winners or losers here.
But do you think that Surfer or BRB when beaten by Thor are fighting to the best of their abilities?
Originally posted by BentleyIf there is nothing new about heralds (and it's not just heralds) beating other heralds in numbers, then why is it such a divergence that you won't even accept what actually happened on-panel? Sorry, I'm not going to automatically dismiss or project low showings onto the two guys that got beaten by one guy. And all your criticisms of inverse ninja law sharply disconnect with this. You're dismissing inverse ninja law when it's plainly apparent via critical mass while simultaneously expanding inverse ninja law to its utmost when there's simply 1+ character. That makes no sense to me.
The forum rule I was thinking was "characters uset their powers at their best".For me there are high showings, low showings and simply circumstances in may of the examples you cite. Heralds beat other heralds in numbers, easily at times, depending in different depictions of the characters. This is nothing new nor poses any radical divergence of how we all chose winners or losers here.
Originally posted by BentleyI wouldn't be surprised if they were. Surfer + Warlock lost. Surfer wasn't holding back and Warlock was fighting as best he could using all his weapons, skills, tactics save for soulsuck (which would have violated CIS). Fighting optimally doesn't guarantee any sort of victory (especially when it's more than arguable about who would take the clear majority between any of the three fighters in a 1-on-1). This isn't math, it's fighting.
But do you think that Surfer or BRB when beaten by Thor are fighting to the best of their abilities?
In any event, this is wholly unrelated to GLs. Apparently, you think Guy and Kilowog could take 10/10 from Superman easily as much as you think that Nul and Angrir take 10/10 from Thor easily. Forgive my disbelief because based on what I've seen on-panel, that isn't how it actually works out. It could happen, it wouldn't definitely happen. And I may believe in inverse ninja law, but I don't stretch its basic concept (more opponents, the less effective they are) to its absolute utmost (just one more opponent, the less effective they are).
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
Fighting optimally doesn't guarantee any sort of victory (especially when it's more than arguable about who would take the clear majority between any of the three fighters in a 1-on-1). This isn't math, it's fighting.
Fighting optimally limits the amount of randomness that we see in comics, I just think it limits it more than you do.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
In any event, this is wholly unrelated to GLs. Apparently, you think Guy and Kilowog could take 10/10 from Superman easily as much as you think that Nul and Angrir take 10/10 from Thor easily.
It's different than the Surfer/BRB example though. Angrir didn't show any real high herald material, and neither Guy and Kilowog are considered to be Hal level.
What you're saying is more akin to saying Thor and Captain Marvel losing some fights to Superman even as a team. Would you say Kal wins some?
An unrelated thing in the Hal/Kyle matchup: these two characters are potentially good team mates, considering they have fought side to side and that they are part of the same corps, received similar training, know their powersets inside out, etc. This raises their odds a lot when they fight optimally imo.
Originally posted by BentleyIt banishes PIS. It doesn't banish Carnage fighting off Venom and Spiderman or Thor fighting off Nul and Angrir.
Fighting optimally limits the amount of randomness that we see in comics, I just think it limits it more than you do.
Originally posted by BentleyI'm done. You're moving the goalposts, ignoring my questions and deflecting.
It's different than the Surfer/BRB example though. Angrir didn't show any real high herald material, and neither Guy and Kilowog are considered to be Hal level.What you're saying is more akin to saying Thor and Captain Marvel losing some fights to Superman even as a team. Would you say Kal wins some?
An unrelated thing in the Hal/Kyle matchup: these two characters are potentially good team mates, considering they have fought side to side and that they are part of the same corps, received similar training, know their powersets inside out, etc. This raises their odds a lot when they fight optimally imo.
I don't think anybody's ever used inverse ninja theory for a 2-on-1 fights. And applying it that way is completely counter-intuitive to refusing to apply it when its 10-on-1 or 100-on-1. Let me know when you figure out whether or not Prime enjoyed inverse ninja law or, as you're (unsuccessfully) trying to distinguish it, Prime's multiple opponents not performing at optimal levels.
Originally posted by OneDumbG0
It banishes PIS. It doesn't banish Carnage fighting off Venom and Spiderman or Thor fighting off Nul and Angrir. I'm done. You're moving the goalposts, ignoring my questions and deflecting.
I don't agree it just banishes PIS. You're deflecting and ignoring as much as me.
Feel free to leave, we're debating about nitpicks and point of views, our discussions will always end when we realize the debate is mooth.
And for the record, I do think Inverse Ninja Law has some validity and that your position is reasonable. I'm not going to pretend I've stone fixed opinions on every matter and that I can't change my mind, that's ridiculous and would make any kind of discussion useless.
Originally posted by SuperwhirlyWhirly, why are you not trolling?
Both you and the other chap, onedumbgo are that very rare thing for this forum, intelligent. Both of you provide compelling arguments in this thread and you are both passionate about your position. How nice to see. You get the Whirly seal of approval for being far to bright for this forum.
Originally posted by BentleyThat doesn't wash. If you focus your conception of hypothetical fights as properly only using a character at the best of his ability, then you've crystallized what that optimal level is for each character. Otherwise you'd never give an opinion on who would win. The way you preach it, there are no differing optimal levels. Optimal literally means best, meaning one, meaning single, meaning top, meaning only. Which means, everytime character A meets character B, both at optimal levels, the one with the higher optimal level will always win 10/10.
I don't agree it just banishes PIS. You're deflecting and ignoring as much as me.Feel free to leave, we're debating about nitpicks and point of views, our discussions will always end when we realize the debate is mooth.
And for the record, I do think Inverse Ninja Law has some validity and that your position is reasonable. I'm not going to pretend I've stone fixed opinions on every matter and that I can't change my mind, that's ridiculous and would make any kind of discussion useless.
Needless to say, that can't be how you think. You've never struck me as a person that considers every fight to be a simple measure of optimal levels run against each other where the higher optimal level guarantees victory every time, i.e., Thor at his optimal levels operates at a higher level than Surfer at his optimal levels only slightly, but because we have to only consider them at their optimal levels, Thor wins every single time in a KMC hypothetical battle 10/10. Taken at a very shallow level, of course using characters at their optimal level makes the whole 2-on-1 inquiry far more simplified, as you simply stack this measurement of both characters A+B optimal level against the single character C. Which is where are initial disagreement lay.
But that's not how fights work. And I need not belabor the obvious by citing to more examples in comics. And my dialogue isn't meant to force you to accept a position, without which, I will unjustifiably paint you as a hypocrite. It's simply about me not being able to move forward in a discussion when you keep shifting your position. I have no idea whether you believe in inverse ninja law. I have no idea whether you would take such a theory and limit it only to large numbers or small numbers or any number larger than one. I have no idea whether or not you make special exceptions regardless of number. If that's where the discussion ends, fine. But let's do away with you backhandedly suggesting that I am purposefully antagonizing you in an unfair manner when it's you that's poking fun at me for thinking that Thor doesn't get cleanly dominated 10/10 by 2 GLs and I'm trying to explain why.