Originally posted by celeyhyga17
If I'm reading his stipulation correctly, I'm pretty sure you can't draw from his feat history. You would literally be confined to their appearances together. In this case you would have to prove that Superman is stronger even though you would be confined to the one showing between them. That showing where he was beaten to death. 😬
Yes and I wont have any problem with it. I don't need to win to prove a point here.
Originally posted by Damborgson
But why does it have to be fair? If Thor has so much ammo that it becomes an unfair comparison, that speaks volumes as to who is stronger. Especially when you consider that Thor isn't even known for always displaying his physical stats because he usually carries Mjolnir with him. So its not 50+ years of showings that are usable, only a hand full really and he still beats out Gladiator.Dont get me wrong, I do get your point, its just not as applicable as it would be to other characters.
It is unfair because Gladiator does not have a long history like thor.
It will be fair if you pit glads vs Thor with thors whole history but you will have to have thor displaying strength with out mjolnir only bare hands that will be fair if you want to use all of thor's history. IMO.
Originally posted by celeyhyga17
Wait so ure now saying he's stronger overall and the condition of being equal to is off the table? Make up your damn mind. You tell more lies than Donald Drumpf. It's like you're making shiet up as you go along.
It's like talking to a two year old child. I said Gladiator looks equal or stronger than Thor in most showings hence ON AVERAGE he is stronger than Thor.
You know how averages work, right?
Yes. Thor is stronger based on feats. What a crazy notion.
What about when they actually meet and are shown in comparison? Does Thor look stronger there?
Is Thor stronger than Thanos based on feats? Mangog?
How about we do a BZ between Thor and Mangog? Feats only.
Who am I kidding? You'll probably come up with more ridiculous stipulations.
At this point you've shown to everyone the kind of balls u have.
Such saltiness.
Originally posted by abhilegendThis whole forum boils down to random feat contests though, usually to the benefit of Superman/Batman supporters.
I'm not interested in competing in a random fears contest.By that logic, Thor is stronger than Thanos and Mangog and Superman is stronger than pretty much everyone.
You have to take comparative portrayals in account. That's the only thing which matters in comics.
You can still take comparative portrayals into account, but it should matter if other writers depict a much stronger version of Thor.
Originally posted by Rao Kal El
Yes and I wont have any problem with it. I don't need to win to prove a point here.
U literally just said u will draw on feat history. You can't.
Do u not see how ridiculous of a bz that would be? The whole point of bz is to use feats whether it be straight strength feats, combat feats, comparative showings, etc. Then you make your case. Him adding such stipulations is basically an admission of defeat. It's not like Gladiator is a one off character. He's appeared in well over 600 comics. And ure idea of Gladz being a B lister has nothing to do with whether it's fair for him. It just screams of more excuses. If he truly believed he's stronger, surely he could make the case.
Originally posted by Smurph
This whole forum boils down to random feat contests though, usually to the benefit of Superman/Batman supporters.You can still take comparative portrayals into account, but it should matter if other writers depict a much stronger version of Thor.
If those writers make a comparison with Gladiator, then only it is worthwhile.
Originally posted by abhilegend
It's like talking to a two year old child. I said Gladiator looks equal or stronger than Thor in most showings hence ON AVERAGE he is stronger than Thor.You know how averages work, right?
What about when they actually meet and are shown in comparison? Does Thor look stronger there?
Is Thor stronger than Thanos based on feats? Mangog?
How about we do a BZ between Thor and Mangog? Feats only.
Such saltiness.
Not by straight strength feats no. By comparative feats the two are considerably and so consistently above him with Mangog being more so. Thanos has a ton of appearances as opposed to Mangog's handful. Gladiator is not lacking in showings. He's appeared in well over 600 comics with a multitude of strength showings.
Originally posted by celeyhyga17
U literally just said u will draw on feat history. You can't.Do u not see how ridiculous of a bz that would be? The whole point of bz is to use feats whether it be straight strength feats, combat feats, comparative showings, etc. Then you make your case. Him adding such stipulations is basically an admission of defeat. It's not like Gladiator is a one off character. He's appeared in well over 600 comics. And ure idea of Gladz being a B lister has nothing to do with whether it's fair for him. It just screams of more excuses. If he truly believed he's stronger, surely he could make the case.
I maybe didnt explain my self . if i agree to a bz with the ao vs sm using only kellys showings I wont have any problem. Because if i use all of supermans feat it will be unfair for the ao.
The only way I will do something using long history of one character is if I use lets say thor with out mallet to pit him against gladiator that way the mallet is not there to compensate strength showing even if he has years of feats with it. Because we are only trying to use or see strength physically not with weapons.
I said i will IF it is only using thor with out the mallet.
No thor + mallet. + all his history
Glads does not have that many feats under his belt.
Hell you could even prove with thors whole history that he is as fast as Gladiator, but when it comes to comparative speed under same writer there is a huge gap, even having Thor unable to react when he had time dilation on his side.
Lets do another one that seems fair. If Thor is as strong as Hulk lets compara Hulk strength feats vs Thor strength feats but thor needs to show his strength or striking feats with out mjolnir. Because this is strength only.
You cant basically randomly comapare feats specially since one character has lots of feats over several books vs one that has not as many feats. You have use certain rules or standards.
An example of Thor vs Thanos was given to you. That is basically what it will happen here.
So you have to use some standards or rules.
Like I said. I personally won't have any problem doing it. I know it will be a fair match in the end.
Originally posted by Rao Kal El
I maybe didnt explain my self . if i agree to a bz with the ao vs sm using only kellys showings I wont have any problem. Because if i use all of supermans feat it will be unfair for the ao.The only way I will do something using long history of one character is if I use lets say thor with out mallet to pit him against gladiator that way the mallet is not there to compensate strength showing even if he has years of feats with it. Because we are only trying to use or see strength physically not with weapons.
I said i will IF it is only using thor with out the mallet.
No thor + mallet. + all his history
Glads does not have that many feats under his belt.
Hell you could even prove with thors whole history that he is as fast as Gladiator, but when it comes to comparative speed under same writer there is a huge gap, even having Thor unable to react when he had time dilation on his side.
Lets do another one that seems fair. If Thor is as strong as Hulk lets compara Hulk strength feats vs Thor strength feats but thor needs to show his strength or striking feats with out mjolnir. Because this is strength only.
You cant basically randomly comapare feats specially since one character has lots of feats over several books vs one that has not as many feats. You have use certain rules or standards.
An example of Thor vs Thanos was given to you. That is basically what it will happen here.
So you have to use some standards or rules.
Like I said. I personally won't have any problem doing it. I know it will be a fair match in the end.
These guys get it.
Originally posted by Damborgson
Then they shouldn't be trying to compete with him.
Originally posted by Smurph
This whole forum boils down to random feat contests though, usually to the benefit of Superman/Batman supporters.You can still take comparative portrayals into account, but it should matter if other writers depict a much stronger version of Thor.
Wut? Thor never fought gladz during time dilation? Maybe not 616 glads but he did fought a glads while speed amped and was unable to counter a bull rush even though glads was tired.
Anyhow. I am not doing a bz with you and frankly after seeing how this is going down i wouldn't like to either.
We can't even get an agreement on a simple thing like this. Much less on a debate.
That is all I am saying there is no more to say on this matter i already expressed my pov and for me what Abhi was asking would make sense specially with characters that have lots of comics vs the ones that have few showings. You might disagree but you are entitled to your pov. 🙂