Anti-Brick

Originally posted by jinzin
Uh no... Wolverine represents a tough-matchup for MOST bricks...

The only reason why Hulk is able to take the edge over Logan in their fights is because of his absurd healing factor which runs on infinity. If it wasn't for that, he would have bled to death during the WWH fight, and Lulz @ you using WWH to try and discredit Logan. Maybe you didn't notice but that version of Hulk was one and three shotting other bricks of high calibur left and right. Wolverine actually took way more punishment than a number of them. 😐

Thor's already hit Wolverine with his hammer, he didn't knock Wolverine out. Thor's punched Wolverine in the face during the reigning, it didn't knock Wolverine out. So yeah, you're wrong there too.

Thing is, comics have shown us that Wolverine DOES present a challenge to bricks 95% of the time he fights them. He can take their punishment on a level that is either equal to their damage soak or better and can bypass their durability because he has a broken offensive weapon for melee.
Wolverine's fought the Hulk more times than he's fought Captain America, Deadpool, and Spiderman combined and Marvel typically tells us it isn't an easy fight for Hulk. 😬

durverine

Wow, you people are horrible, horrible individuals. You probably sacrifice small children to Slaanesh on the weekends with this level of horribleness you possess. I mean collectively, you've all missed the point entirely, and stuff. Jerks.

I never, in any of my posts, stated nor implied that Thor or Superman are bricks. Why you're crying about them not being bricks, I dunno. They don't need to be bricks to support my point, tis not why I mentioned them. All this stuff about Logan only losing to the Hulk because of X or Y, is also completely irrelevant.

The point is that if you hit Logan hard enough, he'll drop, and that'll be the end of the fight. If you throw him into another state, that'll be the end of the fight.

Therefore, on that notion alone, he does not nullify bricks. His speed and regen make him highly resistant to them, but he does not completely nullify them. An example of someone who nullifies bricks would be someone like Shadowcat, who by sheer virtue of her powers can just stand there and giggle while the strongest brick in the collective comic book universe swings at her as hard as he can and achieves zero affect. <-- That's an anti-brick. Martian Manhunter <--- Anti-brick. Telekinesis characters would logically be anti-bricks, etc etc. Simply being able to resist strong attacks or dance around a slow brick does not make you an "anti-brick".

To which one might say, "but Blax! That's not how the forum defines an anti-brick!", and to which I would say that if the only criteria for being an anti-brick is "giving a brick a challenge", then damn near every character in Marvel/DC count as "anti-bricks" since the any given sunday clause has allowed pretty much every character who's popular to beat down bricks on a fairly consistent basis. I guess Batman is an "anti-brick" because he pwn's the likes of Solomon Grundy on a daily basis.

TL;DR: No.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
I never, in any of my posts, stated nor implied that Thor or Superman are bricks. Why you're crying about them not being bricks, I dunno. They don't need to be bricks to support my point, tis not why I mentioned them. All this stuff about Logan only losing to the Hulk because of X or Y, is also completely irrelevant.

The point is that if you hit Logan hard enough, he'll drop, and that'll be the end of the fight. If you throw him into another state, that'll be the end of the fight.

anti-brick!", and to which I would say that if the only criteria for being an anti-brick is "giving a brick a challenge", then damn near every character in Marvel/DC count as "anti-bricks" since the any given sunday clause has allowed pretty much every character who's popular to beat down bricks on a fairly consistent basis. I guess Batman is an "anti-brick" because he pwn's the likes of Solomon Grundy on a daily basis.

No. If you hit Logan enough times that you overload his healing factor that allows him to take multiple, hard hits without being KO'd, he will go down. This "one-shot" idea doesn't have much merit.

You're oversimplifying things here. There is a pretty clear difference between a powerset well-suited to fighting bricks(Wolverine), and beating bricks in spite of your disadvantages(Captain America).

I'm not sure why this is even an issue. We appear to be on the same page. You seem to accept that Wolverine does have an advantage against most bricks. If you don't want to extend the definition of anti-brick beyond "complete nullification of brick abilities", that is fine. I think everyone understands your reasoning there.

Shut up, Slaaneshi cultist. It's too late for that now.

Besides, I really don't see the point in trying to contain this to comic book logic. Comic book logic in itself is a paradox.

I laughed at the general feel of the joke, but I honestly have no idea who Slaaneshi is.

Also, I want you to understand that we get your point. Your stance is a reasonable one, minus stuff like the one-shotting Wolverine thing.

It's just too strict a definition for most of us. 😛

I guess if you're going to define an anti-brick, you should first define a brick, so:

Bricks are typically characterized by super strength and durability. Sometimes they demonstrate fighting skills or agility, often they don't, and rarely do they possess much in the way of long-distance attacks.

Bricks usually stand out as being the strongest/most durable (or at least among the strongest/most durable) in their weight class.

Thing is a high meta because he is very strong and very durable.

Wolverine represents a good example of an anti-brick because, despite Thing holding a severe advantage over most low-metas, he doesn't hold such an obvious one over Wolverine due to the nature of Wolverine's powers: his healing factor allows for tanking even class 100 blows and his claws allow him to pierce high levels of durability. While they don't nullify Thing's ability to do damage to him, they do nullify the severe advantage, and so, despite being in way different weight classes, Wolverine can hold his own against Ben.

Other examples: Loa, any proficient telepath, most people with powerful long range attacks (Cyclops strikes me as a good example), Nocturne, etc. People whose attacks ignore or overcome extraordinary durability, and who can either avoid or handle getting in close combat with somebody with far superior strength.

Flash is probably a good example of an anti-brick that operates on a higher level, but it gets trickier to define up there and there aren't a lot of bricks that would be ranked as being more powerful than Wally/Barry/Bart, so it's hard to gauge.

Originally posted by StyleTime
I laughed at the general feel of the joke, but I honestly have no idea who Slaaneshi is.

Also, I want you to understand that we get your point. Your stance is a reasonable one, minus stuff like the one-shotting Wolverine thing.

It's just too strict a definition for most of us. 😛

And yes, that's why your cultist heathens.
"Too strict". uhuh

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
It's a warhammer 40k thing. Only a level 35+ nerd would get it.

And yes, that's why your cultist heathens.
"Too strict". uhuh

Chill out. I mean, remember, Slaanesh is also the God/Goddess of Love. So feel the Love for your fellow comic book fans!

And then have your soul devoured by the screaming horror that is The Warp!

😂 Good point.

John Constantine. It's all about smarts with him.

Originally posted by Existere
I guess if you're going to define an anti-brick, you should first define a brick, so:

Bricks are typically characterized by super strength and durability. Sometimes they demonstrate fighting skills or agility, often they don't, and rarely do they possess much in the way of long-distance attacks.

Bricks usually stand out as being the strongest/most durable (or at least among the strongest/most durable) in their weight class.

Thing is a high meta because he is very strong and very durable.

Wolverine represents a good example of an anti-brick because, despite Thing holding a severe advantage over most low-metas, he doesn't hold such an obvious one over Wolverine due to the nature of Wolverine's powers: his healing factor allows for tanking even class 100 blows and his claws allow him to pierce high levels of durability. While they don't nullify Thing's ability to do damage to him, they do nullify the severe advantage, and so, despite being in way different weight classes, Wolverine can hold his own against Ben.

Other examples: Loa, any proficient telepath, most people with powerful long range attacks (Cyclops strikes me as a good example), Nocturne, etc. People whose attacks ignore or overcome extraordinary durability, and who can either avoid or handle getting in close combat with somebody with far superior strength.

Flash is probably a good example of an anti-brick that operates on a higher level, but it gets trickier to define up there and there aren't a lot of bricks that would be ranked as being more powerful than Wally/Barry/Bart, so it's hard to gauge.

Mostly when it comes to speed and movement capabilities, ie flight, and also like you said .

I think a good anti-brick shows certain characteristics then, for one they have a powerset that takes advantage of their weaknesses, speed, flight, teleportation, etc

They also have the ability to nullify their strength, ie healing factors, intangibility, etc

And they have an attack that renders their durability moot, Wolverine's claws, telepathy, high powered blast.

I actually think the last one is really important because I don't think someone can consider themselves a true 'Anti-Brick' if they do not have the ability to put the brick down quickly or quick enough.