Originally posted by TheGodKiller
If that is the case , then he also "intended" the Mjolnir used on Juggernaut to be more durable than the reinforced version used against Exitar . I don't see this to be the case .
Show me on-panel evidence regarding this(that Mjolnir's durability was amped post-Exitar) , and my stance for this thread will change .
Godkiller, do you believe that objects and character's durability sometimes change from comic to comic without explanation?
Originally posted by zopzopthis is what u said earlier when u thought different writers did each arc, that all three writers writers had a different takes on the God blast. Now u find out the same writer did the celestial and Juggernaut arc, and your stance is what? That he had a different take on the God blast than himself. The fact that he did both basically prove they were different because he himself depicted them differently. It wasn't another writers take on it, it was his own depiction of the same god blast but at different levels of power. One wrapped in the belt with the power to shatter mjolnir and one without.
He's only ever used the Godblast 3 times that I can recall. In two of those instances Mjolnir didn't shatter (it "safely contained such a blast"😉. The writer had a different take on the Godblast in the "Alone against the Celestials" arc than the previous and subsequent writers. It's that simple. :
Originally posted by Raptor22
this is what u said earlier when u thought different writers did each arc, that all three writers writers had a different takes on the God blast. Now u find out the same writer did the celestial and Juggernaut arc, and your stance is what? That he had a different take on the God blast than himself. The fact that he did both basically prove they were different because he himself depicted them differently. It wasn't another writers take on it, it was his own depiction of the same god blast but at different levels of power. One wrapped in the belt with the power to shatter mjolnir and one without.
Originally posted by zopzopyes he used the same blast. The God force blast. Now do u have any proof that it was a God force blast of the same power, because you know that's what were debating here.
Obvious he changed his mind. He straight up stated that it was the same blast that hurled back Galactus and gave pause to Exitar and he wrote the damn Exitar encounter (and the Juggernaut blast was the most recent of the three).
Since the statement could mean 2 different things. 1 being a type of power being used, or 2 the amount of power being produced. I'm saying the sentence is using the first definition and your saying the second. I have the use of the belt, mjolnir breaking, and the same writer depicting both blasts differently to back my interpretation of the sentence what do u have to back yours.
Originally posted by Raptor22
H1 do u believe a character can use the same power at different levels of power in different comics and it still be the same power?
I have to revise this case, even though I think Celestial Armor should be more durable evidence suggest the opposite.
Thor has been able to damage Celestial Armor with out a gods blast and He damaged Exitar's dome with a reinforced mojolnir blast.
While I believe the reinforced Mjolnir blast could damage Juggernaut, is seems Celestial armor is less durable than Juggernaut.
Based on this evidence I'm leaning towards Juggernaut
Originally posted by Raptor22Your sentence is a little confusing.
H1 do u believe a character can use the same power at different levels of power in different comics and it still be the same power?
Both 'level of power' and 'durability' fluctuates in comics all the time. So we must choose the one which makes more sense. In this case the power being the same makes more sense because it follows the writer's intentions. Another instance of inconsistency was against the Destroyer. In one scene Thor is blocking it's most powerful attack, the Disintegrating Beam. Yet in another instance a casual finger blast slices the hammer easily in two. This is nothing more than comic inconsistency.
Also, there exists made up reasons of how the hammer could break the time against Exitar and not against Juggs under the same level of power. One reason is that the celestial being fixed Thor's hammer after Exitar and reinforced it stronger than before. Another reason is that the hammer was already losing it's integrity from initial use to leading up to Exitar(from other GBs, hitting Exitar on the head first, and other stuff). So when the celestial being repaired the hammer, it was like new with no integrity lost.
Originally posted by TheGodKiller
Such a vast difference in durability ? That too under the same writer ? I am having a lot of trouble believing it .
Two objects can be sufficiently close in durability while a power can be between their resisting points. Let's say object one has a durability of x and object 2 has a durability of x+3. The difference here is 3 and thus not a vast difference if x is sufficiently large. Apply a power of x+2 to both objects. The object with durability x will be destroyed while the object with x+3 durability will remain in tact.
The problem with you is that you are trying to make sense out of comic inconsistency. Inconsistencies happen all the time in comics without explanation.
Thing couldn't phase Hulk with his best punch before, yet he busted a much much more powerful Hulk's face in one punch (WWH). Did Thing's power increase to Sentry's level (since Sentry did the same amount of damage with each blow) or did Hulk's durability decrease or is this just plain writer's inconsistency? The latter is the case since clearly WWH shouldn't be less durable than Savage Hulk and since Thing's power was documented anywhere to have increased to Sentry's level.
The key is to ignore inconsistency and focus more on writer's intentions. Given writer's intentions it is clear that Juggs have a greater durability than Exitar.
Originally posted by biensalsa
I have to revise this case, even though I think Celestial Armor should be more durable evidence suggest the opposite.Thor has been able to damage Celestial Armor with out a gods blast and He damaged Exitar's dome with a reinforced mojolnir blast.
While I believe the reinforced Mjolnir blast could damage Juggernaut, is seems Celestial armor is less durable than Juggernaut.
Based on this evidence I'm leaning towards Juggernaut
Good point. Even if we assume the Exitar blast was greater by about a few times than the Juggs one (the belt of strength only doubles the strength) then the same blast still wouldn't have done nothing to Juggs. Juggs barely felt a tickle. So a power many magnitudes greater is needed to not only damage Juggs but bust him up like Thor did Exitar. If a baby can barely tickle you then how many times the baby's force is needed to seriously injure you?
Originally posted by h1a8
Two objects can be sufficiently close in durability while a power can be between their resisting points. Let's say object one has a durability of x and object 2 has a durability of x+3. The difference here is 3 and thus not a vast difference if x is sufficiently large. Apply a power of x+2 to both objects. The object with durability x will be destroyed while the object with x+3 durability will remain in tact.
Originally posted by h1a8
The problem with you is that you are trying to make sense out of comic inconsistency. Inconsistencies happen all the time in comics without explanation.
Thing couldn't phase Hulk with his best punch before, yet he busted a much much more powerful Hulk's face in one punch (WWH). Did Thing's power increase to Sentry's level (since Sentry did the same amount of damage with each blow) or did Hulk's durability decrease or is this just plain writer's inconsistency? The latter is the case since clearly WWH shouldn't be less durable than Savage Hulk and since Thing's power was documented anywhere to have increased to Sentry's level.
Originally posted by h1a8
The key is to ignore inconsistency and focus more on writer's intentions. Given writer's intentions it is clear that Juggs have a greater durability than Exitar.
Originally posted by h1a8
Good point. Even if we assume the Exitar blast was greater by about a few times than the Juggs one (the belt of strength only doubles the strength) then the same blast still wouldn't have done nothing to Juggs. Juggs barely felt a tickle. So a power many magnitudes greater is needed to not only damage Juggs but bust him up like Thor did Exitar. If a baby can barely tickle you then how many times the baby's force is needed to seriously injure you?
Even assuming Thor's godblast was only doubled from NORMAL power levels, the godblast against Juggernaut was weakened to an unknown degree. It might have been 1/10th as powerful as normal, considering Thor could barely stand a couple of panels before. So that would be 20x greater. It's like getting high by a 5 lb weight on the head, or a 100 lb weight on the head.
Originally posted by h1a8
Good point. Even if we assume the Exitar blast was greater by about a few times than the Juggs one (the belt of strength only doubles the strength) then the same blast still wouldn't have done nothing to Juggs. Juggs barely felt a tickle. So a power many magnitudes greater is needed to not only damage Juggs but bust him up like Thor did Exitar. If a baby can barely tickle you then how many times the baby's force is needed to seriously injure you?
Actually , Juggernaut didn't just merely feel a tickle . Sure he wasn't physically hurt , but I assure you he didn't feel a "tickle" :
I think a better way to gauge this , it will be to know, what has actually pass Juggernaut's protection field.
So far IIRC Celestial armor has been breached at least 3 or 4 times, not an easy task, but what has actually passed Juggernaut's field?
But I still believe Thor's blast vs Exitar's dome was more powerful as a matter of fact it says that the armor around the Dome is more durable than the Celestial's armor itself.