CosmicComet
Senior Member
Originally posted by ODG
Since you've read these fights, you should be smarter than this. Superman knows he can take the hits and Batman knows he can't. Superman often underestimates his superbrick opponents' speed and Batman does not.
No. What I'm talking about is completely divergent from the idea of Superman simply taking a hit to test something or shield someone.
When we have scenes like Superman being able to charge at Eiling, while being drawn as sort of blur, yet still being hit, whilst we know Batman is absolutely not that fast at all and yet will still be able to dodge the same kind of punch, we know something wrong.
Orion's fought Superman several times showing them to be physical peers. Simply dismissing them out of hand because you think they should have gone down differently doesn't change these facts.If Orion was under some blue Astroforce star amping him, maybe he would.
Then neither is Superman in an actual fight. You'll have to learn to deal with this. You can't simply ignore Superman's character established by thousands of comics.
No. We have forum rules to deal with things that are divergent from what should happen. Eliminating PIS and the characters 'fighting to their best'.
Ignoring the meaning of speed feats in fights that happens in comics is due to what? That's right, a product of PIS.
Ignoring the city building feat vs supposed blue sun amp for even just a moment--since that would be getting in to another tangent--we have Superman speed feats, and then we have Orion speed feats. One person, is millions of times faster. Millions. That's far greater than the speed disparity between someone like Muhammad Ali and say George Chuvalo. And the thing is, Orion isn't even hinted to at least be on the same sort of speed level as Superman, even if he had a clear cut statement, it may suffice. But he doesn't.
You don't get to ignore the meaning of something like that in a forum fight where we aren't writing stories, 'just because'. An argument such as this is simply a matter of sentiment. It doesn't 'feel right' to say Gladiator would annihilate Hulk since he's millions of times faster by feats--but I don't deal in sentiment. I deal in what is derivable objectively.
Of course you would make this sort of argument. Because it would give you the sort of leeway to actually argue for characters who have absolutely shit speed feats in the grand scheme of things vs those who have great ones. Otherwise those kinds of fights become completely obsolete. But it doesn't gel, and when inspected for consistency, the logic falls apart.
We know, for example, that Hulk is a guy that Peter Parker is fast enough to readily dodge. Indeed, Parker has even remarked that Hulk moves in 'slow motion' to him. How do you then justify Hulk being able to hit someone like Gladiator in a forum fight then, if Gladiator is fighting 'to his best'? You can't. Period. All that remains to be said is the whole 'in-character in play' argument, though the problems of this being obvious in that this would require you to believe that its 'in character' for someone like Gladiator to be retarded (seeing as you'd have to be to stand in place and let someone who's taking minutes to simply blink, land a blow on you), as well as the fact that Gladiator was 'in-character' when he performed his speed feats (obviously he wasn't pretending to be someone else). So sure, one can still make the argument that Hulk would beat someone like Gladiator if 'gladiator doesn't use his speed', but, what if he does? Then what? What's Hulk's answer? Nothing. Absolutely, nothing. The entire argument against the far faster character relies on it 'not feeling right' to say he could easily beat the far slower character without the latter being able to do anything about it, and the 'in-character' argument then just admits that the only way the faster character can win is not through their own merits, but the actions of the faster character--admitting that their fate is entirely in the faster character's hands.
Suck it up. They 'fight to their best' afterall. None of the sentimental begging holds water thus.
edit: It's funny, though, you tried to make people argue for Superman being able to easily beat the likes of Lobo and other bricks within their own universe since they have no speed feats on par and rely only on fights to show any sort of relative stature with him, and now when I actually argue within this sort of stance you're like 'no you can't say that'. So basically, it boils down to you wanting some excuse to say Hulk can beat someone millions of times faster than them, and try to take some casuality down on the 'other side' when they don't argue in favor of it. And yet when the argument actually agrees with your attempt to take some casualities, all of a sudden it still doesn't work. Lol. I like Orion very much. Just as I like Lobo And it is indeed a 'casuality' for me to say they would lose to Superman in a forum thread since they don't have the speed feats, or even implied speed to compete with him. But, c'est la vie.