Originally posted by comicfan11
Hold on
WaitI've asked you a simple question in this thread 3-4 times and you didn't answer.
You blatantly ignored the question.So I'll ask again.
How do these attacks from characters like Mr Fantastic, Spiderman and Black Widow stack compared to a WW punch to the face or a pissed off GL attack?
I mean do you really expect me to respond to your questions when you ignore mine when it suits you?
I don't feel like answering your question, not all questions deserve an answer, especially dumb ones, no offense. Obviously Spiderman alone is stronger than both WW and GL combined. Dummy.
Originally posted by vince_slice
I didn't ask you a question, I just simply provided evidence against your notion that the arrows penetrated deep into Thanos' flesh. E.g., a clear shot of Thanos' back with not a single drop of blood, no wounds, puncture marks, nothing resembling a wound, and his back looks relatively unscathed after the arrows fell off.I don't feel like answering your question, not all questions deserve an answer, especially dumb ones, no offense. Obviously Spiderman alone is stronger than both WW and GL combined. Dummy.
The arrows were more than half their length inside Thanos.
Either his armor distorts space or those arrows pierced his skin.
Please explain to me where did the front halves of the arrows went if Thanos's armor is at best as fat as his gloves.
You can compare the length of the arrows inside Thanos with the one Hawkeye is pointing at him.
And dude seriously we were debating and you bailed out.
And I'll take it you don't actually believe what you posted about Spiderman punching harder than WW.
Originally posted by -K-M-
Why would they fall off even if they were deep in his armor?
But even if they didn't fall off, it still doesn't change the fact that Thanos' back shows absolutely zero signs of wounds, puncture marks, no blood, and his back looks unscathed.
Originally posted by celeyhyga17
How about Gamora's blade(Godslayer) which was virtually indestructible breaking on his skin not too long ago? I'd go with the arrows on his armor/clothing. If it did actually pierce him, it's blatant WIS/AIS. Writer/Artist Induced.....
Not to mention that he went out of his way to avoid morg's axe which didn't cut terrax in the same issue
There is no such thing as 'cutting' durability.
Thanos can't take a punch from Thor and and take an arrow from Hawkeye, shake off the former, and still be pierced by the latter. Not in reality.
The fact of the matter is, Thanos suffered from BIS (bendis induced stupidity), and thus his durability fluctuated anywhere from street level to high herald depending on who happened to be hitting him at the time.
Originally posted by CosmicComet
There is no such thing as 'cutting' durability.Thanos can't take a punch from Thor and and take an arrow from Hawkeye, shake off the former, and still be pierced by the latter. Not in reality.
The fact of the matter is, Thanos suffered from BIS (bendis induced stupidity), and thus his durability fluctuated anywhere from street level to high herald depending on who happened to be hitting him at the time.
Originally posted by CosmicComet
How do I speak to a fictional character?If a bullet can pierce a character, yet Superman's fist does not, obviously that means a bullet produces more pressure that Superman's fist.
Obviously, this is false.
No, it means there are different types of durabilities, diana gets better blunt force durability, surfer gets better cutting force durability and superman gets both.
Originally posted by carver9
At abhi..you forgot to post Wolverine cutting Thanos. 🙂
Originally posted by abhilegend
Sarcasm, bro!No, it means there are different types of durabilities, diana gets better blunt force durability, surfer gets better cutting force durability and superman gets both.
....No.
You did not understand.
There is no such thing as 'blunt' durability vs 'sharp'. Not in reality.
A knife is easier to cut with than a hammer because its force is focused on to a smaller surface area, thus producing higher amounts of pressure more easily. Pressure is Force divided by Area. Which simply means that in order to cut with a hammer as well as you would with a knife, you simply have to swing the hammer hard enough enough to overcome its greater surface area, and thus produce equal pressure to what the knife could produce with less.
And from there, let me ask a question; what's more damaging, a knife edge producing x amount of pressure or a hammer producing the same amount of pressure?
The answer is the hammer, since that same pressure figure will be felt across a greater surface area--and thus will produce a bigger cut than the knife.
Originally posted by CosmicComet
....No.You did not understand.
There is no such thing as 'blunt' durability vs 'sharp'. Not in reality.
A knife is easier to cut with than a hammer because its force is focused on to a smaller surface area, thus producing higher amounts of pressure more easily. Pressure is Force divided by Area. Which simply means that in order to cut with a hammer as well as you would with a knife, you simply have to swing the hammer hard enough enough to overcome its greater surface area, and thus produce equal pressure to what the knife could produce with less.
And from there, let me ask a question; what's more damaging, a knife edge producing x amount of pressure or a hammer producing the same amount of pressure?
The answer is the hammer, since that same pressure figure will be felt across a greater surface area--and thus will produce a bigger cut than the knife.
You're applying real life science here bro. Not applicable. This isn't rocket science. Otherwise a large part of history and traits of these characters which makes them unique from each other is rendered useless.
You miss the point. It's a false construct, created by fans based on ignorance.
---Truth be told, I don't even think you understood what I said until I explained it just now, and just took the 'blunt/sharp' thing for granted as being a given.
And nowhere in comics do I see it being actively referred to as 'Thanos X type blunt durability is greater than Y type cutting durability'.
Thus, its simple; things like Thanos being cut by Clint's arrows yet not having his head exploded from a Thor punch, is simply a matter of one being a low durability showing, and one being a higher durability showing. That's it.
There is no difference whatsoever. Fan ignorance is not a means of arguing character traits existing.
The only thing worse in comics is the the apparent A>B>C>A thing with speed; E.G. If you are only a marked percent faster than an opponent, you'll dodge him easily and realistically (e.g. spiderman vs hulk), yet if you are millions of times faster than an opponent, you will have no notable speed advantage whatsoever (e.g. gladiator vs hulk)
Originally posted by CosmicComet
You miss the point. It's a false construct, created by fans based on ignorance.---Truth be told, I don't even think you understood what I said until I explained it just now, and just took the 'blunt/sharp' thing for granted as being a given.
And nowhere in comics do I see it being actively referred to as 'Thanos X type blunt durability is greater than Y type cutting durability'.
Thus, its simple; things like Thanos being cut by Clint's arrows yet not having his head exploded from a Thor punch, is simply a matter of one being a low durability showing, and one being a higher durability showing. That's it.
There is no difference whatsoever. Fan ignorance is not a means of arguing character traits existing.
The only thing worse in comics is the the apparent A>B>C>A thing with speed; E.G. If you are only a marked percent faster than an opponent, you'll dodge him easily and realistically (e.g. spiderman vs hulk), yet if you are millions of times faster than an opponent, you will have no notable speed advantage whatsoever (e.g. gladiator vs hulk)
There's obviously a difference between piercing durability and energy/blunt force durability in comics. It doesn't matter if it makes no sense, there are a few characters where there is a disparity between how they take different types of damages.
Thanos' cutting durability obviously isn't on par with his energy/blunt force durability based on historical implication. We can't even rationalize it by pointing out that different writers have different opinions, this was all Starlin as far as I can tell.
Warlock believing that Wolverine could land a killing blow on Thanos is pretty telling to me.
