Originally posted by psycho gundam
not contradicted, but it wasn't sequential with prior feats nor feats immediately after. other than the fact he did do it you have no indication he even could do something half as good while fully powered, that's all i'm trying to saynobody ever tested black adam for example, so to say he couldn't replicate it doesn't make too much sense
I disagree, unless you're talking just about the Superman book, which wasn't exactly great anyway, and was ran by people with an agenda.
What about Adam?
Originally posted by abhilegend
What?
Don't make things personal.
Originally posted by abhilegend
I wasn't making it personal. That was just sarcasm at the way gundam hates superman.
Addressing him personally, using words like "you" and "your" whether he hates Superman or not, is still seen as being personal.
You can argue without saying things like that, you know.
Originally posted by psycho gundam
you're the carver of "superman guys"
Originally posted by psycho gundam
it just needed the tip of it's tail, bruhhe's one of the forum's best posters, even if you don't agree with him
Originally posted by psycho gundam
and you hate sick babiesgoodnight, abhi
Originally posted by -Pr-
Addressing him personally, using words like "you" and "your" whether he hates Superman or not, is still seen as being personal.You can argue without saying things like that, you know.
Originally posted by psycho gundam
and you hate sick babiesgoodnight, abhi
Originally posted by -Pr-I feel like I have to disagree here. Supes first stated he couldn't believe how he wasn't strong enough to break the tripedal curosia--eh, monster's grip (say wut? are the writers telling us this thing could've benched Earth for 10 days?); then it's taken out with a single explosion which, at best, judging from its size, may've been equal to a tactical nuke.
It was a high feat, sure. But that whole comic was about showing how powerful Superman was. The feat wasn't contradicted or lessened in any way by the following pages.
See what I'm having trouble with? How could so "feeble" an explosion have downed a creature who also, apparently, had planetary strength, and whose tissue was strong enough to apply it and resist Superman's strength? Even a 100-megaton blast should've been nothing to it (it better be nothing to Superman).
I don't want to take away from Supes' feat, especially since the method and art were really cool, enough to make me want to suspend disbelief, as this was sooo much better than the days of pulling planets with oversized Home Depot chains. But as many of us predicted, that feat will raise power consistency issues (in other words, comics as usual).
Originally posted by Mindship
I feel like I have to disagree here. Supes first stated he couldn't believe how he wasn't strong enough to break the tripedal curosia--eh, monster's grip (say wut? are the writers telling us this thing could've benched Earth for 10 days?); then it's taken out with a single explosion which, at best, judging from its size, may've been equal to a tactical nuke.See what I'm having trouble with? How could so "feeble" an explosion have downed a creature who also, apparently, had planetary strength, and whose tissue was strong enough to apply it and resist Superman's strength? Even a 100-megaton blast should've been nothing to it (it better be nothing to Superman).
I don't want to take away from Supes' feat, especially since the method and art were really cool, enough to make me want to suspend disbelief, as this was sooo much better than the days of pulling planets with oversized Home Depot chains. But as many of us predicted, that feat will raise power consistency issues (in other words, comics as usual).
the monster was kryptonian. it's all relative.
not going to pretend it was the most well explained feat, but i think people underrate the monster he was fighting.
Originally posted by -Pr-Strength-wise, yes. But then, shouldn't durability have also been comparable (it had to have been, to resist Supe's strength)? A much bigger blast should've been required to take it out -- heck, it didn't take out Superman. And for that matter, the oil blast was a better alternative than a direct blast of HV?
the monster was kryptonian. it's all relative.
Originally posted by -Pr-I think it's what I said before...
not going to pretend it was the most well explained feat, but i think people underrate the monster he was fighting.
Originally posted by Mindship
...comics as usual.
Originally posted by Mindship
Strength-wise, yes. But then, shouldn't durability have also been comparable (it had to have been, to resist Supe's strength)? A much bigger blast should've been required to take it out -- heck, it didn't take out Superman. And for that matter, the oil blast was a better alternative than a direct blast of HV?I think it's what I said before...
Originally posted by Mr.SunKingNot a bad point, actually, except that if you have a certain level of strength, you need a certain level of durability (otherwise you pull yourself apart). The creature was still structurally tough enough to apply its own (superior!) planetary strength, and more importantly, it was still tough enough to structurally resist Superman's ultramarathon-Earthbenching might. That oil blast should've had no more effect on it than a popped kryptonian zit.
[b]however Supes himself stated that it's DNA was corrupted, therefore not all aspects were amplified by the typical yellow sun exposure most likely, causing the strength to increase dramatically. but the durability, not so much... [/B]
Admittedly, this is nitpicky stuff we're supposed to look past. I just would've liked more consistency. It would've hammered home the profundity of Supe's Earthbenching, instead of starting to make it look like an outlier feat (besides, sometimes nitpicking is fun 🙂).
