Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
@janusYet Cap's shield which is basically proto-adamantium sliced the more powerful Maestro.
And Professor Hulk wasn't impervious to adamantium anyway, so these robot dogs from alternate reality aren't very convincing argument.
As for alt universe - Maestro's universe is just a future version of 616. I don't see why there should be any doubt introduced really.
Originally posted by janus77
Yes, it did slice him, when used by Professor Hulk.As for alt universe - Maestro's universe is just a future version of 616. I don't see why there should be any doubt introduced really.
There are many futures.
Cable's from a future version of 616, too.
So is Old Man Logan/Hooded Man.
Doesn't mean we can use them all as canon evidence. That evidence with robots simply doesn't count, especially since we've seen Prof Hulk getting hurt by 616 adamantium.
Originally posted by janus77
Quantum Moulder isn't a brand though, it's a descriptive name for a function - like a wrench or a automotive vehicle.The only thing it needs to share in common with any other incarnation is that it does that essential job. In the case of the QMs - slag Adamantium.
Then there's the Future Imperfect Dogs of War thing - where they have a precise measure for the pressure/force that the robots exert - crushing Adamantium - and that too failed on Hulk.
Replace the brands with Harry Potter's invisibility cloak. Or lightsabres. Or anything from sci-fi, really.
I can say I was inspired after watching Return of the Jedi to make a lightsabre out of some tubing and a flashlight. Or, if I was comic book level clever, I could make a working facsimile which works PRETTY much like a lightsabre, but wasn't.
Let's use a comic book analogy. Carbondium vs adamantium. Adamantium vs Proto-adamantium. They all inspired each other, doesn't mean that they are the same. But they are all metals, and they all have the same function - to be durable and hardwearing. Except Cap has the original, and the best.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Replace the brands with Harry Potter's invisibility cloak. Or lightsabres. Or anything from sci-fi, really.I can say I was inspired after watching Return of the Jedi to make a lightsabre out of some tubing and a flashlight. Or, if I was comic book level clever, I could make a working facsimile which works PRETTY much like a lightsabre, but wasn't.
Let's use a comic book analogy. Carbondium vs adamantium. Adamantium vs Proto-adamantium. They all inspired each other, doesn't mean that they are the same. But they are all metals, and they all have the same function - to be durable and hardwearing. Except Cap has the original, and the best.
Originally posted by janus77
I'd say there's a difference between characters and materials, especially when they're a continuation of 616 rather than some parallel/what if/separate reality.As for being hurt by adamantium, again that's basically the same thing as going rounds with Thing and smashing Onslaught. Dynamic stats.
Thing is, there are shitloads of "continuations" of 616 universe... they are all in fact separate realities, they even have their own designation numbers. They're different from each other, too.
One of the many examples:
Hulk in The End regenerating from getting eaten by bugs.
Hulk in Old Man Logan dying from Logan tearing him apart from inside.
1) Not arguing that point, he ever referred to his own gun as a QM, did he? He merely said ''this was inspired blah blah blah'. Not arguing that QMs reshape adamantium.
2) True.
3) Also true. But there are so many more times that adamantium has proven to be stronger than the Hulk, that one showing, imo, doesn't invalidate it. ABC logic, I know, but if adamantium>Hulk, and if Item X > adamantium, then Item X>adamantium>Hulk.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Its going to be one of those agree to disagree scenarios, I think.Mad Thinker said that it was inspired by Ultron, now if it could melt metal, just imagine what it can do to flesh and bone.
Same way that my Sansum Note can make calls and send text messages, just like a real Samsung. But it doesn't mean that its as good as the real thing.
Why would he even bring it up if it couldn't melt Adamantium? Why even bring up Adamantium and Ultron weapon if it wasnt similar? Writers intent.
He didn't bring it up in the way you think though. Otherwise, with writer's intent, I can argue that the writer did NOT want it to be a shrugging off adamantium melting blast feat, and he displayed this intent by writing the word 'metal' and 'inspired by', rather than 'adamantium' and 'the same as'.
I'm not saying they are not similar. I am not saying that they couldn't melt metal. I am saying that I cannot prove that the Mad Thinker's weapon was of the same power output as Ultron's. And ultimately, neither can you.
Am I allowed to use DOS Doomsday and Flash speed, now, then, if writer's intent is now used as proof? Can I use writer's intent to show how Batman is the fastest member of DCnU JLA?
Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
Hulk resisted transmutation before, it's not exactly a durability feat, more of a special ability/resistance feat.
It can be marked as a durability or resistance ft but from the way Mad Thinker was talking, it was more of a durability ft. He stated it could melt through Adamantium and then said "imagine what it would do to flesh and bone". I'm getting durability out of it but I can see where you are coming from.
Originally posted by carver9
It can be marked as a durability or resistance ft but from the way Mad Thinker was talking, it was more of a durability ft. He stated it could melt through Adamantium and then said "imagine what it would do to flesh and bone". I'm getting durability out of it but I can see where you are coming from.
You forgot the middle sentence, 'where he said if it could melt metal'.
Writer's intent to show that Mad Thinker's version couldn't melt through it, otherwise he would have written it the way you have. Because your intent is to clearly show that it CAN melt adamantium.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
He didn't bring it up in the way you think though. Otherwise, with writer's intent, I can argue that the writer did NOT want it to be a shrugging off adamantium melting blast feat, and he displayed this intent by writing the word 'metal' and 'inspired by', rather than 'adamantium' and 'the same as'.I'm not saying they are not similar. I am not saying that they couldn't melt metal. I am saying that I cannot prove that the Mad Thinker's weapon was of the same power output as Ultron's. And ultimately, neither can you.
Am I allowed to use DOS Doomsday and Flash speed, now, then, if writer's intent is now used as proof? Can I use writer's intent to show how Batman is the fastest member of DCnU JLA?
Again, why would Mad Thinker bring up Adamantium and Ultron weapon in the first place if the two wasn't similar? This is Mad Thinker, a genuous...why would he use a weapon that only melts metal.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
You forgot the middle sentence, 'where he said if it could melt metal'.Writer's intent to show that Mad Thinker's version couldn't melt through it, otherwise he would have written it the way you have. Because your intent is to clearly show that it CAN melt adamantium.
You are not making one bit of sense (still luv you like a bro). Adamantium is metal. Again, why would Mad Thinker use a gun that can only melt through standard metal against HULK.?
Originally posted by carver9
Again, why would Mad Thinker bring up Adamantium and Ultron weapon in the first place if the two wasn't similar? This is Mad Thinker, a tenuous...why would he use a weapon that only melts metal.
Writer's intent, buddy. The writer knew that giving the Hulk such a feat was too extreme, so chickened out at the last minute and made it ambiguous.
Again, not saying they are not similar. Carbonadium was inspired by adamantium's durability, and they are similar. But adamantium is superior to carbonadium.
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Writer's intent, buddy. The writer knew that giving the Hulk such a feat was too extreme, so chickened out at the last minute and made it ambiguous.Again, not saying they are not similar. Carbonadium was inspired by adamantium's durability, and they are similar. But adamantium is superior to carbonadium.
You are making up stuff as you go. The writer can easily change the script if he wanted. Adamantium is metal...mad thinker brought up Ultrons gun and his weapon. He then end up talking about the damage his gun would do to Hulk. Mad Thinker is either an idiot for bringing a standard metal melting gun to a fight against HULK (LMBAO) or he brought a gun that can melt through Adamantium like Ultron gun can. I see no reason for a writer to bring up Ultron gun and Adamantium if he was not telling us the purpose of bringing it up.
Originally posted by StiltmanFTW
We need to remember there were many versions of Ultron, not all were made out of grade "a" adamantium. It's anyone's guess which model of Ultron inspired the Thinker.It's also possible that Hulk wrecked Thinker before his weapon could do any significant harm...
I agree but he compared his gun to the one that melted Adamantium.