DOS Doomsday Repeat

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
And what does that have to do with Thor? All out Thor does crazy shit that's beyond his peers and allies alike as well unless you're arguing he won't go that far against Doomsday or even if he does it won't matter, both of which don't make sense.

21 issues? I'm not just talking about "Mighty Thor" by Fraction. I'm talking the issues of Thor - prior to it being re-titled Journey into Mystery - he did prior to that, the issues done by Gillen, the issues JMS did (barring OF Thor of course), all the Thor mini series and one shots, events such as Siege, Chaos War, and Fear Itself, and his showings in the Avengers book in addition to AvX. So, unless you want to prove that there's literally "100s" of low showings that demote Thor somehow and how those showings hold more weight than everything I've listed, your point is invalid.

And when Thor took the kid gloves off, he obliterated him. And Thor won't stop holding back and unleash his higher end attacks and feats because you said so? How does that make sense? No one's saying Thor's going to start acting like Tournament Mode Thor or anything. When the stakes are high, Thor operates on a higher level. Nothing CIS off about it. And per the OP, this is the "final stand" part of DoS in the Marvel Universe. There's no reason Thor - or Hulk - in this battle WON'T go all out and operate above their "average".

That doesn't changes much. Thor under JMS or Giffen didn't do anything particular. I'm not saying his low showing takes preference here but his average would still go down. He's not above a highly amped j'onn who just a few issues earlier was deemed more powerful than superman by starbreaker. Doomsday completely no sold him and oneshotted him along with maxima.

Because he was only slightly stronger than thor. When he met another being like Doomsday in Pagan, he got the shit beat out of him. The list of characters Thor has beaten by such tactic is exceedingly short. His all out mode is still below superman's all out mode.

@ABHI...

Was it an average Superman that beat Doomsday or a high end Superman that beat Doomsday?

Originally posted by carver9
@ABHI...

Was it an average Superman that beat Doomsday or a high end Superman that beat Doomsday?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Its an average showing for All out superman.

The Superman that was teamed with the JLA against Doomsday, what kind of Superman was that?

Originally posted by carver9
The Superman that was teamed with the JLA against Doomsday, what kind of Superman was that?

Originally posted by abhilegend
In DOS? Holding back superman.

So Superman gave his all, everything he had against Doomsday at the end of the battle, correct?

Originally posted by carver9
So Superman gave his all, everything he had against Doomsday at the end of the battle, correct?

IIRC, It was until the end that He went all out, but he had already expended most of his sunlight reserves trying to subdue Doomsday.

If he had done that (going all out) since the beginning of the fight, He would have won.

Originally posted by carver9
So Superman gave his all, everything he had against Doomsday at the end of the battle, correct?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Yes. Where are you going with this carv?

You're arguing Superman at his best but using Thor at his average. That's where I'm going with this.

Originally posted by Rao Kal El
IIRC, It was until the end that He went all out, but he had already expended most of his sunlight reserves trying to subdue Doomsday.

If he had done that (going all out) since the beginning of the fight, He would have won.

Exactly. I know this. I'm just pointing out how ABHI is being a hypocrite..using Superman at his beat but Thor at his average. I'm done. I usually don't reply in the threads I make. Enjoy.

Originally posted by carver9
Exactly. I know this. I'm just pointing out how ABHI is being a hypocrite..using Superman at his beat but Thor at his average. I'm done. I usually don't reply in the threads I make. Enjoy.

He just told you, that Superman went all out in the end.

Originally posted by carver9
The Superman that was teamed with the JLA against Doomsday, what kind of Superman was that?

Originally posted by abhilegend
In DOS? Holding back superman.

Originally posted by carver9
So Superman gave his all, everything he had against Doomsday at the end of the battle, correct?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Yes. Where are you going with this carv?

Originally posted by Rao Kal El
He just told you, that Superman went all out in the end.

You're missing my point. He is arguing Superman at his best but Thor at his average vs Doomsday.

Originally posted by carver9
You're missing my point. He is arguing Superman at his best but Thor at his average vs Doomsday.

And this thread was with the intention of pitting and all out Marvel hero who has spent MOST of his energy trying to out punch Doomsday in an all out attack in the END?

Or just a fresh all out Marvel hero vs a DOS Doomsday?

Because IMO on the first scenario all will most likely die, on the Second scenario Superman also lives.

Originally posted by carver9
You're arguing Superman at his best but using Thor at his average. That's where I'm going with this.

Originally posted by leonidas
different situations imo. there have been many characters who made an initial splash only to come dramatically down to earth afterwards. we could even throw logan into that stew.... dd was a little different. he killed superman. that's different from beating up hulk once 35yrs ago. he was created to be superman's ultimate foe. that's been sullied beyond recognition but doesn't change his intent in that particular arc nor his plot device power set. could thor win? sure. would he? i'm less sure of that.

DOS Doomsday was specifically made to be a Superman-killer. Great. Classic Abomination was also specifically made to be a Hulk-killer. So what? Keeping original character concepts that haven't aged well simply isn't justified just because you are a fan of their debut storylines. You want to suggest I'm ignoring his basic underlying concept? How is that more justifiable than ignoring the context provided by considerable, subsequent storylines?

Like you phrased it, DOS Doomsday "made his initial splash," then just wore out as a concept and became dated as a character. And for a while now, DOS Doomsday wouldn't kill Thor (or Superman, for that matter) anymore than classic Abomination would curbstomp them.

Originally posted by ODG
I don't see how it's different at all. Nobody else had been introduced as a Hulk villain that was specifically stronger than he was. They actually resorted to pseudo-science and specifically explained his superior strength as the result of a higher bombardment of gamma rays. Furthermore, he retained his intelligence and thus was a better fighter. Classic Abomination beat up Savage Hulk in a straight-up fight so bad, that in-story, the characters actually had to resort to depowering him with a plot-device weapon -- of course much later on, being restored, and even permanently amped further, mattered little in rematches.

DOS Doomsday was specifically made to be a Superman-killer. Great. Classic Abomination was also specifically made to be a Hulk-killer. So what? Keeping original character concepts that haven't aged well simply isn't justified just because you are a fan of their debut storylines. You want to suggest I'm ignoring his basic underlying concept? How is that more justifiable than ignoring the context provided by considerable, subsequent storylines?

Like you phrased it, DOS Doomsday "made his initial splash," then just wore out as a concept and became dated as a character. And for a while now, DOS Doomsday wouldn't kill Thor (or Superman, for that matter) anymore than classic Abomination would curbstomp them.

^ Classic Abomination never killed Hulk, but he did curbstomp him. That's why the comparison is DOS Doomsday killing Thor vs. classic Abomination curbstomping Thor.

Originally posted by ODG
You want to suggest I'm ignoring his basic underlying concept? How is that more justifiable than ignoring the context provided by considerable, subsequent storylines?

i'm not saying you're ignoring anything. i'm saying i have a hard time NOT ignoring it. but regarding how it's justified: in this case we are specifically using ONLY the one arc, and NOT all the subsequent info. i could make a thread and use the abom FROM that initial arc and, i don't know, maybe people WOULD say he curbs thor in straight h2h. the question is, are the thor and hulk from right now above that era's superman? and even if you think yes (as i no doubt believe you do), there is still the issue of dd's ability to adapt to either one of them. so, i don't see this thing as a sure-thing for thor or hulk at all.

The original Doomsday never lost its stock - every time he appeared, he wrecked shit, worse than before.

It was only after he died at the hands of Imperiex, and was rebuilt [flawed], that he started his Doomsday Rex and subsequent inferior performances.

So anyone saying otherwise is wrong.

🙂

that would include dos and hp, right? those were the only really good versions. i think gog wars dd was before imperiex as well, no?