Batman vs. Iron Man

Started by Naija boy29 pages

Originally posted by Odekahn
What resources gap? Bruce can get anything he needs, he's a billionaire too. And it's not a matter of borrowing weaponry, it's how batman isn't afraid to incorporate said technology when prepping. (He used his enemiy's tech against the JL in prep)

And as for your last statement, no one said it wasn't vastly more relevant. If there was a comparison made between the 2 it was done by you and not me. I just said it's important, and in the overall scope of differences between Bruce and Tony, h2h is a credit (albeit minor in this case) for Bruce.

You are being willfully ignorant if you don't think there is a resources gap. Bruce being a billionaire does not mean that he can match the technological prowess of resources or Marvels premiere genius engineer who just happens to specialize in weaponry and to have been developing specialized technology far in excess of anything Bruce possesses for decades. It's absurd. All you have is hopeful strategies of batman borrowing weaponry and equipment from his allies. Even with that he won't be matching Tony....not even close

You are trying to downplay Tonys majorly relevant advantages which are of immense significance here on the basis of the extremely whimsical and flimsy "batman will find a way to separate him from his tech" reasoning. This reasoning presupposes that Tony whose core advantage is technology, will not go to extreme lengths to guard against such a tactic or... is just plain retarded. Trying to negate Tony's advantages with such inchoate logic while then trying to highlight batmans h2h advantage exposes the shallowness of your position.

Your argument equates to Batman finds a way. What is more likely based of off any reasonable and non wishful assessment of the situation however is that Tony finds a way.....or a bunch of ways...to destroy him.

Originally posted by ODG
^ Because a conveniently itemized list of superweapons and WMDs that Stark has created and used hasn't already been posted.

If you're going to troll, at least try to make it subtle.

I am referring to arguments made strictly in the context of this batman/iron man debate - ie. what attack/defense strategies can Tony use against batman.

If you're trying to sound like a smart ass atleast know what the f*** ur saying

Originally posted by Firefly218
I am referring to arguments made strictly in the context of this batman/iron man debate - ie. what attack/defense strategies can Tony use against batman.

If you're trying to sound like a smart ass atleast know what the f*** ur saying

I think you got him

Originally posted by Firefly218
I am referring to arguments made strictly in the context of this batman/iron man debate - ie. what attack/defense strategies can Tony use against batman.

If you're trying to sound like a smart ass atleast know what the f*** ur saying

Let's start with his standard equipment which includes multiple ranged attacks capable of hurting cl 100/herald level people.

Your turn.

Originally posted by pym-ftw
Tony has more options than Batman can prep for In a week.
still hasn't been addressed.

Originally posted by Naija boy
You are being willfully ignorant if you don't think there is a resources gap. Bruce being a billionaire does not mean that he can match the technological prowess of resources or Marvels premiere genius engineer who just happens to specialize in weaponry and to have been developing specialized technology far in excess of anything Bruce possesses for decades. It's absurd. All you have is hopeful strategies of batman borrowing weaponry and equipment from his allies. Even with that he won't be matching Tony....not even close

You are trying to downplay Tonys majorly relevant advantages which are of immense significance here on the basis of the extremely whimsical and flimsy "batman will find a way to separate him from his tech" reasoning. This reasoning presupposes that Tony whose core advantage is technology, will not go to extreme lengths to guard against such a tactic or... is just plain retarded. Trying to negate Tony's advantages with such inchoate logic while then trying to highlight batmans h2h advantage exposes the shallowness of your position.

Your argument equates to Batman finds a way. What is more likely based of off any reasonable and non wishful assessment of the situation however is that Tony finds a way.....or a bunch of ways...to destroy him.

Wayne Industries is a joke compared to Resilient. Which is odd, because Resilient is supposed to be a start-up company independent of all Stark infrastructure. But every time they try to tear Stark's vast industrial infrastucture away from him, his resources are still virtually without limit.

He's building a frikkin Dyson Sphere at the moment.

Originally posted by Silent Master
By all means, post what weapons Batman will use to separate Tony from his tech.

The weapons are merely tools. The tactic is how it all comes together. I've already stated several different weapons Batman could attack Tony's tech. I could post more, my ideas are damn near limitless and Batman is a hell of a lot smarter than I am. Why is "he'll figure out a way" such a stretch? His resume is far more impressive than Tony's in the field of strategy (also known as tactics).

Originally posted by Firefly218
I am referring to arguments made strictly in the context of this batman/iron man debate - ie. what attack/defense strategies can Tony use against batman.

If you're trying to sound like a smart ass atleast know what the f*** ur saying

Because using weapons that he's built against Batman isn't an attack strategy. This is supposed to be your argument. Pretty sure a baby's head in Ethiopia just spontaneously combusted with the sheer stupidity of what you typed here.

English. Please speak it.

Originally posted by Odekahn
The weapons are merely tools. The tactic is how it all comes together. I've already stated several different weapons Batman could attack Tony's tech. I could post more, my ideas are damn near limitless and Batman is a hell of a lot smarter than I am. Why is "he'll figure out a way" such a stretch? His resume is far more impressive than Tony's in the field of strategy (also known as tactics).

By all means, list what tools Batman will use to separate a prepped Tony from his tech.

Batarangs. Maybe an electric batarang

Originally posted by Silent Master
By all means, list what tools Batman will use to separate a prepped Tony from his tech.

Sure, go ahead and list everything Ironman is bringing to the table first. If there's NO WAY that Batman would be able to beat Stark that you can think of, what defenses do you think he'd put into place that are unbeatable?

You guys are the one's saying Batman doesn't even "stand a chance" so you aren't at a disadvantage by answering first, right?

IOW, you can't back up your claim; that is all you needed to say.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
Batarangs. Maybe an electric batarang
Don't forget smoke bombs.

Originally posted by Odekahn
Sure, go ahead and list everything Ironman is bringing to the table first. If there's NO WAY that Batman would be able to beat Stark that you can think of, what defenses do you think he'd put into place that are unbeatable?

You guys are the one's saying Batman doesn't even "stand a chance" so you aren't at a disadvantage by answering first, right?

The whole debate is farcical. Odekhan and his ilk have no way of addressing the resources or technological gap and so would instead like to fantasize about fantastical strategies that Batman could come up with...it wouldn't matter who batman was then facing as they could always think of some story or "strategy" which batman could use to win as long as he has "prep". It's a strategy that avoids having to do any real debating about the characters relative strengths.

Originally posted by Silent Master
IOW, you can't back up your claim; that is all you needed to say.

I'm perfectly willing to answer after you. If Batman doesn't stand a chance, you shouldn't have a problem answering first.

Originally posted by Odekahn
Sure, go ahead and list everything Ironman is bringing to the table first. If there's NO WAY that Batman would be able to beat Stark that you can think of, what defenses do you think he'd put into place that are unbeatable?

You guys are the one's saying Batman doesn't even "stand a chance" so you aren't at a disadvantage by answering first, right?

It's not our job to make your argument for you. You either have a point, or you don't.

Originally posted by Odekahn
I'm perfectly willing to answer after you. If Batman doesn't stand a chance, you shouldn't have a problem answering first.
Originally posted by Naija boy
The whole debate is farcical. Odekhan and his ilk have no way of addressing the resources or technological gap and so would instead like to fantasize about fantastical strategies that Batman could come up with...it wouldn't matter who batman was that facing as they could always think of some story or "strategy" which batman could use to win as long as he has "prep".

The "resources gap" isn't near as large as you portray it to be. And basically, you just said that "Batman could find a way". So you agree with me and my "ilk" 👆

IOW, you can't back up your argument so you're trying to shift the burden. Nice try, but I'm not falling for it.