Batman vs. Iron Man

Started by Odekahn29 pages

Originally posted by Silent Master
Right, Because I didn't list that Tony had stealth tech, force-fields, AI and nanotech etc.

It's become fairly obvious that the Batside is the one actually ignoring facts.

Sure you listed it AFTER I BROUGHT IT UP as something Bruce could use. You have brought nothing to the table. Thus my reluctance to feed you more tactics lol. (Even though there are plenty I haven't even mentioned)

What defenses would Tony have set in place that you think Batman couldn't get around?

Originally posted by Odekahn
Sure you listed it AFTER I BROUGHT IT UP as something Bruce could use. You have brought nothing to the table. Thus my reluctance to feed you more tactics lol. (Even though there are plenty I haven't even mentioned)

What defenses would Tony have set in place that you think Batman couldn't get around?

Except you just admitted that I brought several things to the table, at this point you're just crying because I didn't just accept your "Batman will find a way" or "Iron-man will underestimate him" statements.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Except you just admitted that I brought several things to the table, at this point you're just crying because I didn't just accept your "Batman will find a way" or "Iron-man will underestimate him" statements.

No, I stated that I brought up several things and you just regurgitated them saying that Tony would be the one using them instead, lol. You've brought nothing.

Originally posted by Odekahn
No, I stated that I brought up several things and you just regurgitated them saying that Tony would be the one using them, lol. You've brought nothing.

The things I listed are things that Tony actually has and uses, don't blame me for your lack of Iron-man knowledge.

Originally posted by Silent Master
The things I listed are things that Tony actually has and uses, don't blame me for your lack of Iron-man knowledge.

Things that you apparently didn't even think about until they had already been brought up.

Your lack of answers suggests you have none, but I will give you one more chance.

What defenses would Tony have set in place iyo? You don't want to answer because you know you can't think of everything and you know a weakness will exist somewhere. And since Bruce is a master of exploiting weaknesses, you'd essentially be proving my case for me.

Arguments for the Batman side seem to be: "He will find a way." "He will exploit a weakness." "Tony will underestimate him." lol.

Originally posted by thanos-prime
Arguments for the Batman side seem to be: "He will find a way." "He will exploit a weakness." "Tony will underestimate him." lol.

/facepalm

Originally posted by Odekahn
Things that you apparently didn't even think about until they had already been brought up.

Your lack of answers suggests you have none, but I will give you one more chance.

What defenses would Tony have set in place iyo? You don't want to answer because you know you can't think of everything and you know a weakness will exist somewhere. And since Bruce is a master of exploiting weaknesses, you'd essentially be proving my case for me.

Until the batside made an argument that was more detailed than "Batman will find a way" there wasn't a need to mention any of them. it's not my fault that the stuff the batside finally got around to mentioning is stuff that Iron-man has had for years.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Until the batside made an argument that was more detailed than "Batman will find a way" there wasn't a need to mention any of them. it's not my fault that the stuff the batside finally got around to mentioning is stuff that Iron-man has had for years.

And still, you have mentioned absolutely nothing in regards to what kind of defense Stark would come prepared with.

You complain that we are vague in our tactics, while yours remain nonexistent.

You haven't yet managed to make a decent argument for Batman getting past Tony's standard armor and the weapons he has laying around.

As it stands, Iron-man wins.

Why is this still open?

Originally posted by Batman-Prime
The no limits fallacy of the Marvel front is laughable. So IM if prepped cannot be hurt by anyone?
If you can't address what is actually being said, you shouldn't post at all. BTW, nobody has to prove that IM cannot be hurt by anyone. It's not on us to prove the negative. So make an actual argument instead of relying on a transparent fallacy.
Originally posted by Batman-Prime
His armor isn't imprevious to harm, not by a long stretch.
Nobody said it was. So please try addressing something actually stated. Moreover, nobody has to prove that. It's not on us to prove the negative. So drop the negative proof fallacies and make an actual argument.
Originally posted by Batman-Prime
Batman has faught much more powerful enemies and hurt them.
Show Batman hurting something more powerful than the Thorbuster armor which was a match for King Thor.
Originally posted by Batman-Prime
Tony can't prep to become invulnerable to all harm.
Nobody said he would prep to become invulnerable to all harm. So please try addressing something actually stated. Moreover, nobody has to prove that. It's not on us to prove the negative. So drop the negative proof fallacies and make an actual argument.
Originally posted by Batman-Prime
Acid, EMP, Hacking, Nanobots, energyoverload or simply weapons capable of damaging or even destroying his armor are all good and valid possiblities.
Except when most Iron Man armors have shown to be impervious to acid, EMP-shielded, immune to hacking due to sealed systems, has armor based on nanotech itself (and has used nanotech disassemblers posted previously), are capable of absorbing/redirecting incredible energy outputs even from High Heralds, Trans, and Abstract characters, and are basically beyond what Batman is normally capable of on his own.

And since you haven't really shown sh1t of what Batman would do, your generally witless platitudes and proclamations are worth as much as the electrons wasted by your pointless post. Of course, when you actually try to mention things from comics, you only worsen your case. Follow if you can:

Originally posted by Batman-Prime
Batman has build enough weapons and devices to damage Heralds, so he can do the same with IM.
Which weapons and devices would damage the Thorbuster or Phoenix-Killer or handle any of the super-weapons ad WMDs previously posted?
Originally posted by Batman-Prime
Brothey eye was pre-DCNU Batmans invention, build by his staff and his resources, and it's OMACs would shit all over tony.
Brother MK I was hacked by Maxwell Lord and then enhanced with an evolving sentience by Alexander Luthor. It eventually became Brother Eye. Batman only built Brother MK I. Which was built for the sole purpose of monitoring superhumans and nothing else. Trying to invoke the surveillance satellite that was hacked and taken over by others which caused Batman serious problems as if it were some "trump card" is both ironic and moronic.

And the O.M.A.C.s were not invented by Batman either. So maybe you might want to read the comics. Because arguing that Batman would use Brother Eye or O.M.A.C.s makes about as much sense as us arguing Stark would use Ultron or Phalanx drones.

Originally posted by Batman-Prime
His Insider suit and his other techincal devies are also a proof that he can build high end armor and weapons that can damage IM armor.
Because a suit that can mimic JLA abilities in an extremely limited and cost-inefficient manner that has given the Bat-family problems on-panel is supposed to be able to challenge the Thorbuster or Phoenix-Killer armors. I'm sorry, was this supposed to be another "trump card" or a joke? I'll laugh either way.
Originally posted by Batman-Prime
Tony can't prep against every possible attack.
Once again, nobody said he would. So please try addressing something actually stated. Moreover, nobody has to prove that. It's not on us to prove the negative. So drop the negative proof fallacies and make an actual argument.

Or don't.

Originally posted by pym-ftw
Why is this still open?

trollers gonna troll

If Bruce goes the way of the sleuth, it all boils down to him getting close to Stark, who would have the armor on, which would know he's in the vicinity, lets not kid ourselves(the armor has the damn spider sense on top of everything else for cryin out loud) if he breaks into Stark's lab or something, it's debatable whether he would be able to hack it or upload a virus, it damn sure wouldn't happen with Stark prepped for it. So it all boils down to a confrontation, in which IM scorches Bats.

Originally posted by pym-ftw
Why is this still open?

Well, the batside is now complaining that the people backing the low-herald level character haven't gone into detail about how he'll managed to beat a street-level character. They are also arguing that Iron-man will underestimate Batman and thus not try very hard to win, which IMO is them basically admitting that Batman’s only chance is if Tony doesn’t put in any real effort.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Well, the batside is now complaining that the people backing the low-herald level character haven't gone into detail about how he'll managed to beat a street-level character. They are also arguing that Iron-man will underestimate Batman and thus not try very hard to win, which IMO is them basically admitting that Batman’s only chance is if Tony doesn’t put in any real effort.

I liked the one about Bruce being a bullet timer and he will jump around and dodge Tony's blasts. When all IM has to do is nuke the surrounding area leaving a crater with batman chunks scattered all around. (and im not talking about satellites)

Originally posted by Odekahn
Batman hasn't fought Ironman before, so asking for on panel proof where Batman implements such tactics (aka directed at Tony) doesn't exist.

However, Batman could use any combination of Nth Metal, Nano technology, EMP attacks, frequency jammers, traps, decoys, etc etc etc.

I'm asking for proof of what you're arguing for. Accordingly:

Show us Batman's feats with Nth metal. Show us Batman's feats with nano tech. Show us Batman's feats with EMPs. Show us Batman's best feats with frequency jammers. Show us Batman's best traps.

Make an argument. Stop prattling.

Originally posted by Odekahn
http://i593.photobucket.com/albums/tt11/Odekahn/null_zpsf3ea54db.jpg
WTF does a scan from a non-canon comic from the videogame tie-in, Injustice: Gods Among Us, have to do with this thread?

Originally posted by Inhuman
I liked the one about Bruce being a bullet timer and he will jump around and dodge Tony's blasts. When all IM has to do is nuke the surrounding area leaving a crater with batman chunks scattered all around. (and im not talking about satellites)

I liked the one's about getting help from Flash, MM, Hal and breaking into Stark tower and stealing all the blueprints for Tony's armor and weapons.

Originally posted by ODG
If you can't address what is actually being said, you shouldn't post at all.

So, you want to start a dialogue and exchange opinions? If you stay polite I am more then willing to help you 🙂.

Originally posted by ODG

BTW, nobody has to prove that IM cannot be hurt by anyone. It's not on us to prove the negative. So make an actual argument instead of relying on a transparent fallacy. Nobody said it was.
So please try addressing something actually stated. Moreover, nobody has to prove that. It's not on us to prove the negative. So drop the negative proof fallacies and make an actual argument.

Do you wonder why you are so defensive now? Think about it. Nobody said or implied it? Well, we will see. The fallacies are more common on the Marvel side. However you can take both sides, DC and Marvel into account, blame both sides instead of ignoring and blaming the one you are against. But that would mean to be honest with yourself.

Originally posted by ODG

Show Batman hurting something more powerful than the Thorbuster armor which was a match for King Thor.

Ok, you point is now that nothing short of an Being of King Thors level is capable of hurting Ironman? Well, you said "Nobody said it was." (It refers to being invulnerable to harm). Now, you limit it at least to Skyfathers. So you stance is obviously that no one short of a Skyfather or beyond, because you demand Batman to hurt something more powerful then the Thorbuster which is a match for King Thor in your opinion, can hurt IronMan.
So no Herald stands a chance. If this is your opinion, more power to you. But maybe you should reconsider your point.

Originally posted by ODG

Nobody said he would prep to become invulnerable to all harm. So please try addressing something actually stated. Moreover, nobody has to prove that. It's not on us to prove the negative. So drop the negative proof fallacies and make an actual argument.

No one said? No one has to prove that? So defensive again, ok.
I made enough arguments, which are ignored because they require to think and consider the possiblities of both adversaries.
Maybe some personal preferences are responsible for this but tell me, do you think that Black Panther could come up with a plan to hurt or destroy IM armor with prep? I know Black Panther isn't in this thread but you should be able to follow my line of reasoning.

Originally posted by ODG

Except when most Iron Man armors have shown to be impervious to acid, EMP-shielded, immune to hacking due to sealed systems, has armor based on nanotech itself (and has used nanotech disassemblers posted previously), are capable of absorbing/redirecting incredible energy outputs even from High Heralds, Trans, and Abstract characters, and are basically beyond what Batman is normally capable of on his own.

It's not imprevious. Nothing is failsafe and this "Ironman is invulnerable to all harm" talk is the standard argument from the IM supporters which blocks any potential of a thriving discussion where both sides can be enlightened about both characters, be creative and find ways to defeat each other. It can't be hacked until it is hacked and Tony say "but that's impossible" the same is true for EMP and Acids, happens often enough in comics.

Originally posted by ODG

And since you haven't really shown sh1t of what Batman would do, your generally witless platitudes and proclamations are worth as much as the electrons wasted by your pointless post.

So you are back to insults again? And here I had the hope you improved. I though you grow intellectually and emotionally, are open to discussions, a dialogue, but it seems you just search for a "internetz-fight" to show how tough you are, what new and fancy words you learned and pretend you are smart and well educated, when in truth you just prove you are not, with your insults and your "way of debating". So go on with your monologue, you surely don't need me to participate in this. Now rage on, don't learn, don't grow and start your flaming, I won't read it nor will i help you turn yet another thread into sh1t.

Originally posted by ODG

Of course, when you actually try to mention things from comics, you only worsen your case. Follow if you can: Which weapons and devices would damage the Thorbuster or Phoenix-Killer or handle any of the super-weapons ad WMDs previously posted?

I can follow you quite easily tbh. 🙂 So now we need Abstracts to defeat Tony. It's not a tech war, it's a prep war, tech is a part yes but if you can't see other ways to defeat tony then Skyfather or Abstract weapons, we are done here... indeed we are already, my bad.

Originally posted by ODG

Brother MK I was hacked by Maxwell Lord and then enhanced with an evolving sentience by Alexander Luthor. It eventually became Brother Eye. Batman only built Brother MK I. Which was built for the sole purpose of monitoring superhumans and nothing else. Trying to invoke the surveillance satellite that was hacked and taken over by others which caused Batman serious problems as if it were some "trump card" is both ironic and moronic.
And the O.M.A.C.s were not invented by Batman either. So maybe you might want to read the comics. Because arguing that Batman would use Brother Eye or O.M.A.C.s makes about as much sense as us arguing Stark would use Ultron or Phalanx drones.

So the new OMAC technology is known now to Bruce which makes it even easier to replicate it 👆. Tony won't be able to hack it because Batman is a mystery to him, while Tony as a public whore is exploitable. The trump Card isn't the satelites, you got it wrong, yet again. There have been enough means named that could damage IMs Armor. The trump card is better intel, being a better tactician and strategist, psychology and being simpy more clever. Finally you got it. And we agree that the Brother Eye would take out tony easily.

Originally posted by ODG

Because a suit that can mimic JLA abilities in an extremely limited and cost-inefficient manner that has given the Bat-family problems on-panel is supposed to be able to challenge the Thorbuster or Phoenix-Killer armors. I'm sorry, was this supposed to be another "trump card" or a joke? I'll laugh either way. Once again, nobody said he would. So please try addressing something actually stated. Moreover, nobody has to prove that. It's not on us to prove the negative. So drop the negative proof fallacies and make an actual argument.

Yeah, yeah, Tony is now a Skyfather and nothing below can hurt him. Only weapons that can hurt Skyfathers or Abstracts will be effective, so let's forget everything, even the Insider Suit, which could be improved and is able to damage Heralds. It doesn't matter now what the Batman side names, if it isn't able to hurt high end Skyfathers or abstracts whe have to throw it out of the window.
But nice Strawman argument 👆.

Originally posted by ODG

Or don't.

Oh I won't make the same mistake again. IOW giving you a second chance was a mistake or not I learned something at least about you. Sometimes I can't stop believing in humanity, in you case I have to though. And even though I pity you I won't waste my time reading your flames and insults anymore. But thanks for playing.

Feel honored I took the time to reply to you though.

Originally posted by Batman-Prime
So, you want to start a dialogue and exchange opinions? If you stay polite I am more then willing to help you 🙂.

Do you wonder why you are so defensive now? Think about it. Nobody said or implied it? Well, we will see. The fallacies are more common on the Marvel side. However you can take both sides, DC and Marvel into account, blame both sides instead of ignoring and blaming the one you are against. But that would mean to be honest with yourself.

Ok, you point is now that nothing short of an Being of King Thors level is capable of hurting Ironman? Well, you said "Nobody said it was." (It refers to being invulnerable to harm). Now, you limit it at least to Skyfathers. So you stance is obviously that no one short of a Skyfather or beyond, because you demand Batman to hurt something more powerful then the Thorbuster which is a match for King Thor in your opinion, can hurt IronMan.
So no Herald stands a chance. If this is your opinion, more power to you. But maybe you should reconsider your point.

No one said? No one has to prove that? So defensive again, ok.
I made enough arguments, which are ignored because they require to think and consider the possiblities of both adversaries.
Maybe some personal preferences are responsible for this but tell me, do you think that Black Panther could come up with a plan to hurt or destroy IM armor with prep? I know Black Panther isn't in this thread but you should be able to follow my line of reasoning.

It's not imprevious. Nothing is failsafe and this "Ironman is invulnerable to all harm" talk is the standard argument from the IM supporters which blocks any potential of a thriving discussion where both sides can be enlightened about both characters, be creative and find ways to defeat each other. It can't be hacked until it is hacked and Tony say "but that's impossible" the same is true for EMP and Acids, happens often enough in comics.

So you are back to insults again? And here I had the hope you improved. I though you grow intellectually and emotionally, are open to discussions, a dialogue, but it seems you just search for a "internetz-fight" to show how tough you are, what new and fancy words you learned and pretend you are smart and well educated, when in truth you just prove you are not, with your insults and your "way of debating". So go on with your monologue, you surely don't need me to participate in this. Now rage on, don't learn, don't grow and start your flaming, I won't read it nor will i help you turn yet another thread into sh1t.

I can follow you quite easily tbh. 🙂 So now we need Abstracts to defeat Tony. It's not a tech war, it's a prep war, tech is a part yes but if you can't see other ways to defeat tony then Skyfather or Abstract weapons, we are done here... indeed we are already, my bad.

So the new OMAC technology is known now to Bruce which makes it even easier to replicate it 👆. Tony won't be able to hack it because Batman is a mystery to him, while Tony as a public whore is exploitable. The trump Card isn't the satelites, you got it wrong, yet again. There have been enough means named that could damage IMs Armor. The trump card is better intel, being a better tactician and strategist, psychology and being simpy more clever. Finally you got it. And we agree that the Brother Eye would take out tony easily.

Yeah, yeah, Tony is now a Skyfather and nothing below can hurt him. Only weapons that can hurt Skyfathers or Abstracts will be effective, so let's forget everything, even the Insider Suit, which could be improved and is able to damage Heralds. It doesn't matter now what the Batman side names, if it isn't able to hurt high end Skyfathers or abstracts whe have to throw it out of the window.
But nice Strawman argument 👆.

Oh I won't make the same mistake again. IOW giving you a second chance was a mistake or not I learned something at least about you. Sometimes I can't stop believing in humanity, in you case I have to though. And even though I pity you I won't waste my time reading your flames and insults anymore. But thanks for playing.

Feel honored I took the time to reply to you though.

The problem with your entire argument is that to pull all of the shit that you are saying that Bruce would do will not allow him the time to do everything that you are saying that he could do. You expect him to hack Stark which takes loads of time when speaking of quantum encrypted networks, and then get this armor made that would challenge Tony's tech that took decades to come up with in one week. Your entire argument is filled with holes, and makes little to no sense, even in terms of comic logic. Bruce would need a year or better to do the things that you suggest. meanwhile you aren't giving Stark any recognition, but instead treat him like some dumb static character that will not prep against someone as resourceful as Batman.

Obadiah Stayne has failed at doing what you suggest Bruce could do in a week. Obadiah had years of prep, and Bruce is going to do it in one week? Man just concede.