Originally posted by Jmanghan
No I agree Ozy is superhuman, what I don't agree with is that his strength is Superhuman. I assume you're talking about when he threw Rorschach across the room?
No. When he kicked Rorschach off the ground some 20-30 feet.
When he leaped 30ft through the air.
When he picked up a 200+lb person with ease and threw him at least 15ft through and beyond skyscraper glass window (which is very strong).
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Yeah, honestly, it depends on how many there are and the circumstances they are performed under. If someone performs a single feat that contradicts their normal levels and it is clearly done just to further a point in the story, for example, then, yeah, it's suspect. But if you have a couple of high ends that sit above the norm, I don't see why they shouldn't be included in the thread. But that's also a thing to check for. Whether there is an actual contradiction. If someone only ever lifts a few tons, but never really struggles with it, and then lifts way more, it wouldn't be an issue IMO. But if someone consistently struggles with those kinds of weights and then suddenly lifts way more in one particular instance, it creates an actual inconsistency in their depicted strength level, whereas the first instance could simply be them normally not requiring utilizing their upper limit to do things until that instance of the bigger weight.
I agree 100%
Ozy hasnt ever failed to block an attack out of probably a dozen. The bullet feat just gives a ceiling to what he can do and not really a contradiction. I can see if he got hit a few times which a punch or kick, but that was never the case.
It's definitely inconsistent of Cap to have strength in the tons, yet every time he fights a train human he fails to ko (or kill) them in one blow.
Although we can speculate that he holds back (which is not introduced by the writer), that would mean it is in his character not to against a human.
Originally posted by Jmanghan
Using the best feat when it isn't consistent is an outlier.
Saying cap ripping Ozy in half when it isn't consistent with all his showings against trained humans is a bad policy.
Ozy has multiple superhuman feats that are consistent.
Originally posted by h1a8
No. When he kicked Rorschach off the ground some 20-30 feet.
When he leaped 30ft through the air.
When he picked up a 200+lb person with ease and threw him at least 15ft through and beyond skyscraper glass window (which is very strong).
... Buddy you are exaggerating your ass off. He never did either of those things, 5 feet if that. 10 feet in the air, if that. That's some Luke Cage shit.
Originally posted by h1a8
Because there are arguments explaining how Ozy wins. If you disagree with the arguments then by all means, rebutt them.
I already have a year or two ago in this very thread. You do realize that you are the only one arguing for Ozymandias right? He cant beat Captain America. There is no way he can win. Cap is just too much for him to handle.
Originally posted by Jmanghan
... Buddy you are exaggerating your ass off. He never did either of those things, 5 feet if that. 10 feet in the air, if that. That's some Luke Cage shit.
Ozy literally kicked Rorschach about 15-20 feet from the ground. Rorschach would have went further if he didn't hit the wall to slow his momentum.
I just noticed a durability feat from Ozy. He took several haymakers from Niteowl (he allowed it) without being affected in the slightest. After a few more you see a slight abrasion on his upper check and lip.
Also he saw Niteowl come at him in super slow motion (allowed him to tackle him).
Originally posted by tkitna
I already have a year or two ago in this very thread. You do realize that you are the only one arguing for Ozymandias right? He cant beat Captain America. There is no way he can win. Cap is just too much for him to handle.
But that's not an argument. Just saying someone wins without addressing other's arguments showing the opposite is not debating.
This is a debating forum. Why even post here if you hardly ever debate?
No energy to debate? Fine. Then leave it to the ones who want to debate.
H1 is a classic old school troll. Highly formulaic, but effective (in a sense).
Essentially, it is simply:
Step 1: Bait
1) Say something stupid/controversial/easily disprovable.
2) Act absolutely certain and smug about it.
Step 2: The Hook
1) Keep jumping from one bizarre/ludicrous claim to another, dismissing facts and logic along the way. This is to frustrate the mark and keep them posting. Keep some claims have a tiny level of logic to make act seem sincere.
2) Throw in a few insults to intelligence (whether direct or indirect) along the way (spaced sparingly to avoid getting mod attention) or just keep making claims more and more atrocious to keep mark emotionally invested.
Step 3: The Troll
1) Have the mark expend a lot of time/energy disproving something stupid/meaningless.
Can’t really hate h1, tbh, tho. He generates much needed traffic in these forums and people seem aware of his trolling but engage him anyway because they are bored.
Personally, I just keep him on /ignore as he is not worth my time. Until of course he mans up and accepts my BZ challenges.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
H1 is a classic old school troll. Highly formulaic, but effective (in a sense).Essentially, it is simply:
Step 1: Bait
1) Say something stupid/controversial/easily disprovable.
2) Act absolutely certain and smug about it.Step 2: The Hook
1) Keep jumping from one bizarre/ludicrous claim to another, dismissing facts and logic along the way. This is to frustrate the mark and keep them posting. Keep some claims have a tiny level of logic to make act seem sincere.
2) Throw in a few insults to intelligence (whether direct or indirect) along the way (spaced sparingly to avoid getting mod attention) or just keep making claims more and more atrocious to keep mark emotionally invested.Step 3: The Troll
1) Have the mark expend a lot of time/energy disproving something stupid/meaningless.Can’t really hate h1, tbh, tho. He generates much needed traffic in these forums and people seem aware of his trolling but engage him anyway because they are bored.
Personally, I just keep him on /ignore as he is not worth my time. Until of course he mans up and accepts my BZ challenges.
Which makes his most recent reply to tkitna even more mindboggling:
Originally posted by h1a8
This is a debating forum. Why even post here if you hardly ever debate?No energy to debate? Fine. Then leave it to the ones who want to debate.
I mean think about all his dodging antics regarding BZs and stuff, and then he has the audacity to try and act as if he has authority to tell other people to leave a thread based on their debating style and frequency.
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Which makes his most recent reply to tkitna even more mindboggling:I mean think about all his dodging antics regarding BZs and stuff, and then he has the audacity to try and act as if he has authority to tell other people to leave a thread based on their debating style and frequency.
Debating style?
There is debating and not debating.
Tkitna is not debating at all.
Think about what a debate is.
BZ is based off someone else's opinion.
There is no objective truth.