Speed Rankings

Originally posted by StealthRanger
Referencing feats from different series to prove a point is a different thing than using say, EU feats for a Star Wars character (of E-616 feats for a Marvel character) in a Darth Vader vs Spiderman thread in the movie vs

Nice try, though

I should note that was written by someone fairly well known and respected here (I believe, wikis shifted location a few times so **** if I knew who originally wrote it). But yeah, dismissing shit because you don't like it isn't a valid tactic

Speaking of which, thought you were just going to sit in the corner and wait for a mod ruling, by all means do so

Lol. If you say so. I guess our intepretation of the golden rule is different. When bold letters say "MOVIE FEATS ONLY", I guess in 2006 battleboard speak, thre is some fine print ppl aren't told about. But if that floats your boat, by all means.

"Poster was popular and well respected, thus his post must be correct!!"

Uses made up fallacy to try and prove you wrong. Uses real logical fallacies.

There is a meme here somewhere...l

You understand this is my thread right? And you're the one here who can just leave if he doesn't like the OP?

Lol. If you say so. I guess our intepretation of the golden rule is different. When bold letters say "MOVIE FEATS ONLY", I guess in 2006 battleboard speak, thre is some fine print ppl aren't told about. But if that floats your boat, by all means.

I assume this was you trying to be witty, rite? But if you're admitting you can't keep up then I wholeheartedly apologize

But if I made a Dracula (Dracula Untold) vs Sebastian Shaw thread and somebody told me that Shaw can't win because Dracula can just regenerate from anything. I tell him this is a no limit fallacy and he's never regenerated from anything that Shaw can put out (not sure if this is the case but bear with me). He tells me it still doesn't matter. I ask "Could Drac regenerate from say, Goku's Kamehameha or Lina Inverse's Giga Slave" to enforce the NLF point. That's not a violation

If I used feats for Sebastian Shaw from Earth 616 on the other hand? Now that would be a violation

"Poster was popular and well respected, thus his post must be correct!!"

Uses made up fallacy to try and prove you wrong. Uses real logical fallacies.

Just noting it in the face of "raging teenager" dismissal of yours, then again, dismissal seems to be par for the course here given shit like the Final Fantasy and comic vs animu threads here

You understand this is my thread right? And you're the one here who can just leave if he doesn't like the OP?

Like I said, going by your methodology pretty much a vast majority of fiction is quantifiable because we can't apply quantifiable speed feats to everywhere else unless they perform those exact same feats in said other instances (though as I said, something of this sort happening is an extreme rare occurrence in fiction). If that's how you want to play, by all means, though that makes quantification pointless

Though if you want to work off that, be it far from me to stop you m8

But whatever, am willing to agree to disagree if you will

Originally posted by StealthRanger
I assume this was you trying to be witty, rite? But if you're admitting you can't keep up then I wholeheartedly apologize

But if I made a Dracula (Dracula Untold) vs Sebastian Shaw thread and somebody told me that Shaw can't win because Dracula can just regenerate from anything. I tell him this is a no limit fallacy and he's never regenerated from anything that Shaw can put out (not sure if this is the case but bear with me). He tells me it still doesn't matter. I ask "Could Drac regenerate from say, Goku's Kamehameha or Lina Inverse's Giga Slave" to enforce the NLF point. That's not a violation

If I used feats for Sebastian Shaw from Earth 616 on the other hand? Now that would be a violation

Just noting it in the face of "raging teenager" dismissal of yours, then again, dismissal seems to be par for the course here given shit like the Final Fantasy and comic vs animu threads here

Like I said, going by your methodology pretty much a vast majority of fiction is quantifiable because we can't apply quantifiable speed feats to everywhere else unless they perform those exact same feats in said other instances (though as I said, something of this sort happening is an extreme rare occurrence in fiction). If that's how you want to play, by all means, though that makes quantification pointless

Though if you want to work off that, be it far from me to stop you m8

Call me pedantic, but I follow rules to the letter here.

Have you read that freakin wiki? It sounds like it was written by an angry teenager. Even the logical framework was completely flawed and the methodology to try and prove his case barely goes anywhere. It's a mess of an argument and it is a sad day if ppl actually respected him. Although he might have been popular the way ppl who flame a lot could be popular, but that's it.

And you'd be right. And you'd actually be starting to get the point of this thread. Going by my methodology, plenty of characters would have their "feats" disqualified. That is why I made pains to include ONLY characters that DO have "feats" that qualify within the limited scope I presented. This isn't an end all and be all ranking of characters which includes all their "feats" and using all logical approaches and methodologies. This is a quick and easy debate using the easiest and most indisputable "feats". I figured without the need to prove every "feat" out there for admissibility, I can include several of my favorite characters and have a fun and easy debate....

But now, thanks to your butthurt, you've probably derailed this thread so badly that we've lost any and all posters who once had an interest in posting here. Well, thanks for that... SMFH.

Have you read that freakin wiki?

Yeah, several times

It sounds like it was written by an angry teenager

Right, that doesn't sound subjective or anything there

Even the logical framework was completely flawed and the methodology to try and prove his case barely goes anywhere. It's a mess of an argument and it is a sad day if ppl actually respected him

"I don't like it so I'll just dismiss it with a pseudo sense of elitism"

But now, thanks to your butthurt, you've probably derailed this thread so badly that we've lost any and all posters who once had an interest in posting here. Well, thanks for that... SMFH.

Only real debate was over Silent Master doing his age old "Superman r only peak human in combat" shite he seems to be unwilling to drop even after going back and forth on god knows how many threads

you've probably derailed this thread so badly

Oh stop playing the victim

Originally posted by StealthRanger
Yeah, several times

Right, that doesn't sound subjective or anything there

"I don't like it so I'll just dismiss it with a pseudo sense of elitism"

Only real debate was over Silent Master doing his age old "Superman r only peak human in combat" shite he seems to be unwilling to drop even after going back and forth on god knows how many threads

Oh stop playing the victim

Well, I feel bad for you if you think ppl would read that rant abd think that it has any credibility in it.

It actually is objectively similar to how a teenager writes. As anyone having beyond a high school education would know that in academic writing, gems like "wanker" and "tards" does not inspire confidence in your work. Instead it makes the writer seem juvenile.

No, I dismiss it because it is a mess, is poorly written and failed to prove his point.

Then prove him wrong in those threads instead if stinking up mine with your butthurt.

Grow up. Thanks for skipping the whole point of the thread I made even when I've paintef a clear and defined picture of it, tho. I don't even know why you're still here.

Well, I feel bad for you if you think ppl would read that rant abd think that it has any credibility in it.

No, I dismiss it because it is a mess, is poorly written and failed to prove his point.

Oh come now, don't give me that pseudo elitist shit

As anyone having beyond a high school education would know that in academic writing

>pseudo intellectualism

Oh man, this is almost as gold as Pencil would flame you over how his "physics degree" made him the superior debater over in the OBD several years ago in 2009

gems like "wanker" and "tards" does not inspire confidence in your work.

Style over substance fallacy

Originally posted by StealthRanger
Oh come now, don't give me that pseudo elitist shit

>pseudo intellectualism

Oh man, this is almost as gold as Pencil would flame you over how his "physics degree" made him the superior debater over in the OBD several years ago in 2009

L
Style over substance fallacy

I'm beginning to think you wrote that garbage and you're taking offense because I insulted your baby. 😆 insultingly name dropping irrelevant ppl as if it somehow helps your argument is actually his MO and why his rant was so poorly written.

Lol @ crying "pseudo intellectualism". You don't have to be an intellectual to know his rant went nowhere.

Except the whole reason why I questioned his use of words was to point out that it sounded like a teenager wrote it exactly because of his poor choice of words. And I'd be right. I never mentioned it to dispute the validity of his point, however.

The writer failed to prove his point. He had no "substance". And due to his poor "style", I refuse to take him at his word.

Wrong use of fallacy fail. 😆 nice try tho.

I'm beginning to think you wrote that garbage

Yeah, that was written in like, 2006 or something, well before I became involved in vs debating, but whatever helps you sleep at night I suppose

Wrong use of fallacy fail

Style over substance had two different meanings. One of them being dismissive of an argument because of the choice of wording

Besides, it's not like the OBD like many other vs wikis are maintained by their communities who do it as a recreational hobby

Except the whole reason why I questioned his use of words was to point out that it sounded like a teenager wrote it exactly because of his poor choice of words

That's pretty much what a style over substance argument is

insultingly name dropping irrelevant ppl as if it somehow helps your argument is actually his MO and why his rant was so poorly written.

Or, you know, notifying people who utlised this kind of double standards, ala Phenom and his Bridage downplaying comic characters with the "combat speed" argument (ir. Superman flying between solar systems instantly and demanding proof that he could use that in combat) while saying quantifiable speed feats could be applied to character fights in animu (Gotenks flew around the earth several times in seconds and Buu beat him, Gohan beat Buu and so on, so they'd be relativistic, and when proof would be demanded that they're going that fast in combat they'd just say "oh but they leave afterimages and speed lines so we just know they are mmmkay!" and not bothering to quantify it beyond that)

Plus, really, it is used by them the most out of any faction on the webs, if you look at any MovieCodec thread with DBZ/animu vs comics

The writer failed to prove his point

Can a character move at a certain speed? Can he percieve something moving at that speed? Can he react at that speed? If yes, then that'd constitute as combat speed (unless they'd see their punches move in slow motion to their own perceptions, which is silly)

Also

>vs debates and their wikis
>academic writing

Pencil tier debating

😖kully

Originally posted by StealthRanger

1) Yeah, that was written in like, 2006 or something, well before I became involved in vs debating, but whatever helps you sleep at night I suppose

2) Style over substance had two different meanings. One of them being dismissive of an argument because of the choice of wording

3) Besides, it's not like the OBD like many other vs wikis are maintained by their communities who do it as a recreational hobby

4) That's pretty much what a style over substance argument is

5) Or, you know, notifying people who utlised this kind of double standards, ala Phenom and his Bridage downplaying comic characters with the "combat speed" argument (ir. Superman flying between solar systems instantly and demanding proof that he could use that in combat) while saying quantifiable speed feats could be applied to character fights in animu (Gotenks flew around the earth several times in seconds and Buu beat him, Gohan beat Buu and so on, so they'd be relativistic, and when proof would be demanded that they're going that fast in combat they'd just say "oh but they leave afterimages and speed lines so we just know they are mmmkay!" and not bothering to quantify it beyond that)

6) Plus, really, it is used by them the most out of any faction on the webs, if you look at any MovieCodec thread with DBZ/animu vs comics

7) Can a character move at a certain speed? Can he percieve something moving at that speed? Can he react at that speed? If yes, then that'd constitute as combat speed (unless they'd see their punches move in slow motion to their own perceptions, which is silly)

1) I was obviously ribbing. Sorry you can't tell jokes from direct accusation in the interwebz, I guess. 😂

2) And this is the exact definition I used. Reread.

3) Irrelevant. You tried to present this rant like it was an actual fallacy. It's sad that you don't see the absolute fail in this.

4) My issue was with the effect of the method of writing on the credibility of the wiki post. And as his presentation of facts was inconclusive, I am neither convinced nor inclined go believe it. If you cannot distinguish between validity and credibility, I cannot help you.

5) The existence of double standard debating does not make you logic (or for that matter, the wiki writer's) correct and bringing it up is just fluff in an otherwise flawed logic.

6) Appeal to majority. Appeal to belief. Jee-suz. You really need to stop doing this... I mean, you know this is wrong, right? Just because everyone does it, doesn't mean it is the right method.

7) A person travelling fast and reacting while travelling fast and can see things while travelling fast DOES NOT DIRECTLY translate to the person reacting/percieving at the speed he is travelling in aka. Mach travel speed does immediately not translate to mach speed reaction time.

This example fits all your criteria:

A pilot in a supersonic jet dogfighting another pilot in a supersonic jet does not have supersonic reaction time. But is he traveling at supersonic speed? Yes. Is he percieving something moving at supersonic speed? Yes. Is he reacting to the enemy plane moving at supersonic speed? Yes.

Yet here he is, not a supersonic human.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Nobody is disputing that MoS characters can travel very fast. And I am not disputing (in this thread anyway) that they may have some sort of superspeed. Why do you think I included them in the thread in the first place?? Cuz they probably have some form of superspeed. As long as the "feats" are posted, they are more than admissible in this case.

Hey man, was just pointing out that even though he might appear slower than Faora, he is by no means slow. Fact is that he does create a sonic boom right before he jumps at the one plane, and during combat against Clark. He also dashes quickly and intercepts, grabs and slams Clark while Clark is in mid flight (which we all agree is super fast). So there is also an example of him reacting to a superhumanly fast object while fighting. Clark himself creates one or two shockwaves while the two of them duke it out as well.

We also see Faora display clear superhuman speed in combat against the humans. Don't know where people are getting the idea from that she dashed and then stops and throws a punch at human speeds. Only times she stops is very brief pauses before moving between some of her opponents. She delivers her blows at speed, while doing the blitz thing. It's just really hard to pick up because she one-shots all of them, so it's not like we see opponents each taking a flurry of superfast blows before she moves on. Pretty sure there are other visual cues in both the Smallville and final fight that shows enhanced speed. Would need to crack out my MoS DVD to check.

From a sheer rational level, it also doesn't make sense that the two Kryptonians with the least developed powers would display abilities neither Clark (who has had decades to learn about his abilites) and Zod (who was the only one other than Clark to master flight and heat vision) had, and then choose to use them against humans but not against an equal opponent.

That being said, while they do have enhanced combat speed, I have no idea how to give an accurate estimation, so still have no idea where they fall on this list. 😆

Originally posted by Nibedicus
A pilot in a supersonic jet dogfighting another pilot in a supersonic jet does not have supersonic reaction time. But is he traveling at supersonic speed? Yes. Is he percieving something moving at supersonic speed? Yes. Is he reacting to the enemy plane moving at supersonic speed? Yes.

Yet here he is, not a supersonic human. [/B]

The flaw with this example is that it doesn't consider the effect inertial frames play on perception of movement.

If two pilots are both moving at supersonic speeds, if their speed and acceleration is very similar relative to each other, they won't appear to be moving at supersonic speeds from each others point of view.

Take this example:
You and someone else are in the same model car, on an open stretch of road. You both take off at the exact same time and accelerate at the exact same speed. Now, if you used only the other car as reference as to how fast you both were moving, it would look like you are both standing still from your perspective. That's because you are both in the same inertial frame. So with your human perceptions, something rapidly accelerating appears to not be moving at all. And that has to do with your own acceleration in relation to the other object.

Now, look at this for example, from about 50 seconds into the clip:
YouTube video

He is ducking and dodging between buildings during mid flight, while accelerating. Now, because those buildings are not moving with him and are in fact static, from his perspective they would be accelerating at him at the speed he is. So him, for example, ducking and dodging between buildings, is not the same situation as two fighter pilots dueling it out.

That being said, simply throwing punches at each other while moving at the same super fast speed is NOT a definitive way to prove someone has superhuman speed, for the same reason the jet fighter example doesn't work. For example, two guys fighting on top of a fast moving train are both in the same inertial frame, so while they might both be rapidly moving while they are busy fighting, as long as they are moving at the same speed and acceleration relative to each other, the speed the train is moving will have zero effect on how fast their punches or overall fight is going. It would obviously affect things like balance, but that is not the point here. Point is you would have two people fighting while moving extremely fast, yet fighting at regular human speed.

F*** it. Basically, I just rambled a lot and didn't answer the OP question at all, in terms of ranking the speedsters.
😆

To be clear: I am only talking about hand speed.

Metro Man
Quicksilver
Agents (Smith super speed punches + casual bullet dodging)
Kal-El = The Beast
Obi Wan

Never seen True Blood and don't really remember G-Girl.

Originally posted by KingD19
This thread is about combat speed, correct? So in this context, losing to Faora is a low showing as his speed is severely lacking. Even though that wasn't the point I was making, although you think it was. In that aspect Superman is pretty low on this list, because while he can fly fast as hell, he doesn't seem to be able to fight or react at those speeds.

If he did, he'd have schooled Faora as he was stronger. He wouldn't have been plodding around fighting Nam-Ek, and he and Zod's fight would have been a lot more fast paced.

YouTube video

@ 0:02 Kal attempts (appropriately enough) a left-handed "Superman punch". He covers roughly 20 feet from a sitting position in about 1 1/2 seconds, running the entire way. His speed is not lacking at all, he just never got a clear chance to demonstrate his foot speed like Faora did.

See also: Faora's jog at 1:22. Kal is capable of virtually anything she is.

YouTube video

@ around 0:20 Kal starts making hairpin turns at 400+ mph and is able to stop on a dime shortly after. That is combat speed.

Kal is way above Obi Wan or any other Jedi on film in terms of any speed classification you can think of.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
1) Hey man, was just pointing out that even though he might appear slower than Faora, he is by no means slow. Fact is that he does create a sonic boom right before he jumps at the one plane, and during combat against Clark. He also dashes quickly and intercepts, grabs and slams Clark while Clark is in mid flight (which we all agree is super fast). So there is also an example of him reacting to a superhumanly fast object while fighting. Clark himself creates one or two shockwaves while the two of them duke it out as well.

We also see Faora display clear superhuman speed in combat against the humans. Don't know where people are getting the idea from that she dashed and then stops and throws a punch at human speeds. Only times she stops is very brief pauses before moving between some of her opponents. She delivers her blows at speed, while doing the blitz thing. It's just really hard to pick up because she one-shots all of them, so it's not like we see opponents each taking a flurry of superfast blows before she moves on. Pretty sure there are other visual cues in both the Smallville and final fight that shows enhanced speed. Would need to crack out my MoS DVD to check.

From a sheer rational level, it also doesn't make sense that the two Kryptonians with the least developed powers would display abilities neither Clark (who has had decades to learn about his abilites) and Zod (who was the only one other than Clark to master flight and heat vision) had, and then choose to use them against humans but not against an equal opponent.

That being said, while they do have enhanced combat speed, I have no idea how to give an accurate estimation, so still have no idea where they fall on this list. 😆

2) The flaw with this example is that it doesn't consider the effect inertial frames play on perception of movement.

If two pilots are both moving at supersonic speeds, if their speed and acceleration is very similar relative to each other, they won't appear to be moving at supersonic speeds from each others point of view.

Take this example:
You and someone else are in the same model car, on an open stretch of road. You both take off at the exact same time and accelerate at the exact same speed. Now, if you used only the other car as reference as to how fast you both were moving, it would look like you are both standing still from your perspective. That's because you are both in the same inertial frame. So with your human perceptions, something rapidly accelerating appears to not be moving at all. And that has to do with your own acceleration in relation to the other object.

Now, look at this for example, from about 50 seconds into the clip:
YouTube video

He is ducking and dodging between buildings during mid flight, while accelerating. Now, because those buildings are not moving with him and are in fact static, from his perspective they would be accelerating at him at the speed he is. So him, for example, ducking and dodging between buildings, is not the same situation as two fighter pilots dueling it out.

That being said, simply throwing punches at each other while moving at the same super fast speed is NOT a definitive way to prove someone has superhuman speed, for the same reason the jet fighter example doesn't work. For example, two guys fighting on top of a fast moving train are both in the same inertial frame, so while they might both be rapidly moving while they are busy fighting, as long as they are moving at the same speed and acceleration relative to each other, the speed the train is moving will have zero effect on how fast their punches or overall fight is going. It would obviously affect things like balance, but that is not the point here. Point is you would have two people fighting while moving extremely fast, yet fighting at regular human speed.

F*** it. Basically, I just rambled a lot and didn't answer the OP question at all, in terms of ranking the speedsters.
😆

1) Let me be clear: I am not disputing the MoS speed "feats" in this thread. If you have them, post them. But if you measure his superspeed based using his his flight speed, then I will argue it. As it is, you are not doing that.

Although it does make sense as they seem to be still be discovering their powers and it could be that some personalities are more disposed towards certain attributes. Zod developed flight sooner (with less time under the sun, I mean) than Kal, for example. Even thought Kal had a longer exposure to sunlight he may still be discovering some of his powers and it could be part of how his story unfolds in the sequel. From a logical and storytelling point of view, it makes sense.

That said, I'm not saying this is what is happening here, just that this is a more than plausible explanation.

2) Except that this reply has nothing to do with MoS. This reply has to do with the poor "logic" Stealth presented and the flawed "logic" presented in the fake fallacy he posted.

His false fallacy states that if one posseses travel speed, the ability to react in that speed and the ability to percieve others at that speed exists then superspeed exists. My example meets all 3 criteria.

You must understand that "being able to percieve others in that speed" when being in supersonic speed has a lot to do with reacting within the time frame allowed outside one's inertial frame (as yes, you can still percieve things moving at supersonic speed although you have a limited time to view it until it passes your field of view given it is moving in a straight line and it is big enough to be seen from X distance) and moving yourself within said inertial frame to allow for dogfighting (or outside of it if you are the one being pursued). That still fits the criteria of "percieve X while moving at Y speed" and is one of the reasons why the false "fallacy's" logic is so flawed.

I'd love to see them go to the comic vs board and argue that Thor being able to react to objects/people while flying at FTL speeds means that he has FTL reactions/combat speed.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I'd love to see them go to the comic vs board and argue that Thor being able to react to objects/people while flying at FTL speeds means that he has FTL reactions/combat speed.

Or Surfer being able to travel 1 light year within a few seconds (Infinity
Gauntlet) trying to grab stationary gauntlets at that speed and Thanos being able to react to it in the last moment means they both have over a million times light speed...

Would be fun to watch.

Actually, yeah. I dare anyone here arguing such logic to do that. If you got the guts.

Originally posted by Nibedicus
Or Surfer being able to travel 1 light year within a few seconds (Infinity
Gauntlet) trying to grab stationary gauntlets at that speed and Thanos being able to react to it in the last moment means they both have over a million times light speed...

Would be fun to watch.

Actually, yeah. I dare anyone here arguing such logic to do that. If you got the guts.

I knew they were trolling from the start; I mean their argument basically boiled down to "yeah, I know that the movie doesn't show or state that they were fighting at superspeed, but they were, because I say so". and when someone disagreed with them, they went straight to posting insults.

Originally posted by Nibedicus

"Combat speed fallacy" is a fallacy written by a an angry battleboard poster and is not really a real fallacy as logical fallacies go. Glad that you use made-up fallacies in wikis by angry teenagers as your logical standard tho. 👆

There's no logical fallacy involved. Just stupid people unable to wrap their heads around the concept that reacting while moving hundreds of times the speed of sound requires combat speed on par with that. It's less a failure of logic and more outright denial.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I knew they were trolling from the start; I mean their argument basically boiled down to "yeah, I know that the movie doesn't show or state that they were fighting at superspeed, but they were, because I say so". and when someone disagreed with them, they went straight to posting insults.

You've done the same thing when arguing with dadudemon.

Don't be a hypocrite. 👆

I don't feel the need to argue with people who can't grasp the idea that catching or reacting to people moving far in excess the speed of sound have reaction-times on par.

edit: Disregard that first part, I think I might have confused you with someone else.

Originally posted by NemeBro
This is actually true.

There's no logical fallacy involved. Just stupid people unable to wrap their heads around the concept that reacting while moving hundreds of times the speed of sound requires combat speed on par with that. It's less a failure of logic and more outright denial.

You know what, define what you mean by "on par" with regards to speed vs combat speed perception as I'm starting to feel that a lot of the argument here has a lot more to do with semantics than it does logic.