Orion vs Wonder Woman

Originally posted by Pillow Biter
I agree that in the comics, Orion edges it. I've said as much.

But I was led to believe that we don't rate fights that way here. I get the feeling that most of the people saying that Orion wins are going more by the comics than they are strictly by the board rules.

If you are arguing Orion's side, by the board rules, it should all come down to proving that (a) Orion's speed will let him get in at least one action before Diana blitzes the crap out of him and (b) that action will be an overwhelming use of the Astro Force that even Diana can't block with her bracers.

This chain of logic may be provable--the AF has some crazy feats. But if you are following the board rules, I feel your argument really needs to follow along the above lines fairly strictly.

I understand your confusion because it seems like people just randomly decide when super speed will be a factor and when it won't. Sometimes the characters will use it, and other times it's "oh but they rarely do that in comics".

I've been here for a while and it still confuses me. People might say we don't argue powersets here and they always go "This isn't CBR" and then you look around though and you see some debates that lasted hundreds of even THOUSANDS of pages and do you want to know why they go on for so long? Because they follow the "anything can happen in a comic" type of logic. That is what that kind of debating ultimately gets you. You just go round and round in circles and somehow this is more preferable? I will never understand it.

CIS is basically dictated by PIS anyway.

It's a pointless distinction in my opinion.

Originally posted by CosmicComet
CIS is basically dictated by PIS anyway.

It's a pointless distinction in my opinion.

It depends on the character though. If you have a character who, in the story, is legitimately a very unintelligent person..it's actually in character for them to not use their powers as well as they should. They aren't dumbing down a character for the sake of the plot.

So Superman isn't stupid and it makes no sense why someone who genuinely cares about people would want to give villains time to cause mass amounts of destruction by having a big epic fight with them.

I agree with you on that Surtur. I think that at the end of a battle between these two, the winner will definitely know that they had been through a tough fight. My issue is with those that think that one would stomp by dominating the other? Errors do occur that can tip the battle towards either combatant engaging, or being engaged while striking. Diana is clearly the swiftest out of the two. Orion's hot head could be used against him, because like it or not, Diana is just as calculating of a fighter as Orion is. Well, in her own style. Anyway, It's too close to tell is all that I can say.

Originally posted by Surtur
I understand your confusion because it seems like people just randomly decide when super speed will be a factor and when it won't. Sometimes the characters will use it, and other times it's "oh but they rarely do that in comics".

I've been here for a while and it still confuses me. People might say we don't argue powersets here and they always go "This isn't CBR" and then you look around though and you see some debates that lasted hundreds of even THOUSANDS of pages and do you want to know why they go on for so long? Because they follow the "anything can happen in a comic" type of logic. That is what that kind of debating ultimately gets you. You just go round and round in circles and somehow this is more preferable? I will never understand it.

I take the opposite view: I believe that this board's understanding of what they call PIS and CIS is immature. And this has led them to believe that there is no way to rate fights "by the comics" as "anything could happen". It's not really like that at all.

On the other hand, I believe that it's this board's take on rating fights that will ultimately end in circles. Applying too much realism and ignoring comic conventions will inevitably lead to asking critical questions requiring a level of detail and consistency that the comics cannot reliably provide. Take the question at hand: Orion vs. Wonder Woman. Far from making fights easier to definitively and objectively rate, and reach a conclusion, the board's rules--applied with vigor--lead to questions like: can Wonder Woman, starting at however meters away from Orion, reach him from a standing start faster than he can react at all, and if so, can she disable him before he can react? What is Wonder Woman's maximum acceleration rate in M/s? What is Orion's measured reaction time? These are fine-grain, yet critical, questions for which the text material only has inconsistent and much less-detailed data.

Still, I'm up for trying new things. And so I'm trying to play by the board's rules and see where it takes us. I've changed my mind before. So at the very least I'd like people to be playing by one set of coherent rules--but that doesn't seem to be happening.

Originally posted by Pillow Biter
I take the opposite view: I believe that this board's understanding of what they call PIS and CIS is immature. And this has led them to believe that there is no way to rate fights "by the comics" as "anything could happen". It's not really like that at all.

On the other hand, I believe that it's this board's take on rating fights that will ultimately end in circles. Applying too much realism and ignoring comic conventions will inevitably lead to asking critical questions requiring a level of detail and consistency that the comics cannot reliably provide. Take the question at hand: Orion vs. Wonder Woman. Far from making fights easier to definitively and objectively rate, and reach a conclusion, the board's rules--applied with vigor--lead to questions like: can Wonder Woman, starting at however meters away from Orion, reach him from a standing start faster than he can react at all, and if so, can she disable him before he can react? What is Wonder Woman's maximum acceleration rate in M/s? What is Orion's measured reaction time? These are fine-grain, yet critical, questions for which the text material only has inconsistent and much less-detailed data.

Still, I'm up for trying new things. And so I'm trying to play by the board's rules and see where it takes us. I've changed my mind before. So at the very least I'd like people to be playing by one set of coherent rules--but that doesn't seem to be happening.

That isn't really what the spirit of the rules, or most of the rules themselves, are about.

CIS and PIS alone are about establishing what we believe would happen in comics without the constraints of bad plotting or writing.

Originally posted by -Pr-
That isn't really what the spirit of the rules, or most of the rules themselves, are about.

CIS and PIS alone are about establishing what we believe would happen in comics without the constraints of bad plotting or writing.

Sounds more like what I would believe, though 'bad' is going to be problematic. However, the explicit nature of the 'Full Capacity' rule leads me to believe I might still part company with the board rules, even when considered in their proper spirit.

Further elucidation is always appreciated, though I'll understand if you feel this is the wrong place to have such a discussion.

Originally posted by Pillow Biter
Sounds more like what I would believe, though 'bad' is going to be problematic. However, the explicit nature of the 'Full Capacity' rule leads me to believe I might still part company with the board rules, even when considered in their proper spirit.

Further elucidation is always appreciated, though I'll understand if you feel this is the wrong place to have such a discussion.

I don't mind clarifying as long as the thread doesn't get too derailed.

My view of this board has, for a long time been "if I wrote this fight in a comic, how would I have it go down" while taking in to account the character's behaviour and personality (at least how I view them).

I was the one that wrote the example about the Juggernaut and Martian Manhunter, so I'd hope that would give you some idea of where i'm coming from.

Full capacity for me has always meant "doesn't fight stupidly" rather than "uses 100% of their power all the time".

The prime example of that is the Flash. For me, full capacity means more about him not tripping over random twigs than it does Infinite Mass Punching the face off of everything. Sure, if Flash is against someone he can't beat with speed alone, he'd break out the exotic stuff, but a lot of people seem to miss that middle stage, no matter how many times we have to remind them that these characters are characters, not powersets you get to mould to your will.

"if I wrote this fight in a comic, how would I have it go down"

If you amended that to "if a typical writer wrote this fight in a comic, how would he likely have it go down," I'd be down with that.

Applying the above maxim with a fair and objective spirit basically deals with most problems that the 'CIS' and 'PIS" concepts are supposedly needed to deal with. While I don't believe in any kind of strict averaging (certain portrayals or events are clearly more defining of a character than others), when one looks at a character one obviously takes into account the breadth of his career. If the Flash is always tripping over twigs, then maybe you have an issue. But typically these are just low-showings that posters are trying to pass off as being more typical than they really are.

So perhaps what you meant by the Full Capacity rule was basically "don't present atypical, low showings as the norm for a character?"

Basically characters aren't dumber than they are. They will not fight stupider than what they actually are. If Flash or Thor knows that the only way to win is through exotic means then they will use it.
Superman may start the fight gauging the power level of his enemy. He will turn up the juice (power mostly) if he sees he has to and the enemy can take it without dying. He will not fight stupider than what he actually is and lose the fight.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Sure, if Flash is against someone he can't beat with speed alone, he'd break out the exotic stuff, but a lot of people seem to miss that middle stage, no matter how many times we have to remind them that these characters are characters, not powersets you get to mould to your will.

The problem with Flash, is that middle ground could conceivably take place within a microsecond. The same issue occurs with those with superintelligence.

Just know, if CIS was taken completely off of KMC, the style of debating these character would change. I can get away with Hulk going WB during the onset of a fight.

He needs something to be angry about though, to get stronger? He can't just amp without anger. And there are limits to it. He doesn't go WBH just because Spidey used a yo mamma joke.

Originally posted by Pillow Biter
"if I wrote this fight in a comic, how would I have it go down"

If you amended that to "if a typical writer wrote this fight in a comic, how would he likely have it go down," I'd be down with that.

Applying the above maxim with a fair and objective spirit basically deals with most problems that the 'CIS' and 'PIS" concepts are supposedly needed to deal with. While I don't believe in any kind of strict averaging (certain portrayals or events are clearly more defining of a character than others), when one looks at a character one obviously takes into account the breadth of his career. If the Flash is always tripping over twigs, then maybe you have an issue. But typically these are just low-showings that posters are trying to pass off as being more typical than they really are.

So perhaps what you meant by the Full Capacity rule was basically "don't present atypical, low showings as the norm for a character?"

The problem for me is that a "typical writer" is a very vague idea, and in all honesty, this is us debating the characters, not "what would Grant Morrison do?". We all know what he'd do, for starters.

We already have a low showings rule. Petty people just like to ignore it for whatever reason.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
The problem with Flash, is that middle ground could conceivably take place within a microsecond. The same issue occurs with those with superintelligence.

Sure, but that's why I like to try to trust that people won't be ridiculous with their claims, only to be inevitably disappointed.

========

The problem for me is that while we do want people to be able to debate in constructive, intelligent ways, the way some people carry on, we'd have to be incredibly strict in terms of what can and can't be argued, and that just wouldn't be fair.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
He needs something to be angry about though, to get stronger? He can't just amp without anger. And there are limits to it. He doesn't go WBH just because Spidey used a yo mamma joke.

He was able to go WB plenty of times without a cause. You keep reflecting to his Sentry fight and his last battle. He was able to activate that ability on his own.

Originally posted by Pillow Biter
I take the opposite view: I believe that this board's understanding of what they call PIS and CIS is immature. And this has led them to believe that there is no way to rate fights "by the comics" as "anything could happen". It's not really like that at all.

On the other hand, I believe that it's this board's take on rating fights that will ultimately end in circles. Applying too much realism and ignoring comic conventions will inevitably lead to asking critical questions requiring a level of detail and consistency that the comics cannot reliably provide. Take the question at hand: Orion vs. Wonder Woman. Far from making fights easier to definitively and objectively rate, and reach a conclusion, the board's rules--applied with vigor--lead to questions like: can Wonder Woman, starting at however meters away from Orion, reach him from a standing start faster than he can react at all, and if so, can she disable him before he can react? What is Wonder Woman's maximum acceleration rate in M/s? What is Orion's measured reaction time? These are fine-grain, yet critical, questions for which the text material only has inconsistent and much less-detailed data.

Still, I'm up for trying new things. And so I'm trying to play by the board's rules and see where it takes us. I've changed my mind before. So at the very least I'd like people to be playing by one set of coherent rules--but that doesn't seem to be happening.

Is it any better than just "the character I want to win can only win if the other character forgets his powers so naturally..guess who is going to be forgetting their powers?!??!"

And then in another topic "Well the character I want to win has super speed so YEP speedblitz ftw!!!!".

I mean if we're just going to essentially be writing comics in these threads..shouldn't we try to get these f*ckers published?

Originally posted by carver9
He was able to go WB plenty of times without a cause. You keep reflecting to his Sentry fight and his last battle. He was able to activate that ability on his own.

Morals are still on. Don't confuse morals with strategy.

Originally posted by h1a8
He was just testing himself. He would never go WB in a fight though since he would kill. Superman would never cut loose unless he has no choice.

Morals are still on. Don't confuse morals with strategy.

Going WB is a strategy.

Originally posted by carver9
Going WB is a strategy.

Going WB is fine, just never go full retard.