Originally posted by Nibedicus
Funny how he's now manufactured an argument I never made (where my actual stances are actually available if he just read my previous replies properly) so he can have something to argue against.hmm
H1 logic meltdown?
Based on what I read, your stance is that there is a level of correlation, but just not to the extreme degree H1 is implying. Is that the crux of it?
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Based on what I read, your stance is that there is a level of correlation, but just not to the extreme degree H1 is implying. Is that the crux of it?
Pretty much.
Use average "feats" to determine overall average durability. Where no examples of durability is available.
Not just the top "feats".
It WAS in one of my replies to him, after all. Don't know where this BS argument he is trying to push on me came from.
Originally posted by FrothByte
I can get kicked in the head and not get killed. Knocked down, possibley knocked out, but if I was kicked in the throat with the same force I'd be dead. Same applies here.Nib already posted a feat of Cap kicking Crossbones a further distance than Ozy kicked Rorsch, showing that Cap has striking feats more impressive than Rosch has tanked.
Besides if he was really as durable as you say, why'd he get beat up by a bunch of cops hmmm?
False again, nothing like that was shown at all. RO hit a damn concrete pillar, thus negating how far he traveled. You can't say one was further than the other, when one hit a damn pillar to stop his momentum. Let's get the facts straight here on what happened.
Further, no, you're not more likely to be killed from a throat punch. People have there throat compromised and have still lived thanks to emergency treatment. I'd argue, a kick that would send you flying, while you're on the ground, would kill you. That wouldn't KO you or anything like that... it would straight kill you or put you in a coma. So I'm not following this logic about how RO can take a head kick just fine, but a throat punch, oh yeah... that would kill him. WUT???
Originally posted by KuRuPT Thanosi
False again, nothing like that was shown at all. RO hit a damn concrete pillar, thus negating how far he traveled. You can't say one was further than the other, when one hit a damn pillar to stop his momentum. Let's get the facts straight here on what happened.Further, no, you're not more likely to be killed from a throat punch. People have there throat compromised and have still lived thanks to emergency treatment. I'd argue, a kick that would send you flying, while you're on the ground, would kill you. That wouldn't KO you or anything like that... it would straight kill you or put you in a coma. So I'm not following this logic about how RO can take a head kick just fine, but a throat punch, oh yeah... that would kill him. WUT???
Is there any emergency treatment here in MvF matches? No? Then don't bring that up please. A full strength kick to the throat can kill a lot easier than a full strength kick to the skull.
Neck muscles can be exercised, and there are a number of exercises done in both boxing and wrestling to strengthen the neck in order to avoid getting knocked out easily. There is not a single exercise I know of that can specifically strengthen your throat against attacks.
There is also the fact that the skull is made of very thick bone whereas the throat has no such protection. This is flat out common sense. Do you prefer to get punched in the forehead or punched in the throat hmm?
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Pretty much.Use average "feats" to determine overall average durability. Where no examples of durability is available.
Not just the top "feats".
It WAS in one of my replies to him, after all. Don't know where this BS argument he is trying to push on me came from.
False! You are sugarcoating your true argument (with a slight scaling) so that your argument doesn't look completely dumb.
You basically said that Cap can kill Rorschach with a throat punch despite Rorschach having a feat showing his skin, veins, muscles, joints, and nerves resisting many tons of force WITHOUT DAMAGE. If a bullet does absolutely NO DAMAGE to someone's face then how is it reasonable to assume that the bullet can crush their throat?
In other words, the scaling you are implying is nonexistent. So the term "scale somewhat" is just a cover up.
WITHOUT DAMAGE means that it would take at least several orders of magnitude just to kill Rorschach with a single blow.
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Based on what I read, your stance is that there is a level of correlation, but just not to the extreme degree H1 is implying. Is that the crux of it?
I didn't even give an extreme argument at all. My argument is that the throat durability should naturally scale with (skin, muscle, tissues, nerves, veins, and joint durability).
For example, if all those parts I named are 1000x as durable as a normal human's then the throat should be CLOSE to 1000x as durable as a normal human's too. There is nothing extreme about my argument.
Nib's argument is actually extreme. He is saying that if those parts are 1000x more durable then we can only give the throat a few times more durable than a human's (since it scales only somewhat). But that's dumb.
Otherwise, a strong human can kill Thor or Hulk with a throat punch since the scaling would be only a little. If a character's tissues and muscles and skin and nerves and veins where shown to be 1000x more durable than a human's then is it reasonable to assume that their throat is about 1000x more durable too?
Anywhere close to 1000x times is reasonable (900x is reasonable but 5 times is not reasonable).
Originally posted by h1a8
False! You are sugarcoating your true argument (with a slight scaling) so that your argument doesn't look completely dumb.You basically said that Cap can kill Rorschach with a throat punch despite Rorschach having a feat showing his skin, veins, muscles, joints, and nerves resisting many tons of force WITHOUT DAMAGE. If a bullet does absolutely NO DAMAGE to someone's face then how is it reasonable to assume that the bullet can crush their throat?
In other words, the scaling you are implying is nonexistent. So the term "scale somewhat" is just a cover up.
WITHOUT DAMAGE means that it would take at least several orders of magnitude just to kill Rorschach with a single blow.
If what you say about his durability is true, then please explain to me why he had numerous bruises on his face from getting hit by police batons?
Originally posted by FrothByte
If what you say about his durability is true, then please explain to me why he had numerous bruises on his face from getting hit by police batons?
Because those were inconsistent showings. Remember character's durability, strength, speed, etc. fluctuate from scene to scene. I'm using the most current version of Rorschach. Why would I purposely use Rorshach lowest showings against Cap's highest showings. That's not fair.
No one here has a problem using Cap's highest showings.
Cap breaking submarine glass, cap kicking someone many feet away, etc.
Originally posted by h1a8
False! You are sugarcoating your true argument (with a slight scaling) so that your argument doesn't look completely dumb.You basically said that Cap can kill Rorschach with a throat punch despite Rorschach having a feat showing his skin, veins, muscles, joints, and nerves resisting many tons of force WITHOUT DAMAGE. If a bullet does absolutely NO DAMAGE to someone's face then how is it reasonable to assume that the bullet can crush their throat?
In other words, the scaling you are implying is nonexistent. So the term "scale somewhat" is just a cover up.
WITHOUT DAMAGE means that it would take at least several orders of magnitude just to kill Rorschach with a single blow.
False, my @$$.
Maybe you should read my first reply when you requested what my opinion was. Look it up:
Originally posted by h1a8
I didn't say exact scaling but close scaling. So you agree that it should scale somewhat? But by how much is debatable?If throat durability doesn't scale close to skin, muscle, vein, and nerve durability then Ozy can literally kill Thor, Cap, WS, Hulk, etc. with a throat punch since SOME scaling is not enough. Do you agree?
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Not scaling but a "range" based on character overall average showings across the board.We don't use top "feats".
I just repeated what I already said pages ago. Pls read what ppl post before accusing ppl of covering shit up to avoid making yourself look foolish.
As for the rest of your argument, yes, establishing a character's durability range from average showings is the best way to determine how tough the rest of the body is.
The thrachea isn't bone, muscle, nerve, or skin. It is a membrane protected by rigid (but weak) cartilage.
Cap is strong enough to crush/break metal with his bare hands (Ultron bots). If you think RO has a harder than metal throat, you are delusional.
So yes, I do still believe Cap can kill Rorshach with a single throat strike.
But enough talk. I'm throwing down the gauntlet.
Battlezone me.
Cap vs Rorshach's throat: Can Captain America crush it in one blow?
Put up or shut up.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
False, my @$$.Maybe you should read my first reply when you requested what my opinion was. Look it up:
I just repeated what I already said. Pls read what ppl post before accusing ppl of covering shit up to avoid making yourself look foolish.
As for the rest of your argument, yes, establishing a character's durability range from average showings is the best way to determine how tough the rest of the body is.
The thrachea isn't bone, muscle, nerve, or skin. It is a membrane protected by rigid (but weak) cartilage.
Cap is strong enough to crush/break metal with his bare hands (Ultron bots). If you think RO has a harder than metal throat, you are delusional.
So yes, I do still believe Cap can kill Rorshach with a single throat strike.
But enough talk. I'm throwing down the gauntlet.
Battlezone me.
Cap vs Rorshach's throat: Can Captain America crush it in one blow?
Put up or shut up.
So your are changing your original argument to not using top showings but only average ones?
The trachea material is irrelevant. The argument is whether its durability should scale exactly as the other parts scale. Otherwise, we would still have the silly case of human's killing Thor and Hulk with throat punches.
Ultron bots are fodder. Bullets were damaging them and Clint stabbed right through one. Plus we have the inverse ninja law that lowers the showings as well.
A battlezone would be useless since everyone would ignore the Rorschach feat and assume he has average human durability while using Cap's tops feats. So it would be a no brainer. Rorschach tanked tons of force with that kick WITHOUT ANY DAMAGE. How do you go from not being damaged to being killed (several orders of magnitude more) when Cap's striking feats are comparable to the strike where Rorschach occurred no damage?
Did you know that if you use a character's low showings against another character's high showings then you can prove a weaker character can be a more powerful character several levels above them?
I could prove the Thing can easily beat Superman. It's called the high-low con game.
Your argument should be the Rorschach feat is PIS. That's a good and strong argument. Not this silly crap you are spouting.
Originally posted by h1a8
Because those were inconsistent showings. Remember character's durability, strength, speed, etc. fluctuate from scene to scene. I'm using the most current version of Rorschach. Why would I purposely use Rorshach lowest showings against Cap's highest showings. That's not fair.
No one here has a problem using Cap's highest showings.
Cap breaking submarine glass, cap kicking someone many feet away, etc.
So using that logic, would you then say that Ozy has zero chance of knocking out Black Widow because she survived a swat from Hulk without injury?
Originally posted by FrothByte
So using that logic, would you then say that Ozy has zero chance of knocking out Black Widow because she survived a swat from Hulk without injury?
We don't know how hard Hulk swatted her unless we calculate her distance of being swatted away. Can you post the scene? Which movie is it from?
Originally posted by h1a8
So your are changing your original argument to not using top showings but only average ones?The trachea material is irrelevant. The argument is whether its durability should scale exactly as the other parts scale. Otherwise, we would still have the silly case of human's killing Thor and Hulk with throat punches.
Ultron bots are fodder. Bullets were damaging them and Clint stabbed right through one. Plus we have the inverse ninja law that lowers the showings as well.
A battlezone would be useless since everyone would ignore the Rorschach feat and assume he has average human durability while using Cap's tops feats. So it would be a no brainer. Rorschach tanked tons of force with that kick WITHOUT ANY DAMAGE. How do you go from not being damaged to being killed (several orders of magnitude more) when Cap's striking feats are comparable to the strike where Rorschach occurred no damage?
Did you know that if you use a character's low showings against another character's high showings then you can prove a weaker character can be a more powerful character several levels above them?
I could prove the Thing can easily beat Superman. It's called the high-low con game.
Your argument should be the Rorschach feat is PIS. That's a good and strong argument. Not this silly crap you are spouting.
What change are you talking about?!? That has been my stance since we've started this discussion. I even provided quotes. At this point, you're just making up stances ppl didn't make.
Nice excuses. Your refusal to take me up on simple and easy BZ, where an argument can be resolved via judgement just proves that you are less confident about your stance than I am.
Check and mate.
Originally posted by h1a8
We don't know how hard Hulk swatted her unless we calculate her distance of being swatted away. Can you post the scene? Which movie is it from?
The Avengers. Just before Hulk and Thor brawl. I don't have access to youtube at the moment but you can easily search for it. It was definitely further than Rorsch flew and BW's flight was definitely halted by a bulkhead.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
What change are you talking about?!? That has been my stance since we've started this discussion. I even provided quotes. At this point, you're just making up stances ppl didn't make.Nice excuses. Your refusal to take me up on simple and easy BZ, where an argument can be resolved via judgement just proves that you are less confident about your stance than I am.
Check and mate.
I'll prove that was your stance.
The proof is in the following question.
Why ask about a mod ruling?
Obviously your stance was in CONTRADICTION to mine. All you did was sugarcoat your stance to make it look less ridiculous.
You basically changed your stance somewhat to: "for average showings then WE CAN SCALE. But for high or top showings then we can't".
But then you go back to explaining why the trachea is not related to the skin, muscle, etc. What does that have to do with "for average showings then we can scale."? If we can scale then the fact that the trachea is a different material is irrelevant. Unless your stance is what I just said all along.
That's the proof.
Originally posted by Nibedicus
Nice attempt to sidestep the BZ challenge by making shit up.😆
Originally posted by h1a8
According to the BZ, we get to use Caps highest showings against Rorshach lowest showings? Then of course Cap can kill him.
Using both of their highest showings then Cap shouldn't be able to even ko him (or maybe even damage him) with a single blow.
How bout using their more consistent showings? You know, like any sane person would do.
Originally posted by h1a8
According to the BZ, we get to use Caps highest showings against Rorshach lowest showings? Then of course Cap can kill him.
Using both of their highest showings then Cap shouldn't be able to even ko him (or maybe even damage him) with a single blow.
Accept my BZ then, you sound confident enough.