Only, there are movie feats. Each of the metals in question have multiple feats of withstanding damage. We only need to compare them. This is something we have been trying to get you to do for the entire thread. Whereas you've spent the entire thread trying to think up loopholes to get around the very clearly stated rules.
Originally posted by Josh_AlexanderComcis don't count and the only reason I'd assume Morgoth is superior in the films is based off a film only reason. I see it but it's against the rules and the films go against the books all the time. Do I believe they would in this instance no but my rational has to be film related. Films are different than the books.
Well thats what am using.Is it logical to assume that MCU will go against the comics and say that Vibranium is stronger than Adamantium?
Is it logical to assume that LoTR will go against the books and say that Sauron is more powerful than Morgoth?
Do you see what am trying to point out?
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Very well now we are talking serious. Honestly i was unaware of such comment.So that means that in the case in where there are no movie feats then Debates are dead.
👆
Don't pull that nonsense. People have been telling you this over and over, across multiple threads. I told you to PM Impediment. He would have clarified things in an instant. But, instead, you chose to attack the integrity of the other posters, and accuse them of rule tampering and sabotage. If no one had made you aware of the rules, you could have played the ignorant card. But several people made it very clear.
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Don't pull that nonsense. People have been telling you this over and over, across multiple threads. I told you to PM Impediment. He would have clarified things in an instant. But, instead, you chose to attack the integrity of the other posters, and accuse them of rule tampering and sabotage. If no one had made you aware of the rules, you could have played the ignorant card. But several people made it very clear.
I did PM Impediment. But he never replied.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Only, there are movie feats. Each of the metals in question have multiple feats of withstanding damage. We only need to compare them. This is something we have been trying to get you to do for the entire thread. Whereas you've spent the entire thread trying to think up loopholes to get around the very clearly stated rules.
Okay. I used comic feats cause it made things A WHOLE EASIER in this case. But since i was unaware of Impediments words i have to follow the long road.
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Don't pull that nonsense. People have been telling you this over and over, across multiple threads. I told you to PM Impediment. He would have clarified things in an instant. But, instead, you chose to attack the integrity of the other posters, and accuse them of rule tampering and sabotage. If no one had made you aware of the rules, you could have played the ignorant card. But several people made it very clear.
Not to mention, the mvf Golden Rule ends with the words 'MOVIE FEATS ONLY!" The fact that it's in all capitals and followed by an exclamation point should have been a clue.
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
I did PM Impediment. But he never replied.
Oh, my genuine apologies then.
But seriously, there is a very good reason for the ruling. Numerous arguments have gotten bogged down in the past (sometimes for literally like 10 to 20 pages, if not more), because of people trying to either purely use character statements, offscreen events, or comics, in these debates. It can create way too many contradictions, especially when it is something as vague as a statement, because different people will interpret them differently. Or when it comes to taking things from sources outside the movies. Who judges what secondary sources take precedence over which other? A Marvel comic might say one thing on one topic, but then Kevin Feige, who is steering the MCU, might say something else with regards to how it will be in the films. You see what I mean? And I am not necessarily just talking about the topic at hand, with regards to the metals. The rules are made to be applied across the MvF board, because Imp can't keep an eye on every new thread discussion that gets made.
So, while the rule does limit us with regards to our pool of resources to pull evidence from, it also (for the most part, at least) prevents threads getting bogged down. As I said previously, there is nothing wrong at all with taking the stance that adamantium > vibranium. The only thing is that you have to actually draw feats for the material from the movies to back the claim.
Originally posted by Sable
A mistake?
Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
Oh, my genuine apologies then.But seriously, there is a very good reason for the ruling. Numerous arguments have gotten bogged down in the past (sometimes for literally like 10 to 20 pages, if not more), because of people trying to either purely use character statements, offscreen events, or comics, in these debates. It can create way too many contradictions, especially when it is something as vague as a statement, because different people will interpret them differently. Or when it comes to taking things from sources outside the movies. Who judges what secondary sources take precedence over which other? A Marvel comic might say one thing on one topic, but then Kevin Feige, who is steering the MCU, might say something else with regards to how it will be in the films. You see what I mean? And I am not necessarily just talking about the topic at hand, with regards to the metals. The rules are made to be applied across the MvF board, because Imp can't keep an eye on every new thread discussion that gets made.
So, while the rule does limit us with regards to our pool of resources to pull evidence from, it also (for the most part, at least) prevents threads getting bogged down. As I said previously, there is nothing wrong at all with taking the stance that adamantium > vibranium. The only thing is that you have to actually draw feats for the material from the movies to back the claim.
A mistake indeed. The Golden Rule isnt clear.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Because some movies have things like a novelizations, guidebooks, lore entries etc etc etc.Again, this is the movie versus forum and the Golden Rule includes the words movie Feats only. You're the only one that can't seem to add 2 + 2.
And some movies are based on comics.
The rule isnt clear. If we follow the rule strictly it wouldnt limit you from using comic material outside the movie in some cases.
Given the latest circumstances i had to recreate my points.
Adamantium vs Vibranium: Not debatable based on screen feats!!!
This is a case in where there isnt enough evidence to draw up a conclusion. There is simply no way to determine which is stronger based on screen feats.
So, the only way to determine which is stronger is to use the statements given on screen by the Characters which used the metals:
Adamantium: words by William Stryker:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M8LoVgPxuQ
Described as virtually undestructible.
Vibranium: words by Howard Stark
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0m7IP2B6JnM
Described as stronger than common steel.
Following the description, Adamantium is automatically stronger than Vibranium. Whereas Vibranium is very strong Adamantium is virtually undestructible.
Uru metal has NO MOVIE EVIDENCE therefore cant be form part of the debate.
Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
And some movies are based on comics.The rule isnt clear. If we follow the rule strictly it wouldnt limit you from using comic material outside the movie in some cases.
The rule is very clear, you'e the only one that's ever had trouble understanding it.
Yes it would, As it states "MOVIE FEATS ONLY!"