Originally posted by FrothByte
Seems you need to be reminded of the mvf golden rule:So I ask again, does WW have any feat where she speedblitzed a skilled opponent, making them look like a statue, then chopped a limb off?
She can perceive bullets in slow motion. This is a movie feat.
She can move fast enough to block blocks from close range. This is a movie feat.
She has used the sword in slicing actions. This is a movie feat.
Therefore, WW perceives Thanos as a statue and gets to hacking.
Originally posted by h1a8
She can perceive bullets in slow motion. This is a movie feat.
She can move fast enough to block blocks from close range. This is a movie feat.
She has used the sword in slicing actions. This is a movie feat.Therefore, WW perceives Thanos as a statue and gets to hacking.
Uhm... ok? Nothing you said there shows her hacking off a limb from a skilled fighter while making them look like statues. Do you understand english?
WW never perceived Luddendorf as a statue or hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
WW never perceived Ares as a statue and hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
WW never perceived Steppenwolf as a statue and hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
The only feat where she actually chops off a limb is against DD and she certainly didn't move fast enough to make him look like a statue.
So again. where is your movie feat/clip that shows her chopping off limbs from a skilled fighter and making them look like statues?
Originally posted by FrothByte
Uhm... ok? Nothing you said there shows her hacking off a limb from a skilled fighter while making them look like statues. Do you understand english?WW never perceived Luddendorf as a statue or hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
WW never perceived Ares as a statue and hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.
WW never perceived Steppenwolf as a statue and hacked off his limbs. This is a movie feat.The only feat where she actually chops off a limb is against DD and she certainly didn't move fast enough to make him look like a statue.
So again. where is your movie feat/clip that shows her chopping off limbs from a skilled fighter and making them look like statues?
This is a forum fight. Characters fight to the best of their ability.
A character having superspeed and perception in one scene but not in another doesn't take away that they will use superspeed and perception in the forum fight.
It's called PIS. WW didn't use speed (that she has) for the sake of the plot. It's stupid since it doesn't make sense. Therefore, it is called PLOT INDUCED STUPIDITY.
Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE to use her speed and perception ability in this fight.
Is that what you are claiming?
Originally posted by h1a8
This is a forum fight. Characters fight to the best of their ability.
A character having superspeed and perception in one scene but not in another doesn't take away that they will use superspeed and perception in the forum fight.It's called PIS. WW didn't use speed (that she has) for the sake of the plot. It's stupid since it doesn't make sense. Therefore, it is called PLOT INDUCED STUPIDITY.
Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE to use her speed and perception ability in this fight.
Is that what you are claiming?
I'm claiming that you yourself asked for specific clips to show a character being able to do something on screen, regardless of whether or not they're capable of doing so or not (ie. Cap being able to tackle someone then proceed with ground and pound).
Here's what you told Silent in the other thread:
Originally posted by h1a8
Sure go ahead and list 2 times Cap tackled someone, got them to the ground, and fought them on the ground.
Now I'm not as unreasonable as you, I don't need you to post 2 instances, I just need you to post one instance where WW used her superspeed to make a skilled opponent look like a statue then chop one of their limbs off. Notice I'm not even asking proof that she beheads someone as you earlier claimed.
Couple of things
1) You're leaving out the most important part of a fourm fight, we argue in-character.
2) You're breaking your own rules again, if the Cap side had to provide feats where Cap uses specific tactics in a certain order or it doesn't count. then you have to do the same for WW.
So, go ahead and post examples of WW cutting someone's head/limbs off at superspeed.
Cutting off DD arm was PIS tbh. It was done with a regular sword as well. There only reason it happened was to show DD's regeneration powers. That's it.
Thanos was only ever cut by a magical axe that was forged in a star. Wonder woman doesn't have that.
We see strong characters slice at Thanos with knives to no effect, like Drax trying to cut Thanos's leg on Titan. Also Nebula's sword had no effect on cutting Thanos as well. Both using space swords not just a regular Earth sword like WW has.
Just because Wonder woman cut Doomsday in a PIS showing does not mean she will do the same to Thanos. Nothing other than a magical axe was able to cut him. Drawing a drop of blood on Thanos by Iron Man with his most advanced suit, giving it all he's got, is not the same as cutting off a limb or stabbing him.
Originally posted by FrothByte
I'm claiming that you yourself asked for specific clips to show a character being able to do something on screen, regardless of whether or not they're capable of doing so or not (ie. Cap being able to tackle someone then proceed with ground and pound).Here's what you told Silent in the other thread:
Now I'm not as unreasonable as you, I don't need you to post 2 instances, I just need you to post one instance where WW used her superspeed to make a [b]skilled
opponent look like a statue then chop one of their limbs off. Notice I'm not even asking proof that she beheads someone as you earlier claimed. [/B]
Silent claimed that Cap did it multiple times (at least 2). I told him to go ahead and list the 2. I didn't need 2 as 1 is enough. If I needed 2 then why did I accept that Cap has the propensity to do it with just the Batroc showing?
A character can choose not to tackle someone to the ground and it not be PIS.
A character choosing to not use their speed when they are trying to win is PIS.
This is the main difference. Your logic fails.
Originally posted by Inhuman
Cutting off DD arm was PIS tbh. It was done with a regular sword as well. There only reason it happened was to show DD's regeneration powers. That's it.Thanos was only ever cut by a magical axe that was forged in a star. Wonder woman doesn't have that.
We see strong characters slice at Thanos with knives to no effect, like Drax trying to cut Thanos's leg on Titan. Also Nebula's sword had no effect on cutting Thanos as well. Both using space swords not just a regular Earth sword like WW has.Just because Wonder woman cut Doomsday in a PIS showing does not mean she will do the same to Thanos. Nothing other than a magical axe was able to cut him. Drawing a drop of blood on Thanos by Iron Man with his most advanced suit, giving it all he's got, is not the same as cutting off a limb or stabbing him.
It wasn't done with a regular sword. It sliced a huge ass multi-ton boulder in half with ease after being thrown with the strength of Superman without being damaged in the least. It glowed from magic right afterward. Now explain what regular sword can do that?
According to many, you can't assign a special attribute to a character without proof. In other words, some will argue that Thanos needs cut resistant feats to show that he is more cut resistant than DD because they believe that blunt force durability is not correlated to cut force durability.
Originally posted by h1a8
It seems Silent is PMing you at the very least. You two are in collaboration. Interesting!Silent claimed that Cap did it multiple times (at least 2). I told him to go ahead and list the 2. I didn't need 2 as 1 is enough. If I needed 2 then why did I accept that Cap has the propensity to do it with just the Batroc showing?
A character can choose not to tackle someone to the ground and it not be PIS.
A character choosing to not use their speed when they are trying to win is PIS.
This is the main difference. Your logic fails.
You're deflecting, post an examples of WW cutting someone's head/limbs off at superspeed, like you're claiming.
Originally posted by Silent Master
You're deflecting, post an examples of WW cutting someone's head/limbs off at superspeed, like you're claiming.
You always deflect. Double standards?
Originally posted by Silent Master
Couple of things1) You're leaving out the most important part of a fourm fight, we argue in-character.
2) You're breaking your own rules again, if the Cap side had to provide feats where Cap uses specific tactics in a certain order or it doesn't count. then you have to do the same for WW.So, go ahead and post examples of WW cutting someone's head/limbs off at superspeed.
1) Basically you are claiming that WW is so stupid that she will purposely not use her speed and perceptions to try to win in a forum fight?
2) Cap had to show it because it is NOT PIS to choose to not tackle someone.
WW doesn't have to because it is PIS to choose not to use speed and perceptions to try to win.
This is the big difference.
Originally posted by Silent Master
That was another attempted deflection.1) I'm going by forum rules, that is. we argue in character.
2) Using that logic, WW has to show it because it's not PIS to choose not to cut someone's head off at superspeed.So, go ahead and post the feats required by your stated rules.
1. My post proved it was in character for her to do. Unless you want to argue that she is that stupid.
2. Correct. She can do many different things besides attempt to cut his his head. Either way she wins.
Originally posted by h1a8
It seems Silent is PMing you at the very least. You two are in collaboration. Interesting!Silent claimed that Cap did it multiple times (at least 2). I told him to go ahead and list the 2. I didn't need 2 as 1 is enough. If I needed 2 then why did I accept that Cap has the propensity to do it with just the Batroc showing?
A character can choose not to tackle someone to the ground and it not be PIS.
A character choosing to not use their speed when they are trying to win is PIS.
This is the main difference. Your logic fails.
What, you don't think I'm capable of browsing through your old posts on my own?
Doesn't matter if you asked him for 1 or 2 or 10 examples, fact is you asked him for a specific example of him doing exactly what you were asking. Didn't matter that he's proven Cap is capable of grappling and fighting on the ground. You want specific examples of Cap doing things in a certain order (i.e. tackling someone and ground and pounding them).
I'm asking you to do the same and provide a specific example of WW doing exactly what you claimed: Speed blitzing a skilled opponent and chopping a limb off.
I don't care about your logic (no one does to be honest) because it's nothing but your opinion. Now back it up with some actual feats.
Originally posted by FrothByteplease address my post. You are basically doing Silent trolling tricks. Ignore the post and continue to restate your post.
What, you don't think I'm capable of browsing through your old posts on my own?Doesn't matter if you asked him for 1 or 2 or 10 examples, fact is you asked him for a specific example of him doing exactly what you were asking. Didn't matter that he's proven Cap is capable of grappling and fighting on the ground. You want specific examples of Cap doing things in a certain order (i.e. tackling someone and ground and pounding them).
I'm asking you to do the same and provide a specific example of WW doing exactly what you claimed: Speed blitzing a skilled opponent and chopping a limb off.
I don't care about your logic (no one does to be honest) because it's nothing but your opinion. Now back it up with some actual feats.
Originally posted by h1a8
please address my post. You are basically doing Silent trolling tricks. Ignore the post and continue to restate your post.
Why should I address your post when you're not even addressing my post? All I'm asking is for you to provide proof that WW speedblitzes a skilled opponent and chops a limb off like you claim. It's pretty straightforward. If you can't provide that proof then just admit that you can't prove it.
Now I ask again: Do you or do you not have a feat where WW speedblitzed a skilled opponent and chopped their limbs off?
It's a yes or no question.
Originally posted by FrothByte
Why should I address your post when you're not even addressing my post? All I'm asking is for you to provide proof that WW speedblitzes a skilled opponent and chops a limb off like you claim. It's pretty straightforward. If you can't provide that proof then just admit that you can't prove it.Now I ask again: Do you or do you not have a feat where WW speedblitzed a skilled opponent and chopped their limbs off?
It's a yes or no question.
Originally posted by h1a8Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE to use her speed and perception ability in this fight.
Is that what you are claiming?
I addressed your post. My last post explains everything. It's up to you to rebut it now. Failure results in a concession. I have nothing new to say.
WW still wins in spite.
Originally posted by h1a8
I addressed your post. My last post explains everything. It's up to you to rebut it now. Failure results in a concession. I have nothing new to say.WW still wins in spite.
So when I ask a question that goes "Do you have a clip that proves..."
You think you're addressing this by answering with something like "Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE..."
Man, your English comprehension really sucks huh? It's a yes or no question dude. The only reason why you'd keep trying to avoid that is because you know you're wrong and will be proven wrong once you answer.
Because before you can insist that WW can choose to do something, you first need to prove that she can actually do what you're saying. So far you haven't proved that. Once you've actually proved it then you can ask me about your logic. Without proof, your supposed "logic" is nothing more than made up stuff.
Originally posted by h1a8
1. My post proved it was in character for her to do. Unless you want to argue that she is that stupid.2. Correct. She can do many different things besides attempt to cut his his head. Either way she wins.
1) No, it didn't and I explained why.
2) None of which you've provided feats for.
So, if you're done dodging. please provide feats that show WW using the tactics you're claiming.
Originally posted by FrothByte
So when I ask a question that goes "Do you have a clip that proves..."You think you're addressing this by answering with something like "Unless you are claiming that WW will NOT CHOOSE..."
Man, your English comprehension really sucks huh? It's a yes or no question dude. The only reason why you'd keep trying to avoid that is because you know you're wrong and will be proven wrong once you answer.
Because before you can insist that WW can choose to do something, you first need to prove that she can actually do what you're saying. So far you haven't proved that. Once you've actually proved it then you can ask me about your logic. Without proof, your supposed "logic" is nothing more than made up stuff.
1. You are asking rhetorical questions which are loaded. For example, if I answer "There is no scene that shows it." Then you would say that well WW wouldn't do it. This is trolling. Just simply state there is no scene where WW does x action and therefore she wouldn't do it in a forum fight. Argue directly and stop asking loaded rhetorical questions.
2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character. We use common sense. It's up to the debater to articulate it being in character when another debater is claiming it isn't.
In summary, "a character must show the exact action as the only acceptable proof of in character" is faulty and incorrect.
Originally posted by h1a8
2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character.
So, you demanding proof that Nib's stated tactics were in-character for Cap was just you trolling?
Originally posted by h1a8In summary, "a character must show the exact action as the only acceptable proof of in character" is faulty and incorrect.
That was your standard, why the change of heart?
Originally posted by h1a8
1. You are asking rhetorical questions which are loaded. For example, if I answer "There is no scene that shows it." Then you would say that well WW wouldn't do it. This is trolling. Just simply state there is no scene where WW does x action and therefore she wouldn't do it in a forum fight. Argue directly and stop asking loaded rhetorical questions.
Thank you for admitting that there is actually no proof that WW can do the things you claim she will do.
Originally posted by h1a8
2. We don't need to see a character doing that particular action to prove its in their character. We use common sense. It's up to the debater to articulate it being in character when another debater is claiming it isn't.In summary, "a character must show the exact action as the only acceptable proof of in character" is faulty and incorrect.
Thank you for admitting that you were faulty and incorrect by insisting for exact clips of Cap doing a very basic h2h maneuver.
See, that wasn't so hard was it? Now we can move on to other discussions.