Originally posted by FrothByte
3. Loki handled Cap way better than Spiderman, which should put him comfortably stronger than Spidey.
Could be explained by Cap's strength creep.
A fight is also determined by skill, speed, psychology, experience and many other factors.
If Loki's only real strength feats are derived from A>B>C logic, then its not a very strong case given how many appearances he has made.
Originally posted by FrothByte4. Thor holds back against Loki but the fact that he needs to take Loki seriously in order to beat him proves that Loki is pretty close to his strength.
Thor taking him seriously does not imply Loki is a peer in strength. His main threat is his weapons and magic. He is also very durable.
An extreme example to illustrate - Colossus vs Magneto.
Originally posted by FrothByte5. Loki holds back against Thor too, as there were multiple instances where he could have landed killing shots against Thor but usually just stabs him in the side.
A fair statement, but no real argument for physical strength.
Originally posted by Kovert Potato
Could be explained by Cap's strength creep.A fight is also determined by skill, speed, psychology, experience and many other factors.
If Loki's only real strength feats are derived from A>B>C logic, then its not a very strong case given how many appearances he has made.
Yeah, not saying Loki isn't stronger (I wouldn't be surprised if he is), but there were other factors in that fight, like Pete being a complete noob on his very first outing against other supers (and clearly both nervous and overly excited about it) whereas Loki is somewhere between 1000-1500 years old.
Also, Spider-Man also arguably got stronger since then, considering he went from straining to hold up a 27-odd ton jet bridge in Civil War to supporting a couple hundred ton collapsing bell tower for several seconds in Far From Home. Which would make sense, considering he was still like 15 canonically in his first appearance, so would still be going through puberty and such anyway, never mind his developing superpowers.
The writers haven't always managed to portray Loki consistently though. Because based on a number of his other showings (like surviving the Hulk ragdolling, for example), Thanos should not have been able to casually necksnap him with one hand like he did. That's a low-end outlier IMO. For example, Thanos had Spider-Man by the throat and was choking him during IW, but couldn't just crush his neck. Nor any other characters Loki has been depicted as either a relative peer or superior too. But the Russo bros just decided to fridge him to give Thor some extra motivation. And that's not even getting into the inconsistent use of his sorcery. Because he has displayed abilities once or twice in certain situations, but then have him not use them in a bunch of others where they'd be really useful (like rendering himself invisible, the weird mental projection he did to control Selvig, the TK burst in his cell in TDW etc.). There tends to be a lot of PIS whenever Loki is involved, which is probably going to get worse in his solo series.
Also, unrelated to the Loki thing but generally relevant to the thread discussion, Ronan is clearly A LOT stronger than people like Drax, based on their fight. Both the fact that he could casually overpower him with one arm and actually hurt him with his hits shows that Ronan is crazy strong, considering how absurdly durable Drax is to blunt force trauma.
Originally posted by Kovert Potato
Could easily be explained by Avengers Cap retroactively benefiting from the strength creep.If I surmise KingD's meaning of the term correctly, then the concept itself is on a meta level, determined by the writer, not a natural in-movie explanation. If Endgame Cap is shown to be stronger than Avengers Cap, then that would make no sense to viewers (unless explained by more experience).
A retroactive strength creep doesn't make sense in an in-universe logic. It makes sense to us being the 4th wall and knowing that these are only movies, but it doesn't make sense as far as the characters themselves.
The simple explanation is that Cap has always had the exact same strength (which is what the ss serum should have done) but simply got better feats as the movies progressed. He doesn't have a moment like Captain Marvel or Thor where they clearly got a power boost.
Originally posted by Kovert Potato
Could be explained by Cap's strength creep.A fight is also determined by skill, speed, psychology, experience and many other factors.
If Loki's only real strength feats are derived from A>B>C logic, then its not a very strong case given how many appearances he has made.
Thor taking him seriously does not imply Loki is a peer in strength. His main threat is his weapons and magic. He is also very durable.
An extreme example to illustrate - Colossus vs Magneto.
A fair statement, but no real argument for physical strength.
I never said Loki is Thor’s peer in strength, which is why I gave Thor am 8 and Loki a 7.
Consider that I gave Kurse a 10, Thor an 8 and Loki a 7.
Thor was far less effective against Kurse than Loki was against Thor. That's why there's a 2 point difference between Kurse and Thor but only 1 point difference between Thor and Loki. Because Loki was still able to manhandle Thor better than Thor was able to manhandle Kurse.
Originally posted by Kovert Potato
What is the implication behind this statement? Can Loki put up a H2H fight against Hulk?
Yes, he can. He won't win, but he'll put up a better fight than what happened in their brief encounter. If he's allowed to use his powers, it can end up being a very frustrating fight for Hulk though I still think Hulk will win decisively in the end.
Originally posted by FrothByte
Well he was still strong enough to grab Thor by the nape of his neck and smash his face against the railing of Stark building. So while Thor is clearly stronger than Loki, it doesn't seem like Loki is too far behind.Also, Cap couldn't budge Loki at all despite landing heavy shots. In comparison, Cap was still able to move Spidey with his hits, so I think it's clear that Loki is higher than Spidey.
I guess it's possible Loki would be a 6 instead of a 7, but if I rated Spidey a 5 then I wouldn't rate Loki less than a 6 considering how they both performed against Cap. 7 still seems more reasonable.
When you put it that way, okay. It still feels wrong to have Loki only 2 points behind the Hulk, though.
^ Like I said, the scale not wide enough.
People most likely starting with 10 and picking whoever they think is at top, and then it becomes more of a ranking than a proper scale.
For example if Hulk=1000, Captain America should be 1 (or whatever low number you think is appropriate), but you can't do that on 1-10 whole number scale).
Re: Re: Re: Rank these MCU characters 1-10 Based on physical Strength
Originally posted by jaden_2.0
You've got Ronan and Drax at nearly the same when Ronan absolutely wrecked Drax with almost zero effort in GotG.
You absolutely right. Somehow I missed that scene. Ronan is a solid 6 or maybe 7 and Drax is a 4 or 5.
Thanks for the correction.
With Loki there is some contradiction. In one scene he is matching Thor in a contest of strength yet in another scene Thor is matching Hulk in a similar contest and yet in another scene Loki gets rag dolled like he is significantly weaker than Hulk.
In fiction this occurs a lot. Imo Loki matching Thor is more a lie than Loki getting rag dolled by Hulk. Therefore Loki should be about 2 points below Thor.
If Loki truly had strength near Thor's how come we never see him display it besides while fighting a holding back Thor?
Thor has a variety of strength feats to show Loki isn't anywhere near his level. And it's not like the only thing Loki did over the course of all the movies he was in was fight Thor. *If* he only showed up, did that, and was never seen again it might be one thing, but none of his other feats support that level of strength.
The likeliest explanation for that is because he isn't near Thor's level.
Putting Spidey at 3 and comparing him to Cap ignores the constant gains to strength and durability we've seen from him. He easily caught a punch from Cull Obsidian, accidentally yanked down a multi-ton construction crane, held up the bell tower, etc... He'd do better in a h2h fight against Thor than Loki at this point. Cap took advantage of his inexperience but if he tried to fight Spidey now he'd get obliterated.
Also as I've pointed out not only did Thor hold back severely when fighting his brother, Loki is a runt Frost Giant who specializes in magic. So he should be physically weaker than your run of the mill Jotun and we only ever see him be "strong" against people much weaker than him. He doesn't even have that many strength feats across all the movies.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.OlympusHulk is not a 10. Thanos and Kurse are stronger, especially Kurse.
If Hulk is a 10, Thor is a 9. Loki would be an 7, and Captain America/Spider-Man are like 3.Steve's shield casually bounces off Loki and he couldn't even budge him.
Hulk is an 8. Thor is a 7 and Loki is a 6. Spidey is a 5 and Cap is a 3.
Originally posted by Psychotron
When you put it that way, okay. It still feels wrong to have Loki only 2 points behind the Hulk, though.
The way I tried to do it is that anyone that completely gets dominated in a fight via physical display gets at least a 2 point difference. So that's why I put a 2 point difference between between Kurse and Thor, and between Ronan and Drax, and Spidey and BP (considering what he did to Bucky).
Since Loki was never completely dominated by Thor the same way those other examples showed, I wasn't comfortable giving them a 2 point difference.
My idea was that you could still give someone a fight if they were only 1 point above you even though you'd still lose. But pick a fight with someone 2 points above you or more and you'd get trashed around like a kid.
If the scale were bigger I guess I could give it more granularity. Maybe I should make Cap a 1 so I can fully use the scaling system.
Originally posted by Surtur
If Loki truly had strength near Thor's how come we never see him display it besides while fighting a holding back Thor?Thor has a variety of strength feats to show Loki isn't anywhere near his level. And it's not like the only thing Loki did over the course of all the movies he was in was fight Thor. *If* he only showed up, did that, and was never seen again it might be one thing, but none of his other feats support that level of strength.
The likeliest explanation for that is because he isn't near Thor's level.
If you're looking for specific strength feats like lifting feats and such, majority of MCU characters don't have those. BP, Ronan and Drax all have very limited strength feats but why single out Loki?
Loki has even better feats that Ronan but noone complained about me putting Ronan at the same level as Loki.