Hal v Mogo

Originally posted by abhilegend

These forums were always slanted towards high feats, don't kid yourself.

you could be right, but this type of thinking and debating makes it impossible to compare characters. how are low feats factored in? they're ignored? a non-holding back superman hit apex luthor and...knocked him back a ways. an enraged superman looked like he was going to hit dr manhattan but hit someone else and...sent him back a bit. why aren't those feats factored in? why don't they count as much as a "multiverse busting punch!1!"?

as far as odin--he has consistently been portrayed well above the average level of 'superhero'. THAT's why he's 'ranked' where he is. ss is typically shown to be well above the other heroes in marvel. that's why he's ranked where he is.

more goes into how a character is viewed than JUST FEATS

troll all you like--i don't think the basis of who these characters are has changed--at all.

Originally posted by leonidas
troll all you like--i don't think the basis of who these characters are has changed--at all.

You seem to imply some sneakiness for him with the 'that works nicely for you' when, leo, it's not a matter of working nicely or not. It's a matter of how it works.

Originally posted by leonidas
you could be right, but this type of thinking and debating makes it impossible to compare characters. how are low feats factored in? they're ignored? a non-holding back superman hit apex luthor and...knocked him back a ways. an enraged superman looked like he was going to hit dr manhattan but hit someone else and...sent him back a bit. why aren't those feats factored in? why don't they count as much as a "multiverse busting punch!1!"?

Originally posted by Galan007
But that's not the point.

In that scene there was literally zero collateral damage to Owen's apartment, despite the blast itself being powerful enough to destroy several billion entire dimensions:

So only trying to gauge the blast's potency based on the amount of collateral damage it caused would be faulty in that instance.

Here is another example...

A blast from Galactus actually harmed Thanos to an extent, despite ALL the defensive shielding of his ship being in place:

...But the blast only caused very minor collateral damage to their surroundings(a small circular crater beneath Thanos, is all.)

Yet in the very same series, Thanos himself(without the aid of his ship's shielding) outright tanked the close-range planetary destruction of a gas giant without skipping a beat:

So despite a lack of collateral damage in the first scene, we can still infer that the potency of Galactus's blast would have been =/> the explosion of the gas giant that Thanos tanked a few issues later.

tl;dr
Collateral damage is not always a reliable measuring stick when it comes to gauging the potency of energy attacks and such. Makes perfect sense that higher-end reality/energy manipulators would be able to concentrate and contain their attacks so that they still retain full potency, without causing any unwanted 'bleed-over' to their surroundings(ie. collateral damage.)

Originally posted by Galan007
I'm not discussing Perpetua's standing relative to the others. I am just helping explain why collateral damage isn't always an accurate way of approximating the power of an attack.

As the Owen/Beyonder and Galactus/Thanos scenes illustrate: a lack of collateral damage resulting from an attack doesn't automatically mean said attack wasn't immensely powerful.

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
We already settled how collateral damag should be viewed on this forum though

Lack of collateral damage is not an expression of the power of the attack.

But feats of output/damage [collateral or otherwise] is a good feat in gauging how high an attack can go.

It's weird -- you're accusing him of trolling, when you seem to be in the minority here.

You seem to imply some sneakiness for him with the 'that works nicely for you' when, leo, it's not a matter of working nicely or not. It's a matter of how it works.

yeah i wasn't really talking about abhi trolling. 😉

but i'm not sure that's really how it's supposed to work. as far as i'm aware, we still look at a wider view, and regardless of how many high feats are shown, they are still balanced out by more standard levels. like i said, i think the focus on high feats is the most noticeable change in the way the forum works. that view skews character. but i'm not above admitting maybe it's just me. i really don't think the comics themselves have changed all that much. someone mentioned a 'power creep'. i'm not convinced there has been much of one--not based on the books i've read over the last couple years. but the focus on a few feats really makes it seem like there has been this huge jump. but if that's the direction the forum is taking, not much to be done about it. /shrug

I feel like I'm having the same discussion in two threads, lol.

Suffice to say -- there's been a massive power creep [imo] that a few posters [like Pr for example of somebody who is really not on either side] have noticed as being quite blatant for some characters [Superman, Hal as the most obvious ones. I'd add the New Gods in general there like Darkseid, Orion, too]. There's a reason we go "God Hal" and shit lately -- it's because that's the way he's been portrayed for the last decade or so. Not all characters or even many have this [and certainly not everybody will agree on who has or not], but it's there, to a certain extent.

As somebody who has read everything Superman, Green Lantern and New Gods for the last 40+ years, it's very noticeable in these 3 mythos. Even somebody like Lex Luthor is now absurd -- otherwise it would be a joke to have him be a threat.

Originally posted by leonidas
you could be right, but this type of thinking and debating makes it impossible to compare characters. how are low feats factored in? they're ignored? a non-holding back superman hit apex luthor and...knocked him back a ways. an enraged superman looked like he was going to hit dr manhattan but hit someone else and...sent him back a bit. why aren't those feats factored in? why don't they count as much as a "multiverse busting punch!1!"?

They should. Apex Luthor was powered by seven forces of the multiverse and was beyond the likes of Monitor, Anti Monitor and World Forger. A normal Superman fighting evenly with him is beyond stupid.

as far as odin--he has consistently been portrayed well above the average level of 'superhero'. THAT's why he's 'ranked' where he is. ss is typically shown to be well above the other heroes in marvel. that's why he's ranked where he is.

So is Darkseid and Mordru and most of DC skyfathers. Guardians have feats that shit on Odin's feats, yet they are never given the same consideration because "galaxy level Odin". For example a Guardian overpowering SBP is never given the same consideration as Thanos fighting Odin because?

[b]more goes into how a character is viewed than JUST FEATS

Would you do the same for Darkseid and Guardians then?

troll all you like--i don't think the basis of who these characters are has changed--at all. [/B]

Oh they have. If you think Superman is the same as post crisis version, you are deluded.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Hal has been compared to a guardian now in power and guardians outright said that new gods are more powerful than them.

Not really.

Krona blasting 🤨 ?
Though I agree hal isnt that powerful on average

killing krona is what i was thinking of also.

Here's how I view/viewed it.

A confirmation bias was formed that the top tiers were essentially equal or that universes were balanced. The feats could largely be put in place to not so much convince myself but be used as a counter against others. So everything fit in fairly well for a time. Outliers here and there but everything could at least be matched up to some degree. That's not to say that I had everyone exactly equal mind you as I always had Superman above Hulk in strength, but it was what you would call a "tiering" of some sorts. I viewed/view it to what I figure the intention of writers would write in a comic and used feats to disregard the outliers/high feats. Fitting my headcanon in there with feats to make up differences.

As time went on, DC started pulling away, and pulling away badly. It didn't change my headcanon of how I view fights in my own mind as I feel the intention is still the same, but you can't in good faith actually match those feats; made worse by Marvel never advancing and even devolving if anything. It bothered me back then when I perceived "falsehoods" about feats that were misinterpreted or things that could be matched as I felt the evidence was there. Now? The evidence is grossly on the side of DC and it's more freeing because I literally don't give a shit because there's nothing to say against it for me. It would feel wrong to argue against it for me.

Both the quality and quantity of the feats increased tremendously. Arguing against it would be like arguing Thor actually had really good years this past decade... did a lot of cool stuff, him fighting Hulk could be anyone's game.

I still have my headcanon of how fights could go and that won't ever change, but now I lack evidence without constraining the other side to play in my boundaries.

This is overestimating how much I ever cared about individual battles as opposed to context, but this is how my viewpoint changed on the "feats" side of thing in cross-battles. There's nothing to get worked up about anymore because I view the evidence as being unequivocally on DC's side. Why would I care about people that are right? I agree with some things just being unmatchable.

It went from being able to check off feats from a similar level to those higher end feats being an average minimum. Things just no longer make sense to have cross-company battles for me.

It also physically pains me to hear about Comicvine, CBR, or those wiki/youtube battles desperately trying to downplay DC and play up Marvel. The shoe would probably be on the other foot if I still read comics and didn't hate both modern companies. The "feats" are the least of that problem though...

Black Lives Matter

Originally posted by One Big Mob
Here's how I view/viewed it.

A confirmation bias was formed that the top tiers were essentially equal or that universes were balanced. The feats could largely be put in place to not so much convince myself but be used as a counter against others. So everything fit in fairly well for a time. Outliers here and there but everything could at least be matched up to some degree. That's not to say that I had everyone exactly equal mind you as I always had Superman above Hulk in strength, but it was what you would call a "tiering" of some sorts. I viewed/view it to what I figure the intention of writers would write in a comic and used feats to disregard the outliers/high feats. Fitting my headcanon in there with feats to make up differences.

As time went on, DC started pulling away, and pulling away badly. It didn't change my headcanon of how I view fights in my own mind as I feel the intention is still the same, but you can't in good faith actually match those feats; made worse by Marvel never advancing and even devolving if anything. It bothered me back then when I perceived "falsehoods" about feats that were misinterpreted or things that could be matched as I felt the evidence was there. Now? The evidence is grossly on the side of DC and it's more freeing because I literally don't give a shit because there's nothing to say against it for me. It would feel wrong to argue against it for me.

Both the quality and quantity of the feats increased tremendously. Arguing against it would be like arguing Thor actually had really good years this past decade... did a lot of cool stuff, him fighting Hulk could be anyone's game.

I still have my headcanon of how fights could go and that won't ever change, but now I lack evidence without constraining the other side to play in my boundries.

This is overestimating how much I ever cared about individual battles as opposed to context, but this is how my viewpoint changed on the "feats" side of thing in cross-battles. There's nothing to get worked up about anymore because I view the evidence as being unequivocally on DC's side. Why would I care about people that are right? I agree with some things just being unmatchable.

It went from being able to check off feats from a similar level to those higher end feats being an average minimum. Things just no longer make sense to have cross-company battles for me.

It also physically pains me to hear about Comicvine, CBR, or those wiki/youtube battles desperately trying to downplay DC and play up Marvel. The shoe would probably be on the other foot if I still read comics and didn't hate both modern companies. The "feats" are the least of that problem though...

Black Lives Matter

[/forum]

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
Krona blasting 🤨 ?
Though I agree hal isnt that powerful on average

Originally posted by DeadpoolXXX
killing krona is what i was thinking of also.