Juggernaut (Deadpool II) vs Abomination (MCU)

Originally posted by h1a8
Lifting isn't the only way to measure strength.
If doing something with extreme effort can be calculated to utilize A tons of force then that's equivalent to failing to apply A+1 tons of force with extreme effort.

Here is one example:
Distance cars were thrown.

If Smart Hulk's strength range from 20 tons to whatever tons (due to fiction inconsistency) then a being hit by him means they endured 20 to whatever tons of force.

I always use a character's average strength when using ABC logic.
For example, if Smart Hulk's average strength is 100 tons then alternative Abom withstood a 100 ton punch. But that's my take.

But guess what, Juggs's bridge punch is greater than any smart Hulk punch by far.

Too much speculation here.

The common sense approach would be to power scale. All movies included for their feats.

Now Smart Hulk might have a different strength max. That's logical In-Universe given he's smaller (I think), and Hulk's strength is usually tied to his temperment,

But he still held up a massive portion of the Avengers mansion with only one good arm.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Too much speculation here.

The common sense approach would be to power scale. All movies included for their feats.

Now Smart Hulk might have a different strength max. That's logical In-Universe given he's smaller (I think), and Hulk's strength is usually tied to his temperment,

But he still held up a massive portion of the Avengers mansion with only one good arm.

You can't scale a character off another character's highest feats, only their typical portrayals. This is because fiction strength varies from scene to scene. Otherwise anyone Gladiator has punched can survive planet busting force.

So Abom taking hits from Smart Hulk is a nice feat since I value Smart Hulk's typical strength in the range of 100-500 tons.

Also wasn't that an alternative version (it didn't happen due to the Kevin shenanigans).

Originally posted by h1a8
Chains should be tissue paper to a class 100 being. I can easily rip tissue paper after being stabbed.

Plus shit like concrete and steel was knocking Hulk out and hurting him badly.

Why don't you use this type of debating style with comics?

Originally posted by carver9
Why don't you use this type of debating style with comics?

I don't understand.

Please be specific to what you are referring to.

Originally posted by h1a8
You can't scale a character off another character's highest feats, only their typical portrayals. This is because fiction strength varies from scene to scene. Otherwise anyone Gladiator has punched can survive planet busting force.

So Abom taking hits from Smart Hulk is a nice feat since I value Smart Hulk's typical strength in the range of 100-500 tons.

Also wasn't that an alternative version (it didn't happen due to the Kevin shenanigans).

That's ludicrous logic. We go by highest feats to best quantify a character's limits. Unless of course there was some exceptional circumstance for that feat.

Power scaling of "typical portrayals" would be subjective AF.

It wasn't an alternate reality. It was 616.

The only character abilities She-Hulk asked K.E.V.I.N to change, was that nerd who injected himself with Hulk serum.

Otherwise she was changing the plot ending, not Smart Hulk or Abomination's strength.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
That's ludicrous logic. We go by highest feats to best quantify a character's limits. Unless of course there was some exceptional circumstance for that feat.

Power scaling of "typical portrayals" would be subjective AF.

It wasn't an alternate reality. It was 616.

The only character abilities She-Hulk asked K.E.V.I.N to change, was that nerd who injected himself with Hulk serum.

Otherwise she was changing the plot ending, not Smart Hulk or Abomination's strength.

We only use a character's highest showings when directly representing that character in a forum fight. However, when it comes to scaling or ABC logic, we rely on the typical portrayals of the character against whom the ABC logic is applied. Do you see the distinction?

For example, if Gladiator punches Colossus, we shouldn't automatically assume that Colossus withstood planet-busting force (Gladiator's best striking feat). This is because Gladiator's strength varies at different times. Therefore, we should use his most typical strength level when assessing how much force Colossus actually withstood.

Regarding the Hulk and Abomination, everything was undone, so that fight never happened. However, I'll still credit Abomination with the feat, so no worries there.

Originally posted by h1a8

For example, if Gladiator punches Colossus, we shouldn't automatically assume that Colossus withstood planet-busting force (Gladiator's best striking feat). This is because Gladiator's strength varies at different times. Therefore, we should use his most typical strength level when assessing how much force Colossus actually withstood.

This argument is defeating your purpose. Just because Gladiator didn't hit Colossus with planet busting force doesn't mean he couldn't.

Originally posted by h1a8
I don't understand.

Please be specific to what you are referring to.

Mention ripping steel and concrete knocking characters out when in comics, some of your characters has far worst showings.

Originally posted by carver9
Mention ripping steel and concrete knocking characters out when in comics, some of your characters has far worst showings.

Bad showings are only bad if there are contradictory good ones.
In Abom and Hulk's case there aren't any.

Originally posted by tkitna
This argument is defeating your purpose. Just because Gladiator didn't hit Colossus with planet busting force doesn't mean he couldn't.

You misunderstood. A faulty argument is that Colossus withstood planet busting force.

Originally posted by h1a8

For example, if Gladiator punches Colossus, we shouldn't automatically assume that Colossus withstood planet-busting force (Gladiator's best striking feat). This is because Gladiator's strength varies at different times. Therefore, we should use his most typical strength level when assessing how much force Colossus actually withstood.

Originally posted by h1a8
We only use a character's highest showings when directly representing that character in a forum fight. However, when it comes to scaling or ABC logic, we rely on the typical portrayals of the character against whom the ABC logic is applied. Do you see the distinction?

For example, if Gladiator punches Colossus, we shouldn't automatically assume that Colossus withstood planet-busting force (Gladiator's best striking feat). This is because Gladiator's strength varies at different times. Therefore, we should use his most typical strength level when assessing how much force Colossus actually withstood.

Regarding the Hulk and Abomination, everything was undone, so that fight never happened. However, I'll still credit Abomination with the feat, so no worries there.

Wrong the only objective way to scale is to use highest feats.

The issue you have with Gladiator and Colossus (aside from Gladiator's powers fluctuating according to his confidence), is that Gladiator may have been holding back.

But there's simply no reason to think that when scaling Abom against Hulk, given Hulk was going to kill him.

With Smart Hulk, it's possible, but he seemed to be pretty p***ed, and that would be the 2nd time Abom has gone up against Hulk. So no point in speculating otherwise except that you don't like the scaling.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Wrong the only objective way to scale is to use highest feats.

The issue you have with Gladiator and Colossus (aside from Gladiator's powers fluctuating according to his confidence), is that Gladiator may have been holding back.

But there's simply no reason to think that when scaling Abom against Hulk, given Hulk was going to kill him.

With Smart Hulk, it's possible, but he seemed to be pretty p***ed, and that would be the 2nd time Abom has gone up against Hulk. So no point in speculating otherwise except that you don't like the scaling.

It’s important to clarify that while we do consider a character's highest feats, this is only applicable when directly representing that character in a forum fight.

We do not use the highest feats of a third party to scale another character.

For example, if Character A exhibits strength ranging from 10 to 1000 tons due to fictional inconsistencies but is typically shown at 20 tons, and then strikes Character B, we can't assume Character B endured 1000 tons of force.

Moreover, characters like Gladiator (or any other similar character) are not holding back unless it is explicitly stated or shown in the narrative. Remember, these characters are fictional.

Even if the holding back theory is considered, it could undermine your argument. For instance, Hulk could have been holding back when he hit Abomination.

Yes these characters are fictional so quit trying to apply real world physics to them in every thread.

Or it's PIS, same way H1 and I argued for Black Adam using his speed.

Originally posted by tkitna
Yes these characters are fictional so quit trying to apply real world physics to them in every thread.

Which is heavier: a semi-truck vehicle or an ordinary #2 pencil? Congratulations, you've just applied real-world physics.

Any discussion about something being heavier, faster, or more durable inherently involves applying real-world physics.

So, when you list a character's feats to argue that they are stronger, faster, or more durable, you're essentially applying real-world physics.

Originally posted by h1a8
Which is heavier: a semi-truck vehicle or an ordinary #2 pencil? Congratulations, you've just applied real-world physics.

Any discussion about something being heavier, faster, or more durable inherently involves applying real-world physics.

So, when you list a character's feats to argue that they are stronger, faster, or more durable, you're essentially applying real-world physics.

How do you know a pencil isn't heavier in a fictional universe?

Abomination easily kicked Hulk (1,500+lbs) and sent him flying through buildings where he landed several city blocks away. That requires 100+ ton strength.

/science+physics

Originally posted by Robtard
Abomination easily kicked Hulk (1,500+lbs) and sent him flying through buildings where he landed several city blocks away. That requires 100+ ton strength.

/science+physics

Originally posted by tkitna
How do you know a pencil isn't heavier in a fictional universe?

You forgot the key word, "ordinary ".

Originally posted by Robtard
Abomination easily kicked Hulk (1,500+lbs) and sent him flying through buildings where he landed several city blocks away. That requires 100+ ton strength.

/science+physics

Thinking about it more. That's one hell of a feat. I always thought Hulk got kicked into the building, not completely through it. I would say that feat puts Abomination on Juggs level or above. Good catch.

Originally posted by h1a8
You forgot the key word, "ordinary ".

No I didn't. In a fictional world, physics and properties get thrown out the window. That's why its useless to try to incorporate them in an argument or debate.