Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Steppenwolf has his axe

Round 1: Thor w/ Mjolnir
Round 2: Endgame Thor with Stormbreaker
Round 3: Ragnarok Thor
Round 4: Stormbreaker Thor

Where does he stop

As long as Thor fights smart then he probably gets stopped at round 1. He definitely stops at round 3.

1

Originally posted by carthage
Steppenwolf has his axe

Round 1: Thor w/ Mjolnir
Round 2: Endgame Thor with Stormbreaker
Round 3: Ragnarok Thor
Round 4: Stormbreaker Thor

Where does he stop

Ehhh...I'd place Endgame Thor where R.Thor is, but either way, Steppenwolf loses R1.

I'd say Round 1

Yeah, round one should do it.

Steppenwolf is so underrated.

He ran off Zeus himself including Lanterns and other heroes.

The only person he was afraid of is kryptonian.

He stops at 4

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Steppenwolf is so underrated.

He ran off Zeus himself including Lanterns and other heroes.

The only person he was afraid of is kryptonian.

He stops at 4

Yeah but Zeus and those Lanterns have zero feats we can scale from. All we know is that he had a hard time beating WW who didn't seem to be using her superspeed.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Steppenwolf is so underrated.

He ran off Zeus himself including Lanterns and other heroes.

The only person he was afraid of is kryptonian.

He stops at 4

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Steppenwolf is so underrated.

He ran off Zeus himself including Lanterns and other heroes.

The only person he was afraid of is kryptonian.

He stops at 4

Do those characters have any actual on-screen feats that would make people think running them off is impressive?

Steppenwolf was SHIT, pure and simple.. he stops at 1

TO say he was shit mean to say that the entire Justice Leauge was shit and that simply isnt the case.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Do those characters have any actual on-screen feats that would make people think running them off is impressive?

Zeus has feats from WW that would count.

What on screen feats does Zeus have from WW?

Giving ares a deathblow that took him thousands of years to recover from

The guy that died from a little lightning, that's impressive why?

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
TO say he was shit mean to say that the entire Justice Leauge was shit and that simply isnt the case.


sorry broly, but steppenwolf was horrible..

I wouldnt say being a match for Wonder Woman and Aquaman combined (and clearly greater than either one of them) is bad at all. He clearly has a decent amount of strength and power.

As a character though, he really did suck.

Without Mjolnir I do think pre-ragnarok Thor would have trouble if not outright lose to Steppenwolf.

With Mjolnir though? Nah.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Without Mjolnir I do think pre-ragnarok Thor would have trouble if not outright lose to Steppenwolf.

With Mjolnir though? Nah.

I mean yeah. Take Mjolnir from Thor but leave Steppenwolf with his axe and you've just got a really strong, really tough, awesome fighter vs a really strong, really tough, shitty fighter with a big honkin' axe.

But actually I could see Thor taking the axe from him. He's far more agile and bouncy than almost any other strong man character we've seen so far.

Thor no hammer was besting the Hulk.

Stepp was smacking around Wonder Woman and Aquaman like if they were garbage, but once a character came into the picture that was an actual powerhouse , not a just a tier or two above Captain America, then Stepp became just a mere punching bag.

Thor wins hammer or not.

Originally posted by KingD19

But actually I could see Thor taking the axe from him. He's far more agile and bouncy than almost any other strong man character we've seen so far.


Yep. Too skilled, too agile, and probably just too strong as well.

Definitely too durable.

*Mera

Why not? Sea water is a great conductor of electricity

And lightning comes either directly from Thor or Mjolnir so generating it is no issue. Also he is immune to electricity.

I think round 3 and up a heavy majority goes to Thor but I dont think he steamrolls Steppenwolf by any means.

Steppenwolf loses to ALL versions of Thor

Aquaman is pretty strong and so is WW.
Step has great reflexes (catches arrows from Amazons with ease).

Plus I don't think lightning will much to anything to him.

Originally posted by h1a8
Aquaman is pretty strong and so is WW.
Step has great reflexes (catches arrows from Amazons with ease).

Plus I don't think lightning will much to anything to him.

Loki caught an arrow without looking and Thor easily blocks laser fire with his hammer. So it's not like Steppenwolf has a speed advantage. As for lightning, didn't Zeus' lightning harm him in the flashbacks?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Loki caught an arrow without looking and Thor easily blocks laser fire with his hammer. So it's not like Steppenwolf has a speed advantage. As for lightning, didn't Zeus' lightning harm him in the flashbacks? Good feat for Loki (no look) although he was further from the arrow (took more than a second to reach him).

Heat vision (not lasers) were slow and Destroyer telegraphed.

Originally posted by h1a8
Aquaman is pretty strong and so is WW.
Step has great reflexes (catches arrows from Amazons with ease).

Plus I don't think lightning will much to anything to him.

What feats does he have of resisting lightning attacks?

Originally posted by Silent Master
What feats does he have of resisting lightning attacks? Resisting or defending against Zeus and Ares lightning.

If true, post the clip.

Originally posted by h1a8
Good feat for Loki (no look) although he was further from the arrow (took more than a second to reach him).

Heat vision (not lasers) were slow and Destroyer telegraphed.

I wasn't talking about Destroyer but the Chitauri. It also makes it harder to catch an arrow when you don't see the archer and don't know where the arrow is coming from.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I wasn't talking about Destroyer but the Chitauri. It also makes it harder to catch an arrow when you don't see the archer and don't know where the arrow is coming from.

Reread my comment on Loki. You missed something important.

Post the scene with the Chitauri. Although their weaponry wasn't lasers either.

Originally posted by h1a8
Reread my comment on Loki. You missed something important.

Post the scene with the Chitauri. Although their weaponry wasn't lasers either.

I read your comment on Loki. It doesn't matter that the arrow was fired from a distance if you only see it just as it's about to hit you.

As for Thor's feat, it's when he's fighting Chitauri back to back with Cap. Go look it up yourself, it's all over youtube.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I read your comment on Loki. It doesn't matter that the arrow was fired from a distance if you only see it just as it's about to hit you.

As for Thor's feat, it's when he's fighting Chitauri back to back with Cap. Go look it up yourself, it's all over youtube.

lol you know h1 is far too lazy to do that.

https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11127/111270097/6410701-5983775084-63844.gif

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
lol you know h1 is far too lazy to do that.

https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/11127/111270097/6410701-5983775084-63844.gif

H1: Those Lazers are going 20 miles an hour max. I did the math and that what it comes out to.

Originally posted by h1a8
Resisting or defending against Zeus and Ares lightning.

What makes you think that Zeus' lightning and Thor's are comparable?

Thor can CLEARLY generate wayyyyy more powerful lightning.

I do wonder sometimes if h1a8 has actually seen the first Avengers film.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I do wonder sometimes if h1a8 has actually seen the first Avengers film.

What you don't understand is that 0% of people remember that. It took someone to comb the movie for feats to find it.

Combing movies just for feats shows extreme bias and that you are being deceitful.


Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
What makes you think that Zeus' lightning and Thor's are comparable?

Thor can CLEARLY generate wayyyyy more powerful lightning.

Lightning is all the same in chemical makeup. A bunch of elections and hot plasma.

Originally posted by Inhuman
H1: Those Lazers are going 20 miles an hour max. I did the math and that what it comes out to.

Good. So u understand the feat is garbage.

Originally posted by h1a8



Good. So u understand the feat is garbage.

He was being sarcastic and patronizing.

Originally posted by FrothByte
He was being sarcastic and patronizing.

No he wasn't because the blasts were actually slow.

Originally posted by h1a8
No he wasn't because the blasts were actually slow.


Prove that they were slow.

Originally posted by h1a8
Combing movies just for feats shows extreme bias and that you are being deceitful.

You are legitimately retarded if you believe making the effort to get all the available information makes you deceitful and biased. Also, just because your dumb ass doesn't remember things, doesn't mean it's the same for others. Hell, you didn't even remember that Loki tried to use the Bifrost to wipe out the Frost Giants in Thor 1, which is a major plot point in the 3rd act of that film.

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
You are legitimately retarded if you believe making the effort to get all the available information makes you deceitful and biased. Also, just because your dumb ass doesn't remember things, doesn't mean it's the same for others. Hell, you didn't even remember that Loki tried to use the Bifrost to wipe out the Frost Giants in Thor 1, which is a major plot point in the 3rd act of that film.

It's also extremely idiotic for someone here to complain about having to look for feats when feats are the primary proof we use for arguments in the MvF. Just goes to show that H1 doesn't actually understand how debates here work.

Originally posted by h1a8
What you don't understand is that 0% of people remember that.


What? Lol I remembered it just fine.

Pretty sure I remember all the times Thor has deflected. As someone who read Thor comics I look out for that.

And as someone who frequents the movie versus forum I also look out for that.

Im sure youd fine it strange if someone here arguing against Wonder Womans speed had no recollection of her bullet deflection in Justice League.

Originally posted by h1a8


Good. So u understand the feat is garbage.

Do you think you could deflect those shots with a hammer?

Do you think any human could (and I dont mean getting lucky with the odd shot, I mean legitimately block every shot coming towards you).

Originally posted by h1a8
No he wasn't because the blasts were actually slow.

Based on what?

Originally posted by Inhuman
H1: Those Lazers are going 20 miles an hour max. I did the math and that what it comes out to. How fast are those lasers going?

Originally posted by h1a8
What you don't understand is that 0% of people remember that. It took someone to comb the movie for feats to find it.

Combing movies just for feats shows extreme bias and that you are being deceitful.




Lightning is all the same in chemical makeup. A bunch of elections and hot plasma.



Good. So u understand the feat is garbage.



You want to lecture me in science!? Boy, first of all, I think you meant to say that all lightnings are electrons...A lightning isn't a chemical formula h1.... Lightning is concerned with Physics not Chemestry...

Do you know what an ampere is h1?

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
How fast are those lasers going?

Using tape measure on my cellphone screen, and on reverse, maybe an inch a minute

Sounds accurate. That's almost as impressive as Ozymandias!

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander


You want to lecture me in science!? Boy, first of all, I think you meant to say that all lightnings are electrons...A lightning isn't a chemical formula h1.... Lightning is concerned with Physics not Chemestry...

Do you know what an ampere is h1?

Wrong! Lightning that comes in the air contains electrons AND PLASMA.
electrons heat the air so hot that it becomes plasma surrounding the electrons. Electrons are invisible. Lightning is not. Think about it.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Do you think you could deflect those shots with a hammer?

Do you think any human could (and I dont mean getting lucky with the odd shot, I mean legitimately block every shot coming towards you).

Yes i can, judging by the speed of the blasts.
I played college baseball and have easily hit 90+ mph fastballs. Bunting a 90+ mph fastball is even easier.

And I don't believe that you remember every feat (in vivid detail) of a movie after seeing it once and letting months go by.

Combing for feats isn't wrong, it just shows bias ( thirsty to find Feats for the character you want to win).

Im objective. If a person wins then they win. As long as it makes sense.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Prove that they were slow.

I don't need to. Slow is an opinion. Slower than the arrow shot by the Amazon, that's for sure.

To satisfy you, just look at the time elapsed (or feel itl after the blast leaves their gun and travels to the edge of the screen. It's more time than it would take a 100mph fastball to travel the same distance.
You can clearly see the motion.



Originally posted by FrothByte
I read your comment on Loki. It doesn't matter that the arrow was fired from a distance if you only see it just as it's about to hit you.

As for Thor's feat, it's when he's fighting Chitauri back to back with Cap. Go look it up yourself, it's all over youtube.
No then read it. I stated the feat is impressive because he didn't look, not because of reaction time.

IOW, you're using strict visual speed. great, does strict visual speed also get applied to all of Ozy's feats?

Originally posted by Silent Master
IOW, you're using strict visual speed. great, does strict visual speed also get applied to all of Ozy's feats?

If there is no other reference to how fast something is moving or moves then we use visual speed. For example, if the movie called those blasts actual lasers then we ignore visual speed.

For another example, although the bullets on the Helicarrier against Thor and Hulk we're traveling visually slow we assume they are real bullets traveling at the speed of a real bullet.

There is no such thing as bullet speed, as bullets speeds vary even among bullets of the same caliber depending on different conditions such as what the bullet is made of and the load.

Originally posted by Inhuman
Thor no hammer was besting the Hulk.

Stepp was smacking around Wonder Woman and Aquaman like if they were garbage, but once a character came into the picture that was an actual powerhouse , not a just a tier or two above Captain America, then Stepp became just a mere punching bag.

Thor wins hammer or not.

Ha! You think Wonder Woman is only a teir above Captain America?

You must be smoking crack with your mom on the weekends.

Originally posted by h1a8
Wrong! Lightning that comes in the air contains electrons AND PLASMA.
electrons heat the air so hot that it becomes plasma surrounding the electrons. Electrons are invisible. Lightning is not. Think about it.

Okay, first of all plasma is the result of the flow of electrons, but the lightning itself is electrons.

That's why I asked if you knew what an ampere was...

Only h1 could take a rational debate and turn it fcking stupid

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Ha! You think Wonder Woman is only a teir above Captain America?

You must be smoking crack with your mom on the weekends. Lol, did not read that gem.

Be patient.

Originally posted by h1a8
Yes i can, judging by the speed of the blasts.
I played college baseball and have easily hit 90+ mph fastballs. Bunting a 90+ mph fastball is even easier.



Except a baseball has a much larger surface area than those blasts, so are vastly easier to see coming at you.

To do what Thor was doing (and we never saw him miss one or get hit like Captain America did, who has a huge shield to defend himself with) you need enhanced reflexes and speed perception, period.

If youre going to claim otherwise, then post a clip of something you think is comparable, and we shall compare speeds and surface areas.

If you cant do so, then I shall accept your concession.


Originally posted by h1a8

For another example, although the bullets on the Helicarrier against Thor and Hulk we're traveling visually slow we assume they are real bullets traveling at the speed of a real bullet.


Lmao so youve also just posted proof from the same damn film that the visuals for projectile weapons are considerably slowed down for viewers perception.

Anyway post the video ive asked or concede the point.

H1 doesn't understand how suspension of disbelief works.

Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Lol, did not read that gem.

Be patient.

Originally posted by h1a8
I don't need to. Slow is an opinion. Slower than the arrow shot by the Amazon, that's for sure.

To satisfy you, just look at the time elapsed (or feel itl after the blast leaves their gun and travels to the edge of the screen. It's more time than it would take a 100mph fastball to travel the same distance.
You can clearly see the motion.




No then read it. I stated the feat is impressive because he didn't look, not because of reaction time.

Well thank you for admitting that it's only your opinion and that it isn't actually slow.

Now then, I guess we can all agree that those blasts weren't actually slow unless you have actual proof.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Ha! You think Wonder Woman is only a teir above Captain America?

You must be smoking crack with your mom on the weekends.

I agree that Wonder Woman is quite a bit above Cap. Can't comment on anybodies drug habits7

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Ha! You think Wonder Woman is only a teir above Captain America?

You must be smoking crack with your mom on the weekends.

lol.

I cant count the times ive had to explain shit on here like if im talking to 5 years olds so they can be able to understand.


Movie Cap has done shit like thrown motorcycles so hard it caved in the front of a military jeep. Kept a Helicopter from taking off. You needed like like 8-12 tons of force to accomplish that feat if i remember correctly from, an article. Moved a multi ton slab of concrete in Winter Soldier, etc.
Wonder Woman in her Movie lifts a Mark V tank over her head. That model of tank weighs in at around 28 tons.
The Submarine Aquaman lifts "in water" would fall into the same range as WW's feat. In the same movie Aquaman was struggling to lift some debris in the city from the Black Manta fight.
Spiderman would also fall into the one or two tiers above Cap as well. With the holding up the airport bridge falling on him.

Anyhow I said "a tier or two above movie Cap, which is totally in line with what we seen of these characters from the movies.

All these characters dont compare to the highest end heavy hitters from the movies like Superman, Hulk, Thor, Thanos, etc.

If you cant understand this, let me know ill have to try some simpler shit and bust out some crayons and ill try to draw something so you can understand.

Originally posted by Silent Master
There is no such thing as bullet speed, as bullets speeds vary even among bullets of the same caliber depending on different conditions such as what the bullet is made of and the load.
Your point?
No measurement is exact. Muzzle velocity of bullets of a caliber from a certain gun vary less than 10% of each other.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Well thank you for admitting that it's only your opinion and that it isn't actually slow.

Now then, I guess we can all agree that those blasts weren't actually slow unless you have actual proof.
The next part of my post makes the part you are talking about irrelevant. Ignoring evidence is trolling.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Except a baseball has a much larger surface area than those blasts, so are vastly easier to see coming at you.

To do what Thor was doing (and we never saw him miss one or get hit like Captain America did, who has a huge shield to defend himself with) you need enhanced reflexes and speed perception, period.

If youre going to claim otherwise, then post a clip of something you think is comparable, and we shall compare speeds and surface areas.

If you cant do so, then I shall accept your concession.





Lmao so youve also just posted proof from the same damn film that the visuals for projectile weapons are considerably slowed down for viewers perception.

Anyway post the video ive asked or concede the point.

The cross sectional area of those blasts are pretty big, probably as big as a baseball (coming from their guns). Anyway we got professional table tennis where the ball is smaller and the reaction times are even less.

Please also post the quote before I said, "for example ". Quoting me out of context changes the meaning of what I said.

Originally posted by Inhuman
lol.

I cant count the times ive had to explain shit on here like if im talking to 5 years olds so they can be able to understand.


Movie Cap has done shit like thrown motorcycles so hard it caved in the front of a military jeep. Kept a Helicopter from taking off. You needed like like 8-12 tons of force to accomplish that feat if i remember correctly from, an article. Moved a multi ton slab of concrete in Winter Soldier, etc.
Wonder Woman in her Movie lifts a Mark V tank over her head. That model of tank weighs in at around 28 tons.
The Submarine Aquaman lifts "in water" would fall into the same range as WW's feat. In the same movie Aquaman was struggling to lift some debris in the city from the Black Manta fight.
Spiderman would also fall into the one or two tiers above Cap as well. With the holding up the airport bridge falling on him.

Anyhow I said "a tier or two above movie Cap, which is totally in line with what we seen of these characters from the movies.

All these characters dont compare to the highest end heavy hitters from the movies like Superman, Hulk, Thor, Thanos, etc.

If you cant understand this, let me know ill have to try some simpler shit and bust out some crayons and ill try to draw something so you can understand.

The helicopter feat is less than 2tons.
I would say Cap is a 5 tonner at best and a 1.5 tonner on average (since you want to average Aquaman and not take his best).

Originally posted by h1a8
The next part of my post makes the part you are talking about irrelevant. Ignoring evidence is trolling.


The next part of your post contains no proof that those blasts were slow, or at least any slower than arrows. So it's irrelevant.

Originally posted by FrothByte
The next part of your post contains no proof that those blasts were slow, or at least any slower than arrows. So it's irrelevant.

Of course it does. Just look at the posted seen. You can see the speed is less than a 100pmh thrown baseball (which is less than an arrow).

Now if the blasts looks faster than any thrown baseball or an arrow to you then just say so. We will discuss it. If it doesn't then you are clearly trolling.

Originally posted by h1a8
Of course it does. Just look at the posted seen. You can see the speed is less than a 100pmh thrown baseball (which is less than an arrow).

Now if the blasts looks faster than any thrown baseball or an arrow to you then just say so. We will discuss it. If it doesn't then you are clearly trolling.

Those blasts were leaving a trail of light a few meters long. Of course it's visible. That doesn't mean it's slow. I'm still waiting for you to prove that it was slow

Originally posted by h1a8
Your point?
No measurement is exact. Muzzle velocity of bullets of a caliber from a certain gun vary less than 10% of each other.

You've already admitted that CGI isn't accurate, so why are you relying on it to determine the blasts speed?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Those blasts were leaving a trail of light a few meters long. Of course it's visible. That doesn't mean it's slow. I'm still waiting for you to prove that it was slow

h1 is the king of double standards, he argues that Cap and WS are slow because they can only move as fast as their actors. yet also claims that Bane, Baleman and Mr Miyagi are actually far faster than we see them move.

If it was one of his favorite characters that blocked energy attacks, he'd be using it to prove they were bullet++++ in speed. regardless of how fast the energy looked.

Originally posted by Silent Master
h1 is the king of double standards, he argues that Cap and WS are slow because they can only move as fast as their actors. yet also claims that Bane, Baleman and Mr Miyagi are actually far faster than we see them move.

If it was one of his favorite characters that blocked energy attacks, he'd be using it to prove they were bullet++++ in speed. regardless of how fast the energy looked.

Wrong, I tried arguing the implied speed but you were consistently saying that we should use VISUAL SPEED and that Baleman is slow. Therefore, I stated that under visual speed, Cap and WS move slower than actual professional fighters (they move as fast as their actors).

So you are the one creating the double standard here.


Originally posted by Silent Master
You've already admitted that CGI isn't accurate, so why are you relying on it to determine the blasts speed?

I never admitted that CGI isn't accurate, you did.
Anyway if you claim that we can't use the visual to determine speed then that hurts Thor case since now he has no feats to show that he has superhuman reflexes and perceptions.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Those blasts were leaving a trail of light a few meters long. Of course it's visible. That doesn't mean it's slow. I'm still waiting for you to prove that it was slow Look at the speed of the front end of the blast (that's the true velocity) and you can see its pretty slow in comparison to an arrow.

Again, you claimed that special effects/CGI isn't always accurate

Originally posted by h1a8
For another example, although the bullets on the Helicarrier against Thor and Hulk we're traveling visually slow we assume they are real bullets traveling at the speed of a real bullet.

Therefore using special effects/CGI to prove the blasts were slow is disingenuous.

Originally posted by h1a8

Look at the speed of the front end of the blast (that's the true velocity) and you can see its pretty slow in comparison to an arrow.

I'm actually an archer, and I can tell you that arrows don't travel as fast as you seem to think they do. Even arrows shot from compound bows (which are usually the fastest bows outside crossbows) are very visible to the eye.

Originally posted by FrothByte
I'm actually an archer, and I can tell you that arrows don't travel as fast as you seem to think they do. Even arrows shot from compound bows (which are usually the fastest bows outside crossbows) are very visible to the eye.

Doesn't matter, h1 changes his standards based on what helps his case the most. if it was Ozy that blocked energy blasts he would be claiming that the writer intended them to be traveling at light speed sense energy blasts in fiction are essentially lasers.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Doesn't matter, h1 changes his standards based on what helps his case the most. if it was Ozy that blocked energy blasts he would be claiming that the writer intended them to be traveling at light speed sense energy blasts in fiction are essentially lasers.

Yeah, I specifically remember him insisting that we should not use visual speed when I pointed out that Ozy's fighting moves where nowhere near as fast as Cap's or Bucky's, yet now he seems to be insisting we usual visual speed.

Edit: That should have been since, not sense.

The whole Cap moves as fast as his actor argument would hold more weight if a lot of it wasn't done by a professional martial artist/stuntman. Here is an interview with one of them.

https://www.dailydot.com/parsec/daredevil-stunt-double-chris-brewster-interview/

With the exception of the close up stuff, it's pretty much all other people. They just use various techniques, ranging from camera angles to CGI and other vfx to hide it.

The argument would also hold more weight if the person making the argument hadn't also argued that Baleman, Bane and Mr Miyagi were far faster than they were shown to be.

Originally posted by FrothByte
Yeah, I specifically remember him insisting that we should not use visual speed when I pointed out that Ozy's fighting moves where nowhere near as fast as Cap's or Bucky's, yet now he seems to be insisting we usual visual speed.

I always was a proponent of NOT using visual speed when it didn't make sense to years ago. But since you, Silent, etc insisted on always using visual speed then I have been using it ever since.

Anyway, if you or Silent believes in visual speed then you have to believe it in this case as well.

Originally posted by h1a8
I always was a proponent of NOT using visual speed when it didn't make sense to years ago. But since you, Silent, etc insisted on always using visual speed then I have been using it ever since.

Anyway, if you or Silent believes in visual speed then you have to believe it in this case as well.

You're a liar, you've always switched between visual and implied speed depending on what helped your biased argument at the time.

Originally posted by Silent Master
You're a liar, you've always switched between visual and implied speed depending on what helped your biased argument at the time.

False statement.
If you disagree then prove that I switched this year. You have clearly seen me for the longest time argue visual speed. How many threads do I have to argue visual speed before you understand that's my stance?

Doesn't matter as you are a proponent of visual speed. So we are on the same page right?

Originally posted by TheVaultDweller
The whole Cap moves as fast as his actor argument would hold more weight if a lot of it wasn't done by a professional martial artist/stuntman. Here is an interview with one of them.

https://www.dailydot.com/parsec/daredevil-stunt-double-chris-brewster-interview/

With the exception of the close up stuff, it's pretty much all other people. They just use various techniques, ranging from camera angles to CGI and other vfx to hide it.

That's irrelevant. Cap moved as fast as the actor (stunt double) moved, which is SLOWER than a professional fighter.

Wrong, you only argue visual speed when you think it helps your case. When it comes to guys you support like Bane, Baleman and Mr Miyagi you claim implied speed.

Nobody has forgotten that you've argued that they are faster than the movies show them to be.

Nope, you've never retracted your claims that Bane, Baleman and Mr Miyagi are faster than they're shown.

You've also argued that they're more skilled than shown.

Originally posted by h1a8
I always was a proponent of NOT using visual speed when it didn't make sense to years ago. But since you, Silent, etc insisted on always using visual speed then I have been using it ever since.

Anyway, if you or Silent believes in visual speed then you have to believe it in this case as well.

Ok let's settle this once and for all. Do you agree that, from this moment on, we will base all speed feats on visual speed?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Ok let's settle this once and for all. Do you agree that, from this moment on, we will base all speed feats on visual speed?

If there is no other reference to how fast something is moving or moves then we use visual speed.

Originally posted by h1a8
If there is no other reference to how fast something is moving or moves then we use visual speed.

IOW, you'll only reference visual speed when it helps your argument. when it hurts your argument. you'll demand we go by your opinion of implied speed.

Originally posted by Silent Master
IOW, you'll only reference visual speed when it helps your argument. when it hurts your argument. you'll demand we go by your opinion of implied speed.

What I just said contradicts this statement of yours.

Originally posted by h1a8
What I just said contradicts this statement of yours.

No, it doesn't.

But I'll give you a chance. do you agree to never use your opinion of implied speed to try and dispute visual speed?

Originally posted by h1a8
If there is no other reference to how fast something is moving or moves then we use visual speed.

Ok. Then you have no problems.admitting that Ozy punches and kicks slower than Bucky since that's what we see visually right?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Ok. Then you have no problems.admitting that Ozy punches and kicks slower than Bucky since that's what we see visually right?

Ozy punches faster than Bucky visually and what's referenced in the bullet catch. Before you address this please address the more important point that's below.



Also, it doesn't matter who punches faster (the faster puncher in boxing or mma isn't always the winner). Ozy's main advantage is his super reflexes and perceptions and skill.

Originally posted by Silent Master
No, it doesn't.

But I'll give you a chance. do you agree to never use your opinion of implied speed to try and dispute visual speed? What will you be using? Will you be flip flopping?

Thor beats steppenwolf because Ozy can beat bullseye.

Originally posted by h1a8
Ozy punches faster than Bucky visually and what's referenced in the bullet catch. Before you address this please address the more important point that's below.



See, you immediately contradict yourself. You refuse to acknowledge that Bucky punches visually faster than Ozy even though this is obvious to anyone who watches their fight scenes. I knew you wouldn't be able to stick to your word.

Originally posted by FrothByte
See, you immediately contradict yourself. You refuse to acknowledge that Bucky punches visually faster than Ozy even though this is obvious to anyone who watches their fight scenes. I knew you wouldn't be able to stick to your word.

Yep, h1 basically just admitted he's a troll.

Thor wins.

Originally posted by FrothByte
See, you immediately contradict yourself. You refuse to acknowledge that Bucky punches visually faster than Ozy even though this is obvious to anyone who watches their fight scenes. I knew you wouldn't be able to stick to your word.

Who has punched faster visually can be argued (and I would win).
But why waste time when

Originally posted by h1a8



Also, it doesn't matter who punches faster (the faster puncher in boxing or mma isn't always the winner). Ozy's main advantage is his super reflexes and perceptions and skill.

In other words, Bucky can punch faster than still lose every fight.

Originally posted by h1a8
Who has punched faster visually can be argued (and I would win).
But why waste time when



In other words, Bucky can punch faster than still lose every fight.


Ok, since you're so sure that you'd win. then let's BZ who punches visually faster.

Originally posted by h1a8
Who has punched faster visually can be argued (and I would win).
But why waste time when



In other words, Bucky can punch faster than still lose every fight.

Nah, you'd lose horribly. And if you can't even be trusted to be honest enough to admit which punch looks faster, why would we bother progressing to debating about other stuff?

Originally posted by FrothByte
Nah, you'd lose horribly. And if you can't even be trusted to be honest enough to admit which punch looks faster, why would we bother progressing to debating about other stuff?
Either you have a bad memory or you are trolling.
I have always argued that Ozy visibly punched faster than Bucky. I even gave a scene and challenged anyone to find a scene where Bucky punched faster.


With that said, your logic about who punched faster on screen is irrelevant.