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

1) Thor has his axe/sword. Wonder Woman has her sword/shield. Pure close combat encounter.

2) Wonder Woman can fly, but, Thor can use his lightning.

3) H2h.

Thor wins.

Wonder Woman. Never thought I'd say that. But gonna have to go with her on this. More experience, arguably just as strong, faster, not sure on durability. Probably young Thor. Diana 6/10

Wonder Woman wins by a considerable margin.

Diana breaks him in half.

1) This one for me is the trickiest. Most people would probably give Diana the edge due to skill, but I'd like to see some argument supporting that even when limiting this to Young Thor. His combat skills are most highlighted during this period as it was before he received Mjolnir and he's done pretty much everything Diana has in the new 52. But this could just be my ignorance as I haven't been keeping up with all the titles. I'd have called it a split but I think Thor's plot device axe is too big of an edge.

2) Wonder Woman can fly which gives her a great advantage like Gorr had, but a hit from his lightning, and it's game over. I'd have given Diana the edge but after his later fight with Gorr where he was keeping pace with the other two Thor's and leaping into orbit (Maybe even planetary distances?) or whatever, I'd give him the edge.

3) Diana. Even at this level, I think Thor is probably more durable, as strong, and as we've seen, definitely skilled. Diana hasn't lived nearly as long as even this version but I think she's more experienced in fighting skilled opponents that have powerful stats and is faster.

Diana in all 3.

1) Diana is more powerful than the Valkyrie's that were able to handle young Thor in the fraction series.

2) Rebel Thor will only utilize the lightning after he goes into fisticuffs. Diana is the better strategist and her flight can be used to blitz the Odinson.

3) Diana humbles the Odinson with a Tiger-driver!

Originally posted by LordofBrooklyn
Diana in all 3.

1) Diana is more powerful than the Valkyrie's that were able to handle young Thor in the fraction series.


I don't know why you're acting like a -high end- Valkyrie giving Thor a fight is somehow something to be ashamed about:
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Thor proceeds to ravage across the Nine Worlds for forty days and forty nights (Seems to really love doing that) and fights Valkyrie:
http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188160_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg03.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188161_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg06.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188162_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg07-08.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188163_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg09.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188164_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg10.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188165_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg11-12.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188166_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg13.jpg

"In tandem, they create a symphony of violence rarely seen in any of the Nine Worls. Let alone created by only two people."


Even less has challenged Diana. Not to mention she started the fight with a massive cheap shot and Thor had been raging across the Nine World for 40 days and 40 nights straight.

In that same series, Thor took on Odin in the Destroyer armor:
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Thor vs. the Odin-Destroyer itself, fights rarely get better then this:
http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188142_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg23.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188143_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg24.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188144_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg25.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188145_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg26.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188146_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg27-28.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188147_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg29-30.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188148_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg31.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188149_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg32.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16188150_Thor_Man_of_War_01_Zone-Megan_pg33.jpg

Sure, he got rofl stomped, but even lasting as long as he did and taking that beating as well as he did is a pretty ridiculous feat imho. Diana, WITHOUT her gauntlets, folded just as quickly and from even less attacks, against the First Born.

No idea why anyone would reference this comic as evidence of Diana's superiority. Lol.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus


No idea why anyone would reference this comic as evidence of Diana's superiority. Lol.

Diana is superior to the Valkyrie the Blonde whore faced.

That would be the reason. Lol.

Originally posted by LordofBrooklyn
Diana is superior to the Valkyrie the Blonde whore faced.

That would be the reason. Lol.

They had an evenish fight for a few pages and she didn't even beat him. How is that grounds for any sign of superiority for Diana?

We've seen Diana sparring evenly with random Amazonians.

A full power immortal Valkyrie has demonstrated Herald level capabilities over the years. A good reference would be in Fear Itself when she faced the Serpent's Destroyer armor (Who was wielding the power of all the Worthy hammers) or current Valkyrie who can rage out to access her true form (In which she stomped a bunch of heroes including She-Hulk and Hippolyta, who alone was powerful enough to stomp Ares in AoU for some comparison).

Diana wins

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
They had an evenish fight for a few pages and she didn't even beat him. How is that grounds for any sign of superiority for Diana?

Just this week, Diana had a brief back and forth with some Amazonian. It's far from impossible for Brunhilda to give Diana a hell of a fight, especially in the DCnU.

A full power immortal Valkyrie has demonstrated Herald level capabilities over the years. A good reference would be in Fear Itself when she faced the Serpent's Destroyer armor (Who was wielding the power of all the Worthy hammers) or current Valkyrie who can rage out to access her true form (In which she stomped a bunch of heroes including She-Hulk and Hippolyta, who alone was powerful enough to stomp Ares in AoU for some comparison).

In my appraisal of the 3 scenarios I always referenced young Thor's mentality as well. Explicitly so in the third but it was a key point for all outcomes.

Thor was an absolute brawler and near berserker in the Fraction mini(Zircher's art was great!). In a fight against Diana this is an obstacle he won't be able to overcome.

Young Thor is below herald level in strength/durability. I don't think apocalypse would kill diana in three blows when about hundred blows from Faora couldn't.

Originally posted by LordofBrooklyn
In my appraisal of the 3 scenarios I always referenced young Thor's mentality as well. Explicitly so in the third but it was a key point for all outcomes.

Thor was an absolute brawler and near berserker in the Fraction mini(Zircher's art was great!). In a fight against Diana this is an obstacle he won't be able to overcome.

Yea, Fraction Thor's a brawler and a psycho but that doesn't hinder him in combat.

For example, here's young Thor under Fraction as well using skill:
http://s2.postimg.org/8ttzsfm2d/007.jpghttp://s2.postimg.org/v37wyzhit/008.jpghttp://s2.postimg.org/e3yyjq6b9/009.jpg

But this reasoning I can agree with. Thor's temper causing him to get reckless or something etc. The earlier argument about the Valkyrie is stupid however imho.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Young Thor is below herald level in strength/durability. I don't think apocalypse would kill diana in three blows when about hundred blows from Faora couldn't.



Or maybe Apocalypse was above herald level? He was rocking Celestial armor after all.

You mean the same Young Thor who not only survived being attacked and tortured by Gorr, but dove into the heart of a goddamn Star? Perhaps even a black hole.

Also, despite what the narration said, Thor bounced back from all of Apocalypse' attacks. Including Apocalypse chucking his axe into his chest. If he lacked anything in sturdiness, he more then made up for it in perseverance.

In that same vein, Wonder Woman BROKE her arms blocking a punch from Doomsday. She was also in in critical condition from her first fight against First Born and Artemis.

Look, I'm not saying Young Thor's record is completely spotless or that he's on par with his fully grown incarnation, but the same isn't true for Diana in either categories so trying to write off Young Thor due to one showing is imho silly. If you think Diana wins, that's fine, but try and be objective please.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yea, Fraction Thor's a brawler and a psycho but that doesn't hinder him in combat.

For example, here's young Thor under Fraction as well using skill:
http://s2.postimg.org/8ttzsfm2d/007.jpghttp://s2.postimg.org/v37wyzhit/008.jpghttp://s2.postimg.org/e3yyjq6b9/009.jpg

But this reasoning I can agree with. Thor's temper causing him to get reckless or something etc. The earlier argument about the Valkyrie is stupid however imho.

Diana IS more powerful than Valkyrie.

In a comprable scenario Diana would've beaten Valkyrie.

If Diana had attacked Thor under similar conditions she would've beaten Thor.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Wonder Woman. Never thought I'd say that. But gonna have to go with her on this. More experience, arguably just as strong, faster, not sure on durability. Probably young Thor. Diana 6/10
WTF?

Turn in your "Man Card"............NOW!

Thor wins.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Or maybe Apocalypse was above herald level? He was rocking Celestial armor after all. That wasn't ever indicated to having his strength augmented.

They mean very little and you know it.

Now you're saying the narration was wrong?

Who is an unknown at this time. And they will do worse to young Thor.

But Diana's record against top tiers is pretty much spotless at this time.

Jarnbjorn wins.

Originally posted by LordofBrooklyn
Diana IS more powerful than Valkyrie.

In a comprable scenario Diana would've beaten Valkyrie.

If Diana had attacked Thor under similar conditions she would've beaten Thor.

Like I said, full power Valkyrie, depending on the incarnation, is write up there with Wonder Woman in the DCnU.

If Valkyrie had gotten a clean shot like that, Diana would have probably been dead tbh.

Maybe, maybe not.

You're giving the win to Diana because what, less then Superman gave Thor a fight? The same can easily be said of Diana. She once had a competitive fight with Katana, no?

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
Jarnbjorn wins.
Bracers FTW.

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
Jarnbjorn wins.
Diana ain't a Celestial.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Like I said, full power Valkyrie, depending on the incarnation, is write up there with Wonder Woman in the DCnU.

If Valkyrie had gotten a clean shot like that, Diana would have probably been dead tbh.

Maybe, maybe not.

You're giving the win to Diana because what, less then Superman gave Thor a fight? The same can easily be said of Diana. She once had a competitive fight with Katana, no?
No, she didn't have a competitive fight with Katana.

Rage is making valid points.

Originally posted by abhilegend
That wasn't ever indicated to having his strength augmented.

We already know Young Thor is crazy durable and easily herald level based on God of Thunder imo.

Why would you assume he's weak instead of the opposite for Apocalypse who is rocking a never before seen upgrade? Fyi, historically, donning armor based on celestial tech has always increased attributes like strength.

Archangel under the same writer was a lot stronger and he didn't even have the Deathseed or the ceremonial armor.

Originally posted by abhilegend
They mean very little and you know it.

Now you're saying the narration was wrong?

Who is an unknown at this time. And they will do worse to young Thor.

But Diana's record against top tiers is pretty much spotless at this time.

You mean being butchered and battered by a Trans level opponent or surviving the conditions of a Star (Which I highly doubt Diana can do personally)? Which one do you prefer we ignore exactly?

Nope, I'm just pointing out the circumstances.

We saw the Kryptonian exoskeletons giving him a fair enough fight. And Superman bounced back from his punch IIRC. Safe to assume he's typical Doomsday level.

Why? He's already taken on worse in Gorr and triumphed.

And Young Thor has been busy fighting mostly beyond herald level threats and done surprisingly well.

I don't care if you think Diana wins, that's fair enough, but like usual, your logic is twisted and revolves around lowballing.

A perfectly good thread and we're already comparing how badly Wonder Woman/Thor have sucked, not how good they've been.

Every goddamn time in every goddamn thread it's the same thing.

Not going to let it ruin this one, you want to continue this discussion make a battle zone or start your own thread.

Just want to throw out that Celestial tech amped Hulk.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Like I said, full power Valkyrie, depending on the incarnation, is write up there with Wonder Woman in the DCnU.

If Valkyrie had gotten a clean shot like that, Diana would have probably been dead tbh.

Maybe, maybe not.

You're giving the win to Diana because what, less then Superman gave Thor a fight? The same can easily be said of Diana. She once had a competitive fight with Katana, no?

Diana wins because of superior skill, strategy and Thor's temperament.

I've stated as much.

Originally posted by carver9
Just want to throw out that Celestial tech amped Hulk.

We all agree that both Young Thor and Diana would defeat Hulk.

Thor wins.

Stalemate....pretty evenly matched

Thor destroys diana.

Diana wins

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
We already know Young Thor is crazy durable and easily herald level based on God of Thunder imo. Is he? He was solidly outperformed by Adult Thor.

Has it? Or you're just saying that because it was Thor on the receiving end.

What a random idea.



Both. Getting beaten up isn't a feat or Sodam Yat would be the most badass being ever. Stars and shit are ireelevant.

Nope.

Doomsday is metamorphosing it seems and getting more powerful. Then he would do the same to Thor too.

Alone?

Getting beaten up isn't doing well.

What lowballing? Are we using only high feats for both characters here?

Originally posted by LordofBrooklyn
We all agree that both Young Thor and Diana would defeat Hulk.
See?

This guy gets it.
thumbsup

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
See?

This guy gets it.
thumbsup

How does young Thor put down Banner in your opinion?

Originally posted by LordofBrooklyn
How does young Thor put down Banner in your opinion?
You tell me.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
1) Thor has his axe/sword. Wonder Woman has her sword/shield. Pure close combat encounter.

2) Wonder Woman can fly, but, Thor can use his lightning.

3) H2h. All things being equal, I'm gonna say WW. Only because young Thor was so brash, arrogant and obnoxious that WW would be in full Amazon PMS mode. osheet

By cutting his head off.

Originally posted by Damborgson
By cutting his head off.

Works for me.

Originally posted by LordofBrooklyn
Works for me.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Is he? He was solidly outperformed by Adult Thor.

There's a difference between being on par with Thor, a high end one at that, and just being herald level.

Not to mention he survived brutal beatings alongside the adult version and was actually keeping up for parts of the fight even without Mjolnir.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Has it? Or you're just saying that because it was Thor on the receiving end.

What a random idea.

This isn't even a reply. Are you denying that Celestial tech, much less legit Celestial armor, has greatly augmented stats like physical strength in the past?

Yes or no? If yes, then what's the problem? If no, then I'd like to point you to Uncanny X-Force v1 and v2 by Rick Remender, the writer of that fight.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Both. Getting beaten up isn't a feat or Sodam Yat would be the most badass being ever. Stars and shit are ireelevant.

Withstanding the beating that he did from Superboy Prime WAS a pretty decent feat, he just lost. Not to mention Young Thor kept bouncing back.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Nope.

Doomsday is metamorphosing it seems and getting more powerful. Then he would do the same to Thor too.

He turned into a giant squid or whatever later on. Why is this relevant when the same version that faced Diana was the one from Krypton? Are you saying that he got more powerful in between?

That's some mighty big speculation from someone who just made the argument Apocalypse in Celestial Armor can't be stronger then usual without some specific hard evidence.

Blocking a punch from Doomsday wouldn't break both of Thor's arms. Are you nuts? I just posted scans of Young Thor taking hits from the Odin Destroyer under Fraction.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Alone?

Getting beaten up isn't doing well.

What lowballing? Are we using only high feats for both characters here?

Yup. Lightning bolt to the dome won his first fight as a matter of fact.

Says the guy who posted this:
"when about hundred blows from Faora couldn't."

No, but your entire basis for Thor "getting broken in half" by Diana is a single less then stellar showing. Against an Apocalypse who was rocking CELESTIAL ARMOR. It's retarded and the definition of lowballing.

Some more feats for Young Thor:
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
"Mjolnir, carried beyond Asgard, intertwined with the Sea of Space, fed by the Sun of Midgard, the strength of uru, the magic of Odin and the Mighty Will of THOR!"

http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16039384_Avengers_Origins_-_Thor_022.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16039385_Avengers_Origins_-_Thor_023.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16039386_Avengers_Origins_-_Thor_024.jpg http://s3d3.turboimagehost.com/t/16039387_Avengers_Origins_-_Thor_025.jpg

Dude's a beast. I don't know why people think that just because he's not on par with adult Thor, he's less then Wonder Woman, much less the DCnU incarnation.

Originally posted by Badabing
All things being equal, I'm gonna say WW. Only because young Thor was so brash, arrogant and obnoxious that WW would be in full Amazon PMS mode. osheet

I'd just like to point out that this has not hindered him in combat and even despite his attitude, he knows when to fight smart and retreat such as his fight with Apocalypse.

But fair enough. This is a reason I can understand.

Here's a question how would this version of Diana fair against apocalypse? Because young Thor got wrecked in his first encounter with him. Would she perform slightly better? I think she would.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
There's a difference between being on par with Thor, a high end one at that, and just being herald level. Is it? Thorwasn't playing at any other level than high herald in Gorr arc. You're confusing high end feats with high end tier rankings.

Good for him. He still performed below an actual herald.



I don't recall Apoc's armor specified to do so.

What's there regarding Apoc's armor?



So did Sodam Yat untill stabbed by lead pipes.



The writer has stated that he's going through metamorphosis and would become more powerful. Take it as you can.

Do I have to post the interview here too? Without any on panel description of DD's powers, its the only source of information yet.

Under Soule she's nearly as strong as Superman, so yes it would. Or are you saying young thor is as strong as superman?

Non-canon.


A yonger and less powerful Gorr.

I never said she did well against Faora because of hundred punches.

And him being less than the adult Thor. But I get it, young Thor is high herald and thor is trans, right? But thanks for taking my statement literally.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Some more feats for Young Thor:


Dude's a beast. I don't know why people think that just because he's not on par with adult Thor, he's less then Wonder Woman, much less the DCnU incarnation.



I'd just like to point out that this has not hindered him in combat and even despite his attitude, he knows when to fight smart and retreat such as his fight with Apocalypse.

But fair enough. This is a reason I can understand. It wasn't a most serious reply. But still, full PMS WW would be...scary in a hot sort of way. ohno

Originally posted by abhilegend
Is it? Thorwasn't playing at any other level than high herald in Gorr arc. You're confusing high end feats with high end tier rankings.

Good for him. He still performed below an actual herald.

I don't recall Apoc's armor specified to do so.

What's there regarding Apoc's armor?

So did Sodam Yat untill stabbed by lead pipes.

Rankings are based on averages. In that specific arc, current Thor was written at a high end level and was doing almost as well as All-Father Thor against Gorr and young Thor wasn't too far behind.

You need evidence that Apocalypse's Celestial Armor amplifies his power? Wtf, seriously? This type of shit is why you're an idiot.

Also here you go:
http://s10.postimg.org/4fn4bxqzt/X_Force_Zone_011.jpg

Under the SAME writer even. And that's not even the one handed to a being when they become an Apocalypse.

So are you ready to recognize the obvious, that Apocalypse's armor amplifies his power?

......What? I'm going to assume that's some kind of language barrier because I don't know why Sodam Yat having a weakness to lead makes Thor taking a beating from Gorr less impressive.

Originally posted by abhilegend
The writer has stated that he's going through metamorphosis and would become more powerful. Take it as you can.

Do I have to post the interview here too? Without any on panel description of DD's powers, its the only source of information yet.



And yet yesterday, this is what he says:
Originally posted by abhilegend
Pak says a lot of stuff. According to KMC rules, interviews are non-admissible.
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=593973&pagenumber=7

What a shitty and flip floppy poster you are.

And again, the Doomsday that fought Diana was the same as the one on Krypton.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Under Soule she's nearly as strong as Superman, so yes it would. Or are you saying young thor is as strong as superman?

Non-canon.

What kind of bullshit is this? Now we get to specify different takes such as Remender's Young Thor and Aaron's? Although no version of Young Thor that I can think of would have his arms broken by BLOCKING a punch from a Herald level being.

Not to mention this is Thor/Wonder Woman.

Based on?

Originally posted by abhilegend
A yonger and less powerful Gorr.

I never said she did well against Faora because of hundred punches.

And him being less than the adult Thor. But I get it, young Thor is high herald and thor is trans, right? But thanks for taking my statement literally.

Who was still ending entire pantheons.

That was your reasoning for why she'd beat Young Thor and yet you say that taking a beating is "not a feat"?

Are you saying that DCnU Diana is on par with adult Thor conclusively and that anyone less then him is automatically below DCnU Diana?

Like I've told you before, I don't know how stuff works in that rape rampant shit hole you live in, but here in the civilized world, words matter and carry weight.

I thought that was better. mhmm Too bad Epicurus is banned.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Rankings are based on averages. In that specific arc, current Thor was written at a high end level and was doing almost as well as All-Father Thor against Gorr and young Thor wasn't too far behind. A depleted King Thor you mean? Because when Thor-force returned KT damn near oneshotted Gorr.

No need to be hostile.

That's what I'm talking about. So apoc was amped. Now was that so hard?

OK, I concede that point.

Yup. How strong was apoc at normal level though? Thor level? Gorr level?

Because taking a beating doesn't makes you impressive?

No need to be an A-hole. We know nothing about DD at this point. I'm not even saying its going to be true, but at this point its our only source of information. When the actual comic would come out, this would be meaningless obviously.

You're seriously an a-hole.



Why yes, of course.

So?



Brevoort's words.



Golly gee, he's as powerful as Lobo.

No, my reasoning for her beating had nothing to do with that. Its based on hierarchy.

No, but she isn't far off in strength either.

Like the last time you said you didn't even posted in a thread and then flipped over?

Yeah, like I didn't know.

Abhi got Owned.

Originally posted by carver9
Abhi got Owned.
durpalm

Originally posted by abhilegend
A depleted King Thor you mean? Because when Thor-force returned KT damn near oneshotted Gorr.

No need to be hostile.

That's what I'm talking about. So apoc was amped. Now was that so hard?

OK, I concede that point.

Yup. How strong was apoc at normal level though? Thor level? Gorr level?

Because taking a beating doesn't makes you impressive?

That "depleted" King Thor is way more powerful then Wonder Woman so I don't see your point. He rocked the shit out of Gorr but he was relatively fine and later on was even shielding the blasts.

No, but that the conclusion Apocalypse was amped should be something you reach by yourself. It's not even a leap, anyone with a passing knowledge KNOWS Celestial tech augments powers massively.

Not Gorr level but above Herald level I'd say.

Originally posted by abhilegend
No need to be an A-hole. We know nothing about DD at this point. I'm not even saying its going to be true, but at this point its our only source of information. When the actual comic would come out, this would be meaningless obviously.

You're seriously an a-hole.

Why yes, of course.

So?

I'm being an assho*le because I called you out on your obvious bullshit and flip flopping?

According to you, interviews DO NOT COUNT full stop. There is no on panel evidence to support Diana's Doomsday being stronger. We DO see him evolve and grow but that is a great deal after. For starters, prove that the interview is referring to the one Diana encountered, and not to the one in the arctic right now?

So stop trying to force in a Superman/Young Thor comparison. It's obvious and we ALL know where this is going. And almost immediately you'll start referencing him benching a planet or whatever under completely different writers instead of focusing on the writer of Superman/Wonder Woman which you specified.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Brevoort's words.

facepalm

We already covered this some time ago:
Originally posted by abhilegend
He explicitly stated that its not in the main continuity as all the other thor one shots they had done recently which includes Thor: Man of war too. Doesn't it contradicts the original meeting of thor and destroyer too?

I can just ask Tom brevoort on this on his tumblr page.

313
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
How about you prove that? Thor: Man of War is not a one-shot and part of a 3 part miniseries and it came out at like December 2008 while Rage of Thor came out on August 2010, nearly two years apart.

Okay, reported. Take your trolling out of the respect thread.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=522796&pagenumber=39

That interview does not prove that the Matt Fraction's trilogy is non-canon. It is referring to a completely different story. Try again.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Golly gee, he's as powerful as Lobo.

Why is Lobo relevant in this discussion? Are you incapable of replying with anything but red herrings and lowballing?

Originally posted by abhilegend
No, my reasoning for her beating had nothing to do with that. Its based on hierarchy.

No, but she isn't far off in strength either.

Like the last time you said you didn't even posted in a thread and then flipped over?

Yeah, like I didn't know.

Young Thor is EASILY competitive in both environmental and combat feats and your reasoning for Diana winning is, hierarchy? The two aren't even in the same Universe. This answer does not explain you saying beatings are not a feat and then referencing Faora.

If she isn't as strong as current Thor and below him in power/durability etc. then why would young Thor being below modern Thor be grounds for Diana winning?

Yea, that's definitely the same thing. If you want, we can start a different thread with a poll to a link to both discussions and see what people decide .

Based on his encounter with Superman and everything else, Herald level is a perfect fit for Doomsday and yet he broke Diana's arms when she tried to BLOCK a PUNCH. Whatever his durability, Young Thor bounced back from ALL of Apocalypse's attacks and we've established that he is amped.

Gorr was weaker when Young Thor fought him but was clearly already ridiculously powerful and beyond someone like the First Born. And Diana fared far worse against the latter then Young Thor did against the former.

Simply put, trying to lowball Young Thor to give Diana the win is a losing strategy.

I don't have an axe to grind either way and I don't know jack about dcnu ww to really give an opinion but I gotta say those were some great scans posted by rage. Young Thor is pretty beastly.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
That "depleted" King Thor is way more powerful then Wonder Woman so I don't see your point. He rocked the shit out of Gorr but he was relatively fine and later on was even shielding the blasts. I know that. But King Thor was depicted as Trans, Adult Thor as high herald and Young Thor as somewhat mid or low herald level. Its all about hierarchies.

I know. Its still pretty ambiguous time to time.

Why? We saw Gorr beating on him and he wasn't in danger of being killed.



No, you're being an a-hole because you're an a-hole.

Sure. It still contains information about how Doomsday is supposed to work. if you think I'm going to use that in battles, you're wrong. Of course there isn't. Doomsday doesn't appeared too much either. What? I'm just saying its still too early to say anything about what level Doomsday is at.

I've never used planet benching or whatever to deem character levels.



No, I bowed out of a respect thread because you were being your usual charming self.

Of course it does. Not to mention, it was stated to be the continuation of Thor: Ages of Thunder, which is strictly non canon.

http://marvel.com/news/comics/2008/11/5/5852/thor_family_feud


But obviously you know better than Fraction and Brevoort.

Because killing nameless pantheons means jackshit? You sure pick random feats as being more impressive than they are in the context of the story.



Well he isn't. Yes, hierarchy. So? We know their general power levels. Just a reminder that getting beaten up by Gorr isn't a feat.

He is farther than Diana in strength/power/durability ladder compared to Thor.

Tell me Rage, if Young Thor beats diana say 6/10 or 7/10 as you're saying, adult Thor beats her like 10/10, right? Why don't you come out and say it.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Like I've told you before, I don't know how stuff works in that rape rampant shit hole you live in, but here in the civilized world, words matter and carry weight.

I thought that was better. mhmm Too bad Epicurus is banned. Overboard much?
jawdrop

In reference to a dumb argument from a different thread. No need to panic.

Originally posted by abhilegend
I know that. But King Thor was depicted as Trans, Adult Thor as high herald and Young Thor as somewhat mid or low herald level. Its all about hierarchies.

I know. Its still pretty ambiguous time to time.

Why? We saw Gorr beating on him and he wasn't in danger of being killed.


At least you admit he's herald level now. And King Thor, even weakened as he is, is legit Skyfather as confirmed by his fight with Galactus. And Young Thor was keeping up with the other two Thor's, confirming his status as a herald.

So you think he's above Gorr level? Earlier you were arguing that he wasn't even above Herald level. I don't really care where he ranks as long as you admit giving Diana the win because Young Thor didn't fair too well against a clearly amped Apocalypse is retarded. Especially so since Diana has her share of less then stellar showings.

Originally posted by abhilegend
No, you're being an a-hole because you're an a-hole.

Sure. It still contains information about how Doomsday is supposed to work. if you think I'm going to use that in battles, you're wrong. Of course there isn't. Doomsday doesn't appeared too much either. What? I'm just saying its still too early to say anything about what level Doomsday is at.

I've never used planet benching or whatever to deem character levels.

How about you post this interview with a link?

Well, based on the fact that he hit Superman and it clearly rocked him but he bounced back and the Kryptonian exo-skeletons giving him a good fight, putting this Doomsday in the tier he usually resides in would be a safe bet.

I mean sure, you can hope and pray that he's revealed to be a Skyfather or something, but based on the available evidence, the herald tier is a safe bet. And Wonder Woman still broke her arms trying to block a punch.

Anyways, we've gone completely off topic. My initial point in Doomsday was that arguing for Diana based on one less then stellar showing for Young Thor is retarded as her record is far from spotless. I think you understand as much at this point however. At least, I sincerely hope you do.

Originally posted by abhilegend
No, I bowed out of a respect thread because you were being your usual charming self.

Of course it does. Not to mention, it was stated to be the continuation of Thor: Ages of Thunder, which is strictly non canon.

http://marvel.com/news/comics/2008/11/5/5852/thor_family_feud

But obviously you know better than Fraction and Brevoort.

Because killing nameless pantheons means jackshit? You sure pick random feats as being more impressive than they are in the context of the story.

Like I said, the post from Breevort you're referencing refers to a completely different one-shot that came out like 3 years earlier. They are literally completely different titles.

I just skimmed that interview but exactly what part of it proves that it is non-canon? Here's a part of it:
"We've seen how and why Odin cast Thor out in THOR v1 #159," he remembers. "This cycle of specials honors that, and enhances it. The story, across all three , is why did Odin cast Thor out of Asgard, and force him to become mortal? What in the world could Odin's son have done to deserve that? In a way, it's a prequel to Marvel's own Asgard cycle, I guess."

From this interview, the titles seem to be treated as DIRECT prequels to the reasons for Thor's banishment by examining previous Ragnarok cycles Thanks for proving my point?

Actually, Lobo was killing named characters like Odin etc. I believe BUT referencing that type of story in comparison to the God of Thunder series is about as relevant as a strip from the funny pages. Not to mention it's completely irrelevant as evidence as that Lobo has no interaction with DCnU Wonder Woman.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Well he isn't. Yes, hierarchy. So? We know their general power levels. Just a reminder that getting beaten up by Gorr isn't a feat.

He is farther than Diana in strength/power/durability ladder compared to Thor.

Tell me Rage, if Young Thor beats diana say 6/10 or 7/10 as you're saying, adult Thor beats her like 10/10, right? Why don't you come out and say it.

Hierarchy isn't a reason for winning nor is it any form of evidence. If you want to argue Wonder Woman would win based on a gut feeling, that is fine but please do not pass off your bias as some sort of valid reason or conclusive evidence.

Young Thor isn't competitive with DCnU Diana in feats? That's just flat out untrue based on what we've seen. No, but getting beat up by Gorr and remaining standing is.

No, he really isn't.

You know, I gave Young Thor the clear win in only the second scenario in this thread.

And yes, modern Thor beats DCnU Diana like 7-9/10. That doesn't mean he one-shots her or anything but with the gap between their stats being even GREATER then POST CRISIS and the lasso being downgraded, she has very few, if any, tools in her arsenal that can counter Mjolnir and allow her to get a win.

Not that my opinion on this match up has any relevance in this thread regarding Young Thor and DCnU Wonder Woman.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
In reference to a dumb argument from a different thread. No need to panic. Eh, if I was you I'd be reporting it off. But fortunately, I'm not.



That was never in question. Against an alternate Galactus? After Thor Force has been awakened? No shit bro. Maybe low or mid herald.

I don't know. You're the one who is hyping every character who beat up on Thor. And I didn't see why beating up a low or mid herald is such a big deal. Superman was once stated to be capable of killing wonder woman with three BLOCKED punches and she is a legit mid herald class 100. Did that make him above herald level? Eh, that is one of many reasons. Compared to genuine top tiers? List them.







http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/04/11/greg-pak-interview-action-comics-doomed-superman-crossover

And that is above herald level. You don't style on Superman, break a top tier's hands with a blocked punch and be a herald. You know what, when did a high herald broke anyone's arms with just a blocked punch?

This circular reasoning is pretty funny. I will give you that. Apoc nearly kills Thor with three hits although Thor bounces back, he is outright above herald level. Doomsday break wonder woman's arms, he is still herald. Gotta love this line of logic.

Against top tiers? Who actually beat diana in the top tier bracket? I do. You're still wrong.



And they could be 10 years apart and it wouldn't matter. It references a non canon story, contradicts specified canon and has never been mentioned in a canon comic.

Reading a special part of the interview? Bad rage.



facepalm

As usual the point went over your head. Read again what I said.



Wow? So Thor would win against, say Spectre? This is the kind of shit which make comic debates so tedious. My bias? Hahahaha.

In combat feats? No, he isn't. Eh, it was akin to Superboy vs Superboy Prime. You wouldn't say Superboy beats Black Adam for standing up to SBP better, do you?

He is.

Then you're even more wrong.

Wow. You've sunk even lower than I imagined. Thor's standing against other top tiers hasn't changed because of a single arc under a single writer. If anything his stock has never been lower outside his own comic. And Diana's stock has never been higher, she is a genuine threat to top tiers now. And there wasn't much gap between Thor and post crisis wonder woman to begin with.

Fine, she cuts his head off with that atom splitting sword of hers.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Eh, if I was you I'd be reporting it off. But fortunately, I'm not.

That was never in question. Against an alternate Galactus? After Thor Force has been awakened? No shit bro. Maybe low or mid herald.

I don't know. You're the one who is hyping every character who beat up on Thor. And I didn't see why beating up a low or mid herald is such a big deal. Superman was once stated to be capable of killing wonder woman with three BLOCKED punches and she is a legit mid herald class 100. Did that make him above herald level? Eh, that is one of many reasons. Compared to genuine top tiers? List them.

Alternate? Are you implying it's non-canon or something? It happens in the future, but as far as the comics are concerned, it's all canon.

The Thor Force had already awakened when he fought Gorr. If you acknowledge he's a Skyfather with the Thor Force, then why did you call him a Trans a post back? You even tried to lowball Gorr but saying the Thor Force was depleted. You are so terrible at debating, it's actually funny.

No, hyping would be mentioning that Apocalypse -in even less powerful armor- was beating up the Inhumans and a collection of X-men in a story directly referenced by Remender in X-Force so to give us an idea of where he probably considers him. All I'm doing is pointing out that Apocalypse is naturally a Herald level character and was almost certainly above his regular portrayed level so trying to lowball Young Thor through him is ridiculous.

Superman, especially Post-Crisis Superman has absolutely no relevance here. Skip the red herrings and STICK ON TOPIC. No one cares about Superman, this isn't a thread about Superman. Sure, Superman was above Herald level. He was probably above Galactus!

Are you satisfied? Please stop bringing him up. And beating up Young Thor like he did IS a big deal. We have seen even this specific version of Young Thor display ridiculous durability. And again, Apocalypse was amped and wearing original Celestial armor so it is fairly

Originally posted by abhilegend
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/04/11/greg-pak-interview-action-comics-doomed-superman-crossover

And that is above herald level. You don't style on Superman, break a top tier's hands with a blocked punch and be a herald. You know what, when did a high herald broke anyone's arms with just a blocked punch?

This circular reasoning is pretty funny. I will give you that. Apoc nearly kills Thor with three hits although Thor bounces back, he is outright above herald level. Doomsday break wonder woman's arms, he is still herald. Gotta love this line of logic.

Against top tiers? Who actually beat diana in the top tier bracket? I do. You're still wrong.

Greg Pak specifically references Doomsday's metamorphosis in the arctic which happens like 7 issues later after his encounter with Diana. The version that Diana encountered did not yet display any form of evolution or power growth.

Knocking Superman off his feet with a sucker punch is not above Top Tier. So wait, Young Thor bounced back now? I thought he was nearly killed in 3 punches.

Fine, Doomsday is above Top Tier. Make him Skyfather, I don't give a shit. I don't particularly care where he ranks (Although his fight on Krypton is pretty clear) as long as you stop trying to lowball Thor.

Originally posted by abhilegend
And they could be 10 years apart and it wouldn't matter. It references a non canon story, contradicts specified canon and has never been mentioned in a canon comic.

Reading a special part of the interview? Bad rage.

facepalm

The story Breevort references is Rage of Thor. That story is 3 years apart and not INCLUDED in Matt Fraction's trilogy Man of War or whatever. That shit isn't even written by Matt Fraction.

Contradicting canon does not make a comic non-canon. At best, it makes it a retcon. I've already mentioned to you multiple times how Matt Fraction treats the history of the God's. He even specifically mentions how he is exploring Thor's downfall through multiple Ragnarok cycles by adding to the events in Thor #159.

He said you don't have to worry about continuity. How does this prove that it is non-canon? The same has been said about MANY specials over the years.

Originally posted by abhilegend
facepalm

As usual the point went over your head. Read again what I said.

Wow? So Thor would win against, say Spectre? This is the kind of shit which make comic debates so tedious. My bias? Hahahaha.

In combat feats? No, he isn't. Eh, it was akin to Superboy vs Superboy Prime. You wouldn't say Superboy beats Black Adam for standing up to SBP better, do you?

He is.

Then you're even more wrong.

Wow. You've sunk even lower than I imagined. Thor's standing against other top tiers hasn't changed because of a single arc under a single writer. If anything his stock has never been lower outside his own comic. And Diana's stock has never been higher, she is a genuine threat to top tiers now. And there wasn't much gap between Thor and post crisis wonder woman to begin with.

Fine, she cuts his head off with that atom splitting sword of hers.

I get what you're saying. You want to lowball Gorr and argue that he isn't impressive or something when it's been made perfectly clear he is and then some. And even as far back as when he fought Young Thor, he was already at a level where he'd rape all of the Olympians in Diana's Universe.

If the only evidence you have of Spectre beating Thor is hierarchy, then you do not know anything about comics. And I don't even know how you think the difference between Thor/Spectre is even remotely comparable to Diana/Thor.

We've seen Young Thor take on Odin, Gorr, Surtur, Ulik etc.

No because all Prime did was knock Black Adam away who was relatively unharmed. And again, just because it is inconvenient, that does not mean you get to ignore Young Thor fairing far better against Gorr then Diana against First Born.

I don't consider DCnU Diana to be on par with her Post-Crisis counterpart, much less Thor. And again, in comparison to Thor, she has very little tools to defeat him.

She could try but Young Thor has taken a hit from his axe, blows from the Odinsword etc. Not to mention both of them are armed so he can his use his own weapons to defend himself.

This is getting tedious. What tier do you think young Thor is? Thing, Namor or Hercules? Answer that and we'll take it from there.

Whoever pledges eternal loyalty to The Lizodfather, and sports a raptor sig, will be declared the winner if this debate. Ready...Go!

On second thought, why ruin the fun.
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Alternate? Are you implying it's non-canon or something? It happens in the future, but as far as the comics are concerned, it's all canon. No, its an alternate Galactus as every future story involves alternate characters in marvel. That simple fact has eluded you for so long, its not even funny.

And then he performed FAR better than Adult Thor. Because he fought Gorr without it for awhile? Did I? You are terrible at everything, but its not funny. Its sad.

You haven't read the story, have you? Apoc was amped in that story by -something- other than celestial armor. Read the story and find out. Would you say adult Thor would've been in the same position as Young thor?

Shut up, seriously. Only you and your references have relevancy here, don't they? Oh the hypocrisy.

Why? Its so much fun to see you getting riled up. Fairly what?



Issues as time periods? LOL. You never fail to amuse. But its evolving, that should explain the power disparity between exoskeleton showing and his thrashing of diana.

Why are you focusing on that? I'm using your own words. Your complete denial of narrative and injecting your own ideas in comics is once again, amusing.

Well, you do give a shit.





He also says about the other oneshots. Once again, you include your own ideas. Brevoort specifically said that this oneshot is in the same continuity as the other oneshots they had done. It follows a non canon story too.

When the said comic has never been referenced again? Or the writer specifically says not to worry about continuity? And? You can add to the events in a non canon comic too. See what-ifs.

Which contradict the actual established canon? I'm curious.



Forgive me if I don't apply Gorr's showings to his younger self. Suuuuuuuure.

Its just an analogy dear rage.

And how did his fight with Ulik went?

Adam couldn't even hurt prime, Superboy drew blood with punches. Its funny how you take on a single scene and ignore everything else. I don't. But she fared somewhat lesser than Orion, another top tier. How did Young Thor fare against Gorr compared to adult Thor?

then you'd be wrong. Her stength and sword are just fine.

And cut every time. Are you trying to tell me a sword so sharp that it can cut atoms wouldn't cut his head off combined with her strength? She can easily block his strikes with her bracers, disarm him and lop his head off. Even plunging the sword in his eye would kill him.

Originally posted by Badabing
Whoever pledges eternal loyalty to The Lizodfather, and sports a raptor sig, will be declared the winner if this debate. Ready...Go!
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/2280427/raptor-mascot-o.gif

hysterical

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/2280427/raptor-mascot-o.gif

hysterical He meant to do that! durhulk

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/2280427/raptor-mascot-o.gif

hysterical

Originally posted by abhilegend
And cut every time. Are you trying to tell me a sword so sharp that it can cut atoms wouldn't cut his head off combined with her strength? She can easily block his strikes with her bracers, disarm him and lop his head off. Even plunging the sword in his eye would kill him.
Or he can just KO her with lightning.

http://www.abload.de/img/justiceleague16-5y2p99.jpg

1) Thor has his axe/sword. Wonder Woman has her sword/shield. Pure close combat encounter.

2) Wonder Woman can fly, but, Thor can use his lightning.

3) H2h.

1. Thor - Damage soak is off the charts(especially from cutting weapons). At this point, you would need to cut all his limbs off to beat him.
2. Thor - See previous post this. He takes it hands down.
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/11113/111132618/3593411-thor+god+of+thuner%232.jpg

3. Thor. Better damage soak, more durable, stronger, and just as skilled.

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
1) Thor has his axe/sword. Wonder Woman has her sword/shield. Pure close combat encounter.

2) Wonder Woman can fly, but, Thor can use his lightning.

3) H2h.

1. Thor - Damage soak is off the charts(especially from cutting weapons). At this point, you would need to cut all his limbs off to beat him.
2. Thor - See previous post this. He takes it hands down.
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/11113/111132618/3593411-thor+god+of+thuner%232.jpg

3. Thor. Better damage soak, more durable, stronger, and just as skilled.

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view2/2280427/raptor-mascot-o.gif

hysterical

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
Or he can just KO her with lightning.

http://www.abload.de/img/justiceleague16-5y2p99.jpg
And his lightning is powerful enough to knock out several top tiers at once?Originally posted by celeyhyga17
1) Thor has his axe/sword. Wonder Woman has her sword/shield. Pure close combat encounter.

2) Wonder Woman can fly, but, Thor can use his lightning.

3) H2h.

1. Thor - Damage soak is off the charts(especially from cutting weapons). At this point, you would need to cut all his limbs off to beat him.
2. Thor - See previous post this. He takes it hands down.
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/11113/111132618/3593411-thor+god+of+thuner%232.jpg

3. Thor. Better damage soak, more durable, stronger, and just as skilled.
So Young Thor is what? Darkseid level in DCnU?

And she can easily block the lightning attack with her bracers. I doubt his lightning is more powerful than ****ing omega beams.

http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/11073423/JusticeLeague_6_TheGroup_010.jpg.html

And Mystique took Adult Thor out with a single cutting attack. It goes both ways.

One attack like this and he would go down.

http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/11073427/JusticeLeague_6_TheGroup_011.jpg.html


And a huge lulz @ being stronger, more durable and shit. Has he ever beaten a top tier yet?

Guys, stop lowballing.

Originally posted by abhilegend
And his lightning is powerful enough to knock out several top tiers at once?
So Young Thor is what? Darkseid level in DCnU?

And she can easily block the lightning attack with her bracers. I doubt his lightning is more powerful than ****ing omega beams.

http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/11073423/JusticeLeague_6_TheGroup_010.jpg.html

And Mystique took Adult Thor out with a single cutting attack. It goes both ways.

One attack like this and he would go down.

http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/11073427/JusticeLeague_6_TheGroup_011.jpg.html


And a huge lulz @ being stronger, more durable and shit. Has he ever beaten a top tier yet?
Oh the way she blocked Ocean Master's lightning right? Now I wonder how she would defend against a big a$$ lightning strike like the one that hit Gorr.

Yeah she surprised him with a complete cheap shot. One that he shrugs off like nothing as we later find out. Context bro.

Dude. I just showed you him taking out Gorr. Then again you probably have him as high meta considering your hate for all things Thor.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Guys, stop lowballing.

Ha! Likes that gonna happen.

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
Oh the way she blocked Ocean Master's lightning right? Now I wonder how she would defend against a big a$$ lightning strike like the one that hit Gorr.

Yeah she surprised him with a complete cheap shot. One that he shrugs off like nothing as we later find out. Context bro.

Dude. I just showed you him taking out Gorr. Then again you probably have him as high meta considering your hate for all things Thor.
So Thor's lightning>Omega beams? She didn't even try to block the lightning, its a very low showing honestly.

Cheapshot which was done by a ice shard? How threatening. And he didn't no sell it, he was dropped to his knees with a single attack.

I meant taking on a h2h fight the way you're touting him as stronger, more durable, yadda, yadda, yadda.

But tell me, was Adult Thor able to take out Gorr with that ease? That was a younger, less powerful Gorr with unknown power level at that point. But hey getting taken out by lightning is such a beastly showing, right?

Originally posted by SquallX
Ha! Likes that gonna happen.

You want to be banned with them?

lol

So I was skimming betwixt the last few pages and a couple thoughts popped into my wiener:

Was it ever confirmed that young Thor was actually weaker, as opposed to just not having Mjolnir?

And, was it ever confirmed that Old King Thor was weakened against Gorr? I realize he just got the Thorforce back, but it was never stated to be in a diminished form, just that when he got it it was returning.

Originally posted by abhilegend
So Thor's lightning>Omega beams? She didn't even try to block the lightning, its a very low showing honestly.

Cheapshot which was done by a ice shard? How threatening. And he didn't no sell it, he was dropped to his knees with a single attack.

I meant taking on a h2h fight the way you're touting him as stronger, more durable, yadda, yadda, yadda.

But tell me, was Adult Thor able to take out Gorr with that ease? That was a younger, less powerful Gorr with unknown power level at that point. But hey getting taken out by lightning is such a beastly showing, right?
Move the goalpost much? You're the only one here who is bringing that bs argument. Thor's lightning attacks are not portrayed as a narrow beam. The same way Orm's was not either..

http://media.bailedosenxutos.com/2013/11/20131129-61.jpg

A cheap shot from an ice shard made by an amped iceman. In the end a cheap shot is a cheap shot. Sane people know they can go along way in comics.

I guess going rounds with a more powerful Gorr and Odin Destroyer is not impressive to you.

And though Gorr at that time was not as powerful as he was later on, it still does not erase the fact that he's butchered countless pantheons already.

Originally posted by abhilegend
This is getting tedious. What tier do you think young Thor is? Thing, Namor or Hercules? Answer that and we'll take it from there.

I agree but that's no one's fault but yours tbh.

I made it explicitly clear that I do not mind someone giving Diana the edge due to experience or skill or whatever. Maybe its just their gut feeling, maybe they just like her more, whatever, I don't pretend my opinion is the only one that counts.

However your main argument revolves around blatant lowballing and you seem to be under the impression that he CANNOT be on Wonder Woman's level simply based on the fact that he's not on par with his adult version. Which is downright bullshit.

As a matter of fact, if you want, we can battle zone their attributes.

Hercules level easily. With his axe and weather powers, he'd beat up Hercules tbh.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
So I was skimming betwixt the last few pages and a couple thoughts popped into my wiener:

Was it ever confirmed that young Thor was actually weaker, as opposed to just not having Mjolnir?

I don't think it was ever flat out stated to be the case. But their respective fights against Gorr makes it pretty clear. Especially if you consider the Remender appearance.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
And, was it ever confirmed that Old King Thor was weakened against Gorr? I realize he just got the Thorforce back, but it was never stated to be in a diminished form, just that when he got it it was returning.

He said the Thor Force was drained 900 years ago but thought he felt the rumblings of it's return. IIRC, even right before he blasted Gorr, he was like let's see if I still have the power or whatever. That's probably why many assume he's a shadow of his former self.

I mean yes, seeing his younger self rejuvenated him but I don't think it would actually actively restore energy like the Odin Sleep because he's confident again.

Did you read the King Thor/Galactus fight?

Don't think he is on Herc level but he is pretty strong. I don't think Diana is physically on Herc's level either.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
I don't think it was ever flat out stated to be the case. But their respective fights against Gorr makes it pretty clear. Especially if you consider the Remender appearance.



He said the Thor Force was drained 900 years ago but thought he felt the rumblings of it's return. IIRC, even right before he blasted Gorr, he was like let's see if I still have the power or whatever. That's probably why many assume he's a shadow of his former self.

I mean yes, seeing his younger self rejuvenated him but I don't think it would actually actively restore energy just because he's confident now.

But Young Thor like barely did worse than Normor (outside the planet shattering). Even in that instance he still managed to land some good shots on Gorr without Mjolnir, like knocking him through the worm hole, and landing a solid hit. Plus he did "beat" him at one point as well.
Hell, he also was wiping the floor with Black Berserkers while every Thor in the arc had trouble with them at some point in time, though dynamic strength you know.

And Remender Thor tanked an axe that kills Celestials...
Apocalypse was just written incredibly high, or dare I say "right". If Remender wrote the fight with normal Thor I have no doubt he'd do the same thing. After all, he had no problem with Sentry running amok on Thor. Though he might have Mjolnir make the difference.

If people want to say a lack of Mjolnir holds him back, then so be it. However, his strength/durability didn't seem to differ so much from now, so I fail to see how it just became a fact that he was weaker.

The rumblings when it was returning. If it can suddenly return from nothing, then who's to say it stopped there?
Plus, that whole question was basically "Do I have the full Thorforce anymore? Well, I guess I do considering I nigh one shotted a guy who kills Elder Gods".
If anything that series of questions backs up that he had the full Thorforce... Maybe he didn't, however, but there's no real indication in that comic that he was weakened like everyone just assumes.
Also:

"Such was the awesome might of an All-Father unleashed"

But that same logic works with why would it restore energy in the first place? If it can do that, then why would it stop at shadows? Especially when he also had more time to recover?



Anyway, King Thor was clearly superior to the other Thors anyway. So whether or not he was at full power isn't quite relevant to anything. But just the "fact" again that he was weakened kind of irks me since he wasn't actually stated to be diminished in that arc.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
But Young Thor like barely did worse than Normor (outside the planet shattering). Even in that instance he still managed to land some good shots on Gorr without Mjolnir, like knocking him through the worm hole, and landing a solid hit. Plus he did "beat" him at one point as well.
Hell, he also was wiping the floor with Black Berserkers while every Thor in the arc had trouble with them at some point in time, though dynamic strength you know.

And Remender Thor tanked an axe that kills Celestials...
Apocalypse was just written incredibly high, or dare I say "right". If Remender wrote the fight with normal Thor I have no doubt he'd do the same thing. After all, he had no problem with Sentry running amok on Thor. Though he might have Mjolnir make the difference.

If people want to say a lack of Mjolnir holds him back, then so be it. However, his strength/durability didn't seem to differ so much from now, so I fail to see how it just became a fact that he was weaker.

But he did do worse. He got a great hit in but was injured and tossed away not too long after. All we need to do is compare their respective performances against Gorr. Adult Thor can flat out take more damage.

He killed two black berserkers. In the same issue, current Thor was dropping like a dozen of them at the same time. King Thor even without the Odin Force was taking on like hundreds of them although he was ultimately defeated.

It's not about Thor getting beat up. That super speed ram into the alien planet that Sentry hit current Thor with would have done more damage to Young Thor if Apocalypse is anything to go by.

Because of how badly he fared at different points in comparison to the current one. It wasn't just a lack of Mjolnir. Maybe it's perseverance/will power but I'd argue that if the current and young were to have like a slug fest, the younger version would get wrecked imho.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
The rumblings when it was returning. If it can suddenly return from nothing, then who's to say it stopped there?

Now you are extrapolating to the point that you need additional evidence. All we know is that it was drained almost completely and his mental rejuvenation tapped into some hidden resource inside. That however is a FAR cry from the Odin Force being at full power like you're suggesting. He'd need a full Odin sleep (IIRC a week or whatever) to restore his power just due to the time period alone, nevermind getting into fights.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift

Plus, that whole question was basically "Do I have the full Thorforce anymore? Well, I guess I do considering I nigh one shotted a guy who kills Elder Gods".
If anything that series of questions backs up that he had the full Thorforce... Maybe he didn't, however, but there's no real indication in that comic that he was weakened like everyone just assumes.
Also:

"Such was the awesome might of an All-Father unleashed"

But that same logic works with why would it restore energy in the first place? If it can do that, then why would it stop at shadows? Especially when he also had more time to recover?

Anyway, King Thor was clearly superior to the other Thors anyway. So whether or not he was at full power isn't quite relevant to anything. But just the "fact" again that he was weakened kind of irks me since he wasn't actually stated to be diminished in that arc.

That's a nice way to look at it. Another would be that he wasn't even sure that he had the Odin Force and a single blast does not the full power make:
http://s8.postimg.org/c0vz96rfl/Thor_God_of_Thunder_009_006.jpghttp://s8.postimg.org/s0j86hcv5/Thor_God_of_Thunder_009_007.jpg

Seeing current Thor rejuvenated him and filled him with vigor:
http://s28.postimg.org/qhlhculcp/Thor_God_of_Thunder_007_015.jpg

There's a difference between digging in to find an untapped reserve and having a Senzu bean. Because stopping at shadows is as far as we know that it went.

More time to recover from what? And the Odin Force isn't something that just restores itself with time. If that were the case, he wouldn't have been so lacking when Gorr first attacked and for the 900 years that followed.

Also, it seems that the Odin Force was spent a lot longer then 900 years. It was Gorr who attacked 900 years ago and by then, it seems he no longer possessed it.

It was flat out stated that it was completely drained a long time ago. And he thought he felt the rumblings of it's return. It just so happens that he was right and he could tap into it again.

Galactus claimed to be hungry in the recent fight with Thor but he wasn't actually stated to be diminished in that arc. As a matter of fact, he's still digesting energy from plenty of planets. Are we to assume he's more powerful then ever? I mean, sure, it'd be nice if everything was clear cut and precise.

You may be right, he may have the full power, but based on the available evidence, I find that to be a silly notion.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
But he did do worse. He got a great hit in but was injured and tossed away not too long after. All we need to do is compare their respective performances against Gorr. Adult Thor can flat out take more damage.

He killed two black berserkers. In the same issue, current Thor was dropping like a dozen of them at the same time. King Thor even without the Odin Force was taking on like hundreds of them although he was ultimately defeated.

It's not about Thor getting beat up. That super speed ram into the alien planet that Sentry hit current Thor with would have done more damage to Young Thor if Apocalypse is anything to go by.

Because of how badly he fared at different points in comparison to the current one. It wasn't just a lack of Mjolnir. Maybe it's perseverance/will power but I'd argue that if the current and young were to have like a slug fest, the younger version would get wrecked imho.
Not sure how he did worse. Not enough on panel, maybe. He didn't do as much though, I'll concede that. That doesn't mean he necessarily did worse, just that he didn't do as good.
And Current Thor was injured after that as well, the problem is he could have flew back if he had been knocked into space.
But respective showings against Gorr... Young Thor double KO'ed himself and Gorr. As well as cut off his arm and almost killed him.
And everything Young Thor took was almost continuous throughout the entire arc. Right after he got tortured for 17 days by Gorr, he got put on the slave planet which led right into the final battles with Gorr. And that 17 days of torture was only 7 days after their first fight. Modern Thor at least got some let up.
Young Thor fought Gorr, then Gorr again, then tortured for 17 days straight, then Gorr again, then Gorr again, then slaved, then Gorr again, and then all three fought Gorr, then he bit Gorr's eye out in a scuffle, then he killed Gorr after Modern doubled Mjolnir'd him. And that's ignoring fights with the berserkers.
If he did indeed look inferior (which he really didn't any more than rivals look different in comics), then he at least has a reason for it.



I realize they all started slaughtering them after they activated dynamic strength mode. What I'm saying is Young Thor was the only one who really didn't have any trouble with them at any point.

Nah, Apoc > Sentry. Young Thor would have giggled it off.

But his showings aren't even bad in comparison. If Thor were to beat him in a slugfest, it should be attributed to experience, as opposed to raw power.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Now you are extrapolating to the point that you need additional evidence. All we know is that it was drained almost completely and his mental rejuvenation tapped into some hidden resource inside. That however is a FAR cry from the Odin Force being at full power like you're suggesting. He'd need a full Odin sleep (IIRC a week or whatever) to restore his power just due to the time period alone, nevermind getting into fights. I'm sorry if I disagree that rumblings means it stops there when he first feels it... ?

I'll speak more on the others in a bit. But he should have needed the Odinsleep to get the power back in the first place.



Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
That's a nice way to look at it. Another would be that he wasn't even sure that he had the Odin Force and a single blast does not the full power make:
http://s8.postimg.org/c0vz96rfl/Thor_God_of_Thunder_009_006.jpghttp://s8.postimg.org/s0j86hcv5/Thor_God_of_Thunder_009_007.jpg

Seeing current Thor rejuvenated him and filled him with vigor:
http://s28.postimg.org/qhlhculcp/Thor_God_of_Thunder_007_015.jpg

There's a difference between digging in to find an untapped reserve and having a Senzu bean. Because stopping at shadows is as far as we know that it went. Another would be that it answered the question that he had the full force.

And that it stated it was the might of an all father unleashed.

But his untapped reserve was non existent anyway. He essentially spawned a power up out of thin air. And it was to say the least, quite powerful. I don't feel there's enough to say he was in a weakened state.
An apt comparison would be to compare it with when Thor first gained the Odinforce, but he was shit at using it. He wasn't actually weaker, he just needed to learn what the hell to do with it, and was shit at it. Something this Thor didn't need.

Though, that is an assumption, but that'd be the closest thing I could think of.

I mean, the guy later was wrassling Gorr and overpowering him without Mjolnir. He threw a planet into a black hole. Blasted Gorr light years and had him rethinking his life. And this is Gorr at the height of his powers who was killing Elder Gods and other such pantheons at lesser levels. That to me doesn't scream diminished. Especially when he does all that on one "rumbling" charge. Meh

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
More time to recover from what? And the Odin Force isn't something that just restores itself with time. If that were the case, he wouldn't have been so lacking when Gorr first attacked and for the 900 years that followed.

Also, it seems that the Odin Force was spent a lot longer then 900 years. It was Gorr who attacked 900 years ago and by then, it seems he no longer possessed it.

It was flat out stated that it was completely drained a long time ago. And he thought he felt the rumblings of it's return. It just so happens that he was right and he could tap into some of it again.

Galactus claimed to be hungry in the recent fight with Thor but he wasn't actually stated to be diminished in that arc. As a matter of fact, he's still digesting energy from plenty of planets. Are we to assume he's more powerful then ever? I mean, sure, it'd be nice if everything was clear cut and precisely stated but some intuition and common sense also helps. And the Odin Force isn't something that just goes away and comes back due to "confidence".
But it evidentially is in that story. You can't just apply 616 Odinforce to this one when nothing indicates the same type of usage. Odin would straight up pass out when he was low on Odinforce (though exceptions of course). This Thor, did not. And this Thor in over 900 years apparently never thought to go into an Odinsleep to reinvigorate himself... or it just straight up didn't work the same. Which all evidence points to. This Thor apparently was using rumblings to fire huge blasts repeatedly, and if he's only going on rumblings, then it seems that would be spent. Which brings us to why would he have so much energy against Galactus, since apparently an Odinsleep doesn't restore his power as evidenced by him not doing that in 900 years. Or maybe we assume he did use the Odinsleep before the Galactus fight, but that only makes the talk of him losing it in the first place questionable, as well as why he wouldn't try this at any time.

There's many contradictions between 616 canon and that. So why are we using 616 as a sole basis for how that works? Either we assume his power grew over time once he gained it. We assume that rumblings was just a word used to describe him getting it back, and it was actually at full power due to the next time he used it. Or we assume rumblings meant his powers stayed at a tiny fraction of his full might based solely on that word, and ignoring the later happenings.


Completely drained, and ever since the force came back, it was not stated to be in diminished capacity. It answered the question that he still had it. When he used it, it stated it was the might of an all father unleashed. Whenever he used it, Young Thor dropped a bucket of jizz in his pants. He called it his once again. Etc. Although, maybe the whole ALL FATHER UNLEASHED meant that it was just the might of the rumblings of an all father unleashed.
If we're going to take the "rumblings" at face value when that was the precise moment it came back WHEN it essentially gave him a power boost out of nowhere, then why would we assume it stopped there? If the "Rumblings" line would have never happened, then would you think King Thor was in lesser capacity, and why?

I was unaware that Galactus was the same character as Thor. But you're right, Thor did not feed on a planet so he must have been weakened.


But all I got was opinions why the two were weaker. What I never received was facts. And for things that are being treated as facts, you'd think there'd be facts to back those up. What I'm asking here is really a gripe for what I see passed around as fact around here, and doesn't hurt much, but it still brings about questions to tickle my fancy.


Though I like your defensiveness when I'm trying to help your case. Being stuck in your own opinions is much more important than being helped I guess.
But maybe you're right. Young Thor is quite a ways under current Thor physically. And King Thor was at a fraction of his powers, which means Gorr was weaker as a result. And all those Thor lost to him too, lol.

WW beats the shit out of Young Thor. A being superior to Superman >> a being inferior to Thor.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
Not sure how he did worse. Not enough on panel, maybe. He didn't do as much though, I'll concede that. That doesn't mean he necessarily did worse, just that he didn't do as good.
And Current Thor was injured after that as well, the problem is he could have flew back if he had been knocked into space.
But respective showings against Gorr... Young Thor double KO'ed himself and Gorr. As well as cut off his arm and almost killed him.
And everything Young Thor took was almost continuous throughout the entire arc. Right after he got tortured for 17 days by Gorr, he got put on the slave planet which led right into the final battles with Gorr. And that 17 days of torture was only 7 days after their first fight. Modern Thor at least got some let up.
Young Thor fought Gorr, then Gorr again, then tortured for 17 days straight, then Gorr again, then Gorr again, then slaved, then Gorr again, and then all three fought Gorr, then he bit Gorr's eye out in a scuffle, then he killed Gorr after Modern doubled Mjolnir'd him. And that's ignoring fights with the berserkers.
If he did indeed look inferior (which he really didn't any more than rivals look different in comics), then he at least has a reason for it.



I realize they all started slaughtering them after they activated dynamic strength mode. What I'm saying is Young Thor was the only one who really didn't have any trouble with them at any point.

Nah, Apoc > Sentry. Young Thor would have giggled it off.

But his showings aren't even bad in comparison. If Thor were to beat him in a slugfest, it should be attributed to experience, as opposed to raw power.

I'm sorry if I disagree that rumblings means it stops there when he first feels it... ?

I'll speak more on the others in a bit. But he should have needed the Odinsleep to get the power back in the first place.



Another would be that it answered the question that he had the full force.

And that it stated it was the might of an all father unleashed.

But his untapped reserve was non existent anyway. He essentially spawned a power up out of thin air. And it was to say the least, quite powerful. I don't feel there's enough to say he was in a weakened state.
An apt comparison would be to compare it with when Thor first gained the Odinforce, but he was shit at using it. He wasn't actually weaker, he just needed to learn what the hell to do with it, and was shit at it. Something this Thor didn't need.

Though, that is an assumption, but that'd be the closest thing I could think of.

I mean, the guy later was wrassling Gorr and overpowering him without Mjolnir. He threw a planet into a black hole. Blasted Gorr light years and had him rethinking his life. And this is Gorr at the height of his powers who was killing Elder Gods and other such pantheons at lesser levels. That to me doesn't scream diminished. Especially when he does all that on one "rumbling" charge. Meh

And the Odin Force isn't something that just goes away and comes back due to "confidence".
But it evidentially is in that story. You can't just apply 616 Odinforce to this one when nothing indicates the same type of usage. Odin would straight up pass out when he was low on Odinforce (though exceptions of course). This Thor, did not. And this Thor in over 900 years apparently never thought to go into an Odinsleep to reinvigorate himself... or it just straight up didn't work the same. Which all evidence points to. This Thor apparently was using rumblings to fire huge blasts repeatedly, and if he's only going on rumblings, then it seems that would be spent. Which brings us to why would he have so much energy against Galactus, since apparently an Odinsleep doesn't restore his power as evidenced by him not doing that in 900 years. Or maybe we assume he did use the Odinsleep before the Galactus fight, but that only makes the talk of him losing it in the first place questionable, as well as why he wouldn't try this at any time.

There's many contradictions between 616 canon and that. So why are we using 616 as a sole basis for how that works? Either we assume his power grew over time once he gained it. We assume that rumblings was just a word used to describe him getting it back, and it was actually at full power due to the next time he used it. Or we assume rumblings meant his powers stayed at a tiny fraction of his full might based solely on that word, and ignoring the later happenings.


Completely drained, and ever since the force came back, it was not stated to be in diminished capacity. It answered the question that he still had it. When he used it, it stated it was the might of an all father unleashed. Whenever he used it, Young Thor dropped a bucket of jizz in his pants. He called it his once again. Etc. Although, maybe the whole ALL FATHER UNLEASHED meant that it was just the might of the rumblings of an all father unleashed.
If we're going to take the "rumblings" at face value when that was the precise moment it came back WHEN it essentially gave him a power boost out of nowhere, then why would we assume it stopped there? If the "Rumblings" line would have never happened, then would you think King Thor was in lesser capacity, and why?

I was unaware that Galactus was the same character as Thor. But you're right, Thor did not feed on a planet so he must have been weakened.


But all I got was opinions why the two were weaker. What I never received was facts. And for things that are being treated as facts, you'd think there'd be facts to back those up. What I'm asking here is really a gripe for what I see passed around as fact around here, and doesn't hurt much, but it still brings about questions to tickle my fancy.


Though I like your defensiveness when I'm trying to help your case. Being stuck in your own opinions is much more important than being helped I guess.
But maybe you're right. Young Thor is quite a ways under current Thor physically. And King Thor was at a fraction of his powers, which means Gorr was weaker as a result. And all those Thor lost to him too, lol.

WW beats the shit out of Young Thor. A being superior to Superman >> a being inferior to Thor.

King Thor regained some of the Odin Force and has been running on that juice since the Gorr fight and against Galactus. Based on the available evidence, that is the only possible conclusion I can reach without starting to throw in wild speculation about how things may or may not work.

You know what? You're right.

It's never been stated King Thor is flat out weaker (Although it was never pointed he was at full power or whatever and the burden of evidence is on you to prove that he is if that is what you believe) and that Young Thor was physically less powerful then adult Thor.

If you want to believe otherwise, I can't really convince you as nothing is completely black and white.

That being said, ignoring how the Odin Sleep has worked for 70 years, including Reigning King Thor (The inspiration for this one), is imho flat out ridiculous. Like I said, this Galactus never indicated that being hungry made him weaker in power, are we to assume he's as powerful as he ever was? Maybe when he says hungry, he means for earth specifically due to revenge. mhmm

And do you really believe Apocalypse > Sentry (Amped by the Death Seed no less) in power?

You think Diana > Superman, Superman > Thor? Because being inferior to current Thor to a degree does not automatically someone inferior to Wonder Woman.

Is Reigning KT this new KT? Same arm gone, same eye gone...

I don't think so.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
King Thor regained some of the Odin Force and has been running on that juice since the Gorr fight and against Galactus. Based on the available evidence, that is the only possible conclusion I can reach without starting to throw in wild speculation about how things may or may not work.

You know what? You're right.

It's never been stated King Thor is flat out weaker (Although it was never pointed he was at full power or whatever and the burden of evidence is on you to prove that he is if that is what you believe) and that Young Thor was physically less powerful then adult Thor.

If you want to believe otherwise, I can't really convince you as nothing is completely black and white.

That being said, ignoring how the Odin Sleep has worked for 70 years, including Reigning King Thor (The inspiration for this one), is imho flat out ridiculous. Like I said, this Galactus never indicated that being hungry made him weaker in power, are we to assume he's as powerful as he ever was? Maybe when he says hungry, he means for earth specifically as revenge. mhmm

And do you really believe Apocalypse > Sentry (Amped by the Death Seed no less) in power?

You think Diana > Superman, Superman > Thor? Because being inferior to current Thor to a degree does not automatically someone inferior to Wonder Woman. Nice strawman though. I don't think his power has depleted though, is what I'm saying. Or at least not to the point he would actually need an Odinsleep, if he does currently still run on that.

The whole "Might of an All Father unleashed" implies that he is acting in full capacity. And again, I ask what leads you to believe he is in weaker capacity if you exclude the "rumblings"?
Was it him almost one shotting a Skyfather level being that convinced you? Tanking a punch that put him through a planet and breaking a moon? Either opening a black hole and throwing a planet into it, or dragging a planet to some random black hole and throwing it in there likely light years away? Etc.

I agree that it isn't so black and white. Which was my major gripe with it in the first place. As long as you're admitting previous indications aren't absolute fact, I'm OK with that.

I'm not ignoring how the Odinsleep works, the comic is. The only way it makes sense in the grand scheme of things is if it's akin to when Thor first gained the Odinforce and was essentially at full power from that first charge (though he was shit at using it). And maybe it makes more sense when I think of it like that.
Though it still doesn't answer why exactly he lost it in the first place, or why he couldn't have Odinslept in those 900 years, but plot I guess.
And Galactus needing to eat planets has been in like every single comic he's ever appeared in... not quite the same thing to say the least.

I think under Remender, he'd have him beating Sentry. Everything that guy's written for like 6 years has been about Apocalypse.
I don't personally think Apoc is above Sentry, but I won't attribute Apocalypse's feat to Sentry just because he might possibly be stronger. Young Thor was no pussy after all, and that feat was a little bit extreme, for anyone around that level. Yes, it'd be more acceptable if Young Thor was weaker, but I don't figure that's the case based on Young Thor's history. Hell, even you yourself used the Odin/Destroyer vs Young Thor fight as evidence.

I don't believe any of that personally. I'm just saying if you're so apt in disproving everything I state when I try and back you up, that that's what it could lead to.



And since you earlier brought up a query about what I thought about Galactus, as well as your insistence on talking about him I'll answer some things.
Galactus was weakened. King Thor was at a nice level. Now, that doesn't mean much since I'd put it in the same vein as the weakened Galactus vs IB fight. It was just an incredibly good showing for hungry Galactus that he gets every once in a while. Honestly, he would have been scraped in most other comics, but I guess Aaron is a little bit more respectful... though his Galactus dialogue is despicable.
It doesn't change much in the grand scheme of things. Not something to use against King Thor (though it inevitably will because dawg Alpha Flight beat him!). King Thor fought a high end Hungry Galactus and did incredibly well. Simple really. Same thing likely would have happened if he had fed, but it is what it is. Though tbh, that's how I would have written it.
King Thor is still a high end Skyfather. Galactus is still Galactus.

Or in another way to look at it. He fought a being that was able to take many shots without having to resort to blocking and still came out well. And we know King Thor hits like a sonofawhore, so other Galactus low showings are ultimately irrelevant in that instance (as well as alternate reality).

I know you'll disagree with me, but that's just my take.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
I don't think his power has depleted though, is what I'm saying. Or at least not to the point he would actually need an Odinsleep, if he does currently still run on that.

The whole "Might of an All Father unleashed" implies that he is acting in full capacity. And again, I ask what leads you to believe he is in weaker capacity if you exclude the "rumblings"?
Was it him almost one shotting a Skyfather level being that convinced you? Tanking a punch that put him through a planet and breaking a moon? Either opening a black hole and throwing a planet into it, or dragging a planet to some random black hole and throwing it in there likely light years away? Etc.

I agree that it isn't so black and white. Which was my major gripe with it in the first place. As long as you're admitting previous indications aren't absolute fact, I'm OK with that.

I'm not ignoring how the Odinsleep works, the comic is. The only way it makes sense in the grand scheme of things is if it's akin to when Thor first gained the Odinforce and was essentially at full power from that first charge (though he was shit at using it). And maybe it makes more sense when I think of it like that.
Though it still doesn't answer why exactly he lost it in the first place, or why he couldn't have Odinslept in those 900 years, but plot I guess.
And Galactus needing to eat planets has been in like every single comic he's ever appeared in... not quite the same thing to say the least.

I think under Remender, he'd have him beating Sentry. Everything that guy's written for like 6 years has been about Apocalypse.
I don't personally think Apoc is above Sentry, but I won't attribute Apocalypse's feat to Sentry just because he might possibly be stronger. Young Thor was no pussy after all, and that feat was a little bit extreme, for anyone around that level. Yes, it'd be more acceptable if Young Thor was weaker, but I don't figure that's the case based on Young Thor's history. Hell, even you yourself used the Odin/Destroyer vs Young Thor fight as evidence.

I don't believe any of that personally. I'm just saying if you're so apt in disproving everything I state when I try and back you up, that that's what it could lead to.

And since you earlier brought up a query about what I thought about Galactus, as well as your insistence on talking about him I'll answer some things.
Galactus was weakened. King Thor was at a nice level. Now, that doesn't mean much since I'd put it in the same vein as the weakened Galactus vs IB fight. It was just an incredibly good showing for hungry Galactus that he gets every once in a while. Honestly, he would have been scraped in most other comics, but I guess Aaron is a little bit more respectful... though his Galactus dialogue is despicable.
It doesn't change much in the grand scheme of things. Not something to use against King Thor (though it inevitably will because dawg Alpha Flight beat him!). King Thor fought a high end Hungry Galactus and did incredibly well. Simple really. Same thing likely would have happened if he had fed, but it is what it is. Though tbh, that's how I would have written it.
King Thor is still a high end Skyfather. Galactus is still Galactus.

Or in another way to look at it. He fought a being that was able to take many shots without having to resort to blocking and still came out well. And we know King Thor hits like a sonofawhore, so other Galactus low showings are ultimately irrelevant in that instance (as well as alternate reality).

I know you'll disagree with me, but that's just my take.

The Odin Force was drained completely. He couldn't use it as Gorr was slaying his children. The idea that it was anything less then noticeably depleted is imo idiotic.

No, the might of the All-Father implies that he finally started to fight at the level of a Skyfather. That however does not mean that he's fighting at his very best. You just listed off a bunch of good feats. That doesn't mean he has to be at full power anymore than other characters.

The comic is not necessarily ignoring the Odin Sleep, it's saying that it was drained to the point that the Odin Sleep was perhaps not functioning. This incarnation was directly inspired by Jurgen's version.

Are you asking me to prove that the Odin Sleep is still a factor? Because I believe it'd be like asking you to prove that Galactus still needs to feed to be at full power. It's imho retarded.

I agree to some extent. Even if Galactus was at full power and King Thor was running on fumes or vise versa, I doubt the fight would have gone any different. That being said, I don't think we should jump to conclusions just because they are convenient based on what we believe feats into the hierarchy. Although I guess ultimately it is all irrelevant.

Originally posted by celeyhyga17
Move the goalpost much? You're the only one here who is bringing that bs argument. Thor's lightning attacks are not portrayed as a narrow beam. The same way Orm's was not either..

http://media.bailedosenxutos.com/2013/11/20131129-61.jpg

A cheap shot from an ice shard made by an amped iceman. In the end a cheap shot is a cheap shot. Sane people know they can go along way in comics.

I guess going rounds with a more powerful Gorr and Odin Destroyer is not impressive to you.

And though Gorr at that time was not as powerful as he was later on, it still does not erase the fact that he's butchered countless pantheons already.
What does adult Thor's lightning means in this thread? And yes, it was a narrow beam which hit Gorr. I don't know how you could miss that.

Made by an amped Iceman doesn't makes ice shards more powerful. You're being silly again.

Getting beaten isn't impressive for me. Superboy going three rounds with SBP doesn't makes him a top tier either.

Tough shit. He wasn't as powerful as he was later on, he could've been anywhere in power.Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
I agree but that's no one's fault but yours tbh.

I made it explicitly clear that I do not mind someone giving Diana the edge due to experience or skill or whatever. Maybe its just their gut feeling, maybe they just like her more, whatever, I don't pretend my opinion is the only one that counts.

However your main argument revolves around blatant lowballing and you seem to be under the impression that he CANNOT be on Wonder Woman's level simply based on the fact that he's not on par with his adult version. Which is downright bullshit.

As a matter of fact, if you want, we can battle zone their attributes.

Hercules level easily. With his axe and weather powers, he'd beat up Hercules tbh.
Wait? You think young thor is as strong as Hercules? So Adult Thor>>Young Thor=Hercules=Adult Thor? What kind of BS is that?

Originally posted by abhilegend

Made by an amped Iceman doesn't makes ice shards more powerful. You're being silly again.

You don't believe Iceman's constructs, much less ones where he is amped by a Celestial Death Seed (To the point he would have killed everyone on the planet and was about to), are more durable then ice shards?

Serious or trolling? I'm giving you benefit of the doubt here.

Originally posted by abhilegend

Wait? You think young thor is as strong as Hercules? So Adult Thor>>Young Thor=Hercules=Adult Thor? What kind of BS is that?

Not what I said. In strength, I'd say Hercules would be superior but Young Thor is on his level in regards to this specific incarnation. That doesn't mean he's completely on par.

If you include his OP axe and weather powers and he'd wreck Hercules in a fight.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
The Odin Force was drained completely. He couldn't use it as Gorr was slaying his children. The idea that it was anything less then noticeably depleted is imo idiotic.

No, the whole might of the All-Father implies that he finally started to fight at the level of a Skyfather. That however does not mean that he's fighting at his best. You just listed off a bunch of good feats. That doesn't mean he has to be full power anymore than other characters.

The comic is not necessarily ignoring the Odin Sleep, it's saying that it was drained to the point that the Odin Sleep was perhaps not functioning. This incarnation was directly inspired by Jurgen's version. The Odin Force doesn't function differently all of a sudden because there are minor contradictions.

Asking me to prove that the Odin Sleep is still a factor is like asking you to prove Galactus still needs to feed to be at full power. It's imho retarded.

I agree to some extent. Even if Galactus was at full power and King Thor was running on fumes or vise versa, I doubt the fight would have gone any different. That being said, I don't think we should jump to conclusions just because they are convenient based on what we believe feats into the hierarchy. I don't even know what you could be responding to with your first line. Since my first line was talking about after it came back...
Unless you're saying the Odinforce was drained completely after it came back... ?

Well, if that's what it means, then that would mean he was fighting not at the level of a Skyfather, but at the level of the All Father. Which is a little bit more impressive. In fact, if that's what you think that line means, then you just indirectly agreed with my point, even with your twisting of it.
He was fighting at the level of the All Father, ie the most powerful Skyfather level. Good point Rage.

And yes, I listed a bunch of good feats. But what I listed was consistent with the previous feats of Jurgens Thor who you kept bringing up. It was consistent with his high feats. It was consistent with good feats as a whole really. Hell, most of those feats would be Jurgens' Thor high feats. Maybe he was diminished, maybe he was. But his feats do not in any way tell that story.
And you keep ignoring the question there pal. If you took the word "rumblings" away, then what is Thor being weakened based off of IYO?

Well, if the comic isn't ignoring the Odinsleep, then he doesn't need it, no?
And again, how could it be completely depleted if he could have simply went into the Odinsleep to regain it? It seems odd to say the least.
And no, the Odinsleep doesn't suddenly function differently, good point. Which will lead directly into my next point.

The Odinsleep is only a factor when he's weak anyway. You randomly inserting it into the plot as a reason why he was probably weakened doesn't work when exactly the opposite is shown, IE, he didn't need the Odinsleep. If you're going to keep bringing up Odinsleep as some sort of point, then it'd be interesting to show him actually needing to go into the Odinsleep to refill his power. The absence of the Odinsleep doesn't prove he's weakened, in fact, it goes against that notion entirely.
Galactus needed to feed. Odin didn't need to go into the Odinsleep. What does that tell you?

We can keep talking about how relevant the Odinsleep is all day, or how much of a factor it really is, but at the end of the day if you keep inserting it in there it only seeks to farther prove he wasn't as weak as you're implying.

But yes, let's take your point as a fact. The Odinsleep is definitely a factor in Aaron's Thor. OK, and let's assume it works the exact same way, ie when his power wanes he needs to go into the Odinsleep to replenish it. Now, what exactly would not needing to go into the Odinsleep prove exactly in this case considering the 70 plus years of how canon the Odinsleep is? Well, I may not be a rocket pedophile, but this seems to tell me that Thor currently doesn't need the Odinsleep. That Thor's power hasn't waned enough to go into the Odinsleep. That the Odinsleep has been a complete non factor in every appearance he's been shown in. That's what that tells me anyway. But apparently Thor not needing to go into the Odinsleep tells you that he actually needs it? That doesn't make sense to me personally, but apparently it does to you.

And on the Galactus red herring you keep bringing up. If Galactus doesn't need to feed, then I assume he isn't at hungry levels. If Odin doesn't need to sleep, I assume he's not weakened. If Galactus needs to eat, I assume he's weakened. If Odin needs to sleep, I assume he's weakened. It's simple really. I'd like it if you stop highlighting points for me though. Apparently you want to argue with everyone who doesn't fit into your Thor ideology.

Well, if we shouldn't jump to conclusions, then naturally we should assume Thor needed the Odinsleep...
But I digress. Not sure what I jumped to conclusions on there, but sure, look at me leap.

Again, you can either look at it as Galactus, or you can look at it as a completely separate being who can take many shots unshielded from someone who had Gorr rethink his life with one shot. Either way, it's impressive.



But I take we don't care about Young Thor anymore? And all of this is more about trying to prove King Thor was weakened against Galactus it seems? Tsk tsk tsk. You assume I care about that fight too much it seems. What I really want to talk about is why exactly people try to downgrade Gorr by saying King Thor was weakened, even before Galactus was an afterthought in this arc. It seems counter productive to me, but as long as King Thor has an excuse against Galactus, we can throw Gorr under the bus...

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
You don't believe Iceman's constructs, much less ones where he is amped by a Celestial Death Seed (To the point he would have killed everyone on the planet and was about to), are more durable then ice shards?

Serious or trolling? I'm giving you benefit of the doubt here.



Not what I said. In strength, I'd say Hercules would be superior but Young Thor is on his level in regards to this specific incarnation. That doesn't mean he's completely on par.

If you include his OP axe and weather powers and he'd wreck Hercules in a fight.
Stabbing thor makes razor sharp ice shards (which were as stated in the comic) ultra-mega-super-duper durable? The ice wasn't even that durable as Storm and Gambit were taking out the snowmen which created those shards.

http://i.imgur.com/q4gINtU.jpg

Sometimes I wonder, are you for real?

We're on a good track. So weaker than herc, is he as strong as Namor or stronger?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Stabbing thor makes razor sharp ice shards (which were as stated in the comic) ultra-mega-super-duper durable? The ice wasn't even that durable as Storm and Gambit were taking out the snowmen which created those shards.

http://i.imgur.com/q4gINtU.jpg

Sometimes I wonder, are you for real?

We're on a good track. So weaker than herc, is he as strong as Namor or stronger?

Yes. You just posted a scan of them trapping Wolverine and cutting him in places where he should have an Adamantium skeleton breaking them off.

Yes, Abhilighend. Solidified ice is usually more durable then snow. Not to mention attacks thrown by Mystique would be more powerful then snowmen fodder she created.

Are you? In this very same comic, we saw Iceman hold the entire planet at his mercy. Heck, his ice creations were withstanding some of Thor's lightning:
http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/16212548/Astonishing_X-Men_064-017.jpg.html

Weaker Iceman incarnations have used his ice to block everything from Optic Blasts to eye beams from the Stranger.

As strong more or less I'd say.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yes, Abhilighend. Solidified ice is usually more durable then snow. Let's not get crazy here. Next you're going to say granite is more durable than pizza or something

Originally posted by abhilegend
What does adult Thor's lightning means in this thread? And yes, it was a narrow beam which hit Gorr. I don't know how you could miss that.This is narrow to you? Err...
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/9/91339/3299495-thorvsgorr8.png

Anyways, Young Thor is not restricted to a single narrow attack. He can strike multiple targets with multiple bolts and not unlike Orm's attack on the JLA. She is not blocking them easily.
http://nerdgeekfeelings.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/thor-god-of-thunder-008-014ae.jpg
Originally posted by abhilegend
Made by an amped Iceman doesn't makes ice shards more powerful. You're being silly again.

Getting beaten isn't impressive for me. Superboy going three rounds with SBP doesn't makes him a top tier either.

Tough shit. He wasn't as powerful as he was later on, he could've been anywhere in power.
Of course an ice attack from a death seed Iceman would be more powerful than from a regular Bobby.

Of course you wouldn't think it was impressive. I'm not surprised at all. And yet he stalemated that Gorr from the past..

Gorr has clearly increased in power throughout the years not to mention the experience he's gained also. It's understood since god blood feeds the Annihiblade. He even thanked Thor for teaching him a valuable lesson after their early encounters.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Storm and Gambit were taking out the snowmen which created those shards.

http://i.imgur.com/q4gINtU.jpg proof that Abhi didn't read it

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
I don't even know what you could be responding to with your first line. Since my first line was talking about after it came back...
Unless you're saying the Odinforce was drained completely after it came back... ?

Well, if that's what it means, then that would mean he was fighting not at the level of a Skyfather, but at the level of the All Father. Which is a little bit more impressive. In fact, if that's what you think that line means, then you just indirectly agreed with my point, even with your twisting of it.
He was fighting at the level of the All Father, ie the most powerful Skyfather level. Good point Rage.

And yes, I listed a bunch of good feats. But what I listed was consistent with the previous feats of Jurgens Thor who you kept bringing up. It was consistent with his high feats. It was consistent with good feats as a whole really. Hell, most of those feats would be Jurgens' Thor high feats. Maybe he was diminished, maybe he was. But his feats do not in any way tell that story.
And you keep ignoring the question there pal. If you took the word "rumblings" away, then what is Thor being weakened based off of IYO?

Sure, the highest level of Skyfather. What ever you prefer. Just as long as it is clear there exists no evidence to support him being at full power.

I didn't bring up his feats as evidence of him being diminished. If I wanted to do that, I'd note how he can't fly, create life etc. or do much more then blast stuff (Along with enhanced stats) in this weakened state.

The fact that the Odin Force was completely drained and he has not yet entered the Odin Sleep. Tapping into some hidden internal reserve does not rejuvenate the rest of his energies.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
Well, if the comic isn't ignoring the Odinsleep, then he doesn't need it, no?
And again, how could it be completely depleted if he could have simply went into the Odinsleep to regain it? It seems odd to say the least.
And no, the Odinsleep doesn't suddenly function differently, good point. Which will lead directly into my next point.

The Odinsleep is only a factor when he's weak anyway. You randomly inserting it into the plot as a reason why he was probably weakened doesn't work when exactly the opposite is shown, IE, he didn't need the Odinsleep. If you're going to keep bringing up Odinsleep as some sort of point, then it'd be interesting to show him actually needing to go into the Odinsleep to refill his power. The absence of the Odinsleep doesn't prove he's weakened, in fact, it goes against that notion entirely.
Galactus needed to feed. Odin didn't need to go into the Odinsleep. What does that tell you?

We can keep talking about how relevant the Odinsleep is all day, or how much of a factor it really is, but at the end of the day if you keep inserting it in there it only seeks to farther prove he wasn't as weak as you're implying.

But yes, let's take your point as a fact. The Odinsleep is definitely a factor in Aaron's Thor. OK, and let's assume it works the exact same way, ie when his power wanes he needs to go into the Odinsleep to replenish it. Now, what exactly would not needing to go into the Odinsleep prove exactly in this case considering the 70 plus years of how canon the Odinsleep is? Well, I may not be a rocket pedophile, but this seems to tell me that Thor currently doesn't need the Odinsleep. That Thor's power hasn't waned enough to go into the Odinsleep. That the Odinsleep has been a complete non factor in every appearance he's been shown in. That's what that tells me anyway. But apparently Thor not needing to go into the Odinsleep tells you that he actually needs it? That doesn't make sense to me personally, but apparently it does to you.

This is why I wanted to drop it. I almost feel asleep reading this wall of text just to repeat myself for the fifth time.

No, again you are speculating about completely unsupported stuff. All we know was that the Odin Force drained, he regained some portion of it and he has not yet entered the Odin Sleep.

I'm saying that he IS weak. Why is he not prioritizing entering the Odin Sleep? I'm not sure, maybe he's stubborn, perhaps we'll find out later on that he was doing all he could to put it off. Perhaps through the power of hope and belief, he regained all his power and then some. Who knows?

All I DO know is what has been printed on panel and so far, based on what we know of the Odin Force, King Thor being at full power is not possible.

All this word play and you still seem to gloss over the simple fact that the Odin Force was thought to be completely drained and he has yet to enter the Odin Sleep. Not highlighting that he does need to enter the Odin Sleep does not automatically mean he is no longer weakened or that the other evidence vanishes. Your reasoning for him regaining all of his power legitimately makes no sense based on what we know of the Odin Force. There is a big difference between will power reigniting some energy and restoring all his stores.

We KNOW that Odin Force can only fully rejuvenate through the Odin Sleep. We also however know that Odin Force wielders can put off the Odin Sleep for incredibly long periods of time but it is dangerous and their power continues to wane.

Do you not understand that for over 900 years, he was completely bereft of the power? Failure clouding his mind and suppressing some makes sense. It magically returning in full however is an entirely different leap.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
And on the Galactus red herring you keep bringing up. If Galactus doesn't need to feed, then I assume he isn't at hungry levels. If Odin doesn't need to sleep, I assume he's not weakened. If Galactus needs to eat, I assume he's weakened. If Odin needs to sleep, I assume he's weakened. It's simple really. I'd like it if you stop highlighting points for me though. Apparently you want to argue with everyone who doesn't fit into your Thor ideology.

Well, if we shouldn't jump to conclusions, then naturally we should assume Thor needed the Odinsleep...
But I digress. Not sure what I jumped to conclusions on there, but sure, look at me leap.

Again, you can either look at it as Galactus, or you can look at it as a completely separate being who can take many shots unshielded from someone who had Gorr rethink his life with one shot. Either way, it's impressive.

The comic made it very clear that the Odin Force was in fact drained preceding his fight with Gorr. This isn't rocket science.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
But I take we don't care about Young Thor anymore? And all of this is more about trying to prove King Thor was weakened against Galactus it seems? Tsk tsk tsk. You assume I care about that fight too much it seems. What I really want to talk about is why exactly people try to downgrade Gorr by saying King Thor was weakened, even before Galactus was an afterthought in this arc. It seems counter productive to me, but as long as King Thor has an excuse against Galactus, we can throw Gorr under the bus...

I care, I just realize the futility of discussing something when your mind is already made up.

My position has been that King Thor was weakened from the get go, his fight with Galactus is irrelevant to my stance. Although I'd wager it has a lot to do with yours.

You seem to think my stance will somehow change because Gorr won't look as good. It won't. And people lowballed Gorr because they didn't think that this Thor was particularly powerful due to his condition. Which is silly as weakened or not, an Odin Force wielder is crazy powerful. Further supported by his fight against Galactus.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yes. You just posted a scan of them trapping Wolverine and cutting him in places where he should have an Adamantium skeleton breaking them off.

Yes, Abhilighend. Solidified ice is usually more durable then snow. Not to mention attacks thrown by Mystique would be more powerful then snowmen fodder she created.

Are you? In this very same comic, we saw Iceman hold the entire planet at his mercy. Heck, his ice creations were withstanding some of Thor's lightning:
http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/16212548/Astonishing_X-Men_064-017.jpg.html

Weaker Iceman incarnations have used his ice to block everything from Optic Blasts to eye beams from the Stranger.

As strong more or less I'd say.
Wut? You're saying the ice was harder than adamantium? Next you would say that random arrows from HAND ninjas are more durable than adamantium because they go through logan's body where adamantium is supposed to be.

Yes rage.of.gamma, the ice attack from the ice constructs were more durable than the constructs themselves. And those are the same constructs like which were getting blown up by storm and Gambit. In fact you posted the same scan as I did. And Mystique was just gesturing, the snowmen created those shards. And Bobby made the ice constructs facing Thor extra durable, because why not?

There are so many things wrong with this post, it ain't even funny.

List all the high feats from Bobby while you're at it, why don't you? But I get it since it pierced Thor, it was harder than adamantium.

And Namor would beat DCnU diana then I guess?Originally posted by celeyhyga17
This is narrow to you? Err...
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/9/91339/3299495-thorvsgorr8.png

Anyways, Young Thor is not restricted to a single narrow attack. He can strike multiple targets with multiple bolts and not unlike Orm's attack on the JLA. She is not blocking them easily.
http://nerdgeekfeelings.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/thor-god-of-thunder-008-014ae.jpg

Of course an ice attack from a death seed Iceman would be more powerful than from a regular Bobby.

Of course you wouldn't think it was impressive. I'm not surprised at all. And yet he stalemated that Gorr from the past..

Gorr has clearly increased in power throughout the years not to mention the experience he's gained also. It's understood since god blood feeds the Annihiblade. He even thanked Thor for teaching him a valuable lesson after their early encounters.
The attack which took out Gorr was definitely not wide.

He can target practice, she only has to block the lightning coming to her way.

I am learning new things everyday. Apparently that ice shard cut through adamantium as Rage put it.

And of course you'd find it so impressive. It was done by Thor after all.

So what I'm getting this that Gorr started at an unknown power level where a single bolt of lightning took him out and then he was stomping three Thors. That somehow means taking a young Gorr so impressive. Gotcha.

Originally posted by pym-ftw
proof that Abhi didn't read it
Of course.

honest mistake, just busting your chops.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Wut? You're saying the ice was harder than adamantium? Next you would say that random arrows from HAND ninjas are more durable than adamantium because they go through logan's body where adamantium is supposed to be.

Yes rage.of.gamma, the ice attack from the ice constructs were more durable than the constructs themselves. And those are the same constructs like which were getting blown up by storm and Gambit. In fact you posted the same scan as I did. And Mystique was just gesturing, the snowmen created those shards. And Bobby made the ice constructs facing Thor extra durable, because why not?

There are so many things wrong with this post, it ain't even funny.

List all the high feats from Bobby while you're at it, why don't you? But I get it since it pierced Thor, it was harder than adamantium.

And Namor would beat DCnU diana then I guess?

No, I'm saying it gives you an indication of how durable it is when it doesn't shatter against his skull.

Yes, the ICE projectiles were more durable then the SNOW constructs. Ice IS generally more durable then snow. Not to mention we're referring to Mystique piercing Thor.

You can't think of a reason why Iceman would send a more powerful construct against THOR in comparison to GAMBIT and co.? Not to mention that was a gigantic ice monster that he personally created as opposed to snow constructs that Mystique summoned.

Hey look, Gambit's attack did nothing to Mystique's amped up form:
http://s30.postimg.org/7e477ht41/Astonishing_X_Men_065_002.jpg
http://s30.postimg.org/3t8bo9okh/Astonishing_X_Men_065_003.jpg

And in the same panel, they were easily destroying the snowmen as if they were made out of, well, snow, but were unable to break Logan out.

Surely this is PIS or some sort of magic. It's not at all possible for ice constructs to be more durable then snow, much less for certain ice constructs to be more durable then others. I mean, that would be crazy. It's not as if Iceman has historically been able to create more durable constructs but utilizing more energy........

Yes, I am. Because this particular Iceman shits on every other Iceman portrayal I've ever seen.

Also, if you think I have to post high end feats from Iceman to prove that his constructs are more durable then regular ice (SMH) then you've never picked up an X-men comic in your life.

He's more or less as strong as her as far as I'm concerned. That doesn't mean he beats her however.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
No, I'm saying it gives you an indication of how durable it is when it doesn't shatter against his skull. That's not what happened? You think they fired specially short ice shards at his head while firing a foot long shards into his abdomen?

And those were not ice constructs? Way to fire ice shards from their snow bodies. That was a shard from those ice constructs IIRC.

I can. It wasn't mentioned anywhere though. So it was big and thus more powerful. Great logic.

That was AFTER she impaled Thor with the shard.

What do you mean? Deathbird is seen chipping away the ice. But I feel breaking a block of ice is harder than to break a shard.

It is. It wasn't shown that the ice shard was anything impressively sharp or durable. It was stated to be razor sharp and that's it. Sure he has. But that's irrelevant here.

And? Iceman didn't show anything impressive in his construct durability. I mean you think this is going to happen to a top tier even with Thor sucker shotting him?

http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/16212551/Astonishing_X-Men_064-020.jpg.html

I don't.

Sure I haven't. Only you read comics I guess.

Then you are saying that she is as strong as post crisis version. Because I don't think there is much difference between Namor and post crisis diana in strength.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Like I've told you before, I don't know how stuff works in that rape rampant shit hole you live in, but here in the civilized world, words matter and carry weight.

I thought that was better. mhmm Too bad Epicurus is banned.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Sure, the highest level of Skyfather. What ever you prefer. Just as long as it is clear there exists no evidence to support him being at full power.

I didn't bring up his feats as evidence of him being diminished. If I wanted to do that, I'd note how he can't fly, create life etc. or do much more then blast stuff (Along with enhanced stats) in this weakened state.

The fact that the Odin Force was completely drained and he has not yet entered the Odin Sleep. Tapping into some hidden internal reserve does not rejuvenate the rest of his energies. It's an all father level attack. Don't try and twist out of it now when you already confirmed that it means exactly that attack. All Father = Odin level btw since he was the original All Father. Odin was the previous bearer of the Odinforce (now called the Thorforce since Thor held it longer).

Now, let's go through this again so we have this clear:
Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
No, the might of the All-Father implies that he finally started to fight at the level of a Skyfather. That however does not mean that he's fighting at his very best.

You state that that attack implies he was fighting at Skyfather level. However, the exact words were:
http://postimg.org/image/s0j86hcv5/

"Such was the awesome might of an All Father unleashed"

Which combined with your post, means that he was fighting at All Father level unleashed. Unless your post was wrong, and should be changed.
And unless we're allowed to extrapolate that All Father just means Skyfather level, and we're supposed to ignore what All Father actually means and just ignore the existence of "Unleashed".

Which has zero to do with his raw power. And you just completely ignored that his current feats match most if not all of his previous ones. But yes, King Thor can't fly. Naturally he must be the weakest. And he was apparently trying to grow things. Was he using his power to do this? We don't know.
But if you're going to put an inability to fly above his actual feats, then... well, actually, what the hell, I don't know what to say.
Though how quick you are to forget that King Thor back Thor back to life and purged the necrosword from Thor. And sent everyone back to their own universe. But he can't fly. **** him right. You know what happened the last time Thor died when a full powered Odin was around? He died, and Odin didn't bring him back...

It took Thor from 41 to 57 to enter the Odinsleep from when he first gained the Odinpower. In that time he fought Perrikus, Desak, Desak, made reactors, screwed with nukes, etc. It took remaking the whole moon to finally put him over the top. Don't act like the first charge must be minor just because it's coming back.

Hell, when Thor stopped subconsciously holding the power back he remade the moon "using his power to the fullest"
http://i62.tinypic.com/2l8hf9v.jpg
http://i57.tinypic.com/2hcjfdg.jpg



Oh and btw, when Thor expended himself too much that he needed to recharge the Odinpower, guess what happened? Take a guess.
Give up?

Why, he entered the Odinsleep automatically of course!
http://i58.tinypic.com/13z4vn9.jpg

Considering how Jurgens Aaron's King Thor is, it's a wonder that he has not entered the Odinsleep automatically when he needed it. In fact, it's kind of funny isn't it? How Old King Thor hasn't went into the Odinsleep or referenced it at all considering how weak he is? How he hasn't actually mentioned how weak he is for that matter...


Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
This is why I wanted to drop it. I almost feel asleep reading this wall of text just to repeat myself for the fifth time.

No, again you are speculating about completely unsupported stuff. All we know was that the Odin Force drained, he regained some portion of it and he has not yet entered the Odin Sleep.

I'm saying that he IS weak. Why is he not prioritizing entering the Odin Sleep? I'm not sure, maybe he's stubborn, perhaps we'll find out later on that he was doing all he could to put it off. Perhaps through the power of hope and belief, he regained all his power and then some. Who knows?

All I DO know is what has been printed on panel and so far, based on what we know of the Odin Force, King Thor being at full power is not possible.

All this word play and you still seem to gloss over the simple fact that the Odin Force was thought to be completely drained and he has yet to enter the Odin Sleep. Not highlighting that he does need to enter the Odin Sleep does not automatically mean he is no longer weakened or that the other evidence vanishes. Your reasoning for him regaining all of his power legitimately makes no sense based on what we know of the Odin Force. There is a big difference between will power reigniting some energy and restoring all his stores.

We KNOW that Odin Force can only fully rejuvenate through the Odin Sleep. We also however know that Odin Force wielders can put off the Odin Sleep for incredibly long periods of time but it is dangerous and their power continues to wane.

Do you not understand that for over 900 years, he was completely bereft of the power? Failure clouding his mind and suppressing some makes sense. It magically returning in full however is an entirely different leap. Then don't respond to me. You know what's going to happen when you bring a lack of proof when responding to me. I'll be as boring, or as long as I want. Maybe I should just give 5 word answers like you're getting jacked up when abhi gives them and lowball everything. You seem quite fond of those debates.

Suck my dick homo queer. *Thor getting knocked out by laser beams*

I like to debate on the other hand. I like to be thorough with my points. And that's just how I am. I will include everything I can think of, and will continue doing so. Boring or not.

I'm speculating? No, I'm outright stating he hasn't entered the Odinsleep. I'm stating he hasn't stated anything about it. He hasn't mentioned he's weakened like at all. You want to talk speculation? You repeatedly keep stating he's so weak he needs the Odinsleep to replenish. Where is any of the statements of this level in Aaron's run? No ****ing where is where those are.

You know what happens when people need to enter the Odinsleep? They enter it. You know what happens when they need the Odinsleep but don't do it? They reference it. You know what happens when they don't need to enter the Odinsleep? They don't reference or take the Odinsleep. Aaron's Thor has neither taken the Odinsleep, nor referenced it.

Where does this lead to exactly? He doesn't need it. At all apparently right now.

It's like you want me to go on a rant with your posts. Well in that case, have a good nap there Rage.

Every single time in comics Thor or Odin has been weakened and needed the Odinsleep, they've either taken it or they've referenced it, usually repeatedly. EVERY SINGLE TIME

Hell, there's been many times when they simply passed out and went into an Odinsleep when they needed it without prior warning. Has Aaron's Thor even been alluded to being that weak? Didn't think so.

In addition to a complete lack of any statements being weakened, anything to do with Odinsleep, and being stated to have the might of an All Father unleashed, bringing Thor back to life, sending the Thor's back to their own time, I have my doubts he could even be perceived as weakened.

Yes I understand how the Odinforce works. Yet it didn't work that way when Thor received the power. It didn't work that way a couple times when Odin gained the power back. Heimdall, etc. And the Odinforce also works on a basis that the wearer needs the Odinsleep if he's really weakened. In fact, the whole lack of needing the Odinsleep defeats your entire point anyway. And no, making up some bullshit that he actually needs to Odinsleep despite a complete lack in anything resembling proof of Aaron's Thor doesn't count as proof. Especially in the same post you tried to out me for speculation.

And using Galactus eating as a previous point is beyond nonsensical. Considering just like Odin/Thor, when Galactus needs to eat, he is shown to be eating, or he is stated to be hungry. And that is almost all the time in comics. If you want to relay his situation back to Thor, then that makes him needing Odinsleep even worse since Galactus is constantly announced to be weaker, while currently Thor is not or has not been stated to be. But if you want to pretend it's the same thing, then that only backhands you in the nutsack that Thor was not actually weaker in the Gorr example. Considering how "similar" the situations are, if Thor is weaker, then he needs at least a statement about the Odinsleep (or being weakened in general), which he does not have.

When he needs to Odinsleep, he'll Odinsleep. When he doesn't, he will continue not Odinsleeping.

That is if this is following 616, which, you've opened my eyes to it being based on that due to "Jurgens Thor" claims. So thanks for pointing me in that light there Rage.

If you want to make "Odinsleep" your main point, then you better have some proof that it's relevant in this case. You're leaving a major plothole open with your argument here, and you know it. Your entire argument can be countered with:

"Then why hasn't he Odinslept?"

But word play and all is my strong suit I guess.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
The comic made it very clear that the Odin Force was in fact drained preceding his fight with Gorr. This isn't rocket science. Well, the Odinforce was thought to be extinct before his fight with Gorr, so I fail to see your point. In fact, you're not referencing anything I stated there. But if responding to nothing works against Abhi, continue with that.

In case you need reminding, I'm saying that Thor wasn't so drained that he needed the Odinsleep before the Gorr fight... at the very least.
In fact, Thor hasn't needed the Odinsleep yet apparently... considering he hasn't done so.



Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
I care, I just realize the futility of discussing something when your mind is already made up.

My position has been that King Thor was weakened from the get go, his fight with Galactus is irrelevant to my stance. Although I'd wager it has a lot to do with yours.

You seem to think my stance will somehow change because Gorr won't look as good. It won't. And people lowballed Gorr because they didn't think that this Thor was particularly powerful due to his condition. Which is silly as weakened or not, an Odin Force wielder is crazy powerful. Further supported by his fight against Galactus. Yet you're discussing the "irrelevant" character in the thread with me as opposed to the actual character in the thread. My mind is made up on both of them. But sure, let's discuss King Thor instead. Because that makes sense.

You brought up Galactus repeatedly before I even mentioned his name. Deflect your intentions on me all you want, but we both know what your intentions are. But sure, it is irrelevant to your stance. Let's discuss more on the intricacies of King Thor while acknowledging that we're ignoring Young Thor.
And yes, my posts would be as in depth and full of sex even if you wanted to drop King Thor instead, so yeah. Look at my underhandedness wanting Young Thor to be perceived as higher. I'm a real sicko.
But if Galactus is my underlying goal here, then I might as well point out that since the Gorr fight, Thor had a long period off of doing anything while having a reinvigorated Asgard and apparently visited Earth many times. Which would have been the perfect time to replenish all his power in an Odinsleep. Oh wait, I forgot that he is putting that off for reasons that make zero sense at all.

I know your stance won't change. What I'm trying to figure out is why. It's cemented in assuming a fact, without there actually being facts. It bewilders me. And it's the exact same as Young Thor being weaker than Regular Thor because Regular Thor absorbed sunlight apparently as he got older (?). Both of my issues with these stem from the same thing.
I'm trying to get down to why these are accepted as facts exactly. So far, no reasons really.

And yes, Gorr being lowballed is due to that, and will continue to be due to that. That will never be resolved considering the Thor fans and the Thor haters believe the same "fact". The Galactus feat will change perception, but before then it's still the same. And I've been asking the same thing ever since that comic came out due to "rumblings". But alas, rumblings is doom. Rumblings is now synonymous with low level sparks, even though all it really means is that he feels it coming back...

But I can see it too I guess. As long as Thor the character stays at a perceived weakened level, then he is only more powerful than his comic appearances. The ultimate guard. You're basically lowballing your own character in an effort to make everything he does seem more impressive. Say no more, big Galactus fan here.




EDIT: We can completely drop King Thor here if you're compelled to do so. But only if we go back to Young Thor and have a discussion on his strength/durability level in somewhat of an answer to his answer of Wonder Woman in this thread. In fact, I'd like to get back to how much straight punishment Young Thor took.
Young Thor = Regular Thor in strength/durability or somewhere around it. Prove me wrong.

Originally posted by abhilegend
That's not what happened? You think they fired specially short ice shards at his head while firing a foot long shards into his abdomen?

And those were not ice constructs? Way to fire ice shards from their snow bodies. That was a shard from those ice constructs IIRC.

Looked like it. Either way, this is irrelevant as that shit is apparently very durable to cut Thor. The spike she shot him wasn't even freaking chipped when she pulled it out.

No, they were made of snow. I know living in India, you've probably never seen snow, but their is a stark contrast between snow and ice. It is even represented in the coloring of the book.

Those SNOW constructs:
http://s30.postimg.org/7e477ht41/Astonishing_X_Men_065_002.jpg

Were busy fighting the X-men and Mystique was the one behind Thor.

Originally posted by abhilegend
I can. It wasn't mentioned anywhere though. So it was big and thus more powerful. Great logic.

That was AFTER she impaled Thor with the shard.

What do you mean? Deathbird is seen chipping away the ice. But I feel breaking a block of ice is harder than to break a shard.

So? You seem to be arguing that it is not possible for some constructs to be more durable then others. That clearly is not the case.

Well, if the constructs are as durable as their projectiles, why is she chipping away some minor shards instead of tearing it to pieces?

So you realize that a block of ice is tougher then a shard of ice but cannot comprehend ice being superior to snow?

Originally posted by abhilegend
It is. It wasn't shown that the ice shard was anything impressively sharp or durable. It was stated to be razor sharp and that's it. Sure he has. But that's irrelevant here.

And? Iceman didn't show anything impressive in his construct durability. I mean you think this is going to happen to a top tier even with Thor sucker shotting him?

http://www.turboimagehost.com/p/16212551/Astonishing_X-Men_064-020.jpg.html

I don't.

So Mystique amped to an unknown degree by Iceman being powered by a Death Seed pierced Thor with razor sharp ice. Cool, shit happens.

He did when he monster was tanking hits from Mjolnir and Thor's lightning.

Also, one more time: Iceman can't manipulate the durability of his constructs and their power.

Also, by that logic, Diana's sword broke against Katana's blade. Piercing damage and durability do not always go hand in hand.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Sure I haven't. Only you read comics I guess.

Then you are saying that she is as strong as post crisis version. Because I don't think there is much difference between Namor and post crisis diana in strength.

If you have, then what is this discussion about? Who cares if weaker snow constructs were being destroyed when Mystique and Iceman could have easily made them more powerful?

My bad, I was overrating her strength.

I never even bothered to ask, but why is Mystique piercing Thor relevant? I don't think anyone believes Thor cannot be cut by Diana's sword (She isn't cutting through Asgardian bone however), the problem is his endurance to cutting is pretty crazy lately. And yes, even in this issue, despite being stabbed through the chest from behind, he was up moments later unharmed.

Anyways, this conversation has officially become too silly for my taste because I'm discussing the difference of durability between different shapes of ice/snow.

Iceman's constructs can be a lot more powerful then regular ice, for example:
http://www.supermegamonkey.net/chronocomic/entries/scans12/UX46_vsJuggernaut.jpg

And Mystique clearly hit Thor with something different then the snowmen constructs. You may choose to disagree with one or both of these points but at this point, I've stopped caring tbh.

Also, can someone tell where these scans are from:
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/0/9690/419116-icemanblastsjuggy8ks.jpg
http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/scale_super/10/105675/1970578-1647738_x_men_160_18_super.jpg

X-Men 160. they beat up a bunch of super powered Bruces.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Looked like it. Either way, this is irrelevant as that shit is apparently very durable to cut Thor. The spike she shot him wasn't even freaking chipped when she pulled it out. So basically, it cut Thor so it must've been super-duper durable. Great Logic.

Again with nationality insults? Grow up.

I know. They were still able to produce ice shards from their bodies.



Without any explanation? Seems more like an excuse.

Because Deatthbird is about class 10 or some such. If you're saying the ice was super-duper durable then she wouldn't have done that.

WTF are you talking about?



Now that's the spirit. Stop trying to rationalize it.

And Iceman got shattered by a single mjolnir strike.

What?

Soulsword is haxxx. But you were the one saying Thor is nearly as durable as superman inc cutting durability.



Then why didn't he made his own body super-duper durable?

Suuuuuuuure.

And yeah, Thor: Man of War and the other two shots are definitely non canon.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2008/03/16/thor-legends-of-asgard-interview





And in case you want on panel proof.

It took place in a different Ragnarok cycle.

http://i.imgur.com/jjW5eCG.jpg


But of course rage knows better than the editor and the writer of the comic. Not to mention this comic contradicts the actual canon where Thor didn't have mjolnir in viking times.

http://i.imgur.com/3qtlWx4.jpg

That would contradict Young Thor meeting Apocalypse in viking times and having Jarnjborn as a weapon.

Nor was he ever turned into a human named Arkin Torsen around viking times.

http://i.imgur.com/MQPGbIO.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/KW7mV5D.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/vBNnZVk.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ll5dgH2.jpg

And that's how we know that this whole story is non-canon. It has been stated by writer/editor and it contradicts too many canon facts to be canon.

Come at me rage. These shoulders are here for you.

Originally posted by abhilegend
And yeah, Thor: Man of War and the other two shots are definitely non canon.

http://www.ign.com/articles/2008/03/16/thor-legends-of-asgard-interview

And in case you want on panel proof.

It took place in a different Ragnarok cycle.

http://i.imgur.com/jjW5eCG.jpg


But of course rage knows better than the editor and the writer of the comic. Not to mention this comic contradicts the actual canon where Thor didn't have mjolnir in viking times.

http://i.imgur.com/3qtlWx4.jpg

That would contradict Young Thor meeting Apocalypse in viking times and having Jarnjborn as a weapon.

Nor was he ever turned into a human named Arkin Torsen around viking times.

http://i.imgur.com/MQPGbIO.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/KW7mV5D.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/vBNnZVk.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/ll5dgH2.jpg

And that's how we know that this whole story is non-canon. It has been stated by writer/editor and it contradicts too many canon facts to be canon.

Come at me rage. These shoulders are here for you.

None of this is news.

I realize that the book takes place out of continuity and it doesn't really affect the current canon. Matt Fraction outright said that you don't have to worry about knowing all of the Thor continuity but this story still leads up to Thor's banishment as explained in Thor #151. None of this makes it non-canon. There is a big difference between the two. One-shots and specials are very often out of continuity, even contradicting established stuff sometimes, that does not however make them non-canon.

Yes, I know the story took place among different Ragnarok cycles. In fact, the trilogy is a narrative running across like 20 different Ragnarok cycles. It's all connected. A Ragnarok cycle isn't something that takes place with completely different characters (Although that wouldn't mean they are non-canon) like in the Roy Thomas era of the 70's, but refers to the cyclical nature of the characters. For example: Odin and the Serpent's first battle took place in a previous Ragnarok cycle but they are still the same beings.

What are you talking about? Thor has had Mjolnir in Viking times for DECADES and was first referenced as far back as the Stan Lee days IIRC:
http://s4.postimg.org/5bo66n2xl/Thor_Annual_1983_011_30.jpghttp://s4.postimg.org/62gwcf5ax/Thor_Annual_1983_011_31.jpg

Current Young Thor's depiction actually CONTRADICTS many canon stories. Using a contradiction from a mainstream title to prove that contradictions are non-canon? facepalm

You seem to be under the impression that a comic contradicting other comics makes it non-canon automatically. This is retarded, at best it would be a retcon.

Second, as I've already TOLD you MANY times, Matt Fraction has established that the Gods do not have histories, but stories, that are ever flowing and changing, many are contradictory, but nonetheless are true. That is how he explains the various interpretations and contradictions of Thor's history. INCLUDING his own work in the main title.

This has been a running them for a while now and is the very reason Loki is an Agent of Asgard.

Also, for someone so adamant against interviews being used as evidence, you sure do post them a lot.

Originally posted by abhilegend
So basically, it cut Thor so it must've been super-duper durable. Great Logic.

Again with nationality insults? Grow up.

I know. They were still able to produce ice shards from their bodies.



Without any explanation? Seems more like an excuse.

Because Deatthbird is about class 10 or some such. If you're saying the ice was super-duper durable then she wouldn't have done that.

WTF are you talking about?



Now that's the spirit. Stop trying to rationalize it.

And Iceman got shattered by a single mjolnir strike.

What?

Soulsword is haxxx. But you were the one saying Thor is nearly as durable as superman inc cutting durability.



Then why didn't he made his own body super-duper durable?

Suuuuuuuure.

Iceman was shattered but Thor was trapped by his Ice Dragon specifically because he is able to make his ice more durable to different degrees. facepalm

I get that you posted Mystique stabbing Thor to make him look bad but my question is this, do you acknowledge that Iceman can make his constructs a lot more durable and powerful depending on the power used, yes or no?

WW cuts off Young Thor's head then beats his body into paste with it. sneer

Originally posted by Badabing
WW cuts off Young Thor's head then beats his body into paste with it. sneer
Gud for you. Here have a cookie.

http://www.gifbin.com/bin/022010/1266235163_raptor_mascot_eats_cheerleader.gif

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
None of this is news.

I realize that the book takes place out of continuity and it doesn't really affect the current canon. Hahaha. GTFO. Out of continuity doesn't makes it non canon? You are getting weirder with your Thor obsession.

When Fraction explicitly says this is not Thor of today?




Yet Young Thor didn't have it when he met Apocalypse.


Why not? Its non canon by writer/editor and now it contradicts actual canon stories.

When the writer actually calls it non canon? Yes, I am.

Who the **** cares? He said his trilogy is non canon. End of story.

And I've never seen somebody so desperate for feats. Its actually sad.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Iceman was shattered but Thor was trapped by his Ice Dragon specifically because he is able to make his ice more durable to different degrees. facepalm

I get that you posted Mystique stabbing Thor to make him look bad but my question is this, do you acknowledge that Iceman can make his constructs a lot more durable and powerful depending on the power used, yes or no?
So, his ice monster was even more durable than his own body?



He can. But he wasn't actually using his power to do that when mystique stabbed Thor.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Current Young Thor's depiction actually CONTRADICTS many canon stories. Using a contradiction from a mainstream title to prove that contradictions are non-canon? facepalm

I pointed this out to him in the Phoenix/Surtur thread:
Originally posted by Epicurus
Going by that logic, Thor's encounter with Apocalypse can be dismissed as being AU/out-of-continuity since it contradicts certain details around the original Celestial storyline not to mention that Thor is portrayed as being unworthy of Mjolnir when that was not the case in the original storyline 30 years ago.

He's also going back on his word that interviews are inadmissible by citing that IGN interview, lol :
Originally posted by abhilegend
Interviews are non-admissible. Period.

And who said I used them any more than guidance? I used on panle scans to prove it was non canon.

But your crusade against me in every thread is cute. Real cute.

So who was it that decided that they could change the rules to suit them?

Originally posted by -Pr-
So who was it that decided that they could change the rules to suit them?

Sounds like mod material smiley

Originally posted by abhilegend
Hahaha. GTFO. Out of continuity doesn't makes it non canon? You are getting weirder with your Thor obsession.

When Fraction explicitly says this is not Thor of today?

Yup.

No, he said it doesn't affect current continuity and you don't have to know about Thor's long history etc. to enjoy these stories. That doesn't make them non-canon. BIG difference.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Yet Young Thor didn't have it when he met Apocalypse.

Why not? Its non canon by writer/editor and now it contradicts actual canon stories.

When the writer actually calls it non canon? Yes, I am.

Who the **** cares? He said his trilogy is non canon. End of story.

And I've never seen somebody so desperate for feats. Its actually sad.



So what if he didn't have it when he met Apocalypse? The Fraction Trilogy came out years earlier and at that point in canon, Thor had Mjolnir since he was a teenager.

No he didn't.

No it isn't.

Thor taking a beating from a Cosmic level being isn't exactly rare or unheard of so it's not really that crucial. I'd say you are far more desperate in trying to negate feats for Thor. And I'm sure pretty much everyone, including the NSA, would agree.

Originally posted by abhilegend
So, his ice monster was even more durable than his own body?



He can. But he wasn't actually using his power to do that when mystique stabbed Thor.

Perhaps, yes. Or maybe Thor just struck him harder. It doesn't really matter which was tougher.

But you arguing that the ice monster that Thor was taking on or the spear he was stabbed with was as durable as the snow men Mystique created is retarded.

Except Mystique was using his ice powers.

Originally posted by Epicurus
I pointed this out to him in the Phoenix/Surtur thread:


He's also going back on his word that interviews are inadmissible by citing that IGN interview, lol :

Yup.

Using a canon story that contradicts continuity as evidence that a story is non-canon because it contradicts continuity.



Also, there are similarities such as the use of the Blood Colossus from the Trilogy and in the Thor comics:
http://s28.postimg.org/k4qkzqg4p/Thor_030_031.jpg

http://s28.postimg.org/reh7fk10p/thor_620_003_004.jpg

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yup.

No, he said it doesn't affect current continuity and you don't have to know about Thor's long history etc. to enjoy these stories. That doesn't make them non-canon. BIG difference. He specifically said it was out of continuity. You have to be blind to think he was trying to say it was out of continuity and still canon.




So?

Compelling arguments as usual.



This is like talking to a wall.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Perhaps, yes. Or maybe Thor just struck him harder. It doesn't really matter which was tougher.

But you arguing that the ice monster that Thor was taking on or the spear he was stabbed with was as durable as the snow men Mystique created is retarded.

Except Mystique was using his ice powers.
No if and buts. What was it?

Except she only picked up a shard and impaled him. She picked up the gem later and started using ice powers and whatnot.

Originally posted by abhilegend
He specifically said it was out of continuity. You have to be blind to think he was trying to say it was out of continuity and still canon.


So?

Compelling arguments as usual.



This is like talking to a wall.

Snyder said LTBB was semi-canon and did not affect continuity and yet you had no problem with that. I'd give your opinion a lot more consideration if it wasn't so clearly driven by such nonsense reasons.

So? Are you some kind of retard? Scratch that: Are you really that much of a retard? Current young Thor contradicts Fraction's trilogy because the trilogy was basing Thor having Mjolnir on decades of established canon.

Yes, because you so often convince people to side with you.

Then gtfo of my thread which has like many others gone to shit because you can't help your hate boner.

Originally posted by abhilegend
No if and buts. What was it?

Except she only picked up a shard and impaled him. She picked up the gem later and started using ice powers and whatnot.

What? I don't know for certain. No one does. This is your problem, you form an opinion and assume it is fact while ignoring anything contradictory.

Maybe the Ice dragon wasn't more durable then Iceman and Thor simply struck Bobby harder. It doesn't really matter now as you clearly acknowledge (Through your silence) that Iceman can make some constructs far more durable then others.

So now she stabbed with a shard she picked up? How does that make sense unless you think she can turn invisible?

@Rage: Did you get my PM?

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Snyder said LTBB was semi-canon and did not affect continuity and yet you had no problem with that. I'd give your opinion a lot more consideration if it wasn't so clearly driven by such nonsense reasons.

So? Are you some kind of retard? Scratch that: Are you really that much of a retard? Current young Thor contradicts Fraction's trilogy because the trilogy was basing Thor having Mjolnir on decades of established canon.

Yes, because you so often convince people to side with you.

Then gtfo of my thread which has like many others gone to shit because you can't help your hate boner.
Now did he? I've never seen it. Can you provide the link? As it is, I don't believe anything you say now.

Heh, resorting to namecalling now that when you've been exposed of your lies? What, you're not going to report me now? Such a pitiful trick. Fraction's trilogy is non canon. You can cry all you want, its not going to change.

Who the **** cares about siding people?

Who died and made you a mod?Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
What? I don't know for certain. No one does. This is your problem, you form an opinion and assume it is fact while ignoring anything contradictory.

Maybe the Ice dragon wasn't more durable then Iceman and Thor simply struck Bobby harder. It doesn't really matter now as you clearly acknowledge (Through your silence) that Iceman can make some constructs far more durable then others.

So now she stabbed with a shard she picked up? How does that make sense unless you think she can turn invisible?
That's your problem, not mine.

Your point would be? The ice which penetrated Thor from behind (heh) wasn't particularly durable as Thor shattered it into one blow.

She attacked him from behind genius. Such simple things are so beyond you, its laughable.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Now did he? I've never seen it. Can you provide the link? As it is, I don't believe anything you say now.

Heh, resorting to namecalling now that when you've been exposed of your lies? What, you're not going to report me now? Such a pitiful trick. Fraction's trilogy is non canon. You can cry all you want, its not going to change.

Who the **** cares about siding people?

Who died and made you a mod?

He did. I'll post them later tomorrow.

I haven't lied about anything. You've yet to prove anything. But I'm glad you admit how retarded it is to use current Young Thor as evidence because he doesn't have Mjolnir.

You apparently do:
Originally posted by abhilegend

We've discussed it before galan and I'm not the only one who thought Orion was amped.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=14076304#post14076304

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=14699644#14699644

Bada one day.

Originally posted by abhilegend
That's your problem, not mine.

Your point would be? The ice which penetrated Thor from behind (heh) wasn't particularly durable as Thor shattered it into one blow.

She attacked him from behind genius. Such simple things are so beyond you, its laughable.

So you're basically admitting you don't give a f*ck if a comic is ambiguous and push a point as fact anyways? Well, I guess it isn't a shock.

What are you talking about? The ice that cut Thor wasn't even chipped when we see him holding it so I'm not sure why you'd say it's not particularly durable?

Or are you referring to Thor breaking Iceman's body? We already established as canon that Iceman can make some constructs more durable.

Also, are you saying that something isn't particularly durable because it was shattered by a charged Mjolnir blow from a pissed off Thor?

Yes, she did and we see no one behind him.

You think she THREW it across that distance now?

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
He did. I'll post them later tomorrow. Ok.

That's a lie to begin with. I proved it was non canon to begin with. No need to cry bro.



http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&action=showpost&postid=14699644#14699644

Bada one day. I didn't ask for anybody to side with me. Like you always do.



Nope. Try again.

Wut? What kind of circular logic is that?

But he made his body's parts more durable than he was just a second before when thor shattered him?



Not top tier durable.

She wasn't in the panel. You must've never seen WWE.

No, she stabbed him. But the mental gymnastics you're doing over it are pretty amusing to say in the least.

So, arguing for pages about interviews and admitted low feats...

Anyone want to argue about DBZ while we're at it?

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
So, arguing for pages about interviews and admitted low feats...

Anyone want to argue about DBZ while we're at it?

Broly deserved his own saga. It is one of the glaring mistakes of Akiyama's masterwork.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Ok.

That's a lie to begin with. I proved it was non canon to begin with. No need to cry bro.


I didn't ask for anybody to side with me. Like you always do.

Untrue.

Your reasoning was that your argument had more weight because someone else agreed with it.

You didn't.

The only reason you don't do it more often is because almost no one ever agrees with you.

Originally posted by abhilegend
Nope. Try again.

Wut? What kind of circular logic is that?

But he made his body's parts more durable than he was just a second before when thor shattered him?



Not top tier durable.

She wasn't in the panel. You must've never seen WWE.

No, she stabbed him. But the mental gymnastics you're doing over it are pretty amusing to say in the least.

That sentence didn't make any sense. What body parts were more durable? I'm saying that Iceman might instinctively be more durable then his other constructs and Thor struck harder. Or he may not. No one knows for sure. Either way, that does not change my point.

This discussion has run it's course.

Mjolnir cannot shatter top tier level durability? Only a few months ago we had a discussion of Thor shattering secondary Adamantium Ultrons. Does your memory reset every few weeks?

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Untrue. Nope.

Untrue on all accounts. I don't do this for anyone to agree with me. I say my opinion and let other people decide it for themselves. Whether they agree or disagree has no concerns for me.



It totally does. You're suggesting that the shard that pierced Thor was somehow super duper durable JUST BECAUSE IT PIERCED THOR.

Oh yeah, it has.

That would be like comparing OWAW Superman to every time Superman gets pissed. And this was under a different writer.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
Originally posted by Branlor Swift




Yet you're discussing the "irrelevant" character in the thread with me as opposed to the actual character in the thread. My mind is made up on both of them. But sure, let's discuss King Thor instead. Because that makes sense.

You brought up Galactus repeatedly before I even mentioned his name. Deflect your intentions on me all you want, but we both know what your intentions are. But sure, it is irrelevant to your stance. Let's discuss more on the intricacies of King Thor while acknowledging that we're ignoring Young Thor.
And yes, my posts would be as in depth and full of sex even if you wanted to drop King Thor instead, so yeah. Look at my underhandedness wanting Young Thor to be perceived as higher. I'm a real sicko.
But if Galactus is my underlying goal here, then I might as well point out that since the Gorr fight, Thor had a long period off of doing anything while having a reinvigorated Asgard and apparently visited Earth many times. Which would have been the perfect time to replenish all his power in an Odinsleep. Oh wait, I forgot that he is putting that off for reasons that make zero sense at all.

I know your stance won't change. What I'm trying to figure out is why. It's cemented in assuming a fact, without there actually being facts. It bewilders me. And it's the exact same as Young Thor being weaker than Regular Thor because Regular Thor absorbed sunlight apparently as he got older (?). Both of my issues with these stem from the same thing.
I'm trying to get down to why these are accepted as facts exactly. So far, no reasons really.

And yes, Gorr being lowballed is due to that, and will continue to be due to that. That will never be resolved considering the Thor fans and the Thor haters believe the same "fact". The Galactus feat will change perception, but before then it's still the same. And I've been asking the same t



Okay, I finally ended up reading all of this, and we're going to have to agree to disagree. Mostly because I don't want to reply and the discussion is not going to reach a resolution.

Hopefully they'll clarify King Thor's state in the next issue. In regards to Young Thor, this is probably the closest straight up comparison he's had to adult Thor by someone else aside from their fight with Gorr:
http://s24.postimg.org/4tfrrcfox/Thor_God_of_Thunder_005_009.jpg

You may disagree, but to me at least, it clearly implies a difference between the two.

Also, I don't give a shit about walls of texts. With you alone, I've spent like dozens of pages discussing the most trivial of shit. I just get really bored easily nowadays.

Doesn't imply much tbh though.

Especially when all that Thor's done in front of him is destroy some Berserkers. Though it does show his dynamic strength.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
Doesn't imply much tbh though.

Especially when all that Thor's done in front of him is destroy some Berserkers. Though it does show his dynamic strength.

If you say so. Personally, their respective encounters with Gorr makes it clear to me how the two compare. For example, Young Thor being too spent to even move after the final fight with Gorr while Avenger Thor climbs up from the center of a planet (Although he got pissed and took his eye at the end there).

It kind of does, but I like this one better:
http://s29.postimg.org/z2fcyn983/Thor_God_of_Thunder_009_013.jpg

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
If you say so. Personally, their respective encounters with Gorr makes it clear to me how the two compare. For example, Young Thor being too spent to even move after the final fight with Gorr while Avenger Thor climbs up from the center of a planet (Although he got pissed and took his eye at the end there).

It kind of does, but I like this one better:
http://s29.postimg.org/z2fcyn983/Thor_God_of_Thunder_009_013.jpg Well, again, Young Thor spent that entire arc getting his ass kicked back to back without any rest at all. A lesser (Super)man would have never came out after the torture.
Honestly, go back and read that arc. All of that shit happens to Young Thor back to back. I'd like to see a Wonder Woman arc with that sort of damage soak.

Kind of? The guy fought the first Black Berserker for hours. Now he's just one shotting multiple of them. Pretty nifty stuff.

I just posted another example in the respect thread.

Another feat for Young Thor that I never see mentioned. When he threw the unstable Star Matter at the God Bomb (Which is the size of a moon), it created an explosion so powerful, it literally blasted him off the planet and he was unhurt:
http://s21.postimg.org/p2pkf0mqb/Thor_God_of_Thunder_008_014.jpghttp://s21.postimg.org/cf9t2i7tf/Thor_God_of_Thunder_008_015.jpghttp://s30.postimg.org/bn7jng23h/Thor_God_of_Thunder_008_016.jpghttp://s30.postimg.org/wldplj1y5/Thor_God_of_Thunder_008_017.jpghttp://s21.postimg.org/xari00emr/Thor_God_of_Thunder_008_019.jpg

Out of curiosity Bran, where do you rank Gorr? Keep in mind that in the God of Thunder series, even the random and completely useless canon fodder Gods were all crazy powerful:
http://s28.postimg.org/t9o36zonh/Thor_God_of_Thunder_008_006.jpg

And have been working for centuries without rest, mining the center of planets and the cores of dead Stars.

It's too bad we didn't see more established Gods like Zeus or Mephisto among his victims.

I actually thought about bringing that up in our debate but then I didn't I guess for whatever reason. Only furthers my belief that he isn't really Thor's inferior, only lacks experience and Mjolnir. But meh. Young Thor was pretty crazy in that arc.

I rank Gorr above Odin. Maybe a little, maybe a lot. His problem is he is almost entirely physical in every way, but that doesn't seem to hinder things. Skyfather Venom.

Originally posted by Branlor Swift
Well, again, Young Thor spent that entire arc getting his ass kicked back to back without any rest at all. A lesser (Super)man would have never came out after the torture.
Honestly, go back and read that arc. All of that shit happens to Young Thor back to back. I'd like to see a Wonder Woman arc with that sort of damage soak.

Kind of? The guy fought the first Black Berserker for hours. Now he's just one shotting multiple of them. Pretty nifty stuff.

I just posted another example in the respect thread.

Yeah, he definitely got his ass kicked more, but Avenger Thor was constantly in action as well, tracking the God Butcher and fighting his Berserkers. I don't think his stamina bar was more worn down or something though.

Thor's damage soak is straight up insane under Aaron:
http://s3d2.turboimagehost.com/t1/17503679_Thor_-_God_of_Thunder_017-011.jpg http://s3d2.turboimagehost.com/t1/17503680_Thor_-_God_of_Thunder_017-012.jpg

No way. Wonder Woman was in critical condition and needed medical attention because she fought Artemis and the First Born in the same two days or something.

I saw that, nice job.

Yeah, Young Thor is so much of a damage sponge that three attacks from Apocalypse were going to break his spine and kill him. Real damage sponge there.

And Diana got up from both her arms broken pretty soon.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
Yeah, he definitely got his ass kicked more, but Avenger Thor was constantly in action as well, tracking the God Butcher and fighting his Berserkers. I don't think his stamina bar was more worn down or something though.

Thor's damage soak is straight up insane under Aaron:
http://s3d2.turboimagehost.com/t1/17503679_Thor_-_God_of_Thunder_017-011.jpg http://s3d2.turboimagehost.com/t1/17503680_Thor_-_God_of_Thunder_017-012.jpg

No way. Wonder Woman was in critical condition and needed medical attention because she fought Artemis and the First Born in the same two days or something.

I saw that, nice job. Not saying Thormal wasn't in action, but Young Thor might as well have been in Invincible. Comparably he made Thor look like he took ten senzu beans.



She'd get axed in the face before she ever served that type of damage of course.

"I say.. I do not need a liver.. To kill an elf!"

Aaron must have made it his mission to make stories that are so epic, people won't even remember embarrassing losses to the likes of Rulk ever happened..

Yeah, I can't see Wonder Woman shrugging off the loss of a major internal organ.. She's tough, but not that tough.

Supermans another story... He did survive the loss of his heart against Emperor Joker, for one..

Originally posted by abhilegend
Yeah, Young Thor is so much of a damage sponge that three attacks from Apocalypse were going to break his spine and kill him. Real damage sponge there.

And Diana got up from both her arms broken pretty soon.



That actually is a good regeneration feat for her:
http://s10.postimg.org/g5rg6e5tx/Superman_Wonder_Woman_2013_002_004.jpg



Apocalypse could have straight up KILLED Thor, and it wouldn't change all his other feats. Although making fun of Young Thor (When he came out relatively unharmed) when Diana had her arms broken by what appeared to be a glancing blow from a Herald level being is pretty hilarious:
http://s12.postimg.org/v2bpmx7bx/Superman_Wonder_Woman_2013_002_002.jpg

Fyi, being incapacitated by some broken bones in comparison to Thor, is not really a good feat.

Originally posted by Rage.Of.Olympus
That actually is a good regeneration feat for her:
http://s10.postimg.org/g5rg6e5tx/Superman_Wonder_Woman_2013_002_004.jpg



Apocalypse could have straight up KILLED Thor, and it wouldn't change all his other feats. Although making fun of Young Thor (When he came out relatively unharmed) when Diana had her arms broken by what appeared to be a glancing blow from a Herald level being is pretty hilarious:
http://s12.postimg.org/v2bpmx7bx/Superman_Wonder_Woman_2013_002_002.jpg

Fyi, being incapacitated by some broken bones in comparison to Thor, is not really a good feat.
Herald level? In the same series she took a hundred blows from Faora and no bones were broken. But leave it to you to lowball ****ing doomsday.



And your flip flopping at what is applicable for Thor and what isn't is so amusing. The narration told it in no clear terms that Apoc would've killed Thor in three strikes. That's ****ing embarrassing endurance right there.

When was the last time Thor had both of his arms broken?

Originally posted by abhilegend
Herald level? In the same series she took a hundred blows from Faora and no bones were broken. But leave it to you to lowball ****ing doomsday.



And your flip flopping at what is applicable for Thor and what isn't is so amusing. The narration told it in no clear terms that Apoc would've killed Thor in three strikes. That's ****ing embarrassing endurance right there.

When was the last time Thor had both of his arms broken?

So Doomsday must be really uber because Diana survived attacks from Faora but it's Young Thor being weak against Apocalypse (Despite him having resources far beyond the norm) despite all the other shit this very incarnation has endured?

I didn't say it wasn't applicable, I said he was relatively unscathed. And even if Apocalypse HAD killed Thor, it changes nothing tbh. He has like almost two dozen other feats to draw that indicate easily high end herald capabilities and ridiculous damage soak. It might not be a great durability showing, but it has no reflection on his endurance.

What kind of question is that? The only measure of damage soak and pain endurance is having your arms broken? He has plenty of damage soak feats from just this year that make Diana being incapacitated from broken bones or almost dying from two back to back fights look embarrassing.

Fyi, Thor went a year with his bones shattered into mush. The curse made him immortal, but he still endured and suffered all that pain.