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

Is the mightiest mortal still equal to superman? How well has he fared against the man of steel since new 52 and onwards?

Bonus battle. Post Crisis version. Who is stronger. Has billy ever match clark or beat him in post crisis in an all out battle of raw power?

No one seems to understand that, hence all of the push back in Superman threads.

Originally posted by ODG
So are you both advocating that we dwell on a character's grandest historic feats?

And their depiction relative to each other takes a big back seat to that?

At their best isn't my rule. That seems to be what has been argued by most on this forum. For example, a Predator should have no chance against Wolverine in a forum setting, even though in the comics a Predator severely injured him.

That applies to most characters, lmmfao. It just happens more with Hulk and Superman. Heck, characters like Spiderman and Wolverine have fts in the high meta to Herald tier, on numerous of occasions. That doesn't mean that their strength, speed, etc... is consistently above that tier. Why does this rule only apply to Superman and not Batman or Wonder Woman. ESPECIALLY Batman. Batman have fts fat above meta tier. Cap does as well. Thor, Silver Surfer. All of these characters step above their tier, on a number of occasions. Also, Thor and Surfer fts >>> Captain Marvel and I feel confident none of you would say either of these characters pull a 10 out of 10 against him.

When was the last herald Spidey took down? Wolverine?
When was the last universe+ destroyer that Hulk smacked around? Or the last skyfather type he punched out?

How often do they do this?

Lots of characters have a great feat somewhere in history. Superman does it year in and out.

Batman should indeed be way above meta tier, I agree

Bruce is way above Superman tier, tbh.

He makes Clark look like a carver in every team-up they have.

Superman still manages to look dumber than everyone else.

https://media.tenor.com/dPnoDNjsYOkAAAAC/dc-wouldnt.gif

Guess that's his main power.

Originally posted by Juntai
When was the last herald Spidey took down? Wolverine?
When was the last universe+ destroyer that Hulk smacked around? Or the last skyfather type he punched out?

How often do they do this?

Lots of characters have a great feat somewhere in history. Superman does it year in and out.

When was the last time Superman beat, Zod without no outside interference? Metallo. Hulk JUST took on a Celestial and stomped it. What universe destroyer did Superman beat up this year or last year? No amps, please.

What issue did Hulk fight a Celestial in?

Originally posted by carver9
That applies to most characters, lmmfao. It just happens more with Hulk and Superman. Heck, characters like Spiderman and Wolverine have fts in the high meta to Herald tier, on numerous of occasions. That doesn't mean that their strength, speed, etc... is consistently above that tier. Why does this rule only apply to Superman and not Batman or Wonder Woman. ESPECIALLY Batman. Batman have fts fat above meta tier. Cap does as well. Thor, Silver Surfer. All of these characters step above their tier, on a number of occasions. Also, Thor and Surfer fts >>> Captain Marvel and I feel confident none of you would say either of these characters pull a 10 out of 10 against him.

pr1983

https://i.ibb.co/wNvgwSG/aqpera.png

As far as raw powers are concerned they're roughly the same.

Captain Marvel had planet- and star-displacing feats a full decade before Superman ever did, in staring in Captain Marvel Adventures #28. But the most notable feat was when the Marvel Family displaced "billions of stars" (and planets) the Marvel Family #61 to prevent a collision of galaxies, and this was also before Superman got any planet-level feats.

https://i.imgur.com/pTe82jYm.png

Ultimately is should come down to Superman's susceptibility to magic versus Captain Marvel's lack of experience.

@Jun... you mentioning power ups is not him defeating universal let alone Galaxy level beings.

Wait, with thr Barbatos showing, you do know in same story, Superman, Superboy Prime, Black Adam, Sinestro, Cyborg Superman and others, COMBINED, couldn't destroy a planet. Crazy thing, Superman said "give it everything you've got". Hopefully you're talking about something else.

Originally posted by Astner
As far as raw powers are concerned they're roughly the same.

Captain Marvel had planet- and star-displacing feats a full decade before Superman ever did, in staring in Captain Marvel Adventures #28. But the most notable feat was when the Marvel Family displaced "billions of stars" (and planets) the Marvel Family #61 to prevent a collision of galaxies, and this was also before Superman got any planet-level feats.

https://i.imgur.com/pTe82jYm.png

Ultimately is should come down to Superman's susceptibility to magic versus Captain Marvel's lack of experience.

Be the hero KMC so desperately needs and start posting Steamboat scans

Originally posted by Stoic
At their best isn't my rule. That seems to be what has been argued by most on this forum. For example, a Predator should have no chance against Wolverine in a forum setting, even though in the comics a Predator severely injured him.

Completely off topic but an elder pred should hand a young bone Logan his ass.

Originally posted by carver9
@Jun... you mentioning power ups is not him defeating universal let alone Galaxy level beings.

Wait, with thr Barbatos showing, you do know in same story, Superman, Superboy Prime, Black Adam, Sinestro, Cyborg Superman and others, COMBINED, couldn't destroy a planet. Crazy thing, Superman said "give it everything you've got". Hopefully you're talking about something else.

Didn't Cho try punching the Moon with a hit that registered 123.2 on the Richter scale?

Originally posted by carver9
not him defeating universal let alone Galaxy level beings.

So Carver you think galaxy>universe?

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
So Carver you think galaxy>universe?

My post isn't saying that. I mention Universal and degraded it to EVEN galaxy levels.

Originally posted by carver9
My post isn't saying that. I mention Universal and degraded it to EVEN galaxy levels.
Then you should say "defeating galaxy let alone universal level beings".

As "let alone" suggests that "used to indicate that something is far less likely or suitable than something else already mentioned."

For example:
"he was incapable of leading a bowling team, let alone a country". You can see that the former object is the lower level in terms of scales

Originally posted by carver9
@Jun... you mentioning power ups is not him defeating universal let alone Galaxy level beings.

Wait, with thr Barbatos showing, you do know in same story, Superman, Superboy Prime, Black Adam, Sinestro, Cyborg Superman and others, COMBINED, couldn't destroy a planet. Crazy thing, Superman said "give it everything you've got". Hopefully you're talking about something else.
I was mentioning that through the last two years, he's either been explicitly depowered, or he's amped himself, which is why the request for specifically the last two years and unamped was stupid, because that leaves him depowered on Warworld, which isnt anywhere near a representation of his ability. I don't get why you couldn't understand that from my last post.



Almost all of those characters have destroyed planets on panel, so that doesn't mean much. One of them even rearranged the entire universe.

Supes still casually one punched a guy that devours universes. Probably a better feat than any Hulk has. But thats way off topic, the way you casually brought Hulk into the thread.

Originally posted by Juntai
I was mentioning that through the last two years, he's either been explicitly depowered, or he's amped himself, which is why the request for specifically the last two years and unamped was stupid, because that leaves him depowered on Warworld, which isnt anywhere near a representation of his ability. I don't get why you couldn't understand that from my last post.



Almost all of those characters have destroyed planets on panel, so that doesn't mean much. One of them even rearranged the entire universe.

Supes still casually one punched a guy that devours universes. Probably a better feat than any Hulk has. But thats way off topic, the way you casually brought Hulk into the thread.

Same guy accepts that Marvel Earth could take having a star on it's surface when Hulk was struggling with Proxima's spear...hmmm. Guess it was a tiny star then.

Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Completely off topic but an elder pred should hand a young bone Logan his ass.

Only in a video game.

And keep in mind that young BC Logan made adult, experienced, post-upgrade Parker run for his life screaming like a girl he is.

Comic book Yautja simply lack feats and job too much to pose threat. Their performance in the Wolverine cross-over is amazing compared to their earlier showings.

--
Originally posted by srankmissingnin
Are any of you guys actually knowledgeable on Predator lore and canon, or do the movies just give you boners? Predator canon is full of normal human samurai, soldiers (past/present and future) killing Preds in one on one combat. Machiko only had a brown belt in Karate, and she has killed Predators in h2h and even Xenomorph Queens...

Do some research people.

--
Originally posted by jinzin
Dutch from the first movie has a brother in the Darkhorse comics who has a tendancy to dance with Preds one on one and he's beaten several in combat.
As I said before in a strict h2h fight with this woman Machiko a blooded bug hunting vet started to lose a fight with her until his friends began to cheat.
The newer/stronger/bigger Predators from the new film, Falconer Pred got killed in a sword duel with a mere Yakuza member.

There's a lot of instances of Preds getting killed off left and right when they lose their invisability. Colonial Marines have dropped them in droves.

They've never displayed mass amounts of skill in a h2h fight... because most Pred's are not technically fighters, they're hunters.
It's one of the major reasons that Bad-blood Predators are so dangerous.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Same guy accepts that Marvel Earth could take having a star on it's surface when Hulk was struggling with Proxima's spear...hmmm. Guess it was a tiny star then. I accept that it was a star in weight. Comic told us so. But that weight completely immobilized him and then he reverted back to Banner. Thats comic science for you though. But thats nothing to a kryptonian, who can move stars around.

Originally posted by Juntai
I accept that it was a star in weight. Comic told us so. But that weight completely immobilized him and then he reverted back to Banner. Thats comic science for you though. But thats nothing to a kryptonian, who can move stars around.

yet Marvel Earth was completely unharmed, same with Marvel's Moon. Must mean Marvel is durable.

At the same time, all those Supers were also unable to destroy DC Earth. Must mean they're weak.

Double standards from young Carver.

Originally posted by Astner
As far as raw powers are concerned they're roughly the same.

Captain Marvel had planet- and star-displacing feats a full decade before Superman ever did, in staring in Captain Marvel Adventures #28. But the most notable feat was when the Marvel Family displaced "billions of stars" (and planets) the Marvel Family #61 to prevent a collision of galaxies, and this was also before Superman got any planet-level feats.

https://i.imgur.com/pTe82jYm.png

Ultimately is should come down to Superman's susceptibility to magic versus Captain Marvel's lack of experience.

But i am talking about Post Crisis and specially Post Flashpoint shazam. He has not performed planet or star busting anything in a long time. Has he still mantained Superman equal status in the past 12 years?

Originally posted by light889
But i am talking about Post Crisis and specially Post Flashpoint shazam. He has not performed planet or star busting anything in a long time. How often has Post-Flashpoint Superman performed planet or star busting feats?

Originally posted by light889
But i am talking about Post Crisis and specially Post Flashpoint shazam. He has not performed planet or star busting anything in a long time. Has he still mantained Superman equal status in the past 12 years?
I mean he did stop the rotating moon, which is borderline planet-level depending on where you draw the line.

The point is that they're roughly equal in power. It's like talking about Superman versus Gladiator or Hyperion. They roughly have the same feats across the spectrum. These kind of thread always come down to cherry-picking.

Originally posted by Astner
It's like talking about Superman versus Gladiator or Hyperion. They roughly have the same feats across the spectrum.


lol, lmao even

MrMind is, of course, one of those biased posters who loves to waste their time engaging in said cherry-picking.

People should remember that Glads and Hype only have like 10% of Supes' showings....

Originally posted by Astner
MrMind is, of course, one of those biased posters who loves to waste their time engaging in said cherry-picking.

when you said cherry-picking

you actually mean comparing feats and using logical arguments instead of making baseless claims

but that would be too much of a task for marvel fans.

understandable

Originally posted by MrMind
when you said cherry-picking

you actually mean comparing feats and using logical arguments instead of making baseless claims
No, I meant cherry-picking, as in arbitrarily deciding what evidence to use and what evidence to ignore.

Gladiator and Hyperion have feats on par with some of Superman's best quantifiable feats. Punching planets apart, crossing galaxies in the blink of an eye, and holding apart two Earths on a collision path, and so on....

Do they have as many of these kinds of feats as Superman? Of course not, but that's a consequence of having fewer showings overall. Luckily, if the goal is determining consistent portrayals, then the number of showings aren't relevant beyond establishing said consistency.

Just crack open a Superman comic. Superman is not one-shotting Black Adam, Doomsday, Mongul, or Zod, despite the fact that these characters don't have the same number of high showings.

Originally posted by Astner
No, I meant cherry-picking, as in arbitrarily deciding what evidence to use and what evidence to ignore.

Gladiator and Hyperion have feats on par with some of Superman's best quantifiable feats. Punching planets apart, crossing galaxies in the blink of an eye, and holding apart two Earths on a collision path, and so on....

Do they have as many of these kinds of feats as Superman? Of course not, but that's a consequence of having fewer showings overall. Luckily, if the goal is determining consistent portrayals, then the number of showings aren't relevant beyond establishing said consistency.

Just crack open a Superman comic. Superman is not one-shotting Black Adam, Doomsday, Mongul, or Zod, despite the fact that these characters don't have the same number of high showings. Sure he does. In fact, he fought Bizarro, Mongul, Powersuit Lex, Metallo, Parasite and Silver Banshee at the same time and one shot each of them all on one page. Superman Red and Blue 5. And that’s just a more recent example off the top.


But yes, some guys like Glads and Hyperion have some feats up in Supes bracket. That’s their upper end extreme feats. Those are Monday afternoon at 1:38pm for Superman while he’s still operating at lower levels.
Superman’s high feats are in the truly mythic or beating high end cosmics and gods and stuff.

Originally posted by Astner
Gladiator and Hyperion have feats on par with some of Supergirl and shazam's best quantifiable feats. Punching planets apart, crossing galaxies in the blink of an eye, and holding apart two Earths on a collision path, and so on....


fix it for you

actually scratch that

kara and billy's best feats are so far superior to gladiator and hyperion it's not even funny

let's see marvel's best heralds come up with something that come close to dc's mid herald, then we can move to the weakest superman. but let's start with supergirl first

Originally posted by abhilegend
Supergirl can haul stars, survives attacks that could destroy several solar systems, hits hard enough to shake the cosmos and is brought down by attacks that could destroy galaxies.

https://i.postimg.cc/rKGQ16CK/image.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/ZWTjjfVj/image.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/xXt5ZKZQ/image.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/FfzpXYtL/image.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/bG5Tyq8F/image.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/fSnfd5Vc/image.jpg https://i.postimg.cc/p5fYJ8jg/image.jpg

Originally posted by Astner
No, I meant cherry-picking, as in arbitrarily deciding what evidence to use and what evidence to ignore.

Gladiator and Hyperion have feats on par with some of Superman's best quantifiable feats. Punching planets apart, crossing galaxies in the blink of an eye, and holding apart two Earths on a collision path, and so on....

Do they have as many of these kinds of feats as Superman? Of course not, but that's a consequence of having fewer showings overall. Luckily, if the goal is determining consistent portrayals, then the number of showings aren't relevant beyond establishing said consistency.

Just crack open a Superman comic. Superman is not one-shotting Black Adam, Doomsday, Mongul, or Zod, despite the fact that these characters don't have the same number of high showings.

Whilst I agree with some things, I have to ask - how many showings, then, determine consistency, for you?

Let's say character A has 10 showings, character B has 100 showings. Sure, character A has 1-2 showings that compare with character B's - but if character A ALSO has 1-2 lower showings, why does one trump the other?

I then smiled at your accusations of one side cherry picking, whilst mentioning in the same post 'quantifiable'. Who do you think has hotter HV, Gladiator or Superman?

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Whilst I agree with some things, I have to ask - how many showings, then, determine consistency, for you?

Let's say character A has 10 showings, character B has 100 showings. Sure, character A has 1-2 showings that compare with character B's - but if character A ALSO has 1-2 lower showings, why does one trump the other?

I then smiled at your accusations of one side cherry picking, whilst mentioning in the same post 'quantifiable'. Who do you think has hotter HV, Gladiator or Superman?

I heard you are playing sentry in the new marvel thunderbolts movie

when the movie come out, will you do me a favor and tell all the mcu fans on screen you are weaker than ezra miller's flash?

Originally posted by MrMind
kara and billy's best feats are so far superior to gladiator and hyperion it's not even funny
This is what I mean with cherry-picking. You know that Superman doesn't have these feats so you fall back on other characters.

Originally posted by MrMind
let's see marvel's best heralds come up with something that come close to dc's mid herald, then we can move to the weakest superman. but let's start with supergirl first
Ironic. The scene you posted doesn't include any notable feats at all. What it does include is purple prose. Which, sure, you could interpret literally, but given the fact that we have no actual feats on this level, plus a number of limits that put them far below what a literal reading would suggest, it's worthless.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Whilst I agree with some things, I have to ask - how many showings, then, determine consistency, for you?
It's not the number of showings and limits, it's the ratio. If a character has 10 times as many showings than another, then we should expect the former to have roughly 10 times the amount of of the impressive feats, just as we should expect them to have roughly 10 times the amount unimpressive limits.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Let's say character A has 10 showings, character B has 100 showings. Sure, character A has 1-2 showings that compare with character B's - but if character A ALSO has 1-2 lower showings, why does one trump the other?
There's a lot of things being omitted here, but technically: on a surface level it would depend on how many "lower showings" character B had.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
I then smiled at your accusations of one side cherry picking, whilst mentioning in the same post 'quantifiable'. Who do you think has hotter HV, Gladiator or Superman?
We concluded in the other thread that Superman's Heat Vision was roughly around the 5,000 - 6,000 Celsius range, from the numeric values we've got, right? I don't think we've ever gotten a numeric value for Gladiator's Heat Beams, but it's been described in similar vague terms "hotter than stars" and whatnot. Interestingly enough, Hyperion's Atomic Vision has been enumerated at 12,000 Fahrenheit, which is 6,600 Celsius.

And these values are close enough to where I'd consider them the same. Or more aptly: I wouldn't bother delving into obsessive detail here, especially considering that there are so many relevant details that are left out such as how quickly it would heat an object, etc. So as far as I'm concerned, they're the same.

Originally posted by Astner

It's not the number of showings and limits, it's the ratio. If a character has 10 times as many showings than another, then we should expect the former to have roughly 10 times the amount of of the impressive feats, just as we should expect them to have roughly 10 times the amount unimpressive limits.
Fair enough. I leave the bad showings to the abhis et al.


Which then devolves into a race to the bottom - not that I am saying we should ignore them, I agree that if a character has 10 showings, any low showings then hold more 'weight', as it were (just as high showings also hold more weight). Which leads to wild swings between extremes, I guess.


It's in the range of 1000 degrees Kelvin, when he's angry:
Originally posted by DarkSaint85
https://i.postimg.cc/V6d0Zk4v/14.jpg

We use the latest versions, dood.

Which is about 700 degrees C, or ~10% of the other 2.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
Which then devolves into a race to the bottom - not that I am saying we should ignore them, I agree that if a character has 10 showings, any low showings then hold more 'weight', as it were (just as high showings also hold more weight). Which leads to wild swings between extremes, I guess.
There are more ways than one to measure consistency. Recency is another: If we look at the last 50 comics featuring each character, if they're consistently equal then they should be roughly equal in that particular sample.

Originally posted by DarkSaint85
It's in the range of 1000 degrees Kelvin, when he's angry:

Which is about 700 degrees C, or ~10% of the other 2.
Then it's not as hot.

Originally posted by Astner

It's not the number of showings and limits, it's the ratio. If a character has 10 times as many showings than another, then we should expect the former to have roughly 10 times the amount of of the impressive feats, just as we should expect them to have roughly 10 times the amount unimpressive limits.


There's a lot of things being omitted here, but technically: on a surface level it would depend on how many "lower showings" character B had.


But this seems to extremely hard in the case of comics(specifically, DC and Marvel)

1) The sheer number of certain comic characters have appeared.
There are like countless comics these famous characters have appeared in. To a point it's hard to determine the surface levels others point out are accurate.

Take this for example:
Originally posted by Astner
But the most notable feat was when the Marvel Family displaced "billions of stars" (and planets) the Marvel Family #61 to prevent a collision of galaxies, and this was also before Superman got any planet-level feats.

https://i.imgur.com/pTe82jYm.png

There are two problems I can find in this sentence.
First of all. Marvel Family didn't displace "billions of stars" (and planets) in that story. In the very next page is the comic states they couldn't do that(so later they used a machine to do that)
https://ibb.co/m8C0j6W
Second, Superman/Superboy(Kal-El) pushed a comet that has planetary mass and is going to destroy Earth in Superboy 2(1949). Before Marvel Family #61(1951)
https://ibb.co/mGNsYdL

As you can see. The surface levels can very well be the guy who makes/thinks it is, instead of actually reading every related source.
The case of Gladiator's HV in this thread is also an example highlights this issue. More often than not, the surface levels are what the people(whether it's intentionally or not) make/think it is.

2)Even when we've read the same feats, how much weight does individual given them is also varies.
Take "scaling from another character" for example. There are posters agree to use it in some cases and there are posters don't agree with it.
Or just recently, the stopping the Moon feat Shazam performed. There are many different opinions on how to decide it and how impressive the feat is.
Etcetcetc

Originally posted by qwertyuiop1998
But this seems to extremely hard in the case of comics(specifically, DC and Marvel)

1) The sheer number of certain comic characters have appeared.
There are like countless comics these famous characters have appeared in. To a point it's hard to determine the surface levels others point out are accurate.

Take this for example:

There are two problems I can find in this sentence.
First of all. Marvel Family didn't displace "billions of stars" (and planets) in that story. In the very next page is the comic states they couldn't do that(so later they used a machine to do that)
https://ibb.co/m8C0j6W
Second, Superman/Superboy(Kal-El) pushed a comet that has planetary mass and is going to destroy Earth in Superboy 2(1949). Before Marvel Family #61(1951)
https://ibb.co/mGNsYdL

As you can see. The surface levels can very well be the guy who makes/thinks it is, instead of actually reading every related source.
The case of Gladiator's HV in this thread is also an example highlights this issue. More often than not, the surface levels are what the people(whether it's intentionally or not) make/think it is.

2)Even when we've read the same feats, how much weight does individual given them is also varies.
Take "scaling from another character" for example. There are posters agree to use it in some cases and there are posters don't agree with it.
Or just recently, the stopping the Moon feat Shazam performed. There are many different opinions on how to decide it and how impressive the feat is.
Etcetcetc

A textbook example of my theory that comics being readily and freely available online through certain sites, for everyone to read, is what is really 'killing' comic debates. Back in the day, someone could make a specific argument, and it would then be unchallenged. Now? Boom, the entire comic can be read for context and corrections.

Look, Darksaint just wants to be able to lie without Qwerty calling him out.

That's what makes comic debating fun.

Originally posted by Astner
No, I meant cherry-picking, as in arbitrarily deciding what evidence to use and what evidence to ignore.

Gladiator and Hyperion have feats on par with some of Superman's best quantifiable feats. Punching planets apart, crossing galaxies in the blink of an eye, and holding apart two Earths on a collision path, and so on....

Do they have as many of these kinds of feats as Superman? Of course not, but that's a consequence of having fewer showings overall. Luckily, if the goal is determining consistent portrayals, then the number of showings aren't relevant beyond establishing said consistency.

Just crack open a Superman comic. Superman is not one-shotting Black Adam, Doomsday, Mongul, or Zod, despite the fact that these characters don't have the same number of high showings.
You're still peddling this bullshit after getting destroyed several times. Pathetic

Qwertykent and Abhilane:

https://i.ibb.co/5rBLnYF/408744838-7306387489394380-1079538899759381370-n.jpg

Originally posted by Smurph
Look, Darksaint just wants to be able to lie without Qwerty calling him out.

That's what makes comic debating fun.

Man, hopefully qwerty is never a BZ judge.....

Originally posted by ODG
How often has Post-Flashpoint Superman performed planet or star busting feats?