Herochat

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - fangirl101

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 754
1
What of Superman prime? Is The Runner really a hero? And other questions. Glad you’re making this again
Superman Prime? The Yellow one?Not Quantifiable and not more than 2 appearances. Superboy Prime is evil as fuck. And The runner is neither a hero or villain.

2
ICT / Re: Daredevil vs Aquaman.
« on: November 23, 2017, 09:09:49 AM »
Um...Why do you hate DD so?

3
ICT / Re: Rank the Post JL DCcu relative to the MCU Avengers
« on: November 22, 2017, 08:02:56 PM »
Strength

Evolved Doomsday - 120
Superman - 100
Kurse - 95
Hulk / Doomsday - 85
Steppenwolf - 80
Thor - 65
WW - 60

Durability

Kurse - 110
Thor - 100
Superman / Doomsday / Hulk - 90
WW - 85

Other than "sokovia busting feat" which is highly suspect as it is, Thor has no showings which suggest he is even close to Superman in durability.


He is also shown less durable than Hulk.

Outside of getting stabbed by Loki’s Asgardian knives (and Asgardian weapons being super good at piercing), Thor has held up consistently well to all manner of attacks.


Not really. Even a control chip easily pierced his skin and Dr Strange could pluck his hair (comedic scene but still). He also dived away from falling debris on skaar.

He had welts from Surtur's fire and said a shield throw from Hulk could've killed him.

Superman is invulnerable in the movie. Even a nuke didn't puncture his skin. Thor isn't.
Quote


His biggest feat (Sokovia explosion) looks better than Superman getting weakened by a nuke. Thor was definitely KOed temporarily, but no lasting injury was shown. Superman was temporarily incapacitated by the nuke and physically injury. Not a HUGE difference, but I’m putting Thor above Supes.


Then you've to show us Thor taking the entire "blast" of the attack. It wasn't literally a big explosion that destroyed the city either.

Further Friday said that if Thor hits the vibranium with Tony doubling it, it would've vaporized everything and everyone. That itself calls this showing as a durability feat in question.
Quote


This is a case of Thor being WAY more durable than strong. He’s been smashed around by Hulk and Kurse to little effect. Took a huge explosion on the Bifrost to no effect. Got rammed by a Leviathan to apparently no effect.



Thor was hinted to be on verge of defeat hence the hallucinations of meeting Odin like it was against Hela. It was supposed to be a brutal beat down hence the crowd becoming uncomfortable. It wasn't to show Thor taking several punches to the head without any issue.




TBH, it's more of a PG 13 setting than anything else. Captain America surviving Iron Man's bloodlusted punches comes to the mind while in the second movie he was koed by a rocket launcher even though he had his shield take the majority of the blast.

Thor can't no sell blasts which vaporizes buildings like Doomsday did or even the Congress bomb attack which destroyed the building.

Quote


Thor did get a slight nose bleed from a Hulk punch. That’s a low showing for sure, considering he’s taken other attacks/hits from Hulk later (including multiple head shots during a ground-and-pound without any noticeable damage).


He was also staggered back by a headbutt from a frost giant in the first movie.
Quote


Superman was spitting up blood during his Non/Faora fight, and neither of them had Superman as defenseless or pounded Superman like Hulk did to Thor. Again, this is not a massive durability gulf here, but I do think Thor excels in durability in the movies. But Superman outclasses him in strength huuuuuuuge.
I don't think Superman spit blood anytime from Faora or Nam-Ek  And Nam was stronger than Superman.

Thor doesn't approaches Superman in durability much less exceeds him.
SM didn't spit blood with his fight against them. Having just watched the JL again last night somethings are abudantly clear.

1. It's hard to place where  DCCU WW and Aquaman stand compared to  MCU Thor in STR. They both did equally well against Stephenwolf. The major difference is WW speed edge on land and Aquaman agility and speed edge on water. Forced to choose which one is stronger I would pick WW but I'd be lying if I said the comics didn't influence my decision.

2. Watching WW and Aquaman take on Stephenwolf in the final fight, it seems clear to me Aquaman is the tougher of the 2. WW had her shield to somewhat lessen SW blows, while Aquaman took the blows directly on his body. Yet both got back up the same way.
Let's not forget Diana took blows from Doomsday as well as Superman. So you fail in saying AM is tuffer.
Please I watched the movie BvsS extended version a few days ago on my PC just to respond to your inane suggestions,  at least 90% if not 99% of all the blows WW took from DD landed on her shield which cushioned the attacks. IF you want I can go and rewatch again and list every blow WW took on her shield and which one hit her directly, if I do you won't like the results since I could come the conclusion she took ALL of the hits on her shield instead of over 90% of them.
You can do so if you like. The shield redirects pointed attacks. It's not vibranium. It does not absorb the force of the blow. Moron. Oh amd any attack she took directly still shows she is more fucking durable than Aquaman or Hulk. Since Hulk cant take shots from Thor or Iron Man.

4
ICT / Re: New comic stuff worth talking about but not worth its own thread
« on: November 22, 2017, 12:52:20 PM »
I thought Oa wad the center of the universe. When did Mogo take it's place?

5
ICT / Re: Rank the Post JL DCcu relative to the MCU Avengers
« on: November 22, 2017, 12:48:16 PM »
Strength

Evolved Doomsday - 120
Superman - 100
Kurse - 95
Hulk / Doomsday - 85
Steppenwolf - 80
Thor - 65
WW - 60

Durability

Kurse - 110
Thor - 100
Superman / Doomsday / Hulk - 90
WW - 85

Other than "sokovia busting feat" which is highly suspect as it is, Thor has no showings which suggest he is even close to Superman in durability.


He is also shown less durable than Hulk.

Outside of getting stabbed by Loki’s Asgardian knives (and Asgardian weapons being super good at piercing), Thor has held up consistently well to all manner of attacks.


Not really. Even a control chip easily pierced his skin and Dr Strange could pluck his hair (comedic scene but still). He also dived away from falling debris on skaar.

He had welts from Surtur's fire and said a shield throw from Hulk could've killed him.

Superman is invulnerable in the movie. Even a nuke didn't puncture his skin. Thor isn't.
Quote


His biggest feat (Sokovia explosion) looks better than Superman getting weakened by a nuke. Thor was definitely KOed temporarily, but no lasting injury was shown. Superman was temporarily incapacitated by the nuke and physically injury. Not a HUGE difference, but I’m putting Thor above Supes.


Then you've to show us Thor taking the entire "blast" of the attack. It wasn't literally a big explosion that destroyed the city either.

Further Friday said that if Thor hits the vibranium with Tony doubling it, it would've vaporized everything and everyone. That itself calls this showing as a durability feat in question.
Quote


This is a case of Thor being WAY more durable than strong. He’s been smashed around by Hulk and Kurse to little effect. Took a huge explosion on the Bifrost to no effect. Got rammed by a Leviathan to apparently no effect.



Thor was hinted to be on verge of defeat hence the hallucinations of meeting Odin like it was against Hela. It was supposed to be a brutal beat down hence the crowd becoming uncomfortable. It wasn't to show Thor taking several punches to the head without any issue.




TBH, it's more of a PG 13 setting than anything else. Captain America surviving Iron Man's bloodlusted punches comes to the mind while in the second movie he was koed by a rocket launcher even though he had his shield take the majority of the blast.

Thor can't no sell blasts which vaporizes buildings like Doomsday did or even the Congress bomb attack which destroyed the building.

Quote


Thor did get a slight nose bleed from a Hulk punch. That’s a low showing for sure, considering he’s taken other attacks/hits from Hulk later (including multiple head shots during a ground-and-pound without any noticeable damage).


He was also staggered back by a headbutt from a frost giant in the first movie.
Quote


Superman was spitting up blood during his Non/Faora fight, and neither of them had Superman as defenseless or pounded Superman like Hulk did to Thor. Again, this is not a massive durability gulf here, but I do think Thor excels in durability in the movies. But Superman outclasses him in strength huuuuuuuge.
I don't think Superman spit blood anytime from Faora or Nam-Ek  And Nam was stronger than Superman.

Thor doesn't approaches Superman in durability much less exceeds him.
SM didn't spit blood with his fight against them. Having just watched the JL again last night somethings are abudantly clear.

1. It's hard to place where  DCCU WW and Aquaman stand compared to  MCU Thor in STR. They both did equally well against Stephenwolf. The major difference is WW speed edge on land and Aquaman agility and speed edge on water. Forced to choose which one is stronger I would pick WW but I'd be lying if I said the comics didn't influence my decision.

2. Watching WW and Aquaman take on Stephenwolf in the final fight, it seems clear to me Aquaman is the tougher of the 2. WW had her shield to somewhat lessen SW blows, while Aquaman took the blows directly on his body. Yet both got back up the same way.
Let's not forget Diana took blows from Doomsday as well as Superman. So you fail in saying AM is tuffer.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 754