Dave Galanter
December 1st 1969 - December 12th 2020
He was loved.

Comic Battle >> View Post
·
Post By
Aang

Member Since: Sat Jun 26, 2010
Posts: 1,369
In Reply To
zvelf

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,615
Subj: Re: Whether Superman is above Thor goes without saying
Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2017 at 02:27:51 pm EST (Viewed 192 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Whether Superman is above Thor goes without saying
Posted: Thu Jan 19, 2017 at 09:33:45 pm EST (Viewed 268 times)




    Quote:
    Quote


    Quote:

    Quote:
    Then answer this question: Can an informed person reasonably and sensibly hold the opinion that Thor should beat Superman a preponderance of the time given the evidence in comic books?

    If the evidence is strong enough, yes. I disagree that the evidence is strong enough.


    Okay, so you do think the majority of the board is unreasonable or uninformed since they frequently rank Thor higher than Superman.

I disagree with their opinion. If you want to label them as with those adjectives, knock yourself out but I won't.  I am so comfortable with my choice that I have no interest in the labeling anybody anything. Why would you even herd me towards that? The combined Marvel/DC creative and editorial team deemed Superman should win in that story.  Combine with my belief that Superman's history suggests he is at very least as formidable of Thor seals it for me. I can ask you if you think those guys are an unreasonable and uninformed lot, but I won't





    Quote:
    Quote:
    From what I know of the general rules of battleboard debates (I know this particular one doesn't have any official rules), a printed fight should have more weight than than theoretical conclusions. 

    Indeed it should, but it's not the only evidence, which is why even though Spider-Man beat Firelord and Hulk and Iron Man in printed fights, Spider-Man is not usually considered superior to them. Likewise, sure Superman beat Thor in a printed fight. But Thor has also beaten numerous Superman analogues in printed fights. Some, like Gladiator, have displayed strength feats like destroying a planet and hanging out in a star that surpass any by post-Crisis Superman.

But that's just it, if Superman didn't have a history of ridiculous feats that easily equal or even surpass Thor's, I would agree with you. But he does. I also think in that magnitude of an event as Jla/Avengers, those comparative histories were carefully considered by Busiek, Breevoort, Alonzo, Perez and all creative and editorial staff from both sides - and decided that it would make sense for Superman to win. Straight up hero to hero with no obvious context result in the story.


    Quote:
    Quote:
    Err, I don't know if you know this but I'm not the one who say "goes without saying". I said I agreed with BK saying Supes has won 100% of the time. 

    That's not all you said. Look at your post here: http://www.comicboards.com/php/show.php?rpy=comicbattles-2017011720313135&layout=thread

    You wrote, "Why wouldn't BK think it goes without saying Supes should be #1? I would say that's fair based on JLA/Avengers." So you are someone who says it "goes without saying."

I did not take "goes without saying" as assuming 
supes winning 100% of the time.  If that is indeed the connotation of the phrase then I agree, it probably doesn't apply. If it means (as I took it) that it means Supes should win most of the time then I don't see anything wrong with it.


    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:
    Are you saying Superman hasn't beaten any foes more powerful than himself or Thor? Somehow, I doubt that very much. As a matter of fact, I think he does it quite often over the course of his history. Both characters have also lost to foes that they should have beaten. That's the nature of the comics. Their histories should cancel each other out and guess what we're left with. Yup, the story.


    Nonsense. Histories don't just cancel each other out. Characters' entire histories is what we use to evaluate them. Every hero has beaten more powerful foes, that doesn't mean every hero's history cancels out. If that's the case, then Spider-Man is superior to Firelord.


    Again you misrepresent what I say. I didn't say every hero's histories, I said Thor and Superman's. It wasn't like Superman was featless and didn't have great victories going into JLA/Avengers.


    Ah, so we have another rule. Other characters' histories matter, just not Thor and Superman's. Just like other evidence matters when Spider-Man beats Firelord or Hulk, it just doesn't matter when it comes to Thor and Superman. How convenient.

    LOL, dear me, how do you keep making this leaps? Why do you think their histories don't matter? You actually think if Thor had an established history that is more formidable than Supes that I wouldn't take it into consideration? You make it seem that the comparative histories of Supes and Thor are slanted towards Thor. They are not.


    Really? You think they are exactly equal? Not counting villains who are primarily Avengers or Justice League foes, Thor's rogue's gallery is comprised of the Absorbing Man, Celestials, Demogorge, the Destroyer, Ego the Living Planet, Galactus, Hela, Karnilla, Kurse, Loki, Mangog, Mephisto, the Midgard Serpent, Pluto, Perrikus, Surtur, and Ymir. Superman's most formidable foes are Bizarro, Brainiac, Cyborg Superman, Darkseid, Doomsday, General Zod, Gog, Kalibak, Lex Luthor, Mongul, Mr. Mxyzptlk, and Superboy Prime. Are you really going to tell me that those two lists are exactly equal in power level?

Are you saying histories and rogues galleries are the same thing? What I was saying is that Superman's overall history of formidability is the very least equal to Thor or even superior. That is no doubt  one of the reasons why the writing and editorial teams of both sides decided that Superman. would win. I mean, it has to be. It wouldn't make sense otherwise. 


    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:
    Is it not a fair fight to use your environment against your opponent? If Thor or Superman knocked each other out with a nearby boulder would it not count? Juggernaut could have tossed Spider-Man into the concrete if he wanted to use that tactic. There's nothing unfair about it.

    Did Spiderman overpower Juggs, no. Did Spiderman temporarily remove Juggs from the fight? Yes. I believe that's what they term "BFR", correct? I would say that counts for context.


    If by "temporarily remove" you mean Juggernaut was trapped in that cement for weeks, then yes, he was "temporarily" removed. But fights aren't won just on power alone but on smarts or Batman wouldn't be half the hero he is.

Yes, but that is the context I was talking about besides the fact that Spidey is the hero and Juggs the villain. What similar context was there when Superman beat Thor, I wonder.


    Quote:


    I checked this out and Firelord never turns off his cosmic powers against Spider-Man and he fully intends to kill Spidey and is frustrated that Spider-Man is able to evade his every blast with his spider sense. What Firelord does consider is blowing up the whole city and Spider-Man with it but decides against it because it would not be honorable. So aside from Firelord's honor, which one would argue is an innate part of his character, it's a clean fight and a clean win for Spider-Man.

Just for the record, I did apologize for mis-remembering that story although I do still think there was context. All through the that story Spidey freely admitted he was outmatched and didn't think he could win. The hero factor was strong in this story. Thor vs Supes has no overriding hero factor from either side.


    Quote:
    Quote:

    Quote:
    For one thing, we know that Thor holds back in the vast majority of his fights. In my scan of his fight with Gladiator, they are fighting evenly until Thor says he will no longer hold back, and then right away he knocks Gladiator into semi-consciousness. After that, Gladiator refuses to try to kill Thor again because, as Gladiator states to Zarkko, "He's too strong." Thor also fought Superman without using any versatility. I think it's a given in a rematch, Thor would use a lot more energy projection, Mjolnir's defensive capabilities instead of just wading through Superman's heat vision, even teleportation. If it were truly a fight of the highest stakes, Thor could even use a godblast. Ocean Master took down Superman with lightning not that long ago. There's no reason why Thor couldn't do the same.

    I have to say those are hard sells. One can say Supes holds back just as much or even more than Thor.


    Except since we're taking context into account, being on Marvel Earth was causing Superman to act terribly out of character in that story so that he was erratic, condescending, and uninhibited, so unlikely to be holding back like his usual self.

Didn't Thor initially draw first blood in an earlier story by hitting Superman with arguably a chep Mjolnir shot? I hardly think that's holding back. Also, with the stakes as they are and the dialogue in the fight, I don't think there's anything that would make me assume that Thor was holding back.


    Quote:

    Quote:
    Doesn't Superman have other esoteric powers he didn't use as well? Why didn't he speed-blitz given how mach faster he is?


    It's likely Superman used his super speed in the first two panels of the fight, first to dodge Thor's blow then to instantly fly right back down and strike Thor.

Yeah, but he did not speed-blitz Thor as his powerset would allow him in theory.


    Quote:
    Because Thor can grab somebody, hold them, and godblast them from his body like he does to Durok here, someone stronger and more durable than Superman:




One has to assume that Thor cannot employ that maneuver easily with Superman because otherwise he would've tried it given the stakes. Thor was trying his best to win, as was Superman.


    Quote:
    Quote:
    Remember, JLA/Avengers was a limited series with a multitude of heroes. Even if the actual fight scenes were limited in number, I think it's fair to assume the writer meant to convey that both heroes were fighting to their best abilities given the stakes. That would make more sense than otherwise.


    You know the other clear win in that issue of Avengers/JLA is Iron Man and Hawkeye beating Captain Atom and Green Arrow. Given that Hawkeye and Green Arrow are pretty even, are we then to take this issue as overwhelming evidence that Iron Man is superior to Captain Atom?

Which issue did this happen from the 4 issues. I'd like to check.


    Quote:
    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:

    Quote:
    Every time I’ve brought up anything else in this thread, and I’ve brought up a lot, you immediately dismiss it as unimportant and you point only to this one issue for your opinion. You just wrote above that Thor and Superman’s histories cancel each other out and that leaves only this single story! That’s the definition of you saying JLA/Avengers is exclusively why your opinion is what it is.


    Nope. You've brought up stuff that was extraneous. I already told you that JLA/Avengers AND everything else is what makes me comfortable with my opinion.  With JLA/Avengers being the PRIME piece of evidence. Even without JLA/Avengers one could muster a very good argument for Supes. JLA/Avengers just brought it solidly over the top. Not sure why you are pushing for exclusivity.


    Are you not the one who said that Superman and Thor's histories cancel each other out and so we don't have to take those into account, and only that one issue of JLA/Avengers is what we're left with? And if what I've brought up (Thor beating Gladiator, Hyperion, Captain Marvel, and others much more powerful than Superman) is extraneously, what is less extraneous than those examples that makes you think Thor can give Superman a good fight? Or do you think there is no evidence of that and ALL evidence is on Superman's side?

    Again, I never said there is zero evidence for Thor at all. As a matter of fact, I think he will win some fights given how close they are. I just think there ismore evidence that Superman will win more than not.


    So I ask again, what is the less extraneous evidence that Thor will make it a close fight than what I've brought up?

Let's make this clear, I think the fight was close but Supes was said to have the extra dial he could employ to win solidly more often than not. It was close, but Superman caught a lightning-charged full Mjolnir shot with his left hand, while on his back, and then knock Thor unconscious with his other hand. That was pretty damn impressive.

I'll also tell you what I would have tosee to change my opinion. If I saw Thor beat Superman in a context-free fight. Knowing that all the creative sides who had a hand in that fight won't hurt either. Otherwise, I would have to see undeniable proof that Superman's body of history is less formidable than Thor's. I am skeptical anybody has that kind of evidence.






From his Formspring page.
Tom, who's more powerful: Galactus or a Celestial? I'd put my money on Galactus over any single Celestial.
http://www.formspring.me/TomBrevoort
Sweet.
Posted with Google Chrome 55.0.2883.87 on Windows 10
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2021 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2021 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2021 Powermad Software