I noticed something I never saw before, but in the DC/Marvel crossover, there's actually a small art piece showing Darkseid and Thanos matching eye beam for eye beam, neither having any advantage. Their fight is mostly off panel but throughout the series, it was unquestionably implied that their fight was more than just some brief encounter. People point out that Orion's loss to Surfer carries weight because it represents an author's (John Byrne's) interpretation of how the fight would really happen despite not being canon, yet we see here that the same logic points to Darkseid and Thanos being evenly matched.
I don't know why people point out Orion's loss to Surfer, are they willing to accept the logical consequences?
Tried responding to your question but it said SPAM and was detected and prevented me. Anyway, the logical consequences where pretty straight forward - that you cannot isolate Orion vs Surfer with any level of authority if you’re not willing to accept the bad parts of the ‘96 Dc/Marvel Crossover, namely Darkseid and Thanos fighting to a standstill, Batman KO’ing Carnage, Venom beatingSuperman.... those weren’t voted outcomes. You either accept the whole, discard the whole, but never isolate fights when it suits you.
It was explained to me that there are different levels of hierarchy when deciding battle outcomes - what is canon, handbooks, author Q/A’s, crossover battles, etc., and that Surfer vs Orion could be used as evidence of a likely outcome because John Byrne wrote it and the story was agreed by both companies. So okay, fine, but there’s Batman, Carnage, venom, Superman, etc. that are equally arguable by those standards. This logic allows Batman to beat up Carnage with his mere fists every time. Further, it’s then likely he could do the same to Venom or Spider-Man since they’re all so similar. Spider-Man also beats up on Scorpion, he’s an arachnid, too so... Lots of consequences.