CaV: DCAMU Superman (Maestromage) vs MCU Thor (CocaColaMan) OPEN FOR VOTES!

SPEED OF LIGHTNING

Thor's inherit speed, while relatively unimpressive, is a pretty good place to start.

For one, Thor has been consistently portrayed as fast. Don't believe me?

1. Thor
2. The Avengers
3. Thor: The Dark World
4. Avengers: Age of Ultron
5. Thor: Ragnarok

This is a five-point list of feats from Thor, one from each movie he was in prior to Thanos, where Thor was in his prime. Why do each of these feats show how crazy Thor's speed is?

In his first feat, we see the Destroyer's beams getting deflected. These beams may not be too awfully impressive, but they did cross that distance near instantly, so Thor's reactions are above the average human. Nothing too special, but the next ones are where it's at.

In the Avengers, Thor blocks multiple Chitauri blasts AFTER they have all been fired. Even deflecting two baseballs would be considerably difficult for most humans, so this shows Thor is treating these blasts better than someone like you or I would treat baseballs. And how fast are these blasts? Fast enough to match bullets in speed. This, along with the fact Captain America was shown incapable of reacting to them, shows that Thor's reactions are clearly in the fractions-of-a-second range. I won't bother doing math, but considering the distance between them and the speed of the blasts, I'd say the Chitauri fire was getting to Thor in hundredths of a second minimum.

Dark World sees Thor dodging around Malekith's attacks. These same attacks are breaking the sound barrier, meaning Thor can react to supersonic attacks, though we can reasonably conclude he wasn't moving at supersonic speeds due to the lack of a sound barrier surrounding him.

When Ultron was created, Thor was forced to fight an army of his robots with the rest of the Avengers, and Thor gets a blink-and-you-miss-it feat of reacting to Ultron blasters. These same blasters could cross hundreds to a thousand feet in a second, and looked incredibly similar to Chitauri weaponry, so with the blaster being about 12 ft away, this is a very good reaction feat.

Finally, in Ragnarok, Thor blocks Hela's blades. Why is this so impressive? Well, later on, Hela threw spikes at Surtur so fast they crossed kilometers in seconds. This is clearly supersonic, yet Thor reacted to her spikes. People may say they weren't the same, and while this is true, the fact her spikes were much shorter gives me reason to believe they wouldn't be too awfully slower than those gigantic things.

Now, these are all reactions. That's fine and all, but what about actually moving in the midst of combat? Well, Thor can do this too.

Thor has fought the following people:

• Loki, who can effortlessly react to arrows without looking
• Hulk, who can get up and smack the ground before nigh-supersonic people can move
• Iron Man, who can dodge nigh-supersonic projectiles an inch away from him

These three people are all incredibly fast, but Thor can keep up with and outspeed them in combat. Thor's best combat feat, though, is shown in this scene where Thor moves in "Quicktime." As you can see, other high speed objects, like Captain America's shield, are FROZEN. Thor is literally moving so fast that he can cross dozens upon dozens, if not hundreds, of times the distance of a 30-40 mph object with an attack. This is an insane feat, even moreso when one realizes that later on, Wanda, a person who moved similarly in "Quicktime," reacted to an explosion, which is high hypersonic in speed. That doesn't mean Thor could necessarily replicate this feat, but it is pretty good anyway.

So, as I have proven, Thor may not be the fastest on the block, but you shouldn't count him out.

CRACKLE!

Many a men have tried and failed to overcome this obstacle. They almost managed it, too, but sadly, they just couldn't.

The Lightning Cloak is a very valuable and useful ability of Thor's. While officially nameless, what we Viners refer to as the Lightning Cloak is pretty much passive lightning that Thor just has to activate. Afterwards, Thor can just stand there and his Cloak can do a lot of work itself. While it almost unarguably has a healing factor that can be of some help, I won't bother focusing on it. All this nifty little defense needs to do is do what it did back in Ragnarok and IW. What was that exactly?

Let's start with the "defensive" application of the Cloak. This is how it protects Thor and why it is so hard to get around. This aspect is best shown during the events of Ragnarok when Thor is fighting his sister, Hela. The Lightning Cloak protects Thor from every angle, constantly swarming through multiple hordes to keep Thor away from the zombies. While this is unarguably the best display of the Cloak, it has been shown in Infinity War when Thor returns to Wakanda. In this absolutely epic scene, Thor shows off his weapon, Stormbreaker, which would naturally have a worse Cloak than Thor himself, yet it still doesn't discriminate on direction. All of this considered should show just how hard it is to get to Thor in the first place. You would need either adequate durability or speeds greater than lightning. Since lightning is Mach 286, that's out the window, so now Clark needs to be a tank. Before you can show that off, let me give you the second half of the Cloak, the "offensive" aspect.

This is basically the power of the Cloak. As just about any MCU Thor expert will tell you, the big feat here is in the Battle of Wakanda. Here, Thor straight up destroys a ship the size of a building. This same ship likely weighed in the high hundreds to mid thousands of tons, unless we apply unreasonable doubt to MCU metal. But despite this weight, when it was slammed downwards at high enough speeds to be set on fire (at least hypersonic, or a mile a second) it was completely and totally unaffected. This means that Thor's passive lightning which he doesn't even need to focus on is far superior in power output to several dozen tanks hitting you at speeds so fast you couldn't even perceive them. And yes, it was the Cloak. As you can see, before Thor emerges, two explosions in different spots pop up, signifying that two bolts were going in different directions.

In overview, I think I have successfully shown Thor's most infamous defense well. It's near impossible to get through and powerful enough to keep you away.

IMMORTAL

Thor is indescribably durable. Thor's has had punishment laid on him by the Hulk for almost a dozen hits, yet he was barely bleeding. The Hulk strikes so hard that he can stop these things

flying at him with a punch and DENT VIBRANIUM. Those things above can be compared to thousand-ton boulders, btw.

Did every hit Hulk send at Thor pack that much force? Likely not. But Hulk was definitely not going easy on Thor, so I think it would be unfair to say Hulk was giving Thor any less than a thousand tons to the hit, yet Thor treated it like having a baseball hit him in the arm. I think it is fair to say Thor's skin should already be shown as comparable to things like Uru and Vibranium, but I have two to three more things to prove it when asked.

In all, Thor's counters to the speed advantage more than make up for the fact he truly is slower, and as such, I can see Thor overcoming this disadvantage with everything at his disposal.

BOOMING BICEPS AND THUNDERING TRICEPS

In any real fight, opponents are likely to get to a place where they can grab each other. If these two do that and grapple, I believe you will find that Thor is a very strong adversary.

No beating around the bush will be beneficial for anyone who needs to hurry. In the meaning of saving time, I'll give you Thor's best feat only: Moving the rings. These are multiple rings the size of skyscrapers (those weigh a lot) and while it IS TRUE Thor didn't actually lift them, and he WAS using his full body strength AND momentum, this is still an insane feat. This is potentially a million tons being moved by Thor. But that's enough of that, let's move on.

LIGHTNING STRIKE

Thor's striking strength without a weapon is, admittedly, the worst aspect of him. But he more than makes up for it with his lightning amped strikes.

In Ragnarok, Thor had to fight the Hulk. After a mild beating, Thor gets amped by lightning. When he does this, he shows a clear difference in power.

• No lightning
• Lightning

All things considered, this strike is immensely impressive. Other than Surtur, no one made an attack like that in this movie, which had the same director, happened under the same movie franchise, etc. So it is clear what the intention was. As such, I can reasonably conclude that Thor's punch can be reasonably compared to Hela's large spikes.

These spikes were huge and fast. I ain't even joking. Those things looked at least 80 meters long compared to the 800+ meter Surtur, and 80 meters is long. That much material, moving at speeds so fast they crossed Surtur's body distance in seconds, should be a solid building tier strike, yet it didn't make as much visible disturbance as Thor did.

Even ignoring the above, this lightning hit was clearly doing more than Mjolnir. It dazed Hulk longer than a BB-Cracking fall, and that bridge has been seen dealing with Mjolnir. Mjolnir, of course, being a Hulk-level or above hit. I've already shown Hulk's striking power.

To put it bluntly, Thor can strike a lot harder than you would think he could.

KrAkAbOoM!

Thor's Electrokinesis is infamous for its incredible power and the ridiculousness of its charge up time. To show you just how powerful Thor has been and how much stronger he has become, let's look at each notable feat he accomplished in the pre-Thanos movies which set in stone his lightning's ridiculous power.

Thor

Thor straight up nuked Jotunheim. This land area is MASSIVE. I can look outside at my yard and see how it isn't even half of what Thor broke apart in one strike PRIOR TO BECOMING UNWORTHY but I still have trouble imagining anything short of a MOAB doing something like that to my yard. This feat is so incredible that I could honestly just stop here, but let's keep going.

The Avengers

Remember those Leviathans? You know, the massive multi-thousand ton dudes who move at, like, 20-30 mph? Did I forget to mention they casually swim through metal? Yeah, well, even multiple of them aren't enough to overcome Thor. This is a feat which is so absurd I'm not sure how Thor even loses his fights. These are pretty much flying Taco Bells that Thor is casually pushing back. Clark better have a lot on his side.

Thor: The Dark World

Thor destroyed the Reality Stone temporarily. I mean, I don't know what to say. Scarlet Witch, a person so powerful she can pull off feats like ripping apart Vibranium and lifting multiple multi-thousand ton wheels, takes a longer time to destroy a Stone that is naturally easier for her to destroy. This should make it clear cut that Thor doesn't even need charge up to unleash high level bolts.

Avengers: Age of Ultron

Arguably Thor's most impressive feat of offense, Thor destroyed Sokovia with Tony's help. I would like to note that Tony said that Thor would have cracked it without any help. Sokovia is a 2km landmass, topped with a plethora of buildings. The fact that Thor was so strong that he could crack a 2 kilometer landmass, when thousand ton boulders aren't even close to 100 meters, shows Thor's Herculean power perfectly, and I seriously doubt that my opponent can take a hit like this head on.

Thor: Ragnarok

Finally, we have the icing on the cake. Thor INSTANTLY SUMMONS A BIGGER AND STRONGER BOLT THAN ANYTHING I HAVE ALREADY SHOWN.Since this is the movie gets an amp, I am honestly convinced this means he could summon bolts that are superior to anything shown in previous movies without even a gesture, even AFTER having received a brutal beating.

To recap, Thor's lightning strikes are consistently building level at the BAREST minimum. If you get anything from this post, let it be that Thor's electricity is way stronger than you might have thought.

CLOUDSHATTERER

Thor's weapon in this battle is his axe, Stormbreaker, which he made in an attempt to bring down Thanos and save the universe. This weapon has possibly the most impressive offensive feat below the God Tiers.

At the end of the Battle of Wakanda, prior to the inevitable, Thanos finally gathered all six Infinity Stones. He was getting prepared to Snap, but Thor comes out of the sky to stop him. In a reflex, Thanos launches a beam at Thor, and then Storms are Broken.

This feat is so absurd it isn't even funny. First off, this thing went through a beam from the Infinity Gauntlet. The Power Stone alone has consistent building level feats or better, yet ALL 6 Stones were overpowered by Thor. Regardless, I think it is fair to say an attack from the single most powerful weapon in the universe would be inferior to any of the lightning strikes I showed from Thor, yet that power can't surpass Stormbreaker.

And after a solid few seconds of being opposed by a constant force, SB still had enough force to pierce Thanos. Thanos was totally unharmed by entire assaults from Hulk, Iron Man, the GotG, and Doctor Strange. High-speed drags through rock, buildings hitting head on at high speed, a beating from thousand-tonners, nothing did crap to Thanos. But Thor, while disadvantaged, does DOZENS OF TIMES WORSE than every other attack Thanos felt in Infinity War or even in Endgame.

Honestly, there's no debate here. Stormbreaker is the single deadliest thing Thor has at his disposal, and Clark needs some work before he can face this arc of destruction.

Culminating it all, Thor has an insanely dangerous blade, unavoidable energy attacks, tremendous strength and fists that could go a round with Rocky Balboa. I hope Supes is prepared.

TYPHOON TITAN

The best defense is a good offense. Clark may have his speed, but Thor's versatility and raw power will definitely prove enough to put Superman on the back burner, dodging and blocking to keep himself in the game. Thor's ability to summon lightning is not a wild card Clark can play with, and that blade is going to be as dangerous to the Kryptonian as a sword would be to us humans. With the Cloak keeping Superman off the offense, I am confident in saying that Odinson will be controlling the fight.

CRACKLE!

There isn't much to say here. As I have already shown, the Cloak is basically another entity. If Superman wants to fight, he has to deal with it and suck it up. That will be his doom.

IMMORTAL

Again, I've covered most of it, but let me go back to my Uru/VIbranium comparison.

As I have shown, Thor can take punishment from a Vibranium denter. But that isn't his only feat on that level. To start with a piercing feat, Thor was hit by Hela, yet the blade didn't get in very deep. Hela's blades pierced Uru, so this is pretty insane.

And of course the Star feat. Thor's feat of surviving a shower in a starbeam when Uru couldn't is a feat so solid that I don't see how one could deny it. The same Uru tanked the Sokovia Explosion, which vaporized 2 kilometers of stone, so this wasn't easy-to-break metal either.

Pretty much, Thor is pretty good on the defense, if he ever gets put there.

Seeing as you started off talking about speed, I figured I would deal with this part of the debate right away.

Regarding the feats you showed for Thor, I don't really have any issues with them. I slightly disagree with a few parts (like Hela's blades all being the same speed or the shockwaves Malekith's projectiles made necessarily being sonic booms) but you showed enough different feats that I don't think it makes sense to try and argue over those small points. Despite not agreeing with all of your feats, I agree with your overall assessment of Thor's speed.

With that said, however, I'm now going to show off this Superman's speed (and also emphasising how he uses it) to demonstrate how his speed is still a notable advantage in this fight that Thor may struggle to deal with. I think the easiest way to show how these two characters compare speed-wise would be to show a fight between Superman and someone comparable to Thor in speed. Which brings me to my first feat for Superman, in his initial "fight" against Batman:

Despite not fighting Batman seriously at all (he was just trying to interrogate him) Clark easily blitzes Batman. It's not just this instance either, Clark is very clearly portrayed as on a different tier speed-wise from Batman on more than one occasion. Now you probably wouldn't think that Batman that DCAMU Batman is as fast as Thor has been demonstrated to be, but you'd be wrong. This Batman is comparable to (and in fact canonically superior to) no less than 2 casual bullet timers, Damian and Ra's:

Both Damian and Ra's are able to easily cut bullets out of the air (with Ra's doing it from multiple opponents with automatic weapons who are surrounding him and as I stated Batman is better than both (He was clearly portrayed as Damian's superior when they fought despite holding back, and Dick stated that he beat Ra's Al Ghul's ass every time they fought in the past). Given that these feats are as good if not outright better than Thor's speed feats, it's more than fair to say that Batman is at least comparable to MCU Thor in speed.

So, based on Clark's performance against Bruce, he should be more than capable of outspeeding Thor and dancing around him should he wish to. To further hammer home Clark's speed, I'll show one more feat:

In this feat we see Clark move at continuous blur speed, going fast enough to effectively make a mini-tornado. Such a feat of raw speed is clearly more than Thor can either replicate or cope with, and thus will be a significant advantage in this fight (I'll talk about dealing with the lightning cloak in the next section). With that said, this section isn't over. Though I've already demonstrated his speed, I want to go on to show how effectively he uses and abuses it in his fights.

The best example of what I mean would probably be the Death of Superman opening fight against Intergang.

(Full fight here)

Despite his opponents being fodder to him, Superman consistently uses his speed to his advantage throughout the fight (as the above example shows) to blitz and outmanoeuvre his opponents, opting to avoid attacks instead of tanking them.

Another good example of Superman doing this would be an example I've already mentioned, his scuffle with Batman in JL War. As already mentioned, Clark wasn't trying to fight Batman seriously, and he definitely didn't need to abuse his speed, but he still did, appearing as a blur to him on several occasions and blitzing him more than once. I could bring more examples, but the point is that it's consistent for DCAMU Superman to abuse his speed in fights, even against inferior opponents, so there's no reason he won't do the same to Thor.

This fighting style will make it very difficult for Thor to fight Superman as he'll be landing significantly fewer attacks than his opponent. For Thor to win this he would have to be notably more powerful and durable, but as I will go on to show, that simply isn't the case.

Now that I've addressed Clark's speed advantage, I'm going to show why he's more than able to put Thor down with his damage output. Clark's main form of damage is achieved through his strength so let's start there.

Your main feat for Thor's blunt force durability (well your only one actually lol) was him taking a barrage of punches from Hulk who is obviously no slouch in strength. However, Hulk's leviathan feat isn't as impressive as you made it out to be due to the fact that Hulk didn't exactly stop it with a punch:

He slows the Levithan down with the initial punch, but even whilst continuously pushing against it he still fails to completely stop its momentum. Now, Leviathans are building-sized and this is still a good feat but it's not enough to let Thor take a beating from Supes.

You compared the Leviathans to 1000 tonne boulders, but when it comes to moving rocks Clark has done a lot better:

In this feat, Clark (whilst injured) pushes a cliff big enough to bury the Dark Trench, which was a building-sized sea creature (size examples)

This feat is already notably better than what you showed for Hulk, but where this incarnation of Superman really excels is his striking. I'm just gonna show off a few feats to show what I mean:

Firstly, Clark punches Hal's shield construct through a building (which the shield tanks). He later breaks Hal's shield despite him constantly repairing it.

Here Clark sends Trigon reeling backwards with a supersonic bullrush, forcing him to steady himself. Trigon is already huge, but he was also barely moved by Wonder Woman slamming a huge boulder into his face as well as Flash (seemingly) IMPing him:

Making Superman moving him as much as he did even more impressive.

Now not a feat for Superman himself, but Diana knocks down two large buildings whilst pounding on Darkseid, and Clark is consistently portrayed as her physical superior (plus he easily caught a punch from her in JL vs TT).

These feats should all demonstrate the power Superman has behind his hits. Now, compare these to your Leviathan feat for Hulk and you'd be pretty hard-pressed to say that Thor can tank Clark's hits for long.

However, Superman's physicals aren't the only thing Thor has to tank. He will also have to deal with Clark's Heat Vision. Now the clearest feat I can show to demonstrate its heat would be this feat:

Where Clark's HV instantly melts through multiple steel beams (as well as the wall behind it). Steel has a melting point well over 1000°C making Clark's heat vision more than worthy of the name. On top of being pretty hot, it's also very powerful just as an energy projection ability, as shown particularly well in these two instances:

The first feat sees Clark take out an almost building-sized number of parademons using his HV in an AOE fashion. Given that these parademons are a lot more durable than walls (they've torn through walls in lesser numbers with ease) this should easily be a building level energy projection feat for Clark.

In the second feat, Clark blasts off Cyborg Superman's arm with a single attack from his Heat Vision, which is very impressive given that Cyborg Superman has pretty decent energy durability having tanked this explosion:

as well as a shot from this gun:

Clark basically being able to one-shot Cyborg Superman is very impressive, and it means that tanking his HV won't be easy.

Now, before I end this section I wanted to talk about what I know will be the obvious counter to Clark's HV, that being Thor's star forge feat.

(full scene here)

Now in this scene, Thor takes "the full force" of a neutron star for a brief period of time. If you've watched the scene then you'll obviously know that this doesn't imply "star level Thor" or anything like that, but it is a very good heat durability feat. That said, there are a few reasons why I don't think this is necessarily enough to say Thor can easily tank Clark's HV.

My overall point is basically just that we have no idea what temperature this neutron star was at. Neutron stars are normally incredibly hot and should have surface temperatures in the vicinity of 600,000 Kelvin, but neutrons star whilst isolated continuously cool down over time which makes gauging the temperature hard as we don't know how old it is. There's even more reason for it to be cooler given that this was explicitly stated to be a dying star and the fact that it had seemingly gone out when Thor and co first arrived at Nidavelir. That said the whole "going out" thing doesn't make sense and just isn't how stars work. Which brings me to my second and more notable point:

Nidavellir doesn't act like a neutron star. One of the most notable points about a lot of neutron stars (or the ones we can detect) is that they spin rapidly. When they do this we call them pulsars. Now, not every neutron star needs to be a pulsar, but it's still a way Nidavellir could have acted as a neutron star. The bigger problems would be the fact that Nidavellir displays no gravity whatsoever. Neutron stars weigh bare minimum 1.1 solar masses (1.1x more than the Sun) and thus should have some pretty serious gravity. Despite this, I don't think Nidavellir displays any gravitational properties in its entire screen time, and Thor even fell away from it after performing the star forge feat instead of gravitating towards it as one would expect. And I already mentioned how the whole "going out" thing makes zero sense. A neutron star doesn't actively generate heat so if it "went out" you wouldn't really be able to make it "start-up" again. Even if you somehow could reverse the star life cycle process I'd imagine the energy required to do so would make needing the star in the first place pointless.

The point I'm getting at with all this is that Nidavellir blatantly doesn't act like a neutron star in so many ways that it's illogical to assume that it also has neutron star level temperatures, making the whole thing fairly unquantifiable. Plus, it doesn't help that Thor almost died performing the feat. However, you did nicely bring up the point that Nidavellir's beam melted Uru:

And of course the Star feat. Thor's feat of surviving a shower in a starbeam when Uru couldn't is a feat so solid that I don't see how one could deny it. The same Uru tanked the Sokovia Explosion, which vaporized 2 kilometers of stone, so this wasn't easy-to-break metal either.

A very very small amount of that explosion would have actually hit Mjolnir given that the hammer is very small compared to a 2km sized explosion, and even then durability doesn't equate to melting temperature. Even if we are to assume that Uru has a higher melting point than steel (which isn't unreasonable), it would be impossible to say by how much. Additionally, Uru melting heat had Thor near-death whereas Clark's HV can instantly melt through steel. Plus Clark has also instantly melted through the alien metal armour of parademons

Now I'm not at all equating their armour to Uru, but I'm using it as an example given that this armour is seemingly more durable than normal metals and yet Clark still melted through it with ease.

Unless I'm forgetting some feat for Thor (which I could be) then I don't think he has any feats you can use to definitively say that he can easily tank Clark's HV. I'm not suggesting it's going to one-shot him, but if Thor gets hit by it (which he will) it's going to do some serious damage.

Though Clark's speed advantage means he won't be getting tagged very often, in this section I'm going to show why he's more than capable of dealing with what Thor can dish out

The first thing to tackle would be, of course, the lightning cloak.

Let's start with the "defensive" application of the Cloak. This is how it protects Thor and why it is so hard to get around. This aspect is best shown during the events of Ragnarok when Thor is fighting his sister, Hela. The Lightning Cloak protects Thor from every angle, constantly swarming through multiple hordes to keep Thor away from the zombies. While this is unarguably the best display of the Cloak, it has been shown in Infinity War when Thor returns to Wakanda. In this absolutely epic scene, Thor shows off his weapon, Stormbreaker, which would naturally have a worse Cloak than Thor himself, yet it still doesn't discriminate on direction. All of this considered should show just how hard it is to get to Thor in the first place. You would need either adequate durability or speeds greater than lightning. Since lightning is Mach 286, that's out the window, so now Clark needs to be a tank. Before you can show that off, let me give you the second half of the Cloak, the "offensive" aspect.

I'm just gonna say this straight out; Thor's lightning cloak is, in my humble opinion, vastly overrated and will afford Thor almost no benefits in this fight. A bold claim I know, but I have reasons for this stance.

1. Thor doesn't always have it on. Though the cloak is automatic Thor still has to activate it in the first place, meaning he's still open to being blitzed or whatever before he uses it.

2. The Lightning Cloak has no speed feats. What I mean when I say this is that the lightning cloak doesn't have any reaction speed feats to suggest that it can react to anyone notably faster than Thor. Many people seem to think that any slower than lightning is going to get hit by hit, but in reality, when you look at his showings there's no reason someone notably faster than Thor (like Clark) couldn't just blitz him regardless.

3. Thor's Lightning doesn't work on projectiles. Thor's lightning cloak has taken out many a fodder character, but it actually hasn't displayed the ability to block projectiles. In fact, it has instances of it failing to do just that:

In his fight with Hela on the Bifrost bridge at the end of Ragnarok, we see Hela throw two blades at Thor which the lightning cloak does nothing to stop. This leaves Thor to block them both himself which he fails to do and gets hit by one of them. So by feats, Thor's lightning cloak won't do anything to save him from Clark's heat vision. The above feat also brings me nicely to my 4th point.

4. Thor's lightning cloak seemingly deactivates when he gets tagged. As we see in the above feat, simply getting hit by a single attack from Hela (which didn't even wound him much) is enough to knock him out of his cloak. Meaning that Clark hitting him once is enough to stop him using it.

However lastly and perhaps most importantly, Thor has never used his lightning cloak to accomplish anything significant in a 1v1 fight. Take a look at his fight with Hela or any of his fights with Thanos. In any of them do we see his opponents get fried just be being close to him or his lightning cloak blocking attacks or anything like that? No. Heck, half the time he doesn't even have it on. Looking a third time at the gif above, Thor is literally attacking Hela who is a metre away from him and the cloak does nothing.

To summarise, Thor's lightning cloak is demonstrably useless in a 1v1 fight against a faster opponent, as is the case here.

Even if I steel-manned you and was to say that the lightning cloak will tag Clark, even then it's still also not as powerful as you made it out to be.

This is basically the power of the Cloak. As just about any MCU Thor expert will tell you, the big feat here is in the Battle of Wakanda. Here, Thor straight up destroys a ship the size of a building. This same ship likely weighed in the high hundreds to mid thousands of tons, unless we apply unreasonable doubt to MCU metal. But despite this weight, when it was slammed downwards at high enough speeds to be set on fire (at least hypersonic, or a mile a second) it was completely and totally unaffected. This means that Thor's passive lightning which he doesn't even need to focus on is far superior in power output to several dozen tanks hitting you at speeds so fast you couldn't even perceive them. And yes, it was the Cloak. As you can see, before Thor emerges, two explosions in different spots pop up, signifying that two bolts were going in different directions.

Seemingly very impressive but if you slow down the footage and look closely then you'll realise that Thor actually just flew inside the ship and then blew it up from the inside out. Making the whole "tanked reentry" thing moot. Blowing up a building-sized ship with a few blasts is still a decent feat for a passive ability, but it's nowhere near enough to put down DCAMU Superman, as I will go on to demonstrate.

Before we get to that, however, I have some more counters regarding what you said about Thor's offensive ability.

In Ragnarok, Thor had to fight the Hulk. After a mild beating, Thor gets amped by lightning. When he does this, he shows a clear difference in power.

• No lightning
• Lightning

All things considered, this strike is immensely impressive. Other than Surtur, no one made an attack like that in this movie, which had the same director, happened under the same movie franchise, etc. So it is clear what the intention was. As such, I can reasonably conclude that Thor's punch can be reasonably compared to Hela's large spikes.

I'll be blunt, this chain of logic makes absolutely no sense, and actually contradicts how these characters are portrayed in comparison to each other. Thor did one impressive attack so now he's Hela level? How does that make any sense? Despite the fact that even when Thor using his more powerful lightning attacks as well as being assisted by Valkyrie he still never forced Hela to use her large spikes. Thor's normal lightning punches being at the level of Hela's strongest attacks is blatantly ludicrous.

Thor straight up nuked Jotunheim. This land area is MASSIVE. I can look outside at my yard and see how it isn't even half of what Thor broke apart in one strike PRIOR TO BECOMING UNWORTHY but I still have trouble imagining anything short of a MOAB doing something like that to my yard. This feat is so incredible that I could honestly just stop here, but let's keep going.

A great feat, though I would think that part of the reason for the destruction spreading to such an extent would be due to the fact that the ground isn't very stable in Jotunheim to begin with (it's literally just a big ice floor held up by very sparsely placed pillars).

Remember those Leviathans? You know, the massive multi-thousand ton dudes who move at, like, 20-30 mph? Did I forget to mention they casually swim through metal? Yeah, well, even multiple of them aren't enough to overcome Thor. This is a feat which is so absurd I'm not sure how Thor even loses his fights. These are pretty much flying Taco Bells that Thor is casually pushing back. Clark better have a lot on his side.

You also neglected to mention the fact that Thor seemed to be drawing power from the city (or just the building) or the fact that this attack took a whole 15 seconds to charge up. Clark has no reason to just stand there and let Thor charge up a huge lightning attack.

Thor destroyed the Reality Stone temporarily. I mean, I don't know what to say. Scarlet Witch, a person so powerful she can pull off feats like ripping apart Vibranium and lifting multiple multi-thousand ton wheels, takes a longer time to destroy a Stone that is naturally easier for her to destroy. This should make it clear cut that Thor doesn't even need charge up to unleash high level bolts.

Keyword here, "temporarily". He didn't destroy the reality stone as much as he dispersed it (given that it was in its Aether/liquid form at the time) which makes this whole scaling to Wanda void.

Arguably Thor's most impressive feat of offense, Thor destroyed Sokovia with Tony's help. I would like to note that Tony said that Thor would have cracked it without any help. Sokovia is a 2km landmass, topped with a plethora of buildings. The fact that Thor was so strong that he could crack a 2 kilometer landmass, when thousand ton boulders aren't even close to 100 meters, shows Thor's Herculean power perfectly, and I seriously doubt that my opponent can take a hit like this head on.

Tony's statement about Thor being able to "crack it" was actually in reference to the spire (which was vibranium to be fair, so still a great feat). On top of that, he and Tony didn't actually destroy Sokovia themselves. Thor broke the thing that was holding the landmass together and Tony kept the force from going outwards and instead redirecting it back on itself. On the one hand, Thor's initial attack still destroyed a city block(ish) area and also cracked vibranium, but on the other hand, this attack (again) took about 16 seconds to charge up if you look at the uncut footage and Clark isn't just going to sit there and let that happen.

At the end of the Battle of Wakanda, prior to the inevitable, Thanos finally gathered all six Infinity Stones. He was getting prepared to Snap, but Thor comes out of the sky to stop him. In a reflex, Thanos launches a beam at Thor, and then Storms are Broken.

This feat is so absurd it isn't even funny. First off, this thing went through a beam from the Infinity Gauntlet. The Power Stone alone has consistent building level feats or better, yet ALL 6 Stones were overpowered by Thor. Regardless, I think it is fair to say an attack from the single most powerful weapon in the universe would be inferior to any of the lightning strikes I showed from Thor, yet that power can't surpass Stormbreaker.

And after a solid few seconds of being opposed by a constant force, SB still had enough force to pierce Thanos. Thanos was totally unharmed by entire assaults from Hulk, Iron Man, the GotG, and Doctor Strange. High-speed drags through rock, buildings hitting head on at high speed, a beating from thousand-tonners, nothing did crap to Thanos. But Thor, while disadvantaged, does DOZENS OF TIMES WORSE than every other attack Thanos felt in Infinity War or even in Endgame.

Stormbreaker > Infinity Stones > Pre-Ragnarok Thor > Infinity stone? nice scaling

Unfortunately for me, DCAMU Superman doesn't have any crazy piercing durability feats that would allow him to take hits from Stormbreaker. However, as I'm about to demonstrate, that really shouldn't pose much of an issue in this fight. Time to finally show some durability feats.

To start with, let's show a decent blunt force durability feat for Supes.

Here Clark tanks a punch from Luthor that sends him flying through an entire large building and far beyond, and then tanks 2 more punches and a throw from him.

Seeing as you didn't exactly hold back with your post, however, I figured I might as well just show Clark's best pure durability feat.

In this feat Clark straight up no-sells part of a city-block busting attack from Darkseid. Now, he won't have taken the full force of the attack given the nature of AoE attacks, but to completely no-sell it is still an excellent feat.

What really makes this Superman so hard to put down, however, is his endurance which is frankly ridiculous:

Take his fight against Cyborg Superman for instance (Fight part 1 and part 2). Despite being weakened to the point where individual punches from Henshaw are enough to draw blood, Clark takes an insane beating for several minutes from Hank, even being bullrushed through the entire watchtower at one point. It's at this point that I'd remind you that the two durability feat I posted above weren't even close to drawing blood from Clark.

However, Clark's clearest (and best) example of his endurance would obviously be his fight with Doomsday.

The gif above is really just a very small extract from their fight but it shows my point pretty nicely. Despite Doomsday actually being stronger than him, Clark went on fighting Doomsday and getting smacked around by him without any real issues for a really long time. In fact, when their fight started the sun was beginning to set, but by the time it ended it was well into the night, clearly implying that Clark was fighting doomsday for hours. An yet, as the above gif shows off nicely, he just keeps on getting up. Despite constantly taking attacks that draw blood from him (which takes quite a lot as I demonstrated earlier) he continuously gets back up and resumes fighting.

As for Thor, I don't think he hits hard enough to even draw blood from Clark, so putting him down physically will be a nigh-impossible task. Of course, he has Stormbreaker to help but given Clark's speed advantage I don't see Thor landing a clean hit on Clark, and given his endurance, a couple of small cuts from Stormbreaker aren't doing anything to slow him down.

Your main feat for Thor's blunt force durability (well your only one actually lol) was him taking a barrage of punches from Hulk who is obviously no slouch in strength. However, Hulk's leviathan feat isn't as impressive as you made it out to be due to the fact that Hulk didn't exactly stop it with a punch:

He slows the Levithan down with the initial punch, but even whilst continuously pushing against it he still fails to completely stop its momentum. Now, Leviathans are building-sized and this is still a good feat but it's not enough to let Thor take a beating from Supes.

The Hulk was pushed back because he was rammed into by a gigantic space whale, and he was against concrete. If we were to replace the street with, say, steel, do you still believe Hulk would have been as pushed back as he was? If so, what about Uru or Vibranium? And there's the fact the hit actually moved down the Leviathan's head, which was relatively unmoved by a dive through a building or Iron Man's lasers. It was said Tony would need to waste all his power penetrating that shield, and Tony earlier in the franchise one shot a tank.

You compared the Leviathans to 1000 tonne boulders, but when it comes to moving rocks Clark has done a lot better:

I didn't just compare them, I showed how much bigger they were. A Leviathan would easily be several times longer and at least as thick, with metal armor. These things would be at least several thousand tons.

In this feat, Clark (whilst injured) pushes a cliff big enough to bury the Dark Trench, which was a building-sized sea creature (size examples)

This feat is already notably better than what you showed for Hulk

It's better, but not to the extent you're implying. Hulk had to use one hand to overpower the weight coming at him at high speeds, while Clark was using his full body strength to push the stationary cliff. This should show how they're closer than it may seem.

Firstly, Clark punches Hal's shield construct through a building (which the shield tanks). He later breaks Hal's shield despite him constantly repairing it.

Punching people through buildings is child's play to Thor. Here, Abomination does the same to Hulk, who is heavier than what Clark is hitting, and Abomination is weaker than Hulk himself. Thor himself did something similar to Malekith.

Here Clark sends Trigon reeling backwards with a supersonic bullrush, forcing him to steady himself.

Hulk did similar to Surtur in Ragnarok. And yet, when he performed a leaping hit on Thor, Thor still got hit a few more times, and he was unblemished. This is further shown to be impressive when Surtur tanks Mjolnir hits earlier, with AoU Thor being strong enough to stuff like this.

Now not a feat for Superman himself, but Diana knocks down two large buildings whilst pounding on Darkseid, and Clark is consistently portrayed as her physical superior (plus he easily caught a punch from her in JL vs TT).

Hulk was less effected by similar than he was by Thor's lightning amped hits, or Thanos' hits which Thor tanked.

These feats should all demonstrate the power Superman has behind his hits. Now, compare these to your Leviathan feat for Hulk and you'd be pretty hard-pressed to say that Thor can tank Clark's hits for long.

Even without the Leviathan feat, Thor could tank Superman's hits based on what you showed. The Leviathan feat is just the icing on the cake.

Where Clark's HV instantly melts through multiple steel beams (as well as the wall behind it). Steel has a melting point well over 1000°C making Clark's heat vision more than worthy of the name.

The first feat sees Clark take out an almost building-sized number of parademons using his HV in an AOE fashion. Given that these parademons are a lot more durable than walls (they've torn through walls in lesser numbers with ease) this should easily be a building level energy projection feat for Clark.

In the second feat, Clark blasts off Cyborg Superman's arm with a single attack from his Heat Vision, which is very impressive given that Cyborg Superman has pretty decent energy durability having tanked this explosion:

I mean... come on, man. Let's get into it.

From what I can see, you're saying we don't know the specifics of the star beam. True. But still, considering it was so great that it could effect Uru, arguably the most durable material in the verse, even more than the Vibranium which no sells forest-leveling explosions and, through common sense, could tank Thor's lightning. This beam was meant by the directors to put Thor on death's shore (I do recognize the state Thor was in after this feat). This was clearly, VERY clearly, a lot more powerful than you seem to be letting on.

Even without this feat, Thor could still easily tank explosions like these (1) (2) and as far as beams, he easily tanked a 400% Tony's beams. While these aren't on the same level as Clark's HV, they are still pretty powerful, and Thor was nowhere near his prime here.

And the Sokovia explosion. Of course. I think the thing we disagree on is easily how much of the energy Thor was actually hit with. I believe Thor was near the ground zero, so he would have still taken a notable amount of the energy. And in any case, if you look closely at the explosion, you can see massive rocks getting tossed kilometers away in a second. Anything that can send heavy objects like boulders that far in a second is insanely powerful, but Thor still took it.

In all, I believe I have proven Thor can tank Superman's hits well.

Here, I'll address the Kryptonian's defense.

I'm just gonna say this straight out; Thor's lightning cloak is, in my humble opinion, vastly overrated and will afford Thor almost no benefits in this fight. A bold claim I know, but I have reasons for this stance.

This'll be a fun challenge.

1. Thor doesn't always have it on. Though the cloak is automatic Thor still has to activate it in the first place, meaning he's still open to being blitzed or whatever before he uses it.

Very true. However, I'm assuming that, as Thor realizes Clark's powers, he'll use it, if he doesn't activate it from the get-go. Neither fighter knows about their opponent. When Thor sees his disadvantages, I have no doubt he'll use it.

2. The Lightning Cloak has no speed feats. What I mean when I say this is that the lightning cloak doesn't have any reaction speed feats to suggest that it can react to anyone notably faster than Thor. Many people seem to think that any slower than lightning is going to get hit by hit, but in reality, when you look at his showings there's no reason someone notably faster than Thor (like Clark) couldn't just blitz him regardless.

I get what you're saying. But as Thor is literally the God of Thunder, it looks like lightning, it acts like lightning, it is much more powerful than lightning, we see Thor using sky lightning a lot, and no one has ever reacted to his lightning except for Hela moving a foot back at long range, I'm willing to bet his lightning is comparable in speed to regular lightning.

3. Thor's Lightning doesn't work on projectiles. Thor's lightning cloak has taken out many a fodder character, but it actually hasn't displayed the ability to block projectiles. In fact, it has instances of it failing to do just that:

In his fight with Hela on the Bifrost bridge at the end of Ragnarok, we see Hela throw two blades at Thor which the lightning cloak does nothing to stop. This leaves Thor to block them both himself which he fails to do and gets hit by one of them. So by feats, Thor's lightning cloak won't do anything to save him from Clark's heat vision. The above feat also brings me nicely to my 4th point.

A valid point, except that the one projectile Clark has won't effect Thor as much as his regular hits.

4. Thor's lightning cloak seemingly deactivates when he gets tagged. As we see in the above feat, simply getting hit by a single attack from Hela (which didn't even wound him much) is enough to knock him out of his cloak. Meaning that Clark hitting him once is enough to stop him using it.

True. I have acknowledged this in the past. However, I think that as long as Thor can get just one hit on Superman, he'll be fine. His lightning cloak'll protect him at least once, and if Thor can land a hit on Supes with his weapon while he's still staggered, it borderline guarantees a win. Plus, Thor can just, y'know, reactivate it.

However lastly and perhaps most importantly, Thor has never used his lightning cloak to accomplish anything significant in a 1v1 fight. Take a look at his fight with Hela or any of his fights with Thanos. In any of them do we see his opponents get fried just be being close to him or his lightning cloak blocking attacks or anything like that? No. Heck, half the time he doesn't even have it on. Looking a third time at the gif above, Thor is literally attacking Hela who is a metre away from him and the cloak does nothing.

In his fights with Hela and Thanos, we see

1. Thor does use his Cloak, it just isn't useful against Hela.
2. Thor's fight was off screen.
3. Thor had Thanos dead to rights.
4. Thor wasn't really fighting Thanos, he was just an executioner.
5. EG Thor was a disgrace through-and-through anyway, so I'm not too sure about that.

And as for the Cloak not hitting, I think it's a one-hit defense, not a constant one. But that one hit is all Thor needs.

Seemingly very impressive but if you slow down the footage and look closely then you'll realise that Thor actually just flew inside the ship and then blew it up from the inside out. Making the whole "tanked reentry" thing moot. Blowing up a building-sized ship with a few blasts is still a decent feat for a passive ability, but it's nowhere near enough to put down DCAMU Superman, as I will go on to demonstrate.

Does destroying it from the inside make it any less impressive, though? He still tore through the same metal.

I'll be blunt, this chain of logic makes absolutely no sense, and actually contradicts how these characters are portrayed in comparison to each other. Thor did one impressive attack so now he's Hela level? How does that make any sense? Despite the fact that even when Thor using his more powerful lightning attacks as well as being assisted by Valkyrie he still never forced Hela to use her large spikes. Thor's normal lightning punches being at the level of Hela's strongest attacks is blatantly ludicrous.

Hela's large spikes would have been useless against the likes of Thor, since her blades are too big to pierce him. And Hela never really had the upper hand against Thor in the fight. They were actually pretty equal, when you look at the whole thing. Thor hit her with lightning twice, and both times she appeared to be incapacitated. He was blocking and dodging several of her blades, and at one point he had her backing up. She got in her hits, too, but after awakening, Thor's only problem with Hela was putting her down for good.

A great feat, though I would think that part of the reason for the destruction spreading to such an extent would be due to the fact that the ground isn't very stable in Jotunheim to begin with (it's literally just a big ice floor held up by very sparsely placed pillars).

True. That does take away a bit from the feat. But I still can't imagine anything short of a MOAB doing that much IRL, even to ice.

You also neglected to mention the fact that Thor seemed to be drawing power from the city (or just the building) or the fact that this attack took a whole 15 seconds to charge up. Clark has no reason to just stand there and let Thor charge up a huge lightning attack.

I don't understand how the building was supposed to amp his attack at all. We see the lightning travel down it, sure, but how does that make the attack any stronger? And I'll address the chargeup in a sec.

Keyword here, "temporarily". He didn't destroy the reality stone as much as he dispersed it (given that it was in its Aether/liquid form at the time) which makes this whole scaling to Wanda void.

I very seriously doubt that it being temporary means he didn't really destroy it (I mean, it was the Reality Stone, for Pete's sake,) but I will give you this due to lack of solid evidence.

Tony's statement about Thor being able to "crack it" was actually in reference to the spire (which was vibranium to be fair, so still a great feat). On top of that, he and Tony didn't actually destroy Sokovia themselves. Thor broke the thing that was holding the landmass together and Tony kept the force from going outwards and instead redirecting it back on itself. On the one hand, Thor's initial attack still destroyed a city block(ish) area and also cracked vibranium, but on the other hand, this attack (again) took about 16 seconds to charge up if you look at the uncut footage and Clark isn't just going to sit there and let that happen.

Was it really, though? We see in Spider-Man: Homecoming that the spire was perfectly intact. I'll try and find the pic later. But "it," in that scene, could have very well been applied to the city, since we see an intact spire AND we hear that the "effect would still be devastating." From where I'm seeing it, this means that Thor could have cracked the city apart and the effects still would have caused mass destruction.

And now I'll address the chargeup claims. True, Thor needed charge he won't get here. And while I agree for this on the Sokovia feat (no countering it, really,) the Leviathan is easier.

See, in Ragnarok, Thor was beaten to the point of unconsciousness by Hela, and still he summoned a lightning bolt implied better than any other bolt Thor summoned, in just a second or two. No gestures. If Thor instantly summons a bolt here, Clark is going to get hit with worse than the Leviathan bolts, and that is going to sting.

Ah, the Stormbreaker. The idea that the infinity stones must be > Thor in power is silly and also unsubstantiated, especially as this is literally a feat of Thor overpowering the infinity stones, not to mention the fact that 5/6 stones are just used for hax/versatility as opposed to power. Plus you already used Thor "breaking" the reality stone as a feat earlier, so...?

Stormbreaker > Infinity Stones > Pre-Ragnarok Thor > Infinity stone? nice scaling

1. The Infinity Stones are supposed to be the most powerful energy sources in the Universe, and they are all gathered together here. Even a random hit from any of them should be decently powerful, and this was Thanos using all 6.

2. Thor didn't overpower the Infinity Stones with lightning, he did so with Stormbreaker. Stormbreaker is definitely superior to Thor's bolts, considering THREE TIMES it cut through Thanos.

3. The Mind Stone was used by Vision for beams, and the Reality Stone had offensive capability too. BTW, even ignoring the Thor lightning thing, the PS alone has consistent building level feats, so this beam being below building busting is nearly lowballing.

4. Breaking something /=/ being stronger than it. That was Thor destroying a Stone after multiple seconds of concentrating power on it, and that was, again, his lightning, which means he himself wasn't feeling any returning force from hitting the Stone.

And thanks, my scaling is oBvIoUsLy perfect.

Here Clark tanks a punch from Luthor that sends him flying through an entire large building and far beyond, and then tanks 2 more punches and a throw from him.

Okay, that's crazy as far as visuals go, and a really good durability feat. But is this quantifiable, in any way? Not saying it's unusable, but I think it would be nice to have numbers, since in the MCU, power isn't often portrayed in sending people far distances.

In this feat Clark straight up no-sells part of a city-block busting attack from Darkseid. Now, he won't have taken the full force of the attack given the nature of AoE attacks, but to completely no-sell it is still an excellent feat.

This is also impressive. However, if this is the best you have, I'm afraid you're doomed. Remember, regardless of whether you think Thor was ground zero or not, Thor would have taken worse energy in the city-busting Sokovia explosion, unless somehow the explosion bent around, which, given how bullets seem to do the same in the eyes of the Vine, might have happened. Regardless, Thor would have a similar but better feat in comparison, and Stormbreaker would undoubtedly slice Thor to ribbons. You honestly ruined yourself here.

Your endurance feats are top-notch. Still, though, I don't see how they help. If things go the way I'm arguing it to, the fight wouldn't even need endurance as a factor, since Thor has the means to stun Clark for just long enough to one shot him with Stormbreaker.

The Hulk was pushed back because he was rammed into by a gigantic space whale, and he was against concrete. If we were to replace the street with, say, steel, do you still believe Hulk would have been as pushed back as he was? If so, what about Uru or Vibranium? And there's the fact the hit actually moved down the Leviathan's head, which was relatively unmoved by a dive through a building or Iron Man's lasers. It was said Tony would need to waste all his power penetrating that shield, and Tony earlier in the franchise one shot a tank.

Him being against concrete isn't really the point; if his punch was strong enough it would have stopped the Leviathan right there but it didn't. Also, Tony one-shot a tank with his tank buster missile, so comparing that to his lasers is faulty.

I didn't just compare them, I showed how much bigger they were. A Leviathan would easily be several times longer and at least as thick, with metal armor. These things would be at least several thousand tons.

They are definitely a lot bigger, but there's also the issue of the fact that Leviathans aren't solid the whole way through, and the fact that their armour makes up for a relatively small fraction of their total volume. Plus, there's also the fact that when a Leviathan fell on a building it didn't do much to it:

Now you could just say this is a low showing, but at the very least it lends credence to the idea that Leviathans aren't as impressive as you make them out to be.

It's better, but not to the extent you're implying. Hulk had to use one hand to overpower the weight coming at him at high speeds, while Clark was using his full body strength to push the stationary cliff. This should show how they're closer than it may seem.

Clark was also successful in drastically changing the speed of his object notably more than Hulk was. Additionally, there's the fact that he did this with a stab wound and under the pressures of the bottom of the ocean and that he would have also displaced a huge amount of water performing his feat, so no; It is better by a notable extent.

Punching people through buildings is child's play to Thor. Here, Abomination does the same to Hulk, who is heavier than what Clark is hitting, and Abomination is weaker than Hulk himself. Thor himself did something similar to Malekith.

Neither of those feats are comparable to what I showed. Abomination kicked Hulk through a wall in that gif, and Thor hit Malekith through a few pillars. Neither of the two sent their object flying as fast and as far and through as much material as Clark did.

Hulk did similar to Surtur in Ragnarok. And yet, when he performed a leaping hit on Thor, Thor still got hit a few more times, and he was unblemished. This is further shown to be impressive when Surtur tanks Mjolnir hits earlier, with AoU Thor being strong enough to stuff like this.

This could honestly just be chalked up to Surtur being surprised by Hulk's attack given that Surtur was literally no selling punches from him moments later, but it's still an impressive feat. However, I'd still say Clark's feat against is better given that he actually moved Trigon backwards as opposed to just staggering him as Hulk did, and also due to how hard Trigon has proven himself to move (what with WW and Flash's big attacks doing nothing).

Hulk was less effected by similar than he was by Thor's lightning amped hits, or Thanos' hits which Thor tanked.

Hulk's durability is irrelevant given we're talking about Thor's (not to mention Thanos bloodied Thor with his hits IIRC) but this is another case where the two feats really aren't comparable. In Hulk's Iron Man destabilises a building under construction with missiles and then bullrushes Hulk through it, which is impressive don't get me wrong. However, what happened in Diana's feat is that she bullrushes Darkseid through a building whilst pounding on him, and a building next to it got knocked over as a side effect of her attack, which is quite clearly more impressive than what Tony did to Hulk.

Even without the Leviathan feat, Thor could tank Superman's hits based on what you showed. The Leviathan feat is just the icing on the cake.

So you're saying the Leviathan feat is Hulk's best striking feat? Cool, Superman is definitely stronger than Hulk given that you yourself already conceded that Clark's cliff feat is better (though to a lesser extent, better is still better) and honestly his Trigon feat and Diana's Darkseid feat are also better.

That said, something you failed to mention is that even if Superman was only as strong as Hulk, Hulk quite clearly had Thor on the backfoot with his strength and was literally pounding him into the ground. And that's without having the significant speed advantage that Clark has here. So you've essentially conceded that Clark will be free to beat Thor down with his physicals.

I mean... come on, man. Let's get into it.

From what I can see, you're saying we don't know the specifics of the star beam. True. But still, considering it was so great that it could effect Uru, arguably the most durable material in the verse, even more than the Vibranium which no sells forest-leveling explosions and, through common sense, could tank Thor's lightning.

Here the biggest issue with your counter; durability has absolutely zero relevance to the melting point of a metal. Case and point, Steel is more durable than Iron (which is why they use it instead of Iron for construction) and yet it's melting point is a couple of hundred degrees C lower.

So Uru's durability means nothing here. Now you could make the argument that it's melting point must be high enough that they need to use the star forge to melt it (though I could just as easily make the argument that it seems like the dwarves use the star forge for everything) but that just takes us back to the fact that the heat of Nidavellir is entirely unknown, outside of being vaguely very hot.

This beam was meant by the directors to put Thor on death's shore (I do recognize the state Thor was in after this feat). This was clearly, VERY clearly, a lot more powerful than you seem to be letting on.

So Thor has good heat durability because he withstood a beam that could kill him? Of course, nice circular scaling there.

Even without this feat, Thor could still easily tank explosions like these (1) (2) and as far as beams, he easily tanked a 400% Tony's beams. While these aren't on the same level as Clark's HV, they are still pretty powerful, and Thor was nowhere near his prime here.

Neither of those explosions was particularly hot from what we could tell (and Thor was KO'd by the second lol), nor do Tony's repulsors have any notable heat feats that I can remember. So none of that helps at all.

And the Sokovia explosion. Of course. I think the thing we disagree on is easily how much of the energy Thor was actually hit with. I believe Thor was near the ground zero, so he would have still taken a notable amount of the energy. And in any case, if you look closely at the explosion, you can see massive rocks getting tossed kilometers away in a second. Anything that can send heavy objects like boulders that far in a second is insanely powerful, but Thor still took it.

He was near ground zero sure, but I'd definitely disagree that he took a large part of it for several reasons, but I'll go with the simplest one. Thor hitting the spire was the action that set off the explosion in the first place, and if you look at the scene again the explosion actual propagates away from him:

So logically it would make sense that Thor would have to tank very little of the explosion. Also, not really a heat resistance feat anyways.

In all, I believe I have proven Thor can tank Superman's hits well.

Not really. Hulk (who you've basically admitted Clark is at least a physical equal to) had Thor on the backfoot with his strength, even without having the speed advantage the Clark has here (Thor literally danced around him earlier in the fight) so I'm definitely unconvinced that Thor can just shrug off Clark's hits and keep fighting. And regarding his heat vision, you've still yet to definitively show anything that would let Thor tank the kind of heat it dishes out, especially not with building-level power behind it.

Very true. However, I'm assuming that, as Thor realizes Clark's powers, he'll use it, if he doesn't activate it from the get-go. Neither fighter knows about their opponent. When Thor sees his disadvantages, I have no doubt he'll use it.

Cool but it's useless so it won't do him any good.

I get what you're saying. But as Thor is literally the God of Thunder, it looks like lightning, it acts like lightning, it is much more powerful than lightning, we see Thor using sky lightning a lot, and no one has ever reacted to his lightning except for Hela moving a foot back at long range, I'm willing to bet his lightning is comparable in speed to regular lightning.

You misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm not doubting the speed of Thor's lightning itself (I could but that would open a whole can of worms so I shan't) but rather I'm doubting the reaction speed of the cloak itself. Could the cloak react to a bullet (if it worked on projectiles which it doesn't) as an example? Even if we're to assume that its reaction speed is as good as Thor, that's not enough to suggest it will prevent a blitz (though Clark could arguably just power through it anyway) even more so given that it doesn't have a ridiculous range.

A valid point, except that the one projectile Clark has won't effect Thor as much as his regular hits.

Already addressed Thor's inability to tank heat vision.

True. I have acknowledged this in the past. However, I think that as long as Thor can get just one hit on Superman, he'll be fine. His lightning cloak'll protect him at least once, and if Thor can land a hit on Supes with his weapon while he's still staggered, it borderline guarantees a win. Plus, Thor can just, y'know, reactivate it.

I'm failing to see how it will protect him from anything. Even if I accepted it somehow reacting to Clark, given that its best feat is destroying a building-sized structure with several blasts, I'm inclined to say Clark just no-sells it and keeps going. Thor certainly can reactivate it (assuming he gets the chance to) but it turning off after he gets hit is just another reason it just kinda sucks.

In his fights with Hela and Thanos, we see

1. Thor does use his Cloak, it just isn't useful against Hela.
2. Thor's fight was off screen.
3. Thor had Thanos dead to rights.
4. Thor wasn't really fighting Thanos, he was just an executioner.
5. EG Thor was a disgrace through-and-through anyway, so I'm not too sure about that.

So basically what you're saying it Thor has never used it to accomplish anything in a 1v1. Cool, glad we agree.

Does destroying it from the inside make it any less impressive, though? He still tore through the same metal.

The outsiders were inside the ship, can they also tank reentry now? The outside of a ship logically wouldn't be made of the same material as the inside of the ship. You're essentially suggesting that the entirety of a spaceship, including all of the interior, is made out of the same material as the heat shield (in case you're not aware, it isn't).

Hela's large spikes would have been useless against the likes of Thor, since her blades are too big to pierce him. And Hela never really had the upper hand against Thor in the fight. They were actually pretty equal, when you look at the whole thing. Thor hit her with lightning twice, and both times she appeared to be incapacitated. He was blocking and dodging several of her blades, and at one point he had her backing up. She got in her hits, too, but after awakening, Thor's only problem with Hela was putting her down for good.

That's not the point. You argued that because Thor did a flashy attack, his punches are now at the level of Hela's strongest attacks. Which is clearly not the case if you actually look at how the characters are portrayed in relation to each other. Hela shrugged off Thor's biggest lightning attack but any old lightning amped punch equals her strongest attack? Not to mention Thor got put on his ass by regular spikes from Hela

I don't understand how the building was supposed to amp his attack at all. We see the lightning travel down it, sure, but how does that make the attack any stronger? And I'll address the chargeup in a sec.

When I first watched The Avengers, I assumed that Thor was drawing electrical power from the building (and perhaps the city beyond) to increase the power of his attack, similar to how characters like Jenny Sparks use electricity/lightning. That may not be what happened there but I was just throwing in a possible alternative.

Was it really, though? We see in Spider-Man: Homecoming that the spire was perfectly intact. I'll try and find the pic later. But "it," in that scene, could have very well been applied to the city, since we see an intact spire AND we hear that the "effect would still be devastating." From where I'm seeing it, this means that Thor could have cracked the city apart and the effects still would have caused mass destruction.

Did we? I don't remember that so I'd appreciate the photo. But anyways, the full quote was:

Tony: "Well the spire's vibranium. If I get Thor to hit it..."

Friday: "It'll crack. That's not enough, the impact would still be devastating."

Now the "it" there could admittedly refer to the whole city, but I think Thor cracking apart a mountain-sized object with a single attack should definitely be an outlier.

And now I'll address the chargeup claims. True, Thor needed charge he won't get here. And while I agree for this on the Sokovia feat (no countering it, really,) the Leviathan is easier.

See, in Ragnarok, Thor was beaten to the point of unconsciousness by Hela, and still he summoned a lightning bolt implied better than any other bolt Thor summoned, in just a second or two. No gestures. If Thor instantly summons a bolt here, Clark is going to get hit with worse than the Leviathan bolts, and that is going to sting.

Sure, except Thor has never instantly summoned a lightning attack that big instantly before or (more importantly) since. So even if he has the ability to do so, I'm not inclined to believe he would.

1. The Infinity Stones are supposed to be the most powerful energy sources in the Universe, and they are all gathered together here. Even a random hit from any of them should be decently powerful, and this was Thanos using all 6.

2. Thor didn't overpower the Infinity Stones with lightning, he did so with Stormbreaker. Stormbreaker is definitely superior to Thor's bolts, considering THREE TIMES it cut through Thanos.

3. The Mind Stone was used by Vision for beams, and the Reality Stone had offensive capability too. BTW, even ignoring the Thor lightning thing, the PS alone has consistent building level feats, so this beam being below building busting is nearly lowballing.

4. Breaking something /=/ being stronger than it. That was Thor destroying a Stone after multiple seconds of concentrating power on it, and that was, again, his lightning, which means he himself wasn't feeling any returning force from hitting the Stone.

You're missing the point. You can't scale the infinity stones above Thor's lightning due to them being the most powerful objects in the universe whilst simultaneously using them as a feat for Thor's weapon. The idea that the infinity stones must be less powerful than Thor is clearly false given that he overpowers them with Stormbreaker in this very feat. Stormbreaker being > Thor's lightning due to piercing Thanos also isn't necessarily true, it is a piercing weapon, they're meant to stab stuff. Plus Thanos isn't exactly rolling in piercing durability feats so I see no reason a comparable (ish) opponent with any decent piercing weapon wouldn't be able to pierce him.

And thanks, my scaling is oBvIoUsLy perfect.

yOUrE wELcOmE

Okay, that's crazy as far as visuals go, and a really good durability feat. But is this quantifiable, in any way? Not saying it's unusable, but I think it would be nice to have numbers, since in the MCU, power isn't often portrayed in sending people far distances.

Well, Luthor casually punching Clark through an entire building (vertically) is enough to say he can tank punches from Thor no problem anyways so I don't see the need to.

This is also impressive. However, if this is the best you have, I'm afraid you're doomed. Remember, regardless of whether you think Thor was ground zero or not, Thor would have taken worse energy in the city-busting Sokovia explosion, unless somehow the explosion bent around, which, given how bullets seem to do the same in the eyes of the Vine, might have happened. Regardless, Thor would have a similar but better feat in comparison, and Stormbreaker would undoubtedly slice Thor to ribbons. You honestly ruined yourself here.

I already addressed the Sokovia explosion in the previous section, but looking back I actually noticed something funny (well funny for me, less so for you). It seems like Thor was actually KO'd by the Sokovia explosion:

After the explosion we see Thor fall into the water, seemingly unconscious. So even if I concede that Thor took a good chunk of the explosion, it still doesn't put him on Clark's level given that he straight no-sold a city-block busting attack (I mean Flash came out of the attack unscathed just by standing behind Clark). That said, I don't think Clark can just shrug off Stormbreaker or whatever, but it's hardly going to bisect him with a touch either.

Your strategy seems to be; "Thor can tank hits from Clark for a while, so eventually he'll tag Clark with lightning and use the opening to kill him with SB"

However, I don't think this particular strategy will be effective, for two main reasons.

Firstly, Thor can't actually tank Clark's output for long. Given the feats I've shown, I don't think it's at all unreasonable to suggest that Clark is stronger than Hulk, and Hulk was to get Thor in a position where he was on top of him beating on him through strength alone. Thor was able to tank it sure, but the point is that he was hardly shrugging off Hulk's hit. Meaning he'll struggle even more so to tank Clark's hits given that he's stronger than Hulk, and also the fact that he's a lot faster than Hulk, meaning he'll be able to land a lot more blows in a much shorter time. Plus I haven't even mentioned Clark's HV, for which you have yet to show a convincing argument for Thor being able to tank them.

Secondly, The fight simply wouldn't go the way you're suggesting. You're suggesting that Thor will just tank Clark's attacks no problem, and then as soon as Thor lands one lightning attack he'll immediately be free to land another with Stormbreaker, but that seems a little weird, no? You may not think so, but let me propose an alternative scenario: Clark will land a punch, and then Thor will be stunned by the first punch so Clark will be free to land another. And then another and another until Thor is KOd. Plus he actually has the speed advantage here so it makes sense right? I doubt you would accept this, despite it being more likely than the scenario you proposed, nor would I expect you to. Just as Clark isn't going to keep on hitting Thor and never give him a single opening to strike back, Clark also isn't suddenly going to be wide open just from getting hit by a single lightning attack. At this point, I'd like to remind you of the endurance feats I showed in my opener, in which Clark takes hits strong enough to bloody and bruise him, and just bounces right back up.

Despite Clark clearly being quite beat up (as opposed to having been hit by a single attack), there no massive opening for Thor to come in and chop off his head like you're suggesting. Clark is ripped through a car, slammed into the ground and punched multiple times by Doomsday and Clark just immediately hit him with his heat vision and went back on the offensive. Not to mention that Thor isn't even as fast as Doomsday is.

Thor may hit Clark with a lightning attack or two during the fight sure, but Clark isn't just going to sit there unguarded for a few seconds because Thor hit him with a single attack, not even if they were even in speed. A far more likely scenario is just that Clark will beat on Thor with his physicals, Thor might land a lightning attack or two but Clark will just get back up and keep fighting until Thor goes down. And let's not even get into the fact that Clark could just catch Stormbreaker the way Thanos did (whether Thor throws it or not). In fact, Thor even coming into melee range of Clark would probably be a mistake given that Clark is notably faster and stronger. His Stormbreaker swings would likely be dodged (or potentially caught) and then Clark will just counterattack with HV or physicals, neither of which Thor can take for an extended period of time.

Him being against concrete isn't really the point; if his punch was strong enough it would have stopped the Leviathan right there but it didn't.

Does this really take away from Hulk's feat, though? The Green Goliath may be known for his strength, but I don't really see how him under-performing here devalues his ability at all. He punched the Leviathan, and the force was enough that the multi-thousand ton, speeding creature was brought to a standstill, even if not instantly. If Hulk had made it stop instantly without being pushed back, that would have made it just that much more impressive, but what we still have is more than enough.

Also, Tony one-shot a tank with his tank buster missile, so comparing that to his lasers is faulty.

For one, why should we assume that Iron Man's missiles are better than his lasers, or at least superior enough we shouldn't mention it? Secondly, even without it, we have feats of Iron Man cutting through tank armor like butter and statements of Iron Man's lasers being petawatt tier. Though this isn't wholly accurate, the intention is clear enough that Iron Man's lasers are incredibly powerful, enough so that them being incapable of piercing Leviathan armor is noteworthy.

They are definitely a lot bigger, but there's also the issue of the fact that Leviathans aren't solid the whole way through, and the fact that their armour makes up for a relatively small fraction of their total volume.

The Leviathan's may not have been solid all the way through, but the size difference between the Leviathans and the rocks, the armor that covers most of their body, plus the fact they were moving at relatively high speeds against Hulk when he hit them, should more than make up for it.

Plus, there's also the fact that when a Leviathan fell on a building it didn't do much to it:

Now you could just say this is a low showing, but at the very least it lends credence to the idea that Leviathans aren't as impressive as you make them out to be.

Everyone and everything has low points that make no sense. Throughout every. single. movie. In the MCU, the characters have been shown as making nowhere NEAR enough damage compared to what they should logically be doing. Hulk and Thor should have torn down the Helicarrier, Thanos should have been sent to space when Hulk ambushed him, Malekith should have been BFRed when Thor smacked him hard enough to crack dozens of meters of rock accidentally, everything for a mile should have been wrecked when Hela broke Mjolnir, the Asgardian Palace should have come tumbling when Thor struck Hela, every hit Thanos sent at Tony should have sent him flying hundreds of feet, Thor's hits on Hulk should have sent him flying every time, Thanos cracking Cap's Shield should have been creating mile-wide shockwaves every hit, Captain Marvel tossing the missile should have created a massive shockwave, even the Leviathans themselves failed to pop a taxi's wheels at one point (unless we now think the Leviathans were less than a hundred tons?) Using a lack of environmental damage to portray anything MCU as lesser than they truly are is a tried-and-failed tactic that shouldn't even be considered anymore. If we use this logic, I could show every example of high tiers like Post Crisis Superman failing to send people flying, and it would "give credence

Clark was also successful in drastically changing the speed of his object notably more than Hulk was. Additionally, there's the fact that he did this with a stab wound and under the pressures of the bottom of the ocean and that he would have also displaced a huge amount of water performing his feat, so no; It is better by a notable extent.

I was unaware of the context. Yes, this is better than Hulk's, but I think we're all forgetting that this is a pushing feat, not a striking feat. While I understand that Hulk pushed after the punch, his punch alone still clearly did most of the work, slowing down the Leviathan a lot and possibly killing it. This becomes all the more impressive when one realizes that the Leviathans were incredibly hard to put down, as prior to this, a fly through a skyscraper and an assault from Iron Man was ignored by them.

Neither of those feats are comparable to what I showed. Abomination kicked Hulk through a wall in that gif, and Thor hit Malekith through a few pillars. Neither of the two sent their object flying as fast and as far and through as much material as Clark did.

1. This is a lowball of Abomination's feat. I believe @amcu put it best in his Respect Thread of the Hulk. Hulk was sent such a far distance it took Abomination multiple seconds to cross the building's roof, and we see Hulk earlier in the movie keeping up with vehicles in speed.

2. Thor may not have sent Malekith the same distance, but this feat still is enough to prove my point. Sending people far distances through some material isn't good enough for Thor at his prime.

This could honestly just be chalked up to Surtur being surprised by Hulk's attack given that Surtur was literally no selling punches from him moments later, but it's still an impressive feat.

The difference is that when Hulk was getting no sold, he was at a standstill. When he moved Surtur, he had momentum, just like Superman did, making the comparison fair.

However, I'd still say Clark's feat against is better given that he actually moved Trigon backwards as opposed to just staggering him as Hulk did, and also due to how hard Trigon has proven himself to move (what with WW and Flash's big attacks doing nothing).

I don't see why they should be different by a margin that matters. Hulk hit this guy so hard that he was sent reeling. Not even Hela's building-sized blades moving fast enough to cross kilometers in seconds got Surtur to move that much, even by surprise, just like Hulk's hit, regardless of the fact her normal-sized spikes could pierce Uru-plated armor. I think that's enough to prove that Hulk could at least dent Uru with a momentum hit, which is backed further by him denting Vibranium (or something with a Vibranium element) with what we can reasonably infer to be one hit. I mean, unless Superman is now so strong that he can do worse than dent Uru, this should be enough to prove that Hulk isn't completely outclassed by the Man of Steel.

Hulk's durability is irrelevant given we're talking about Thor's (not to mention Thanos bloodied Thor with his hits IIRC) but this is another case where the two feats really aren't comparable. In Hulk's Iron Man destabilises a building under construction with missiles and then bullrushes Hulk through it, which is impressive don't get me wrong. However, what happened in Diana's feat is that she bullrushes Darkseid through a building whilst pounding on him, and a building next to it got knocked over as a side effect of her attack, which is quite clearly more impressive than what Tony did to Hulk.

Thor is more durable than Hulk, almost undeniably. Thor took Thanos' hits better while in his fat self, and he has consistently better feats and, sometimes, portrayal in almost every apartment, not just durability. Hulk getting slammed through a building, AFTER having taken on dozens upon dozens of punishments from the Hulkbuster, a physical rival, is enough to say Thor could too. In fact, outside of the Snap (which Hulk did with a natural advantage over everyone else due to his gamma nature) Hulk has never been shown more durable than even Phase 1 Thor.

While Diana's feat is superior, it's still something to consider. Especially since Thor in Infinity War is far superior to his Pre-Ragnarok incarnation, which already could reasonably surpass Hulk in the durability department.

So you're saying the Leviathan feat is Hulk's best striking feat?

His best standstill, no-momentum feat in the movies (meaning not counting the Vibranium denting feat,) yes.

Cool, Superman is definitely stronger than Hulk given that you yourself already conceded that Clark's cliff feat is better (though to a lesser extent, better is still better) and honestly his Trigon feat and Diana's Darkseid feat are also better.

Stronger? Yes. To enough an extent that it will matter? No. And his Trigon feat is really no better than Hulk's Surtur feat, and Diana's building feat isn't really the most relevant thing against the durability of someone like Thor.

That said, something you failed to mention is that even if Superman was only as strong as Hulk, Hulk quite clearly had Thor on the backfoot with his strength and was literally pounding him into the ground. And that's without having the significant speed advantage that Clark has here. So you've essentially conceded that Clark will be free to beat Thor down with his physicals.

Hulk had Thor on the backfoot because Thor was Mjolnir/Stormbreaker/Lightningless, and even then it was a back-and-forth thing. Here, Thor has Stormbreaker AND Lightning. Had he either of those things at the beginning of his fight with Hulk, he would have slaughtered Banner in a minute at most.

To address the melting point: while it isn't necessarily wrong, I think I've been saying everything wrong, or at least looking at it wrong. Let's look at how hot lightning is; 5x hotter than the surface of the Sun. Are we honestly going to say that lightning would melt either Vibranium OR Uru, reasonably? We've already seen that Vibranium can tank just about everything but other Vibranium and Thanos/Hulk tier hits. Uru is even more durable, logically. In fact, everything we've seen bust up Uru in any way was superior to Thor's basic lightning (Hela and the Gauntlet, basically.) Putting the heat durability of the two most highly regarded metals in the Universe at tens of thousands of degrees isn't a longshot in any way.

So Thor has good heat durability because he withstood a beam that could kill him? Of course, nice circular scaling there.

The point is that Thor took it better than the Uru metal did. Otherwise, this feat would be useless. We see Thor take this beam for several seconds before he starts getting damaged, while Uru began melting quicker.

Neither of those explosions was particularly hot from what we could tell (and Thor was KO'd by the second lol)

True, but Thor's second feat was after a beating from Thanos, and he easily tanked the first.

nor do Tony's repulsors have any notable heat feats that I can remember.

They're supposed to be made of plasma IIRC, and plasma is at least 10,000 K.

He was near ground zero sure, but I'd definitely disagree that he took a large part of it for several reasons, but I'll go with the simplest one. Thor hitting the spire was the action that set off the explosion in the first place, and if you look at the scene again the explosion actual propagates away from him:

So logically it would make sense that Thor would have to tank very little of the explosion. Also, not really a heat resistance feat anyways.

1. The explosion looks like it's traveling away from him because he was at the top, so when the explosion happened, it looked like most of it was downwards. At the end of the explosion, we see a screen-wide flash to show us how large it was. It effected Thor for sure.

2. Enough force should actually be a good enough substitute for heat. If someone tanked a city busting explosion, but never got near a 100 C fire, would we then argue their heat durability bad enough to get burnt by a regular fire?

Cool but it's useless so it won't do him any good.

You misunderstand what I'm saying. I'm not doubting the speed of Thor's lightning itself (I could but that would open a whole can of worms so I shan't) but rather I'm doubting the reaction speed of the cloak itself. Could the cloak react to a bullet (if it worked on projectiles which it doesn't) as an example?

I think I get it now. So basically, what's the reaction speed of the Cloak itself?

Well....

Shoot....

Even if we're to assume that its reaction speed is as good as Thor, that's not enough to suggest it will prevent a blitz (though Clark could arguably just power through it anyway) even more so given that it doesn't have a ridiculous range.

I have my doubts on Clark powering through it.

I'm failing to see how it will protect him from anything. Even if I accepted it somehow reacting to Clark, given that its best feat is destroying a building-sized structure with several blasts, I'm inclined to say Clark just no-sells it and keeps going. Thor certainly can reactivate it (assuming he gets the chance to) but it turning off after he gets hit is just another reason it just kinda sucks.

The same building sized structure was made of ridiculously durable metal. The point of the feat is that Thor got his Cloak through metal so durable it could no sell getting slammed into the Earth at hypersonic speeds, while weighing heavens knows how many tons, which is a ridiculous feat no earthly metal could replicate in the same circumstance.

And yeah, the Cloak would suck if it gets turned off after a hit, but like I said, he can just activate it again, which invalidates it.

So basically what you're saying it Thor has never used it to accomplish anything in a 1v1. Cool, glad we agree.

Pretty much, yeah. You've got me here. But the context is important.

1. Thor was fighting Hela, back when his Cloak was nowhere near as potent as his IW self. Hela's main thing was that she was basically impossible to put down for good without Surtur, and her ability to spam long-range attacks was a hard counter to Thor's Cloak.
2. The fight was off screen. We can't claim if Thor used the Cloak or not for a fact, though considering he was fighting Thanos and didn't use it on screen, I'd say there's a very good chance he did. Not saying for a fact, though.
3. In the Battle of Wakanda, Thor wasn't fighting 1v1 until Thanos came. Then, he just two shot Thanos. He wasn't in a position to use his Cloak.
4. Thanos was on the floor, held by Hulkbuster and Captain Marvel. Thor was just an executioner; it wasn't a real fight.
5. Post-Timeskip Thor, I've already expressed my opinion on. Him not using the Cloak is completely and totally irrelevant to me, personally.

The outsides were inside the ship, can they also tank reentry now? The outside of a ship logically wouldn't be made of the same material as the inside of the ship. You're essentially suggesting that the entirety of a spaceship, including all of the interior, is made out of the same material as the heat shield (in case you're not aware, it isn't).

It doesn't matter what the inside was made of. Thor's Cloak pierced to the outside regardless, which is what tanked the fall.

That's not the point. You argued that because Thor did a flashy attack, his punches are now at the level of Hela's strongest attacks. Which is clearly not the case if you actually look at how the characters are portrayed in relation to each other.

Throughout the fight post-powerup, Thor was constantly landing hits on Hela, putting her on the backfoot, he just wasn't doing damage. If Thor could have actually damaged Hela at all, he would have won. Sure, she was dodging and landing hits, too, and they were doing worse to Thor, but they weren't very far apart when Thor had his lightning.

This is further supported by him moving back a leaping Hulk, who I've already proven moved Surtur farther than Hela's blades in similar circumstances.

Hela shrugged off Thor's biggest lightning attack but any old lightning amped punch equals her strongest attack? Not to mention Thor got put on his by regular spikes from Hela

I'm almost positive Hela's swords could have pierced her, too. Using her putting Thor on the ground, as if his punch wouldn't have done the exact same thing, just isn't going to work out. Plus, it is debatable as to how she took the Bolt. The script said she appeared KOed.

When I first watched The Avengers, I assumed that Thor was drawing electrical power from the building (and perhaps the city beyond) to increase the power of his attack, similar to how characters like Jenny Sparks use electricity/lightning. That may not be what happened there but I was just throwing in a possible alternative.

So, agree to disagree?

Did we? I don't remember that so I'd appreciate the photo. But anyways, the full quote was:

Tony: "Well the spire's vibranium. If I get Thor to hit it..."

Friday: "It'll crack. That's not enough, the impact would still be devastating."

Now the "it" there could admittedly refer to the whole city, but I think Thor cracking apart a mountain-sized object with a single attack should definitely be an outlier.

Sure, here's the pic. If you scroll up, you can see another perspective of it.

I'd agree with the outlier thing, but it would depend on the severity of cracking. I have no doubt that Thor couldn't have cracked it into several hundred tiny pieces, but if he just sent a crack or two across it, splitting it in half or in thirds, it wouldn't be the most absurd thing, especially when you consider how much charge up he had AND how other characters like Hulk and Captain Marvel have pretty crazy feats themselves when amped by momentum.

Sure, except Thor has never instantly summoned a lightning attack that big instantly before or (more importantly) since. So even if he has the ability to do so, I'm not inclined to believe he would.

True enough. But again, has he ever really been in a position where he could since then prior to Endgame?

You're missing the point. You can't scale the infinity stones above Thor's lightning due to them being the most powerful objects in the universe whilst simultaneously using them as a feat for Thor's weapon. The idea that the infinity stones must be less powerful than Thor is clearly false given that he overpowers them with Stormbreaker in this very feat. Stormbreaker being > Thor's lightning due to piercing Thanos also isn't necessarily true, it is a piercing weapon, they're meant to stab stuff. Plus Thanos isn't exactly rolling in piercing durability feats so I see no reason a comparable (ish) opponent with any decent piercing weapon wouldn't be able to pierce him.

But I'm not saying Thor himself, or his lightning, is comparable to the Stones. My view on any MCU Thor vs Faster Character fight is that it's less MCU Thor and more MCU Stormbreaker and Lightning Cloak. Take either of these things away, or even just limit them in some way, I wouldn't be here arguing for Thor.

If something is better than Thor's lightning, that doesn't make it better than Stormbreaker, which was made SPECIFICALLY to kill Thanos, who we see MULTIPLE TIMES tanking lightning from Thor and Worthy Cap. This makes it undeniable that Stormbreaker > Thor's lightning. In fact, we don't even need feats, we just need the common sense of Thor saying he needs to nearly kill himself so that he can craft a weapon to kill Thanos. Why go through all of that if his lightning could be of any help at all?

Stormbreaker isn't Thor. You're basically arguing that a gun can't be better than its owner if you think Thor failing means Stormbreaker can't succeed.

Well, Luthor casually punching Clark through an entire building (vertically) is enough to say he can tank punches from Thor no problem anyways so I don't see the need to.

True enough. But Thor's punches are irrelevant here, and I'm sure both of us can agree Stormbreaker is the only thing I have in my corner.

I already addressed the Sokovia explosion in the previous section, but looking back I actually noticed something funny (well funny for me, less so for you). It seems like Thor was actually KO'd by the Sokovia explosion:

What I see is Thor getting hit by the explosion, then falling down into the water with 2 seconds showing him not moving. Maybe he was KOed, maybe he wasn't. But regardless, Thor had actually taken a good bit of punishment prior to this, so it would still be impressive.