MCU CaV: Hela (ChaosElement) vs Thanos (CocaColaMan) OVER

Rules

• Fight on Asgard
• Starting distance of 50 meters
• Thanos has his armor and sword
• No prep or knowledge
• Win by death, ko, or incap
• In character

Standard CaV voting rules.

Tag.

TAEP

TAEP

Surprised it took this long for this match to be CAV’d

Weren’t you arguing for Thanos soloing her plus some other villains in another thread Chaos, or did my arguments sway you?

Yeah this confuses me since ChaosElement has spammed a bunch of threads with this exact match up claiming that Thanos wins.

Example: https://comicvine.gamespot.com/forums/battles-7/mcu-battle-hela-vs-thanos-1946261/?page=4#js-message-22935750

TAEP

I kinda changed my mind on Hela after rewatching her fights, and some other arguments. You did make some solid points to be honest as I have told you.

TAEP and T4V

Detective vs cocacolaman always a classic

@chaoselement: The first round was base Hela vs Thanos and you said Thanos wins.

@chaoselement: Lol it was 4 days ago

Yes, I changed it during those days. Now, can you please remove your comments in this thread? Thanks. As they are not relevant to the debate

TAEP

Hela is a very dangerous opponent indeed. However, in comparison to the biggest bad of the MCU so far, I don't think she is going to be dangerous enough.

I'm going to lay down a few claims and prove them, one by one.

1. Thanos has superior physicals in all categories, or at least, all categories that will be relevant to this debate.
2. Thanos' skill is at least as good, if not better than Hela's own skill.
3. Thanos' sword will be capable of deflecting any of Hela's projectiles and will slice into Hela.
4. If Hela's blades do hit Thanos, their damage will be negligible.

Most of the post will be focused on Thanos' physicals, with only a glance at the following 3. Now, let's get into it.

1. Thanos' Physicals

My first claim was that Thanos has better physicals than Hela. By physicals, I am referring to Strength, Striking, and Durability. You may count Endurance/Stamina as part of the fight, but I doubt this fight will go on for so long that Thanos will be exhausted. Anyway, let's get into it.

Starting with Strength, I don't think there's any debate. If you compare the two, it's just too obvious that Hela is physically inferior to the likes of Thanos.

Both Hulk and Hela portray a similar level of superiority to Thor.

• It's the same version of Thor, literally the same movie with no amp, and he's not holding back against either.
• Thor is in an advantageous position for using his strength, plus is using two hands.
• Both characters overpower him completely with one hand.

Now, I do think that Hela's feat is superior by a margin, but that doesn't take away from the fact that Hela didn't show to be much stronger than Hulk. In fact, aside from this scene, she shows nothing else that puts her on this level aside from simply scaling above Thor, which Hulk also does, and the Mjolnir feat, which I question the consistency of, though Hulk has also matched by catching the jaws of Fenris Wolf, who was shown as comparable to what Mjolnir did to the Bifrost bridge. This is Fenris, this is Thor. Against Surtur, both characters were capable of effecting him, with Hulk effecting him more than Hela did, despite Hela using her big blades. Before you say that Hela actually pierced him, she hit his soft fiery body, while Hulk actually hit the solid part of Surtur. Hela's small blades are superior to her strength since she cut Thor with her weapons, but not with her hands, and her big blades are obviously superior to her small blades, so Hulk actually outdid her here, albeit with momentum. As such, I feel that Hulk and Hela are very close. Let's give Hela the benefit of the doubt and say she's ever so slightly stronger.

Here, Hulk, with all his bodyweight behind him, gets completely overpowered by just Thanos' arms.

Just be honest here. Thanos was at a massive disadvantage in this strength, with him only being able to access a portion of his strength against all the strength that Hulk could use, but he still won the bout. In this fight, Thanos will have access to his full body weight, plus a reach advantage and a size advantage.

The difference in strength between Thanos and Hulk is very, very obvious, much more than the difference (if one exists) between Hela and Hulk. As such, I feel right saying Thanos has superior raw Strength than Hela. This could apply in cases where Thanos needs to restrain Hela and pin her down, or throw her. Thanos could act like he did against Iron Man and rip away Hela's blades to use against her.

Now, how about Striking? Well, this is less about comparing who strikes harder and more how their striking goes against each other's durability. So, let's look at Hela's best feat of durability.

Here, Hela takes a lightning blast from Thor. This lightning blast, in theory, scales above the blasts that killed the Leviathans and ravaged Jotunheim. Both impressive feats, which make this feat a solid durability feat, except for one thing: Hela, according to the official script of Thor: Ragnarok, was close to unconscious from this strike. So, a strike much less powerful than this would be enough to actually hurt her, which Thanos is more than capable of.

Within just a few strikes, Thanos had Thor bleeding. Regardless of whether you think that Thor was at his prime or not, I seriously doubt this was the weakest Thor was ever been. In Ragnarok, Thor took several consecutive hits by Hulk to the face and wasn't even scratched. Compared to now, when Thanos has less than half the strikes that Banner had, Thanos is getting Thor bloody. This shows that Thanos has far superior striking to Hulk, and we all know how powerful Hulk's strikes are. Hulk's strikes, though not quite as powerful as Thor's lightning, have a great comparison to make.

When Hulk lands a punch on a Leviathan, he brings it to a stop.

Thor's lightning pushes back a charging Leviathan.

Now, what's the big thing here? Well, though Thor's lightning is superior here, I'd argue it's not to the extent that some believe. Hulk's punch doesn't last for an extended period of time like Thor's lightning does. Also, if you take a close look, the lightning is actually just pushing back the Leviathan's head, not its whole body like Hulk is doing.

I'm not going to claim anything as ridiculous as Hulk having striking that's as good or better than the Leviathan Lightning, but if Hulk's punch can bring a Leviathan's whole charging body to a stop, while Thor's continuous stream of lightning only pushes back the head of a Leviathan, it becomes pretty reasonable that Avengers Hulk's striking is close to this specific Thor feat. And Thanos scales above the Hulk from Ragnarok, who was not only much angrier, but much more experienced and farther along.

TL;DR

Hela's best feat is taking Thor's best lightning. Thor's lightning in the past has overpowered the head of a Leviathan, but Hulk brought a charging Leviathan's whole body to a stop with a punch. Thanos can make Thor bleed with his hits despite a much stronger Hulk failing to do so with more hits. Therefore, Thanos should have the striking strength to lay some serious pain on Hela. If Thanos ever restrains Hela, he can treat her like he treated the Hulk, and attack specific points to maximize damage. Soz for the low quality.

Finally, durability. I understand Hela will mainly be using blades, but I got hypothetical by assuming Thanos would be using his hands, so let's do the same for Hela for a minute. Hela... well, all she really did was hurt Thor. That was it. My opponent can't prove otherwise, as far as anything that would bother Thanos. Thanos is obviously more durable than Thor is (and by obvious, I mean it's honestly just wasting time trying to prove it to anyone who watched the movie while utilizing their common sense) but if you want a feat, here you go.

Thanos takes Hulk's hits back to back with absolute ease. Again, Hela's, at best, slightly stronger than Hulk, and that was for raw strength, not striking strength, where she has nothing to suggest she's better Hulk (she performed less than Hulk did against Thor in that regard.)

To Recap

Thanos has taken hits from and overpowered people on Hela's tier of strength, and his striking is enough to hurt her. If Thanos ever lost his weapon, he could still take her hits and dish out worse.

2. Thanos' Skills

This will be going into two things, Speed and Combat Skill. Thankfully, the best feat for both comes in one nice package.

Thanos takes on Cap, Iron Man, and Thor. Thor has already shown to have a better time against Hela, by himself, prior to getting his awakening. Here's a table to help illustrate.

If that feat, somehow, isn't enough, here's another feat comparison.

Hela dealing with Mjolnir

Thanos dealing with Mjolnir

This shows effectively that Thanos can do what Hela can when Hela literally has every advantage to do such. If this doesn't show that Thanos won't have trouble keeping up, I don't know what will. It's also worth mentioning that Mjolnir's performance in the Thanos GIF was its best strength feat (as far as being thrown) by dozens of times, since it knocked out Iron Man, so that is also evidence to consider.

3. Thanos' Sword

It broke Vibranium. Nothing else is necessary except showing it going into helicopter mode and blocking repulsor blasts, which are consistently FTE. With that level of rotating speed and strength, Hela's blades would never get through it, and Hela herself would be bisected the instant it got a good angle.

Sorry if you expected more, but I don't really need more than this. Unless Hela is now more durable than Vibranium, which I highly doubt, considering Vibranium no sold the Sokovian Explosion. For reference, the floating city was 2 kilometers long, and with the massive landmass below it, the chance of the explosion being mountain level is very high.

4. Hela's Blades

I've already shown Thanos' durability. So, what about Hela's blades? Their best feats are piercing Thor and, if we use the big ones, moving Surtur. However, I question how useful these would be against Thanos. Thanos is already more durable than Thor by feats, but if you want something else, look no further than Thanos and Hulk's reactions to the Snap. Keeping in mind that Hulk isn't too far off from Thor in durability, we see Professor Hulk, with a significant gamma resistance, get absolutely decimated by Snapping. Thanos Snapped twice, but he still looked to be in better shape afterwards.

Hulk was knocked out and his arm was useless. Thanos was still using his arm good and well afterwards. Let me provide a third table to help illustrate my point.

Thor, simply, isn't at this level of durability. If Hela barely managed to pierce his skin through his thin armor, she's doing jack squat to Thanos through his thick armor (Thanos' armor should be more durable than him.)

IN CONCLUSION

Thanos has all the advantages that matter. CQC would result in him winning with ease, he can easily overpower Hela if it ever comes down to it, and his weapon can one shot. Hela's main weapons are not fast or strong enough to pierce through Thanos' defenses, and if they ever did, they would still have to get through his armor and skin to be worth anything. Nothing Hela does will hurt him for good. As such, Thanos wins.

Maybe next time, Thanos will lend Hela the Stone as help.

@chaoselement@edgelord91@nn5@ready_4_madness@viking1205@namebk@asgardianweapon My post is up.

@cocacolaman: Oh, nice post.

My opener will be up tomorrow I think. Also, can you check PM?

@cocacolaman: nice

@cocacolaman: That's a solid opener

Hela The Goddess of Death: Post #1

Rebuttals 1.0

Both Hulk and Hela portray a similar level of superiority to Thor.

• It's the same version of Thor, literally the same movie with no amp, and he's not holding back against either.
• Thor is in an advantageous position for using his strength, plus is using two hands.
• Both characters overpower him completely with one hand.

Now, I do think that Hela's feat is superior by a margin, but that doesn't take away from the fact that Hela didn't show to be much stronger than Hulk. In fact, aside from this scene, she shows nothing else that puts her on this level aside from simply scaling above Thor, which Hulk also does, and the Mjolnir feat, which I question the consistency of, though Hulk has also matched by catching the jaws of Fenris Wolf, who was shown as comparable to what Mjolnir did to the Bifrost bridge. This is Fenris, this is Thor. Against Surtur, both characters were capable of effecting him, with Hulk effecting him more than Hela did, despite Hela using her big blades. Before you say that Hela actually pierced him, she hit his soft fiery body, while Hulk actually hit the solid part of Surtur. Hela's small blades are superior to her strength since she cut Thor with her weapons, but not with her hands, and her big blades are obviously superior to her small blades, so Hulk actually outdid her here, albeit with momentum. As such, I feel that Hulk and Hela are very close. Let's give Hela the benefit of the doubt and say she's ever so slightly stronger.

Well, Hela's physical strenght feat is definitely superior since we see Hulk clenching his teeth implies that it was harder for him to overpower Thor. In the case of Hela, we can clearly see that she overpowered Thor with ease with one hand at the start of the movie. Hulk has no physical feats on par with breaking an Uru hammer. I must remember you see that Hulk wasn't even able to stop the momentum or move Mjolnir in his fight vs Thor in the helicarrier? Personally, you have already conceded that Hela is superior physically to Hulk so i believe this is enough for the Hela vs Hulk compairson... Hulk's bullrush on Surtur has no correlation with Thanos or any of his strenght feats, that's an ability that Hulk has over the MCU.

Here, Hulk, with all his bodyweight behind him, gets completely overpowered by just Thanos' arms.

Just be honest here. Thanos was at a massive disadvantage in this strength, with him only being able to access a portion of his strength against all the strength that Hulk could use, but he still won the bout. In this fight, Thanos will have access to his full body weight, plus a reach advantage and a size advantage.

The difference in strength between Thanos and Hulk is very, very obvious, much more than the difference (if one exists) between Hela and Hulk. As such, I feel right saying Thanos has superior raw Strength than Hela. This could apply in cases where Thanos needs to restrain Hela and pin her down, or throw her. Thanos could act like he did against Iron Man and rip away Hela's blades to use against her.

Now, how about Striking? Well, this is less about comparing who strikes harder and more how their striking goes against each other's durability. So, let's look at Hela's best feat of durability.

Ok, here we go with this scene. You already conceded that Hela is superior to Hulk and i have already shown that by compairson and feats she is above him, so the gap is wide between them. Also, overpowering Hulk does not mean that Thanos is stronger than Hela, since it's actually Hela > Hulk in physicals. Due to the distance and damage output, Thanos will not be able use Hela's TK blades aganist her as i am willing to show after.

Here, Hela takes a lightning blast from Thor. This lightning blast, in theory, scales above the blasts that killed the Leviathans and ravaged Jotunheim. Both impressive feats, which make this feat a solid durability feat, except for one thing: Hela, according to the official script of Thor: Ragnarok, was close to unconscious from this strike. So, a strike much less powerful than this would be enough to actually hurt her, which Thanos is more than capable of.

Within just a few strikes, Thanos had Thor bleeding. Regardless of whether you think that Thor was at his prime or not, I seriously doubt this was the weakest Thor was ever been. In Ragnarok, Thor took several consecutive hits by Hulk to the face and wasn't even scratched. Compared to now, when Thanos has less than half the strikes that Banner had, Thanos is getting Thor bloody. This shows that Thanos has far superior striking to Hulk, and we all know how powerful Hulk's strikes are. Hulk's strikes, though not quite as powerful as Thor's lightning, have a great comparison to make.

Well, considering that Thanos doesn't use energy attacks, this example has no relevance in this battle. Thanos deals blunt attacks not energy attacks, and Hela no sold Thor's strikes which were able to hurt Hulk and Iron Man so she can definitely take some hits.

When Hulk lands a punch on a Leviathan, he brings it to a stop.

Thor's lightning pushes back a charging Leviathan.

Now, what's the big thing here? Well, though Thor's lightning is superior here, I'd argue it's not to the extent that some believe. Hulk's punch doesn't last for an extended period of time like Thor's lightning does. Also, if you take a close look, the lightning is actually just pushing back the Leviathan's head, not its whole body like Hulk is doing.

I'm not going to claim anything as ridiculous as Hulk having striking that's as good or better than the Leviathan Lightning, but if Hulk's punch can bring a Leviathan's whole charging body to a stop, while Thor's continuous stream of lightning only pushes back the head of a Leviathan, it becomes pretty reasonable that Avengers Hulk's striking is close to this specific Thor feat. And Thanos scales above the Hulk from Ragnarok, who was not only much angrier, but much more experienced and farther along.

That is some crazy scaling, and it doesn't work. Energy/lightning durability=/=blunt force durability. Yes, Thor destroyed the Leviathan with lightning. But we need to see what the Leviathan can endure in term of kinetic force, but we never really get to see how high its blunt/heat durability is, so you can't scale Hulk's or Thanos' punches to be as powerful as Thor's lightning given that they deal two entirely different types of damage.

I am going to make an example here: DCEU Superman melts tungsten with Heat Vision instantly, and then DCEU Zod destroys the same tungsten with a punch, does it means that Zod "hits" as hard as HV? Absolutely not, since we can't scale the melting point of Leviathan's armor to Hulk's attacks since they share different type of damage outputs. I mean, this would claim that in example a Leviathan could tank a city block level explosion but it had no blunt force durability feats, and a character would one shot it... it wouldn't mean that the character in question has damage output superior than a city block level explosion.

Hela's best feat is taking Thor's best lightning. Thor's lightning in the past has overpowered the head of a Leviathan, but Hulk brought a charging Leviathan's whole body to a stop with a punch. Thanos can make Thor bleed with his hits despite a much stronger Hulk failing to do so with more hits. Therefore, Thanos should have the striking strength to lay some serious pain on Hela. If Thanos ever restrains Hela, he can treat her like he treated the Hulk, and attack specific points to maximize damage. Soz for the low quality.

Ok, here we go to invalid this. I am going to show Hela's physical level using her first fight with Thor. Basically, Hela appeared in Dublin and overpowered Thor with no difficulty, but the most impressive thing is what she did at the start of the fight:

Here we go. Hela completely overpowered Thor's strenght and Mjolnir's momentum with one hand and with no effort at all and destroyed it. Keep in mind that Mjolnir is made of Uru metal, the same metal that needs a star to melt and could no sell city level explosions plus it completely no sold a town sized explosion. This is also a speed feat considering that Thor was able to throw Mjolnir at supersonic speed and a durability feat since it means she can completely no sell a Mjolnir throw and all the force packed into the throw. I mean, Mjolnir has very impressive striking feats so this feat gives Hela a raw strenght advantage and also the durability to withstand multiple hits (if Thanos will ever land them).

Finally, durability. I understand Hela will mainly be using blades, but I got hypothetical by assuming Thanos would be using his hands, so let's do the same for Hela for a minute. Hela... well, all she really did was hurt Thor. That was it. My opponent can't prove otherwise, as far as anything that would bother Thanos. Thanos is obviously more durable than Thor is (and by obvious, I mean it's honestly just wasting time trying to prove it to anyone who watched the movie while utilizing their common sense) but if you want a feat, here you go.

Thanos takes Hulk's hits back to back with absolute ease. Again, Hela's, at best, slightly stronger than Hulk, and that was for raw strength, not striking strength, where she has nothing to suggest she's better Hulk (she performed less than Hulk did against Thor in that regard.)

To Recap

Thanos has taken hits from and overpowered people on Hela's tier of strength, and his striking is enough to hurt her. If Thanos ever lost his weapon, he could still take her hits and dish out worse.

I will counter all of this at the same time now. First of all, Thanos overpowered Hulk who is physically weaker than Hela (as you said and by feats) and no one who can overpower Thor with one hand while talking or someone who is able to crush Uru metal. I believe that in term of physicals, Hela is strong enough to do damage with her strenght and punches. I mean, that Hela also scales to Thor's feat of opening the nidavellir rings which is probably what Thanos scales too, but i have shown that she overpowered Thor easier than Hulk and Thanos and she has a better standalone feat in term of raw strenght: crushing Mjolnir.

Thanos takes on Cap, Iron Man, and Thor. Thor has already shown to have a better time against Hela, by himself, prior to getting his awakening. Here's a table to help illustrate.

Thanos	Hela	Meaning
Faced Thor, Iron Man, and Steve	Faced just Thor	Hela would have had a naturally easier fight
Faced an Awakened, Armed Thor	Faced a younger, Unawakened Thor	Hela was fighting a much weaker Thor
Stomped his scenario	Gained the upperhand with some difficulty	Thanos is much better than Hela

If that feat, somehow, isn't enough, here's another feat comparison.

Hela dealing with Mjolnir

Thanos dealing with Mjolnir

Ok, first of all the fact that Thor was apparently "weaker" when between Ragnarok and IW a few hours passed, is a false claim. In term of physicals, Hela overpowered the same Thor who moved the rings and also a bit easier than Thanos. Don't confuse striking strenght with raw strenght, they are different things, also.. does this look like Hela had any difficulty in physicals with Thor? I don't think so.. Hela overpowered Thor with ease every single time as i have shown.

Thanks for showing the Mjolnir feat, it just shows that Hela was not only fast enough to react to it and stop the striking power that Mjolnir had but completely destroyed it. All Thanos did was using Iron Man as a shield on a telegraphated launch by Thor, he didn't do much there. It is a speed feat? Yes, but it's not a strenght feat. So Hela's feat is better.

This shows effectively that Thanos can do what Hela can when Hela literally has every advantage to do such. If this doesn't show that Thanos won't have trouble keeping up, I don't know what will. It's also worth mentioning that Mjolnir's performance in the Thanos GIF was its best strength feat (as far as being thrown) by dozens of times, since it knocked out Iron Man, so that is also evidence to consider.

Hela has actually better perceptions and speed feats than that, as those two i am gonna show now;

Hela was able to percieve and react to lightning after it was fired from sky by Thor, he moved he body slowly and before getting it. This pretty much proves that she can react to lightning but she can't move her body fast enough to dodge it if she is caught off guard. Another consistency in this feat is the fact that she also reacted to Thor’s lightning blasts in the final battle. I am claiming that Hela is a lightning timer? No. But she reacted to it, i have shown a screenshot that pretty much confirms she reacted after it was fired here. here is another confirmation on this feat.

Honestly, i believe this two feats are enough for now to show that Hela can definitely keep it up in close combat and since this area is close (Hela was faster than Thor who reacted at chitauri blast that were shown to be fast as bullets) it's not a gamechanger for Thanos. There will be no problem for Hela to tag and keep it up or even take advantages in close combat.

It broke Vibranium. Nothing else is necessary except showing it going into helicopter mode and blocking repulsor blasts, which are consistently FTE. With that level of rotating speed and strength, Hela's blades would never get through it, and Hela herself would be bisected the instant it got a good angle.

Sorry if you expected more, but I don't really need more than this. Unless Hela is now more durable than Vibranium, which I highly doubt, considering Vibranium no sold the Sokovian Explosion. For reference, the floating city was 2 kilometers long, and with the massive landmass below it, the chance of the explosion being mountain level is very high.

First of all, the melting point of Thanos' double blade is irrilevant in this debate, so i don't see what you are implying with the repulsors blasts and helicopter mode claims. I want actually piercing durability feats for the blade, since Hela's blades are very impressive and they have actually pierced something more durable than Thanos sword.

While the sword can pierce Hela, as i have said Hela has pierced a more durable metal than Thanos' sword;

She one shotted and pierced Skurge's armor, this feat is insanely impressive in term of piercing damage since skurge has an armor made of Uru metal. I am requesting durability feats for the sword, to prove that it won't get destroyed by the blades. Keep in mind that she destroyed it with her small blades, which are less powerful than the big blades she used on Surtur. They can definitely pierce Thanos' armor and his skin given that they destroyed Uru (i have already shown why Uru metal is extremly durable).

I've already shown Thanos' durability. So, what about Hela's blades? Their best feats are piercing Thor and, if we use the big ones, moving Surtur. However, I question how useful these would be against Thanos. Thanos is already more durable than Thor by feats, but if you want something else, look no further than Thanos and Hulk's reactions to the Snap. Keeping in mind that Hulk isn't too far off from Thor in durability, we see Professor Hulk, with a significant gamma resistance, get absolutely decimated by Snapping. Thanos Snapped twice, but he still looked to be in better shape afterwards.

Hela blades are very powerful and have impressive piercing feats. Let's start with Thor and why piercing him is impressive, Thor was able to no sell bifrost crystals at high speed while being pushed by Hela’s strength. This feat is very impressive considering those crystals pierced Surtur’s dragon head, which was able to fly through dense rock and tank a Mjolnir hit to the face. Moving on, Thor has also tanked 25MM bullets round with ease in Age of Ultron and he has a very high pain tolerance so I believe those feats are enough to prove that Thor has comparable if not greater piercing durability than Thanos and Hulk.

Moving on, Hela is also very good at timing her attacks with her TK controlled blades (Thor, Surtur and Asgardian battle for examples) so i am bringing up another strategy and how she can win by her blades;

Hela was able to pierce Surtur, who no sold busting into an Asgardian palace, multiple Mjolnir hits and the full asgard explosion. This would just put Surtur's energy durability on par or better than Thanos' and considering Thor also tanked the star beam a few hours later Ragnarok.. Thanos’ damage soak will not be a problem for the blades. They can pierce him.

Honestly, the GIF as i have shown is ALL Hela need to do to win this fight for multiple reasons: 1) Thanos doesn't have the feats to suggest he is fast enough to close the distance and avoid her skycraper sized blades and if he uses her sword to deflect them like he did with Iron Man's repulsors, it's probably getting destroyed into pieces 2) Thanos' has no feats that allows him to survive the blades and neither his armor, since i have shown that they pierced a very durable metal and somebody with comparable if not greater piercing durability.

Regarding your point again, energy durability =/= piercing durability. An example is that DCEU Wonder Woman is not able to tank low caliber bullets... but she is able to full tank Heat Vision. Now, does it means that HV is weaker than bullets? absolutely not, so the blades won't have problem in either piercing Thanos for his energy durability and for his piercing durability.

Hulk was knocked out and his arm was useless. Thanos was still using his arm good and well afterwards. Let me provide a third table to help illustrate my point.

Thanos	Hulk	Meaning
Snapped Twice	Snapped Once	Hulk took 1/2 the force Thanos did
Didn't have gamma resistance	Had a gamma resistance	A significant portion of the force was cushioned or nullified on Hulk that wasn't cushioned or nullified for Thanos
Was in better shape	Was in worse shape	Thanos is way more than 2x, maybe even 4x, Hulk's durability

Thor, simply, isn't at this level of durability. If Hela barely managed to pierce his skin through his thin armor, she's doing jack squat to Thanos through his thick armor (Thanos' armor should be more durable than him.)

I have already shown that Thor has comparable if not greater damage soak and pain tolerance in term of energy and piercing. The snap is not relevant to this type of damage, as i have told you.

In conclusion:

Hela can pierce Thanos skin, his armor and probably even his sword.

IN CONCLUSION

On the whole, I'd back Hela in this fight. She quite literally has everything she could possibly need to win. In term of stats she has the superior raw strength and speed and the skill to keep it up. Her blades and strategy will avoid the CqC combat, and she has the durability to withstand a few hits. Overall, she can win by using her blades that will pierce Thanos and his armor and kill him.

@edgelord91@nn5@ready_4_madness@viking1205@namebk@asgardianweapon@cocacolaman

My post is up.

@chaoselement: Neat post! I'll get mine up soon.

@cocacolaman:

Thanks.

@cocacolaman: @chaoselement: Good opener from the both of you. How many posts will you two be doing?

@namebk: Thanks.

@cocacolaman Are you good with 2 posts? Considering Hela was only in one movie ?

Two will work. I don't want to do anything extended.

Seems fair, interested in the other debate or nah?

Not really. I'm planning to spend less time on the Internet once I get done with my two CaVs.

Ok fine, lets finish this then :))

very interesting, keep up the good work you two

@chaoselement: nice

ya'll going mad ham with the whole freakin court case. I just think Hela wins but in a REALLY good fight seeing as they are similar

Strength- Hela>Thanos

Skill- Hela=Thanos

Weapons Hela>Thanos

Durability/Regen Hela>Thanos

disagree if u want idc periodt

Thanks.

This is a CAV...

T4V please

@chaoselement: yea true srry

Taep

@cocacolaman: Any idea when the post would be up?

@chaoselement: Sorry, been distracted. If it's not up today, it'll be tomorrow.

@cocacolaman: Ok, seems fair mate.

Well, Hela's physical strenght feat is definitely superior since we see Hulk clenching his teeth implies that it was harder for him to overpower Thor. In the case of Hela, we can clearly see that she overpowered Thor with ease with one hand at the start of the movie. Hulk has no physical feats on par with breaking an Uru hammer. I must remember you see that Hulk wasn't even able to stop the momentum or move Mjolnir in his fight vs Thor in the helicarrier? Personally, you have already conceded that Hela is superior physically to Hulk so i believe this is enough for the Hela vs Hulk compairson... Hulk's bullrush on Surtur has no correlation with Thanos or any of his strenght feats, that's an ability that Hulk has over the MCU.

It's not super relevant to reply to this, considering we both agree Hela is stronger than Hulk. But I do have to say, Hulk gritting his teeth isn't a sign of struggle, it's a sign of anger. I agree Hulk can't break Uru, but, as you'll see later in my post, I question the durability of Uru that's not enchanted.

Hulk's bullrush isn't supposed to show that Thanos has that level of strength, it's supposed to show that Hulk is comparable to what Hela can do.

Ok, here we go with this scene. You already conceded that Hela is superior to Hulk and i have already shown that by compairson and feats she is above him, so the gap is wide between them. Also, overpowering Hulk does not mean that Thanos is stronger than Hela, since it's actually Hela > Hulk in physicals. Due to the distance and damage output, Thanos will not be able use Hela's TK blades aganist her as i am willing to show after.

By feats and scaling, it's not a wide gap at all. Both did similarly against Thor and Hulk outperformed Hela against Surtur, albeit with momentum. The point I made with Thanos and Hela is that Hulk had a significant advantage of leverage, while Thanos only had access to a portion of his strength against Hulk's whole body weight, but Thanos still casually overpowered him. The strength difference is made much more apparent than the one between Hulk and Hela.

Hela doesn't really fight the way you're suggesting, spamming long range.

Show me where she is fighting against a relevant threat and does this.

Well, considering that Thanos doesn't use energy attacks, this example has no relevance in this battle.

Though I don't agree with this line of thinking, as is made abundantly clear later, this really only helps my argument, since that means Hela has no super good durability feats to fight Thanos with.

Thanos deals blunt attacks not energy attacks, and Hela no sold Thor's strikes which were able to hurt Hulk and Iron Man so she can definitely take some hits.

Thanos hits harder than Hulk, who hits harder than Thor. Hela tanking Thor's hits isn't good enough.

That is some crazy scaling, and it doesn't work. Energy/lightning durability=/=blunt force durability. Yes, Thor destroyed the Leviathan with lightning. But we need to see what the Leviathan can endure in term of kinetic force, but we never really get to see how high its blunt/heat durability is, so you can't scale Hulk's or Thanos' punches to be as powerful as Thor's lightning given that they deal two entirely different types of damage.

Energy attacks, like Thor's lightning, are just heat and blunt force. They don't follow a completely different set of laws than blunt force. If anything, this helps me, since Thor had an added heat component to help him push back the Leviathan, while Hulk had just blunt force.

I am going to make an example here: DCEU Superman melts tungsten with Heat Vision instantly, and then DCEU Zod destroys the same tungsten with a punch, does it means that Zod "hits" as hard as HV? Absolutely not, since we can't scale the melting point of Leviathan's armor to Hulk's attacks since they share different type of damage outputs.

Bad comparison because Superman melting something isn't the same as Thor pushing back something. If Thor's lightning had melted the Leviathan, you'd have a point. But the Leviathan getting pushed isn't because of heat, unless you want to say the Leviathan wasn't even pushed, but just backed up, which makes it even worse and might even make Hulk's feat more impressive.

I mean, this would claim that in example a Leviathan could tank a city block level explosion but it had no blunt force durability feats, and a character would one shot it... it wouldn't mean that the character in question has damage output superior than a city block level explosion.

So, what you're saying is, if character X killed a Leviathan which tanked attack Y, attack Y would still be stronger than character X? That doesn't make sense.

Ok, here we go to invalid this. I am going to show Hela's physical level using her first fight with Thor. Basically, Hela appeared in Dublin and overpowered Thor with no difficulty, but the most impressive thing is what she did at the start of the fight:

Here we go. Hela completely overpowered Thor's strenght and Mjolnir's momentum with one hand and with no effort at all and destroyed it. Keep in mind that Mjolnir is made of Uru metal, the same metal that needs a star to melt and could no sell city level explosions plus it completely no sold a town sized explosion

It may sound cliche, but that's honestly inconsistent. Her next best feat (moving Surtur with her blades) is dozens, if not hundreds, of times weaker than this, when she has gigantic blades and is on Asgard, where she is supposed to be stronger, not to mention that she put in more effort against Surtur than here. She also never does something like this to Thor, despite being at his throat. It makes absolutely no sense. The only real explanation is that Mjolnir was less durable after Odin died, which would be consistent with Thor being more durable than Uru in Infinity War but being less durable than Mjolnir by every intent.

This is also a speed feat considering that Thor was able to throw Mjolnir at supersonic speed and a durability feat since it means she can completely no sell a Mjolnir throw and all the force packed into the throw. I mean, Mjolnir has very impressive striking feats so this feat gives Hela a raw strenght advantage and also the durability to withstand multiple hits (if Thanos will ever land them).

Thanos already surpassed this speed feat. And for durability, Mjolnir's best feat while being thrown was pushing Malekith. It has nothing on Thanos' striking.

I will counter all of this at the same time now. First of all, Thanos overpowered Hulk who is physically weaker than Hela (as you said and by feats) and no one who can overpower Thor with one hand while talking or someone who is able to crush Uru metal. I believe that in term of physicals, Hela is strong enough to do damage with her strenght and punches. I mean, that Hela also scales to Thor's feat of opening the nidavellir rings which is probably what Thanos scales too, but i have shown that she overpowered Thor easier than Hulk and Thanos and she has a better standalone feat in term of raw strenght: crushing Mjolnir.

I already addressed the thing about Uru (Thanos effortlessly crushed Vibranium with his fingers, if you don't want to accept any other argument, and Vibranium is close to Uru in durability, considering they both came out unscathed from Sokovia. If it was the Stone that broke Vibranium, then Thanos no sold an explosion that broke Vibranium, so win-win for me.) If Hela and Thanos get physical, Thanos has consistently portrayed superior physicals, since he overpowered a stronger Thor than Hela did.

Ok, first of all the fact that Thor was apparently "weaker" when between Ragnarok and IW a few hours passed, is a false claim. In term of physicals, Hela overpowered the same Thor who moved the rings and also a bit easier than Thanos. Don't confuse striking strenght with raw strenght, they are different things, also.. does this look like Hela had any difficulty in physicals with Thor? I don't think so.. Hela overpowered Thor with ease every single time as i have shown.

Thor got Awakened. Awakened Thor is far superior to Sleeping (?) Thor, which is the one who Hela overpowered.

Thanks for showing the Mjolnir feat, it just shows that Hela was not only fast enough to react to it and stop the striking power that Mjolnir had but completely destroyed it. All Thanos did was using Iron Man as a shield on a telegraphated launch by Thor, he didn't do much there. It is a speed feat? Yes, but it's not a strenght feat. So Hela's feat is better.

I wasn't focusing on the strength aspect. I was focusing purely on the speed aspect, since I've already shown Thanos can overpower her. And his was closer to combat speed, so in that regard, his was better, because combat is different than reactions and moving your limb.

Here's an example. Humans blink in about .4 seconds. The fastest puncher can punch at 45 mph to my knowledge, which is 66 feet per second. Assuming he has a reach of 3 feet, this man can throw his full punch in .04 seconds. Does this mean he can throw 10 punches in the time it takes to blink? No. Similarly, Hela moved a limb, but Thanos had to drop his movement and pick up a new one, meaning he had to perform several movements.

Hela was able to percieve and react to lightning after it was fired from sky by Thor, he moved he body slowly and before getting it. This pretty much proves that she can react to lightning but she can't move her body fast enough to dodge it if she is caught off guard. Another consistency in this feat is the fact that she also reacted to Thor’s lightning blasts in the final battle. I am claiming that Hela is a lightning timer? No. But she reacted to it, i have shown a screenshot that pretty much confirms she reacted after it was fired here. here is another confirmation on this feat.

Hela being able to see lightning isn't indicative of her being able to move anywhere near that fast. Yeah, she can perceive at those speeds, but I (not the fastest in any way) have perceived in .07 seconds at my best. Hela may be able to see Thanos' attacks coming, but she can't fight at these ridiculous speeds.

Honestly, i believe this two feats are enough for now to show that Hela can definitely keep it up in close combat and since this area is close (Hela was faster than Thor who reacted at chitauri blast that were shown to be fast as bullets) it's not a gamechanger for Thanos. There will be no problem for Hela to tag and keep it up or even take advantages in close comba

Not sure I'm understanding why you're posting Thor's feats. I've already shown Thanos outspeeding him, so this is irrelevant.

First of all, the melting point of Thanos' double blade is irrilevant in this debate, so i don't see what you are implying with the repulsors blasts and helicopter mode claims. I want actually piercing durability feats for the blade, since Hela's blades are very impressive and they have actually pierced something more durable than Thanos sword.

Thanos' blade will be slicing up those blades, not tanking them. That's the whole reason for me showing the rotating sword, since it is fast enough to intercept any of these blades Hela will be sending at him. Thanos' blade doesn't need any durability feats, because that's not the point. If you want durability feats, his sword is implied as a match to Vibranium/Uru.

She one shotted and pierced Skurge's armor, this feat is insanely impressive in term of piercing damage since skurge has an armor made of Uru metal. I am requesting durability feats for the sword, to prove that it won't get destroyed by the blades. Keep in mind that she destroyed it with her small blades, which are less powerful than the big blades she used on Surtur. They can definitely pierce Thanos' armor and his skin given that they destroyed Uru (i have already shown why Uru metal is extremly durable).

I've already addressed my thoughts on Uru. And why are you bringing up her big ones? She never used them against a small opponent. But regardless, her swords have also consistently failed to do much to Thor, so they shouldn't do much to Thanos. This is also consistent with Thor being more durable than unenchanted Uru, so you can't say "But she pierced Uru!"

Oh, and just in case it wasn't clear, it doesn't matter if Uru is better enchanted or not, because her blades still won't be piercing Thanos.

Hela blades are very powerful and have impressive piercing feats. Let's start with Thor and why piercing him is impressive, Thor was able to no sell bifrost crystals at high speed while being pushed by Hela’s strength. This feat is very impressive considering those crystals pierced Surtur’s dragon head, which was able to fly through dense rock and tank a Mjolnir hit to the face. Moving on, Thor has also tanked 25MM bullets round with ease in Age of Ultron and he has a very high pain tolerance so I believe those feats are enough to prove that Thor has comparable if not greater piercing durability than Thanos and Hulk.

Thanos is still more durable than Thor. It being piercing/blunt force/energy/neck/silent-but-deadly fart/eyeball/global warming/lukewarm water durability

DOES. NOT. MATTER.

Thanos took the Snap better than Thor could have based on lore. Therefore, he is more durable than Thor.

Hela was able to pierce Surtur, who no sold busting into an Asgardian palace, multiple Mjolnir hits and the full asgard explosion. This would just put Surtur's energy durability on par or better than Thanos' and considering Thor also tanked the star beam a few hours later Ragnarok.. Thanos’ damage soak will not be a problem for the blades. They can pierce him.

Surtur got pierced because his body is made of fire and lava. He's not even a physical form aside from his head.

Honestly, the GIF as i have shown is ALL Hela need to do to win this fight for multiple reasons: 1) Thanos doesn't have the feats to suggest he is fast enough to close the distance and avoid her skycraper sized blades and if he uses her sword to deflect them like he did with Iron Man's repulsors, it's probably getting destroyed into pieces

But why the heck would Hela use her skyscraper sized blades on someone that's not even 1/100 their size?

Thanos' has no feats that allows him to survive the blades and neither his armor, since i have shown that they pierced a very durable metal and somebody with comparable if not greater piercing durability.

Thanos is multiple times more durable than someone on or above Thor's physical tier (Hulk.) I don't care if Thanos hasn't tanked a bullet, that's probably because Thor knew better than to think that he could kill Thanos with a bullet, so he went to a star to go on a suicide mission just so he could forge a weapon to pierce Thanos, which is so strong that it would literally drive superhumans insane. Superhumans can hold guns with their mental faculties fairly intact.

Regarding your point again, energy durability =/= piercing durability. An example is that DCEU Wonder Woman is not able to tank low caliber bullets... but she is able to full tank Heat Vision. Now, does it means that HV is weaker than bullets? absolutely not, so the blades won't have problem in either piercing Thanos for his energy durability and for his piercing durability.

Wonder Woman is a very famous exception. It makes no sense, but she's an exception. Everyone else is sitting fine, with Superman, Hulk, and Thor (all three of whom are less durable than Thanos) taking energy attacks and blunt force attacks like full force punches, but not even noticing bullets.

Also, this is the second time you've used DCEU characters to prove a point relating to the MCU.

I have already shown that Thor has comparable if not greater damage soak and pain tolerance in term of energy and piercing. The snap is not relevant to this type of damage, as i have told you.

....

On the whole, I'd back Hela in this fight. She quite literally has everything she could possibly need to win. In term of stats she has the superior raw strength and speed and the skill to keep it up. Her blades and strategy will avoid the CqC combat, and she has the durability to withstand a few hits. Overall, she can win by using her blades that will pierce Thanos and his armor and kill him.

She has nothing to surpass Thanos' strength, she can keep up (at best) in speed and skill, and her blades aren't doing jack.

@dmnb2wavy

@cocacolaman: nice comeback

@cocacolaman: Nice.

Now, check PM thanks.

Hela The Goddess of Death: Post #2

Rebuttals 2.0

It's not super relevant to reply to this, considering we both agree Hela is stronger than Hulk. But I do have to say, Hulk gritting his teeth isn't a sign of struggle, it's a sign of anger. I agree Hulk can't break Uru, but, as you'll see later in my post, I question the durability of Uru that's not enchanted.

Hulk's bullrush isn't supposed to show that Thanos has that level of strength, it's supposed to show that Hulk is comparable to what Hela can do.

Yeah, Hela is stronger than Hulk and plus.. Hulk overpowered Thor with much more effort than Hela did and was hurt by his punches (which Hela no sold.) Thanos never showed or did that bullrush, as super leaping is an Hulk ability so i don't see your point here.

By feats and scaling, it's not a wide gap at all. Both did similarly against Thor and Hulk outperformed Hela against Surtur, albeit with momentum. The point I made with Thanos and Hela is that Hulk had a significant advantage of leverage, while Thanos only had access to a portion of his strength against Hulk's whole body weight, but Thanos still casually overpowered him. The strength difference is made much more apparent than the one between Hulk and Hela.

Hela doesn't really fight the way you're suggesting, spamming long range.

Well, Hela overpowered him easier and with only one hand and has a better strenght feat than Thanos. I showed you she is very good at planning her attacks aganist Surtur, Asgardian Soldiers, Valkyries so she can spam the blades at long range.

Though I don't agree with this line of thinking, as is made abundantly clear later, this really only helps my argument, since that means Hela has no super good durability feats to fight Thanos with.

Hela has the durability feats to withstand punches (if Thanos has that) and Thanos doesn't use lightning therefore energy =/= blunt attacks.

Thanos hits harder than Hulk, who hits harder than Thor. Hela tanking Thor's hits isn't good enough.

She stopped Mjolnir's momentum which hits as hard as a Mjolnir hit, since it did damage Surtur and did damage to Malekith and Mjolnir hits probably harder than Thanos. That feat speak for Hela's physical durability level.

Energy attacks, like Thor's lightning, are just heat and blunt force. They don't follow a completely different set of laws than blunt force. If anything, this helps me, since Thor had an added heat component to help him push back the Leviathan, while Hulk had just blunt force.

They're different as Thor had additional lightning conducted by the tower to make shockwave and break out the entire leviathan, meanwhile Hulk only pushed back. The leviathan exploded when Thor destroyed it (as confirmed by the script) meanwhile it didn't when Hulk did hit him. It needed an help from Iron Man to destroy it.

Bad comparison because Superman melting something isn't the same as Thor pushing back something. If Thor's lightning had melted the Leviathan, you'd have a point. But the Leviathan getting pushed isn't because of heat, unless you want to say the Leviathan wasn't even pushed, but just backed up, which makes it even worse and might even make Hulk's feat more impressive.

It clearly melted and made an explosion over the shell, meanwhile Hulk didn't completely kill it but only pushed it back. Thor's feat doesn't scale to Hulk. Different type of attacks.

So, what you're saying is, if character X killed a Leviathan which tanked attack Y, attack Y would still be stronger than character X? That doesn't make sense.

I just said that we have to know the physical or heat durability about an object before making claims and scaling them, you can't scale HV to a punch the same way you can't scale lightning to a punch.

It may sound cliche, but that's honestly inconsistent. Her next best feat (moving Surtur with her blades) is dozens, if not hundreds, of times weaker than this, when she has gigantic blades and is on Asgard, where she is supposed to be stronger, not to mention that she put in more effort against Surtur than here. She also never does something like this to Thor, despite being at his throat. It makes absolutely no sense. The only real explanation is that Mjolnir was less durable after Odin died, which would be consistent with Thor being more durable than Uru in Infinity War but being less durable than Mjolnir by every intent.

Well, Surtur is a mountain sized monster with invulnerability who took the Asgardian explosion, Hela hurting and piercing him is a great feat for her, it only helps my argument. About the Mjolnir point, it's headcanon as it was never stated in the movie or script. I am going to post the script here;

https://www.scripts.com/script.php?id=thor%253A_ragnarok_21816&p=21

It never says anything about Magic or about Mjolnir being less durable, it just confirms that Hela overpowered Thor and Mjolnir at the same time with one hand and was strong enough to break it. Hela has just feats of overpowering Thor with ease, so you need evidence before claiming it's an outlier.

Thanos already surpassed this speed feat. And for durability, Mjolnir's best feat while being thrown was pushing Malekith. It has nothing on Thanos' striking.

A thrown Mjolnir can hits as hard a Mjolnir hit, as i have shown with the Surtur example. In term of speed, i have shown that Hela has also reacted to gunfire during the asgardian scene so she will have no problem in keeping up with Thanos.

I already addressed the thing about Uru (Thanos effortlessly crushed Vibranium with his fingers, if you don't want to accept any other argument, and Vibranium is close to Uru in durability, considering they both came out unscathed from Sokovia. If it was the Stone that broke Vibranium, then Thanos no sold an explosion that broke Vibranium, so win-win for me.) If Hela and Thanos get physical, Thanos has consistently portrayed superior physicals, since he overpowered a stronger Thor than Hela did.

Sinetic Vibranium, with almost no durability feats compared to Mjolnir... Hela's physical strenght feat is still better than Thanos'. Also, Vision doesn't have the same Vibranium metal that Sokovia had, Hela overpowered Thor with one hand with ease and it's the same Thor that moved the rings. Personally, i can see that Thor was able to push Thanos back in EG while having hammers meanwhile he never was able to take a single upperhand on Hela physically or make her struggle. This pretty much confirms that Hela is stronger than Thanos in physicals.

Thor got Awakened. Awakened Thor is far superior to Sleeping (?) Thor, which is the one who Hela overpowered.

Hela overpowered Thor while he had lightning and no proof Thor got physically stronger. it's the same Thor who moved the rings a few days after Ragnarok happened. Therefore Hela scales to Thor's strenght feats.

I wasn't focusing on the strength aspect. I was focusing purely on the speed aspect, since I've already shown Thanos can overpower her. And his was closer to combat speed, so in that regard, his was better, because combat is different than reactions and moving your limb.

Here's an example. Humans blink in about .4 seconds. The fastest puncher can punch at 45 mph to my knowledge, which is 66 feet per second. Assuming he has a reach of 3 feet, this man can throw his full punch in .04 seconds. Does this mean he can throw 10 punches in the time it takes to blink? No. Similarly, Hela moved a limb, but Thanos had to drop his movement and pick up a new one, meaning he had to perform several movements.

Well, you have to prove that Thanos can move at long range and has even percieved lightning/bullets if you want to say he is faster than Hela. I have already shown that Hela has comparable if not greater speed and reactions.

Hela being able to see lightning isn't indicative of her being able to move anywhere near that fast. Yeah, she can perceive at those speeds, but I (not the fastest in any way) have perceived in .07 seconds at my best. Hela may be able to see Thanos' attacks coming, but she can't fight at these ridiculous speeds.

No, it just means she is faster than Thanos who got hit by lightning everytime and couldn't even see that after it was fired. It just means that can percieve and react to Thanos' attacks without problem, i mean we are not talking about a speedster here.

Not sure I'm understanding why you're posting Thor's feats. I've already shown Thanos outspeeding him, so this is irrelevant.

Well, Thanos was more skilled but i don't see him blitzing Thor or moving way faster than him in close combat like Hela did.

Thanos' blade will be slicing up those blades, not tanking them. That's the whole reason for me showing the rotating sword, since it is fast enough to intercept any of these blades Hela will be sending at him. Thanos' blade doesn't need any durability feats, because that's not the point. If you want durability feats, his sword is implied as a match to Vibranium/Uru.

A vague statement about the sword doesn't give him scaling or any durability feats actually, the only durability feat the sword has is tanking a hit from the handle of Stormbreaker, which is not enough to prove it can tank multiple blades that pierced high quality Uru metal.

I've already addressed my thoughts on Uru. And why are you bringing up her big ones? She never used them against a small opponent. But regardless, her swords have also consistently failed to do much to Thor, so they shouldn't do much to Thanos. This is also consistent with Thor being more durable than unenchanted Uru, so you can't say "But she pierced Uru!"

Oh, and just in case it wasn't clear, it doesn't matter if Uru is better enchanted or not, because her blades still won't be piercing Thanos.

I mean, she can adapt and use that strategy accordingly aganist Thanos. That just shows that Thor has a good pain tolerance, i mean you failed to show a single piercing feat for Thanos and to prove he is more durable than Uru and Thor in term of piercing. Thanos will be pierced and KOd by a few hits.

Thanos is still more durable than Thor. It being piercing/blunt force/energy/neck/silent-but-deadly fart/eyeball/global warming/lukewarm water durability

I don't see the feats to claim he is more durable than Thor in term of piercing durability, you need evidence to back up those claim. I mean, Thor took bifrost crystals and bullets with no much harm and was impaled by Hela easily.

Thanos took the Snap better than Thor could have based on lore. Therefore, he is more durable than Thor.

Energy durability =/= piercing durability, we need feats regarding bullets etc not feat about energy attacks. I did show to you multiple examples on characters that are less durable to piercing than energy attacks. For example Doctor.Strange or Diana or Spider-Man.

Surtur got pierced because his body is made of fire and lava. He's not even a physical form aside from his head.

He has a physical body clearly, since he took out the asgardian palace and was able to move in a dense area.

But why the heck would Hela use her skyscraper sized blades on someone that's not even 1/100 their size?

By understanding the threat and his gear, obviously.

Thanos is multiple times more durable than someone on or above Thor's physical tier (Hulk.) I don't care if Thanos hasn't tanked a bullet, that's probably because Thor knew better than to think that he could kill Thanos with a bullet, so he went to a star to go on a suicide mission just so he could forge a weapon to pierce Thanos, which is so strong that it would literally drive superhumans insane. Superhumans can hold guns with their mental faculties fairly intact.

This proves nothing man sorry, that's a feat for Stormbreaker (Uru metal and Hela pierced the same metal) i mean you need to show feats about Thanos tanking that, so the blades will still hurt him.

Wonder Woman is a very famous exception. It makes no sense, but she's an exception. Everyone else is sitting fine, with Superman, Hulk, and Thor (all three of whom are less durable than Thanos) taking energy attacks and blunt force attacks like full force punches, but not even noticing bullets.

Also, this is the second time you've used DCEU characters to prove a point relating to the MCU.

I made an example of Strange etc in the MCU, there's still no correlation between energy attacks and blunt attacks as i have shown. Thanos will be taken out quickly by the blades.

....

Well, considering she can regrow limbs as long as her clothes are there and she healed from a stab in a second, Thanos won't get close or slice her up with any weapon.

She has nothing to surpass Thanos' strength, she can keep up (at best) in speed and skill, and her blades aren't doing jack.

Well, i already proved that she is stronger, faster and has ranged attacks which can hurt and put Thanos down quickly. In term of skills and durability she can compete and take some hits, the same can't be said about Thanos. All Hela need to do is to raise their hands and use her blades to win this battle, it's a win condition she has in her bag.