MCU Thor (IW) vs DCEU Superman (JL)

@xzone:

Yeah, and you aren't understanding it which is why I simplified

See, that's your main problem. You take simple stuff, and overcomplicate them with piss poor analogies.

Maybe heat wise, but not for showing how much energy it takes to hurt Thor or Superman

The most devastating part of the nuke is located within' the epic center of the said nuke, the atom shredding blast, the extreme temperatures.. etc. It's all located in the epic center, there is something called "google" y'know, it helped me a lot, you should try it sometimes. Not to mention, the fact that's it's named "300-400kt nuke" makes it a lot more quantifiable than that beam of heat that you're desperately trying to quantify.

You're completely missing the point.

No, I really am not.

I'm not arguing Thor's feat>Superman's feat in power (Though I do agree with that).

You think that tiny beam had more concussive force than the nuke? Elaborate. Fact remains, the nuke is still a lot hotter, and has more DC at the epic center than that beam, which is where Superman was located.

I'm saying you can measure how many seconds Thor can survive said energy from the star before it burning him, then KOing him. We know that Thor survived for about 50 seconds, so that's measurable. What we don't know is how much energy was required to KO Superman. All we know is that a nuke can KO him, but that's all we really get from that. We can't tell how much energy it takes to simply hurt Superman

That is not how you quantify nor measure things, my gawd. Just because he took it for "50 seconds" doesn't make it more quantifiable or even quantifiable for that matter, you need to calculate how much energy and heat he was hit with in order to deem it more quantifiable and so far you haven't done any of that. For all we know, the entirety of the energy he took could've been lesser than a 5 kiloton nuclear bomb. In layman's terms, it's not quantifiable.

So you think Superman would have tanked the nuke. If you really think that (Baseless btw) then what I'm saying really doesn't apply to begin with

What? I said the exact opposite of that:

"A 300-400 kt nuke did in fact knock out a depleted Superman, and there is not enough reason for me to assume Superman would've withstood (as in tank, or remain fully conscious after the initial impact) said nuke, had he been at full power."

...now you're just putting my words in my mouth.

Gosh, I did. I'm saying we can see exactly how long it takes a certain amount of energy to hurt, then eventually KO Thor

Thor making Stormbreaker

Really, how much energy does it take to K.O Thor?

Thor starts taking the heat around the 25 second mark, and we don't see any serious burns till around the one minute mark, so because of this we can assume that whatever the heat/energy of a neutron star is, Thor can survive that for about 35 seconds without being hurt much at all.

We then see Thor is KO'd at the 1 minute 15 second mark, so we know it takes about 50 seconds of energy from a neutron star to KO Thor

What is this? I mean.. what is this? How does this make it quantifiable? Did you calculate how much force said "energy beam" packed? And we shouldn't even call it an "energy beam", it's a heat beam. It had almost no concussive force behind it.

All of that information is provided for Thor's feat, but all we know for Superman's is that a nuke can KO him. That's it

What information? Bro, what are you talking about? You aren't making any sense.

The main reason I explained this is because people continue to say, "Superman survived a nuke. Thor's lightning<a nuke, so that lightning can't hurt Superman". This is flawed because we have no idea how much power was actually required to KO Superman. For all we know half that amount of energy could have KO'd Clark, or maybe it barely KO'd him.

What? The difference between Thor's lightning cloak and a 300-400 kt nuke, is the difference between a piccolo firecracker and a 15 kt nuclear bomb. Thor's lightning is like a baby punch compared to the nuke, it's really not comparable what.so.ever and the fact that Superman was in a depleted state when he took the nuke, makes it even more impressive.

Point is, we don't know that for Superman's feat, but we know what happened for Thor's feat

Oh right, because he took it for 50 seconds? Smh.

@thebestofthebest: I don't think we are debating the same thing here. I'm going off the assumption that the beam from the star is simply the heat/energy of a star hitting Thor. Because of that, I can measure how long he was hit by that heat, then I can measure how much heat it takes to burn, then KO Thor (Because we see how long he was hit by it)

You seem to be saying the beam from the star forge is not quantifiable at all, so we're debating two different things

For Superman's feat, you continue to miss the point. We know the amount of energy/heat it takes to KO him, but what we do not know is how much it takes to harm him based off that feat alone. This is why it is flawed to say "Nuke>Thor's lightning, so the lightning can't hurt Superman". Saying it can't kill Superman is probably accurate via that scaling, but saying it can't hurt him is pretty baseless from the argument

X

@xzone: Let me rephrase it for ya, Thor's lightning cloak isn't even 1/1000th of the nuke that hit a depleted Superman. It ain't doing jack. Period.

beat up Thor?...This looks like a job for Superman

@chazzer: if it explodes in the centre and mid air. it can and quite casually. It can do it to much bigger landmass actually.

Supes

R1: Superman destroys

R2: Thor destroys

Is anyone going to continue this?

It never ends. 2 "omnipotent" beings from both verses and people argues who is stronger. This is stupid.

@sexybayonetta22: I'm only here to continue the ravaging chaos! Watching 'fanbois' duke it out over the character they have the biggest boner for is pretty damn fun!

Although to be fair, there have been a few serious debaters in this thread, but most of the populous seems to be more inclined to being part of the whole 'cHaRaCtEr ***** gEtS StOmPed! ... MuH StAr LeVeL FeAtS ... BuT TeCtOnIc PLaTeS ... etc etc etc'

Honestly at this point, I think it should be clear that for fair fights in the Live Action Comic Book match-ups, Superman needs to ahve his speed equalized otherwise it becomes a borderline stomp! Most people in this thread already caught on for round 1, and it was the debating for round 2 that really got me intrigued. In fact, I had originally thought that Superman would have won both rounds, but after looking at the arguments from both sides, my opinion was slowly changed from Superman in a stomp to Thor in a close fight. It's debates like these that make me appreciate the battle forums of comic vine, but when large random hoards of fans come in and start wanking the crap out of their characters it tends to ruin the mood for debating! Either way, this was a fun thread and I hope it gets continued.

Knowing life after Endgame movie another omegawankers wave will approach to omegawank Thor to cosmic tier characters.

Fight ends like this:

Thor stomps.

Thor gets his shit handed to him easily by a blur which is not trying very hard.

Lol not this again

Round 1: Superman kind of stomps

Round 2: Thor easily

Thor only wins with speed equalized

Supes

Superman

Only axe hit can harm Superman but he is too fast

@davidharewood14: not in round two

I know. Speed must be equalized to make Thor win

@davidharewood14: so Thor wins round 2?

yes

@davidharewood14: okay

Superman.

Thor.

Thor looses both rounds.

Give supes the victory, Thor doesn’t have the firepower to take him out.

Superman

Still Superman superstomps both rounds. Massively better stats in all categories and more versatility.

How Thor reacts to speedsters.

How Superman reacts to speedsters.

Lmao!

Round 1:Superman

Round 2:Thor

R1: Clark

R2: Zonedinson

SM is still too fast for Slowdinson

Thor still wins both rounds. I hope Thor shows more of his abilities in End Game

@kalkent: So you agree Thor wins with speed equalized?

@xzone: Yea.

My mans this is like twice the mismatch Thor vs Diana is given Superman is faster and can one shot Thor.

Smh I shouldn't be entering these threads all of sudden.

@anthp2000: Superman can one shot Thor? haha

@xzone:

Yeah, he can like, you know, punch his head off at hypersonic speeds or however fast he is (I really dc, but he's obviously fast enough to blitz Thor). It's very simple.

Is there a reason people keep bumping these threads?

He won't one shot him, but thor is going to be getting hit by hypersonic punches, which IIRC, has never been hit by.

Superman can definitely one shot Thor. He doesn't have feats to say he survives the punch he hit Steppenwolf with. He simply does not have the feats.

60 pages and still Superman destroys. There is no argument around the speed factor.

As for the second round, thor still does not have blunt force or damage output to actually harm superman. We have been many times trough the stormbreaker argument still no feats that prove it can cut superman.

Superman wins both rounds, maybe much harder win in the second round, but he would still outlast thor.

Another thing to add he could just heat vision him through the eyes if he was bloodlusted.

Superman still stomps pretty hard. The only counter for speed is versatility and hax which Thor lacks. His strongest lightning requires a brief period to charge and its unlikely Superman would give him that time. He can’t conjure massive storms like the comic book version. He has no counter to Clark’s speed. You could make a argument for the comic book version but mcu version lacks the versatility. And his lightning cloak shouldn’t hurt Clark at all.

@xzone: I understand why Thor wins R2, but R1? Superman has more than enough striking power to damage Thor, and his durability will allow him to no sell the cloak and take blows from Stormbreaker, add the ridiculous speed gap to that and I just don’t see Thor even taking 1/10 rounds.

Supes