can MCU Hela cut DCEU Doomsday Arm off

Lol at the DCEU fanboys talking nonsense about M16s that have nothing to do with Hela's swords smh.

@worldofthunder: You said that the Nightcrawler was "just that powerful" for tanking the axe.

However, this is a consistent flaw that many people present in their argument.

You cannot assume that anything that has no other feats of tanking similar damage is "just that powerful" when the weapon in question is lacking feats as well.

Here is an example:

Sword A attacks Rock B. Rock B tanks this attack. I try to argue that Sword A is not powerful, because the featless Rock B was able to stop it. Sword A hs very little feats besides this. Opponent replies that Rock B is simply that powerful, and that tanking Sword A merely proves that. With both Sword A and Rock B, decent showings are scarce.

I am not arguing on this thread, but merely on this stance of logic.

You used examples of ESTABLISHED characters WITH FEATS TO BACK UP DURABILITY, and those examples used real-life items that WE KNOW the real-life damage of. Yes Iron Man is just that powerful, because he is fictional. The missiles have a known level of destruction, because they actually exist. We are to assume that real life objects act as they normally would in real life unless stated otherwise. This is why Superman is strong for tanking bullets rather than bullets being weak. Furthermore, Superman has feats supporting his durability.

Do you understand how this concept doesn't work?

Yes

Nope. Diana's sword cutting Doomsday is a feat for the sword ergo it can't be used against Doomsday's piercing durability. It's like saying MCU Hela blades can impale Pre 52 Superman's skin because Pre 52 Diana's sword can do so as well.

@thespartanb345t:

You said that the Nightcrawler was "just that powerful" for tanking the axe.

However, this is a consistent flaw that many people present in their argument.

You cannot assume that anything that has no other feats of tanking similar damage is "just that powerful" when the weapon in question is lacking feats as well.

Here is an example:

Sword A attacks Rock B. Rock B tanks this attack. I try to argue that Sword A is not powerful, because the featless Rock B was able to stop it. Sword A hs very little feats besides this. Opponent replies that Rock B is simply that powerful, and that tanking Sword A merely proves that. With both Sword A and Rock B, decent showings are scarce.

I am not arguing on this thread, but merely on this stance of logic.

You used examples of ESTABLISHED characters WITH FEATS TO BACK UP DURABILITY, and those examples used real-life items that WE KNOW the real-life damage of. Yes Iron Man is just that powerful, because he is fictional. The missiles have a known level of destruction, because they actually exist. We are to assume that real life objects act as they normally would in real life unless stated otherwise. This is why Superman is strong for tanking bullets rather than bullets being weak. Furthermore, Superman has feats supporting his durability.

Do you understand how this concept doesn't work?

The Nightcrawler has literally no established feat. Not a single one other than taking a hit from Steppenwolf's axe, in which the axe cleaved right through it.

Iron Man's armor is made of a gold-titanium armor yet it tanks shit it isn't supposed to because it's merely fiction. If that logic works, then how doesn't it work for the Nightcrawler? That's a double standards.

I understand where you're coming from, but what you're saying is wrong.

If in fiction, something is featless but it tanks an attack from someone/something, then it's that durable unless it's got consistent and established feats that contradicts it, which in the Nightcrawler's case, it's not because it literally has no established feats.

Regardless, I'm not even sure why I'm debating this over something a troll said (not you, but the other guy) that isn't even true. Steppenwolf's axe cut through the Nigthcrawler, then end.

People severely underestimate hela, its like nothing she did was credible just because its the mcu and unlike dceu mcu actually works at the moment

@lord_titan_: lol......no one is underestimating hela, people overrate her, enough holes have been poked into the 'skyscraper' sized swords to make them grossly inadequate and unable to harm kryptonians. the swords have pierced people who have terrible piercing durability like these:

Gallery

kryptonians have been in situations much worse than the stuff that broke thor's skin and they always come out unscathed, so yea trying to claim hela could scratch a kryptonian based on the feats her blades have displayed is really a non starter

@DammeFavour: Superman has been overrated long before this site even began

@lord_titan_: sure, but in this case, he has feats to back him up

@DammeFavour said:

@lord_titan_: lol......no one is underestimating hela, people overrate her, enough holes have been poked into the 'skyscraper' sized swords to make them grossly inadequate and unable to harm kryptonians. the swords have pierced people who have terrible piercing durability like these:

Gallery

kryptonians have been in situations much worse than the stuff that broke thor's skin and they always come out unscathed, so yea trying to claim hela could scratch a kryptonian based on the feats her blades have displayed is really a non starter

lol

Yes Doomsday was cut every time a slashing weapon was introduced

Yeah ok and based on your response your telling me the fact that hela could pierce surtur but can't pierce superman isn't overrating him?

@lord_titan_: yea....because surtur doesn't have any durability feats and he was pierced by something that was obliterated by an m16, that's not overrating, that's plain fact

yes

Her weapon is made by Old gods. His armor and weaponry is made by New ones. It makes sense that they are at least equal.

@thebestofthebest: Doomsday has no piercing feats as everything he got stabbed and cut with hurt him.

Superman hasn't shown resistance to piercing either

@lord_titan_: come on, the guy has taken giant bullets to the face and his body was intact after he got hit with a nuke, his piercing resistance is perfect

@chimeroid: but theyre not, she couldnt break his axe until superman froze it a little. So its confirmed him and his axe are more durable than doomsday, but get shattered once a thin layer of ice is on it, and cant even penetrate the nightcrawler. Ok i got it

Yes.

Someone mentioned the bullets he took were 50 caliber, but anyways tanking bullets is more of a durability feat than a piercing resistance feat, sure bullets can and will pierce but you can't compare them to a sword flying at the same speed, he was pierced by doomsday without much effort, whats stopping hela from accelerating her swords to such momentum she is able to easily replicate what doomsday was able to achieve?

Yeah, they could pierce asgardians and spaceships. Don't see why not.

He's an amplified version of Zod. What do you precisely mean by "everything" ? He's taken a nuke at point blank range and it didn't even demolish him, he grew stronger, he's taken missiles in his weaker form it didn't even scratch him. The only artifact that was shown to actually pierce him is Diana's sword which is like I said earlier a feat for the sword not against Doomsday's durability. Besides, Hela never stabbed someone with a durability that extends above Nuke-level.

@thebestofthebest: He absorbed the nuke so he didnt tank it and tanking missles doesnt mean any sword could cut him

@supergoku17: Lol what ? Now that's lowball, he did tank it otherwise he would've never adapted to it in the first place. Had he truly absorbed the whole nuke, that huge fireball/The blast wouldn't have been visible from the sky. Regardless, Hela has never shown to penetrate someone with the durability to tank a nuclear blast ahead on with minimal damage.

Even a earth made shotgun can break a asgardian metal.

@plotweapon16255: ok

No he absorbed the nuke then evolved

And tanking a nuke doesnt mean a swordcan not cut him

It was never shown he could adapt because is he could adapt then he would of adapted past the kryptonite

@supergoku17: Meaning he's more powerful than the nuke which makes him far more durable than anything Hela's came face to face with.

And tanking a nuke doesnt mean a swordcan not cut him

That doesn't seem right nor logical at all. Are you by any chance implying that any kind of sword can penetrate his skin ?

It was never shown he could adapt because is he could adapt then he would of adapted past the kryptonite

I'm pretty positive becoming more substantial than a nuke is also a form of adaptation. Likewise, I'm not entirely sure if he's actually dead or not because that part was never revealed even Comic Doomsday took a hell of a lot of time to adapt to Kryptonite.

Edit: Kryptonite is also Doomsday's weakness, not adapting to it or bypassing it doesn't change the fact he still can overcome/adapt to other forms of beating/torture.

Easily...

Based on what exactly ?

Based ON sif's statement in agents of SHIELD.

@plotweapon16255: Did that happen off or on screen ?

@thebestofthebest: just posted it.

Again was never said in the movie that he has or can adapt that is speculation on your part

Tanking a nuke doesnt give him piercing resistance as a nuke is blunt force

So your logic is far from logicial

@supergoku17:

Again was never said in the movie that he has or can adapt that is speculation on your part

Isn't overcoming obstacles is considered a form of adaptation ? Em..

Tanking a nuke doesnt give him piercing resistance as a nuke is blunt force

He's still a Kryptonian after all, just like Superman whose piercing durability is fine and Doomsday is his superior. Like I said before, I haven't seen anything from Hela to suggest she can penetrate his skin.

So your logic is far from logicial

And yours is ? Alright.

@supergoku17:

• Care to enlighten me ?
• It's called deductive reasoning, google it. He's a superior Kryptonian which means he can handle more damage (Blunt force/Piercing/Explosions) far better than Superman.
• You've yet to support the notion of Hela being able to penetrate Doomsday skin, she's never taken on someone as durable as he is before.

@plotweapon16255 said:

Loading Video...

@thebestofthebest said:

@plotweapon16255 said:

@sergeant-rl3 said:

Yeah, they could pierce asgardians and spaceships. Don't see why not.

Even a earth made shotgun can break a asgardian metal.

Based on what exactly ?

Based ON sif's statement in agents of SHIELD.

Yupe, it's official, with enough Kinetic Energy, Earth weapons can break Asgardian metals, let alone their citizen.

One thing people have been arguing is Hela's spike > Thor hence it must be > Clark & DD. Which itself is flawed logic, since Thor aren't even on Kryptonian league. Power wise, sure, Thor is God of Thunder after all. But strength and durability? No even close.

@supergoku17:

• How, pray tell, is that supposed to be "flawed logic" ? He's a Kryptonian and Superman is a Kryptonian which means they can both scale to each other. Can't you get that through your skull ? It doesn't take a freaking genius to understand simple logic. And do you even know what deductive reasoning means ?
• Her sword casually penetrated Doomsday's skin, a creature with the durability to tank a nuclear bomb at point blank range without even getting knocked out. Hela's sword has never (not even once) penetrated an entity with that kind of durability before therefore Diana's sword > Hela's blade based on feats. Ask yourself this, if Pre 52 Diana's sword penetrated Superman's skin on multiple occasions, it even killed him once, does that mean MCU Hela's swords are capable of doing the same just because it's a "sword" ?

@thebestofthebest: 1.No as Dceu Krytonians have varied in stats

2.Shoving your ABC logic down my throat and screaming at me that im a idiot in your own words wont change how flawed your logic is

3.Again with the nuke arguement DD has been cut by Wonder Womans sword which can throught cars and a kryptonite spear DD has no cutting resistance feats and tanking a nuke doesnt exempt him from having no cutting resistance feats.

4.Helas Swords have cut Thor and Surtur

5.Pre-52 Wonder Womans Sword means nothing here

So tell me really which of ours logic is flawed from where i see it your logic is so flawed and full of things that i have debunked already

@supergoku17:

1.No as Dceu Krytonians have varied in stats

Depending on how much solar energies they've stored in their cells but they still have the same physiology.

2.Shoving your ABC logic down my throat and screaming at me that im a idiot in your own words wont change how flawed your logic is

You've no idea what "deductive reasoning" means, do you ? Here, take a good look at it:

Doomsday is superior to Superman and considering he's also a Kryptonian, he should be able to handle even more damage and it doesn't matter if it's blunt force or piercing or explosions meaning if a tank-busting bullets couldn't scratch a weaker Superman skin it definitely won't scratch Doomsday's skin, why ? Because it's common sense. There is nothing that contradicts said notion.

3.Again with the nuke arguement DD has been cut by Wonder Womans sword which can throught cars and a kryptonite spear DD has no cutting resistance feats and tanking a nuke doesnt exempt him from having no cutting resistance feats.

Sigh... cutting a car in half is somehow more impressive than cutting an individual with the durability to withstand a nuke at point blank range ? That's borderline idiotic. Talk about flawed logic.

4.Helas Swords have cut Thor and Surtur

So what ? Both individuals are far lesser than Doomsday in the durability department and Thor skin has been penetrated by both brute force "Kurse and Hulk" and "featless" sharp swords before such as Loki's dagger (Kryptonian armor was damaged by a shotgun back in Agent of SHIELD S01E13) ergo cutting Thor means completely jack in this case. Be that as it may, if we apply your logic here with Hela then I guess her swords never chopped a car in half therefore Diana's sword > Hela's swords, see what I did there ? Lmao.

5.Pre-52 Wonder Womans Sword means nothing here

Great, so now you're dodging my question ? So Imma ask you again, if Pre 52 Diana's sword penetrated Superman's skin on multiple occasions, it even killed him once, does that mean MCU Hela's swords are capable of doing the same just because it's a "sword" ? Answer me with conviction.

So tell me really which of ours logic is flawed from where i see it your logic is so flawed

Yours, definitely. Especially after that part in which you implied cutting Doomsday is less significant than cutting a car in half.

and full of things that i have debunked already

Y'know.. dreaming is for free, mate. So keep telling yourself that :)

@thebestofthebest: 1. Thx for telling me a defenition I already know

2.Your logic is still flawed

3.I didnt say that cutting a car is more impresive than tanking a nuke you just did

4.Your hypocrisy meets no bounds

5.Your logic is definitely more flawed as you try to say that since he can tank a nuke nothing can cut him

6.More ABC Logic

7.I have debunked everything you said in my previous post

8.Using thor getting stabbed by lokis daggers is as logical as superman not reacting to batmans guns on the roof

Getting stabbed by lokis dagger did nothing to him and we didnt see it affect him badly so he has a piercing resistance feat

What you think of me also means nothing

Hela no sold being stabbed btw

WW Isnt special so any sword could cut DD

So go on and post more flawed logic

The Nightcrawler has literally no established feat. Not a single one other than taking a hit from Steppenwolf's axe, in which the axe cleaved right through it.

Exactly. Assuming it didn't get cut, it still would downgrade the axe's durability, especially if the axe lacked feats like the Nightcrawler does.

Iron Man's armor is made of a gold-titanium armor yet it tanks shit it isn't supposed to because it's merely fiction. If that logic works, then how doesn't it work for the Nightcrawler? That's a double standards.

You skimmed my post, didn't you? I already countered this idea.

Yes Iron Man is just that powerful, because he is fictional. The missiles have a known level of destruction, because they actually exist. We are to assume that real life objects act as they normally would in real life unless stated otherwise. This is why Superman is strong for tanking bullets rather than bullets being weak. Furthermore, Superman has feats supporting his durability.

BOOM. Looking for this?

I understand where you're coming from, but what you're saying is wrong.

You flat out ignored part of my post...

If in fiction, something is featless but it tanks an attack from someone/something, then it's that durable unless it's got consistent and established feats that contradicts it, which in the Nightcrawler's case, it's not because it literally has no established feats.

This is true, unless the attack that it tanked also lacks feats of substance. Steppenwolf's Axe lacks good feats.

Regardless, I'm not even sure why I'm debating this over something a troll said (not you, but the other guy) that isn't even true. Steppenwolf's axe cut through the Nigthcrawler, then end

Like I said before.

I am not arguing on this thread, but merely on this stance of logic.

@thespartanb345t:

This is true, unless the attack that it tanked also lacks feats of substance. Steppenwolf's Axe lacks good feats.

This is the only thing I'm going to respond to since your post seems to be based on lack of feats for Steppenwolf's axe in this example of feats. Steppenwolf's axe does indeed have a great feat, a better striking feat than most, if not all, DCEU and MCU high-tiers have: