Boobster

@Static Shock said:

@Boobster said:

I didn't want to be specific because it was too obvious.

Yes, in your own mind, I'm afraid.

@Boobster said:

But you seem to have nothing more to do rather than importune with your pointless "correction".

You find it difficult to admit what you really meant. Sounds like a personal problem to me.

Personal problem ? You have a personal problem, if you can't understand obvious things. Why even bother quoting me if you can't say anything rather than that your own interpretation of what I said differs from what I had initially in mind ? I don't care what you think, OK ? Stop being a nuisance. But wait, you're a moderator, it is your job to be a nuisance. Sorry then.

@Static Shock said:

@Boobster said:

I didn't imply that she had no feats at all. In a thread with a name like "who is stronger in strength", wasn't it obvious what feats did I mean ?

You said Thor was stronger because he ACTUALLY has feats, implying that Wonder Woman had none. If you wanted to be specific, you could have said Thor was stronger because he has better feats of strength than Wonder Woman. There's a difference between both statements.

I didn't want to be specific because it was too obvious. But you seem to have nothing more to do rather than importune with your pointless "correction".

Tough call. They both have projectiles, Ken has Shoryuken and Tatsumaki, while Liu has Bicycle Kick and Flying Kick. I guess it comes to who is faster in combat, I can't tell cause I don't know how fast is Ken canonically.

@Static Shock said:

@Boobster said:

@Static Shock said:

@Boobster said:

Thor, because he actually has feats.

To assume Wonder Woman doesn't have any is absurd.

Name her strength feats that are on par with Thor.

You misread my response to your comment, in which you implied that Wonder Woman had no feats. I wasn't saying that she had feats on par with Thor, not to mention that I already said he was closer to Superman than she is.

Semantics? Really?

I didn't imply that she had no feats at all. In a thread with a name like "who is stronger in strength", wasn't it obvious what feats did I mean ?

@Static Shock said:

@Boobster said:

Thor, because he actually has feats.

To assume Wonder Woman doesn't have any is absurd.

Name her strength feats that are on par with Thor.

I can't see how one can put down the other, unless surroundings get involved.

Round 1 goes to Darkseid, not sure for second round, no way Darkseid wins the third one.

@majestic99 said:

@Boobster:

Sorry, but do you have scans?

m99

I don't have scans at the moment. It is in volume 2 definitely but I don't remember the exact number of issue.

@czarny_samael666 said:

Most powerfull version of Thor Girl is fully-powered Designate from future.

Current Thor Girl is Designate, but she still didn't reach her full potential.

Classic version of Thor Girl was at least in Thor level (she was able to defeat some mech that defeated Thor) and had enough energy to give Odin a chance to kill Surtur (there was high difference between Surtur's power level and Odin's, since Odin was highly weakned).

Only one version of Thor Girl (Initiative one) was close to Thunderstrike. Designate > Thor and IMO > King Thor. Not sure about Odin.

She had Designate powers when they fought Surtur. If not for that, they would be a toast. And Odin himself stated Designate was more powerful, if I recall the things correctly.

Where did you hear that Thor is above Anti-Monitor ? At best, he is wiser than Odin, but that's it. Though Anti-Monitor isn't that impressive either if you dig into details, but personally, I wouldn't put RKT that high in power. He barely had any notable feats during the Ragnarok saga.