DC Comics herald-level characters upgrade discussion - Part 2

[Deagonx]

A small few of them had greater context that meaningfully prevented them from being anti-feats, but the vast majority remained valid and all of them were sourced now. You're painting a great deal of counter evidence with a broad brush that doesn't apply to most of what was provided.

Some of the so-called debunks have been quite bad. Such as the Hyperion station counter argument that it was actually bigger than the moon, which it was, but still very clearly and obviously not as large as earth and maybe generously only 2x as large as the moon. That's not a debunk in any sense of the word.

 

[Armorchompy]

We do have massive lists of high exertion counter-feats available that support my interpretation, and your list is far less explicit/self-evident and has been heavily contested.

Contested doesn't mean debunked, the arguments against them have in my opinion been countered pretty satisfyingly. The counter-feats on the other hand are for the most part invalid.

A small few of them had greater context that meaningfully prevented them from being anti-feats, but the vast majority remained valid and all of them were sourced now. You're painting a great deal of counter evidence with a broad brush that doesn't apply to most of what was provided.

There's like... 3/4 anti-feats at best that haven't been basically universally disagreed with. I'm sorry but that just isn't enough to face several time more valid feats. Several weren't even from the right continuity.

 

[Deagonx]

There's like... 3/4 anti-feats at best that haven't been basically universally disagreed with. I'm sorry but that just isn't enough to face several time more valid feats. Several weren't even from the right continuity.

The number is a lot higher than that, and calling the feats in the OP more valid is quite a stretch. There isn't a single feat in the entire list that's actually straightforward or obvious. It always a few degrees of abstraction between what's literally occurring on panel and the rationale used to interpret it as a high tier, but with the long list of anti-feats we have many extremely straightforward limitations placed on characters in a way that leaves no room for confusion or interpretation. I really don't see any argument for those being less valid.

 

[Armorchompy]

The number is a lot higher than that

I just went back and checked, they ain't. Asura and Sumitpo have countered them pretty extensively (to the point that I didn't express my own gripes with them because they were basically 100% covered) and you haven't really countered much or any of that.

If you want to continue this debate, please quote or repost the anti-feats that are, in your opinion, still valid, so that I or others may make an argument against them. It's difficult to do so if I don't know which you are referring to.

There isn't a single feat in the entire list that's actually straightforward or obvious. It always a few degrees of abstraction between what's literally occurring on panel and the rationale used to interpret it as a high tier

So what? If the rationale is correct then the feat is correct. I'd be willing to accept the argument that a more straightforward anti-feat is more valid, that's something that I generally find agreeable, if 1) you actually brought enough to the table 2) secondarily, there weren't feats higher than them disproving them, and there's plenty of more casual tier 4 or high end tier 5 feats for heralds.

I've said it already, there's a reason I haven't voted in favor of this CRT, I'm neutral and if an amount of reliable, roughly consistent anti-feats were posted that surpasses the amount of universal feats, I would be more than willing to disagree with it, the issue is that that just hasn't happened.

 

[Deagonx]

I just went back and checked, they ain't. Asura and Sumitpo have countered them pretty extensively (to the point that I didn't express my own gripes with them because they were basically 100% covered) and you haven't really countered much or any of that.

They certainly responded to them, but not really countered them, no. There were a small amount that had additional context I was unaware of, but a large amount of the rebuttals essentially amounted to "this is lifting strength" which I addressed, and many of the discrepancies in power are far far too vast to justify with minor objections like "this is a earlier in his career" which just isn't adequate to explain something like the difference between planetary level power and universal power, given how in-verse itself there's very little to any indication of these characters increasing billions of orders of magnitude in power during these periods of time. Early GL may have been weaker than a more mature Hal Jordan, but we never get the impression of either A) Early Hal is an absolute amoeba relative to any experienced GL, or B) The rest of the GLC is an amoeba compared to an experience Hal, which is what would have to be true if he went from "struggles with planets" to "can destroy the universe" over the course of a few years.

So what? If the rationale is correct then the feat is correct

Quite often the rationale isn't correct, or itself turns into an anti-feat. Such as Ion being able to recreate the universe, which was only possible due to absorbing many GL-level power sources, which is pretty explicitly an anti-feat against GL being universal. In fact Eficiente and Ant did very thoroughly what you are claiming was done to the counter-feat list, but instead of just saying it was Lifting Strength, outliers, or before a certain power up, there's actually a lot of really bad reasoning that goes into many of these feats, such as the Tesseract feat which essentially is saying "this guy is power by a gem that has infinite space, therefore anyone who can fight him can destroy universes" which is pretty ridiculous.

And it warrants consideration that we are here after culling the majority of the original feats, which were even worse than these ones. I understand Ant's concern, because while a small handful of these feats could actually be chalked up to a difference in opinion or perspective, we have several "agrees" on feats that are quite blatantly not valid in any way.

We have a set of characters here who pretty routinely treat planetary feats as the peak of what they're able to pull off, and a whole host of them all trace their current Solar System level tier back to Alan Scott, who has a single statement implying that the power-source in his chest, if not contained by his willpower (if he dies) would destroy the solar system. It is genuinely the case that all of these characters are already tiered considerably above their abilities based on a generous interpretation of a single statement.

It does appear to be the case that this thread might pass, but that'd be really unfortunate, because it simply won't be accurate. It's already pretty far removed from their actual showings in comics, and imagining them as universal gets even further from the truth.

 

[Armorchompy]

They certainly responded to them, but not really countered them, no. There were a small amount that had additional context I was unaware of, but a large amount of the rebuttals essentially amounted to "this is lifting strength" which I addressed, and many of the discrepancies in power are far far too vast to justify with minor objections like "this is a earlier in his career" which just isn't adequate to explain something like the difference between planetary level power and universal power, given how in-verse itself there's very little to any indication of these characters increasing billions of orders of magnitude in power during these periods of time. Early GL may have been weaker than a more mature Hal Jordan, but we never get the impression of either A) Early Hal is an absolute amoeba relative to any experienced GL, or B) The rest of the GLC is an amoeba compared to an experience Hal, which is what would have to be true if he went from "struggles with planets" to "can destroy the universe" over the course of a few years.

Sure, I could agree with some those arguments on paper (Not the GL one though. Their power is determined by their willpower, Hal could very well have and has experienced massive growths in power with the right developments as a character. I mean, we list him to be 2-C at peak willpower already). Please quote the anti-feats that you think are legit, I can't argue against something I'm not looking at.

Quite often the rationale isn't correct, or itself turns into an anti-feat. Such as Ion being able to recreate the universe, which was only possible due to absorbing many GL-level power sources, which is pretty explicitly an anti-feat against GL being universal. In fact Eficiente and Ant did very thoroughly what you are claiming was done to the counter-feat list, but instead of just saying it was Lifting Strength, outliers, or before a certain power up, there's actually a lot of really bad reasoning that goes into many of these feats

And those arguments themselves were countered by an argument from the other side, that's a debate works, or at least it's how it used to, before the several months' worth of derailing.

And it warrants consideration that we are here after culling the majority of the original feats, which were even worse than these ones. I understand Ant's concern, because while a small handful of these feats could actually be chalked up to a difference in opinion or perspective, we have several "agrees" on feats that are quite blatantly not valid in any way.

Ok, unfortunately your or Ant's concerns are irrelevant unless they can actually be vocalized into proper arguments, so I would really appreciate it if you focused on that and that alone rather than insinuations, given that the other side hasn't really dealt any of them out .

We have a set of characters here who pretty routinely treat planetary feats as the peak of what they're able to pull off, and a whole host of them all trace back to Alan Scott, who has a single statement implying that the power-source in his chest, if not contained by his willpower (if he dies) would destroy the solar system. It is genuinely the case that all of these characters are already tiered considerably above their abilities based on a generous interpretation of a single statement.

Nobody's disagreeing that the 4-B rating is wrong. However I don't think it qualifies as an anti-feat given that it could just as well be a range issue.

 

[Deagonx]

And those arguments themselves were countered by an argument from the other side, that's a debate works, or at least it's how it used to, before the several months' worth of derailing.

That makes it sound as though debates are a contest in who gets the last word. Replying to an argument isn't the same as countering it, hence my objection that feats were "debunked" by simply quoting it and saying "this would be lifting strength" or "This was a younger version of Superman" as a rationale for dismissing pretty overt anti-feats.

Especially for characters such as Superman, whose attack strength is purely physical and thus should be within a reasonable range of his lifting strength. Claiming that he could punch something so hard it destroys the universe but, due to a bizarre disparity in lifting strength, cannot move a planet, would be like writing a character who could punch a bowling ball into sheer dust but wouldn't be able to pick up a single grain of what was left.

That isn't a canonical disparity that's actually described in the verse, it's one that is being manufactured for the sole purpose of avoiding clear anti-feats, which is why I reject the claim that most of the anti-feats were debunked in some way, because pointing out that moving a planet would technically be lifting strength doesn't really change that it's an anti-feat.

Ok, unfortunately your or Ant's concerns are irrelevant unless they can actually be vocalized into proper arguments, so I would really appreciate it if you focused on that and that alone rather than insinuations, given that the other side hasn't really dealt any of them out .

There's a whole compilation of proper arguments on the first page, and that's what I'm referring to.

Nobody's disagreeing that the 4-B rating is wrong. However I don't think it qualifies as an anti-feat given that it could just as well be a range issue.

I'm not calling it an anti-feat, it was just never a proper feat through which to give so many people Solar System level power. My point is that Ant is right, even rating these characters as planetary is quite a bit higher than how they are consistently portrayed in various storylines, and we have quite a few explicit statements to prove that.

 

[KingTempest]

Especially for characters such as Superman, whose attack strength is purely physical and thus should be within a reasonable range of his lifting strength. Claiming that he could punch something so hard it destroys the universe but, due to a bizarre disparity in lifting strength, cannot move a planet, would be like writing a character who could punch a bowling ball into sheer dust but wouldn't be able to pick up a single grain of what was left.

Lifting Strength

Lifting Strength is defined as the mass that an individual can lift on Earth. In other words it measures the amount of upwards force a character can produce. As such pushing and pulling feats are also considered a part of this statistic, granted they are properly calculated to account for the...

vsbattles.fandom.com

While Striking Strength measures the energy of a character's physical attacks, Lifting Strength measures the amount of mass they can lift, which is determined by the amount of force a character can produce. This means that they measure two different physical quantities. Furthermore it can't be assumed that a character that can physically produce the amount of energy used in lifting an object by a certain height can also lift it, if it didn't demonstrate the ability to produce that level of Lifting Strength. It is a common feature within fiction to feature characters capable of vastly greater physical striking strength energy outputs than what would be required to lift weights that they are repeatedly shown to struggle with.

Hence Lifting Strength and Striking Strength are in general not comparable and should be evaluated separately.

 

[Deagonx]

Lifting Strength

Lifting Strength is defined as the mass that an individual can lift on Earth. In other words it measures the amount of upwards force a character can produce. As such pushing and pulling feats are also considered a part of this statistic, granted they are properly calculated to account for the...

vsbattles.fandom.com

Especially for characters such as Superman, whose attack strength is purely physical and thus should be within a reasonable range of his lifting strength. Claiming that he could punch something so hard it destroys the universe but, due to a bizarre disparity in lifting strength, cannot move a planet, would be like writing a character who could punch a bowling ball into sheer dust but wouldn't be able to pick up a single grain of what was left.

That isn't a canonical disparity that's actually described in the verse, it's one that is being manufactured for the sole purpose of avoiding clear anti-feats, which is why I reject the claim that most of the anti-feats were debunked in some way, because pointing out that moving a planet would technically be lifting strength doesn't really change that it's an anti-feat.

 

[KLOL506]

Unfortunately this argument doesn't work, because again, site policy.

LS and AP are not comparable in general regardless of how one's attack strength operates, physical or not.

 

[KLOL506]

Especially for characters such as Superman, whose attack strength is purely physical and thus should be within a reasonable range of his lifting strength. Claiming that he could punch something so hard it destroys the universe but, due to a bizarre disparity in lifting strength, cannot move a planet, would be like writing a character who could punch a bowling ball into sheer dust but wouldn't be able to pick up a single grain of what was left.

You'd be surprised at how many characters like this exist on our site. Baller AP feats, dogshit lifting feats.

 

[Deagonx]

Which makes perfect sense for users of magic, reality warpers, et cetera. It's absolutely illogical for a character such as Superman, the discrepancy being suggested is far too extreme for this to be reasonable.

 

[KLOL506]

Which makes perfect sense for users of magic, reality warpers, et cetera. It's absolutely illogical for a character such as Superman, the discrepancy being suggested is far too extreme for this to be reasonable.

Dragon Ball exists, you know.

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

Especially for characters such as Superman, whose attack strength is purely physical and thus should be within a reasonable range of his lifting strength. Claiming that he could punch something so hard it destroys the universe but, due to a bizarre disparity in lifting strength, cannot move a planet, would be like writing a character who could punch a bowling ball into sheer dust but wouldn't be able to pick up a single grain of what was left.

This argument is a whole nothing burger if I'm being honest. As the others have stated, LS and SS/AP are completely different stats, as per the site's explicit policy. It doesn't matter if the character is purely "physical" or not. We do not assume that because a character can punch with a certain force, or destroy something with their attacks, that they can also lift things on that level. Destroying a planet with a punch =/= being able to lift a planet. At all.

That isn't a canonical disparity that's actually described in the verse, it's one that is being manufactured for the sole purpose of avoiding clear anti-feats, which is why I reject the claim that most of the anti-feats were debunked in some way, because pointing out that moving a planet would technically be lifting strength doesn't really change that it's an anti-feat.

The insinuation that these people are "manufacturing" a disparity, when it is literally an explicit part of the site's policy, and applies to literally all verses is pretty ridiculous, and honestly uncalled for.

 

[KLOL506]

I could keep looking for more verses and find examples where characters have brute-force Tier 2 AP feats but have ******* tier LS feats nowhere near Infinite or Immeasurable, and I could find plenty at that.

 

[Deagonx]

Destroying a planet with a punch =/= being able to lift a planet. At all.

Well, fortunately that's not my argument, at all.

 

[KLOL506]

Well, fortunately that's not my argument, at all.

It doesn't matter what your argument is, it would still apply there nonetheless.

 

[Deagonx]

It wouldn't, no, as what he said and countered just simply didn't address my stance.

 

[KLOL506]

It absolutely would. Kindly read UchihaSlayer's comment once again, please.

 

[Deagonx]

I did. My response is the same.

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

Well, fortunately that's not my argument, at all.

Your argument is nothing but pure incredulity, mate. What you said amounts to you not believing that a character who could destroy the universe with a punch could also have Lifting Strength below planetary levels, which is meaningless as characters like Son Goku exist on the wiki.....

 

[Deagonx]

Your argument is nothing but pure incredulity, mate.

Well, a large amount of anti-feats tends to induce that sort of thing. We are given fairly explicit limitations and it's not even the case that all of them are lifting strength related, several were even agreed upon by Emirp and Qawsedf as being valid antifeats.

The feats themselves are pretty suspect as Eficiente described at length.

 

[UchihaSlayer96]

Well, a large amount of anti-feats tends to induce that sort of thing. We are given fairly explicit limitations and it's not even the case that all of them are lifting strength related, several were even agreed upon by Emirp and Qawsedf as being valid antifeats.

The feats themselves are pretty suspect as Eficiente described at length.

That's fine. I'm not knowledgeable enough on DC Comics to evaluate those arguments/counterarguments, I was merely replying to that LS point specifically. We can, and often do, have absolutely gargantuan disparities between AP/SS and LS. It's very common.

 

[Deagonx]

I wasn't arguing against that concept.

 

[KingTempest]

Bro read the site policy and said naw

 

[Deagonx]

Me: that's not my stance (x3)
Others: no this is your stance

 

[KLOL506]

No matter how you try dressing it up as not your stance, it ultimately falls under it because of that first paragraph alone.

 

[Armorchompy]

That makes it sound as though debates are a contest in who gets the last word. Replying to an argument isn't the same as countering it, hence my objection that feats were "debunked" by simply quoting it and saying "this would be lifting strength" or "This was a younger version of Superman" as a rationale for dismissing pretty overt anti-feats.

List the valid anti-feats already, how am I meant to debate against them if you don't do that and just keep saying "nah man they're still legit"????

Especially for characters such as Superman, whose attack strength is purely physical and thus should be within a reasonable range of his lifting strength. Claiming that he could punch something so hard it destroys the universe but, due to a bizarre disparity in lifting strength, cannot move a planet, would be like writing a character who could punch a bowling ball into sheer dust but wouldn't be able to pick up a single grain of what was left.

Listen man. We split AP and LS. That's just the way we do things here, it's not really something you can argue against, it's genuinely probably one of the most important standards we have in place. I can maybe guess that you're trying to argue about portrayal, and I can understand that, I think there is something to say about an alleged universe buster not being able to push the moon, but that just does not hold the same weight as... a real AP anti-feat.

 

[Deagonx]

List the valid anti-feats already, how am I meant to debate against them if you don't do that and just keep saying "nah man they're still legit"????

I'll leave out anything LS related for this list as that's a separate issue

2) It takes 9 Heroes/Villains hitting the earth with everything they have at max-speed to destabilize it (DC Death Metal #5)

The response was that the Earth was acting as a conduit for TDK being powered by the multiverse, but there's no indication that this altered or affected the degree of difficulty it would take to destabilize it, and they're clearly doing this as AP, given that Black Adam is literally cracking his knuckles.

7) Superman is unsure how to destroy a bomb capable of withstanding the Earth's core (Man of Steel #6)

8) Darkseid is the only being in the Universe with the power to destroy a world (Forever Evil #7)

The response to this was that a few months later Superman fights a guy that destroys a planet. To me that's pretty much moot as this still pretty effectively displays the fact that destroying a planet is considered an extremely high display of power (which it consistently is, in Superman storylines)

19) Ship is accelerated to the point where it would merely destroy a continent... ...Superman passes out after stopping it (Action Comics #901-902)

Now I ask you, which feats in the OP arguing for Tier 2 and 3 do you feel are convincing?

Listen man. We split AP and LS. That's just the way we do things here, it's not really something you can argue against, it's genuinely probably one of the most important standards we have in place. I can maybe guess that you're trying to argue about portrayal, and I can understand that, I think there is something to say about an alleged universe buster not being able to push the moon, but that just does not hold the same weight as... a real AP anti-feat.

The reason that LS feats are being portrayed is because it eliminates the element of subjectivity. With combat feats, pretty much all of Superman's anti-feats or lower showings will be handwaved with some degree of either "he could've been holding back" or "his opponent simply scales" which is why the conversation goes nowhere. In these examples, a very clear and objective limitation is being placed on these characters over and over again.

 

[LordTracer]

8) Darkseid is the only being in the Universe with the power to destroy a world (Forever Evil #7)

Since it seems that you’ve forgotten, Post-Flashpoint (specifically the New 52) is not being upgraded. Bringing “anti-feats” from that era doesn’t help your argument.

 

[Armorchompy]

2) It takes 9 Heroes/Villains hitting the earth with everything they have at max-speed to destabilize it (DC Death Metal #5)

The response was that the Earth was acting as a conduit for TDK being powered by the multiverse, but there's no indication that this altered or affected the degree of difficulty it would take to destabilize it.

I don't necessarily agree with that but the other much easier response is that this is a Rebirth storyline, and this is a Post-Crisis CRT. Additionally, Swamp Thing and someone comparable to him are there, so if this is a "Rebirth scales to Post-Crisis" thing, then this is just wrong given that they're unquestionably tier 2 in P-C.

7) Superman is unsure how to destroy a bomb capable of withstanding the Earth's core (Man of Steel #6)

This is a legit anti-feat but it's not a tier 5 one, it's like tier 9 or at best 8, the Earth's core isn't a planetary nuclear reactor. This is also a Rebirth run.

8) Darkseid is the only being in the Universe with the power to destroy a world (Forever Evil #7)

This is from a New 52 run. And if you wanna claim it applies to Post-Crisis somehow, then it's just laughably wrong given how many beings hanging out in the DC universe there are that we rate as tier 2.

The response to this was that a few months later Superman fights a guy that destroys a planet. To me that's pretty much moot as this still pretty effectively displays the fact that destroying a planet is considered an extremely high display of power (which it consistently is, in Superman storylines)

In New 52, maybe, I don't disagree that that should have its own scaling, and from my experience it is indeed at a lower level of power.

19) Ship is accelerated to the point where it would merely destroy a continent... ...Superman passes out after stopping it (Action Comics #901-902)

This one's legit. Arguably LS though.

Now I ask you, which feats in the OP arguing for Tier 2 and 3 do you feel are convincing?

I haven't really looked too closely but I'd say more than one.

The reason that LS feats are being portrayed is because it eliminates the element of subjectivity. With combat feats, pretty much all of Superman's anti-feats or lower showings will be handwaved with some degree of either "he could've been holding back" or "his opponent simply scales" which is why the conversation goes nowhere. In these examples, a very clear and objective limitation is being placed on these characters over and over again.

Fair, but that's still a limitation on a different statistic, it's weird as hell and I agree but it can't be your primary argument.

 

[KLOL506]

So lemme get this straight.

All the anti-feats here are not Post-Crisis. Yet they are being used to justify Post-Crisis not being that high.

Why exactly is that? Did people just suddenly forget whom we're upgrading here?

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

While I am no active reader, and mostly have my source being things I have seen from other people before and going off statements I heard from others.

I am not a big fan of how so many whataboutisms are being overused; I do agree that lifting strength feats usually aren't anti-feats against striking strength feats, but their can be exceptions if they also double as anti-feats against durability or if said anti-feats are consisting of characters whose main method of attacking are ripping or pulling apart feats or things like pushing/pulling or throwing/dropping large objects. But Dragon Ball is an example verse where not only is it's power level system quite linear with character A > B > C and it's extremely consistent that SS far outweighs lifting strength and combat speed far outweighing flight speed. And while various characters ranging from planet level to universe level often complain about things not even skyscraper level weight, they never got like permanent damage and more so just fatigue from the weight.

DC Comics far from linear with its power level system. Yes, some characters are consistently Superman level in terms of heavy hitting despite lacking anything beyond Batman level lifting capacity such as the various Flashes and Karate Kid. But Superman is pretty much the opposite and he typically trains his lifting capacity and flight speed with his SS and combat speed only being as good as those. And a lot of characters who are just as strong as Superman pretty much have their lifting strength being their primary method of attacking even against their strongest opponents. Lobo's best lifting strength feat was stellar class and he had to give all his might to pull it off, and this is the same guy who has ripped Superman's arms off before (Or at least I have seen an image for such on an old Screwattack forum that no longer exists). Furthermore, I recall FanofRPGs mentioning many times in the past, but the various planetary lifting feats also caused Superman's muscles to tear up and gave put him in a near cardiac arrest point.

Also, the list of anti-feats aren't the only thing Deagon listed that concerned, but pretty much each and every single Tier 2 feat has some flaws or reading the entire comics either proved otherwise that either there was no real feat to be had, or was a chain reaction; and the few legit Tier 2 feats aren't even direct feats but indirect feats such as him fighting Superboy-Prime (Who held back exponentially against Post-Crisis) and it's still consistently stated for Post-Crisis to be infinitely weaker than his Pre-Crisis counterpart. So Superboy-Prime going from being Pre-Crisis Superman's equal to then being Post-Crisis' equal makes 0 sense unless he either some how got much weaker or he held back that much.

I mean, there are some good points and the really low anti-feats should probably be avoided. Like the Earth's core thing since by Thermal Equilibrium, it's Tier 8 at best. And stuff like struggling to lift up an airplane is more so PIS even though it does happen a lot. Some are indeed worth bringing up, but we should maybe try to focus on ones anti-feats against durability, SS, and AP failing to destroy things rather than lifting stuff (Unless the LS anti-feat doubles as a one for AP such as failing to rip something or doubles as one for durability such as getting hurt from lifting objects). And more importantly is pointing out the invalidity of the various Tier 2 feats instead of trying to single them as outliers (Which almost always turns out to be hot topics).

 

[LordTracer]

Who held back exponentially against Post-Crisis

Would you happen to have scans to show this?

it's still consistently stated for Post-Crisis to be infinitely weaker than his Pre-Crisis counterpart

And please, bring scans of this too. As far as I can recall, I’ve never seen such statements.

 

[Deagonx]

I don't necessarily agree with that but the other much easier response is that this is a Rebirth storyline, and this is a Post-Crisis CRT.

All the anti-feats here are not Post-Crisis. Yet they are being used to justify Post-Crisis not being that high.

Why exactly is that? Did people just suddenly forget whom we're upgrading here?

But several of the feats in the OP are from that same time frame? Even the same event, this first one is from Death Metal as well.

- Superman punches out Barbatos(Dark Nights: Death Metal Trinity Crisis, November 2020)

- Mr Terrific, who was certain Wally had Infinite and Incalculable power, isn't certain he's more powerful than Superman, implying he considers Superman to also have Infinite Power (The Flash (Rebirth) #775, October 2021)

- Superman states he could make the entire Phantom Zone cease to exist if he really put his head to it. (Superman Vol 5 #5 January 2019) and Superman shakes the Phantom Zone with one punch(Superman (2018) (Rebirth) #6, February 2019)

- Superman one-shot Auteur.io(Batman/Superman Vol. 2 #21, October 2021)

- Auteur.io created the Archive of Worlds, an archive of realities (Batman/Superman Vol. #19, August 2021), and could destroy them if he didn't like them(Batman/Superman Vol. 2 #17, June 2021)

So you can't put that on me.

 

[Emirp sumitpo]

But several of the feats in the OP are from that same time frame? Even the same event, this first one is from Death Metal as well.

- Superman punches out Barbatos(Dark Nights: Death Metal Trinity Crisis, November 2020)

- Mr Terrific, who was certain Wally had Infinite and Incalculable power, isn't certain he's more powerful than Superman, implying he considers Superman to also have Infinite Power (The Flash (Rebirth) #775, October 2021)

- Superman states he could make the entire Phantom Zone cease to exist if he really put his head to it. (Superman Vol 5 #5 January 2019) and Superman shakes the Phantom Zone with one punch(Superman (2018) (Rebirth) #6, February 2019)

- Superman one-shot Auteur.io(Batman/Superman Vol. 2 #21, October 2021)

- Auteur.io created the Archive of Worlds, an archive of realities (Batman/Superman Vol. #19, August 2021), and could destroy them if he didn't like them(Batman/Superman Vol. 2 #17, June 2021)

So you can't put that on me.

Rebirth and Post-Crisis do actually somewhat scale to each other, as several characters from Post-Crisis appear within Rebirth. The Darkseid statement is purely new 52 so it's not the same.

 

[KLOL506]

But several of the feats in the OP are from that same time frame? Even the same event, this first one is from Death Metal as well.

- Superman punches out Barbatos(Dark Nights: Death Metal Trinity Crisis, November 2020)

- Mr Terrific, who was certain Wally had Infinite and Incalculable power, isn't certain he's more powerful than Superman, implying he considers Superman to also have Infinite Power (The Flash (Rebirth) #775, October 2021)

- Superman states he could make the entire Phantom Zone cease to exist if he really put his head to it. (Superman Vol 5 #5 January 2019) and Superman shakes the Phantom Zone with one punch(Superman (2018) (Rebirth) #6, February 2019)

- Superman one-shot Auteur.io(Batman/Superman Vol. 2 #21, October 2021)

- Auteur.io created the Archive of Worlds, an archive of realities (Batman/Superman Vol. #19, August 2021), and could destroy them if he didn't like them(Batman/Superman Vol. 2 #17, June 2021)

So you can't put that on me.

IT LITERALLY DOES NOT MATTER. Because none of them are in the Post-Crisis Era. So they can't be cross-scaled to other eras. End of story. Bring up Post-Crisis era anti-feats, scans and context or your entire argument falls apart like a house of cards.

I am sorely disappointed in you Deagon. I expected better from you.

 

[Deagonx]

Because none of them are in the Post-Crisis Era. So they can't be cross-scaled to other eras. End of story. Bring up Post-Crisis era anti-feats, scans and context or your entire argument falls apart like a house of cards.

I am sorely disappointed in you Deagon. I expected better from you.

I should note this only affects Post-Crisis and Rebirth, as the latter scales to the former.

Emirp literally said the thread addresses Post-Crisis and Rebirth, and the argument utilizes several Rebirth feats. I am well within my rights to use Rebirth anti-feats to debunk a Rebirth upgrade, and it is not at all the case that I only had Rebirth anti-feats in my post.

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

Would you happen to have scans to show this?

I do not even know specifically where this is stated, but I have heard it brought up numerous times on previous discussions. So I trust others more than I trust my own. However.

And please, bring scans of this too. As far as I can recall, I’ve never seen such statements.

The Essential Superman Encyclopedia statement. And the same page above mentioned how he defers from his Pre-Crisis counterpart.

 

[KLOL506]

The Essential Superman Encyclopedia statement. And the same page above mentioned how he defers from his Pre-Crisis counterpart.

I think you need to read the rules regarding secondary canon a bit more clearly brother.

This many number of cosmic feats, they contradict the guidebook.