• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

DC Comics - Post-Crisis Superman Early Key Proposal

Status
Not open for further replies.
His tier is currently variable already. But it would be misinformation to say he goes from 6-C or whatever up to 5-A, since his actual lower limit is way below 6-C.
I don't think he's shown visible damage from anything less that the Tier 7 explosive feats listed prior.
 
Last edited:
Doomsday? The guy whose defining character moment is stomping the rest of the JL? Don't you think it'd be a bit weird to rate him as millions of times weaker than a freshly-recruited fodder Green Lantern?
I suppose that is a valid point. We can probably omit Doomsday then.
His tier is currently variable already. But it would be misinformation to say he goes from 6-C or whatever up to 5-A, since his actual lower limit is way below 6-C.
Well, this wouldn't be intended to be his absolutely lowest depths, but rather his generally presented levels. However, he was knocked out by a point blank nuclear explosion, so I suppose that we could use "Usually 7-B to 6-C; 5-A at his peak" or somesuch instead. Would that be preferable?
 
Again, I bring up my prior post.

Due to the nature of the Death of Superman storyline, is it more accurate to scale Doomsday at this time to Superman than the side characters?

Let's say we have a story called Death of Batman who has consistent Tier 8 limits in his stories.

Now we have a new villain who appears. A side character in this story is taken down.

Said side character is consistently Tier 7 in his own stories.

The new villain then proceeds to fight evenly matched with Batman for several issues.

Is it accurate to scale the new villain and Batman to the Tier 7 character?

Should we scale the new enemy to the side character interactions instead of the guy he his having a prolonged fight with? What is the standard procedure per the site rules?

These are the writers for the Death Story: Dan Jurgens; Louise Simonson; Roger Stern; Jerry Ordway

Here are the significant effort/limit feats that they gave Superman and co.
  • Dan Jurgens
    • Downed by a blasts from Starbreaker, who needed to absorb multiple heroes just to penetrate the planet which is at most Tier 6
    • Eradicator and Cyborg Superman, who are stronger that Superman at the time, were heavily injured by a Tier 6 Explosion
    • Describes Doomsday's punches as Tier 7
  • Louise Simonson
    • Injured by an at most Tier 6 Explosion
    • Eradicator would complete a Tier 6 modification of the sun over time.
  • Roger Stern
    • Injured in Tier 7 explosion
    • Caused a Tier 7 quake
 
Last edited:
I still think that Firestorm808 has much more fact-based, objective, and logical arguments here.
 
, is it more accurate to scale Doomsday at this time to Superman than the side characters?
The main issue here is more that Doomsday has stories where he retroactively fought a bunch of people before Superman like the GLC, Guardians and a young Darkseid.
 
I suppose that we could use "Usually 7-B to 6-C; 5-A at his peak" or somesuch instead. Would that be preferable?
That’d be more accurate than the current proposal.
The main issue here is more that Doomsday has stories where he retroactively fought a bunch of people before Superman like the GLC, Guardians and a young Darkseid.
Not even retroactively, he beat the tar out of the Justice League in the comics he was first introduced in.
 
The above takes place in Doomsday Annual, December 1995 which was written after Zero Hour where history was changed.
That is a good point, yes.
What are the site rules and precedence regarding this kind of situation?
I am not sure, but we probably need more staff consensus here.
I suppose that we could use "Usually 7-B to 6-C; 5-A at his peak" or somesuch instead. Would that be preferable?
That’d be more accurate than the current proposal.
I am fine with this.
So should we use this compromise solution then? It seems to be acceptably accurate and take both sides into account equally.
 
Don’t GL have an inherent power mechanism and a varied tier?

I thought their power was tied to their willpower at any given moment, one off feats aren’t good to scale to other than themselves.
 
Don’t GL have an inherent power mechanism and a varied tier?

I thought their power was tied to their willpower at any given moment, one off feats aren’t good to scale to other than themselves.
Superman scales to full powered GLs
 
Superman scales to full powered GLs
What "full powered GLs" even mean and how this is relevant, as Green Lanterns' ring does not run on the amount of charge left in their rings that allows them to perform "tasks" over a period of time (24h).
Doomsday scales above a blatantly fully-powered Guy Gardner.
This does not lead anywhere, Green Lanterns' ring runs on willpower.
 
What "full powered GLs" even mean and how this is relevant, as Green Lanterns' ring does not run on the amount of charge left in their rings that allows them to perform "tasks" over a period of time (24h).

This does not lead anywhere, Green Lanterns' ring runs on willpower.
PROVE IT
 
This is common knowledge lol.
wekaN562lNnDh2c0cvmcjTHNljYxvr0czsESCmMCdHCnKJhIwnn_sjD_ApwQv5u40xEtsw-ycRVr4ZB66OWtHR_9ONmtS9uRBK2zpd27wAr0T1YvPEVm0ZFZhuT77Sw2GUP3Lg=s1600
 
… yes, everyone who’s read Green Lantern is aware of that.
Then why would you scale Doomsday or any DC character to a GL first, and stressed on "fully powered" as if the amount of charge left in their ring increase/decrease their power.
Point is Green Lanterns are the last DC characters you to scale to any characters.
 
Then why would you scale Doomsday or any DC character to a GL first, and stressed on "fully powered" as if the amount of charge left in their increase/decrease their power.
Point is GL are the last DC characters to be scaled to another characters.
And when did I say it was based on the charge of his ring?
 
Again, what is the point of saying "fully powered". You are tap dancing around the question.
You literally never asked me anything before this comment- how am I tap dancing around a question that you never asked me?
 
You literally never asked me anything before this comment- how am I tap dancing around a question that you never asked me?
Then why would you scale Doomsday or any DC character to a GL first, and stressed on "fully powered" as if the amount of charge left in their ring increase/decrease their power.
Point is Green Lanterns are the last DC characters you to scale to any characters.
Key words: Why.
Don't act like a blind fool, my initial reply to you had two questions in it.
 
Key words: Why.
Don't act like a blind fool, my initial reply to you had two questions in it.
First of all, don’t call people fools.

Second of all, I have already explained why Doomsday scales above Guy Gardner in this thread. He tanked his blast, as well as several other members of the Justice League, with no damage. Guy was clearly trying his utmost, hence the use of the term fully-powered. You randomly assumed I was referring to the charge in his ring, which I never once suggested.

Third of all, your initial reply to me was this comment, which didn’t have any questions in it.
 
I really don't think it's necessary to list two ratings below 5-A tbh, but do whatever honestly
 
First of all, don’t call people fools.
I said act like a blind fool. This is not the same thing as calling people fool.
Nice strawman already.


Second of all, I have already explained why Doomsday scales above Guy Gardner in this thread.
Let me see if it holds.
He tanked his blast, as well as several other members of the Justice League, with no damage.
Doomsday scaling to a weaker version of the Justice League was not questioned.

Guy was clearly trying his utmost, hence the use of the term fully-powered.
"Trying his utmost" is uncorelated with, in your own words, the use of the terms 'fully powered' , which first implies that a character is in his best shape, so to speak, not that he is trying his best. Again, not the same thing.

You randomly assumed I was referring to the charge in his ring, which I never once suggested.
I'll conclude that you have poorly chose your words, and not use misleading words to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Third of all, your initial reply to me was this comment, which didn’t have any questions in it.
Forgot about this one.
The fact remains questions were asked to give you the oppurtunity to clarify yourself, which you did not until this post.
Again, dont act like a blind fool.
 
Last edited:
Prove that guy gardner's willpower was any less in that comic
You'll already made a fool of yourself by asking a proof regarding a common fact. Don't think it'll be wise to expose more about your clueness on the Green Lantern lore.
Start by reading comic books first.
 
I said act like a blind fool. This is not the same thing as calling people fool.
Nice strawman already.
Yeah, I don’t care, don’t refer to people like that. It comes off as insulting.
"Trying his utmost" is uncorelated with, in your own words, the use of the terms 'fully powered' , which first implies that a character is in his best shape, so to speak, not that he is trying his best. Again, not the same thing.
I'll conclude that you have poorly chose your words, and not use misleading words to give you the benefit of the doubt.
Everyone seems to have understood what I meant except you, so honestly… I don’t care. The 5-A rating has been agreed upon.
 
Yeah, I don’t care, don’t refer to people like that. It comes off as insulting.
Then "I don't care" as well about your feeling by using the same principle as you. So don't come, and complain about my delivery if you are unsensitive, lol.
Everyone seems to have understood what I meant except you,
Huge assumption and big leap to the conclusion that : if nobody speaks up, therefore it mean that everybody agree.
so honestly… I don’t care.
See my first subpoint.
The 5-A rating has been agreed upon.
Irrelevant to the context of the discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top