- 11,807
- 7,372
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Because DC supporters can't create their own threads so they try to force their revisions in Marvel ones
Can you link this cases?It can't be poetic if it has already been shown on multiple occasions that Thor can in one way or another shake the universe, plus in a few comics later on the narrator states that Galactus and Ego shook the universe
He is, but that doesn't attribute that not being able to be a hyperbole for his power being too great.Why should he be if he only emphasizes the capabilities of his power?
Of course.This statement is vague, but if you have the context that the character has a 4-A/3-C power, this statement supports these levels.
Have to disagree, it's very clear by context that he doesn't mean as in anything 4-A or 3-C, he's dealing with someone hiding, he's willing to mess things up to deal with this, mess up planets (w/o annihilating 'cause why would he), and by extension the galaxy and cosmos. featAs well.
Well, show proof, because I'm seeing that Thor can fly from Asgard to Earth without using any kind of artifact.
Can't do due to lack of time, ignore it as it is, I can only hope someone to pay attention and see to it. It's also not really an artifact, it's a physical bridge in Asgard but then when used anywhere on Earth it may be a bridge that appears at different parts of the world or may be not portrayed visible at all, with characters leaving Earth w/o the bridge and popping up in Asgard with its bridge, it's weird.I think it's pretty clear from the narrative statement that this is an omnidirectional expansion that originates in Asgard and reaches all the way to Earth.
So powerful is the enchanted sweep of Mjolnir
so all consuming is its thrust
that even on the far distant earth, skyscrapers are shattered like puny playthings
and towering mountain peaks area toppled by the awesome force
That's not how Dimensional Travel works, you just pop up from one location in space to another in other dimension, with 0 regard to their distance as if both places were in the same dimension.However, if the storm were to pass through the universe by dimensional travel, it is still possible to calculate the power needed to expand from the edge of the universe to the Earth.
What does it mean? Please explain it better.
Yes but galaxies don't explode, he may refer to someone making them explode, which they are a number of ways to do. If a galaxy were to be covered with energy and then that blows up then the feat itself is 3-C, but taking it from the epicenter isn't the same in durability, as the whole explosion didn't came from there. Replace "cover with energy" with anything where the whole explosion still doesn't came from the epicenter and the result is the same.He speaks of a galaxy exploding as a whole, and refers to the heart as the epicenter.
The following statement backs him up by saying that he has even survived explosions even more impressive than those of galaxies.
Didn't see the "the heavens and" before, but doesn't change much. What I think of that is the same with some changes in the wording.Beta Ray Bill, defender of the korbinite race and last survivor of ragnarok, was unable to stop Galactus from devouring his people's adopted home planet. Now, both he and Stardust, the herald of Galactus, lie unconscious after an epic battle which rocked the heavens and shook the very firmament of the universe.
It seems pretty clear to me that they shook the entire universe, by which I mean they shook the heavens and the very firmament of the universe.
The feat used to be in Galactus' profile in his hungry key, the wording used made it seem like he was weakened but yet a bit amped, it's weird, and better to take the feat as what it did on its own.The explosion could easily be a few light years old and have an AP 3-A, as it was launched by Galactus at full power.
I think that might be due to destroying something that had galaxy in its name? Idk. We will see.Also, I believe there are some claims that Galactus' power spread throughout the galaxy.
Not in that image. Idk.This god is depicted as being able to affect a large portion of a galaxy, just as you don't know if he can scale Thor or Hercules?
I refer to what much Mjolnir can have inside, in case that bit is seen as a feat.What pocket reality are you talking about?
I misunderstood something, ok.A shock wave that is capable of shaking planets half a universe away created by thunder, the end.
All the "this is very powerful" stuff is true, she would need so to get away with that much evil, but a super terrorist can be anywhere from Tier 8 to anything higher themselves to threaten to burn the whole world while angry, even if they already are a threat to the planet. They can destroy things overtime or mess up society as we know it in evil ways w/o annihilating it.Why not? The situation doesn't justify that she can progressively destroy the Galaxy, besides a panel earlier the Star Brand is called out as one of the most powerful weapons in the cosmos, even Gladiator considered the Star Brand as a threat to the galaxy.
By the way this comic was written by Jason Aaron the same who created Mother Storm.
Except the only contradiction is the 1 trillion one?Yeah but If the universe's statement have contradictions and other things like that they don't tend to used.
Except the only contradiction is the 1 trillion one?
I know. Now we know it's at least 1 trillion which I still think it's kinds uselessI just want to note here, from what I know the scan never explicitly states the size of the universe is limited to trillions of lightyears, only that the distance in which the character could sense something is trillions of lightyears. Therefore it isn't even a contradiction
I support high 6-C as their peak
Then you can use the statement of the universe statement in the book or the writers normal statement of universe maybe infinite or any other he uses in his othee books if not then just 93 billion light years.Except the only contradiction is the 1 trillion one?
You realise both companies still use each other's writers at times too right?Yeah but the difference between cosmology between authors in DC is absurd.
assuming the universe in Marvel to be 93 billion LY as opposed to stated whatever trillion for the sake of 4-A being more consistent than 3-C or whatever it would calc to is simply bias. We don’t arbitrarily decide what the Marcel cosmology is to make characters certain tiers.
Ok we should use the Trillion Light Year statement for now as a minimum then unless the Infinite Sized statements prove to be more definitive in description, or any contradictory evidence pops in to say otherwise.Then you can use the statement of the universe statement in the book or the writers normal statement of universe maybe infinite or any other he uses in his othee books if not then just 93 billion light years.
It'd be one thing to say this if you had scans that contradicted the one's we're using currently, but what you're saying right now basically amounts to ......."well, these comics don't state the size so maybe they don't think it's that big either."I'm saying the universe's size can be determined by how authors take them as different writers take how the universe size is.
You should find that that'd help us out plenty if that's the caseI remember a fantastic for book it's stated to be jillions or whatever that digit is.
Then you can use the statement of the universe statement in the book or the writers normal statement of universe maybe infinite or any other he uses in his othee books if not then just 93 billion light years.
That's why I said it depends on the writer if a writer me mentions infinite universe in his book then it can be used if no contradictions and if he doesn't then 93 billion light years and we don't cross scale them like that only the writer who mentioned this atleaat 1 trillion light year statement can be used.Ok we should use the Trillion Light Year statement for now as a minimum then unless the Infinite Sized statements prove to be more definitive in description, or any contradictory evidence pops in to say otherwise.
Then we just use 93 billion light years if no statement is given. Nop that statement is of recent.It'd be one thing to say this if you had scans that contradicted the one's we're using currently, but what you're saying right now basically amounts to ......."well, these comics don't state the size so maybe they don't think it's that big either."
Apparantly more than one Trillion Light Year Minimum statements exists anyway, one of which spans as far back as the 60's or whatever, so this isn't even a new development. As far as I'm concerned we're just being needlessly stringent simply ignoring it just because it might not be in the minds of every writer that touches Marvel
I never said it was. That's why I said atleast throughout I even corrected someone above saying it should be far more than that the same way it's believed our unobservable universe is also trillions of Light years which means our universe could even be bigger.That statement isn't a contradiction. The scan never says the universe is only trillions of lightyears. The scan itself doesn't really even have anything to do with the size of the universe, more so the range in which the a character can sense something. If that really was the limit of the universe then the comic would've made that clear. So again, I'm still not sure what "contradictions" everyone is referring to
Yes it's actually what done to DC and marvel.I don't think I understand your position, hypothetically, suppose we have a 5 issue story where each issue has different authors, are you suggesting we treat those 5 issues as having different cosmologies given each author has their own interpretation on how strong the characters are? Is that an accurate consequence of your position?
No way.....Yes it's actually what done to DC and marvel.
Yeah we have a "Holding Back" and "Peak" statistics now. They vary wildly, but that's pretty much the only way to do justice to their peak statistics now.No way.....
Yes way.No way.....
...again. This is just straight up not what was accepted lol, you're making shit up.Yes it's actually what done to DC and marvel.
It's what accepted by splitting the cosmology by writers....again. This is just straight up not what was accepted lol, you're making shit up.
It limits to cosmological characters' definitions, not even feats, and even in THAT we allowed fo cross-writer scaling if they referred to aspects of another writer's cosmology. This shit isn't even accepted for DC.
Teezar if you don't know the thread why are you acting like you do? I already addressed this on this thread alone, you're making me repeat this.
Yes if the particular writer of those books treats the universe as infinite without any contradictions then sure.So the shaking feats should be considered high 3-A?
Wait I thought you were talking about the "Holding back" and "Peak" parts.I never said it was. That's why I said atleast throughout I even corrected someone above saying it should be far more than that the same way it's believed our unobservable universe is also trillions of Light years which means our universe could even be bigger.
Yes it's actually what done to DC and marvel.
...no. I made that thread, I know what I wrote. I didn't write that. Prove me where I said it extends to universal tier.It's what accepted by splitting the cosmology by writers.
Not when you're saying shit like "oh this is what the accepted standard is" and using that to quell debates. It's misinformation.I don't know the thread azin how? We can give input in any thread from our point of view all you have to do is prove us wrong.
That seems like a firestorm problem to me. But that shouldn't be. Just because a writer doesn't go out of his way in every issue to mention the universe is infinite in size is... Stupid. The universe is infinite, and that's practically something every writer agrees with.I'm pretty sure it as you can ask firestorm when I tried to use the 60 trillion light years in half a second big bang he said if the writers are different I should stick with 93 billion light years as writers tend to ignore stuffs like that and other reasons for consistency.
if the universe is infinite, wouldn't they be high 3-A feats?So is the 4-A rating going to be accepted then, and if so who will scale to it?
No, one out of two statements are recent additions. The first statement came out in the 60's apparently written by Stan Lee, as you can see here:Then we just use 93 billion light years if no statement is given. Nop that statement is of recent.
And in a Stan Lee comic there is also a trillion statement, which Jason Aaron seems to be referencing (As he has done with other statements).
Well, the problem is that getting the specific size of the universe is important since we're talking about feats that specifically involve the entire universe. If the MU is consistently portrayed as being Infinite in size as you say, then we're talking about High 3-A upgrades instead of what's being proposed.Anyway, can we leave this discussion behind already? The universe is infinite, and we have at least 1 trillion statement. Don't like it? Take it up to marvel.
We need to discuss that, but everyone's basically going in other directions.So is the 4-A rating going to be accepted then, and if so who will scale to it?
So, universe-shaking feats in Marvel are High 3-A?Anyway, can we leave this discussion behind already? The universe is infinite, and we have at least 1 trillion statement. Don't like it? Take it up to marvel.