• 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.

Massively FTL+ Makkari 👀

Already addressed this point, so either read that or concede
Concede what? It's not a double standard to say she's Immortal but doesn't scale to Marvel's flight speed. One has nothing against, the other does.

If she is faster than anyone else in the universe, it would include carol's interstellar flight speed.
She doesn't have anything to back that she can go MFTL+. The statement can work if she can outrun CM to something, but right now she just doesn't have anything suggesting she should get a 10,000x speed upgrade based on unconfirmed scaling.
 
I mean to be fair Captain Marvel was stated by WoG to have the power to shake moons but has done absolutely nothing to get even remotely close to that(unlike thor)so that alone wouldn't be enough to give her ratings that'd otherwise be dozens of times higher than anything she's shown. So in this case it's no different she's stated to be the fastest in the universe but her best showings when we see her absolutely pushing herself come out at sub-relativistc so it's kinsa meh in that sense, accuracy over the sake of upgrades just for upgrades that aren't reflected in the media
 
I mean to be fair Captain Marvel was stated by WoG to have the power to shake moons but has done absolutely nothing to get even remotely close to that(unlike thor)so that alone wouldn't be enough to give her ratings that'd otherwise be dozens of times higher than anything she's shown. So in this case it's no different she's stated to be the fastest in the universe but her best showings when we see her absolutely pushing herself come out at sub-relativistc so it's kinsa meh in that sense, accuracy over the sake of upgrades just for upgrades that aren't reflected in the media
MCU already should be 5-C, as Ronan empowered by the power stone tanked an attack that would desteoy the moon
 
Edit: I did a quick calc on moon shaking and got 41 Gigatons
It was a surface destruction not just a shockwave😭😭 there was massive ground fragmentation and rubble flying up as it went throughout the surface but that's good considering you just did the shockwave of it, look closely at it thought.




This is also why in the shots of valkyrie and thor fighting gorr there's debris and rocks everywhere because it happens here(just using trailer timelines to line up events)
Do you have a link to that statement
asking out of curiosity
Can't find it, pretty sure it was a feige statement around the time cap marvel 1 was releasing
 
It was a surface destruction not just a shockwave😭😭 there was massive ground fragmentation and rubble flying up as it went throughout the surface but that's good considering you just did the shockwave of it, look closely at it thought.
I calculated it like an earthquake
cuz you said Marvel can shake moons
 
It was a surface destruction not just a shockwave😭😭 there was massive ground fragmentation and rubble flying up as it went throughout the surface but that's good considering you just did the shockwave of it, look closely at it thought.




This is also why in the shots of valkyrie and thor fighting gorr there's debris and rocks everywhere because it happens here(just using trailer timelines to line up events)

I think he meant the calc was for Cap Marvel shaking the moon, not the Gorr feat
 
We can talk about this in the MCU discussion thread and I asked for help finding it there since I'm having trouble and it's likely burried pretty deep

This so far is the only thing close to ir I could find:


When explaining the character in-depth, and specifically the casting of Brie Larson, Feige reveals, “With Captain Marvel, who has powers that approach a level that we haven’t seen before in our films, you need to counter-balance that by finding somebody who is also very human and very relatable and can get into a groove with the audience, where they’re willing to see her fly through the sun and punch a moon away from a spacecraft. At the same time, we need her to land and have relatable flaws.”
 
We can talk about this in the MCU discussion thread and I asked for help finding it there since I'm having trouble and it's likely burried pretty deep

This so far is the only thing close to ir I could find:


When explaining the character in-depth, and specifically the casting of Brie Larson, Feige reveals, “With Captain Marvel, who has powers that approach a level that we haven’t seen before in our films, you need to counter-balance that by finding somebody who is also very human and very relatable and can get into a groove with the audience, where they’re willing to see her fly through the sun and punch a moon away from a spacecraft. At the same time, we need her to land and have relatable flaws.”
Shit nvm I found some articles it was this statement here that I sent above so it was correct that feige said she could punch a moon away


So yeah these were from the same time when feige said this but you get my point that WoG can give extreme statements
 
You didn’t address that point what you said was

Pointing out a double standard is fine but don’t say you refuted a point when all you did was go against a statement without any backing
Why does the statement need a backing, with this logic I can say all feats are invalid without backing

This is such an oversimplified way of looking at statements.
Prove that

Concede what? It's not a double standard to say she's Immortal but doesn't scale to Marvel's flight speed. One has nothing against, the other does.


She doesn't have anything to back that she can go MFTL+. The statement can work if she can outrun CM to something, but right now she just doesn't have anything suggesting she should get a 10,000x speed upgrade based on unconfirmed scaling.
Why is there nothing against her being immortal?

Yes she does have something to back she can go MFTL+, the statement alone is enough
 
Cant a “possibly massively FTL+” Work? I genuinely see no reason why it shouldn't.
Or a “varies, Sub-Relativistic up to massively FTL+” maybe?
I have no idea why completely throwing the statement in the garbage would be the best option.
 
I want to ask you something KING, do you know what an outlier is? Also on screen feats don't need backing because they're literally shown on screen. We take actual feats from the source material above statements if those statements contradict the feats provided in the source material.
Ok, explain why this is an outlier but sub relativistic isn't when they're both 1 feat

Also on screen feats don't need backing because they're literally shown on screen

The immortality isn't "shown on screen", its stated. Just like the one I use

We take actual feats from the source material above statements if those statements contradict the feats provided in the source material.

You didn't prove the statement is contradicted

Cant a “possibly massively FTL+” Work? I genuinely see no reason why it shouldn't.
Or a “varies, Sub-Relativistic up to massively FTL+” maybe?
I have no idea why completely throwing the statement in the garbage would be the best option.
Yeah I think a possibly is fine
 
I just really dont see the “this does not scale to spaceflight" argument, speed is where an individual goes from A to B in some time.
Being the “fastest" means you can cover a distance in the fastest amount of time. Which scales above ANY other individual that covers the distance regardless of form of travel.

About consistency, so far, makkari has done her fastest feat pretty easily, no reason to assume thats her top speed imo.
Which is why a “possibly" or “varies" rating would be alot more safer.
 
Ok, explain why this is an outlier but sub relativistic isn't when they're both 1 feat
Because, as I said, it's a feat on screen and onscreen feats take priority when they're not contradicted as the MFTL+ feat is, which...

You didn't prove the statement is contradicted
Okay, I'm assuming you watched the movie, so you'd know the context of the sub rel scene. She's searching for the location of the emergence. You'd think that in this scene she'd be running at MFTL+ speeds, then why the hell is she moving at only sub rel, which is, as stated by others, thousands of times slower by comparison. She knows the urgency, she knows what's at stake, so why would she move that slow if she could move at MFTL+ speeds. If it's shown she's consistent with Captain Marvel's flight speed in another movie, fine, fair, the feat can be used, but as of right now, we have one major on screen feat for her speed and its no where near that level.

The immortality isn't "shown on screen", its stated. Just like the one I use
As for this, another instance of something that's on screen. When I say onscreen, I don't mean literally shown on the screen I mean something shown visually or said in the movie, the primary source for these characters
 
Last edited:
If Makkari and Captain Marvel both had a race to the Moon, Captain Marvel would get there the fastest, no? No matter how quickly Makkari can run.

But anyway, I agree with Qaws and Abaddon. There isn't enough support for MFTL+ Makkari.
I mean if they have some sort of bridge or something to run on (considering she cant really run on the amount of people that have seen this movie) in space, i am very sure her being stated to be the fastest means she would run there the fastest.


But yeah it is a little weird that she ran at sub rel speeds only in the emergence point feat.
Is that like enough to completely debunk the statement on here tho?
 
I mean if they have some sort of bridge or something to run on (considering she cant really run on the amount of people that have seen this movie) in space, i am very sure her being stated to be the fastest means she would run there the fastest.


But yeah it is a little weird that she ran at sub rel speeds only in the emergence point feat.
Is that like enough to completely debunk the statement on here tho?
It is to me.

If you have a statement saying "Gilgamesh is the physically strongest character in the MCU" but then he only shows feats of struggling to lift 100 tons and other characters easily outperform him, then the statement is bunk.
 
It is to me.

If you have a statement saying "Gilgamesh is the physically strongest character in the MCU" but then he only shows feats of struggling to lift 100 tons and other characters easily outperform him, then the statement is bunk.
Gilgamesh is tho
Yeah i agree, lets wait on more stuff on that.
 
Because, as I said, it's a feat on screen and onscreen feats take priority when they're not contradicted as the MFTL+ feat is, which...


Okay, I'm assuming you watched the movie, so you'd know the context of the sub rel scene. She's searching for the location of the emergence. You'd think that in this scene she'd be running at MFTL+ speeds, then why the hell is she moving at only sub rel, which is, as stated by others, thousands of times slower by comparison. She knows the urgency, she knows what's at stake, so why would she move that slow if she could move at MFTL+ speeds. If it's shown she's consistent with Captain Marvel's flight speed in another movie, fine, fair, the feat can be used, but as of right now, we have one major on screen feat for her speed and its no where near that level.


As for this, another instance of something that's on screen. When I say onscreen, I don't mean literally shown on the screen I mean something shown visually or said in the movie, the primary source for these characters
On screen feats take priority does not mean statements are invalid

Where is it stated that she is only moving at sub relativistic speed? Send a scan or don't waste my time.

When I say onscreen, I don't mean literally shown on the screen I mean something shown visually or said in the movie, the primary source for these characters

Marvel Comics youtube channel is still canon since its an official source, so its fine to use. Primary source feats are better, but this doesn't mean we can't use this statement
 
I mean, At most Sub Rel is the best option we have ATM.

Though I feel it should probably only scale to his reactions and not his regular speed.

So At most Sub Rel reaction speed
I agree, even if Ikaris ends up scaling to her it would be Reaction only, maybe combat speed, but he never kept up with her in any other "fields" of speed

Also Makkari's statement of being the fastest woman means she doesn't scale to Ikaris flying to the Sun which should be MFTL lol
 
You mean besides what’s literally shown on screen? Yknow the feat the whole sub-rel thing is talking about?
Ok where is it said she's moving at maximum sub relativistic speed and it took 3 seconds in real time? With this logic, I can downgrade Thor to subsonic because we see him fight in real time in almost every scene. Same for the whole MCU
 
Ok where is it said she's moving at maximum sub relativistic speed and it took 3 seconds in real time? With this logic, I can downgrade Thor to subsonic because we see him fight in real time in almost every scene. Same for the whole MCU
Ya know spidey and hela also fought in realtime and the spideys could dodge electro's lightning and keep pace with him in burst while thor could fight hela who in real time swatter lightning with her hand so good luck with that train of logic. Just try something else but definitely don't try that logic because it'll backfire with how many speed feats we have
 
Back
Top