Literally everything confirms what I’m saying ock visually makes a face that he’s putting effort in the attack
No way you're going off "expression scaling".
For a dude who isn't even doing anything because he doesn't actually attack himself let alone put effort into it, the robot arms do.
Putting effort into an attack, and that attack being stronger, also aren't 1:1, they're different actions entirely, they don't even rely on the same mechanics, one is piercing, one is a weird ***** mix of tensile and shear done through the claw's grip strength, which has been consistently shown to be a notable trait even back in spidey 2.
Nothing beyond this conjecture confirms anything. Confirmation would be an explicit hard statement, not a bunch of disconnected vague points open to interpretation at best.
ock was surprised when his blade bent on the iron spider and yes it’s going to eclipse it ock himself says I underestimated you but now you die he thought that blade would kill spidey ock himself seen the thing pull the nano off it meaning he’d know if his arms would casually break it
What? Not how this works.
He went to kill Spidey, by aiming for his exposed chest, he was a tad surprised, but that doesn't mean a thing as he didn't attack the armor to begin with. He thought it would kill Spidey because there was a giant gaping hole in the armor he JUST ripped open, and the armor re-arranged itself to protect him.
He was not expecting the armor to reconfigure itself, why would he? That was unexpected, but the very fact it did that meant it was going to be lethal.
You're legitimately arguing a stab at an exposed place being blocked means Ock restraining him, ripping it off with crushing and tearing forces, something his arms excel at, somehow invalidates it, even though that VERY act, is far more relevant to various things and the plot, than say, a twitter statement.
like your argument is just nonsense ock was trying to kill he intended to kill him right there and it didn’t work a casual grab of his tentacles are not stronger then a piercing amped nano blade why would he ever use it if his tentacles are far beyond the blade ?
Idk dude why does any character ever do anything besides their absolute strongest attack ever, every time?
Maybe because he didn't think he had to?
Spend like 20 seconds crushing his head, or a quick stab to the heart in an exposed armorless area? Both would work, but one's quick, less cumbersome, and messy. Honestly it doesn't matter why, fact is he didn't, and your reasons aren't good enough for arguing the blade >>> the arm's grip in raw power.
Actually he didn’t he pulled the nano tech off and it integrated it with his arms pulling is not the same as damaging and you can make the case it’s jst a weakness of the suit we visually see he’s unable to damage it when actually trying and there is no not the same action the blade was intended to kill the grab was not meaning the blade was stronger 1 was with amped arms the other was not
Yeah, no.
Digging his claws and ripping a chunk of the suit off, is damaging it. The CHEST is gone dude, yeah it integrated with him, AFTER he tore it off.
A weakness of the suit is if you tear it apart you get it? So what, it's just "weak" to tearing? Why? You're arguing it has the same defensive capabilities as Mark 50, yet for one of the 3 basic durability mechanics, it's so flawed that you'd call it a weakness? Why? Mark 50 don't have that weakness, if it differs there, then why argue they're the same? They obviously aren't at that point.
No, we visually see one failed attack, with a different method of attack, against a spot that was no longer armored to begin with. Half your argument only works if he attacked the armor with killing intent, and failed, but he didn't, he attacked Pete with killing intent in a spot, that he didn't need to account for the armor.
You'd need to prove the blade > actual mechanical crushing strength in something that's shown exceling at it. You can't. What you think isn't proof. Actual statements is.
because he can’t crush them his arms couldn’t even damage the iron spider arms which if the arms were casually above nano tech would again tear and snap them apart he intended to kill Peter there he pulls the arm back and looks at the blade surprised
This is such a fallacious argument. You realize he
literally tore a chunk of it off right? There is no "he can't", because he literally did.
Is it because he didn't do it with every attack? So what? Not every attack is the same. You don't see anyone complaining not every attack from Thanos pulps Iron Man's suit do you? No. But does it happen? Yep. Is it even a focus of a scene? Yep. So would we say nuh uh actually he can't because Thanos wasn't punching holes clean through him every time? Nope because the already showed us he can, drew attention to it, and had it even be plot relevant.
Yeah, I'm sure he was surprised. For multiple reasons.
None of which actually prove your point though so it doesn't matter.
He pulls the blade back because it failed, looks at it, and that was kinda it, the fight changes from that point, he isn't put back into a position where he can do what he did before.
Also there is no huge flaw in the argument so far my argument is perfect your trying to debunk everything with 1 scene of ock pulling it off but conveniently ignores how in their entire fight he never once damaged it or was capable of even piercing
Your argument doesn't even have an explicit statement. It's literally just "ignore this scene where Ock deliberately, purposefully does this thing, ripping a whole chunk of the suit out. This action is focused on, and it even leads to Ock himself get nanotech, making it an actual plot and character relevant feat" with "ock went to stab pete in his exposed chest and failed afterward and went huh".
One of these is not only far more important to a character, but the latter only happens BECAUSE the first thing happened. You literally can't ignore the former.
And this is all based on conflation actions, the attacks aren't even the same, the method they inflict damage isn't the same, and the apparent "nuh uh it don't count", is done in a case he wouldn't have even accounted for the armor to begin with.
Ignore how in their entire fight he never once damaged it? He literally ripped a chunk off it, it's the very thing that leads to the stab fail. I shouldn't even be humoring this.
So here’s how it goes at best that scene is an outlier
A scene that has actual relevance, leading directly into a character power up, is an outlier, but everything else isn't?
Do you hear yourself? You are arguing Spidey's suit scales a billion times above every feat it's ever done, and ignoring the numerous anti-feats it has, based solely on disconnected vague statements that don't even say what you're arguing, and Cull. except Cull is bad because base Spidey would scale to him too, which circles back around to having literally hundred+ anti feats.
which means nothing as many iron man suits and even hulk buster suits have those like getting pierced by street polls and taken down and torn apart by outriders literally sub super soldier aliens but I don’t see you trying to debunk the suits with those we don’t do double standards
Because they're actually consistent? It's usually done by someone with the relevant strength (Like Hulk impaling Stark, is not the same as him just tripping on one and getting spiked), and should I? Do you WANT a downgrade for them?
And there's no way in hell you're comparing random fodder hurting a main character, to one of Spiderman's own villains and one of the selling points of the movie, doing something of note.
Has everything to do with the crt ? It’s a protective suit did you even think before typing this
Which means nothing. A protective suit is literally nothing without actual evidence. It can be a protective suit and be just as durable as he is, it's an extra layer of protection, it protects, it could b even weaker and still offer extra protection.
It has nothing to do with the CRT because just saying "it's a protective suit", doesn't mean "it's a suit 5000000000x above where we scale it".
Literally support the crt do you ever put any effort into your replies
Keep up the attitude and I'll be reporting you.
Tony made the webs that has on screen feats of taking hits from the mark 50 same gear is said to be upgraded stark tech which is what the iron spider is which is stated multiple times to scale
And? Webbing =/= armor. Hell not even all webbing is the same. You say so yourself below even.
Iron Spider being Stark tech, doesn't mean it's equal to all Stark tech. They do different things, the very fact it's suited for Spidey in particular means it isn't going to be made the same way as the other suits. What Spidey needs, and what Stark needs, isn't the same.
That's the thing, it ISN'T stated multiple times to scale, if it did, why not post that?
"The Iron Spider armor scales to Mark 50 in durability and statistics". Easy, done, if it's stated multiple times, where is that statement?
because they don’t his feats suggest it actually watch the film with the cull stuff literally 2 separate films no sold and handled cull better then tony ever did
Oh so base Spidey scales above Stark now too?
Yet his interactions with Cull would dictate the gap between base and iron spider, isn't notable? In fact he does even better in base initially.
Yet, you're arguing the gap between Iron Spider's durability and base Spidey is whole magnitudes?
Don't you find that odd?
That or maybe scaling to Cull is an outlier, given Spidey's 100+ contradictory feats that puts him magnitudes below where Cull scales.
Or maybe he DOES scale to Cull, and it's Cull who shouldn't be scaling to the top dogs. Either way.
You're cherry picking two brief, non-important interactions, over his feats, his villain's feats, and blatant upper limit showings. You want spidey and cull to be in the same ballpark? Cool, but it wouldn't be him being upgraded, it'd be the latter getting downgraded, you realize that right?
next part Norman didn’t rip the same webs and we have no evidence those are the same as iron spider ones
Well damn, there ya go, upgrade the Iron Spider webs, assuming there isn't actual anti-feats and contradictions.
But, case and point, special unique webbing scaling super high, doesn't effect anyone or anything, if they're SPECIAL and NOT the same as what's usually used and what's scaled to.
It isn't like Iron Spider's durability scales to said special unique webbings, so why is it even being brought up?
yes you are the suit is stated to scale the suit is stated to be the exact same nano stuff that Tony uses for his the suit the webs have feats of taking mark 50 missile
You posted nothing outside of a leading twitter statement that doesn't even say it scales, as proof it scales.
Beyond that, no, simply using the same tech doesn't make it the same thing. We already know multiple facets of it differ, why is durability the same?
Especially given there's literally anti-feats for it being the same, yet no real statement saying "yes they have the same defensive capabilities" or something.
Hell, being the same tech wouldn't even matter, nanotech, and being the same material, aren't mutual.
Stark didn’t make it as strong because he didn’t build Peter a mark 50 arc reactor
Wouldn't need to, he could have still gave it strength enhancing capabilities without it, but he didn't.
the iron spidey lacks several capabilities of the mark 50 but has nothing to due with the actual durability of the suit itself or the material its made of literally a direct WoG saying it
WoG means nothing when it's a leading twitter question. It's actively not allowed.
And the worst part?
He says "ballpark", not "equal", the very fact he says that means they aren't actually equal. Being in the same ballpark, by definition, means they aren't 1:1. So all your arguments about them being equal, them being the same tech so they scale, whatever, is shot down by your very own scan, you want to use that scan, you can't use half your own arguments, they're paradoxical.
But even further, what does ballpark even mean? How big is the gap? There's a gap by definition, is it a lil? A lot? What's it relative too? What's the definition he's working on? That's a subjective thing, like for example if someone says 5-A is a general ballpark, that's true, large planet, but there's still a huge gap within it.
Does this dude even comprehend the gap between the feats in question? Authors not always reliable. For all we know he could think Iron Man is like 8-B or some shit, underestimating where he actually scales.
Author statements are only to be used when corroborated or non-contradictory, this doesn't apply.
It makes no sense in verse he’d give peter a suit millions of times weaker then his own but give a suit that scales to everyone else like war machine and Potts especially when WoG which is used to scale them is literally the same guy saying iron spidey scales
Yeah it does? Pete already has superpowers? He's superhumanly strong, durable, and fast. He has instinctive action, borderline precog, and excels in NOT being hit. One of your very own scans says that Stark doesn't even think anyone can hit anyway.
So, instead of wasting time making a suit he doesn't need, why not focus on things that actively benefit him and how he fights? Numerous types of webbings, extra limbs for enhanced mobility and surface scaling as well as multi-directional attacks, an AI to aid him, etc.
Like why would he give Pete a suit millions of times weaker physically too? If Pete had a suit that made him just as strong, that'd also be helpful, but he didn't. "he didn't make an art reactor for him", why not? Why not add any strength enhancement tech like War Machine for example? Or inversely, why not add webbing and limbs to his or Pott's suits too? It's only beneficial after all, targeting systems, AI, and etc account for their lack of skill with it, so why not?
Because he just didn't, it wasn't needed, he didn't want to, who gives a shit why, fact is he didn't on some stuff, and without proof we can't say he did anything, especially if there's contradictions to it.
Perfect proof it’s called looks the same stated to be the same stated to scale stated to be the same as tony uses meaning anything you say is head canon
"looks the same"
Mark 2 and Mark 50 look the same.
"stated to be the same".
Both being nano-tech doesn't mean they're equal in durability, see above.
"stated to be the same as stark"
literally just a repeat of the previous few words.
Lad, all you've done thus far, is post scans that don't actually say what needs to be said, made excuses, and basically vibe scaled.
Post a statement saying they're equal in durability, nothing else matters.
Also their is no actual showings every suit has outliers
First off. Not the thing you want to argue. If they're prevalent, newsflash, it means they
should be downgraded, not ignored. You're shooting yourself in the foot here.
yes there’s no proof they can be any different as they are created with the exact same metals and materials same ballpark meaning head canon to assume anything else and I’ve already proven it stated multiple times to scale there’s no such thing as vibes now your straight up lying everything this crt is based on is official statements on screen feats and on screen implications
https://cdn.**********.com/attachments/1070940734380847195/1214685621587550218/ezgif-2-fbb69ad4dc.gif?ex=67c0d8a3&is=67bf8723&hm=3466bedee216e288fd34c2b46043c5f41795db0de51b444bd753412f6a6934e6&
literally not the purpose of the crt it’s to accept that they are same nano tech mark 50 and iron spider mark 50 a nano tech already has a durability rating
Well, unfortunate as it might be, you haven't posted sufficient proof for that either.
It’s not obtainable via a leading question the guy was literally asking him to clarify what he means about one of his statements about the iron spider not the same thing as leading him to say the iron spider scales because the guy wanted it to scale
"hey dude uhm is the suit dogshit or is it scaling to iron man, i think it scales lmao".
Is a leading question, it's framed by two extremes. The dude didn't go "hey man, how durable is it?", and then the dude went "oh it's this durable!", the question had shit planted in it to obtain a specific reply, not even that subtly either.
Lying again are we directly stated to scale directly stated to be the same stuff Tony uses
I will actively report you if you so much say I'm lying again.
I like how all your arguments are either flat out lying and ignoring everything presented and going it doesn’t scale because I don’t want it to scale
I will be writing up the report.
The iron spider was only used at the beginning of NWH but go on
That was in reference to you complaining about how we don't scale Spidey to Cull's magnitude higher rating.
But ironically, Iron Spider has anti-feats in that section too.
You could do the same for many many characters no tier is consistent especially for the street ones also irrelevant to the crt as it’s not about about Peter raw strength right now
You really don't want to argue "it isnt consistent so it's fine, especially for this character". That isn't how you prove it's legit, it's actively conceding it isn't consistent.
And no, many, many characters consistent, hell Spidey himself is consistent, just not consistently where you want him to be.
They are consistent happens in 2 separate films this isn’t it a happened one time also nothing you are saying has anything to due with stats but lifting strength which is not the same thing as the rest
A 4 second and a not even 2 second interaction in two different films, is not the same as Spidey's multiple several minute long, key scenes, that cap him, or even the hundreds of other examples like him being smashed through bridges, walls, whatever and taking damage or dudes that scale directly to him struggling or max effort tier 8 feats, or etc.
You're gonna need like, 100+ Cull feats for that to hold any merit.
anyway all irrelevant to the crt
Then stop yapping about it.
what does this even mean the iron spider didn’t struggle with cull or take any damage from him and I’ve already says it lacks the fire power of the mark 50
Base Pete legit grabbed his punch meant for Stark.
That doubles as a dura feat.
Anyway ignoring all this.
Scan 1 says nothing, just that Stark plans on making him a suit.
Scan 2 also says nothing, except your extrapolation that Stark got nanotech from her, which, ok, fair, but that doesn't mean they use the same materials (They almost 100% don't, Iron Spider displays none of the Vibranium attributes we've come to know).
Scan 3 is twitter lmao.
Scan 4 is awful google translate, and all it says is it combines facets of multiple things, it's even worded in a way that implicates it's just specific traits too, not literally everything (which is obvious, given it lacks a bunch of stuff).
