Possible Wasp Profile?

[LordTracer]

I was wondering if it would be possible for someone to create a profile of The Wasp, Janet van Dyne.

While I couldn't find many feats for her, I do have a few that could be used in a potential profile for her.

- She was able to dismantle Ultro

- She one-shot several members of the X-Men (and Magneto) with less than half her full power

- She damaged Thor

- And finally, she damaged Death Seed Sentry, and managed to do more damage than Thor did here.

Those are some 4-B feats for her, most of which would end up scaling her to Thor, plus a 5-A feat with the X-Men thing. The X-Men feat could also be used as a Massively Hypersonic+ speed feat, as she was too fast for the likes of Wolverine, Cyclops, Colossus, etc. to tag.

So, I think a profile could be made for her.

 

[Antvasima]

These are all either unquantifiable or Plot-Induced Stupidity Outliers. The Wasp is generally too hard to rate properly.

 

[LordTracer]

Why unquantifiable? 3/4 of the feats seem to be pretty clear cut examples of her damaging beings with solar system level durability, the other is moreso a supporting feat, and these give her AP, speed, striking strength and likely durability. What makes it so hard to rate her?

 

[Antvasima]

She is normally presented as a low-powered irritant unable to do real damage, and below Spider-Man in terms of raw power, so given Marvel's ridiculously extreme inconsistency regarding matchup power levels, and her lack of feats of her own that are possible to calculate, I do not think that we can reliably rate her to any set statistics beyond 9-A or so, at least at small size.

 

[LordTracer]

If her being at small size is the problem, then only the Ultron feat is unusable, as while she is shrunken when she harms Thor and solos the X-Men, she is still at a considerable size. And with Sentry, she's at full size. Her not having her own feats to go off of really shouldn't matter, as most Marvel characters get their tiering through scaling alone. General portrayal doesn't seem to matter that much either. For example, Iron Man (Model Prime) is a solar system buster (through scaling), but I don't think the comics portray him as even being a planet buster.

I think something like 9-A physically, 4-B with stingers would make sense. She took out Wolverine with a physical strike and she was worried about if one of the X-Men managed to hit her, and most of them are 9-A physically (Wolverine included once the 8-A's are downgraded). She also took a blow to the back of the head from a large rock golem when she fought Sentry, which could be a supporting feat. Then she'd be 4-B with her stingers due to harming Thor, as well as doing more damage to Sentry than Thor was able to, and Sentry does admit that Wasp hurt him.

She would also have Massively Hypersonic+ speed for being swifter than Wolverine, Nightcrawler, Storm, Cyclops, etc.

 

[Antvasima]

Again, the feats above are all massive outliers over a very long history of very low-power actual feats. According to the handbooks, she is officially supposed to have raw power that is barely above Captain America.

 

[Antvasima]

Also, again, please read the Power-scaling Rules for Marvel and DC Comics page to better understand what we are dealing with.

 

[Sera_EX]

I agree with Ant. Her "power level", for lack of a better term, doesn't match her feats which means they are all massive outliers. Yes, outliers can be consistent too. It's called being consistently inconsistent.

 

[Antvasima]

Agreed. Her best feats of her own are shattering doors and bending guns as far as I remember. She is supposed to be a 9-A level character.

 

[LordTracer]

Again, there's a lot of characters that display a far higher level than they're actually at only through scaling.

- Iron Man - 4-B - Hasn't even destroyed a planet on his own, and the majority of his feats are far below that, but he's 4-B via scaling.

- Namor - At least 5-A, possibly 4-B - Has Namor ever destroyed a planet or a solar system? Or like a moon or something?

- Wonder Man - 4-B - Has he destroyed anything on a planetary or stellar scale?

I could go on. Numerous characters are tiered only via scaling and not their own destructive feats. Why exactly is Wasp different?

How exactly does "consistently inconsistent" make sense? It's completely oxymoronic.

Why do the handbooks take precedence over higher end feats that contradict them? And going through the profile, the handbooks are only used for speed. The only characters I see that uses it for AP are Speed Demon, where the handbook doesn't even say how strong he is, it gives a feat of him fighting someone else, Fin Fang Foom and Iron Man characters. Her physical power is shown to be on the level of Cap, but her stingers are shown to be far superior to him.

I understand Marvel is inconsistent, but there are several characters in the exact same situation as Wasp, so why is she any different?

 

[Sera_EX]

We actually are intending to downgrade a lot of those characters. We know they have inflated statistics.

 

[Antvasima]

Wasp has far more instances of being treated as an extremely low-powered irritant than the reverse, whereas the 3 examples you mentioned above have consistently matched or almost matched 4-B characters, even though, as Sera says, their statistics are likely exaggerated as well, if not to such an extreme degree as what you suggest.

Marvel writers generally simply do not care in the slightest about anything resembling logic during matchup situations. If we scaled every character to every character they have ever fought, ALL of the featured Marvel characters in our wiki would be 1-A.

As such, we are definitely not going to rate the Wasp of all characters as being comparable to solar system busters, no matter how much you bother us about it. Sorry.

 

[LordTracer]

Well if you've already decided you're not going to change your mind, then go ahead and close the thread.

 

[Sera_EX]

Let's just say Marvel is in a pickle, and it's hard for us to rate them properly due to how vastly inconsistent they are or just otherwise incompatible with our standards. So we have to be critical and skeptical of something like 4-B Wasp due to that.

 

[Antvasima]

Sera is correct. It isn't your fault, it is the fault of Marvel's editorial department.

 

[LordTracer]

Could you at least show some of her "more consistent" feats?

 

[Antvasima]

I do not remotely have the time to look through her entire history of feats just to satisfy you, but I have read quite a lot of Avengers stories, and she is never treated as a powerhouse, just as physically a bit stronger than Ant-Man, and capable of blasting through doors, bending gun barrels larger than she is and the like. You can also read her handbook entries if you wish.

 

[LordTracer]

Alright, close the thread, I'll do more research on my own.