@WillPayton said:
@tg1982 said:
@WillPayton said:
Clearly you have a closed mind to the points being made.
No disrespect intended, but what points? One poster say that Black Widow's H2H feats aren't valid because she used gadgets, yet in EVERY H2H fight that you posters use for Bats' H2H "superiority" is LADENED with gadget using. Ra's only lost because GORDON shot down the train bridge momenarilty distracting Ra's, before that Ra's was in the dominant position. So again I ask where is the proof of movie Bats' H2H "superiority"?
The point about poisoning the well.
It's really annoying that many people on this forum seem to think that once they've made up their mind everyone else who disagrees is obviously wrong and there's no possible room for different interpretations of the facts. Not only that, but then you have people like beatboks1 who go for the "everyone who disagrees with me is closed minded" bs. That's not an argument, that's called poisoning the well. I called him on it, and even then he seemed completely oblivious to it.
I know I shouldn't take things personally (and really don't care ) but I have to call this as a point of honor. That is something I take very seriously and since my personal honor and integrity have been questioned I will offer one final rebuttal.
I've changed my mind many times on this forum when a counter argument has been made that has been sufficiently supported. From what I have seen you on the other hand have always held fast to a point of view regardless of the evidence that is offered. I have also apologized to many posters when they have pointed out that i have taken them the wrong way or when their case has been a case of my misunderstanding (subsequently not accepting) their case based on semantics. I understand that on a world wide forum there can be many different point of view and often the context of those points can vary based on cultural difference. You in fact have been one of those posters that I have apologized to on other thread (a courtesy I have never seen returned - interestingly)
So far throughout this thread to support my argument I have offered feats of the characters from both movies. I have called into question your supporting evidence because I don't believe it supports your particular stance. to counter these calls you have offered nothing further. How am I supposed to come to a different position if you wont counter an argument, but simply restate the case you made exactly the same way.
I could go through and restate every argument made but that would obviously be pointless. So instead i will just quickly restate your arguments and see if there is something I have missed that you can clear up.
I was completely undecided when I created the fight, but now I'm leaning towards Batman. I think the starting distance gives him the chance to try different tactics including trying to hide and use his stealth, or attack BW with some gadgets as she closes the distance. I'm sure he's got some flashbangs, smoke, knockout gas, or some other type of incapacitating device he can use, not to mention batarangs, and other stuff. In close h2h he has the advantage in strength and durability, plus the armor will help a lot (will reduce his mobility, but help to tank hits). Also I think they're comparable in h2h skills. BW showed great skills, but so did Batman taking out multiple trained ninjas and SWAT team members. Also, even though both are highly intelligent, I give the versatility advantage to Bruce, against because of the utility belt and suit.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I have already stated why I think Batman would win. I dont really feel like going over what I already said. But, saying that she can clear 10m (and more) in less time than he can react is just ridiculous.
Also, you can keep saying "I've clearly shown" all you like, but apparently you havent since I still disagree. Like for example you're claiming that Batman's armor is useless in h2h, and since I think it's not useless than I'm obviously wrong. That's not any kind of logic, that's just you continually claiming to be right and everyone who disagrees is wrong.
Lastly, you're misrepresenting what I said. I said that Batman's utility belt would be useful because he probably has things like flashbangs, smoke grenades, knockout gas grenades, etc, which he might use to gain an advantage and perhaps hide and use his stealth abilities. I never said he has "more gadgets than BW". So, why should I bother to continue the debate when you're going to make stuff up and continue to assume there's no room for disagreement, and that only your opinions are the right ones?
These (^^) were two separate posts (pages apart)
1. Your offering evidence (by your own admission) that wasn't part of the film. You're the one who chose movie versions yet you want to offer potential strategies and devices that weren't shown to be used in the movies. If you want it to be comic Batman vs movie Widow, change the OP. It's your thread. What's to say that BW's arsenal "probably" doesn't have the same. I mean come on. That's not an argument that can be taken seriously.
2. the actual movies (as stated by myself and few others) show quite clearly that his armor doesn't let him tank hits. In fact the very feat you keep offering to support him as such a great fighter also clearly shows him not doing so. Clearly from about 1minute 20 to 1 minute 40 Bruce is hurt by several of Ra's blows through his oh so mighty hit tanking armor. There's also the fact that he's been knocked out by a fall (which I believe is a hit ) that was similar size drop to some BW took ( and certainly less of a blow than the glancing strike of an enraged Hulk). his limping away from a fall, his being hurt by a dog. Sorry but as these are the evidence that has been offered to counter your stance I fail to see how his armor is going to help him all that much. It will stop a bullet (which will still hurt like hell), but he will still suffer damage just like he also did in the below scene at 40 to 50 seconds. That's not to mention the scars shown in the film when he was watching Harvey on TV. I haven't seen a durability advantage shown that can be substantiated. In fact if there is one based on the evidence of the films it favors Natasha.
Oh and by the way I didn't misrepresent what you said at all. In another post you said
To be fair, movie Batman didnt get into that many h2h fights because he used stealth to gain the advantage and take out enemies quickly. In other words, he was being smart. And his ability to make himself invisible (so to speak) was actually pretty impressive after he got his ninja training. And even before he had the combat training he was able to defeat like 6 thugs all at once with little-mid difficulty. Also, lets not forget he comes in with the armor/equipment advantage.
I think it's party that, but also partly that hardly anyone is considering the issue of equipment. For example, I already admitted that I think with the suit slowing him down, BW would be faster and more agile in h2h than Bruce. But I also think the protective qualities of the suit help to balance that. But, also, we have various equipment from the utility belt that people arent considering. All I hear is "she can dodge whatever he throws at her"... but, she cant "dodge" a blinding flashbang, or smoke, or knockout gas, etc.
Is there a way I'm not aware of, of interpreting an equipment advantage or the equipment from the utility belt that people aren't considering that doesn't imply he has more equipment. he can't dodge these things either and she's actually been shown using some of them where he hasn't.
3. How is it ridiculous exactly. She cleared two halls in IM2 that would have been 25 to 30m each in as some have said under a minute. In the above scene we have seen that Bruce can't even react to a simple blow from Ra's who has shown no where near that type of speed or agility. That feat was having to drop a dozen guards on the way, with nothing to slow her down. In the scene where we see scarecrow and the dog's he couldn't avoid a dog at 5 to 7m. the dog's weren't moving as fast as we saw Widow on screen. Nor could he avoid a van reversing in a turning ark from having just started. The evidence is pretty clear in both films that Bruce doesn't react all that quickly. In almost all movements he has been shown to move slower than the guards BW easily took down from a greater distance in her fight scenes. in fact you yourself made a post supporting this very thing
The armor must slow him down, there's no way of getting around it. It's too bulky and stiff in places, which is needed to allow it to protect from knives and bullets. Even if only by a small amount, it still slows him from his peak without it. The fact that he can still easily beat multiple trained fighters with it on just shows how great he is. In the end though, I think the effects of the armor are a wash. It will slow him down, but it protects from the knives and guns BW will be using, and it also has offensive capabilities like the blades on the forearms. If they were both fighting h2h with no weapons or equipment I think Bruce would win.
So like I said, I think the edge goes to Bruce, because of his stealth and versatility of his equipment, which he can utilize as they close from the starting 10m distance.
That brings me to another point
4. Your OP makes this a random encounter, both with standard equipment. Why would they be fighting H2H. BW used more than just guns. Bat's lower half of his face is exposed and not armored. She used electric shockers. She DID use flash bangs, and she's blood lusted. Where have we seen the Bat armor in film protect from electricity. is his face suddenly impenetrable. You also made them blood lusted. If she's out for the kill and the first few shots bounce of his chest what's stopping her from shooting him straight in the face or eye (it is only 10m).
5. You also made it a random encounter, no prep is mentioned (and let's face it random encounter implies none) so he's not going the stealth route (which he would have employed and taken her out from behind with planning and possibly won).
Batman didnt just defeat thugs, he also defeated ninjas and fought Ra's on equal terms, eventually defeating him. Bruce also showed great stealth abilities, strength, and he has the advantage when it comes to equipment. You keep trying to make it out like Batman only beat thugs, which isnt true. BW has some nice moves, but she never showed the ability to defeat a master ninja.I'm also not sure how impressive you think it was to beat some "Russian mobsters". From what I remember, their greatest feats were that they were beat down by a girl. They didnt seem that tough to me.
6. First we have nothing to show us the skill level of the ninja's, we don't know if their fully trained or early grades. Second how is he on equal terms with Ra's in the fight scene (^^). There is about 10 to 18 seconds of that fight (of the total of about 70 seconds of the two of them actually mixing it up) where Bruce could even be considered to be even let alone better than Ra's. The rest of the actual H2H battle Ra's is clearly on top. he smashes Bruce through a window, followed by several blows to Bruce where he clearly guts in pain (oh that damn pesky armor is so good) and Ra's ends up on top of him on the floor ready to finish it. he wins thank's to the outside intervention of an ally. Bruce never showed teh ability to beat a master Ninja either, not on his own. Again ask you what were the feats for the ninja's. As I recall Bruce could beat them before he was trained so they can't be that good.
As far as I saw BW did some nice jumping around and acrobatics, all while looking super sexy, and she beat up a few dudes of whom we dont know how tough they were. So, yeah, Batman should be better at h2h.
Which is pretty much exactly what Bruce did. beat up a few dudes of whom we don't know how tough they were. because the only one we really have an idea how tough he was (Ra's - being a master) beat Bruce in actual combat ability at every turn.
In closing.
Of course "there's possible room for different interpretations of the facts" (to quote you) but you haven't offered anything for me to look at them in a different way. I believe I have tried to, if I haven't call me on it and I will try to support my position (or if I can't possible and likely see that different interpretation ). I apologize to anyone this post or any others I've done on this thread offends (and if so please PM me so i can know the error of my actions). I was going to simply reply in PM and flag the post, but as I was vilified (in a way that verges on slander) on a public forum I wanted to publicly defend my actions.
I again apologize for the long winded rant, but I'm an old 54yr old ex serviceman who's only real thing of value is my honor and integrity and I will not brook that being denigrated
the Flag of course will be forthcoming.
/end rant
Log in to comment