1. And still you avoid the matter at hand. There is nothing to suggest that Hawkeye lost any of his skill, and we clearly see him operating as a credible combatant. He wasn't even a mindless zombie - he was able to think tactically and even offer suggestions to Loki (getting the iridium). My evidence is not a hunch, it's called inferring from the data available, your argument on the other hand is based on some ambiguous dialogue that has nothing supporting your point. All your response has done is try to downplay mine without offering any supporting evidence for yours, a flawed defense mechanism you keep relying on.
2. And still you cling onto the businessman feat as though it automatically concludes that Catwoman can disarm anyone she wants like it's her superpower. Your argument for the validity of the mercs is equally shaky. The only reasons why they were able to seize control of Gotham was through Bane's tactical intelligence, including trapping the police underground and holding the city hostage by threatening to detonate the nuclear bomb. There's absolutely nothing suggesting the mercs had any tactical input at all. Now you claim that these men are trained professionals - even though that's exactly what Hawkeye is. Is he some low-level rent-a-cop? No - he's clearly an experienced SHIELD agent, to use your terminology, a 'professional'. There's nothing to suggest that he lost any skill when he was mind-controlled, and at least he's displayed CQC feats in the final battle.
3. Catwoman disarming a businessman is not an accurate comparison. He was just a non-combatant who thought he had the drop on her, your repeated claim that she 'has more disarming feats' has absolutely zero legitimacy to it. And it's already been displayed that Chitauri have a stronger constitution - your suggestion that 'electricity' and 'piercing' works differently on the aliens has no merit because there's no proof. You've just been giving me one poorly thought-out assumption after the other.
And not once have I said that it was a 'stomp'. I said that Black Widow would take a majority. According to the Battles rules, all battles are assumed to be ten rounds, with the character taking a majority winning. That is what I have said, and you haven't given anything to suggest otherwise.
These are your words:
I say Widow can win via weapons, but if its just hand to hand, its a toss up.
This is not a weaponless-match. Your claim that Catwoman can disarm Black Widow has nothing supporting it. And you've already admitted it above, so the only purpose this debate has had is to continuously serve your claim that Catwoman will win a HTH match, a decision that regardless of its turnout has absolutely zero bearing on this debate. You're picking a fight where there isn't one, and for the record, you started it.
From your argument that Catwoman is 'more adept at espionage' (even if she isn't a spy), your claim that Widow's guns aren't standard equipment, your claim that Widow is enhanced (when you previously said it was 'momentum), to pure conjecture like Catwoman 'survived in prison' or that she has 'disarming feats' - all you've given me is shoddy guesswork and poor arguments.
This discussion is over. Feel free to reply, but know that I won't. Good day.
Log in to comment