• 148 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by WillPayton (9333 posts) - - Show Bio

The two masters of the atom fight it out. Who will win?

Dr Manhattan vs Firestorm (Ronnie Raymond/Martin Stein):

..vs..


No morals, 30 seconds prep, to the death or any sort of permanent incapacitation. Battle takes place on an empty planet, 100 meters apart.

#2 Posted by Spartan101 (2321 posts) - - Show Bio

ouch this might get nasty,,,im with dr m.

#3 Posted by Saren (25571 posts) - - Show Bio

Firestorm. All day.

Moderator
#4 Posted by Skunkstein (591 posts) - - Show Bio

Well again, we dont know how powerfull Manhattan actually is, i personally think he is way stronger than Firestorm but i cant say for sure...

One question for those who think Firestorm wins; How would he kill him? He cant affect organic matter. Manhattan would just recreate a body for himself if Firestorm should be able to destroy it in the first place.

#5 Posted by nickthedevil (11875 posts) - - Show Bio

Firestorm wins. Because he actually has feats.

Online
#6 Posted by krilling (2488 posts) - - Show Bio

@nickthedevil said:

Firestorm wins. Because he actually has feats.
#7 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

#8 Posted by Skunkstein (591 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans: Im not really sure what youre asking me? I never said he had any feats... well not any that really shows how powerful he is.

#9 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@Skunkstein said:

@LordOfAllHumans: Im not really sure what youre asking me? I never said he had any feats... well not any that really shows how powerful he is.

I'm not asking you anything, I'm explaining to you how this thread will go. Those that pick Firestorm will say he wins because he has feats, and Dr. Manhattan doesn't.

#10 Posted by nickthedevil (11875 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

Worst example ever. Dr. Manhattan hasn't shown anything at all to suggest he's superior to Firestorm. that simple.

Online
#11 Posted by mynewb (60 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

Firestorm has feats to show his powers. Dr.M has fought humans. Nothing to do with TOAA or anything..

#12 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@nickthedevil said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

Worst example ever. Dr. Manhattan hasn't shown anything at all to suggest he's superior to Firestorm. that simple.

Neither has TOAA, if so show me scans. You can't, so by your logic of having feats being the decider Firestorm can beat the featless TOAA. See what happens when you use fallacy in a debate that takes place in the realm of imagination? even simpler.

#13 Posted by Skunkstein (591 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein said:

@LordOfAllHumans: Im not really sure what youre asking me? I never said he had any feats... well not any that really shows how powerful he is.

I'm not asking you anything, I'm explaining to you how this thread will go. Those that pick Firestorm will say he wins because he has feats, and Dr. Manhattan doesn't.

Right, and i agree..

#14 Posted by ReVamp (22865 posts) - - Show Bio

@nickthedevil said:

Firestorm wins. Because he actually has feats.
#15 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@mynewb said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

Firestorm has feats to show his powers. Dr.M has fought humans. Nothing to do with TOAA or anything..

it has everything to do with it. It's not about who fought what. It's about stating that somebody wins due to having more feats. Regardless of feats they have similar powers, expect by description Dr. Manhattan has more.

The physics of his world make it so that he only has humans to fight. You can't really compare the two in that department because because it's like apples and oranges. It's fallacious to assume that Dr. Manhattan can't fight the same superpowered humans when he in actuality will never get a chance to do it. If Firestorm fights and uses his power of molecular manipulation, then I don't see how it's hard to believe that Dr. Manhattan can use this same powers. By this very flawed logic, I guess we can assume that Dr. Manhattans powers would not help in an encounter with anybody in comics.

Having more feats is not the deciding factor, it simply makes the thread more colorful if scans are introduced.

#16 Edited by nickthedevil (11875 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@nickthedevil said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

Worst example ever. Dr. Manhattan hasn't shown anything at all to suggest he's superior to Firestorm. that simple.

Neither has TOAA, if so show me scans. You can't, so by your logic of having feats being the decider Firestorm can beat the featless TOAA. See what happens when you use fallacy in a debate that takes place in the realm of imagination? even simpler.

well he's pimp Slapped Thor. and seeing as how he's talked about by other beings like Odin, watcher, Ec. thats enough. Dr. Manhattan what? reffered to as a god my a news anchor man? Pffft.. please. the only thing simple here was your notion on TOAA as an example.

Online
#17 Posted by Wyldsong (5320 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

There are a ton of characters with similar powers, and similar descriptions. Even with similarities in powers, some characters are far more proficient in their use, or far more powerful with the abilities. Just because it is described that a character has access to a power set, does not mean one should start assuming on the range of that ability (think Kid Flash versus Flash, or Superman versus SBP, etc). Hence the use of feats as a benchmark in this case, and hence the calls of Manhattan just not having enough actual feats, or benchmarks to gauge his powers against other opponents, as we have seen him do very little.

I won't profess to know a lot about Firestorm, so I won't call for a loss here, but based on what is on his page here on the comicvine, if it is true, and he is a matter manipulator/transmuter with far more showings/feats/benchmarks than Manhattan, then I don't see how a good argument could truly be made for Manhattan. Both being able to manipulate matter, and Firestorm possessing superhuman speed and so on, so far sounds a little above Manhattan in many respects. Again, I can't really argue the point here of who would win, but that is just what I see at the moment (and again, that depends on the accuracy of Firestorm's page here on the vine).

#18 Posted by Onemoreposter (4006 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans: I'd argue that any feats by the Spectre or Zauriel or Lucifer could be construed as feats for TOAA because all these being are empowered by it, but I understand your point.

Manhattan pulls out a sword and stabs Ronnie. Game over.

Heh. No but really, Ronnie can only win this if Manhattan is somehow inorganic after his transmutation, but then again Manhattan's abilities are so poorly defined he might just be unkillable.

#19 Posted by nickthedevil (11875 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@mynewb said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

Firestorm has feats to show his powers. Dr.M has fought humans. Nothing to do with TOAA or anything..

it has everything to do with it. It's not about who fought what. It's about stating that somebody wins due to having more feats. Regardless of feats they have similar powers, expect by description Dr. Manhattan has more.

So you compare TOAA to Firestorm?? really?

Online
#20 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@Wyldsong said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

There are a ton of characters with similar powers, and similar descriptions. Even with similarities in powers, some characters are far more proficient in their use, or far more powerful with the abilities. Just because it is described that a character has access to a power set, does not mean one should start assuming on the range of that ability (think Kid Flash versus Flash, or Superman versus SBP, etc). Hence the use of feats as a benchmark in this case, and hence the calls of Manhattan just not having enough actual feats, or benchmarks to gauge his powers against other opponents, as we have seen him do very little.

I won't profess to know a lot about Firestorm, so I won't call for a loss here, but based on what is on his page here on the comicvine, if it is true, and he is a matter manipulator/transmuter with far more showings/feats/benchmarks than Manhattan, then I don't see how a good argument could truly be made for Manhattan. Both being able to manipulate matter, and Firestorm possessing superhuman speed and so on, so far sounds a little above Manhattan in many respects. Again, I can't really argue the point here of who would win, but that is just what I see at the moment (and again, that depends on the accuracy of Firestorm's page here on the vine).

I understand the concept, I'm not picking the Dr., but my point still stands. Regardless of how few feats he has his powers allow him at least the basic functions of somebody with that power, he can dupe himself and they also have his powers, that alone would suggest he can in the least overpower Firestorm. So then we can ask "What feats does Firestorm have against an army of immortal matter manipulators?" if he has none then won't that negate using his feats as proof that he can beat Dr. Manhattan?

#21 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@LordOfAllHumans: Quit playing devil's advocate for a character that's best "feat" is blowing up a tank.
#22 Posted by jameshebrew (763 posts) - - Show Bio

im taking dr. M

seems like hes on a different level than FS

#23 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@jameshebrew said:

im taking dr. M

seems like hes on a different level than FS

Based on what?
#24 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@nickthedevil said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@mynewb said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

Firestorm has feats to show his powers. Dr.M has fought humans. Nothing to do with TOAA or anything..

it has everything to do with it. It's not about who fought what. It's about stating that somebody wins due to having more feats. Regardless of feats they have similar powers, expect by description Dr. Manhattan has more.

So you compare TOAA to Firestorm?? really?

I see how limited your understanding of what I said is making you try to twist what I said. Now read carefully.

I am not comparing him to TOAA, I'm giving an example of how fallacious arguments can be used to say somebody wins. This is your logic not mine. You say quite matter of factly that Firestorm wins because he has feats, now correct me if I'm wrong, but if that's what you think, then it's safe for me to assume this is your take on all battles, the more feats the more win. TOAA has no feats, your logic would try to have use believe that, that means somebody with feats can beat him. If this is not what you are saying then your entire reasoning for picking a winner is flawed.

#25 Posted by jameshebrew (763 posts) - - Show Bio

@Illuminatus: this websites page they have on him, and the fact that he cant be killed he just recreates himself

#26 Posted by Skunkstein (591 posts) - - Show Bio

Technically Dr. Manhattan could be anywhere between moderately powerful to the most powerful comic book character ever created.. there is no way of telling, i hope his powers is getting more defined when the ''Before Watchmen'' comics are hitting town.

Now i personally believe he is way above Firestorm... i always saw him as created that way, that was one of his purposes in the Watchmen comic, we got these two poles of heroes, the Batman type and the Superman type. If Dr. Manhattan was in the between one of those two poles he would be more insignificant. He truely is a god. However i know this is all speculation and i have nothing to back that up with... its a personal opinion, and its not an argument for Manhattan winning.

#27 Posted by Wyldsong (5320 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Wyldsong said:

I understand the concept, I'm not picking the Dr., but my point still stands. Regardless of how few feats he has his powers allow him at least the basic functions of somebody with that power, he can dupe himself and they also have his powers, that alone would suggest he can in the least overpower Firestorm. So then we can ask "What feats does Firestorm have against an army of immortal matter manipulators?" if he has none then won't that negate using his feats as proof that he can beat Dr. Manhattan?

Well, let's also look at this: For one, there is no actual proof of immortality on Manhattan's part (we know he can come back from intrinsic field removal and we know he either doesn't age or ages slower than regular humans), and we also have no proof of just how powerful Manhattan's dupes are, what powers those dupes actually have, and we have no idea just how many he can make. That's where we get into the territory of benchmarks and such, and Manhattan just doesn't have much.

Personally, I spend a lot of time trying to argue Manhattan down in a lot of fights where I see claims with no proof, but here, I am just trying to point out the other side. I don't know Firestorm, and I could possibly be persuaded to one side (not stating that you picked a side or need to do this mind you, just in general) by a good debate on how Manhattan can win here. I just don't see good debate happening with speculation and lack of benchmarks/feats.

As someone stated earlier, Manhattan has a truly ill defined set of abilities, and even just going with the basics of the power set, then where do you actually set the standards or basics for it, when the powerset itself really has no set standard? Matter manipulation, and most other power sets are truly all over the place.

#28 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@Illuminatus said:

@LordOfAllHumans: Quit playing devil's advocate for a character that's best "feat" is blowing up a tank.

That is his best feat in your opinion and a feat of circumstance, what else is he supposed to blow up? Furthermore, how did he blow that tank up? Through the molecular manipulation of matter. You saying that does not prove that he can't do more than that, it only proves that he doesn't need to do more than that based on his universe. You can use Firestorms feats to support your case, but at the same time the few feats Manhattan has can also be used.

Had Firestorm used his power to destroy an immortal that can simply will himself into existence?

Has he used his power to take out an army of immortals with similar powers?

Like I said if he (Firestorm) didn't and doesn't have feats to support that, then according to you he can't win. See how that works.

#29 Posted by nickthedevil (11875 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@nickthedevil said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@mynewb said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Skunkstein: they don't know, they'll say "he has feats" as if this somehow negates the description of the others powers. Which also means Firestorm can beat TOAA, why you say...he has feats.

Firestorm has feats to show his powers. Dr.M has fought humans. Nothing to do with TOAA or anything..

it has everything to do with it. It's not about who fought what. It's about stating that somebody wins due to having more feats. Regardless of feats they have similar powers, expect by description Dr. Manhattan has more.

So you compare TOAA to Firestorm?? really?

I see how limited your understanding of what I said is making you try to twist what I said. Now read carefully.

I am not comparing him to TOAA, I'm giving an example of how fallacious arguments can be used to say somebody wins. This is your logic not mine. You say quite matter of factly that Firestorm wins because he has feats, now correct me if I'm wrong, but if that's what you think, then it's safe for me to assume this is your take on all battles, the more feats the more win. TOAA has no feats, your logic would try to have use believe that, that means somebody with feats can beat him. If this is not what you are saying then your entire reasoning for picking a winner is flawed.

Whatever you say.

Online
#30 Edited by nickthedevil (11875 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Illuminatus said:

@LordOfAllHumans: Quit playing devil's advocate for a character that's best "feat" is blowing up a tank.

That is his best feat in your opinion and a feat of circumstance, what else is he supposed to blow up? Furthermore, how did he blow that tank up? Through the molecular manipulation of matter. You saying that does not prove that he can't do more than that, it only proves that he doesn't need to do more than that based on his universe. You can use Firestorms feats to support your case, but at the same time the few feats Manhattan has can also be used.

Had Firestorm used his power to destroy an immortal that can simply will himself into existence?

Has he used his power to take out an army of immortals with similar powers?

Like I said if he (Firestorm) didn't and doesn't have feats to support that, then according to you he can't win. See how that works.

no, you are taking it in Black and White. you r understanding of what we are saying, (for some reason) Is: No feats = No victory.

There. i worded it better for you, but the point still stands.

Online
#31 Posted by Wyldsong (5320 posts) - - Show Bio

@Wyldsong said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Wyldsong said:

I understand the concept, I'm not picking the Dr., but my point still stands. Regardless of how few feats he has his powers allow him at least the basic functions of somebody with that power, he can dupe himself and they also have his powers, that alone would suggest he can in the least overpower Firestorm. So then we can ask "What feats does Firestorm have against an army of immortal matter manipulators?" if he has none then won't that negate using his feats as proof that he can beat Dr. Manhattan?

Well, let's also look at this: For one, there is no actual proof of immortality on Manhattan's part (we know he can come back from intrinsic field removal and we know he either doesn't age or ages slower than regular humans), and we also have no proof of just how powerful Manhattan's dupes are, what powers those dupes actually have, and we have no idea just how many he can make. That's where we get into the territory of benchmarks and such, and Manhattan just doesn't have much.

Personally, I spend a lot of time trying to argue Manhattan down in a lot of fights where I see claims with no proof, but here, I am just trying to point out the other side. I don't know Firestorm, and I could possibly be persuaded to one side (not stating that you picked a side or need to do this mind you, just in general) by a good debate on how Manhattan can win here. I just don't see good debate happening with speculation and lack of benchmarks/feats.

As someone stated earlier, Manhattan has a truly ill defined set of abilities, and even just going with the basics of the power set, then where do you actually set the standards or basics for it, when the powerset itself really has no set standard? Matter manipulation, and most other power sets are truly all over the place.

And just fyi, I am just playing devil's advocate to your devil's advocate. I am not trying to talk you down or prove you wrong.

#32 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Illuminatus said:

@LordOfAllHumans: Quit playing devil's advocate for a character that's best "feat" is blowing up a tank.

That is his best feat in your opinion and a feat of circumstance, what else is he supposed to blow up? 

It's his best feat because I have actually read Watchmen and I know every single one of Manhattan's "feats" like the back of my hand. The character has done nothing to support the notion he is capable of combating a skilled matter manipulator such as Firestorm.   

Furthermore, how did he blow that tank up? Through the molecular manipulation of matter.

Thanks for pointing out the obvious.  What's your point?  

 

You saying that does not prove that he can't do more than that, it only proves that he doesn't need to do more than that based on his universe. You can use Firestorms feats to support your case, but at the same time the few feats Manhattan has can also be used.

Umm...what? This literally makes no sense. Manhattan lives in a universe where he is the most powerful being by default. Simple as that. 

Had Firestorm used his power to destroy an immortal that can simply will himself into existence?

Why would he need to? You're acting as if Manhattan is immortal when he's not even mortal in the first place. He's a mass of energy with a conscious.   
 

  Has he used his power to take out an army of immortals with similar powers?

Has Manhattan? Nope. Again, do you have a point you're planning on making or are you just trolling again? 
 
I never even said Firestorm wins. I'm just tired of seeing you play devil's advocate for characters who are virtually featless or severely outmatched. 
#33 Posted by Skunkstein (591 posts) - - Show Bio

@Illuminatus: Isnt his most incredible feat teleporting to Mars with minimum effort?

#34 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@Wyldsong said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Wyldsong said:

I understand the concept, I'm not picking the Dr., but my point still stands. Regardless of how few feats he has his powers allow him at least the basic functions of somebody with that power, he can dupe himself and they also have his powers, that alone would suggest he can in the least overpower Firestorm. So then we can ask "What feats does Firestorm have against an army of immortal matter manipulators?" if he has none then won't that negate using his feats as proof that he can beat Dr. Manhattan?

Well, let's also look at this: For one, there is no actual proof of immortality on Manhattan's part (we know he can come back from intrinsic field removal and we know he either doesn't age or ages slower than regular humans), and we also have no proof of just how powerful Manhattan's dupes are, what powers those dupes actually have, and we have no idea just how many he can make. That's where we get into the territory of benchmarks and such, and Manhattan just doesn't have much.

Personally, I spend a lot of time trying to argue Manhattan down in a lot of fights where I see claims with no proof, but here, I am just trying to point out the other side. I don't know Firestorm, and I could possibly be persuaded to one side (not stating that you picked a side or need to do this mind you, just in general) by a good debate on how Manhattan can win here. I just don't see good debate happening with speculation and lack of benchmarks/feats.

As someone stated earlier, Manhattan has a truly ill defined set of abilities, and even just going with the basics of the power set, then where do you actually set the standards or basics for it, when the powerset itself really has no set standard? Matter manipulation, and most other power sets are truly all over the place.

Even with feats all these cross company battles come down to speculation. Being destroyed and coming back while not being affected by basic human needs or time is not immortal? With these abilities in place how would one die? All being immortal means is that you won't die from "natural" causes, from what I can tell Manhattan fits that description. As far as his duping goes I have a vague recollection of him duping himself to have a dupe fight crime or something (I'll have to check) that would suggest that a dupe has enough of his power to be effective or there'd be no point.

We have benchmarked what he is capable of, and we know he was a physicist so it would be kind of silly to assume he doesn't understand the nature of his power and what he can do with it, considering that is the same way Firestorm knew the best ways to use his.

I don't understand how people can say he has an ill defined set of abilites, per his universe all matter was seemingly susceptible to his power, outside of the the more exotic energies and materials in DC, everything else is the same as far as the physics. That pretty much defines his abilities the way it defines all matter manipulators, they manipulate matter.

I do however appreciate your responses, very well thought out, and this is what these debates are about.

#35 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@nickthedevil said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Illuminatus said:

@LordOfAllHumans: Quit playing devil's advocate for a character that's best "feat" is blowing up a tank.

That is his best feat in your opinion and a feat of circumstance, what else is he supposed to blow up? Furthermore, how did he blow that tank up? Through the molecular manipulation of matter. You saying that does not prove that he can't do more than that, it only proves that he doesn't need to do more than that based on his universe. You can use Firestorms feats to support your case, but at the same time the few feats Manhattan has can also be used.

Had Firestorm used his power to destroy an immortal that can simply will himself into existence?

Has he used his power to take out an army of immortals with similar powers?

Like I said if he (Firestorm) didn't and doesn't have feats to support that, then according to you he can't win. See how that works.

no, you are taking it in Black and White. you understand that wahat we are saying, (for some reason) that No feats = No victory.

I know one thing is for certain, I don't understand what you are saying.

#36 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@Skunkstein said:

@Illuminatus: Isnt his most incredible feat teleporting to Mars with minimum effort?

That's not really a feat as much as it's an ability. The guy can teleport to Mars in an instant. If he did that here, he would be disqualified for leaving the battlefield, and thus would be forfeiting.  
#37 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@LordOfAllHumans said:

@nickthedevil said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Illuminatus said:

@LordOfAllHumans: Quit playing devil's advocate for a character that's best "feat" is blowing up a tank.

That is his best feat in your opinion and a feat of circumstance, what else is he supposed to blow up? Furthermore, how did he blow that tank up? Through the molecular manipulation of matter. You saying that does not prove that he can't do more than that, it only proves that he doesn't need to do more than that based on his universe. You can use Firestorms feats to support your case, but at the same time the few feats Manhattan has can also be used.

Had Firestorm used his power to destroy an immortal that can simply will himself into existence?

Has he used his power to take out an army of immortals with similar powers?

Like I said if he (Firestorm) didn't and doesn't have feats to support that, then according to you he can't win. See how that works.

no, you are taking it in Black and White. you understand that wahat we are saying, (for some reason) that No feats = No victory.

I know one thing is for certain, I don't understand what you are saying.

That's hilarious, coming from someone such as yourself. You're going on and on about what Manhattan should/could be capable of and using TOAA as a template for your ridiculous arguments. Everyone here stopped taking you seriously some time ago, so maybe you should just give up.
#38 Posted by TheGodKiller3 (359 posts) - - Show Bio

@Skunkstein said:

@Illuminatus: Isnt his most incredible feat teleporting to Mars with minimum effort?

IIRC , his most incredible feat was creating a fragile glass structure on Mars . Plus he's supposed to also have walked on the surface of the Sun , and witnessed events that happened at femtosecond durations(at least thats what it sounds like from a physics point of view) .

#39 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheGodKiller3 said:

@Skunkstein said:

@Illuminatus: Isnt his most incredible feat teleporting to Mars with minimum effort?

IIRC , his most incredible feat was creating a fragile glass structure on Mars . Plus he's supposed to also have walked on the surface of the Sun , and witnessed events that happened at femtosecond durations(at least thats what it sounds like from a physics point of view) .

Hyperbole/off-panel actions. Also, either Firestorm could've easily replicated Manhattan's undertaking of creating that massive structure on Mars, seeing as both have control over inorganic material on a molecular level.  
#40 Posted by TheGodKiller3 (359 posts) - - Show Bio

@Illuminatus said:

@TheGodKiller3 said:

@Skunkstein said:

@Illuminatus: Isnt his most incredible feat teleporting to Mars with minimum effort?

IIRC , his most incredible feat was creating a fragile glass structure on Mars . Plus he's supposed to also have walked on the surface of the Sun , and witnessed events that happened at femtosecond durations(at least thats what it sounds like from a physics point of view) .

Hyperbole/off-panel actions. Also, either Firestorm could've easily replicated Manhattan's undertaking of creating that massive structure on Mars, seeing as both have control over inorganic material on a molecular level.

Doesn't change the fact that they still took place .

By the way , I am no longer considering building that fragile glass structure an incredible feat . Seeing how easily it was shattered by Laurie .

#41 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheGodKiller3 said:

Doesn't change the fact that they still took place .

I never stated anything to the contrary. I'm simply saying that because these things happened off-panel and we don't know of the context of these instances, they shouldn't be used to gauge Manhattan's potential.  
#42 Posted by LordOfAllHumans (3978 posts) - - Show Bio

@Illuminatus said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@nickthedevil said:

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Illuminatus said:

@LordOfAllHumans: Quit playing devil's advocate for a character that's best "feat" is blowing up a tank.

That is his best feat in your opinion and a feat of circumstance, what else is he supposed to blow up? Furthermore, how did he blow that tank up? Through the molecular manipulation of matter. You saying that does not prove that he can't do more than that, it only proves that he doesn't need to do more than that based on his universe. You can use Firestorms feats to support your case, but at the same time the few feats Manhattan has can also be used.

Had Firestorm used his power to destroy an immortal that can simply will himself into existence?

Has he used his power to take out an army of immortals with similar powers?

Like I said if he (Firestorm) didn't and doesn't have feats to support that, then according to you he can't win. See how that works.

no, you are taking it in Black and White. you understand that wahat we are saying, (for some reason) that No feats = No victory.

I know one thing is for certain, I don't understand what you are saying.

That's hilarious, coming from someone such as yourself. You're going on and on about what Manhattan should/could be capable of and using TOAA as a template for your ridiculous arguments. Everyone here stopped taking you seriously some time ago, so maybe you should just give up.

what's hilarious is you wrote something illegible and then expect me to understand the point you are trying to make. That is why I used the bold button, what exactly are you saying in that "sentence" it makes no sense. I'm not going on and on about anything, to the contrary. You can't even understand simply logic. It's ridiculous to you because you don't seem to grasp simple concepts as much as you would like to believe. In fact you are technically arguing with yourself, as you keep insisting I am comparing TOAA, when as I explained earlier that I am using your flawed logic, and as you see it makes no sense thus my point has been made

Oh no some nerd said a bunch of other nerds don't take me seriously about fictional characters. What ever will I do? Grow up, you can't even find a way to universally use something you believe is fact, and when it's used against you, you reduce yourself to this, but then again maybe this is just you.

#43 Posted by Wyldsong (5320 posts) - - Show Bio

@LordOfAllHumans said:

@Wyldsong said:

Even with feats all these cross company battles come down to speculation. Being destroyed and coming back while not being affected by basic human needs or time is not immortal? With these abilities in place how would one die? All being immortal means is that you won't die from "natural" causes, from what I can tell Manhattan fits that description. As far as his duping goes I have a vague recollection of him duping himself to have a dupe fight crime or something (I'll have to check) that would suggest that a dupe has enough of his power to be effective or there'd be no point.

We have benchmarked what he is capable of, and we know he was a physicist so it would be kind of silly to assume he doesn't understand the nature of his power and what he can do with it, considering that is the same way Firestorm knew the best ways to use his.

I don't understand how people can say he has an ill defined set of abilites, per his universe all matter was seemingly susceptible to his power, outside of the the more exotic energies and materials in DC, everything else is the same as far as the physics. That pretty much defines his abilities the way it defines all matter manipulators, they manipulate matter.

I do however appreciate your responses, very well thought out, and this is what these debates are about.

My debate style evolves each and every day, and is not always such (in reference to the bolded), but I thank you for the compliment my friend=)

As for cross company debates, I don't entirely agree, although at times, yeah, speculation does make it's way into the argument, but at least with a lot of these cross comany battles, we still have many more benchmarks to go off of (but again, it does get hairy at times, like in a recent Zoom versus Classic Strange thread and not knowing how Strange's time control would affect Zoom's personal time control field thingy -- yes, I said thingy -- but with others it is much easier through benchmarks -- Superman versus Spiderman -- plenty of benchmarks, little to speculate).

On immortality, there are many different ideas of immortality based on comic companies, fictional sources, myths and so on -- so based on that and never seeing him coming back from anything other than the again, and this term is getting overused, "ill defined" intrinsic field removal, then I wouldn't say there is proof positive of immortality (as we have no idea what constitutes true immortality in Watchmen). As for duping, the only time you see him dupe himself is in Watchmen #3 in Laurie's apartment, and there really wasn't much power use beyond that in that scene (you never see it used in a combat scenario). And again, for matter manipulation, we still don't know the extent of it. His best matter feat was probably creating the structure on Mars, and we see very little of his matter manipulation on living beings, which again, when he affects humans by blowing them up or various body parts, we don't truly know if that is matter manipulation or a form of intrinsic field removal. It's never spelled out, and is again (and I cringe to even say it), ill defined. So, we don't know truly know the extent of his matter manipulation abilities (plenty of characters have started out weak in that power set only to grow over time, some only achieved a minor level of ability, and some are just downright godly).

The only other point I would give here, is you stated earlier that Manhattan was a "mass of energy with a conscious", but when you do see him coming back, you see flashes of actual body parts (eyeballs, brainstem, musculature and bones, etc). You also see him in clothes from time to time, and touching people and interacting in intimate ways. Again, he is ill defined, but I would argue that he is a flesh and blood being (just someone with the ability to come back from intrinsic field removal).

Alright, I have said I think all that I can say here, and I don't want to turn into a broken record. I appreciate the discussion, and I appreciate the civility you presented it with (I often find myself butting heads with less civil types on these forums). It's been nice chatting, but I have some Skyrim modding to do. Take it easy, and thanks for the discussion. Again, it is appreciated.

#44 Posted by TheGodKiller3 (359 posts) - - Show Bio

@Illuminatus said:

@TheGodKiller3 said:

Doesn't change the fact that they still took place .

I never stated anything to the contrary. I'm simply saying that because these things happened off-panel and we don't know of the context of these instances, they shouldn't be used to gauge Manhattan's potential.

Didn't you yourself mention that Manhattan was an energy being with a consciousness? Then doesn't that hypothetically enable him to perform all of those aforementioned feats ? Doesn't he fact that they took place (off-panel, nevertheless) , and that there is no evidence to the contrary , confirm that ?

#45 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheGodKiller3 said:

@Illuminatus said:

@TheGodKiller3 said:

Doesn't change the fact that they still took place .

I never stated anything to the contrary. I'm simply saying that because these things happened off-panel and we don't know of the context of these instances, they shouldn't be used to gauge Manhattan's potential.

Didn't you yourself mention that Manhattan was an energy being with a consciousness? Then doesn't that hypothetically enable him to perform all of those aforementioned feats ? Doesn't he fact that they took place (off-panel, nevertheless) , and that there is no evidence to the contrary , confirm that ?

What are you talking about? Those instances happened off-panel, and are therefore almost entirely useless in a constructive debate. I'm not attempting to argue what Manhattan is capable of based on the proverbial fiber of his being. 
#46 Posted by jeanroygrant (20191 posts) - - Show Bio

Firestorm

#47 Edited by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@LordOfAllHumans said:

what's hilarious is you wrote something illegible and then expect me to understand the point you are trying to make. That is why I used the bold button, what exactly are you saying in that "sentence" it makes no sense. I'm not going on and on about anything, to the contrary. You can't even understand simply logic. It's ridiculous to you because you don't seem to grasp simple concepts as much as you would like to believe. In fact you are technically arguing with yourself, as you keep insisting I am comparing TOAA, when as I explained earlier that I am using your flawed logic, and as you see it makes no sense thus my point has been made

Oh no some nerd said a bunch of other nerds don't take me seriously about fictional characters. What ever will I do? Grow up, you can't even find a way to universally use something you believe is fact, and when it's used against you, you reduce yourself to this, but then again maybe this is just you.

Go look up the definition of "illegible" and get back to me. You're obviously incapable of supporting your ridiculous boastings of Manhattan, and then you've settled with the degradation of every single user in this thread by using the term "nerd' in a condescending sense when I've proven you wrong and when you're also incapable of responding to my earlier post that ripped your argument to pieces. 
#48 Posted by TheGodKiller3 (359 posts) - - Show Bio

@Illuminatus said:

@TheGodKiller3 said:

@Illuminatus said:

@TheGodKiller3 said:

Doesn't change the fact that they still took place .

I never stated anything to the contrary. I'm simply saying that because these things happened off-panel and we don't know of the context of these instances, they shouldn't be used to gauge Manhattan's potential.

Didn't you yourself mention that Manhattan was an energy being with a consciousness? Then doesn't that hypothetically enable him to perform all of those aforementioned feats ? Doesn't he fact that they took place (off-panel, nevertheless) , and that there is no evidence to the contrary , confirm that ?

What are you talking about? Those instances happened off-panel, and are therefore almost entirely useless in a constructive debate. I'm not attempting to argue what Manhattan is capable of based on the proverbial fiber of his being.

Who said I was using them in a debate ? Off-Panel or not , they still happened . They are still cannon . I am not using them as an argument as to why Manhattan wins, Firestorm has better feats , thats why I give him my vote.

I was merely clarifying the facts about the character to another poster . Plus you didn't answer a single one of my questions in my previous question , apart from the same "Off-Panel" argument .

#49 Posted by Illuminatus (9503 posts) - - Show Bio
@TheGodKiller3 said:

Who said I was using them in a debate ? Off-Panel or not , they still happened . They are still cannon . I am not using them as an argument as to why Manhattan wins, Firestorm has better feats , thats why I give him my vote.

I was merely clarifying the facts about the character to another poster . Plus you didn't answer a single one of my questions in my previous question , apart from the same "Off-Panel" argument .

What were the questions you were asking? They didn't even make sense the first time around, which is why I responded with, "What are you talking about?".
#50 Posted by buttersdaman000 (9566 posts) - - Show Bio

Firestorm.

Dr. Manhattan and Firestorm are very close in power in potential, based on what we've seen(!), so the obvious winner would go to the one with the most amounts (and better) feats.

The TOAA analogy that was previously used doesnt apply for this battle. Nobody would argue that Odin defeats TOAA would they? No. Because by very definition TOAA is the supreme creator of the universe. It doesnt matter if Odin has way more feats. The same goes for such fights as.....Thor vs Superman Prime 1 million. We really havent seen anything from the guy, have we? But would you argue for Thor in the fight? No!

All we really know about Dr. Manhattan is that he is a powerful matter manipulator who can blow people up, recreate his body, travel to mars, teleport and so on. Thats pretty close to Firestorms power set......except he has about 100 times more feats.