Poll Batman with excessively long prep actually broke VS rules? (20 votes)
While I agree that Doctor Doom is more overrated than Batman and that with sufficient prep, Batman would BEAT Doctor Doom in a battle of wits, it has come to my realization that quite some people still don't actually understand why is Batman considered overrated and just claim he is so without thinking.
Read the rules made by CV
"Things like upgrading certain characters to a certain physical levels, or removing powers for two opponents to gauge hand-to-hand skills is fine as long as the fight is fair in the process. However, giving people like Hulk the Power Cosmic or people like Nightwing a Green Lantern ring is unacceptable because neither character has displayed the skill and/or competence to use such weapons/items. That said, it would be difficult (and in most cases, nearly impossible) for people to debate. Threads of this nature will be locked if it becomes an issue."
Batman with ridiculous prep-time = Giving illegal buffs
The excessive prep-time users tend to give Batman is actually one of the factors that made him seemed so "overrated". Think about it Batman fanboys, when in the comics does Batman display feats that rely on excessive prep-time in the range of multiple years?
Yet I see extremely ridiculous threads like Batman vs Superman where Batman gets 20 years of prep, Batman vs Galactus where Batman gets 10 years of prep, etc etc. And people still debate about it, which is why some users tend to think Batman is overrated.
Do you agree that giving excessive prep-time to Batman is the equivalent of giving Batman buffs which hasn't been demonstrated in any media?
Discuss.
Log in to comment