New 52 not nerfed.

Some are. Some arent.

There's a differwnce however. Theres a specific user who likes to say that certain new 52 character are nerfed. And after thinking about what exactly that ment, i realized thats not true.

See, nerfed means not as powerful as before. So that would be true if this new version attempted a feat he or she did before new 52 and then fails at it.

For example. Lets say Character X lifted a truck that weighed 2 tons pre 52. If the same character tried to do that and failed now in the new 52, then yes, that character has now been nerfed.

BUT, thats not whats happening. People are taking a lack of feats as these characters being nerfed and thats not the case. Unless maybe they dont know what nerfed means. It hasnt even been 3 years yet since it started. Not even 36 issues in. Give them time to accomplish impressive feats.

But the main point eas theyre not nerfed because they havnt attempted and failed those same feats as before so theyre in fact, not berfed.

That language needs to change since it's incorrect.

The main point is one I've said for awhile now: writers don't write their characters to be used on he battle forums. They really don't care about who beat whom this weak, or how good a feat they just displayed was.

I think the word nerfed is inaccurate in this case, the characters just aren't as powerful. Nerfed is a more extreme case IMO

most lower characters got some upgrade

higher end characters got a downgrade some very severe

Shouldn't the writers care about the battle forums? After all, thats what the fans want.