Vance Astro's forum posts

#1 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

@mazeraiii said:

Are you trolling?

It is an obvious mismatch,Galactus stomps.

If you continue to make mismatch threads you will be banned.

I think you are classicion's new account.

This is a mismatch but you don't have to be this aggressive.

Moderator
#2 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

Don't do this...

Moderator
#3 Edited by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

@claymore1998 said:

@vance_astro: Hey there friend, but you have to consider their weakness were clearly mentioned and shown when one was exploited. For example when Ex-Nihilo were able to turn one of them into trees it was clearly stated why that was possible. Same thing happened in regards to how Doom stayed undetected or how he was able to kill the Beyonders, though the details aren't still vivid and we are due a more detail explanation later.

Nothing of the sort was mentioned during Starbrand instance though. That would certainly cast doubt on that somehow being a result of their supposed weakness. Would it really make sense for Hickman to go out of his way to explain how the other 2 were done with such clarity but fail to mention one for Starbrand. That certainly seem to indicate it wasn't because of their weakness. Perhaps starbrand's power were outright that powerful specially when its unleashed at the moment of his death.

While i understand it was never mentioned the said explosion cause by Starbrand's death killed a beyonder without exploiting any weakness, but honestly when has something like that being mentioned. As opposed to when someone's weakness is actually exploited details are clearly mentioned say for example a couple of pages earlier in the same issue.

I am not a big fan of Brevoort's opinion to be honest, but that's a debate for different day, but its actually not pretty clearly if Tom was talking about how Ex-Nihili managed to defeat Beyonder or how Starbrand managed to do so.

Given lack to evidence suggesting it was done through exploration of some unknown or unmentioned weakness, or the fact the starbrand's source of power is merely cosmic energy in nature from un-defined source there does not appear much that would suggest it was exploiting any weakness, as far as I have seen on any of the stories thus far.

I don't know whether Brevoort knows what he's talking about or whether he's just guessing. That's why I brought up The Void incident though. It was never stated that Sentry has any ability to control who can and cannot hurt him especially to the magnitude where he's killed but Bendis (who wrote the comic) stated that Sentry was killed because he wanted to die although previously he had seemingly been invincible. In other words this wouldn't be the first time a story came to a conclusion with results based on something not completely explained in the story.

Moderator
#4 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

@sophia89 said:


If you're a male and are attracted to a man who has female parts and you know they are male you're homo.

You already suggested this. I disagreed and you just said it again...

Moderator
#5 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

The issue is, the way he's explaining it makes absolutely no sense.

1. Batman/Superman/Kryptonite.

What is he even comparing to kryptonite here? Starbrand's suicide bomb? That's supposed to be weakness to beyonder for reasons unknown? Correct me if I am wrong, but no such thing has been stated to date nor is there even a way to connect the two. This may be explained further, though.

You're basically saying here that it doesn't make sense and you're also explaining how it does. Kryptonite is Superman's weakness, even if the details are shaky on what exactly is the Beyonders' weakness or how it works, that doesn't take away the fact that a weakness is was exploited in order for the Earth Heroes to win. The part you're saying doesn't make sense doesn't even have anything to do with the analogy.

2.

"We need to stop thinking of these power relations as simply black and white terms"

And believe that a being that can supposedly solo entire celestial race, destroy eternity to take down the universe will die to a starbrand explosion? How are the beyonders really threatening, if we remove the black and white and consider all the characters somewhere on the same tier?

This again doesn't have anything to do with the point. You're arguing with whether what is said to be a weakness can be, not whether one was exploited or not. Brevoort didn't explain the weakness or even intended to. "We need to stop thinking of these power relations as simply black and white terms" means that the person asking the question seems to be thinking in terms of who are what would be powerful enough to overpower the Beyonders, that's where the Superman/Kryptonite analogy comes in. In that case it's not about whether the wielder of the Kryptonite is as powerful as Superman, Kryptonite is just his weakness.

3.

If real life worked like that, we'd have no sporting events of any kind - you could look ... stats.

Real life sports have a minimal gap, and various people have various skills. Putting a human against eternity will make a very convincing event, I suppose.

What he's saying is that there are variables in sports, nothing is set in stone based on stats. A team could appear better than another based on stats and still lose. What's stupid about this?

Moderator
#6 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

@atheistknowledge said:

@vance_astro: Of course it does, but he can still be wrong just like everyone else and he has been in the past.

Examples?

It is, he used the most basic analogy ever without delving into why it works in this particular situation.

Basic, yes...but it does answer the question.

Me throwing Kryptonite at Superman and Batman is one thing but abstract beings losing to Beyonders while Earths heroes figure out their weakness(which isn't explained and probably never will be) is completely different. There are so many other variables here, it's not as simple as he tries to make it look, yet ironically he calls others on looking things as black and white. Look it's not like Marvel and DC and whatever other company hasn't done "questionable" things just to move the plot forward i mean no editor on this planet can tell me for instance that a whisper suddenly makes Thor unworthy... that's not how picking up the hammer works. But you know who cares, let's just move the plot forward and i am having that same vibe here where he honestly pulled this "weakness" straight out of his ass while trying to make the comic book fans look stupid. Which plenty of them are, to this day some people still use the ABC logic to the letter but him trying to relate cosmic beings fighting each other while shaking the multiverse to real life sporting events is facepalm worthy.

I don't think it's ironic at all or saying that people look at things as "black & white" considering the way the question was asked. He's asking how the Beyonders were defeated using more powerful characters as a measuring stick but considering the power levels of those characters is irrelevant to the answer it's obvious an ABC approach was taken. The Superman/Kryptonite analogy works perfectly because says that Batman isn't as powerful as Superman but has a way to even the odds. Too me this seems like the same thing that happened with The Void during Siege. He was seemingly invulnerable to all their attacks and couldn't be phased at all. Some powerful characters were (like Loki for instance) killed extremely easily then all of a sudden a helicarrier falls on him and he's beatable now? When asked, Bendis said on Formspring that Thor was able to kill him because he wanted to die. Apparently he has that ability now. That was never explained in that issue. In this case the person asking the question isn't asking the writer, he's asking the editor. Brevoort may not be completely clear on the details and that's why his point is so vague but he does somewhat explain it. It's not about matching power levels it's about exploiting weaknesses.

Moderator
#7 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

@stormphoenix said:

But people need to accept that there is no way Wonder Woman is getting close to Storm.

I think they would if it was a fact, but it's not.

Moderator
#8 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

@atheistknowledge said:

@vance_astro: Not to butt in but does that somehow exempts him from being an idiot? I mean the analogy he used is rather lame and i know for a fact this Beyonder "Kryptonite" is never gonna get explained. They got beat because Earths heroes figured out the weakness abstract beings couldn't, which weakness is that? Tune in next week to found out, but not really.

No, but that does lend him more credibility than posters on a comic forum. The analogy he used isn't lame, the person who asked the question was using ABC logic, Brevoort explains how that logic doesn't work. Whether these beings having a weakness makes sense or not doesn't have anything to do with the fact that one was used to defeat them. He didn't write it, he's explaining it.

Moderator
#9 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

This isn't fair for Cassandra Cain.

Moderator
#10 Posted by Vance Astro (89666 posts) - - Show Bio

@bee14ish said:

That makes no sense. Any character capable of even remotely challenging LT shouldn't have a weakness. That guy sounds like an idiot.

You realize that Tom Brevoort is the editor of Marvel Comics, right?

Moderator