• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I do agree with the idea that I feel like he should be weaker, but other than body appearance I haven't seen any real contradiction to the WoG.

The only time Thor post-Stormbreaker ever fought Thanos was when he three stormbreaker when he caught Thanos off guard, and when he chopped Thanos's arm and head off, again off guard. Thanos never had the proper chance to fight back until Endgame.
I mean Stormbreaker easily pushed through a 6 Infinity Stone blast and mortally wounded Thanos when thrown by Infinity War Thanos, it just doesn't seem that powerful in Endgame.
 
Thanks for the input.

So, based on what you saw with Iron Man's feat (The meteor didn't break apart on hitting Iron Man, it was mostly intact when it slammed Iron Man into the ground and stopped only after hitting the ground), how should we treat it, in your opinion?
I haven't looked at al the other details, but IMO Iron Man is probably at least comparable to that one meteors KE.

But what do we do with planetary collisions? Like in the case of Superman. Not saying that the Apokolips and Genesis feat are legit since they're not legit due to canonicity issues, but suppose it was some other verse.
DontTalkDT:

The issue that I have been concerned about is not when a character actually shatters a large meteorite, cancels out its impact, or similar, but when they are simply hit with it while standing on the Earth, and the surrounding surface area withstands most of the energy involved.
Let me first say that I don't actually know this feat either.
If we do factually know that the surrounding surface area made a truly significant contribution then I suppose it shouldn't scale. And if we are talking about planets colliding them breaking apart is also something that would usually happen.
Otherwise, if the planets remain like solid unbroken balls with the character squished between them I would scale it, though.
 
I haven't looked at al the other details, but IMO Iron Man is probably at least comparable to that one meteors KE.



Let me first say that I don't actually know this feat either.
If we do factually know that the surrounding surface area made a truly significant contribution then I suppose it shouldn't scale. And if we are talking about planets colliding them breaking apart is also something that would usually happen.
Otherwise, if the planets remain like solid unbroken balls with the character squished between them I would scale it, though.
Here's the feat if you're interested.

The ground did get significantly damaged by the meteor tho (While the meteor mostly was showed to be intact), no idea how that would affect things.

Also, what do you mean by "a truly significant contribution"
 
Last edited:
About the snap: calcing the atomized body count isn't the attack that Thanos tanked.

Rocket specifically shows with the hologram that they were calcing the energy output from the gauntlet alone, not the snap's universal atomization. They used this logic to pinpoint the planet Thanos was on.

So the 5 gigaton statement is just referring the the energy released upon snapping, and the Low 6-B calc is for a completely separate thing. Otherwise it would have been useless trying to pinpoint where Thanos was by using the energy of the infinity gauntlet because of its universal range.
 
Here's the feat if you're interested.

The ground did get significantly damaged by the meteor tho (While the meteor mostly was showed to be intact), no idea how that would affect things.

Also, what do you mean by "a truly significant contribution"
The impact was really small comparing to the Tier 6 KE though so the indication seems to be Iron Man tanked most of it?
 
Also, any opinions on the 5 gigaton energy surge that resulted in the snap a few seconds before everyone got dusted?
 
Also, any opinions on the 5 gigaton energy surge that resulted in the snap a few seconds before everyone got dusted?
I agree with the assertion that that was the energy produced by the Gauntlet itself (Which Thanos tanked) to produce the Snap on a Universal scale, and not necessarily the universal dusting itself. (Which can be calculated separately and applied as its own AP value, or just be treated as hax)
 
Yes, I think Thanos is the only one who can reliably scale to the energy generated by the full IG, as he only retained minor injuries from the first snap (even though, again, he had a giant axe planted in his chest), while Hulk and IM sustained major to lethal damage respectively.

I'm pretty sure Bleeding Edge IM at least somewhat downscales from Thanos due to their fight on Titan right?
 
Yes, I think Thanos is the only one who can reliably scale to the energy generated by the full IG, as he only retained minor injuries from the first snap (even though, again, he had a giant axe planted in his chest), while Hulk and IM sustained major to lethal damage respectively.

I'm pretty sure Bleeding Edge IM at least somewhat downscales from Thanos due to their fight on Titan right?
I mean, at most, iron man and co would be downscaled to High 7-A, consistent with Endgame Thor
 
Just thinking, but wasn't Thanos stated as being the most powerful villain in the universe including beings like Ego?
 
Like Spino said, the ground impact is really small compared to the meteor's actual KE so Iron Man would have taken most, if not all of the yield anyway, and the meteor also didn't break apart upon impact.

But... trying to scale him to the meteor's full yield of 72.06 gigatons (As the Roche limit version was the actual yield accepted by DMUA as Spino notes) would be a massive outlier anyhow considering how the 5 gigaton energy surge literally left Thanos crippled (Granted he was hit in the chest with Stormbreaker but you get what I mean).

So yeah, meteor feat is wack and has to go anyway.
 
High 7-A is a tiny tier, and 5 gigatons is not far from baseline 6-C (4.3 gigatons), which even then the snap majorly injures Thanos, so he would downscale from that.

So I think everyone else Thor tier being at High 7-A is fine rather than scaling up to 6-C considering they downscale from Thanos, but otherwise I'm neutral.
 
High 7-A is a tiny tier, and 5 gigatons is not far from baseline 6-C (4.3 gigatons), which even then the snap majorly injures Thanos, so he would downscale from that.

So I think everyone else Thor tier being at High 7-A is fine rather than scaling up to 6-C considering they downscale from Thanos, but otherwise I'm neutral.
I actually completely agree with this.

Endgame Thor's feat is 3.77 gigatons, while baseline 6-C is 4.3 gigatons.
The snap is 5 gigatons, so the difference between it and Thor's feat is pretty miniscule.

We know IW Thor is probably stronger than his Endgame self, at least a little bit, and Thanos is clearly stronger than both versions physically.
So Thanos should probably either be "At least High 7-A+" or "At least High 7-A+, likely higher/6-C (baseline, due to the difference being so miniscule and him stomping Thor)".
I'm neutral towards upscaling him to baseline 6-C as well.
I think all 3 options would be consistent with him surviving the snap (s), but still being notably harmed by them.

Iron Man would also be either "High 7-A+" or "At least High 7-A+" due to harming Thanos physically, albeit barely.

Thor obviously scales to his own feat, and probably above Thanos with Stormbreaker for obvious reasons.
So "High 7-A+, At least High 7-A+, likely higher with Stormbreaker" or something like that.

Hulk scales to base Thor, so High 7-A+ for him as well. Note that he was also manhandled by base Thanos.

I'd also like to point out that the difference between 5 gigatons and 3.77 gigatons is literally only 1.326x, so I don't think upscaling Thanos to baseline 6-C is out of the question, and it'd still be consistent with everything else.
 
Last edited:
Btw, I think this doesn't just apply to Phase 3, but also some of the characters from Phase 1 and Phase 2. Since I noticed that the characters who have survived strikes from Mjolnir are way weaker than the rating of Mjolnir itself.
 
I actually completely agree with this.

Endgame Thor's feat is 3.77 gigatons, while baseline 6-C is 4.3 gigatons.
The snap is 5 gigatons, so the difference between it and Thor's feat is pretty miniscule.

We know IW Thor is probably stronger than his Endgame self, at least a little bit, and Thanos is clearly stronger than both versions physically.
So Thanos should probably either be "At least High 7-A+" or "At least High 7-A+, likely higher/6-C (baseline, due to the difference being so miniscule and him stomping Thor)".
I'm neutral towards upscaling him to baseline 6-C as well.
I think all 3 options would be consistent with him surviving the snap (s), but still being notably harmed by them.

Iron Man would also be either "High 7-A+" or "At least High 7-A+" due to harming Thanos physically, albeit barely.

Thor obviously scales to his own feat, and probably above Thanos with Stormbreaker for obvious reasons.
So "High 7-A+, At least High 7-A+, likely higher with Stormbreaker" or something like that.

Hulk scales to base Thor, so High 7-A+ for him as well. Note that he was also manhandled by base Thanos.

I'd also like to point out that the difference between 5 gigatons and 3.77 gigatons is literally only 1.326x, so I don't think upscaling Thanos to baseline 6-C is out of the question, and it'd still be consistent with everything else.
I agree completely with this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top