Comic Battle >> View Post
·
Post By
Toe Rag

Member Since: Mon May 14, 2012
In Reply To
thorfan

Subj: Re: Class 100, is it a poor way to rank strenght?
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 at 11:46:17 am CST (Viewed 91 times)
Reply Subj: Class 100, is it a poor way to rank strenght?
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 at 08:56:16 am CST (Viewed 40 times)

Previous Post

We've seen the hulk way above class 100 showings, im sure that others have showings high above that also(probably anyone who's ever held up a building) in your opinion is It a good way to rank strength? In other words why not class 500, class 1000?

I think using the numbers as tonnage is incorrect. To me, Class 100 doesn't mean 100 tons. Class 100 means one of the top classes - able to lift a tremendous amount of weight. When we see Thor lift a mountain, it's obvious he's lifting substantially more than 100 tons. Only Class Incalculable is higher and is reserved for beings whose strength cannot truly be measured. Because of his variable strength, the Hulk is in this class. How do you measure the strength level of someone who's strength can increase? It's not possible.

And I consider these classes to be based upon physical strength, not the ability to affect gravity, magnetic fields, or manipulate energy. To me, these are different forms of energy projection.


Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software