PDA

View Full Version : Batman vs Superman [Spoilers]



TinSoldier
2006-04-29, 06:39 PM
In another thread (http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=comics;action=display;num=1146239012 ;start=11#11), where it is off topic, a couple of people posted about Batman kicking Superman's butt.

I've seen it in a couple of places, but the one I remember most is the graphic novel Batman: The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller. The same guy who did Sin City.

It doesn't have anything to do with any TV show.

I can't remember where else I've seen it though. I know Batman handed Superman his ass on at least one other occasion.

Anyway, Batman > Superman.

Rainee_Sue
2006-04-29, 06:48 PM
I always liked Batman because he wasn't born with awesome abilities. He just woke up one day and decided he was gonna be badass, and then he did it.

Besides, everyone knows that Superman's a **** (http://www.superdickery.com/).

Dawnstrider_Moogle
2006-04-29, 06:50 PM
I really have to side with the Utahraptor (http://www.qwantz.com/index.pl?comic=745).

If nothing else - superspeed, folks.

On the other hand, there is that synthetic "red" kryptonite that turned his skin transparent or whatever that Ra's Al'ghul duplicated using notes stolen from the Dark Knight.

TinSoldier
2006-04-29, 06:59 PM
I always liked Batman because he wasn't born with awesome abilities. He just woke up one day and decided he was gonna be badass, and then he did it.

Besides, everyone knows that Superman's a **** (http://www.superdickery.com/).Thanks for the link! I'm checking it out now... Edit Wow. What an awesome site! I'm not even partially through it yet and I love it! I never really thought Superman was a **** before, but I'm starting to believe it!

Edit Aw, doggone it! Some of these show Batman being a **** too. So it is inadmissable! :-X

One point that I wanted to make is that while Batman is mundane, he has intelligence, ability, and resources. Superman has super powers. He's pretty smart, too, but not as smart as Batman.

Plus Batman places fewer restrictions on what he considers acceptable actions than does Superman.

Edit: OMG! It's Elan! (http://www.superdickery.com/****/1.html)

tgva8889
2006-04-29, 07:23 PM
Ok, explain how Superman loses to Batman in a straight up fight. Sure, Batman has kryponite, but Superman can just friking drop a mountain on him. Or carry him into space. Or crush his head. I mean, Batman is really smart and everything, but he'd have to be close to Superman and then use the Ring of Kryptonite. Not that this would ever, ever happen, as they are great friends in all. But it's possible that either would win, but I'd side with Superman, just because Superman has almost every power imaginable. Or he used to.

ElfLad
2006-04-29, 07:27 PM
Ah, but would Batman enter a fight with Superman without extensive preparation?

TinSoldier
2006-04-29, 07:36 PM
Ok, explain how Superman loses to Batman in a straight up fight. Sure, Batman has kryponite, but Superman can just friking drop a mountain on him. Or carry him into space. Or crush his head. I mean, Batman is really smart and everything, but he'd have to be close to Superman and then use the Ring of Kryptonite. Not that this would ever, ever happen, as they are great friends in all. But it's possible that either would win, but I'd side with Superman, just because Superman has almost every power imaginable. Or he used to.Well, it has happened in the graphic novel that I have.

One thing is that their friendship is more of a liability for Superman than it is for Batman. It causes Superman to hold back just enough -- while the Batman does not.

In that same graphic novel, however, Superman (barely) survives a nuclear explosion. And Batman has a heart attack because he is older (he doesn't die, though). He's using powered armor.

Of course, it wasn't a fight to the death. Superman just got beat more than Batman (disregarding the heart attack part.)

6079smithw
2006-04-29, 07:54 PM
Ok, explain how Superman loses to Batman in a straight up fight. Sure, Batman has kryponite, but Superman can just friking drop a mountain on him. Or carry him into space. Or crush his head. I mean, Batman is really smart and everything, but he'd have to be close to Superman and then use the Ring of Kryptonite. Not that this would ever, ever happen, as they are great friends in all. But it's possible that either would win, but I'd side with Superman, just because Superman has almost every power imaginable. Or he used to.

Here's the thing about Superman: he's kind of dumb. Sure, he could win every fight just but going infinitely fast or dropping a mountain on his opponent or something, but he generally just flies forward and tries to punch; it's not that he can't think of anything else to do, it's just that it works so often he never bothers. He's overpowered and therefore lazy. Batman, on the other hand, has constantly to face insanely creative opponents and people with almost infinitely more power, and he wins. He wins because he's friggin' insane about putting every faculty he has towards winning, and he has a lot of faculties.
An even better case of Bats dropping Superman, though far from canon, is The Dark Knight Strikes Again (although certainly weaker story-wise than it's predecessor.) Batman knows exactly what Superman's tactics are, and counters them at every turn; he eventually gets to kryptonite, but not until he's humiliated the man so much that it's clear who would have won even without the weakness.
To quote Ford Prefect, "[Superman] isn't obsessed by anything, you see. And that's the deciding factor. [He] can't win against obsession. [Batman] cares, he doesn't. Batman wins."

Steward
2006-04-29, 09:35 PM
Superman wouldn't hurt Batman. He's way too nice. Superdickery is a funny website but it takes the strips out of context for the humor.

LordOfNarf
2006-04-30, 01:37 AM
I am not an avid reader of graphic novels or comics, but i am inclined to think that Superman would win, even though batman is cooler. Supermans fly-and-punch tactic tends to work wel, since he is bulletproof and such.

Dhavaer
2006-04-30, 01:37 AM
There was a comic series that showed how a lot of heroes died. Superman was, of course, killed off by Batman after he went mad. (Supes, not Bats)
Batman basically just went up to Superman and held up the Kryptonite while he and Robin dodged.

Haggis_McCrablice
2006-04-30, 02:24 AM
Besides, everyone knows that *Superman's a ****.
Esp. when he's had a few (http://www.fiction.net/tidbits/etc/empire_wind.html).

It depends on if you like a hero who isn't afraid to use strongarm tactics, bust a table now and again to get his point across. Superman isn't the type to hang a guy off a ten-story building by his ankle until he squeals; Batman will.

Of course, some say Batsie's at his best when he thinks things through and can solve a case without throwing a punch. I just read a comic book the other day in which he goes up against that mean green brach Poison Ivy. He just talks for most of the book to buy time, while Robin's downstairs putting weed killer in the sprinker system of an office building to kill her giant vines.

And then there was the one about Superman and Wonder Woman (http://www.c4vct.com/kym/humor/heroesx.htm)....

Flak_Razorwill
2006-04-30, 02:33 AM
And then there was the one about Superman and Wonder Woman (http://www.c4vct.com/kym/humor/heroesx.htm)....

Blasphemy!

http://nodating4batman.ytmnd.com/

Haggis_McCrablice
2006-04-30, 04:32 AM
Y'know, I wonder what Batman does when he's on a stakeout, and he needs to take a leak. I guess he can go behind an air conditioner unit or something--no one'll see him up on a rooftop. I've heard he doesn't let Batgirl come with since that time she drank a Big Gulp and three mocchachinos right before an all-nighter near the docks.... *;)

Tanaar
2006-04-30, 05:37 AM
Superman has a weakness, ergo Batman can beat him. Period. Superman is a close second for most unbeatable superhero ever. Batman essentialy has no weaknesses, and those he has, he covers to the point his enemies can't exploit them, while successfully using every weakness his opponents have.

My view of a serious Superman-Batman faceoff:

Superman goes at Batman. Batman runs away and hides. Batman waits for the opportune moment, stalking Superman. Causes distraction. Outsmarts Superman, gets close. *dodge* *kryptonite ftw*

Nerd-o-rama
2006-04-30, 08:07 AM
Spiderman.

Silly DC fans...

In all seriousness, Batman's definitely got a shot. He's much more clever than Superman, if not outright smarter. He's just had to work harder. The only things that can even faze Superman are kryptonite and moral quandaries. Batman has to work his ass off every fight, being a normal - if obsessive, rich, and super-buff - human. Batman just plain tries harder, and therefore has the advantage. Plus, Batman usually works by exploiting his opponents' weaknesses, and Supes, as I said, has two glaring ones.

In all honesty, it'd take a hell of a lot of planning, timing, and luck for Batman to pull a win, but it could happen. Mostly, I just find Superman annoying, in spite of Bill's excellent defense of his characterization.

Seriously though, Spidey or Wolverine could take them both at once.

danielf
2006-04-30, 08:48 AM
Thor x Wolverinewho wins?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWKxol6Ras8
watch the video :D

MalachorWraith
2006-04-30, 08:14 PM
Seriously though, Spidey or Wolverine could take them both at once.

I just had to say that is overall one of the stupidest statements made by anyone who has ever read comics.

Lets just suggest that the Hulk is on the same strength level as Superman. The comics that have been written have all had Superman beat the Hulk. They just have. Next issue.

Have you ever seen Wolverine fight the Hulk? Have you ever seen Spiderman fight the Hulk? They always take advantage of the fact that they are dealing with a halfway competent individual in order to get anything done. In the Hulk fight against Wolverine, the Hulk threw Wolverine into the sky at about the height of a low flying airplane. Wolverine passed out unconscioius. Now imagine someone with that strength level and he can fly. Supes would take down Wolverine fairly quickly if he really wanted to. Wolverine weighs about 300 pounds. Ok now consider that Superman is also faster than Wolverine. You know how Superman threw all those rockets into the sun? Am I illustrating a point?

Spiderman would have better offense on Supes by comparison but the sad truth is that Spidey can be killed by a single well place bullet and would lack the endurance for any form of open combat with Superman.

As far as Batman goes, he kills anything with one hour preparation. Thats how he works. Thats how he could defeat Superman.

Ing
2006-04-30, 08:45 PM
actuallly spidy and wolverine were both able to hold their own agianst the hulk...but only if you define win as 'not get smashed' which is still a feat when fighting agianst a guy who can eat oldsmobiles.

Superman can't really be a hero though....to be a hero you have to actually risk something, be willing to put your life on the line. how can a man who is virtually invincible in everyway really be a hero? stop a missile, take a bullet, its nothing to him, now batman a regular guy has a great possibility of death even with all his preperation and is willing to accept that outcome for the greater good. hence Batman is clearly more hero than Superman...

Dhavaer
2006-05-01, 04:51 AM
Has anyone read the Dc vs Marvel series? From what I remember:

Superman > Hulk
Robin > Jubilee
Storm > Wonder Woman
Wolverine > Lobo
Spiderman > Superboy

Who fought Catwoman, and who won out of Thor and Captain Marvel?

Ulicus
2006-05-01, 06:02 AM
Has anyone read the Dc vs Marvel series? From what I remember:

Superman > Hulk
Robin > Jubilee
Storm > Wonder Woman
Wolverine > Lobo
Spiderman > Superboy

Who fought Catwoman, and who won out of Thor and Captain Marvel?

Yeah, but I'm pretty sure they allowed fans to vote on some (all?) of them. Which explains how Storm beat Wonder Woman, which, when you think about it, is so ridiculously stupid it doesn't even bear thinking about.

I'm not sure how Wolverine beat Lobo either... Oh yeah, rabid fanboys! Garghh. Not that I don't like Wolvie.

Catwoman fought Elektra... uh, I think... I can't remember who won. I think Thor won against Captain Marvel. Didn't the Silver Surfer fight the Green Lantern and win too?

Sparhawk
2006-05-01, 06:27 AM
I think they were all fan voted.

Silver Surfer fought Kyle Rayner but I'm not sure who won. I don't have issue with either of those winning though I would lean towards Surfer.

Ulicus
2006-05-01, 06:32 AM
I think they were all fan voted.

Silver Surfer fought Kyle Rayner but I'm not sure who won. I don't have issue with either of those winning though I would lean towards Surfer.

Yeah, just checked, the Surfer won.

This is the entire list from that crossover event:

* Spider-Man defeats Superboy
* Superman defeats Hulk
* Thor defeats Captain Marvel
* Robin III defeats Jubilee
* Wolverine defeats Lobo
* Storm defeats Wonder Woman
* Batman defeats Captain America
* Aquaman defeats Namor the Sub-Mariner
* Flash III defeats Quicksilver
* Elektra defeats Catwoman
* Silver Surfer defeats Green Lantern V

ObadiahtheSlim
2006-05-01, 11:00 AM
Batman wins. Why? Because he's batman.

WampaX
2006-05-01, 11:35 AM
The problem is, Batman has to know. If he doesn't, he's dead. As shown in some of the Superman issues leading up to Infinite Crisis.

Batman will do anything to end a fight and his only limitation is that he's human. But Superman has self imposed limitations as well as his innate weaknesses to Magic and Kryponite.

Still, after witnessing the nothing-to-lose battle between Superman and Wonder Woman during The OMAC Project, I'd have to go with Superman if he went all out. Otherwise, Batman.

TinSoldier
2006-05-01, 11:41 AM
I'm not really familiar with the comics of either superhero. Most of my knowledge comes from the graphic novels I've got and from Batman: The Animated Series (love that show!)

Nerd-o-rama
2006-05-01, 12:06 PM
Regarding my earlier statement: that was a joke. I was just stating my (slight) preference for Marvel comics over DC.

Beleriphon
2006-05-01, 01:20 PM
Has anyone read the Dc vs Marvel series? From what I remember:

Superman > Hulk
Robin > Jubilee
Storm > Wonder Woman
Wolverine > Lobo
Spiderman > Superboy

Who fought Catwoman, and who won out of Thor and Captain Marvel?


Lets not forget Batman vs Carnage. Batman won by virtue of taking Caranage's horrible beating and then beating him senseless. As I recall Bats also beat Captain America.

As for Superman being a hero, he nothing of himself, but he has a great deal to lose in others. I don't think that he would knowningly risk Lois or his parents. Batman seems much more likely to take those as "reasonable sacrifices" if it came right down to it, although it wouldn't be his first choice.

EscherEnigma
2006-05-01, 04:43 PM
hm... I think I remember reading about that old DC vs. Marvel series... if I recall correctly, the main challenge to the writers was coming up with a way for the fights to make sense. Now, this is just off the top of my head, but didn't Storm end up with Thor's Hammer while fighting Wonder Woman? That would probably explain how that fight went... but I'm probably wrong. Never actually read the comics, just read articles about the comics.

As for Batman vs. Superman... uh... Has Superman EVER won that fight? I can vaugely remember them fighting several times, and Batman always winning. Which makes sense to me, because if the two biggest Hero's in the DC universe are going at it, there has GOT to be some serious plot to justify it, and Batman probably knew it was coming, so he had time to plan.

Edit: after spending the last while on the internet searching, I finally found some vague descriptions of the DC vs. Marvel fights. Many places list the outcomes, but few the methods. ah well. Turns out I was wrong. 'pparently Thor lost his hammer in his fight, and Wonder Woman picked it up and became far too powerful. So powerful, in fact, that she felt it was unfair in her fight with Storm, so she discarded it. And then Storm just kinda zapped her... so yeah, fairly lame.

Anyway. I stand by my statement about Batman.

Dr._Weird
2006-05-01, 06:01 PM
Superman would win. Hands down. His 2 weaknessess have been mentioned, so I won't go over them.

Really, how the hell does Batman get his hands on kryptonite? It's not like you mine it out of the ground. Kryptonite is scattered throughout the universe. It's not that easy to come by.

Take moral dilemmas. The only moral dilemma Supes is going to stop for involves his friends or innocent people. For one, Superman's friends are also Batman's friends. For another thing, innocent people are who Batman's trying to protect. So no way.

Ulicus
2006-05-01, 07:39 PM
Now, this is just off the top of my head, but didn't Storm end up with Thor's Hammer while fighting Wonder Woman? That would probably explain how that fight went... but I'm probably wrong. Never actually read the comics, just read articles about the comics.

If I recall correctly, Wonder Woman had the hammer - then decided that it would be dishonourable to fight Storm like that, so she discarded it - then proceeded to lose in a fair fight to the mutant. Which makes no sense.


Superman would win. Hands down. His 2 weaknessess have been mentioned, so I won't go over them.

Really, how the hell does Batman get his hands on kryptonite? It's not like you mine it out of the ground. Kryptonite is scattered throughout the universe. It's not that easy to come by.


Well, Superman *gave* Batman kryptonite... with the explict reasoning of: "So that you can take me down if I go nuts"... so...

(He might have lost it somewhere down the line though, I've not really kept up on my comic continuity.)

Whatever, with preparation, Batman wins every time. That's practically what his "superpower" IS.

TinSoldier
2006-05-01, 09:44 PM
Really, how the hell does Batman get his hands on kryptonite? It's not like you mine it out of the ground. Kryptonite is scattered throughout the universe. It's not that easy to come by.Because Bruce Wayne is one of the richest fricken' men in the world?


Take moral dilemmas. The only moral dilemma Supes is going to stop for involves his friends or innocent people. For one, Superman's friends are also Batman's friends. For another thing, innocent people are who Batman's trying to protect. So no way.They generally agree, but sometimes Superman is more Paladin-like than Batman. Batman uses means that Superman doesn't necessarily agree with. Batman won't necessarily kill someone, but he will definitely violate their civil rights to get information whereas Superman wouldn't.

Bats has a much darker personality that Supes; and he uses that to his advantage.

tgva8889
2006-05-01, 09:56 PM
Yeah, Batman has a Kryptonite ring which he used during the Supergirl comics. He is also rich. Very, very rich.

Batman is awesome. My opinion of him is greater because of that new Batman movie, Batman Begins was it? Anyhow, that movie ruled.

Superman, I think he's just awesome, and in a fair fight Batman would have some trouble, because if Superman got his hands on him, I'm pretty sure that Batman would be screwed. And I still stand by the dropping-a-mountain-on-him battle plan.

But Bruce Wayne is probably the smartest man alive. Superman is pretty smart, being a super alien with almost every power imaginable (or at least, all the ones without real drawbacks), but smarts is almost all Batman has going for him; otherwise, he's just as mortal as I am. He's probably stronger than I am, but that's because he trains heavily and I don't. Superman, he just got his powers by being not human.

In all fairness, Superman has probably fought some tough foes. I mean, Lex Luthor is basically Evil Batman, except less strong and more smart. And we all know how hard those fights are for Superman. And Brainiac, don't even get me started on how smart Brainiac is.

So in other words, Batman has the one thing that can beat Superman - a gigantic IQ. If he is able to use that to his advantage, then he can win. But I still stand by the fact that he'll need some major help. I mean, if Superman and Wonder Woman hadn't been there in the last Supergirl comic, Batman would probably have no legs. So, he needs some help against Superman, I think.

Steward
2006-05-01, 10:01 PM
Superman can't really be a hero though....to be a hero you have to actually risk something, be willing to put your life on the line. how can a man who is virtually invincible in everyway really be a hero? stop a missile, take a bullet, its nothing to him, now batman a regular guy has a great possibility of death even with all his preperation and is willing to accept that outcome for the greater good. hence Batman is clearly more hero than Superman...

Not necessarily. Superman is a hero because he makes the conscious decision to be one, even if it's not particularly easy when you have to put up with Lex Luthor and his unlimited supply of kryptonite for 1,000,000 comic strips. He could just as easily take over the world with his robot doubles but he doesn't because he has a strong moral compass and has decided that he wants to do the right thing. To me, that makes him as heroic as Batman.

turkishproverb
2006-05-02, 01:43 AM
Superman would win. Hands down. His 2 weaknessess have been mentioned, so I won't go over them.

Really, how the hell does Batman get his hands on kryptonite? It's not like you mine it out of the ground. Kryptonite is scattered throughout the universe. It's not that easy to come by.

aH, ever read JLA: Tower of Babel? *Bat's had wayne enterprises secretly producing a nonlethal artificial kryptonite for a while. *Then there's the fact that he's bought out Lexcorp in the comics, so chances are he got more than a little K there. *ANd he had that ring until recently. *I remember him storing up some other K-related items way back. (in continuity)

There's also the fact that superman's not *invulnerable* to all non magical/nonK forces, just really really really tough. (enough to be effectively invulnerable). *You launch a cruismissile at superman he's going to feel it. *Not be hurt, but feel it. *Then there's that kryptonian plant that causes some severe sikness in kryptonian's (swamp thing cured superman of that.) *Superman's also affected by ultrasonic's, if done in the right frequencies. I have more stuff, if you want a list.

Combine these witht he fact that batman is quite simply more brutal and ruthless, and you have a winner.

"YOu know the difference between you and me, Clark? *Deep down, your a good guy. *And deep down....I'm not."-Batman

"You've studied him?"-Catwoman
"Yes....He's the best at what he doe's." *batman reaches into his belt
"Oh really?" Catwoman
"I said he's the best at what he does" Batman pulls out kryptonite ring, "Not at what I do."

6079smithw
2006-05-02, 04:38 AM
Was I the only one a little disappointed in both Hush and Kingdom Come? I thought them both good, but not great. Anyway, back on topic.

There's a line from Lawrence of Arabia in which Prince Feisal compares himself to Lawrence: "With Major Lawrence, mercy is a passion. With me, it is merely good manners. You may judge which motive is the more reliable."

I would say that's roughly the difference between Batman and Superman. Superman is merciful because he's so ridiculously overpowered that he can afford not to attack with full strenth; he's being polite to the world upon which he is a guest. Batman, on the other hand, is obsessive about never killing anyone under any circumstances, because if he ever did he would snap. Batman, like Lawrence, never kills anyone because he's afraid he might enjoy it.

Ulicus
2006-05-02, 06:24 AM
Was I the only one a little disappointed in both Hush and Kingdom Come? I thought them both good, but not great. Anyway, back on topic.

There's a line from Lawrence of Arabia in which Prince Feisal compares himself to Lawrence: "With Major Lawrence, mercy is a passion. With me, it is merely good manners. You may judge which motive is the more reliable."

I would say that's roughly the difference between Batman and Superman. Superman is merciful because he's so ridiculously overpowered that he can afford not to attack with full strenth; he's being polite to the world upon which he is a guest. Batman, on the other hand, is obsessive about never killing anyone under any circumstances, because if he ever did he would snap. Batman, like Lawrence, never kills anyone because he's afraid he might enjoy it.

I think Superman's "not killing" policy is much more to do with how it would get easier every time, rather than anything to do with being polite. It's a slippery road. Superman kills one guy, and, well he's *killed* someone now, he may as well kill *all* the unquestionably guilty villians he comes across... come to think of it, he's a superpowered force for good, why isn't he ruling the world and making sure humanity doesn't get out of hand? ... etc etc.

I pretty much agree with the Batman analysis though.

Ryujin
2006-05-02, 07:00 AM
Edit: after spending the last while on the internet searching, I finally found some vague descriptions of the DC vs. Marvel fights. *Many places list the outcomes, but few the methods. *ah well. *Turns out I was wrong. *'pparently Thor lost his hammer in his fight, and Wonder Woman picked it up and became far too powerful. *So powerful, in fact, that she felt it was unfair in her fight with Storm, so she discarded it. *And then Storm just kinda zapped her... *so yeah, fairly lame.
.

With regards to the Wolverine-Lobo fight, it was all covered in a single page: they both fall down behind a bar, and Wolverine gets up again after a few panels' worth of sound effects and off-screen violence.

Casualgamer
2006-05-02, 09:14 AM
Why does this have to be a discussion of martial superiority? I think the Batman v. Superman issue should be determined by who is cooler, in which case Batman clearly wins because he has character depth deeper than a puddle.

Argent
2006-05-02, 12:33 PM
It all comes down to context and backstory. Has Batman been able to prepare himself and the general area of the battle? (Reference "The Dark Knight Returns" and its sequel -- he had all the necessary preparations in place to beat Superman, as he was able to dictate when and where the fight took place.) What kind of preparations have taken place? How ticked off is Supes -- is he in control of himself or is he under some sort of influence (as in "Hush")? You really can't answer the who-wins question in a vacuum.

If Bats has been able to set up the battleground in his favor, then he has a good chance of winning a particular fight. If it's just him and Supes in a featureless 20' x 20' room, it'll be a short fight.

gooddragon1
2006-05-02, 02:20 PM
Admittedly I'm the kind of guy who would say that strength doesn't beat intelligence (20th lvl fighter vs 20th level wizard, I mean come on fighter charges, wizard flies, fighter uses magic item, wizard uses mordenkainen's disjunction, fighter busts out a bow, wizard casts protection from arrows, fighter cries to the higher powers that life just isn't fair, wizards turns fighter into a pile of dust with multiple disintegrations or delayed blast fireballs (the difference between magic users and fighters is the ability to take on a group of targets per day or the ability to take out any number of enemies as long as the health holds up and they don't use lots of magic)

Anyway... Superman
If he has at least the tiniest minutiae of intelligence he will just split the planet in half and thus eliminate all life on earth or he will reverse time or: make the sun or some asteroid/comet collide with the earth, stop the earths rotation, create a black hole, cause the sun to go supernova, ignite the atmosphere, melt the polar ice caps, cause a tidal wave by moving the moon really close to the earth, etc... but I think its more of an issue of lives lost in the process (if he was insane however... ).

Dr._Weird
2006-05-02, 04:29 PM
Alright, I have been out-reasoned. I don't read comics that much, so I really shouldn't be in this discussion anyway ::).


Anyway... Superman
If he has at least the tiniest minutiae of intelligence he will just split the planet in half and thus eliminate all life on earth or he will reverse time or: make the sun or some asteroid/comet collide with the earth, stop the earths rotation, create a black hole, cause the sun to go supernova, ignite the atmosphere, melt the polar ice caps, cause a tidal wave by moving the moon really close to the earth, etc... but I think its more of an issue of lives lost in the process (if he was insane however... ).

As turkishproverb said, he's not that infinitely powerful. I could be wrong (see previous lack of information) but I think that Superman needs to breathe. And besides, he doesn't have the strength to do those things.

The Glyphstone
2006-05-02, 05:04 PM
Alright, I have been out-reasoned. I don't read comics that much, so I really shouldn't be in this discussion anyway *::).

As turkishproverb said, he's not that infinitely powerful. I could be wrong (see previous lack of information) but I think that Superman needs to breathe. And besides, he doesn't have the strength to do those things.

I don;t read comics either, but I'm pretty sure he spends a lot of time in space...deflecting asteroids, visiting the Martian Manhunter, that sort of thing. Plus, I think the Justice League fortress is a satellite.

TinSoldier
2006-05-02, 05:08 PM
Yeah, I think you usually see Superman without a helmet when he's in space whereas many other characters (Batman included) wear a space helmet with a breathing aparatus.

I doubt he could hold his breath indefinitely; just for a very, very long time.

Yet another one of those useful superpowers.

Finwe
2006-05-02, 05:22 PM
Doesn't superman gain his power from the earth's sun though? So if he made it go supernova... bye-bye superpowers, hello vacuum of space :O

(Or did the sun's radiation permanently change him?)

Dr._Weird
2006-05-02, 05:27 PM
Yeah, I think you usually see Superman without a helmet when he's in space whereas many other characters (Batman included) wear a space helmet with a breathing aparatus.

I doubt he could hold his breath indefinitely; just for a very, very long time.

Yet another one of those useful superpowers.

But not enough to get that far, I'm guessing.

2xSlick
2006-05-02, 05:32 PM
I don't know about Batman taking him down, but Lex Luther should be smart and evil enough. Honestly, strap some kyrptonite to a chick, then throw her off the empire state building. Bonus points if its Louis Lane. Supe swoops in and catches her, gets weakened by the kryptonite, and they both crater. Why hasn't Brainiac thought of that?

gooddragon1
2006-05-02, 06:15 PM
OH MY GOD!
I Just found the perfect way to analyze these heroes!
http://aleshandre.tripod.com/downloads/poweroverwhelming.pdf
I would say the superman probably got the endless endurance power which allows him to ignore checks like breathing or even eating.

Haggis_McCrablice
2006-05-02, 07:19 PM
I've always wondered why no one has ever kicked Superman in the family jewels. I don't care how all-fired super-strong or invulnerable: a shot in the pills will hurt.

The most surreal Superman moment for me was in S:TAS where Metallo dunked Supes' head in boiling magma aad didn't muss a hair. What, does he have super-gel or something in that duck's-butt?

Mxylzptlk once tried to blow up Superman by turning into a missile with a green-k head. But Superman turned the tables on him by flying in a pattern and making him spell his name backwards in the vapor trail while in pursuit. ;D

6079smithw
2006-05-02, 08:03 PM
The Mxylzptlk one was an interesting example of Superman fighting exclusively with his wits- he never punches anything in that episode, as I recall. Just goes to show that he can be fairly clever when he knows he has to bother (and has months of preptime.) It'd be interesting to see what Batman would have done there.

turkishproverb
2006-05-02, 09:39 PM
As turkishproverb said, he's not that infinitely powerful. I could be wrong (see previous lack of information) but I think that Superman needs to breathe. And besides, he doesn't have the strength to do those things.

No, super's doesn't need to wear anything in space in the current timeline. BUt your right, he couldn't do those thiings in one blast in the current timeline either.

Hyrael
2006-05-02, 09:43 PM
heh, i loved that episode.

Nuts, NUTS, NUTS!

In a straight up fight, batman would be toast, plain and simple. but, batman doesnt do straight up fights. he PLANS. he does research. he has a thing for gadgets. and he's a billionare. its kind of obvious that he would bring kryptonite brass knuckles to the fight.

Kish
2006-05-02, 10:16 PM
I've always wondered why no one has ever kicked Superman in the family jewels. I don't care how all-fired super-strong or invulnerable: a shot in the pills will hurt.
I think it would hurt...the kicker, who would feel as though s/he had kicked a brick wall with all his/her strength. Superman, who can shrug off bullets, not just when he's lucky or when they don't hit anything vital but every single time anyone shoots him anywhere even at point-blank range, wouldn't feel anything.

TheEmerged
2006-05-02, 11:00 PM
Arena #1> The comics world

Surprised this hasn't been mentioned before now: in a comic book, the winner is whoever the writer wants to win, regardless of any sense or argument to the contrary. *See for reference Miko beating the whole team in OotS as an example.

Arena #2> A superhero RPG.

Let's see, Superman has the range advantage, the speed advantage, and the ability to perceive his opponent far earlier and easier than his opponent. *Superman's speed advantage is sufficient to nullify Batman's ability to react to anything Batman wants to do to him. *

Combine the speed with Superman's massive (and vastly underestimated) sense-related powers and it allows Superman to detect any trap Batman could set in advance if Superman is acting like someone with a college education instead of as a villain in a Batman book...

The one possible advantage Batman could use (Kryptonite) has a significantly shorter range than Superman's heat vision, nullifying any possibility for it to matter. *And being "above superstition" Batman can't use magic to his advantage.

As for the "Batman would win because he cheats" argumnet? I suppose none of Superman's rogue's gallary ever cheats ::)

So Batman can't hurt him, can't trap him, can't perceive him unless Superman wants to be perceived, and can't use his weaknesses against him in a real fight.

======================

Is Batman "cooler"? *Yes. *More popular? *Debatable, I'd argue a substantial percentage of Superman's fanbase no longer reads comics. *Batman keeps winning in the comics because writers want him to win, and because the people actually buying the comics want him to win (blame latent anti-jock tendencies).

Finwe
2006-05-02, 11:12 PM
I think it would hurt...the kicker, who would feel as though s/he had kicked a brick wall with all his/her strength. Superman, who can shrug off bullets, not just when he's lucky or when they don't hit anything vital but every single time anyone shoots him anywhere even at point-blank range, wouldn't feel anything.


human, kryptonian or demi-god, being kicked in the nuts hurts.

turkishproverb
2006-05-02, 11:13 PM
well, that depends. In said Superhero RPG, are the character's being played properly? Because that drastically lessons superman's advantage. Furthermore, superman, while college educated, tend's to be a chump, and not think to look for trap's. (much like my old professor's when they try to grade an essey and the student's bill of right's based on their opinion of the topic.) Similarly, superman is not about to endanger humanity in general, or specific humans, trying to take batman down. Batman would be willing to take the risks. Superman wouldn't be willing to be cruel, brutal, and in general criminal towards his adversary and their loved ones. Batman would.

Also, batman's not neccissarily "above superstition." He uses magicians and such as he sees neccesary. He has called upon Jason Blood/Etrigan the demon several times, and even used artifacts whent he situation called for it. He's had frequent contact with the swamp thing and the phantom stranger, and has more than a couple magicians operating in gotham city.

6079smithw
2006-05-03, 12:04 AM
The problem with the Superhero RPG arena is that you're assuming the characters are being played by people of equal competence. That makes it unfair, because Batman is way better at thinking through a fight than Superman, and you're taking that away from him.
We aren't analyzing what did happen in comics, which is always the writers prerogative, nor who would win if I were Superman and you were Batman, we're analyzing who would win if they were real people. And I'm going to keep my argument on the "has more than one strategy" side: Batman.

turkishproverb
2006-05-03, 12:43 AM
The problem with the Superhero RPG arena is that you're assuming the characters are being played by people of equal competence. That makes it unfair, because Batman is way better at thinking through a fight than Superman, and you're taking that away from him.
We aren't analyzing what did happen in comics, which is always the writers prerogative, nor who would win if I were Superman and you were Batman, we're analyzing who would win if they were real people. And I'm going to keep my argument on the "has more than one strategy" side: Batman.


Thank you. *Thank you. Thank you.

This is problem numero UNO with most of the superman win's theories. *He simply wouldn't/couldn't (because of personality/capability/mental limitations) do these things.

Mind you, you put batman up against someone without all of Supermans personality flaws and weakensses, like Captain marvel, I'm not putting the fight as going as well, but then agian, cap's personality would be batman's greatest asset in that fight.

Alfryd
2006-05-03, 10:57 AM
See for reference Miko beating the whole team in OotS as an example.
See for reference:
http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=comics;action=display;num=1133335443 ;start=0#0

It's generally plausible, if you tweak Durkon's behaviour and fudge a roll or two.

I imagine in a properly balanced superhero RPG, during character creation there would be significant tradeoffs between supes ultra-powers and essential 'trade skills' or external resources available to bats, not to mention attributes and behavioural limitations.


The problem with the Superhero RPG arena is that you're assuming the characters are being played by people of equal competence.
The problem with the RPG arena is that it would, due to technology limitations, revolve around straight-up fights that hand the contest to Superman. CoH, for instance, has NO non-combat related elements, let alone adequate provison for things like sense motive, bluff, intimidate, escape artist, or craft checks. These are Batman's strengths.

Bats would use his informant network to track supe's position in advance and use misinformation to lure him, craft a cunning trap at the desired position with strategically placed lead shielding to nullify supe's senses and pepper him with darts of kryptonite secured using limitless wealth to weaken him to the point where he can be dispatched manually, dodging his lightning fast attacks in advance using sense motive, move silently and hide.
At least, that would be the plan.
But I would be astonished if the game even allowed such collossally unbalanced characters to realistically develop in the first place.

BlythraB
2006-05-03, 07:13 PM
Okay, I gota say: Superman is just plain stupid! he's invincible. Batman is way cool. he comes within inches of death all the time, but superman is like: Hi I'm dumb and I have an ugly curl of hair on my head and I can't die so I'm gonna go rescue my girlfriend who is too dumb to keep out of her own trouble. Then I'll use cheesy pick up lines on her, look through her underwear, turn back time and survive death by a glowy green rock by wooing my would be killers worker.
Batman is like:
Well, I've got to go get my dumb sidekick who I'm only nice to because I'm cool like that, then I'm gonna go kick some bad guy butt but I won't kill anyone because I'm awesome

WampaX
2006-05-03, 07:44 PM
Okay, I gota say: Superman is just plain stupid! he's invincible. Batman is way cool. he comes within inches of death all the time, but superman is like: Hi I'm dumb and I have an ugly curl of hair on my head and I can't die so I'm gonna go rescue my girlfriend who is too dumb to keep out of her own trouble. Then I'll use cheesy pick up lines on her, look through her underwear, turn back time and survive death by a glowy green rock by wooing my would be killers worker.
Batman is like:
Well, I've got to go get my dumb sidekick who I'm only nice to because I'm cool like that, then I'm gonna go kick some bad guy butt but I won't kill anyone because I'm awesome

You just compared the plot of Superman to . . . umm, no plot of a Batman movie I can think of.

If your only interaction with these characters is through movies, well, you're only getting part of the story. if you want to limit yourself to visual mediums, then I would suggest the DCAU (DC Animated Universe) series, especially their respective series of Batman: The Animated Series and Superman.

TinSoldier
2006-05-03, 07:50 PM
For me, the graphic novels and the animated series make the characters.

I have never really bought comic books regularly. When I used to read my friends' comics, it was always X-Men.

For the animated series, I only watched a few Supermans (and they were pretty good) but I loved Batman: The Animated Series and The New Batman Adventures (but not as much).

Batman Beyond was pretty good, too, but again I never saw as much of it as I would have liked.

aaronbourque
2006-05-03, 11:26 PM
Superman would win. Hands down. His 2 weaknessess have been mentioned, so I won't go over them.

Really, how the hell does Batman get his hands on kryptonite?
Superman gave him the Kryptonite.

Because Superman? Not too bright.


Take moral dilemmas. The only moral dilemma Supes is going to stop for involves his friends or innocent people. For one, Superman's friends are also Batman's friends. For another thing, innocent people are who Batman's trying to protect. So no way.
But Batman is willing to sacrifice more than Superman is willing to sacrifice.

Batman wins because Superman winning is too obvious. Superman always wins. There's no dramatic tension. Batman, being a man with no super-powers, isn't ensured victory. Thus, by the rules of dramatic underdog victories, he wins.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

Rex_Hondo
2006-05-04, 01:52 AM
Batman always has plans within plans, and given any warning whatsoever, I'd put money on him agains virtually anybody in the DC Universe. He's an unparallelled expert at the mental side of the game.

He know's that in a stand-up dukefest, he's going to end up a grease-smear. That's a given. That's why he never lets it happen.

Also, one of the advantages Bats has, even when somebody, say, is mind-controlling Superman, is that half the superbeings on DC Earth have his back. So, if mind-screwed Big Blue is pounding him into paste, he hits a button and Wonder Woman or somebody swoops in and saves his life. He may have "lost" the fight, but he survives, and Superman, when he gets his body back, feels guilty and holds back that much more in their NEXT inevitable butting-of-the-heads.

PerpetualNewb
2006-05-04, 03:51 AM
A trend I've been noticing in this thread is that the proponents of a Batman victory are saying that Batman's vast plans would somehow allow him to get close enough to Superman to use Kryptonite on him. Ok. Bats has used Kryptonite on Supes. What next? Does Batman kill Superman? Does the fact that Superman is weakened give Batman a victory? In short, what are the victory conditions?

Dhavaer
2006-05-04, 06:15 AM
In the fight I saw, Bats just held the ring near Superman until he died. Victory Bats.

Rex_Hondo
2006-05-04, 06:23 AM
Well, considering the fact that neither of them kills, I'd say incapacitation or surrender would be the victory condition. Of course, for Batman (or anyone fighting Supes for that matter) getting away with his skeleton still in its original configuration could be considered a victory in itself. :P

Death, your friend the Reaper
2006-05-04, 07:10 AM
On an book thing i read (may have been mentoned before) Superman wouldn't attack batman since batman had a field of electormantic (or something neway) that would trigger if he touched him and would "set off a bomb and kill an innocent" That stoped superman from attacking him. After it all Batman reveals that he had the bomb on him and that the innocent was him

BlythraB
2006-05-04, 10:30 PM
Seriously though, Spidey or Wolverine could take them both at once.
I actually have a mental ranking of Superheros and superhero groups and the top 3 are
Batman
Spiderman
X-men

You just compared the plot of Superman to . . . umm, no plot of a Batman movie I can think of.

If your only interaction with these characters is through movies, well, you're only getting part of the story. if you want to limit yourself to visual mediums, then I would suggest the DCAU (DC Animated Universe) series, especially their respective series of Batman: The Animated Series and Superman.
You may have a point, I did compare mostly from the movie but I've also read the comics. so no, not all of my knowledge comes from movies, but then again, it is true that all Superman stuff ever (yes, including comics, no, ESPECIALLY comics) has been ridiculously cheesy. and I will stand by a few things I already said:
Superman does have an ugly curl on his forehead,
Lois Lane IS too stupid to keep out of her own trouble
Superman's pick up lines are cheesy.
but I will be fair to Superman: his story was a good idea, but it's like Q in Star Trek (yeah, yeah, I'm a nerd): If you're going to make an all powerful being who interferes with life for fun, you have to assume that the Q continuum controls everything in the universe. likewise, you have to factor in Superman in all sorts of normal things (like when he sees that someone died on the news, why didn't he stop it)that he should be affecting

Kedrot
2006-05-04, 11:16 PM
As much as I love Batman, i only have one point to add to this debate















Superman is the only hero who puts on a disguise to be NORMAL

turkishproverb
2006-05-04, 11:19 PM
Superman is the only hero who puts on a disguise to be NORMAL

Ah, but for Batman, Bruce wayne is the disguise.

CelestialStick
2006-05-05, 01:49 AM
Ah, but for Batman, Bruce wayne is the disguise.

Since Bruce Wayne was Bruce Wayne before he was Batman, and since Clark Kent was Clark Kent before he was Superman, arguably both Bruce and Clark are their real selves, while Batman and Superman are just the disguises. :)

Superman has always been my favorite superhero. He is good, true and noble, the boy scout (or paladin) among the superheroes. He leads by example, insipres and brings hope. Just the mere fact that he has all that power and it hasn't corrupted him is a testament to his goodness. A lesser person would try to use that that power to take over (as General Zod did, or as an alternate universe Superman did in cahoots with Lex Luthor after Lois Lane died) or at least to become some sort of super villain. Superman has long been the greatest American hero (so much so that DC sued the makers of the tv show "The Greatest American Hero" for copyright infringement), standing for truth, justice and the American way. Before Vietnam and Watergate, a less jaded American audience believed in those things, and while I wouldn't expect non-Americans to thrill to such a thing, many still do these days (though many wouldn't admit it for fear of being mocked by more jaded Americans).

Batman is probably my second favorite superhero. While the campy 1960s Batman TV show made out Batman as somewhat similar in character to Superman, and the 1970s Superfriends animated tv show pretty much made the whole Justice League that way, Batman has pretty often been portrayed since that time as much darker. During the 1980s as I recall, they even portrayed him as a psychopathic vigilante, foaming at the mouth while he shot two guns at the same time; that Batman had no compunction against killing. (Incidentally, it was Superman who stopped him at that time.)

More recently they seem to have returned Batman to his roots as a detective (he started out in a detective comic book) and of course made him rather more sane and less dark, while still keeping him somewhat dark. He doesn't have Superman's ability to lead and inspire.

Many of the characteristics that people on this thread seem to regard as stupidity or character flaws are in reality at product of Superman's goodness and nobility. (I've also noticed in D&D that more than a few people regard good as stupid, so maybe I shouldn't be so surprised.) I do think that that because he's so powerful he does have some arrogance, which is why in the old George Reeves Adventures of Superman he used to just stand there and let the bullets bounce off his chest. (Incidentally, the reason Reeves dodged the gun was because while the bullets were blanks, the gun was a real prop and would have hirt. ;D)

I think more importantly, however, the reason that Superman so often flies blindly into situations without using his superhearing and supervision is that he's just so awesomely powerful that if the authors always had him using all of his powers it would be very difficult if not impossible to challenge him, and there would be no storylines. Occasionally, however, they highlight his intelligence, such as the already-mentioned adventure where Superman beat Mxylzptlk by wits alone or when Superman explained to Lex Luthor what causes earthquakes.

As far as kryptonite killing Superman, there's an interesting little scene in the 1940s Superman serial. A scientist opens a metal box to show reporter Clark Kent a strange meteor rock he found, and Clark Kent falls dead. The scientist checks him out and he's stone cold dead, no pulse and no breath. The scientist closes the box, and Clark comes back to life. Of course they may have established more recently that kryptonite can kill him permanently, but then, well, um, he's still alive, isn't he? ;D Actually there are probably dozens of scenes were someone drops kryptonite on Superman and not only does he not die, but he still manages to use a superpower or two, like when Lex Luthor trapped Superman in a kryptonite cage and Superman used his super breath to drag the key to him.

Now as far as a fight, in theory anyone armed with kryptonite could kill Superman. I think though that Superman is so awesomely fast and strong that he could zip in unseen, grab any superhero, except the Flash, and toss him (or her) into the sun before he (or she) could blink. Part of what makes Superman so noble is that he could but he doesn't want to do any such thing.

As far as Superman needing to breath, I seem to recall that in the 1960s comics he could go into space without needing to breath or hold his breath. I don't recall the George Reeves Superman of the 1950s flying into space, but I recall that there was an episode where he was trapped in a diving bell with Lois and Jimmy and wouldn't have drowned if he burst out of it. The Superman movies with Christopher Reeve show him flying into space without any need to breath. In Lois and Clark in the 1990s, however, Superman did need to take oxygen with him when he flew out to try to stop a meteor from colliding with earth.

Skyserpent
2006-05-05, 02:50 AM
Batman's main way of attack are using bombs and explosives, I think the only thing in batmans arsenal that can hurt Superman is the Kryptonite. If we were to pit Batman against Superman on a larger scale, ongoing conflict, then Bats would basically be Luthor, with more explosives and less minions. On that note, Superman's Posse, (Supergirl, Superboy, and Jimmy) And Batman's Posse (Robin, Nightwing, and Batgirl) have a similar conflict, None of Batman's crew has anything that can take out a Kryptonian. Bruce is the only guy with Kryptonite, and a recent conflict showed that Superboy is now FAR more powerful than he used to be. Robin is more skilled than before, yes, but his improvement can't do anything to an Invulnerable guy. Nightwing has some tricks but heck if I know what he would do against Superboy, Jimmy is functionally useless so let's just slide over him. Supergirl is really powerful, and I doubt Batgirl has anything approaching that level of ability.

So if it's crew vs. crew, sorry people, but the Supes win.

(In combat anyway)

LostInBrittany
2006-05-05, 04:34 AM
This thread is a bit like a thread about what car would win in a race, a Ferrari F40 or a Mini Morris. Mini fans would make all kind of wild hypotheses to explain why the Mini would win, because everybody knows that Mini are way cooler than Ferrari, so Mini must win...

"So as the ferrari has no gas and an incompetent pilot, and as Mini has a nitro-booster and two home-made air turbines, Mini would kick ferrari's ass and win the race!"

:D :D

CelestialStick
2006-05-05, 05:30 AM
This thread is a bit like a thread about what car would win in a race, a Ferrari F40 or a Mini Morris. Mini fans would make all kind of wild hypotheses to explain why the Mini would win, because everybody knows that Mini are way cooler than Ferrari, so Mini must win...

"So as the ferrari has no gas and an incompetent pilot, and as Mini has a nitro-booster and two home-made air turbines, Mini would kick ferrari's ass and win the race!"

:D :D


Well-said. Since Batman's cool, perhaps you're permit me to change it to a race between a Ferrari an an Aurora (secret American spy plane rumored to fly at Mach 5). Sure, the Ferrari is fast and cool, but you'd need a pilot who couldn't fly the Aurora and a Saturn booster attached to the Ferrari for it to win. ;D

aaronbourque
2006-05-05, 10:16 AM
Batman's main way of attack are using bombs and explosives
No, Batman's main way of attacking is to first scare the ever-lovin' crap out of you.

Then he'll blow you up (if he's reasonably sure it won't kill you.)

Unless he wants to kill you.

Then you're kept guessing until it's done.

But the thing is, Batman is the closest thing the DCU has to a heroic ninja, and since the law of ninjas is that the fewer there are (for values above 0), the more dangerous, and since there's only one Batman, he's the most dangerous man in the universe. Even Superman recognizes this.

Which means he was very stupid when he gave Batman the Kryptonite. Very noble, but very stupid.

Aaron "The Mad Whitaker" Bourque

turkishproverb
2006-05-05, 10:41 AM
Since Bruce Wayne was Bruce Wayne before he was Batman, and since Clark Kent was Clark Kent before he was Superman, arguably both Bruce and Clark are their real selves, while Batman and Superman are just the disguises. *:)

Putting aside the fact virtually all of your evidence in the rest of the post comes from tv shows and such, this line isn't accurate. * Batman consider's everything he doe's as Buce Wyne to be a facade. *He has said so. *He probably doesn't even refer to himself as Buce in his own mind. *A good example of this comes in Sandman Volume 10: the Wake, where we see Clark kent, and a couple other hero's secret idtentities talking in a corner in the dream world. *Bruce wayne is not talking with them, though, Batman is. *Because THAT is who he see's himself as.


White Martian leader: How can he be doing this? He's just a man.
Superman: The most dangerous man on earth.

TinSoldier
2006-05-05, 10:48 AM
Great post, CelestialStick. Now just let me comment the heck out of it...


Since Bruce Wayne was Bruce Wayne before he was Batman, and since Clark Kent was Clark Kent before he was Superman, arguably both Bruce and Clark are their real selves, while Batman and Superman are just the disguises. :)I think the point is that the superhero persona has become so important to the individual that the mundane persona has less effect. Bruce Wayne is Batman's alter-ego and Clark Kent is Superman's alter-ego. The true individual of each is represented by the superhero not the other way around.


Superman has always been my favorite superhero. He is good, true and noble, the boy scout (or paladin) among the superheroes. He leads by example, insipres and brings hope. Just the mere fact that he has all that power and it hasn't corrupted him is a testament to his goodness. A lesser person would try to use that that power to take over (as General Zod did, or as an alternate universe Superman did in cahoots with Lex Luthor after Lois Lane died) or at least to become some sort of super villain.I respect Superman very much. I don't think that he's Lawful Stupid.


Superman has long been the greatest American hero (so much so that DC sued the makers of the tv show "The Greatest American Hero" for copyright infringement) [ nitpick ] Well it would be trademark infringement [ / nitpick ] I kinda remember that. I don't know who won, though.


Batman is probably my second favorite superhero. While the campy 1960s Batman TV show made out Batman as somewhat similar in character to Superman, and the 1970s Superfriends animated tv show pretty much made the whole Justice League that way, Batman has pretty often been portrayed since that time as much darker. During the 1980s as I recall, they even portrayed him as a psychopathic vigilante, foaming at the mouth while he shot two guns at the same time; that Batman had no compunction against killing. (Incidentally, it was Superman who stopped him at that time.)I don't remember the two-gun wielding Batman. I remember the Punisher did that and also for a time someone else who was more violent was Batman (not Bruce Wayne.)


More recently they seem to have returned Batman to his roots as a detective (he started out in a detective comic book) and of course made him rather more sane and less dark, while still keeping him somewhat dark. He doesn't have Superman's ability to lead and inspire.I like the portrayal of Batman as somewhat psychologically damaged but basically good and very smart man.


As far as Superman needing to breath, I seem to recall that in the 1960s comics he could go into space without needing to breath or hold his breath. I don't recall the George Reeves Superman of the 1950s flying into space, but I recall that there was an episode where he was trapped in a diving bell with Lois and Jimmy and wouldn't have drowned if he burst out of it. The Superman movies with Christopher Reeve show him flying into space without any need to breath. In Lois and Clark in the 1990s, however, Superman did need to take oxygen with him when he flew out to try to stop a meteor from colliding with earth.I've seen it a lot in the cartoons from all three decades (70's, 80's, 90's). My supposition was that he couldn't hold his breath indefinitely, though. I made that comment in response to someone who said that Superman could just destroy the Earth to defeat Batman.

BlythraB
2006-05-05, 05:09 PM
Unless he wants to kill you.
As far as I know, batman has never killed anyone except the Joker by accident in the Batman Beyond: the animated series cartoon movie. maybe I'm wrong.
I didn't like that series as much because Alfred (who is THE coolest secondary character of all time) wasn't in it

TinSoldier
2006-05-05, 05:13 PM
As far as I know, batman has never killed anyone except the Joker by accident in the Batman Beyond: the animated series cartoon movie. maybe I'm wrong.
I didn't like that series as much because Alfred (who is THE coolest secondary character of all time) wasn't in itBatman has actually killed the Joker several times. Of course, I don't remember them all.

I think he is killed a few times in the animated series, but since they never recover the body he always comes back.

The first Batman movie
Batman: The Dark Knight Returns I believe -- I don't have it in front of me right now.
I think he kills him in A Death in the Family as well. Again, not in front of me right now. I'll check them tonight.

6079smithw
2006-05-05, 05:19 PM
I'm pretty sure the only time he actually in fact kills Joker himself is in Dark Knight (technically, he just paralyzes him, but close enough.)

turkishproverb
2006-05-05, 06:22 PM
Batman has actually killed the Joker several times. Of course, I don't remember them all.


Nope, never killed the Joker. Not in continuity anyway. Nor in the animated series (terry killed him in batman beyond, but he was sorta only a brain parisite by that time.) You could make the argument about the movie, but really, that was more or less karma.

Truthseeker
2006-05-05, 07:33 PM
This thread is a bit like a thread about what car would win in a race, a Ferrari F40 or a Mini Morris. Mini fans would make all kind of wild hypotheses to explain why the Mini would win, because everybody knows that Mini are way cooler than Ferrari, so Mini must win...

"So as the ferrari has no gas and an incompetent pilot, and as Mini has a nitro-booster and two home-made air turbines, Mini would kick ferrari's ass and win the race!"

:D :D

Exactly. Batman wins because Superman is boring and less popular. Why is Superman less popular and boring? Because Superman is overpowered and can't lose. Illogical. Illogical. Norman co-ordinate! **universe explodes** ;)

Ing
2006-05-05, 10:07 PM
See here's the problem. Superman is too powerful now he would be a good kick ass character if he were slightly less powerful. reduce his invulnrability, make most of his powers psionic based, give him strong strength but not world destroying strength, and make him someone vulnerable to certian things such as the vacuum of space, suffication and intense heat. actually some friends and i were comming up with a little D20 campaign of modified heros, broke down on whether we would do marvel or DC, idea was make it a paralell universe so we can freely play with continuity while keeping the spirit the same. came up with a slightly depowered superman that was still fun to play and kicked ass. made batman equally powerful as him in theroy since Superman had alot of racially inherinet abilities but we gave him only 4 class levels (decided an adult human has 4 levels minimum of a class) while batman had quite a bit more to reflect his training.

CelestialStick
2006-05-05, 10:41 PM
Putting aside the fact virtually all of your evidence in the rest of the post comes from tv shows and such, this line isn't accurate. Batman consider's everything he doe's as Buce Wyne to be a facade. He has said so. He probably doesn't even refer to himself as Buce in his own mind. A good example of this comes in Sandman Volume 10: the Wake, where we see Clark kent, and a couple other hero's secret idtentities talking in a corner in the dream world. Bruce wayne is not talking with them, though, Batman is. Because THAT is who he see's himself as.


White Martian leader: How can he be doing this? He's just a man.
Superman: The most dangerous man on earth.

Yes, there was an episode of Batman Beyond in which some villain was trying to persuade Bruce Wayne that he was crazy so that he would kill himself. The villain had planted a speaker in a bandage on Bruce's head and was addressing him as "Bruce." At the end of the episode he told Terry that he knew the voice wasn't his own because "Bruce" isn't what he calls himself.

My point though is that Bruce Wayne is the dark, damaged vigilante and Clark Kent is the good, noble man.

There was an episode of the New Batman/Superman Adventures (or maybe it was the Batman series by the same people that immediately preceded it) in which Sandman puts him into a dream of Brue's own fantasy, and in the dream he is not only Bruce Wayne, but his parents are still alive.

turkishproverb
2006-05-05, 11:30 PM
My point though is that Bruce Wayne is the dark, damaged vigilante and Clark Kent is the good, noble man.

There was an episode of the New Batman/Superman Adventures (or maybe it was the Batman series by the same people that immediately preceded it) in which Sandman puts him into a dream of Brue's own fantasy, and in the dream he is not only Bruce Wayne, but his parents are still alive.

1: my point is that Batman is the dark, damaged vigilante and Clark Kent is the good, noble man.

2. It was Batman the animated series, and it was The madd hatter, using a specialised machine, not one of the sandmen. And you are forgetting something about a dream being someones fantasy: rarely are we who we would like to be under ideal circumstances. Batman would LOVe to be bruce wayne, with his parents alive. But he ISNT. He's Batman, the spawn of a walk through crime alley and two bullets.

6079smithw
2006-05-05, 11:31 PM
That's the Mad Hatter, not Sandman. Sandman never shows up in the Animated Series.
And that episode is pretty relevatory as to what Batman is capable of believing- he's so damaged that his psyche can no longer handle the concept of a happy, normal life, and invents a method by which to break free of it. Batman has issues.

TinSoldier
2006-05-05, 11:54 PM
In Batman: The Killing Joke it looks like Batman kills Joker just as the cops show up. It is ambiguous, though.

In Batman: A Death in the Family (where the Joker kills Robin) the end looks like Joker is dead. The Joker has been shot in the chest by his own henchman on a helicopter, which crashes and explodes just after Batman escapes from it. Unfortunately, they don't recover the body. The Joker is kinda like Michael Meyers, eh?

Reading Batman: The Dark Knight Returns

Okay, it looks like Batman paralyzes Joker, but Joker commits suicide in order to implicate Bats.

Quoted from the Batman/Superman fight:

You're begining to get the idea Clark...

...This...is the end...
...for both of us...

We could have changed the world...
...now...look at us...

I've become a political liability...
...and you...

...you're a joke...

...I want you...
to remember,
Clark...,

... in all the years to come...

... in your most private moments...

I want you to remember...
my hand...at your throat

...I want...you to remember...

...the one man who beat you...

Then his heart stopped. But he didn't die.

I was going to do more, but that would probably be pushing fair use. Basically this is the end of the fight. Not the beginning.

I need to read these books again...

CelestialStick
2006-05-06, 01:53 AM
Great post, CelestialStick. Now just let me comment the heck out of it...

Wow! Thanks so much for the compliment, TinSoldier! :)


I think the point is that the superhero persona has become so important to the individual that the mundane persona has less effect. Bruce Wayne is Batman's alter-ego and Clark Kent is Superman's alter-ego. The true individual of each is represented by the superhero not the other way around.

Sure, I know what you mean; I'm just arguing the other perspective. I think that in the live-action tv shows and movies they spent a lot more time as Bruce or Clark than they do in the comics or in the various animated series. I've enjoyed espisodes where they have identity crises. In one of the Superman movies, Superman gets hit with red kryptonite and becomes not quite so good. At some point he breaks into two people--Superman and Clark Kent--and they fight it out. Clark Kent wins, and so Superman goes back to being good and noble.

In an episode of Lois and Clark, Clark finds himself jealous of Lois' affections--for Superman! Clark explains the situation to his mother, who says, "but dear, you ARE Superman." Clark confesses that he's not quite sure who he is anymore. She assures him that he is Clark Kent. There's also a scene (not necesarily from that episode) where Clark says, "Superman is what I can do, it's not who I am." Of course these will not be cannonical for the avid comic readers, but I still enjoyed them immensely.

From a real-world historical perspective though I think it's correct that Superman and Batman preceded Clark Kent and Bruce Wayne: I think the authors of both superheroes invented the superhero first, and then later created the secret identity, though I'm not 100% sure as I'm pretty sure I've never seen the very first Superman or Batman comics. (I have seen some of the very old ones, but I don't think I was viewing the very first.)

From the perspective of the world inside the comics, of course, Clark Kent preceded Superman and Bruce Wayne preceded Batman. I'm just saying that Clark was already good and noble before he became Superman, and Bruce was already dark and vengeful before he became the Batman. One of the things I like about Smallville (I know, many comic fans hate it) is that it shows Clark as good and noble long before he invents Superman.

Speaking of the real person, if you look at the Superman movies and see the Clark Kent teenager who precedes Superman, he doesn't seem quite like either the Superman or the Clark Kent who follows. The adult Clark Kent is a bumbling, cowardly fool who's clearly not the real Clark, but the Superman doesn't really seem to have the humility of the teenage Clark either. (Actually there's a scene in the longer version of Superman: The Motion Picture where he returns to the Fortress of Solitude after zipping around, saving people and stopping criminals, where Jor-El confronts him about feeling too good about himself for doing all that good. In that scene we see some of the teenage Clark's humility return.) It seems like in the movies both Superman and Clark Kent are covers for the real person underneath. We seem to glimpse the real person only when he's drowning and trying to persuade Miss Teschmacher to save him so that he can save Jimmy and Lois, and when he finds Lois dead. Other than that, it all seems pretty much like a cover.

Speaking of Lois dying, I have to say that I just love the scene where Superman's high up over the United States, having just tossed one of the nuclear missiles out into space, and he turns and sees the other missile's nuclear explosion in California.


I respect Superman very much. I don't think that he's Lawful Stupid.

Cool! :)


[ nitpick ] Well it would be trademark infringement [ / nitpick ] I kinda remember that. I don't know who won, though.

As I recall, DC did not win, but it's a long time ago. I do know that the main character was named Mr. Hinkley, and that after John Hinkley shot President Reagan the show started referring to him as "Mr. H" and dropped the "Hinkley." I actually stopped watching it after the first season.


I don't remember the two-gun wielding Batman. I remember the Punisher did that and also for a time someone else who was more violent was Batman (not Bruce Wayne.)

Actually a D&D buddy of mine showed it to me back in the 1980s. We were talking about superheroes at one of the D&D games and he told me that Batman had become a foaming-at-the-mouth psychopathic killer. So one time he showed me a comic with Batman foaming and firing two guns. The storyline was set in a time when people no longer trusted superheroes, and they had all agreed to stop being seen in public. Batman, as a psychopathic vigilante, was ignoring the agreement, and Superman came to stop him. What's cool is that Superman moves so quickly the entire time that you never see him (so that he's not being seen), but you "hear" him speaking to Batman--whom as I recall he calls "Bruce." ;D


I like the portrayal of Batman as somewhat psychologically damaged but basically good and very smart man.

I do too. I think the portrayal of him as a rabid psychopath was an over-reaction to the 1960s Batman TV show and 1970s Superfriends potrayal of him as a being pretty much a Superman clone in terms of personality.


I've seen it a lot in the cartoons from all three decades (70's, 80's, 90's). My supposition was that he couldn't hold his breath indefinitely, though. I made that comment in response to someone who said that Superman could just destroy the Earth to defeat Batman.


The Superman of the movies could move tectonic plates, so I could see him destroying the earth that way if he wanted. (Of course he wouldn't want to.) Is the current comic Superman strong enough to destroy the world that way? I suppose he could just tunnel down to the center of the earth and release the molten core.

Haggis_McCrablice
2006-05-06, 04:13 AM
Batman has actually killed the Joker several times. Of course, I don't remember them all.
Well, there was the 1989 Burton film with Jack Nicholson. One think I hated about the films was that practically every good villain either bites it (Joker, Two-Face, Penguin) or goes irretrievably off the deep end (Riddler). And don't get me started on Schumacher's giant Bat-nipples.

Anyway, in an episode of Justice League("Wild Cards"), Joker is rendered catatonic by Ace's hypnotic stare. Not exactly dead, but presumably he was out of it for a good while (it was his last appearance in the Timm Bat-continuity).

Superman's abilities greatly according to the incarnation, immediate need, and the writer. The fifties Superman actually time-traveled freely by moving at super-speed and simply popping in and out of wormholes, but I think that talent was phased out a decade or so later.

And of course, a superhero who outthinks a villain rather than running in like a drunken bar brawler, fists swinging, will always have an edge. In the first appearance of Solomon Grundy (1944), Green Lantern realized his ring wouldn't work on the guy because his zombie body was partly composed of wood, and he was weak against that substance. So he tricked the big lug into walking in front of an oncoming train (okay, Grundy was not exactly a rocket scientist, but you see my point).

Ing
2006-05-06, 11:50 AM
Wood? his weakness was wood.....

for some reason this just sounds dirty


seriously though, wood actually makes more sense than yellow....i mean how much yellow do you need? could anyone just spray paint themselves yellow and be invulrnable to him, does it have to be a certian shade of yellow?

Tarlonniel
2006-05-06, 07:41 PM
Yellow? Are you seriously telling me that the color yellow was/is a weakness of the Green Lantern superheroes?? :P Who writes these comics, interior decorators?

Steward
2006-05-06, 10:15 PM
Yellow? Are you seriously telling me that the color yellow was/is a weakness of the Green Lantern superheroes?? :P Who writes these comics, interior decorators?

Yeah. Hal Jordan used to get so mad when he was fighting Sinestro (or Paintguy, the villain who carries around a bucket of paint) because all they had to do was find something yellow and they could deflect or destroy any of the ridiculous garbage he shot out of his power ring. In Superfriends, he was prone to talking to himself whenever this happened; I don't know if that was a neurosis brought up by his Green Lantern energy or if that was just a sign that Hal Jordan was truly a complete moron.

Personally, I think that it was both.

That's another reason why Superman is a better hero than Green Lantern.

CelestialStick
2006-05-07, 12:16 AM
Yellow? Are you seriously telling me that the color yellow was/is a weakness of the Green Lantern superheroes?? :P Who writes these comics, interior decorators?

LOL. Apparenlty the writers eventually decided that the color yellow was a silly weakness, so they made up a storyline in which there was a yellow being of fear trapped in the central power core of the Green Lantern Corp which caused the weakness. Supposedly after that time a Green Lantern could overcome the weakness by recognizing his own fear, and the John Stewart Lantern didn't have the weakness. In an episde of JLU, however, Luthor, in Flash's body, overcomes Jon Stewart's energy shield by tossing lemon (yellow) Jello at him. So apparently, in answer to your questions: interior designers and cooks. ;D

Haggis_McCrablice
2006-05-07, 01:52 AM
Yes. Theoretically I could just beat the crap out of Green Lantern with a yellow Louisville Slugger. Or I can wear my yellow cap and cape, just like in my avatar. ;D

Martian Manhunter's weakness is fire. Now I don't know if it has to be a roaring flame, or if you can make him piddle himself with just a Zippo lighter. Also, he loves Oreos. I mean loves the buggers. In one storyline M.M. was just sitting in his apartment literally surrounded by piles of cookies, gorging himself silly.

CelestialStick
2006-05-07, 02:00 AM
Yes. Theoretically I could just beat the crap out of Green Lantern with a yellow Louisville Slugger. Or I can wear my yellow cap and cape, just like in my avatar. ;D

Yes, but remember that even a Green Lantern with a yellow weakness can make a giant hand, pick up a boulder and turn you in your yellow suit into yellow paste. ;D

Tarlonniel
2006-05-07, 05:47 AM
Psychedelic, man! Did any supervillains try spray-painting the Green Lantern yellow to see what would happen? ;)

CelestialStick
2006-05-07, 08:08 AM
Psychedelic, man! Did any supervillains try spray-painting the Green Lantern yellow to see what would happen? ;)

It seems to me that there was a villain named the Painter or something like that who used paint, but I don't know if he ever actually tried to spray-paint a Green Lantern.

Steward
2006-05-07, 11:00 AM
Psychedelic, man! Did any supervillains try spray-painting the Green Lantern yellow to see what would happen? ;)

I think you overestimate how clever comic books can be.

Sophistemon
2006-05-07, 05:01 PM
Tsh! (http://www.biggercheese.com/index.php?comic=608)

TinSoldier
2006-05-07, 05:12 PM
That was a funny link, Sophos!

Sophistemon
2006-05-07, 05:13 PM
There are more of them if you read ahead.

danielf
2006-05-07, 05:40 PM
Yellow? Are you seriously telling me that the color yellow was/is a weakness of the Green Lantern superheroes?? :P Who writes these comics, interior decorators?

he doesnt have a chance against your avatar :P

Tarlonniel
2006-05-07, 07:15 PM
he doesnt have a chance against your avatar :P

Sweet. *takes over the world universe!!* ;D

Dhavaer
2006-05-07, 10:59 PM
The Flash had an enemy called 'The Turtle' whose superpower was, I swear, being really slow. He didn't make other people slow, he was just slow himself.

And that's terrible.

6079smithw
2006-05-08, 12:26 AM
The Flash had an enemy called 'The Turtle' whose superpower was, I swear, being really slow. He didn't make other people slow, he was just slow himself.

And that's terrible.

At least that has something to do with speed and the character's gimmick. His arch-villian is a monkey. A big, mod, suited, talking ape.
My objection here is that the gorilla should obviously be the hero.

PerpetualNewb
2006-05-08, 02:36 AM
At least that has something to do with speed and the character's gimmick. His arch-villian is a monkey. A big, mod, suited, talking ape.
My objection here is that the gorilla should obviously be the hero.

To be honest, Grodd is a decent villian because:
a)He's so much smarter than Flash, that it's not even
funny.
b)Can't he mind control people using some Gorilla City tech?
c)Come on, a talking monkey. Hilarious.

CelestialStick
2006-05-08, 03:53 AM
To be honest, Grodd is a decent villian because:
a)He's so much smarter than Flash, that it's not even
funny.
b)Can't he mind control people using some Gorilla City tech?
c)Come on, a talking monkey. Hilarious.

I can't speak for the comic books, but the animated Justice League had a couple of stories with Grodd. In the stories Grodd was smarter than the Flash, indeed, smarter than most everyone else around. That's part of the joke--the gorilla is smarter than humans.

KayJay
2006-05-08, 04:25 AM
The Flash had an enemy called 'The Turtle' whose superpower was, I swear, being really slow. He didn't make other people slow, he was just slow himself.

And that's terrible.

Last I remember hearing about him, he managed to extend his abilities to steal others' speed including flash's, giving him a run for his money.

Is Grodd even a monkey these days? He's got some body-jumping thing last I remembered, and the monkey was just a form he jumped into. I think.

CelestialStick
2006-05-08, 06:14 AM
Last I remember hearing about him, he managed to extend his abilities to steal others' speed including flash's, giving him a run for his money.

Is Grodd even a monkey these days? He's got some body-jumping thing last I remembered, and the monkey was just a form he jumped into. I think.

There's a whole city of technologically-advanced intelligent gorillas called, somewhat obviously, Gorilla City. Grodd at one time worked high in the Gorilla City government, but he had plans to take over using mind-control.

Haggis_McCrablice
2006-05-09, 12:48 AM
Is Grodd even a monkey these days? He's got some body-jumping thing last I remembered, and the monkey was just a form he jumped into.
No, that was the Ultra-Humanite, who appeared in Justice League a couple times in his albino ape form (Grodd is a normal-colored gorilla). Grodd is essentially the Lex Luthor of his people, but larger and with hair, of course. Ultra-Humanite turned state's evidence against Lex in exchange for a big-screen TV in his cell (it seems he's an opera buff).

Dhavaer
2006-05-09, 03:51 AM
Specifically, he was watching Gilbert and Sullivan's The Mikado.

KayJay
2006-05-09, 04:23 AM
No, that was the Ultra-Humanite, who appeared in Justice League a couple times in his albino ape form (Grodd is a normal-colored gorilla). Grodd is essentially the Lex Luthor of his people, but larger and with hair, of course. Ultra-Humanite turned state's evidence against Lex in exchange for a big-screen TV in his cell (it seems he's an opera buff).

Doh! You'd think there were so few Gorillas in comics that I would find it hard to get the mixed up :P Things make a lot more sense now, thanks :)

CelestialStick
2006-05-09, 04:52 AM
Doh! You'd think there were so few Gorillas in comics that I would find it hard to get the mixed up :P Things make a lot more sense now, thanks :)

If it makes you feel any better, there was an episode of JLU in which as a result of Grodd's attempts at mind control Luthor and Flash switch bodies. So it would be easy to confuse that body-switching involving Grodd with the other body-switching. :)

Ebon_Drake
2006-05-09, 11:02 AM
Doh! You'd think there were so few Gorillas in comics that I would find it hard to get the mixed up :P
You'd think that would be true... (http://img388.imageshack.us/img388/4374/supersimians3nk.jpg)

Dhavaer
2006-05-09, 11:21 AM
I thought you would link here... (http://www.superdickery.com/galleries.html)

Korota
2006-05-09, 11:50 AM
Doh! You'd think there were so few Gorillas in comics that I would find it hard to get the mixed up :P
Are you kidding? DC Comics actually instituted a policy limiting the number of apes on the covers of their comic books each month. For some reason, comic books featuring an ape or monkey, especially one talking or doing something people do. So there's tons of 'Silver Age' ape characters.

So, uh, anyways, Batman vs. Superman. Um... I say Superman, because Batman is only super-foolproof-plan-for-everything guy because the writers play favorites.

WampaX
2006-05-09, 11:56 AM
Voice of the Wampinator:
People, people.
If you want to talk Superhero shop, create another thread. In fact, create multiple threads. But this thread should be about Superman vs Batman and all the repercussions thereof.

nothingclever
2006-05-09, 04:53 PM
It's real simple Superman wins.

Batman will beat Superman if he plans beforehand.

Superman will easily beat Batman if he plans beforehand.

Superman will easily beat Batman in a straight up fight.

Batman wins only with the odds in his favour.
Superman wins with or without the odds in his favour.

Batman: 1
Superman: 2

GG NO RE.

TinSoldier
2006-05-09, 04:59 PM
Yeah, I was reading my Batman: The Dark Knight Returns graphic novel last night.

Superman had just stopped a super-bomb that blotted out the sun for awhile. He had started regaining his strength but he wasn't completely up to snuff.

Batman had powered armor, and he used I think it was Green Arrow to shoot Superman with some kind of Kryptonite stuff.

Clark got his butt kicked, but he did win in the end. I think the point is that Batman has kicked Superman's butt on occasion. It is pretty obvious he would not be able to do it if both of them were out to kill each other and both were at full strength.

WampaX
2006-05-09, 05:13 PM
Batman had powered armor, and he used I think it was Hawkeye to shoot Superman with some kind of Kryptonite stuff.

Green Arrow . . . Hawkeye is a Marvel character.

TinSoldier
2006-05-09, 05:15 PM
Thanks, Wampa! Fixed my post.

I never know the difference between Marvel and DC heroes anyway.

turkishproverb
2006-05-09, 06:10 PM
Yeah, I was reading my Batman: The Dark Knight Returns *graphic novel last night.

Superman had just stopped a super-bomb that blotted out the sun for awhile. He had started regaining his strength but he wasn't completely up to snuff.

Batman had powered armor, and he used I think it was Green Arrow to shoot Superman with some kind of Kryptonite stuff.

Clark got his butt kicked, but he did win in the end. I think the point is that Batman has *kicked Superman's butt on occasion. It is pretty obvious he would not be able to do it if both of them were out to kill each other and both were at full strength.


Did you actually READ DKR? Batman intentionally faked his own death during the fight. That hardly means superman won.

TinSoldier
2006-05-09, 06:14 PM
Did you actually READ DKR? Batman intentionally faked his own death during the fight. That hardly means superman won.Okay, I re-read my post and I see what you are saying.

Yes, I know Batman faked his own death. I don't think he would have lasted much longer even if he hadn't.

My main point to this whole thread was that he kicked Superman's butt. You could even say that by faking his own death, he conceded.

Kind of like a chess game. Or maybe it was a stalemate since Superman figured it out at the end.

6079smithw
2006-05-09, 07:54 PM
Okay, I re-read my post and I see what you are saying.

Yes, I know Batman faked his own death. I don't think he would have lasted much longer even if he hadn't.

My main point to this whole thread was that he kicked Superman's butt. You could even say that by faking his own death, he conceded.

Kind of like a chess game. Or maybe it was a stalemate since Superman figured it out at the end.

Should I mark this spoiler? I'll white it out if someone wants.
I thought the whole point was to demonstrate that Batman could have killed Superman, but chose not to. I mean, he's winning the fight, and then he 'has a heart attack' - I assumed he was faking, or the Batman equivalent of faking, which involves more preparation and is a lot more realistic.

"I want you to remember... my hand... at your throat...
I want you to remember the one man who beat you..."
And then his heart beat stops. I thought that was pretty clear.

turkishproverb
2006-05-10, 12:14 AM
Exactly. It even specifies that he used chemicals to make himself seem dead for a certain amount of time.

Great quote, incidentally.

KayJay
2006-05-10, 04:30 AM
Both played to the best of their abilities? Superman would win hands down. Kryptonite doesn't affect him that quickly, especially something as small as a kryptonite ring. And that's the only card Batman has to play. Superman has a flash-like ability to "slow down time" enough that everything moves at a crawl to him. I can't see Batman somehow being able to move quickly enough to put much into effect to beat him. He'd have maybe one or two plans at most, which Superman should be able to see from a mile off, at his speed.
Of course, Superman is rarely played to his full abilities, for the simple fact that it becomes boring writing, while for the same reasons, Batman is written as beyond his abilities.

turkishproverb
2006-05-10, 04:47 PM
Ah, the Kryptonite ring does affect him pretty badly. *As does K in general, if utilized properly. *

That's not the only "card" batman has to play, and several posts throughout the thread point this out. *Magic, Ultrasonics, Missiles, artificial K (different affects, full incapacitation) energy weapons, these are ony a few of his non traditional (IE: K) options.

The flashlike ability to "slow down time" is a decent argument, if you assume superman think's to do it before batman puts things into motion, which isn't bloody likely the way supes operates. *(and besides, batman has an Anti-flash protocal he could use in that situation)

And as we've discussed here, superman is a bit of a chump. *He never see's plans coming even when he should. *

As for Bat's being written beyond his abilities, I can hardly think of a case of that which has been used as evidence here, or that I used to form my opinion.

For that matter, the only case of it I can think of involving these two was in "Death in the family" when he punched superman and only bruised a couple knuckles (and THAT was explained by superman as him having rolled with the punch to avoid hurting bats)

"He's the most dangerous man on earth."-Superman, reguarding Batman.

Shotaro
2006-05-10, 05:17 PM
9 pages of posts and i dont want to search them all to see if this has been brought up yet but there is a story where batman and catwoman take on posion ivy who has superman under her control.

Batman kicks the hell out of superman (it's been a while since i read it but iirc superman was about to throw a car at bats so bats just throws his kryptonite at supes' feet then he keeps doing similair tricks until catwoman finds poison ivy)

ill try to find out the name of the book if anyone's interested


oh trukish proverb: there's an issue where the JLA are stranded in the middle of antartica after the villain gets away and batman calmly brushes away the snow under his feet to reveal a teleporter, saying something like 'be prepared' that is definately WAY too convenient and if he really has placed teleporters exactly where he will need them before he even knows they might be useful that is far beyond human ability

6079smithw
2006-05-10, 07:54 PM
Actually, that was Hush, and it did come up a few pages back. Batman beats Superman there in part because Batman knows exactly what Superman's breaking point is, in terms of what he'll do when mind controlled.
And Batman, as far as his mental faculties and ability to prepare go, is effectively more than human. It comes out a bit lame sometimes because it's amazingly difficult to write for a character who's smarter than you are.

turkishproverb
2006-05-11, 12:18 AM
Exactly. Batman is THE thinking hero. Yes, he can beat the living crap out of people, yes he's scary as heck, but more than that, he's a thinker.

P.S. As to the teleporter thing, I specified rediculous things werent used in my opinions, not that there were none, and IMO, he may have just memorised where all the JLA teleporters on earth were.

Pax_Chi
2006-05-11, 12:49 AM
Apparently the Superman vs Batman arguement is so primal it can infect even a fantasy centric stick figure board. Go fig. ;D

Well, as someone who hangs out on a comic book centric message board, including a debate battle board, I give you my two cents:

In a direct fight, armed only with their standard gear, Superman would utterly dominate Batman. No two ways about it. With his usual gear, Batman just doesn't have anything capable of putting Superman down. If Superman truly wants to, he can literally knock Batman's head off before he can blink.

The thing of it is, however, that two things are unlikely with that scenario:

1) Superman's not a killer and doesn't use his powers in that way. Superspeed isn't a power that gets used in combat all that much unless he's fighting someone else with superspeed. Whether this is because it's difficult to maintain and work at those speeds (since while he has superspeed, he's not really a speedster in the sense that the Flash is), or due to self imposed limitations, the bottom line ultimately is that Superman is a moral, compasionate person that cares for the well being of everyone, including his opponents. . . . . . . . . .

2) . . . . . . . and Batman is the same way, but to a lesser degree. Batman is moral, he is compasionate, and he does care about the well being of even the people he fights. But not enough that he won't do everything short of killing or crippling them to defeat them. This is a guy who kept security protocols on how to defeat his friends and teammates. This is a guy who built a spy satelite to keep tabs on metahumans. This is a guy who, for a long time, was very paranoid, who made knowing his friends and opponents weaknesses inside and out, and who is not afraid to hurt them if he has to.

So in a straight up fight, Superman wins.

Batman's secret to success? Never let it become a straight up fight. Exploit every weakness, be it physical or psychological. Have the battlefield set up to favor you and only you. Know your enemy inside and out, so that he cannot surprise you.

Batman makes the Art of War and Book of Five Rings seem like childrens literature.

So Superman's facing a guy who knows exactly how he acts, and has technology capable of hurting him (he's done so with explosives and such before) and who has in-depth knowledge of his weaknesses and means to exploit them.

At the same time, Superman isn't an idiot. He's a smart, tacticle guy who can think on his feet. The question remains whether or not he can adapt quickly enough to what Batman throws at him.

So it comes down to Superman winning half the time due to taking Batman before he gets prep time, or thinking outside the box and actually surprising Batman, or Batman winning due to serious tech and prep time while exploiting his opponents weaknesses.

50/50

CelestialStick
2006-05-11, 02:38 AM
It's possible for Batman to win, but to do so he has to do everything right and Superman has to do everything wrong. Otherwise Superman wins.

Edit: Oh, as far as Batman, the powered armor and the heart attack, I haven't read the comic so perhaps he did fake the heart attack there. In the Batman: Beyond universe, however, the battle armor does indeed put too much strain on Batman's heart, and indeed even without the battle armor and just the powered suit that Terry ends up using, Batman has a heart attack fighting some villain and nearly shoots the villain rather than lose. That's in fact what made him give up going out as Batman.

6079smithw
2006-05-11, 03:05 AM
...
So it comes down to Superman winning half the time due to taking Batman before he gets prep time, or thinking outside the box and actually surprising Batman, or Batman winning due to serious tech and prep time while exploiting his opponents weaknesses.

50/50
I agree with most of this, though I'm not sure that you can really put odds on it; any given fight will be decided pretty much before it starts, which makes bookmaking a pretty risky proposition.

Obviously, Superman is a lot stronger and more powerful than Batman. Batman would be lucky to survive one full power punch without aid, and a return punch would probably do little more than hurt the Batfist. On the other hand...

Superman's whole career is about limiting his power. I've always thought he was pretty much omnipotent, but that he just won't allow himself any more power than he has. It makes a lot of the weird scaling issues make a lot more sense. Superman's only limitation is that he doesn't trust himself absolutely.

Batman, conversely, has spent his entire life stretching himself as far as a human being can possibly go, over, and over, and over. Batman has taken moral responsibility for everything that happens in Gotham (it's why he considers it a personal failure every time someone manages to commit a crime) and very rarely has any reason to pull his punches. Batman uses himself to the utmost, and he trusts himself and his sense of morality absolutely.

Finally, Superman both believes and wants Batman to be capable of taking him down. It's why he gave Batman the kryptonite ring- Superman knows that, were he to go rogue (and it happens a lot,) he could pretty much destroy everything he loves, and he cares more about stopping that than he does about saving himself. Basically, Superman trusts Batman more than he does himself.

So, yeah, Superman could win, I suppose. But neither he nor Batman would bet on it.

CelestialStick
2006-05-11, 05:38 AM
Obviously, Superman is a lot stronger and more powerful than Batman. Batman would be lucky to survive one full power punch without aid, and a return punch would probably do little more than hurt the Batfist. On the other hand...

Superman's whole career is about limiting his power. I've always thought he was pretty much omnipotent, but that he just won't allow himself any more power than he has. It makes a lot of the weird scaling issues make a lot more sense. Superman's only limitation is that he doesn't trust himself absolutely.

Batman, conversely, has spent his entire life stretching himself as far as a human being can possibly go, over, and over, and over. Batman has taken moral responsibility for everything that happens in Gotham (it's why he considers it a personal failure every time someone manages to commit a crime) and very rarely has any reason to pull his punches. Batman uses himself to the utmost, and he trusts himself and his sense of morality absolutely.

Finally, Superman both believes and wants Batman to be capable of taking him down. It's why he gave Batman the kryptonite ring- Superman knows that, were he to go rogue (and it happens a lot,) he could pretty much destroy everything he loves, and he cares more about stopping that than he does about saving himself. Basically, Superman trusts Batman more than he does himself.

So, yeah, Superman could win, I suppose. But neither he nor Batman would bet on it.

That's just it. Batman is stretched as far as a human can go. He can't get any better. Superman, however, rarely uses most of his abilities. In an all out fight Superman would use those abilities to stop the Batman, kryptonite and cool Batmachines not withstanding.

KayJay
2006-05-11, 06:18 AM
Ah, the Kryptonite ring does affect him pretty badly. As does K in general, if utilized properly.

That's not the only "card" batman has to play, and several posts throughout the thread point this out. Magic, Ultrasonics, Missiles, artificial K (different affects, full incapacitation) energy weapons, these are ony a few of his non traditional (IE: K) options.

The flashlike ability to "slow down time" is a decent argument, if you assume superman think's to do it before batman puts things into motion, which isn't bloody likely the way supes operates. (and besides, batman has an Anti-flash protocal he could use in that situation)

And as we've discussed here, superman is a bit of a chump. He never see's plans coming even when he should.

As for Bat's being written beyond his abilities, I can hardly think of a case of that which has been used as evidence here, or that I used to form my opinion.

For that matter, the only case of it I can think of involving these two was in "Death in the family" when he punched superman and only bruised a couple knuckles (and THAT was explained by superman as him having rolled with the punch to avoid hurting bats)

"He's the most dangerous man on earth."-Superman, reguarding Batman.
I've seen Superman WEAR the kryptonite ring. I've also seen Supergirl (who is meant to be debatably weaker than Superman) withstand a kryptonite MAN and capture him. And they did engage in fisticuffs for a while. In the most recent infinite crisis, they were on a planet littered with kryptonite, and he still managed to beat Superboy (didn't the kryptonite not affect him because he wasn't native to that reality?) All in all, kryptonite doesn't affect him that immediately. Not before he can remove the source of it/ move away/ do something at ultra-speed.

Batman using magic? Right ::) Ultrasonics doesn't really work when you can move faster than sound. Hell, superman could bat the individual waves of sound out of the way lol. missiles beat superman? New one to me. Artificial kryptonite- the green kind is less effective than real stuff as I recall, and the red kind actually made him stronger, so much so he was afraid to do anything in case he overshot. That's hardly gonig to stop him, if he had half a mind to win.
Batman's antiflash protocol relied on the fact that he could catch the flash, and insert something in the base of his spine to cause epileptic fits. You think that'd work on someone with pretty invulnerable skin? Even if it pentrated, I doubt it'd really do anything.

Plus, this is superman- the guy who most likely knows Batman the best, beyond people like Robin and nightwing- and even then, I don't doubt there are things only the two of them know about each other. I think Superman would have a lot more respect for Batman to underestimate him and fall into an unseen trap.

Oh and the "Superman controlled" storyline in Hush? he was pretty much a zombie. And even then, I'd hardly call hoping that Superman would break out of it before he died being a masterful plan on the behalf of Batman, or anything.

6079smithw
2006-05-11, 01:31 PM
Umm...
Magic =/= sonics.
Nuclear missles hurt Superman.
Superman gave Batman the ring with the specific intention that it be possible for it to take him down. It's generally shielded, and only fires in a cone.
It doesn't matter how well Superman knows Batman- Batman knows him as well or better, and Batman is smarter.
And Batman had a specific plan for snapping Superman out of it in [i]Hush[i]- he knew from experience that Superman, even under mind control, would save Lois Lane. Which would snap him out. Which is exactly what happened.
And artificial kryptonite can have almost any property, including hurting Superman more quickly, or in one case, completely taking his powers away forever.

KayJay
2006-05-11, 03:47 PM
When did I say magic = sonics? I'm saying Bruce doesn't use magic, and ultrasonics has little effect when you are faster than sound, just like how Flash has rendered villains like Sonar ineffectual by passing the sound barrier. Nuclear missiles might hurt Superman, but then again, who wouldn't they hurt ::) Apparently anyone can beat Superman, provided we can give them a nuclear missile, right? In any case, I doubt that Superman can't avoid something like that, and he has been known to withstand extremely powerful nuclear blasts. (The second fight with Doomsday, I recall something similar to him withstanding a blast as powerful as a thousand nuclear reactors, or the like)
And how exactly does snapping Superman out of anything consititute a repeatable plan that might explain how Batman would trump Superman? I'd hardly cite this as an example of Batman "beating" Superman, more like Batman managing to not die against him.


And artificial kryptonite can have almost any property, including hurting Superman more quickly, or in one case, completely taking his powers away forever.
Yes, in the crazy past before the first crisis, but then at times like that, Superman was even more powerful than he is nowadays. That's hardly considered canon at all, which was the point of the rewrite. In the present day, the most effective kryptonite is real kryptonite, the synthetic stuff is nowhere near is strong. I haven't seen anjy comic or other source that says synthetic kryptonite is more powerful than actual kryptonite.

Pax_Chi
2006-05-11, 04:03 PM
The effectiveness of Kryptonite varries from writer to writer. Some have it as being a substance that instantly weakens Superman and renders him weak enough for a normal person to slap around. (Rukka)

Others write it as a substance that takes longer to affect him, and he can even withstand contanct with it before becoming too weakened, allowing him to survive being stabbed with a Kryptonite sword. (Leob)

Still others have it as something that needs to be used in large quantities to effect him, or be used in a truly dire way, such as injecting liquid kryptonite into his body. (Austen)

As such, how the k-nite will effect Superman largely depends on the writer and the opposition. If someone wants Superman to be taken out by a ring sized chunk ot Kryptonite, then he will be. If another wants him to be able to grab a fist sized chunk of k-nite and use it to beat an evil kryptonian senseless with it before going under, he will.

It all depends on what sources and writers you cite.

6079smithw
2006-05-11, 10:56 PM
When did I say magic = sonics? I'm saying Bruce doesn't use magic, and ultrasonics has little effect when you are faster than sound, just like how Flash has rendered villains like Sonar ineffectual by passing the sound barrier. Nuclear missiles might hurt Superman, but then again, who wouldn't they hurt ::) Apparently anyone can beat Superman, provided we can give them a nuclear missile, right? In any case, I doubt that Superman can't avoid something like that, and he has been known to withstand extremely powerful nuclear blasts. (The second fight with Doomsday, I recall something similar to him withstanding a blast as powerful as a thousand nuclear reactors, or the like)
And how exactly does snapping Superman out of anything consititute a repeatable plan that might explain how Batman would trump Superman? I'd hardly cite this as an example of Batman "beating" Superman, more like Batman managing to not die against him.

Yes, in the crazy past before the first crisis, but then at times like that, Superman was even more powerful than he is nowadays. That's hardly considered canon at all, which was the point of the rewrite. In the present day, the most effective kryptonite is real kryptonite, the synthetic stuff is nowhere near is strong. I haven't seen anjy comic or other source that says synthetic kryptonite is more powerful than actual kryptonite.


Sorry, I thought the magic and ultrasonics things were part of the same sentence, because you didn't actually address why magic was a bad option- however silly it may be, it's an integral part of the DC world.

The point about Hush was that Batman had a plan to fit the situation, as he always did- you, earlier, made it sound as though he just got lucky, which wasn't the case.

The point about missles, once again, was that you had scoffed at the possiblity of them doing anything to him, which they certainly do.

Sorry if I got kryptonite confused between continuities, it is (as the person above me mentioned) kind of a weird scaling factor. But I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Superman gave Batman the K ring with the specific intention that it could take him down. Therefore, Superman believes that it will work. I'm going to trust him on that.

KayJay
2006-05-12, 02:52 AM
Sorry, I thought the magic and ultrasonics things were part of the same sentence, because you didn't actually address why magic was a bad option- however silly it may be, it's an integral part of the DC world.

The point about Hush was that Batman had a plan to fit the situation, as he always did- you, earlier, made it sound as though he just got lucky, which wasn't the case.

The point about missles, once again, was that you had scoffed at the possiblity of them doing anything to him, which they certainly do.

Sorry if I got kryptonite confused between continuities, it is (as the person above me mentioned) kind of a weird scaling factor. But I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Superman gave Batman the K ring with the specific intention that it could take him down. Therefore, Superman believes that it will work. I'm going to trust him on that.
He gave it him as it's quite possibly his only chance, not because it's a guaranteed takedown measure. What else could Superman give to someone he wants to have the ability to take him down in case he goes rogue? Some large scale weapon of mass destruction that he can use on anyone? Or something he knows he is susceptible to and only affects him? The choice is obvious, that's not to say it'll work, if Supes had half a mind to actually do something. Just think of how something like a gun can stop Batman, and that's just as dangerous to him as kryptonite is to Superman. However, Batman can handle someone carrying a gun quite easily, and has done so in the past, I don't see why it's not conceivable that Superman can handle things quite easily too against kryptonite. He's yet to be beaten and killed by kryptonite, and has worked around it before even when acting incompetent and not using his full ability range, so I wouldn't say it's an autowin by any means.

Finwe
2006-05-12, 06:30 PM
Batman would win, hands down. Why? Bruce Wayne has billions of dollars with which to buy out Chuck Norris :D

CelestialStick
2006-05-12, 09:07 PM
He gave it him as it's quite possibly his only chance, not because it's a guaranteed takedown measure. What else could Superman give to someone he wants to have the ability to take him down in case he goes rogue? Some large scale weapon of mass destruction that he can use on anyone? Or something he knows he is susceptible to and only affects him? The choice is obvious, that's not to say it'll work, if Supes had half a mind to actually do something. Just think of how something like a gun can stop Batman, and that's just as dangerous to him as kryptonite is to Superman. However, Batman can handle someone carrying a gun quite easily, and has done so in the past, I don't see why it's not conceivable that Superman can handle things quite easily too against kryptonite. He's yet to be beaten and killed by kryptonite, and has worked around it before even when acting incompetent and not using his full ability range, so I wouldn't say it's an autowin by any means.


KayJay, your posts on this subject are exceedingly well-argued.

I don't know if you all know or not, but kryptonite didn't originate in the comic books at all. Rather kryptonite was invented by writers of the 1940s Superman radio serial quite a while before kryptonite appeared in the comic books.

Speaking of synethic kryptonite, there was a storyline in those radio serials in which some badguys create synthetic kryptonite. At first it worked as well as the real stuff, but the older it got, the weaker it got, so that by the end of the story arc all the synethetic kryptonite they had managed to manufacture had lost its power to weaken Superman. It's cool because he finds out, but Lois doesn't, so when Lois, suspecting at last that Clark is Superman, brings the synthetic K to Clark in hopes of uncovering him as Superman, it doesn't work but she thinks it proves that he's not Superman.

6079smithw
2006-05-12, 09:36 PM
He gave it him as it's quite possibly his only chance, not because it's a guaranteed takedown measure. What else could Superman give to someone he wants to have the ability to take him down in case he goes rogue? Some large scale weapon of mass destruction that he can use on anyone? Or something he knows he is susceptible to and only affects him? The choice is obvious, that's not to say it'll work, if Supes had half a mind to actually do something. Just think of how something like a gun can stop Batman, and that's just as dangerous to him as kryptonite is to Superman. However, Batman can handle someone carrying a gun quite easily, and has done so in the past, I don't see why it's not conceivable that Superman can handle things quite easily too against kryptonite. He's yet to be beaten and killed by kryptonite, and has worked around it before even when acting incompetent and not using his full ability range, so I wouldn't say it's an autowin by any means.


I agree that it's not an autowin, and I agree that Kryptonite alone probably won't kill or even beat him; the whole thing is a bit too lame. However, I'd say that Batman+Kryptonite pretty well cancels out the Superman "I am God so I autowin" advantage, and Batman is a lot smarter and more capable than most of Superman's enemies. Luthor is the only one who comes close, and he can't ever go all out because a.) he doesn't have the physical abilities or obsession Batman does, and b.) he has to keep his hands clean. Batman, against anything but absolutely overwhelming advantage, is unbeatable.

turkishproverb
2006-05-12, 09:45 PM
Thank you.

On so many different levels.

Thats basically the excuse people are giving on superman's victory in their posts half the time.

"He is god so he autowins."

CelestialStick
2006-05-12, 10:35 PM
Thank you.

On so many different levels.

Thats basically the excuse people are giving on superman's victory in their posts half the time.

"He is god so he autowins."

That comment seems a tad ironic given that so many of the posts on this thread have basically said, "Batman is omniscent so he autowins." ;D

6079smithw
2006-05-12, 11:04 PM
That comment seems a tad ironic given that so many of the posts on this thread have basically said, "Batman is omniscent so he autowins." ;D

Well, yeah, but it's kind of true; Batman and Superman are both pretty much unbeatable. It's why the fight between them is such a big issue.

Rex_Hondo
2006-05-13, 12:02 AM
Just a side comment RE: "Batman's only human."

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that it has been a continuing debate within continuity whether Batman has pushed himself so far beyond normal human limitations that he should actually be classified as a metahuman.

Pax_Chi
2006-05-13, 12:12 AM
Also, calling someone 'just human' in a comic book is somewhat misleading.

We've got non-powered guys like Batman, Captain America and Daredevil being able to do things like kick down trees, stone columns, flip limos, dodge bullets, etc. Mere humans in comics can achieve some pretty impressive feats.

It gets even more insane when you get to guys like Shang Chi, who can deflect bullets and kick down radio towers or iron doors, or guys like the Legion of Superheroes' Karate Kid, who could actually stalemate Daxamite/Kryptonian class opponents due to his ungodly martial arts skill.

6079smithw
2006-05-13, 12:33 AM
Also, calling someone 'just human' in a comic book is somewhat misleading.

We've got non-powered guys like Batman, Captain America and Daredevil being able to do things like kick down trees, stone columns, flip limos, dodge bullets, etc. Mere humans in comics can achieve some pretty impressive feats.

It gets even more insane when you get to guys like Shang Chi, who can deflect bullets and kick down radio towers or iron doors, or guys like the Legion of Superheroes' Karate Kid, who could actually stalemate Daxamite/Kryptonian class opponents due to his ungodly martial arts skill.

I think Daredevil is powered- in at least one version, his blindsight (sonar) and so forth are hightened by the stuff that blinded him. Also, Captain America got the 'Super Soldier' serum, which pretty much counts as powered.

I always assumed the human/metahuman divide was beween people whose abilities were due to outside forces (Green Lantern, Superman, etc.) vs. people who made them themselves (Green Arrow, Batman.) I guess the high-tech ones don't really fit in, though.

Pax_Chi
2006-05-13, 12:38 AM
I think Daredevil is powered- in at least one version, his blindsight (sonar) and so forth are hightened by the stuff that blinded him. Also, Captain America got the 'Super Soldier' serum, which pretty much counts as powered.

Well, I ment that Daredevil doesn't have any muscular augmentation in the sense that he has superhuman strength, yet can easily toss 600 lbs weights and flip cars.

Captain America is supposedly only 'peak human', not metahuman, but there's been debate over that.



I always assumed the human/metahuman divide was beween people whose abilities were due to outside forces (Green Lantern, Superman, etc.) vs. people who made them themselves (Green Arrow, Batman.) I guess the high-tech ones don't really fit in, though.

I generally agree. If the character achieved their abilities through training, then they aren't really metahuman. Though some people claim it gets kind of murky when you talk about guys like Dr. Strange, a mystic, or Karate Kid, an uber-martial artist that can hurt Superman class people.

turkishproverb
2006-05-13, 12:53 AM
That comment seems a tad ironic given that so many of the posts on this thread have basically said, "Batman is omniscent so he autowins." * ;D


I've never siad that (or even implied it in any way), but it's a fair argument that some of the bat people have used the coolness factor/Ultra Knowledge factor without understanding hte characters fully or using the physics of the universe properly.

KayJay
2006-05-13, 02:55 AM
Batman+Kryptonite pretty well cancels out the Superman "I am God so I autowin" advantage

Batman, against anything but absolutely overwhelming advantage, is unbeatable.
It's nice how we just removed the "I am Superman, I autowin" advantage, replacing it with the "I am Batman, I autowin" one ::)
Regardless, I'm trying to consider an actual fight of the two people through their merits, regardless of writer bias and stereotypes.

CelestialStick
2006-05-13, 03:39 AM
Well, yeah, but it's kind of true; Batman and Superman are both pretty much unbeatable. It's why the fight between them is such a big issue.

We should do everything in our power to see that just a horrible tragedy never occurs. ;D

CelestialStick
2006-05-13, 03:44 AM
I've never siad that (or even implied it in any way), but it's a fair argument that some of the bat people have used the coolness factor/Ultra Knowledge factor without understanding hte characters fully or using the physics of the universe properly.

Thanks. :)

CelestialStick
2006-05-13, 03:44 AM
It's nice how we just removed the "I am Superman, I autowin" advantage, replacing it with the "I am Batman, I autowin" one ::)
Regardless, I'm trying to consider an actual fight of the two people through their merits, regardless of writer bias and stereotypes.

Well said (again)!

6079smithw
2006-05-13, 04:01 AM
It's nice how we just removed the "I am Superman, I autowin" advantage, replacing it with the "I am Batman, I autowin" one ::)
Regardless, I'm trying to consider an actual fight of the two people through their merits, regardless of writer bias and stereotypes.
Ok, but as I recall, your last point was 'Superman has never lost to kryptonite, and therefore there is no reason to assume that it can beat him.
Well, by the same logic, Batman has never lost to much of anything, and there is therefore no reason to assume that much of anything can beat him.
I maintain that kryptonite, used properly, is a significant danger. Batman uses things properly. It's what he does.

Superman has a huge physical advantage. I would argue that Batman has an at least equally huge mental advantage, combined with a lot of useful technology, training, and artifacts. He uses all of those things, in combination with his intellectual and physical abilities, on a very regular basis. Superman, conversely, almost never uses anything but his huge physical advantage.

Therefore, it seems as though his only hope is that his advantage is so huge that it counters all of the subsidiary ones Batman has picked up- in other words, the 'It doesn't matter what Batman has lined up, Superman throws him into the sun theory.' a.) I don't think that works in the first place due to Batman's penchant for pre-planning (meaning that he would have some sort of power suit or gravity enhancer or something to stop this,) and b.) Batman has an available attack on a specific weakness of Superman's.

Look, they both autowin, ok? It's the unstoppable force and the immobile object. But look, we've found the magic switch that turns the unstoppable force off! Guess who wins?



*edit to avoid doubleposting:
Executive summary available below \/\/\/

Rex_Hondo
2006-05-13, 04:07 AM
It's nice how we just removed the "I am Superman, I autowin" advantage, replacing it with the "I am Batman, I autowin" one ::)



Hardly. It's simply that, more often than not, vast intellect and tactical savvy will trump brute strength. Supe's powers can be counteracted, circumvented, or taken away outright. The same can't be said about Batman's mind.

KayJay
2006-05-13, 05:37 AM
Ok, but as I recall, your last point was 'Superman has never lost to kryptonite, and therefore there is no reason to assume that it can beat him.
Well, by the same logic, Batman has never lost to much of anything, and there is therefore no reason to assume that much of anything can beat him.
I maintain that kryptonite, used properly, is a significant danger. Batman uses things properly. It's what he does.
I'll agree with significant danger, but that's a given. Superman has more than enough ways to neutralise the danger though.
I think you're missing a word in your statement though. I don't think there's much of a need to AUTOMATICALLY assume that Kryptonite can beat Supes, and in that case, I'll readily agree that there's no need to AUTOMATICALLY assume that Batman can be beaten by anything. At this point, when we've stopped assuming things on an abstract level, then we can start discussing their actual abilities and how they'd employ them to win, rather than things like "he's smarter" or "he's god-like" kind of statements, which don't really get us anywhere, interesting reading that it is. That's why I've listed things like direct counters and strategies Batman might use, whereas all I hear from the Batman side is that "he's smarter" (notice the vagueness) or "he has kryptonite" (which I'm unconvinced that a single kryptonite ring will do much, given the plethora of counters Superman could employ).





Hardly. It's simply that, more often than not, vast intellect and tactical savvy will trump brute strength. Supe's powers can be counteracted, circumvented, or taken away outright. The same can't be said about Batman's mind.
Yes it can, like I've said. Super speedsters can speed themselves up so that time passes a lot more slowly to them- when Superman is making his actions within hundredths of a second, not even Batman can think fast enough to keep up. I'm pretty sure that I've seen flash out-maneuver supercomputers (Possibly in our Worlds at War? I forget), just by slowing down time so much that he can do the calculations at the same speed as it. Superman can do something similar, although obviously not to a flash scale as he's not as fast as the flash.
Not that I'd call Superman just brute strength. He's obviously not a Super-genius, but he's hardly brain-addled. In fact, he's more likely than not far above average in intelligence. Notice how he's recently lost his powers for a year, and now that he's devoted time to his job, he's an even better reporter than before when he was scooping people by being Superman?
I've yet to see much that might portray him as thick, by anyone's standards.



Superman has a huge physical advantage. I would argue that Batman has an at least equally huge mental advantage, combined with a lot of useful technology, training, and artifacts. He uses all of those things, in combination with his intellectual and physical abilities, on a very regular basis. Superman, conversely, almost never uses anything but his huge physical advantage.

Therefore, it seems as though his only hope is that his advantage is so huge that it counters all of the subsidiary ones Batman has picked up- in other words, the 'It doesn't matter what Batman has lined up, Superman throws him into the sun theory.' a.) I don't think that works in the first place due to Batman's penchant for pre-planning (meaning that he would have some sort of power suit or gravity enhancer or something to stop this,) and b.) Batman has an available attack on a specific weakness of Superman's.
Useful technology, training and artifacts? I've yet to see much evidence of this. I don't recall anything in the Batcave that can stop Superman other than the kryptonite ring. Anything else just riles him up a bit. Power suit or gravity enhancer? I've yet to see him use something like this. He does have some kind of exoskeleton that can power him up slightly, but that's about it. Not that throwing him into the sun is the only way to kill Batman. That's just going for showy overkill. All it takes is one "Superpunch" which potentially packs more power than a bullet, and he's out.

A lot of Batman's strength comes from his leadership and mind, and I don't think that's enough to beat Superman, unless we start adding in other heroes that Batman can lead into the mix. Any remotely epic enemy that Batman's fought tends to be through the JLA, where he will take a role where he allocates the resources (i.e the other members) effectively enough to make a difference. On his own, his level of villains is much lower, consisting of the likes of Bane, Killer Croc in the physical department. I would say it's a large step down when he has to work alone.

6079smithw
2006-05-13, 05:54 AM
Umm, actually, I'm pretty sure that Superman specifically can't think any faster when he moves faster. It's one of the reasons he doesn't go fast that often, and one of the advantages Flash has over him.

Also, we obviously can't list exactly how a fight would go- we aren't writing a comic here, we're trying to see who has the advantage. I've listed several concrete advantages for Batman (versatility, technology, greater overall intelligence, willingness to use whatever power is available, kryptonite, etc.) and Superman's disadvantages (laziness with powers, self-doubt, belief that Batman could win, unwillingness to think through a fight in advance.)

What's more, the generalizations do go in Batman's favor- Superman takes on weaker opponents and still takes a beating, whereas Batman takes on much stronger opponents and generally comes out more cleanly. They both (almost) always win in the end, but Superman very rarely wins for any reason other than overwhelming power. Which we've neutralized. That's not "Batman is smarter", that's "Batman is better at winning." Which he is.

You've pointed out that kyptonite isn't an autowin, and that Superman isn't actually stupid. I'm gonna need more than that.

counteredit:
So, you're leaning on the "Superman wins because he's strong" argument again. Batman counters strength with kryptonite, which it absolutely and demonstrably does.

Batman might be killable in one punch (although, seeing as how Superman hasn't ever killed anyone this way, he might not think to go all out against a non-enhanced human,) and Superman could conceivably land it before the ring came out (although he generally can't seem to figure out pre-emptive strikes even against the lamest of k wielders) but that scenario requires that he be in a position to punch Batman openly. Obviously, there are circumstances where this is impossible. Batman is very good at getting a fight in his own arena, and would therefore likely make it in such circumstances. Thus, his intellect counters Superman's strenght.

Batman doesn't generally use high-end technology because it generally isn't necessary. But he knows how to use them, and has the means by which to aquire them. And one of the advantages of being willing to prep is that he knows what is necessary, and does it. Same for artifacts.

Dhavaer
2006-05-13, 05:57 AM
"he has kryptonite" (which I'm unconvinced that a single kryptonite ring will do much, given the plethora of counters Superman could employ).

Batman used the Kryptonite ring to kill Superman in Armageddon 2001

KayJay
2006-05-13, 06:14 AM
Umm, actually, I'm pretty sure that Superman specifically can't think any faster when he moves faster. It's one of the reasons he doesn't go fast that often, and one of the advantages Flash has over him.

Also, we obviously can't list exactly how a fight would go- we aren't writing a comic here, we're trying to see who has the advantage. I've listed several concrete advantages for Batman (versatility, technology, greater overall intelligence, willingness to use whatever power is available, kryptonite, etc.) and Superman's disadvantages (laziness with powers, self-doubt, belief that Batman could win, unwillingness to think through a fight in advance.)

What's more, the generalizations do go in Batman's favor- Superman takes on weaker opponents and still takes a beating, whereas Batman takes on much stronger opponents and generally comes out more cleanly. They both (almost) always win in the end, but Superman very rarely wins for any reason other than overwhelming power. Which we've neutralized. That's not "Batman is smarter", that's "Batman is better at winning." Which he is.

You've pointed out that kyptonite isn't an autowin, and that Superman isn't actually stupid. I'm gonna need more than that.
He's going to find it very hard to fly at superspeed when he can register what's happening around him. He can't catch bullets if he can't track the bullet's movement, which requires a link to his brain. He's not reflexively catching these bullets you know. Conscious choice.

(versatility, technology, greater overall intelligence, willingness to use whatever power is available, kryptonite, etc.)
I've yet to see much evidence of technology and being willing to use whatever power is available being a large factor at all. Versatility? Pretty subjective, I'd say Superman is versatile enough with his plethora of abilities Greater overall intelligence I agree on, but I don't see it helping. Kryptonite is the only one with much meaning on the list, and that's easy enough to get by. I recall the other Superman in infinite crisis coming to meet Batman, and Batman pretty much got owned the instant kryptonite didn't work. Same as when he wasn't carrying the ring and was pulped by Superman who was under the control of Maxwell Lord.

(laziness with powers, self-doubt, belief that Batman could win, unwillingness to think through a fight in advance.)
Self doubt?? Belief that Batman could win?? I don't see where these are really coming from. I'll agree he tends to not use his full range of abilities at times, but agaisnt the correct foe, he has done so. Even without it, if you aren't going to be finishing him first time, he comes back and actually ups the ante when he knows that he can do so without being afraid of killing them. And against someone he knows as well as Batman, and the respect that he has for him, I doubt that he'd underestimate him in the first place.


Wait, so you're still saying kryptonite is an autowin and Superman IS stupid? Because if so, there's really little more I can say on that to convince you, and I'll let others come to their own conclusions.

KayJay
2006-05-13, 06:18 AM
Batman used the Kryptonite ring to kill Superman in Armageddon 2001

That was like 15 years ago O.o
Same continuity, but this wasn't really the same kind of DC as what I'm talking about these days (and as I recall it was an alternate universe type thing. Plus DC in general was more focuses on humour as I recall.). Barely anything I say isa referring to that kind of time period, as the heroes are essentially completely different and changed. Superman for one is much more powerful than those days.

Dhavaer
2006-05-13, 06:21 AM
That was like 15 years ago O.o

Really? It looked new.

Rex_Hondo
2006-05-13, 06:25 AM
KayJay, you're either flat-out ignoring or unaware of times when Batman has singlehandedly rescued the JLA (The White Martians), the tech he has available to him, but doesn't necessarily "display" in the cave (Thanagarian, Kryptonian, Apokalyptian, and his own creations to name a few), and a number of times where Batman HAS come out on top, or at least gotten away with a whole skin, against Superman (Batman vs Poison Ivy controlled Supes, to name one).

And that's not even to say that Batman ALWAYS wins. Nobody's claiming that. In fact, fairly recently, somebody was messing around with Superman's mind (AGAIN. Not thick, but certainly VERY susceptible to mental manipulation.) and made him believe that Batman was actually Doomsday or something (don't remember exactly) and Batman, having absolutely no warning that Superman was going to attack or that the rules had changed, ended up in a coma.

As for the vaunted superspeed being the trump-all, anyone who's read Identity Crisis knows that's not necessarily true.

And let's not forget, these ARE comic book characters. Trying to apply anything other than comic book logic to them is an inherently ridiculous and self-defeating endeavor.

KayJay
2006-05-13, 06:49 AM
KayJay, you're either flat-out ignoring or unaware of times when Batman has singlehandedly rescued the JLA (The White Martians), the tech he has available to him, but doesn't necessarily "display" in the cave (Thanagarian, Kryptonian, Apokalyptian, and his own creations to name a few), and a number of times where Batman HAS come out on top, or at least gotten away with a whole skin, against Superman (Batman vs Poison Ivy controlled Supes, to name one).

And that's not even to say that Batman ALWAYS wins. Nobody's claiming that. In fact, fairly recently, somebody was messing around with Superman's mind (AGAIN. Not thick, but certainly VERY susceptible to mental manipulation.) and made him believe that Batman was actually Doomsday or something (don't remember exactly) and Batman, having absolutely no warning that Superman was going to attack or that the rules had changed, ended up in a coma.

As for the vaunted superspeed being the trump-all, anyone who's read Identity Crisis knows that's not necessarily true.

And let's not forget, these ARE comic book characters. Trying to apply anything other than comic book logic to them is an inherently ridiculous and self-defeating endeavor.

All of those had pretty obvious extenuating circumstances. The first time, that'd be him exploiting a weakness so severe that it was pretty much autowin by anyone with a fire. All that was really necessary was to recognise them as white martians. Mind controlled Superman was mainly "stay alive until he snaps out of it" which isn't precisely the best plan ever. If he didn't snap out of it, I can't see Batman having survived for much longer. The tech available, if we're referring to those, don't impress. They're above human tech, but not really enough to take Superman down. Superman can take down Darkseid himself (screw the tech), and I'm pretty sure that Thanagar's isn't that much better.



And that's not even to say that Batman ALWAYS wins. Nobody's claiming that. In fact, fairly recently, somebody was messing around with Superman's mind (AGAIN. Not thick, but certainly VERY susceptible to mental manipulation.) and made him believe that Batman was actually Doomsday or something (don't remember exactly) and Batman, having absolutely no warning that Superman was going to attack or that the rules had changed, ended up in a coma.
I'm pretty sure someone's claimed that :)
And I'd hardly call Superman VERY susceptible at all- just not immune to it. Not that Batman can exploit this "weakness" at all. It's been shown on more than one occasion, that Superman with a power ring would be extremely deadly- thus showing his kind of willpower.

Superspeed isn't a trump, when you are as fast as someone like Deathstroke (who has been way enhanced to metahuman status, and would be able to take down Batman quite easily IMO) and are being predictable like the flash. Not that that tactic works when you're invulnerable like Superman, and not like Flash was using remotely similar to Superspeed. (If he's traveling at near light speeds, I somehow doubt that he can move his sword back in time to do much).

When both superheroes having "comic book logic" working for them, it's better to ignore it altogether.

KayJay
2006-05-13, 06:51 AM
Really? It looked new.
http://www.fanzing.com/mag/fanzing36/feature3.shtml
I only vaguely remember it from reading the beginning of the crossover, which my brother bought back in the day.

6079smithw
2006-05-13, 07:14 AM
Mind controlled Superman was mainly "stay alive until he snaps out of it" which isn't precisely the best plan ever. If he didn't snap out of it, I can't see Batman having survived for much longer. ....

We already had this argument. He had a specific plan. He knew Lois would snap him out. Can you stop claiming he just got punched and lucky please?

KayJay
2006-05-13, 10:06 AM
We already had this argument. He had a specific plan. He knew Lois would snap him out. Can you stop claiming he just got punched and lucky please?
It's a plan that relies on far too much luck. You don't KNOW things like that, you can gamble and hope it pays off, more than anything else. If that's really what consistutes as a "plan" to Batman, then my estimation of him goes down several notches.

Finwe
2006-05-13, 11:14 AM
I think superman should take a page out of Belkar's book.

Batman: Kryptonite Ring!
Superman: Lead Sheet!

*WANG!!!!*

flacko
2006-05-13, 07:33 PM
http://www.superdickery.com/seduction/1.html

Behold supermans a **** and batman's gay.

edit:srry the first post I read was about superman being a **** so I just assumed, this is my first argument. but batman would kick superman bonified ass with krytonite.

Skyserpent
2006-05-13, 07:37 PM
So the debate has shifted to ***** vs. Gays?

flacko
2006-05-13, 07:51 PM
srry first vs argument, never even heard of these things before, but hell um batman would win because he can use kryptonite.

danielf
2006-05-13, 07:58 PM
This url has an awesome fight: Neo from Matrix versus Robocop. *:o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGG8BKYqiiw

turkishproverb
2006-05-13, 11:20 PM
I maintain that kryptonite, used properly, is a significant danger. Batman uses things properly. It's what he does.

Great quote. *I love when superman try's to stop the shielded K arrow in DKR. *Batman had it set to open up and release the Kryptonite Gas. *Priceless


Umm, actually, I'm pretty sure that Superman specifically can't think any faster when he moves faster. It's one of the reasons he doesn't go fast that often, and one of the advantages Flash has over him.

Thats quite true. *Even the Flashes, who have far mroe time management/concous awareness at superspeed can't retain and control everything at superspeed (ala read books and retain the informantion {only impulse/kidflash could do that}) *It's made quite clear superman is primarily working reflexively/off of instinct while at superspeed, and htis is made clear several times. *IT's like when a piolet is flying a jet fighter. He cannot see Everything going on, and when his instruments go down, things get very hard for him. *Superman's on the jet without instruments. *He can still go, and if sharp eyed he might be able to do damage, but he's working on instinct.


KayJay, you're either flat-out ignoring or unaware of times when Batman has singlehandedly rescued the JLA (The White Martians), the tech he has available to him, but doesn't necessarily "display" in the cave (Thanagarian, Kryptonian, Apokalyptian, and his own creations to name a few), and a number of times where Batman HAS come out on top, or at least gotten away with a whole skin, against Superman (Batman vs Poison Ivy controlled Supes, to name one).

As for the vaunted superspeed being the trump-all, anyone who's read Identity Crisis knows that's not necessarily true. *

Answer par 1: Thank you!

Answer par 2: *WHy didn't I mention that?



It's a plan that relies on far too much luck. You don't KNOW things like that, you can gamble and hope it pays off, more than anything else. If that's really what consistutes as a "plan" to Batman, then my estimation of him goes down several notches.

Knowing your opponent's way of operating and thinking (this applies in that situation to Superman AND poison Ivy) and their abilities limits (Ivy's mind contro)l is not relying on luck. *How on earth do you think it is? *It's called strategy. *Read Art of War for heavens sake: *"Know yourself and your enemy, and you will always be victorious."

Batman KNEW how much Ivy could control Superman, and he KNEW what was needed to snap him out of it, just as ke KNEW that catwoman could kidnap and drop Lois at the right times.


The tech available, if we're referring to those, don't impress. They're above human tech, but not really enough to take Superman down. Superman can take down Darkseid himself (screw the tech), and I'm pretty sure that Thanagar's isn't that much better.

Lol. *::)

Have you read most of the Superman/Darkseid interactions? *Even when Superman win's hands down, it hardly an easy fight for him. *Tech from Thangar and Apokolips have both hurt superman on occasion, and Superman has obvious weakness to Kryptonian tech.

LIkewise, your forgetting that currently Wanye Enterprises OWNS Lexcorp, therefore all of lex's little anti superman toys have been perused by Batman (he even mentioned this somewhere..)

KayJay
2006-05-14, 04:30 AM
Great quote. I love when superman try's to stop the shielded K arrow in DKR. Batman had it set to open up and release the Kryptonite Gas. Priceless

Like I say, Superman played to even marginally full abilities rather than to "this is the plot, I will make him weak enough that it follows the plot" would take Batman. He can catch bullets and is stopped by an arrow? Ok ::)



Thats quite true. Even the Flashes, who have far mroe time management/concous awareness at superspeed can't retain and control everything at superspeed (ala read books and retain the informantion {only impulse/kidflash could do that}) It's made quite clear superman is primarily working reflexively/off of instinct while at superspeed, and htis is made clear several times. IT's like when a piolet is flying a jet fighter. He cannot see Everything going on, and when his instruments go down, things get very hard for him. Superman's on the jet without instruments. He can still go, and if sharp eyed he might be able to do damage, but he's working on instinct.

You can't catch a bullet reflexively that's far away, as that takes too much coordination. When you catch a ball, your brain has to register it, especially if it requires leg movement too. Hell, you shouldn't even be able to coordinate where you're going in a city if you can't use your brain, unless we've given him Super GPS, where he can program where he goes and doesn't need to think about the turns he needs to make to get there? I've yet to see anything that says they're doing things on instinct. What DOES happen when you go fast, is that momentum can make it hard for you to stop, which is what seems to happen with Flash sometimes (and given the power of Superman, I don't think momentum is much of an issue). The argument is NEVER that it's using instinct. Oh and reading books and retaining the info isn't possible for them, solely because they don't have a photographic memory. They can read a book and retain as much information as any normal person reading at their relative speed (Like if I read a book on advanced quantum mechanics, I might read it at my normal speed, that's not to say it'd make sense unless I read the previous books leading up to it). The only difference with impulse is that he's effectively scanned the book for his perusal to get 100% recall when he needs of the book.





Knowing your opponent's way of operating and thinking (this applies in that situation to Superman AND poison Ivy) and their abilities limits (Ivy's mind contro)l is not relying on luck. How on earth do you think it is? It's called strategy. Read Art of War for heavens sake: "Know yourself and your enemy, and you will always be victorious."

Batman KNEW how much Ivy could control Superman, and he KNEW what was needed to snap him out of it, just as ke KNEW that catwoman could kidnap and drop Lois at the right times.

He didn't KNOW any of those things, which is why it was a gamble. Note how he states that Lois isn't really in any danger and that Catwoman could catch her, and only says she doesn't need to AFTER Superman is gone. THis implies that he didn't know what he was going to do at all, which is enforced by the fact he was willing/hoping for him to "be the boy scout". It was a plan, but one with a lot of risk (as they would've been severely caught out if CAtwoman had to save Lois and Superman kept pummeling Bruce) and one that wouldn't be repeatable in a Vs fight like we're talking about, unless we really want to discuss a mind controlled Superman versus a clear headed Batman.



Have you read most of the Superman/Darkseid interactions? Even when Superman win's hands down, it hardly an easy fight for him. Tech from Thangar and Apokolips have both hurt superman on occasion, and Superman has obvious weakness to Kryptonian tech.

LIkewise, your forgetting that currently Wanye Enterprises OWNS Lexcorp, therefore all of lex's little anti superman toys have been perused by Batman (he even mentioned this somewhere..)

Did I say it was easy? Darkseid is better than most of the apokolyptian technology, which is why when Doomsday landed on Apokolips, Darkseid had to try to handle it personally- the tech had no effect.
What toys? Even Lex tends to fall back HEAVILY on kryptonite, or failing that, attacking Superman in a more psychological manner than anything else.
I don't recall any weakness to Kryptonian tech. In fact I recall on more than one occasion him dismantling them. Remember that on Krypton, everyone wasn't superpowered like he is on Earth, so the scale isn't precisely Superman scale. Hurting Superman isn't really enough- I'd agree some of the tech would HURT, but then you have to consider the fact that it'd be hard to hit him or the fact that he can survive a lot of pain- he is very physical after all. A paper-cut or a kick to the shin can hurt Batman, I wouldn't give the win to someone in possession of them either, no matter how well they could use it, seeing as Lex is one of the smartest people on the planet also.

6079smithw
2006-05-14, 05:51 AM
Sigh. Let's take this point by point.

Like I say, Superman played to even marginally full abilities rather than to "this is the plot, I will make him weak enough that it follows the plot" would take Batman. He can catch bullets and is stopped by an arrow? Ok ::)
That's exactly it. Superman caught the arrow. As Batman expected him to do. It then released k gas. Get it? Batman outthought Superman.


You can't catch a bullet reflexively that's far away, as that takes too much coordination. When you catch a ball, your brain has to register it, especially if it requires leg movement too. Hell, you shouldn't even be able to coordinate where you're going in a city if you can't use your brain, unless we've given him Super GPS, where he can program where he goes and doesn't need to think about the turns he needs to make to get there? I've yet to see anything that says they're doing things on instinct.
Yes, and this is where the comic book logic you conveniently dismissed comes in. It's true that it doesn't make a lot of sense that he can do things at light speed without being able to think faster than a normal person. But then, it's also true that virtually everything that happens in that world is impossible. It has been specifically pointed out that Superman does not have sped up cognition, so arguing that some of his powers contradict that is meaningless. If you want to prove that he can't catch bullets, that's fine with me.

He didn't KNOW any of those things, which is why it was a gamble. Note how he states that Lois isn't really in any danger and that Catwoman could catch her, and only says she doesn't need to AFTER Superman is gone. THis implies that he didn't know what he was going to do at all, which is enforced by the fact he was willing/hoping for him to "be the boy scout".
Implies, nothing. All this shows is that Batman, as usual, had a contingency plan. Let's say he was 99.9% sure that it would snap Superman out. Does that mean he should actually let Lois splatter if something goes wrong? Dropping her with only the assumption that Superman would catch her, however strong that assumption, would be tantamount to attempted murder, which is not Batman's style.



It was a plan, but one with a lot of risk (as they would've been severely caught out if CAtwoman had to save Lois and Superman kept pummeling Bruce) and one that wouldn't be repeatable in a Vs fight like we're talking about, unless we really want to discuss a mind controlled Superman versus a clear headed Batman.
The point is not that this is a relevant battle tactic, but that Batman knows Superman's reactions to stimuli extremely well. I'd say being able to predict exactly what your opponent will do at all times is something of an edge, wouldn't you?


Did I say it was easy? Darkseid is better than most of the apokolyptian technology, which is why when Doomsday landed on Apokolips, Darkseid had to try to handle it personally- the tech had no effect.
What toys? Even Lex tends to fall back HEAVILY on kryptonite, or failing that, attacking Superman in a more psychological manner than anything else.

Darkseid could, under the right circumstances, take Superman. Luthor has come extremely close to doing so. Given that Batman has access to the resources of both and is quite a lot cleverer than either, I don't see where their track records make Batman's chances look a lot worse- quite the opposite, in fact.



Hurting Superman isn't really enough- I'd agree some of the tech would HURT, but then you have to consider the fact that it'd be hard to hit him or the fact that he can survive a lot of pain- he is very physical after all.

So now your argument is that Batman has no finishers? I don't know, I think a massive dose of kyrptonite or a teleportation into the middle of a red giant would do nicely. Or, hell, we can just send him into the Phantom Zone- it's been demostrated that that works on Kryptonians pretty well.


A paper-cut or a kick to the shin can hurt Batman, I wouldn't give the win to someone in possession of them either, no matter how well they could use it, seeing as Lex is one of the smartest people on the planet also.
Well, actually, someone who could kick expertly enough would pose a significant danger to Batman. Especially if that person were infinitely prepared for the fight and considerably smarter than Bats. And Luthor's intelligence is a lot more limited than Batman's- he may be a genius, but only in very specific areas (buisness and technology, most notably.) Batman is brilliant at combat strategy and tactics, too.

KayJay
2006-05-14, 08:22 AM
Let's take this point by point :)


That's exactly it. Superman caught the arrow. As Batman expected him to do. It then released k gas. Get it? Batman outthought Superman.
Exactly. Why did he catch the arrow? He could easily do any number of different things. Heat vision it once it's traveled 1 centimeter from being shot, move out of the way, scan the arrow first and act accordingly... It all reeks of plot device more than any skill, as he has enough ways to get out of it if he was being actually used to his full potential. But then if he's being used at full potential, the fight between Superman and Batman become pretty much a one-sided affair consisting of Batman being pummelled into submission.





Yes, and this is where the comic book logic you conveniently dismissed comes in. It's true that it doesn't make a lot of sense that he can do things at light speed without being able to think faster than a normal person. But then, it's also true that virtually everything that happens in that world is impossible. It has been specifically pointed out that Superman does not have sped up cognition, so arguing that some of his powers contradict that is meaningless. If you want to prove that he can't catch bullets, that's fine with me.

Been pointed out by you, who didn't give any evidence to prove the point. I've not seen any evidence saying that superspeeded people are thinking at normal speed, other than wishful thinking. Ignoring logic and saying that "comic book logic" applies doesn't really work well when nothing says that this is comic book logic.





Implies, nothing. All this shows is that Batman, as usual, had a contingency plan. Let's say he was 99.9% sure that it would snap Superman out. Does that mean he should actually let Lois splatter if something goes wrong? Dropping her with only the assumption that Superman would catch her, however strong that assumption, would be tantamount to attempted murder, which is not Batman's style.
You're missing the point. My point is that luck was a pretty large factor, which is why Batman had a fallback. He didn't KNOW anything, the ball was completely in Superman's court, and that was why there was the moment of willing him on, as well as waiting for what he was going to do. A plan relying on someone else that much doesn't really give much credit to Batman's planning skills, at all.


The point is not that this is a relevant battle tactic, but that Batman knows Superman's reactions to stimuli extremely well. I'd say being able to predict exactly what your opponent will do at all times is something of an edge, wouldn't you?

Not when you can't really take advantage of that between split seconds, or when your actions don't really hurt him. I doubt it extends farther than knowing as little as Superman's opening move. He knows a lot of people "extremely well" and yet still gets hit by them, and that's because the knowledge is more in the lines of a psychological profile than anything else. I don't think he knows Superman move by move at all, and he's not really demonstrated anything like that. You seem to be giving him near psychic knowledge over Superman, when that's not really been the case.



Darkseid could, under the right circumstances, take Superman. Luthor has come extremely close to doing so. Given that Batman has access to the resources of both and is quite a lot cleverer than either, I don't see where their track records make Batman's chances look a lot worse- quite the opposite, in fact.

He's quite a lot cleverer than them? Debatable.



So now your argument is that Batman has no finishers? I don't know, I think a massive dose of kyrptonite or a teleportation into the middle of a red giant would do nicely. Or, hell, we can just send him into the Phantom Zone- it's been demostrated that that works on Kryptonians pretty well.

That's not Batman finishers, that's general finishers. I could just say "gun" and state that as a Batman finisher, apparently, so anyone who uses one therefore wins. I'm pretty sure with Superman's speed he could take one fromn somewhere in the world. The issue is that you're not going to catch Superman in this unless he's being railroad plotted into it (remember that Oots episode? :)) I've yet to see anyone managing to be teleported into a red giant, but that would've been very useful when someone like Doomsday came along. If only Batman was around for that! Batman has one kryptonite ring, which doesn't even weaken Superman much- he's both worn the ring, and is still capable of wiping the floor with Batman when he has it on, provided he is mind controlled and is therefore holding back a lot, as he doesn't really want to fight.



Well, actually, someone who could kick expertly enough would pose a significant danger to Batman. Especially if that person were infinitely prepared for the fight and considerably smarter than Bats. And Luthor's intelligence is a lot more limited than Batman's- he may be a genius, but only in very specific areas (buisness and technology, most notably.) Batman is brilliant at combat strategy and tactics, too.
As usual, we seem to have moved Batman into the realms of absurdity. Infinitely prepared? It's statements like this that make me wonder if I'm missing something. He's not a god, his internal dialogue tells you how fallible he is.
Looking over those hush issues again, it is apparent that a Superman-Batman fight between the two where he's not mind controlled is going to go badly, even in Bruce's eyes. To quote, "If Clark wanted to, he could use his Superspeed and squish me into the cement". That was while he had the ring on his hand.

6079smithw
2006-05-14, 08:43 AM
And you, in turn, are missing the point that Superman is very predictable. He caught the arrow because that is how he generally reacts. Batman wasn't trusting to luck, because he knew how Superman would react. Batman can be infinitely prepared against Superman, because Superman's reactions to given stimuli can be almost perfectly predicted.
And as I said, Batman is cleverer than Luthor if only because his intelligence extends to so many more fields, while Luthor's is generally limited almost exclusively to technology and buisness.
And you keep insisting that Batman's actions can't hurt Superman after you admitted that various things Batman either has or could obtain hurt him. How does that work?

sun_tzu
2006-05-14, 09:43 AM
Batman vs. Superman? Hmmm...
Can Superman be beaten without superpowers?
...
Yes. Kryptonite, nuclear weaponry, biological warfare, oxygen deprivation, mind tricks, and more. I may not know HOW to use them effectively to beat him, but I'm positive there IS some way or another.

CAN Batman find such a way?
...
Yes. Thinking up such plans is what he does best.

So, if he has the time to prepare whichever plan he needed, I'd say he could do it. Otherwise, he's toast.

KayJay
2006-05-14, 04:58 PM
And you, in turn, are missing the point that Superman is very predictable. He caught the arrow because that is how he generally reacts. Batman wasn't trusting to luck, because he knew how Superman would react. Batman can be infinitely prepared against Superman, because Superman's reactions to given stimuli can be almost perfectly predicted.
And as I said, Batman is cleverer than Luthor if only because his intelligence extends to so many more fields, while Luthor's is generally limited almost exclusively to technology and buisness.
And you keep insisting that Batman's actions can't hurt Superman after you admitted that various things Batman either has or could obtain hurt him. How does that work?
Because they all involve Superman to act braindead for them to work. If you're really going to cripple him that much, while playing Batman to the absolute maximum of his abilities, then it's hardly a fair fight is it? Kryptonite can undoubtedly hurt him, but it's pretty obvious that he has more than enough ways around it (if he's got half a mind to do so by the writers, and aren't screwing up the plot). Example- kryptonite gas. He can blow gas away absurdly quickly. He doesn't actually need to breathe for extremely long periods of time either- which is why he can fly to other planets.

Batman wasn't trusting to luck, because he knew how Superman would react. Batman can be infinitely prepared against Superman, because Superman's reactions to given stimuli can be almost perfectly predicted.
Again, we're overestimating Batman, and underestimating Superman. I don't even think this is worth responding to, as Superman is nowhere near that predictable. I've yet to see any evidence that Batman can do more than build up a psychological profile not this "I know what you'll do before you even do it, even if you move at superspeed and I can't even register you doing it" idea which is somehow ingrained in your head. That's just handicapping Superman so Batman can win by saying "oh, but Superman will do EXACTLY this, and therefore Batman will win", and not allowing him to choose his own actions. Obviously a fight will go Batman's way, when you've assigned yourself control over both Superman's AND Batman's actions, but I've not seen evidence of Bagtman being able to do this with anyone, and there are people he hangs around with and knows better than Superman.



Yes. Kryptonite, nuclear weaponry, biological warfare, oxygen deprivation, mind tricks, and more. I may not know HOW to use them effectively to beat him, but I'm positive there IS some way or another.
I've said before, he's withstood extremely powerful nuclear explosions. I just checked the Superman Doomsday fight on Calaton, which has him surviving a blast equivalent to "a million nuclear blasts". Biological warfare? I've seen him pretty resistant to that, having a very strong immune system. I've not seen oxygen deprivation work on him considering he's traveled extremely far into outer space. Mind tricks? Like I've said, he has a lot more willpower than you're giving him credit for, which is why he slings a mean ring when we see him with a GL power ring. In fact, he seemed to master it more easily than that recent issue where Batman was given the ring temporarily by Hal. Most people automatically assume that mind control doesn't work at all on Superman because of his will, so I wouldn't really say this is much of an exploitable weakness.

Edit: You know, I'm kind of getting bored of this debate now lol. I think at this point I'll agree to disagree :)

Rex_Hondo
2006-05-15, 12:14 AM
So, in conclusion boys and girls, when Batman does something that gives him the upper hand, it's a merely a plot device or the writers playing favorites, and therefore not relevant to the discussion.

But, when Superman does it... Well... he's Superman, so that makes it okay.

Never mind the fact that they're both fictional characters and what the writers say happens is what happens, no matter how often or loudly anybody wants to shout, "That's not what would happen!"

Edit: Of course, it still hasn't been clearly defined which incarnation of either character, what the stakes are, what the situation is, etc... But, I think the discussion is esentially over, and can only devolve from here...

turkishproverb
2006-05-15, 01:04 AM
So, in conclusion boys and girls, when Batman does something that gives him the upper hand, it's a merely a plot device or the writers playing favorites, and therefore not relevant to the discussion.

But, when Superman does it... Well... he's Superman, so that makes it okay.

Never mind the fact that they're both fictional characters and what the writers say happens is what happens, no matter how often or loudly anybody wants to shout, "That's not what would happen!"




What he said.

Also, Kayjay, knowing what someone will do is not only guessing or gambling, otherwise psychology would be totally meaningless and never help anyone, or have any sort of respectable formatting to any of it's theories.

6079smithw
2006-05-15, 02:09 AM
I think we've pretty much reached 'agree to disagree' stage; I think Superman is predictable, less than brilliant, and generally possible to beat, and that Batman is smart enough to predict both Superman's actions and weaknesses, giving him the edge.

KayJay, it seems as though your estimation of their relative intellects is different, and more closely favors Superman. Ok. I certainly agree that if Superman can come up with and use new tactics as fast or nearly as fast as Batman, and is willing to use them, he's probably going to win. If he has hypercognition too, it's a shoo-in.

I just don't think that's how Superman works. Different heroes for different people, I guess.

Foeofthelance
2006-05-15, 10:59 PM
First bit off topic, second bit on topic. Jut a quick warning.

First, in regards to Wolverine and Spiderman beating Superman. Both can beat superman easily. Spiderman beat Superboy, who is pretty much just as powerful, by dunking him in the east river, then swinging him into an electrical transformer. The same would go for Superman. That's current incarnations. I've read the Spiderman vs. Superman book, and it was either a tie or Superman won. Can't remember off the top of my head. Wolverine is just about unkillable. They throw him into the sun and he comes back from it. Doesn't get much more difficult to kill a guy then that. His adamantine cuts through anything, and the only thing that can stop it is more adamantine. It's molecular, so Supes is in trouble. Against Batman, Spiderman is doomed, while I give it 70/30 in favor of Wolverine. He and Batman have had similiar training, Batman is better equipped, but Wolverine is just plain nasty in a fight. If he was prepared, I'd give Batman 50/50.

Now as far as the fight between the two of them, Batman would win. He'd be half dead but he'd win. Here's how I see it playing out.

Circumstances:
Batman and Superman from the current Batman and Superman book. The team up one.

A 20x20x20 room as stated in a previous post.

Standard load outs.

1) Superman creams Batman. Beats him to living pulp, and then leaves him lying on the ground.

2) Batman picks himself up, sneaks up on Superman (yes he has super hearing, but you can't hear what isn't there) and sucker punches Superman in a nerve cluster with not one, but two kryptonite rings. That's right. both of them wear one on their persons at all times. Batman would easily pick it off Superman while getting clobbered.

3) Having taken Superman out of the fight, Batman proceeds to go to town on him, striking every major nerve cluster, with finishing moves to the temples, wind pipe, and spinal column. Since he's using kryptonite, Superman's natural resistance's are useless. Paralyzed and helpless, Superman suffocates ten minutes later.

Darkseid said it best. Clark is simply incapable of finishing anything, partly because he's too caring about his friends, and partly because he's too arrogant to ever think of somebody coming back after him. Batman on the other hand, is capable, and is more then willing to follow through on his threats.

Beleriphon
2006-05-15, 11:52 PM
As far as Superman needing to breath, I seem to recall that in the 1960s comics he could go into space without needing to breath or hold his breath. I don't recall the George Reeves Superman of the 1950s flying into space, but I recall that there was an episode where he was trapped in a diving bell with Lois and Jimmy and wouldn't have drowned if he burst out of it. The Superman movies with Christopher Reeve show him flying into space without any need to breath. In Lois and Clark in the 1990s, however, Superman did need to take oxygen with him when he flew out to try to stop a meteor from colliding with earth.


Its generally established that Supes needs to breath. He can hold his breath for several hours if necessary, but he does need to breath.

At the moment his powers include:
Flight
Heat Vision
Super Senses
Super Strength
Super Speed (although DC has finally stated that The Flash is the fasted being the in universe)
Invulnerability, or rather a millimetre thick field of energy that will stop nearly anything short a massive thermonuclear explosion.

For a really good overview of the character, the history, and even current continuity check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman,

Overall I still says that Batman has a good chance of winning given enough time, and proper preparation.

Finwe
2006-05-15, 11:58 PM
Doesn't he also have ice-breath, or was that jsut something they added in for the video game?

turkishproverb
2006-05-16, 12:24 AM
Overall I still says that Batman has a good chance of winning given enough time, and proper preparation.

Especially since preperation is batman's middle name.

Beleriphon
2006-05-16, 10:41 AM
Doesn't he also have ice-breath, or was that jsut something they added in for the video game?

Forgot that one, but yes he does have a freezing breath as well. Or rather he can create gusts of wind so fast that they blast all of the air out of any area creating a temporary vacuum, which in turn causes the temperature to rapidly drop.

Steward
2006-05-17, 04:29 PM
Foeofthelance; How is Batman 'not there' in your scenario?

Krytha
2006-05-17, 09:48 PM
TETSUOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

KANEDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!

Superman wins.

turkishproverb
2006-05-17, 10:33 PM
and you're basing your opinion off of Akira?

Krytha
2006-05-18, 12:39 AM
No, I just believe that superman wins.

Nobody can convince anybody otherwise of their starting opinion anyway.

*Edit* And really, nobody ACTUALLY won in Akira...

Idiotbox90
2006-05-18, 12:56 AM
Superman is essentially predictable. There are a few things he will usually do or not do.
1. No lethal force on humans.
2. Stick to brawling.
3. No finishing off enemies.
4. Rarely lies.
5. Will not use unusual never-before-seen resources.

Batman on the other hand:
1. Avoids lethal force. Will make an enemy think he'll use it.
2. Who knows what he'll do.
3. Does finish off enemies if they pose a great threat.
4. Deception is key.
5. Has a huge pool of resources at his disposal. Can do most things that can be done.

However one must remember:
1. Super strength, heat vision,...
2. Vulnerable to kryptonite.

Batman:

1. No extraordinary abilities. (Compared to other superheroes.)
2. Vulnerable to heat vision, punches, fire, bullets...

It depends on who's doing the attacking. If Superman snaps and randomly attacks Batman, Superman wins hands down. If Batman has time to make a strategy (or more likely make activate one of his already existing strategies) Superman will die.

Rex_Hondo
2006-05-18, 02:17 AM
Unfortunately, most of the "Superman wins," scenarios posited by others involve him acting in ways contrary to his established personality. Throwing Batman into the sun or just snapping and grinding him into pulp both fall into those categories. It then becomes "Batman vs. Somebody else with Superman's powers," instead of "Batman vs. Superman."

Plus, I'm surprised nobody's brought up just how much Big Blue loves the sound of his own voice. He can hardly go into a fight without trying to talk the other guy into surrendering. Comes from feeling like he lives on a planet made of cardboard. (LOVED that line from the JLU finale.) But, if you want to win against a guy like Batman, you don't give him even that much time.

KayJay
2006-05-18, 05:16 AM
Unfortunately, most of the "Superman wins," scenarios posited by others involve him acting in ways contrary to his established personality. Throwing Batman into the sun or just snapping and grinding him into pulp both fall into those categories. It then becomes "Batman vs. Somebody else with Superman's powers," instead of "Batman vs. Superman."

Plus, I'm surprised nobody's brought up just how much Big Blue loves the sound of his own voice. He can hardly go into a fight without trying to talk the other guy into surrendering. Comes from feeling like he lives on a planet made of cardboard. (LOVED that line from the JLU finale.) But, if you want to win against a guy like Batman, you don't give him even that much time.
Superman has stepped out of the established mode at times as the situation demands. He HAS killed before (Kryptonians as I recall), and he HAS gone all out against beings that warrant it- Imperiex, Mongul and Doomsday (killed him too), possibly Darkseid (doomed him for all eternity- arguably worse than killing someone), being the examples that immediately come to mind, I think there'd probably be more.
we also seem to be saying a lot that Superman isn't going all out, which beggars the question on why Batman would be. There has to be some kind of extenuating circumstance that is forcing Batman to fight Superman too, as he also needs to feel a reason before he will try to take down one of his best friends. He wouldn't be going all-out either unless he had a reason to, same as Superman. Maybe Batman is willing to use more excessive force more readily, but that's about all I see. I don't see Superman pulling his punches at all, unless we're going to handicap him by saying Batman has a good reason to fight, while Superman doesn't.

Beleriphon
2006-05-18, 10:56 AM
We also seem to be saying a lot that Superman isn't going all out, which beggars the question on why Batman would be. There has to be some kind of extenuating circumstance that is forcing Batman to fight Superman too, as he also needs to feel a reason before he will try to take down one of his best friends. He wouldn't be going all-out either unless he had a reason to, same as Superman. Maybe Batman is willing to use more excessive force more readily, but that's about all I see. I don't see Superman pulling his punches at all, unless we're going to handicap him by saying Batman has a good reason to fight, while Superman doesn't.


Like in Dark Knight Returns or Dark Knight Strikes Again. Given that in Returns Batman wasn't trying to win, but rather make appear as though Supes had killed him, I think that you'd have to admit that if Batman decides to fight somebody he's in the fight to end the fight.

Idiotbox90
2006-05-18, 11:43 AM
Let us assume one turns evil. Let us further assume that the evil one no longer cares about his reputation.

Evil Superman will completely slaughter Batman as long as Batman is the first person he kills. If Batman has warning, he will use one of his many plans he has set up for this very reason.

Evil Superman wins as long as he plays smart, something Superman doesn't do often.

Evil Batman on the other hand knows Superman's weaknesses, physical and psychological. Batman could most certainly concoct a plot to kill Superman, and it would probably work.

Superman would only win in either case if he strikes first. Otherwise Batman wins.

Beleriphon
2006-05-18, 05:28 PM
Let us assume one turns evil. Let us further assume that the evil one no longer cares about his reputation.


I think its better that we work on the premise that they each assume that the other has become evil. We'll say that because we all know that Lex Luthor has come up with some kind of wonky mind control paranoia drug and used it on Bats and Supes.

This way neither of them will intentionally step out of their normal way of doing things, but neither of them will necessarily think twice about stopping the other. From this perspective I see Superman as making much more of an effort to stop Batman, without killing him. I see Batman being much more willing to kill Superman.

sun_tzu
2006-05-19, 02:26 AM
Evil Superman wins as long as he plays smart, something Superman doesn't do often.

It may not be something he does often, but it is something he is capable of. Kent's far from stupid, after all.

CelestialStick
2006-05-19, 05:02 AM
I think superman should take a page out of Belkar's book.

Batman: Kryptonite Ring!
Superman: Lead Sheet!

*WANG!!!!*

There was an episode of the New Batman/Superman Adventures in which Superman has a suit made of material laced with lead, including a visor made of lead crystal.

In an episode of Smallville Clark picks up one of those x-ray shield vests and uses it to block the Kryptonite. It's not really all that hard to neutralize Kryptonite.

KayJay
2006-05-19, 05:57 AM
I think its better that we work on the premise that they each assume that the other has become evil. We'll say that because we all know that Lex Luthor has come up with some kind of wonky mind control paranoia drug and used it on Bats and Supes.

This way neither of them will intentionally step out of their normal way of doing things, but neither of them will necessarily think twice about stopping the other. From this perspective I see Superman as making much more of an effort to stop Batman, without killing him. I see Batman being much more willing to kill Superman.]

How many people has Batman killed? Do you recall Batman's reaction when Wonder Woman killed? It wasn't an understanding one at all, which shows us his stance on this issue. I don't see him any more willing to kill than Superman (in fact, Superman has probably killed more people than Bruce).

CelestialStick
2006-05-19, 06:25 AM
It may not be something he does often, but it is something he is capable of. Kent's far from stupid, after all.


And Batman, contrary to what some of the people on this thread imply, isn't omiscent.

I might also add that Batman has been defeated by Bane, who's much less powerful than Superman. Bane broke the Bat.

sun_tzu
2006-05-19, 07:21 AM
And Batman, contrary to what some of the people on this thread imply, isn't omiscent.

I might also add that Batman has been defeated by Bane, who's much less powerful than Superman. Bane broke the Bat.

Perhaps, but "this guy beats this guy" isn't a transitive relation - "A can defeat B" and "B can defeat C" doesn't automatically mean that "C's screwed in a fight with A". The relationship is more like rock-paper-cisor, if anything.
Superman would easily defeat almost any Batman villain. Those guys give Batman a hard time. Batman would be perfectly capable of coming up with a plan to defeat Superman. Different skills and powers, different results.
Bane knew Batman's secret identity, had months to prepare, and weakened Bats by getting all his regular enemies to fight him for weeks before Bane stepped in. Like Batman himself, Bane is far, far more dangerous when he has the time to plan.

KayJay
2006-05-19, 09:30 AM
how on earth is it like rock-paper-scissors at all? That is a complete assumption from the fact that because Superman beats all of Batman's bad guys with ease, Batman can apparently beat Superman in a similar manner. This is a circular argument when you consider that this is also being used to support the fact that Batman can beat Superman.

CelestialStick
2006-05-19, 11:13 AM
Perhaps, but "this guy beats this guy" isn't a transitive relation - "A can defeat B" and "B can defeat C" doesn't automatically mean that "C's screwed in a fight with A". The relationship is more like rock-paper-cisor, if anything.
Superman would easily defeat almost any Batman villain. Those guys give Batman a hard time. Batman would be perfectly capable of coming up with a plan to defeat Superman. Different skills and powers, different results.
Bane knew Batman's secret identity, had months to prepare, and weakened Bats by getting all his regular enemies to fight him for weeks before Bane stepped in. Like Batman himself, Bane is far, far more dangerous when he has the time to plan.


All Supermann has to do to knock out Batman it to flick Batman on the head with one finger. Batman would have to do absolutely everything right to beat Superman. Therefore Batman would most likely lose, and Superman would most likely win.

sun_tzu
2006-05-19, 01:51 PM
how on earth is it like rock-paper-scissors at all? That is a complete assumption from the fact that because Superman beats all of Batman's bad guys with ease, Batman can apparently beat Superman in a similar manner. This is a circular argument when you consider that this is also being used to support the fact that Batman can beat Superman.
What I mean is that one set of skills will be usefull against one opponent, and useless against another - and that doesn't automatically means one is better.
Imagine three superpowered characters. The first one, Brick, is so strong he can bench 100 tons, and so tough that, well, that lifting 100 tons wouldn't kill him. The second one, Mindkill, is a powerfull telepath. The third one, Mecano, is a robot with a built-in chaingun and the best aim in the world.
So how do fights between them go?
Brick vs. Mindkill: Mindkill lobotomizes Brick without moving a finger.
Brick vs. Mecano: The bullets bounce off Brick's chest before he tears the robot appart.
Mecano vs. Mindkill: none of Mindkill's mind tricks have any effect on Mecano, who just shoots him in the head.
Rock, paper, scisor.

Aiani
2006-05-24, 12:04 PM
What I don't understand is how every person with a couple dollars in his pocket can get a lump of kryptonite. When the planet exploded, did it all land on earth?

Just because batman is slightly evil doesn't make him cooler.

CelestialStick
2006-05-25, 08:52 AM
What I don't understand is how every person with a couple dollars in his pocket can get a lump of kryptonite. When the planet exploded, did it all land on earth?

Yeah, it's pretty silly that kryptonite is so easy to come by. You just have to go to your local convenience store.

In any case, Bane broke the bat with sheer strength. None of the toys or alleged omniscent plans of the Batman saved him from just being broken in two. Superman's so much more powerful than Bane that it's not even funny. I would be that much easier for Superman to take out Batman.

Tiberian
2006-05-27, 11:48 PM
http://supeshasnochance.ytmnd.com At least verbally.

Soniku
2006-05-28, 08:53 AM
From the few crossover comics of them I have read, batman keeps some kryptonite in his bat-belt, which would let him win.

If for some reason he didnt, super would win.

CelestialStick
2006-05-28, 08:53 AM
http://supeshasnochance.ytmnd.com At least verbally.
Actually I have to disagree and say that Superman is the most inspiring of Superheroes. That's why he's the head of the JL. He inspires people to be the best they can be--not the richest or the most powerful, but the best people.


From the few crossover comics of them I have read, batman keeps some kryptonite in his bat-belt, which would let him win.

If for some reason he didnt, super would win.


Keep in mind though that Superman has faced kryptonite repeatedly and won. It hardly defeats him automatically.