Death Battle IV: The Source Material Loses

[Reddish Mage]

Tools, maybe. For abilities though they pull from extreme outliers all the time.

Seriously, you want to start up on outliers again? An outlier is not the same thing as a peak. Peaks happen in data all the time.

The last time I asked for outliers and you weren't able to give any. Outliers have to not only be very far out of the usual range but they also need to be incredibly rare. The very notion of pulling "extreme outliers all the time" is contradictory.

[Anteros]

Seriously, you want to start up on outliers again? An outlier is not the same thing as a peak. Peaks happen in data all the time.

The last time I asked for outliers and you weren't able to give any. Outliers have to not only be very far out of the usual range but they also need to be incredibly rare. The very notion of pulling "extreme outliers all the time" is contradictory.

The problem is that your definitions of "peaks" and "outliers" seems totally arbitrary and dependent entirely on whether or not you personally like the character in question. I could list off a dozen extreme outliers that DB has used off the top of my head, but it's meaningless because you'll just refuse to acknowledge that they're outliers in the first place, even if the character in question is normally depicted as nowhere near that level of power.

You have your own opinions and that's fine. However, a failure to convince you in particular does not mean the argument itself is flawed.

[Reddish Mage]

The problem is that your definitions of "peaks" and "outliers" seems totally arbitrary and dependent entirely on whether or not you personally like the character in question. I could list off a dozen extreme outliers that DB has used off the top of my head, but it's meaningless because you'll just refuse to acknowledge that they're outliers in the first place, even if the character in question is normally depicted as nowhere near that level of power.

You have your own opinions and that's fine. However, a failure to convince you in particular does not mean the argument itself is flawed.

My perspective comes from actually doing scientific research where dealing with outliers was a real issue. I have stated what an outlier is and I have objective criteria for applying them.

You mention you have "a dozen" examples, but you haven't given me any. You just accuse me of being having a set of criteria of "whether or not you personally like the character in question." That is not ok

[Knaight]

The last time I asked for outliers and you weren't able to give any. Outliers have to not only be very far out of the usual range but they also need to be incredibly rare. The very notion of pulling "extreme outliers all the time" is contradictory.

There's nothing contradictory about it - it simply requires a large enough data set. In this case, individual characters show up in one or a small handful of episodes, and every individual character has a body of work in which they perform a high number of tasks. Many of them (e.g. comic characters) have a body of work going back decades, working out to hundreds or thousands of issues and thus hundreds of thousands of individual tasks. Death Battle consistently being able to find one outlier in this data set of hundreds of thousands of points doesn't somehow prove they aren't outliers.

As for "not being able to give any", that's sheer nonsense. Assuming you aren't just fabricating whole conversations you're going from none being given when demanded to none being able to be given when demanded, while ignoring other possibilities (e.g. the existence of a life outside this forum, which lets the conversation move past). Nonetheless, let's have some: Kirby, a creature consistently depicted as slowly waddling around, spitting small creatures a few feet, knocking slightly larger creatures a few feet with a small selection of tools (most notably a mallet), and occasionally going into a run that's respectable at best. What gets used by DB to determine capabilities? One out of context cutscene of Kirby throwing someone into the sun.

The force, energy transfer, etc. are all several orders of magnitude above a tightly grouped data set that wouldn't even necessitate a log scale. It's an outlier by any reasonable definition (which does vary depending on the statistical models in use).

[Anteros]

My perspective comes from actually doing scientific research where dealing with outliers was a real issue. I have stated what an outlier is and I have objective criteria for applying them.

You mention you have "a dozen" examples, but you haven't given me any. You just accuse me of being having a set of criteria of "whether or not you personally like the character in question." That is not ok

Right, because no one but you has had a high school level statistics class to know what an outlier is.

You're the one with the constant double standards on what evidence counts towards a character's capabilities or not. It's been pointed out to you numerous times. Just like you're asking for examples now, despite the fact that they've been given over and over in the past.

We just keep going through this circle over and over where you ask for evidence, completely ignore anything you don't like based on completely arbitrary reasons, and pretend no evidence was given to you as a result.

[Rater202]

To cite an outlier: In Goku vs Superman, they use(and misinterpret) the 50X Supernova incident asan example of Superman's stated durabillity.

This is despite the fact that Superman regularly suffers extreme pain/injury, unconsciousness, or, counting Supermen of alternate realities, death from an attack that's highest demonstrated destructive output, even completly ignoring all defenses, is barely planet busting levels(Darkseid's Omega Beams.)

Superman consistently needs his unique, special protection he's implied to have to survive an attack that's full power isn't even enough to destroy the earth.

That makes the single instance of him surviving the electromagnetic shockwave of a Super-Nova a statistical outlier.

(Meanwhile int he same episodes they more or less makeup statistics based on Goku's feats from a point in time where he's relativly weak by the standards of the series as a baselin and ignore later ones and more or less ignore rules on what is and is not canonically magic in both DC and Dragon Ball to claim that Goku's attacks can't hurt Superman)

[Seppl]

That makes the single instance of him surviving the electromagnetic shockwave of a Super-Nova a statistical outlier.

Except for all the 50 times he does similar things, and also the times he no-sells all the different things that you listed above. The problem here is not cherry-picking by the Death Battle team but extremely inconsistent writing on part of the creators of Superman, with the more well-known versions of Superman (Cartoons, Live-action movies) being far weaker than the really crazy stuff from the comics, and all of them, especially the comics, not being consistent at all.

Not saying that Death Battle does not use outliers in their analysis but this one is a very bad example. Kirby was mentioned already, that one is an excellent example with the whole analysis hinging on one humorous cutscene. Others that I can think of are the soccer scene for Princess Peach, or the steel pillar for Yang.

[HolyDraconus]

Except for all the 50 times he does similar things, and also the times he no-sells all the different things that you listed above. The problem here is not cherry-picking by the Death Battle team but extremely inconsistent writing on part of the creators of Superman, with the more well-known versions of Superman (Cartoons, Live-action movies) being far weaker than the really crazy stuff from the comics, and all of them, especially the comics, not being consistent at all.

Not saying that Death Battle does not use outliers in their analysis but this one is a very bad example. Kirby was mentioned already, that one is an excellent example with the whole analysis hinging on one humorous cutscene. Others that I can think of are the soccer scene for Princess Peach, or the steel pillar for Yang.

Objection! The creators of Superman didn't even have him fly. Let alone tanking planet busting attacks or the rest of his suite of abilities. That was later radio and TV after his creators lost him.

[Reddish Mage]

There's nothing contradictory about it - it simply requires a large enough data set. In this case, individual characters show up in one or a small handful of episodes, and every individual character has a body of work in which they perform a high number of tasks.

The force, energy transfer, etc. are all several orders of magnitude above a tightly grouped data set that wouldn't even necessitate a log scale. It's an outlier by any reasonable definition (which does vary depending on the statistical models in use).

You are ignoring a critical part of actually being entitled to dismiss data as an anomaly that corrupts your statistical model. The data point has to be something unexpected, abnormal, not acceptable. Physicists don't frequently dismiss outliers for a reason.

You can't dismiss that a star occasionally goes supernova, especially if that's the very thing you are trying to measure.

Just because superheroes only occasionally fight at some absurd level doesn't mean those occasions are outliers. Instead, look to whether these occasions are mistakes, have signs of abnormalities and data corruption (e.g. not canon, played as a joke, etc.), or if the amazing surge in output is the main point. Also, if the feat is repeated its probably something they can really do, a part of that character's abilities, not a mistake.

The superhero doing something dramatic at the very height of an exciting story arc or during a one of the large cross-over events is a showcase of the very peak of their abilities.

However, for a moment I'll accept your definition of outlier for sake of argument. Here, all you are really saying is you want to measure a more typical output and throw out anything that is too far from whatever's common. Calling something an outlier doesn't add anything to that.

It does however, seem a bit ridiculous to ignore the big cross-over events and the climaxes of major comic arcs.

To cite an outlier: In Goku vs Superman, they use(and misinterpret) the 50X Supernova incident asan example of Superman's stated durabillity.

See Seppl. I've actually linked to quite a few examples of Superman's extreme durability. Its not an outlier if it appears time and time again.

Also, would you accept that Broly's destruction of South Galaxy is also an outlier?

You're the one with the constant double standards on what evidence counts towards a character's capabilities or not. It's been pointed out to you numerous times. Just like you're asking for examples now, despite the fact that they've been given over and over in the past.

I don't recall when you've put together two examples of me applying a standard one way and then failing to apply it another. We've argued about standards some, and mostly I recall having to explain what my standard actually is on the occasion you parody it.

[Rater202]

Broly has three quantifiable feats in his debut movie.

1: Requiring a fraction of his power to instantly eradicate an entire Galaxy. This was his establishing character moment, meant to show how powerful he was. As his establishing character moment, by all means, it can't be an outlier.

2: Casually obliterating a planet from another planet.

3: Being so powerful that the five strongest guys the Cell-Games Era Z-Fighters had been completely unable to beat him until they pooled what was left of their power and coincidentally hit Broly in the one place he was vulnerable.

Considering the levels of power that were established by the time of Broly's movie, if anything the casually obliterating the planet was the outlier, skewing his average power down if we're averaging.

So no, I wouldn't consider it an outlier.

Unlike the maybe dozen times that Super-Man has tanked planet-buster or higher level attacks(Most of which have extenuating circumstances) are when compared to the countless times he's consistently gone down to much less powerful effects.

[Knaight]

You are ignoring a critical part of actually being entitled to dismiss data as an anomaly that corrupts your statistical model. The data point has to be something unexpected, abnormal, not acceptable. Physicists don't frequently dismiss outliers for a reason.

You can't dismiss that a star occasionally goes supernova, especially if that's the very thing you are trying to measure.

I must have missed the memo of how physics is the only real science. On top of that, Physicists routinely dismiss outliers, they just usually toss the data set as well because the outliers are usually indications of malfunctioning equipment. That applies even more to sciences that are generally less well behaved - it's not unusual in chemistry to get yield values tightly grouped plus one that's just way off, and that's generally a sign that something weird happened in the experimental procedure and that you need to redo the reaction, not that it's a totally valid data point. That said, if redoing the reaction isn't viable for some reason dismissing the data is totally reasonable.

The same thing applies even more to biology. I don't and haven't worked with anything multicellular so I can't comment much there, but if you're looking at, say electrophoresis plates to try and get DNA lengths and most of your samples come in with closely mapped data sets and one comes in with a near zero outlier you can surmise that the DNA you're looking at fits most of the samples, and the one odd plate saw improper handling and you blew the DNA. Same thing with GFP fluorescence readings.

Just because superheroes only occasionally fight at some absurd level doesn't mean those occasions are outliers. Instead, look to whether these occasions are mistakes, have signs of abnormalities and data corruption (e.g. not canon, played as a joke, etc.), or if the amazing surge in output is the main point. Also, if the feat is repeated its probably something they can really do, a part of that character's abilities, not a mistake.

There's two major signs of abnormality being disregarded here though, and it's writer error due to not understanding scale, and nonliteral stylistic elements in art. Yang breaking a pillar getting thrown into it is clearly one of this - the author likely didn't appreciate the specific strength of that particular structure, and damaging structures is a well known stylistic element to display strength that's not really intended to be read literally.

Take crack propagation - the specific distance that cracks propogate through a material on impact can indicate the force of an impact. How this works is ridiculously dependent on the specific material, and intuition is likely to be wrong. Yet showing cracks is pretty standard for artists. This sort of nonliteral stylistic effect happens all the time, and extracting data from them can easily produce outliers.

[Reddish Mage]

There's two major signs of abnormality being disregarded here though, and it's writer error due to not understanding scale, and nonliteral stylistic elements in art. Yang breaking a pillar getting thrown into it is clearly one of this - the author likely didn't appreciate the specific strength of that particular structure, and damaging structures is a well known stylistic element to display strength that's not really intended to be read literally.

Take crack propagation - the specific distance that cracks propogate through a material on impact can indicate the force of an impact. How this works is ridiculously dependent on the specific material, and intuition is likely to be wrong. Yet showing cracks is pretty standard for artists. This sort of nonliteral stylistic effect happens all the time, and extracting data from them can easily produce outliers.

this sounds like intelligent conversation.

I agree with you writer error due to not understanding scale is a thing as well as the stylistic element. I'm not sure I agree on the significance.

Yang's abnormally high toughness in the Paladin fight is certainly the result of Monty's unusually high flippant style towards physics being exercised in that fight full-on.

However, that was all I wouldn't call it an outlier. Its not just cases where the author fails to understand or applies the rule of cool...that happens all the time in with action characters, I would say those examples mostly prove a characters skill.

Physics simply cannot be expected to be consistent in the sort of media we are dealing with. Characters abilities function according to their own reality expressed vaguely by explanations that run counter to physics. Even the displayed abilities are often at wide variance to the explanation (i.e. Batman cannot do some of the things he physically can do and be a normal human).

if you toss out abilities for violating physics you are attacking the very premise of DB (and any sort of attempt to decipher what superheroes can and cannot do).

You need more than stylistic variance from physics to toss out a character's abilities. That extra bit is a very strong element of does not belong and cannot be allowed to fit.

That's why Yang's performance in the Paladin fight is an outlier. The outcome of the fight suggests Yang is pretty much invincible, which we see is far from true from the Neo fight and the Mercury fight. In fact, the entire Paladin fight, taking place along a crowded highway, makes no sense in the RWBY world.

Yang's displayed abilities in this fight is completely unique to that fight. In Yang's case we would have a very different impression of her toughness and strength having seen the Paladin fight and having that cut out even now in Season 5. This is after several big scale fights for Yang. Yang also lacks a big data set. If RWBY goes to 12 seasons and gets its own comic book we may very well see feats that make Yang's Paladin performance seem like a pale shadow, but so far no dice.

If an ability appears only once in an non-sensical adventure that makes no sense in canon that's perfectly consistent with treating it as an outlier. However, stuff that simply chooses to follow rule of cool or evidence that the author has a total ignorance of scale doesn't matter, especially when those choices are made in scenes that are big important events for the character and/or repeated.

[Knaight]

Physics simply cannot be expected to be consistent in the sort of media we are dealing with. Characters abilities function according to their own reality expressed vaguely by explanations that run counter to physics. Even the displayed abilities are often at wide variance to the explanation (i.e. Batman cannot do some of the things he physically can do and be a normal human).

if you toss out abilities for violating physics you are attacking the very premise of DB (and any sort of attempt to decipher what superheroes can and cannot do).

Not universally, no. However, some parts of physics are likely to be closer fitting than others, and something like DB can absolutely choose to focus on the parts of physics the authors are more likely to get right. Evaluating how hard characters hit by how far opponents get thrown is much stronger than evaluating how hard characters get hit by what they break through. Evaluating character movement speed by shown movement instead of by off screen minimum movement speeds is similar.

[Reddish Mage]

Not universally, no. However, some parts of physics are likely to be closer fitting than others, and something like DB can absolutely choose to focus on the parts of physics the authors are more likely to get right. Evaluating how hard characters hit by how far opponents get thrown is much stronger than evaluating how hard characters get hit by what they break through. Evaluating character movement speed by shown movement instead of by off screen minimum movement speeds is similar.

Both of us agree that taking everything into account is not always advisable. However, I am saying it is very much the exception, and you need strong signs of abnormality to dismiss something. What I am hearing from you, however, is that essentially large swaths of data must be ignored.

Let’s compare what you are saying to judging the attributes (speed, strength etc) of a professional athlete. I am saying to take his measure everytime he plays, practices, or is evaluated, but maybe dismiss some of the apocryphal tales, or if there is signs that say, the strength machine was broken that day in practice. The official games always count.

In your case you are saying that not only do you have to throw out everything except the official statistics, but you also have to prune away that time the athlete caught fire and played like a legend, and even the times the athlete carried the team to victory in the championships.

If we were both evaluating Michael Jordan, I’d agree we ignore Space Jam. However, I’d perfectly be willing to focus on his amazing runs and championship performances. You however, would cut all that out, and stress the importance of his time with the Wizards.

[Knaight]

Both of us agree that taking everything into account is not always advisable. However, I am saying it is very much the exception, and you need strong signs of abnormality to dismiss something. What I am hearing from you, however, is that essentially large swaths of data must be ignored.
...
Let’s compare what you are saying to judging the attributes (speed, strength etc) of a professional athlete. I am saying to take his measure everytime he plays, practices, or is evaluated, but maybe dismiss some of the apocryphal tales, or if there is signs that say, the strength machine was broken that day in practice. The official games always count.

The thing about the professional athlete is that as actual real people constrained by actual real physics - except for in the apocryphal tales - the sort of outliers described literally can't happen. Those amazing hot streaks and exceptional acts are far closer in magnitude to the rest of their behavior, likely including mechanical failures in strength machines.

[Reddish Mage]

The thing about the professional athlete is that as actual real people constrained by actual real physics - except for in the apocryphal tales - the sort of outliers described literally can't happen. Those amazing hot streaks and exceptional acts are far closer in magnitude to the rest of their behavior, likely including mechanical failures in strength machines.

The problem with fictional people is that they are not constrained by actual physics. Attempts to constrain them by labeling every peak an outlier is a very unnatural way of reading the comics.

I have no problem if “outliers” means true abnormalities. But you word to mean eliminating extreme deviations from the mean.

There are plenty of characters whose entire thing is that they very rarely operate at peak strength.

Also, there is another proposal you made to further prune the dataset. You want to count only observations of how strong characters look in combat against their opponents (how far they throw their opponent, etc.) and completely ignore objective measures such as destroying buildings (or planets). This too is absurd. You even suggest ignoring that an opponent goes through a brick wall or similar signs of great strength (I presume because these feats are so nonsensical). It also makes measurement impossible since the opponents are usually super powered themselves.

I’m not the one who gives Goku galaxy-busting status, but even I’ll accept that he can destroy a planet with an energy attack. However, I don’t see how you count this as one of his abilities. We never actually see him do this, and in combat the worst he does is disintegrates parts of his opponent while sending a pretty beam into space.

Moreover, would have Goku, Superman, Ryu, Spider-Man....all characters capable of absurd (and widely different levels) strength feats all operate at approximately the same level. This is because you are suggesting we look at how far their opponents are thrown (ignore that Superman and Goku rarely throw their opponent into the Sun or something as that’s a wide deviation from the mean) and how hard they punch and take a punch in a typical confrontation.

[Devonix]

Let's all admit that there is no one correct way to do any of this. Trying to apply physics to things which fundimentally ignore those things is silly. Just have fun and try not to get to wrapped up into it.

One thing I've always seen people behave silly to is stuff like vulnerability to slashing, piercing vs bludgeoning.

There are tons of characters who can take a planet to the face. But a single normal human with a butter knife could kill them. Yes there shouldn't be a difference. But there is. It's stupid, but it's fiction. You don't ignore the butter knife or slashing damage just because they should be able to tank it because of the planet feat.

[Reddish Mage]

Let's all admit that there is no one correct way to do any of this. Trying to apply physics to things which fundimentally ignore those things is silly. Just have fun and try not to get to wrapped up into it.

One thing I've always seen people behave silly to is stuff like vulnerability to slashing, piercing vs bludgeoning.

There are tons of characters who can take a planet to the face. But a single normal human with a butter knife could kill them. Yes there shouldn't be a difference. But there is. It's stupid, but it's fiction. You don't ignore the butter knife or slashing damage just because they should be able to tank it because of the planet feat.

There are many ways to analyze these characters and the very exercise is troublesome but not anymore silly then reading about the characters themselves.

It’s all in good fun, but it’s going to get heated as long as the title of this thread reflects an attitude that there is an incorrect way of doing it and the attitude of a lot of posters is that DB does it wrong.

A serious suggestion for an “improved” analysis warrants a serious response. It is possible to analyze things in many ways, but it’s still possible a particular suggestion results in many more problems and very odd-looking Death Battles then the original.

I like Knaight’s creativity and desire to provide an alternative, but I don’t think it’s any sort of objective improvement. Moreover the way he defines his suggestions would manage to make every character look very weird compared to what you would expect, when his very purpose is to remove the oddities.

I think I’m offering an improvement when I am trying to nudge him to find and only remove the real oddities, not stuff that’s essential to a lot of these characters.

[McNum]

IT'S TIME FOR A- eh, you know what I mean.

Spoiler: Jack vs. Afro

Show

Ouch that left a mark. But Jack walked away with it with one more arm than his opponent, so that counts as a win. Interesting animation, too, didn't quite nail the styles, but I don't think we've had a 2D animated battle before. I liked it.

Also, people need to stop having their characters dodge lasers or fall from orbit. It makes for silly extreme feats.

Spoiler: Next Time...

Show

In the red corner. The very, very red corner. Carnage from Marvel Comics! And in the previously blue corner, which is also stained red with blood, Lucy from Elfen Lied!

Oh dear. This is going to be a very messy fight, isn't it?

[Rater202]

Spoiler: Next Time

Show

The question is... Which Carnage?

The Carnage Symbiote itself has had several "main" hosts and The Carnage Cosmic or The Red Goblin are gonna be a bit more of a challenge than plain olf Vanilla Kassady.

Even if it's Kassady, he's had two symbiotes and has been eaten by a Poison--while we don't know how powerful his second Symbiote is in comparison to Carnage, we can assume tha tit was genetically engineered to adapt to him faster like every other symbiote from that storyline was and Poisons make Symbiotes Stronger several times over when they're absorbed and removes the sonic weakness.

The Carnage Symbiote's highest measured strength, before expanding out in muscle mass or growing to giant sizes, was 80 imperial tons.

It has canonically grown several times stronger since that measurement was taken.

Lucy's main advantage, as far as I can tell, is the ability to tear people apart at the range but the carnage symbiote is demonstrably able to repair severe bodily damage and form replacement limbs...

Really, the question here... Do they mean Carnage the symbiote or Carnage the person in it?

[Kitten Champion]

Spoiler: Next Time

Show

The question is... Which Carnage?

The Carnage Symbiote itself has had several "main" hosts and The Carnage Cosmic or The Red Goblin are gonna be a bit more of a challenge than plain olf Vanilla Kassady.

Even if it's Kassady, he's had two symbiotes and has been eaten by a Poison--while we don't know how powerful his second Symbiote is in comparison to Carnage, we can assume tha tit was genetically engineered to adapt to him faster like every other symbiote from that storyline was and Poisons make Symbiotes Stronger several times over when they're absorbed and removes the sonic weakness.

The Carnage Symbiote's highest measured strength, before expanding out in muscle mass or growing to giant sizes, was 80 imperial tons.

It has canonically grown several times stronger since that measurement was taken.

Lucy's main advantage, as far as I can tell, is the ability to tear people apart at the range but the carnage symbiote is demonstrably able to repair severe bodily damage and form replacement limbs...

Really, the question here... Do they mean Carnage the symbiote or Carnage the person in it?

What did they do with Venom?

[Rater202]

What did they do with Venom?

Spoiler

Show

Irrelevant.

Thre are clear-cut distinctions between Venom and it's hosts as well as each individual Venom that aren't present with Carnage--The Carnage symbiote's personality is patenred directly on Cletus Kassady's due to it bonding to him within seconds of being born and is bonded to him on a physiological level that is greater than any other Klyntar--they're said to be intertwined at the genetic level and the symbiote is known to be able to regenerate from Cletus's blood if its entire being is destroyed.

It's also known to force it's other hosts to behave like Kassady and was recently implied to have a Back Up of Kassady's epersonality, if not his entire consciousness, preserved in it--Norman Osborn ended his time as the Carnage Symbiote's host completly convinced that he was Cletus Kassady.

The argument could thus be made that Cletus himself doesn't matter and that the Symbiote is Carnage, in which case any of it's hosts are free game, as would it demonstrating abillities that it had with one host while with another host.

Hell, for the longest time there wasn't a distinction between Cletus and Symbiote: They were considered to be the same person in-universe and out.

[Forum Explorer]

Spoiler: Jack vs Afro

Show

I really thought it would come more down to Jack's sword being better then Afro's, but hey simply being stronger, faster, and better trained works too.

Also yes, please stop having people dodge lasers.

Spoiler: Next time

Show

If Rater is correct, and Carnage is maxxed out at 80 tons (x whatever growth modifiers thrown on top), then it's an easy win for Lucy. Her finale feat is smashing a city apart, with her telekinetic whatevers reaching all the way into space. All while fending off an attack by multiple cruise ships, and jet fighters. The effort in doing so did cause her to begin melting, but she was still alive even after melting down to a torso and head, so even that won't actually take Lucy out of the picture.

Also note that her attacks were aimed. She was precise enough to kill the pilots of planes and cut missiles in half as they launched. All while kilometers away.

On the other hand, Carnage is a Marvel character with years of possible BS loaded into them. So I wouldn't count him out just yet.

[Rater202]

Spoiler: Jack vs Afro

Show

I really thought it would come more down to Jack's sword being better then Afro's, but hey simply being stronger, faster, and better trained works too.

Also yes, please stop having people dodge lasers.

Spoiler: Next time

Show

If Rater is correct, and Carnage is maxxed out at 80 tons (x whatever growth modifiers thrown on top), then it's an easy win for Lucy. Her finale feat is smashing a city apart, with her telekinetic whatevers reaching all the way into space. All while fending off an attack by multiple cruise ships, and jet fighters. The effort in doing so did cause her to begin melting, but she was still alive even after melting down to a torso and head, so even that won't actually take Lucy out of the picture.

Also note that her attacks were aimed. She was precise enough to kill the pilots of planes and cut missiles in half as they launched. All while kilometers away.

On the other hand, Carnage is a Marvel character with years of possible BS loaded into them. So I wouldn't count him out just yet.

Spoiler

Show

Note that it's been several years and a couple of hosts since that measurement was given and Carnage is noted to get stronger every time it changes hosts, regardless of whether the ne host has powers or mutations to absorb.

Let alone the fact that it's been magically enhanced in the most recent Carnage Mini and if they go with the Symbiote over Kassady it's had it's power multiplied by the Goblin Formula(Which made it categorically immune to fire and sonic weapons, might have given it the abillity to create bio-mecahnica machines and implicitly gave it minor pyrokinetic abillities)

In terms of physical feats I don't know what Carnage's feats of strength are, but I do know that the Weaker Venom Symbiote(Whose strength was measured at 70 tons around that time at base strength) capped out at 500 tons when it was bonded to MacGargon and also the size of a T-Rex and Carnage has been known to reach sizes comperable to Fin-Fang Foom when he has enoug biomass to spare. Fin's about 500 feat tall. Assuming a similar multiplyer applies to size...

Okay, I don't know how to do this math but a T-Rex is about 13 feet tall. If someone T-Rex sized has a 500 ton lift strength but has a 70 tons strength when human sized, how strong would a imilar person be at 500 feet when they're at 80 when human sized?

[Forum Explorer]

Spoiler

Show

Note that it's been several years and a couple of hosts since that measurement was given and Carnage is noted to get stronger every time it changes hosts, regardless of whether the ne host has powers or mutations to absorb.

Let alone the fact that it's been magically enhanced in the most recent Carnage Mini and if they go with the Symbiote over Kassady it's had it's power multiplied by the Goblin Formula(Which made it categorically immune to fire and sonic weapons, might have given it the abillity to create bio-mecahnica machines and implicitly gave it minor pyrokinetic abillities)

In terms of physical feats I don't know what Carnage's feats of strength are, but I do know that the Weaker Venom Symbiote(Whose strength was measured at 70 tons around that time at base strength) capped out at 500 tons when it was bonded to MacGargon and also the size of a T-Rex and Carnage has been known to reach sizes comperable to Fin-Fang Foom when he has enoug biomass to spare. Fin's about 500 feat tall. Assuming a similar multiplyer applies to size...

Okay, I don't know how to do this math but a T-Rex is about 13 feet tall. If someone T-Rex sized has a 500 ton lift strength but has a 70 tons strength when human sized, how strong would a imilar person be at 500 feet when they're at 80 when human sized?

Spoiler: Solve for x

Show

This is some real life algebra stuff here. We've got two formulas.

13x=500

and

5.9 is average height of male in USA, rounded down to 5.9 because the Imperial System is stupid garbage so

5.9x= 80

Make them equivlant

13x-500 = 0 and 5.9x-80 = 0 Therefore

13x-500=5.9x-80

which becomes

7.1x-420=0

7.1x=420

x=59.155

So now we plug this in.

(59.155)(500) = 29577.5 tons of weight. So pretty impressive, assuming the modifier is all the same every time. (IE, there is no other variables other then x, which is almost certainly false.)

And that's how you do math Death Battle style! All of my steps are likely correct, but the end result is pointless because it depends on unprovable assumptions that are almost certainly wrong!

Spoiler: Okay, being serious about next time now

Show

Anyways, I don't think Carnage's punching strength really matters here. A single bullet could kill Lucy, if it could actually hit her. It's more a matter of surviving to get in range in the first place. I'm pretty sure Carnage's range is not in the kilometers, and Lucy's is (at least end game Lucy is, which is likely what will come up). Lucy's hitting strength is weird. She's capable of tearing islands apart in the anime, but at the same time uses that power to knit human flesh together so her love interest doesn't die. I think she may even go as far as putting blood back in his body.

She could potentially do the same against Carnage, and tear each droplet of blood he has apart, scattering them to the winds. Though that is extremely power extensive. But I think that'd bypass even Carnage's freaky strong regeneration.

Anyways, my prediction is a Lucy win, but she's going to be half melted by the time she pulls it off.

[Rater202]

Spoiler: Solve for x

Show

This is some real life algebra stuff here. We've got two formulas.

13x=500

and

5.9 is average height of male in USA, rounded down to 5.9 because the Imperial System is stupid garbage so

5.9x= 80

Make them equivlant

13x-500 = 0 and 5.9x-80 = 0 Therefore

13x-500=5.9x-80

which becomes

7.1x-420=0

7.1x=420

x=59.155

So now we plug this in.

(59.155)(500) = 29577.5 tons of weight. So pretty impressive, assuming the modifier is all the same every time. (IE, there is no other variables other then x, which is almost certainly false.)

And that's how you do math Death Battle style! All of my steps are likely correct, but the end result is pointless because it depends on unprovable assumptions that are almost certainly wrong!

Spoiler: Okay, being serious about next time now

Show

Anyways, I don't think Carnage's punching strength really matters here. A single bullet could kill Lucy, if it could actually hit her. It's more a matter of surviving to get in range in the first place. I'm pretty sure Carnage's range is not in the kilometers, and Lucy's is (at least end game Lucy is, which is likely what will come up). Lucy's hitting strength is weird. She's capable of tearing islands apart in the anime, but at the same time uses that power to knit human flesh together so her love interest doesn't die. I think she may even go as far as putting blood back in his body.

She could potentially do the same against Carnage, and tear each droplet of blood he has apart, scattering them to the winds. Though that is extremely power extensive. But I think that'd bypass even Carnage's freaky strong regeneration.

Anyways, my prediction is a Lucy win, but she's going to be half melted by the time she pulls it off.

Spoiler

Show

Dont be so sure.


Lucy's power isn't pure TK but specific psychic constructs(the Vectors/arms) that have to make contact, yes?

Carnage has all of Spider-Man's powers--that includes Spider-Sense. Carnage can be immediatly aware of Danger and know to avoid it. Since the arms are discrete vectors with specific dimensions, they can be
dodged if you know where they are.

Carnage has superhuman speed(Not Speedster speed, but still super human,) Super Human agility and reflexes, and superhuman flexibillity due to the symbiote giving the host spider-man's powers.

Carnage may be able to avoid the attacks and get in close to make the kill

[Forum Explorer]

Spoiler

Show

Dont be so sure.


Lucy's power isn't pure TK but specific psychic constructs(the Vectors/arms) that have to make contact, yes?

Carnage has all of Spider-Man's powers--that includes Spider-Sense. Carnage can be immediatly aware of Danger and know to avoid it. Since the arms are discrete vectors with specific dimensions, they can be
dodged if you know where they are.

Carnage has superhuman speed(Not Speedster speed, but still super human,) Super Human agility and reflexes, and superhuman flexibillity due to the symbiote giving the host spider-man's powers.

Carnage may be able to avoid the attacks and get in close to make the kill

Spoiler

Show

That doesn't matter if the Vectors can move faster then Carnage (and they can, they are capable of intercepting bullets after all)

He might dodge them initially, but they can just run him down. Though that is a factor of distance. I suppose they wouldn't start at kilometers apart after all, which might give Carnage a chance. Though at max power she can send enough Vectors out to basically form a wall, or aim the Vector down and basically stand on it. Lucy never does that particular trick, but I believe another character does.

Most importantly though, Vectors are massless and can adjust on the fly. They aren't like a bullet that has a set path, they can react to dodges in mid flight.

The biggest thing is going to be where Lucy starts on the spectrum of her power. If she starts at Nyu, then I think Carnage will get it. But if it starts an end game Lucy, then it should be an easy win for Lucy. Going by what Death Battle normally does, it'll likely be end game Lucy.

[Traab]

Spoiler

Show

Dont be so sure.


Lucy's power isn't pure TK but specific psychic constructs(the Vectors/arms) that have to make contact, yes?

Carnage has all of Spider-Man's powers--that includes Spider-Sense. Carnage can be immediatly aware of Danger and know to avoid it. Since the arms are discrete vectors with specific dimensions, they can be
dodged if you know where they are.

Carnage has superhuman speed(Not Speedster speed, but still super human,) Super Human agility and reflexes, and superhuman flexibillity due to the symbiote giving the host spider-man's powers.

Carnage may be able to avoid the attacks and get in close to make the kill

Spoiler: On Spider Sense

Show

Dont forget, spider sense warns of danger, and can even give a generalized direction, but you still need to know what the danger is before you can dodge it. If these vecters are invisible (I dont know if they are or no) then while he may be able to dodge them to an extent, its highly unlikely he will be able to dodge them all. On the other hand, carnage also has 360 degree vision right? So if he CAN see them, the you wont be getting easy sneak attacks on him anyways.

[Forum Explorer]

Spoiler: On Spider Sense

Show

Dont forget, spider sense warns of danger, and can even give a generalized direction, but you still need to know what the danger is before you can dodge it. If these vecters are invisible (I dont know if they are or no) then while he may be able to dodge them to an extent, its highly unlikely he will be able to dodge them all. On the other hand, carnage also has 360 degree vision right? So if he CAN see them, the you wont be getting easy sneak attacks on him anyways.

Spoiler

Show

The vectors are invisible, mostly. In the anime, blood and stuff gets on them which makes them visible for brief periods, but nothing sticks to them, so you can't just throw flour on them and call it a day.

[Dragonus45]

People here are way underestimating the power of spider senses it has been portrayed at various times as almost straight up precognition in dodging things no one has any right dodging including invisible stuff.

I Honestly given how difficult he is to actually put down the real question here is can Lucy kill him before she melts herself. Although it has also occurred to me that Carnage might just be strong enough to arm wrestle a vector as well. And if he is he could just powe through and end her very quickly. There is also a chance he could get tricky and split himself up or attack her from an odd angle.