Batman Vs. Superman Who Would Win

[scatterax]

True.



True. Although if Superman wanted to he could simply take all of Batman's limbs off with his heat vision and stop Batman without killing him if he were really a threat to him. Heck, he could just blind him and take an arm or two off, or freeze Batman in a mile thick iceberg. End of the dark knight there. Superman still wins either way, IMO.

Why do I already know what sto_vo_kor_2000 is gonna say about this? oh, who am I kidding. it's because I've been posting here for a couple months already!!

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Idk, I still think it would have the same results of a lex vs superman battle. w/ superman overcoming batmans scheme in the end. but atleast now I can see why some1 would actually think batman stood a chance.

One is glad to be of service

True. Although if Superman wanted to he could simply take all of Batman's limbs off with his heat vision and stop Batman without killing him if he were really a threat to him. Heck, he could just blind him and take an arm or two off, or freeze Batman in a mile thick iceberg. End of the dark knight there. Superman still wins either way, IMO.

I dont deny that Superman is capable of any of that "IF" he "WANTED" to.

What I do no agree with you is one wether Superman "WOULD" do any of it soly based on if he felt Bat's "was really a threat to him".

The plain and simple fact is Superman would only take any of the actions you listed if he were suffering from a break down or under the control of an out side force.

Superman has never ,"NEVER", ripped limbs off with his heat vision of anyone who was not robotic in some way only because they were a threat.

Superman has never, "NEVER", Blinded any of the bad guys he was fighting by intent only because they were a threat [unless it was a robot or something]

And there's no way, "NO WAY", he going to just start doing these things in a fight with Batman and still be in character.

Why do I already know what sto_vo_kor_2000 is gonna say about this? oh, who am I kidding. it's because I've been posting here for a couple months already!!

Were you right???

 

[scatterax]

Were you right???

yep. pretty much what I thought you'd say to that.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

yep. pretty much what I thought you'd say to that.

Glad I didnt disappoint.

At least I'm staying "IN CHARACTER" and sting with in the "personality and behavioral norms" that have been "established" by the history of my post.

Which should be how any fight between Superman and Batman should go.

 

[House]

FTW

 

[Kevin Smith]

One is glad to be of service



I dont deny that Superman is capable of any of that "IF" he "WANTED" to.

What I do no agree with you is one wether Superman "WOULD" do any of it soly based on if he felt Bat's "was really a threat to him".

The plain and simple fact is Superman would only take any of the actions you listed if he were suffering from a break down or under the control of an out side force.

Superman has never ,"NEVER", ripped limbs off with his heat vision of anyone who was not robotic in some way only because they were a threat.

Superman has never, "NEVER", Blinded any of the bad guys he was fighting by intent only because they were a threat [unless it was a robot or something]

And there's no way, "NO WAY", he going to just start doing these things in a fight with Batman and still be in character.



Were you right???

So then you admit Superman would win.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

So then you admit Superman would win.

Not at all....follow the post and you'll see that I'm saying that Batman wins.

Follow all my post and you'll see that.

"SHOULD" and WOULD" are two very different things.

Superman should win this on powers alone but his personality,his compassion and his concern for human life prevent him from doing whats nessesery to win this fight.

Now if you want to take that as a "Not wanting to win" stance to say why he loses then fine.

Superman is capable of winning on powers alone but its his personality that keeps him from winning.

So you might want to bone up on your reading skills buddy

Just kidding

 

[GreenKToo]

Thats like asking who would win between The Punisher and the Hulk.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Thats like asking who would win between The Punisher and the Hulk.

Actually theres a hell of a big difference between both fights.

The Hulk would be willing to step on the Punisher.

Superman wouldnt be willing to do the same to Batman.

 

[GreenKToo]

No your right, Supes wouldnt do that. He could just Fly Bats up high enough so he passes out. Unless you wanna give Bats prep time that is. If so, then Supes needs it as well.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

No your right,

Thanks

Supes wouldnt do that. He could just Fly Bats up high enough so he passes out.

And yet an other example of an action that Superman wouldnt do.

Yes he could but he wouldnt.

And the proof is in the pudding.

In any of the fights they have had Superman hasnt done that...in any of the fights with Lex he hasnt done that.....in any of the fights he has had with other non powered humans he hasnt done that.

He's not going to start now just so you guys can win this argument.

Besides Batman has equipment in his belt so that he would be able to breath at those heights and not pass out.

And before you go and say Superman can fly him up so fast that Batman wouldnt have the time to get the equipment out of his belt.......those speeds would kill Batman from either wind shear, the mounting pressure or the cold caused from flying that fast.

And as I keep pointing out...thats something Superman would never do to a non powered human while under his own control.

Unless you wanna give Bats prep time that is. If so, then Supes needs it as well.

And again Batman has most of the prep time needed for this fight years ago.

You guys really need to think harder on this before you post because every example you guys come up with seems to be out of character for SUPERMAN.

 

[GreenKToo]

Your debate is mute. In a normal situation, they wouldnt fight anyway. Now if one were under the influence of someone else, lets say Supes for instance. Why wouldnt he fly Bats up high if he wasnt in his right mind.

The same with Bats. If he were under the control of some villain, I have no problem believing Supes would fly him up high enough till he passed out, if only to prevent from seriously injuring him.

.

 

[sto_vo_kor_2000]

Your debate is mute.

Really lets see.....

In a normal situation, they wouldnt fight anyway.

Granted.

But I can think of a few situations where they may have to fight that does not envolve either being under the control of a 3rd party.

As a matter of fact I've already posted the comic in which it was already done.

And again I'm not useing it as evidence of it being done but of how it could be done.

Now if one were under the influence of someone else, lets say Supes for instance. Why wouldnt he fly Bats up high if he wasnt in his right mind.

No one said he wouldnt.

The same with Bats. If he were under the control of some villain, I have no problem believing Supes would fly him up high enough till he passed out, if only to prevent from seriously injuring him.

That would only work if Batman were under the control of some dumb villian or didnt have access to his memories.

But if Batman were under the influence of someone or something that altered his personalty but still retains his memories and skills that trick wouldnt work for the same reasons I posted in my last post.

Here it is again to refresh your memory....

Batman has equipment in his belt that would allow him to breath in the upper atmosphere.

So to be able to prevent Batman from getting to the equipment Superman would have to fly him at speeds that would certainly kill Batman.

And thats something Supermans not willing to do.


So how was my debate mute????

You should have taken my advise and put some thought harder about what you wanted to post

 

[GreenKToo]

I did. and I stand by what I said. Supes wins.

 

[scatterax]

Your debate is mute. In a normal situation, they wouldnt fight anyway. Now if one were under the influence of someone else, lets say Supes for instance. Why wouldnt he fly Bats up high if he wasnt in his right mind.

The same with Bats. If he were under the control of some villain, I have no problem believing Supes would fly him up high enough till he passed out, if only to prevent from seriously injuring him.

.

some good points here.

I agree, superman would win.

 

[Mutagen]

Batman would win.

Doctor Doom would completely erase BOTH of them.

At the same time.

 

[blksuperman2]

Your debate is mute. In a normal situation, they wouldnt fight anyway. Now if one were under the influence of someone else, lets say Supes for instance. Why wouldnt he fly Bats up high if he wasnt in his right mind.
.

I hate it when someone misuses this word.

moot (m

t)
n. 1. Law A hypothetical case argued by law students as an exercise.
2. An ancient English meeting, especially a representative meeting of the freemen of a shire.

tr.v. moot·ed, moot·ing, moots 1. a. To bring up as a subject for discussion or debate.
b. To discuss or debate. See Synonyms at broach1.

2. Law To plead or argue (a case) in a moot court.


So really when you say moot. it means open for debate. Not the opposite.

 

[dnno1]

Hey we all have out opinions.

But which book is that from again????..

Justice League: New Frontier

 

[dnno1]

Batman would be asking for trouble against Superman (especially if he wanted to kill).

 

[DChero]

I think the speed at which Superman moves would be the deciding factor. Sure, there are ways to kill him, but if we have to resort to allowing Bats to sneak up on him to simply justify what some of us want to happen is a little unfair.

Let's have them meet in an abandoned city, Batman with his USUAL arsenal and Superman with his. Who wins?

Should we give them time to prepare? If we do then Superman, who is just as smart as Batman (see non-Frank Miller comics), would probably be able to protect his Kryptonite weakness. Then what?

Another factor would be which version of the character we base this on. Again I mention the strong differences between how writers like Johns, Frank Miller, etc. have created these variable styles of presenting the characters. In addition, there are very definitive differences in Superman's abilities based on the Age or version that we decide on.

So after all that, I think the rules need to be set before we play this game.

 

[Jake Cassidy]

Since Batman is a normal human, Superman can just wait around until he dies. Than go up to Bats' coffin and say, "I win, *****."

 

[CFE]

Superman. I'm a bigger fan of Batman, but Superman would destroy him with ease.

Kryptonite? please...Superman can be at safe distance and roast Batman alive with heat vision.

Clark might be naive here and there...but he's WAY smarter than people give him credit for.

Also, watch the ending of "Superman: Doomsday" where the Superman Clone is fighting the army prior to the real Supes showing up.

Yeah it's not the REAL Superman, but the clone sufficiently showed what it'd be like if Kal-El threw all caution to the winds...if he wants to down F-22s and Helicopters, he can just do it...without flinching...If for some reason he wants you dead, you are DEAD.

 

[Mercurius]

A little rhyme I did on the subject:

"Bats beats Supes.

It has happened before, it will happen again.

Supes has muscles, Bats has brains."

 

[scatterax]

supes has beat bats b4 too. it happened b4, it'll happen again.

 

[GreenKToo]

I hate it when someone misuses this word.

moot (m

t)
n. 1. Law A hypothetical case argued by law students as an exercise.
2. An ancient English meeting, especially a representative meeting of the freemen of a shire.

tr.v. moot·ed, moot·ing, moots 1. a. To bring up as a subject for discussion or debate.
b. To discuss or debate. See Synonyms at broach1.

2. Law To plead or argue (a case) in a moot court.


So really when you say moot. it means open for debate. Not the opposite.

It doesn't matter. You know what I meant Cap'n Grammar.