I just got back into reading Spider-Man and jumped on at Ends of the Earth. If I havent read that story I would have voted for Batman. Spider-Man thinks much more tactically then he used to. He wears the suit he needs to based on the situation. He has magnetic webbing, ice pellets, and sonic weapons. He also has just as much experience fighting villains as Batman does (Not as much training though). I get that Batman could deduce that Spider-Man has his spider-sense but he still cant negate it. Mentally he could but every weapon or trap would still set up the alarm for Spider-Man. Spider-Man still wins but not by much. Although some good points for Batman almost had me jump ships.
So Spidey has gone the Batman route?! I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Batman finding a way to negate the Spider-Sense. It's been done by people in the past (Osborne, Hobgoblin, Tony Stark). Plus, Batman would not necessarily have to negate it. I recall one of my favorite Batman/Superman fights, Batman used Supes' enhanced senses against him. Don't think Batman cannot find a way to turn one of Spider-man's strength against him...or even create confusion as to the validity of each buzz occurring in ol' Spidey's noggin.
Spider-Man defeated Firelord in a one-on-one battle. He does not succumb and will not lose. The only one I'd take to beat him would be Captain America
If you're going to say Cap could take down Spidey, than I'd argue Batman definitely could. Not because Batman bested Cap, but save for the enhanced abilities Cap has, Bats and Cap are basically the same type of character. Again, the big difference being is Batman is a dirty fighter.
You're going to say that Spidey would win because he would stop (which he's proven several times), Batman is the same type of character (this isn't Die Fledermaus.) Doesn't that define a hero?!
M
Now if we're talking Batman verses Snake-Eyes, Wolverine, or Thor (to name a few) I'd say the Dark Knight adds some losses to his stats. I still argue Batman could not have taken down the Hulk in the old Marvel/DC crossover.
First of all, this all depends on the writers. The writers let Batman defeat Superman because they WANT that to happen. A writer could easily have a Bats/Supes fight last a second as Kal vaporizes Bruce with one shot of his heat vision.
And Batman's biggest problem, I think, is that he is USED to winning, which I think makes him cocky. I loved the Court of Owls story because it was a rare time that Bruce got his ass kicked and had to rise above that. But that happens to Peter all the time. He just keeps fighting. Same thing with Steve, who will take on the Beyonder if he has to. Peter will simply keep taking his licks until he bests Bruce. It's a war of attrition and the Spider gets it.
Why does everyone think Bats has something in his utility belt (apart from shark repellent) that can over come everything. Obviously it's just a MacGuffin that can do anything, anytime the plot needs it.
BTW it's been mentioned recently that he sticks his mask to his face now the same way he clings to walls. I'm not sure if having Bats tell him to SHUT UP would work on him, he talks more when nervous and intimidated.
The fun part would be were Spidey stands over a beaten Bats and goes "Bruce Wayne! Money, Girls and a super hero! Some guys have all the luck"
Truthfully, I have always found "Batman has the exact tool for the job in his utility belt" kind of ridiculous. What is the possibility Batman always have just the right tool on him (I would say it's possible he has the right tool, but knew to pack it on that specific night?!)
I'd prefer he adapts a tool/weapon to another situation. Say, he used a freezing agent normally used on Clayface(s) to freeze the webbing, rather than an anti-webbing agent Batman just happened to have the foresight to put into the belt. It makes more sense to normally carry equipment that has multiple uses than specific use tools. I mean, Bats doesn't have Pym particles for that belt?
As for the Shark repellent, (I HATE anything with that version of Batman) if I recall correctly, wasn't that a canister in the Bat-Copter and not something already in the belt?
I just got back into reading Spider-Man and jumped on at Ends of the Earth. If I havent read that story I would have voted for Batman. Spider-Man thinks much more tactically then he used to. He wears the suit he needs to based on the situation. He has magnetic webbing, ice pellets, and sonic weapons. He also has just as much experience fighting villains as Batman does (Not as much training though). I get that Batman could deduce that Spider-Man has his spider-sense but he still cant negate it. Mentally he could but every weapon or trap would still set up the alarm for Spider-Man. Spider-Man still wins but not by much. Although some good points for Batman almost had me jump ships.
So Spidey has gone the Batman route?! I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Batman finding a way to negate the Spider-Sense. It's been done by people in the past (Osborne, Hobgoblin, Tony Stark). Plus, Batman would not necessarily have to negate it. I recall one of my favorite Batman/Superman fights, Batman used Supes' enhanced senses against him. Don't think Batman cannot find a way to turn one of Spider-man's strength against him...or even create confusion as to the validity of each buzz occurring in ol' Spidey's noggin.
Spider-Man defeated Firelord in a one-on-one battle. He does not succumb and will not lose. The only one I'd take to beat him would be Captain America
If you're going to say Cap could take down Spidey, than I'd argue Batman definitely could. Not because Batman bested Cap, but save for the enhanced abilities Cap has, Bats and Cap are basically the same type of character. Again, the big difference being is Batman is a dirty fighter.
You're going to say that Spidey would win because he would stop (which he's proven several times), Batman is the same type of character (this isn't Die Fledermaus.) Doesn't that define a hero?!
M
Now if we're talking Batman verses Snake-Eyes, Wolverine, or Thor (to name a few) I'd say the Dark Knight adds some losses to his stats. I still argue Batman could not have taken down the Hulk in the old Marvel/DC crossover.
First of all, this all depends on the writers. The writers let Batman defeat Superman because they WANT that to happen. A writer could easily have a Bats/Supes fight last a second as Kal vaporizes Bruce with one shot of his heat vision.
And Batman's biggest problem, I think, is that he is USED to winning, which I think makes him cocky. I loved the Court of Owls story because it was a rare time that Bruce got his ass kicked and had to rise above that. But that happens to Peter all the time. He just keeps fighting. Same thing with Steve, who will take on the Beyonder if he has to. Peter will simply keep taking his licks until he bests Bruce. It's a war of attrition and the Spider gets it.
Well, depending on the writer, of course...
Sure, Superman could just vaporize Batman, but it's not his MO. It wasn't until Superman thought he was fighting different villains before he really unleashed his fury on Batman. Plus, I could not rule out Batman's ultimate Superman contingency plan involves a few Wayne-Tech satellites remotely targeting and shooting him with a Kryptonite laser should Bats' death be by Superman.
One of my favorite Batman monologues involves him planning out the Red K for Superman. He thought, how he could pretty much improvise everyone else, but how it would always come down to Kent and him.
It's a thin line, but I would say Batman is confident (perhaps overly confident) in fights because he is a great tactician. I think if he was cocky, the way he approached his opponents would be different. Look at "Casey at the Bat" story. THAT is being cocky. Batman never really mouth offs or look down at formidable opponents with the mindset "I'll win...I'm the goddamn Batman!"
As I posted earlier, it's normally Batman's ability to plan 10 steps ahead which often causes him to miss things right in front of him.
I think you strongly underestimate who and what Batman is.
Ummm... OK. I'll give myself two Bat-Demerits.
I'm just saying, if it came down to who had the power, than the voting would not be that close. Didn't Spider-man beat the Hulk a couple times? Surely the Hulk can throw more than a moped at ol' Webhead!
Sorry, Matt. You win. I was being facetious. I have a difficult time taking questions such as this seriously. Clearly, you disagree with that, too! Have a wonderful day!
Sorry, Matt. You win. I was being facetious. I have a difficult time taking questions such as this seriously. Clearly, you disagree with that, too! Have a wonderful day!
Actually, I'm not trying to win anything, these are actually my favorite characters from each of their respective companies. I think this is an interesting match up because of what each character brings to the fight. I just didn't want someone to base an opinion on one character having superpowers anymore than basing the outcome on other match ups (Spidey v. X-Men, Bats v. Supes, etc.)
This really comes down to what character (or company) the voter prefers. It is completely subjective. For every point used to justify Spidey's win, another will come up for Batman.
Comments
And Batman's biggest problem, I think, is that he is USED to winning, which I think makes him cocky. I loved the Court of Owls story because it was a rare time that Bruce got his ass kicked and had to rise above that. But that happens to Peter all the time. He just keeps fighting. Same thing with Steve, who will take on the Beyonder if he has to. Peter will simply keep taking his licks until he bests Bruce. It's a war of attrition and the Spider gets it.
Well, depending on the writer, of course...
I'd prefer he adapts a tool/weapon to another situation. Say, he used a freezing agent normally used on Clayface(s) to freeze the webbing, rather than an anti-webbing agent Batman just happened to have the foresight to put into the belt. It makes more sense to normally carry equipment that has multiple uses than specific use tools. I mean, Bats doesn't have Pym particles for that belt?
As for the Shark repellent, (I HATE anything with that version of Batman) if I recall correctly, wasn't that a canister in the Bat-Copter and not something already in the belt?
Sure, Superman could just vaporize Batman, but it's not his MO. It wasn't until Superman thought he was fighting different villains before he really unleashed his fury on Batman. Plus, I could not rule out Batman's ultimate Superman contingency plan involves a few Wayne-Tech satellites remotely targeting and shooting him with a Kryptonite laser should Bats' death be by Superman.
One of my favorite Batman monologues involves him planning out the Red K for Superman. He thought, how he could pretty much improvise everyone else, but how it would always come down to Kent and him.
It's a thin line, but I would say Batman is confident (perhaps overly confident) in fights because he is a great tactician. I think if he was cocky, the way he approached his opponents would be different. Look at "Casey at the Bat" story. THAT is being cocky. Batman never really mouth offs or look down at formidable opponents with the mindset "I'll win...I'm the goddamn Batman!"
As I posted earlier, it's normally Batman's ability to plan 10 steps ahead which often causes him to miss things right in front of him.
M
M.
This really comes down to what character (or company) the voter prefers. It is completely subjective. For every point used to justify Spidey's win, another will come up for Batman.
M
Spider-man's quipability has the ability to defeat nearly anyone...