Captain America will beat Batman in a straight up fight
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 3 votes and with 9 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Given only their abilities as they are described on paper and not based on the feats we see on comic books or film as they have varied wildly throughout the years and different media. They will also only be allowed to use tools and weapons that they carry with them on a normal day, no outside help, no upfront knowledge about the other, no running away to fight another day. This is my first debate on debateart so i want to start with something simple.
These arguments are about who would win in a fight, and i thought it would be batman because he has so many fighting skills and cool gear. Most of the round were forfeited, but the ones that weren't forfeited, the instigator was able to defend his proposition without a response from challenger. Challenger said "Can you please explain to me how Cap would be able to dodge Batman's weapons or fights off all of them with his shield?" And the next round Pro responded "Captain america's incredible reflexes and senses give him the ability to dodge a vast array of projectiles, and his shields ability to stop any and all oncoming impact and other forces that batman could pull from his utility belt." This is a good response and it is not challenged by the challenger because they forfeit, so I now think captain America wins this fight and instigator (green) wins the convincing arguments point.
Most of the debate was forfeit by both sides, however, based on what little was offered I have to side with Pro. The setup of the debate makes the scenario wildly unfair to Batman as a ordinary mortal human whose ability comes mainly from his intellect, investigative ability and access to advanced technology through his alternate persona as Bruce Wayne. Pro sets up the debate and also makes arguments which greatly limit Batman's ability to access these abilities. Con's only counter argument is that Batman has trained his agility, while Captain America supposedly did not. Con also asked Pro to explain how Captain America would use his shield during the fight, which provoked Pro to describe how Captain America would not only use his shield, but his superior stamina would eventually prevail against Batman in an extended battle. As Con forfeit the remainder of the debate beyond that point and nothing else was offered, Pro wins by default.
Full forfeit - but this hinges on “a straight up fight”. While Batman beat other foes, I found the argument that Batman needed preparation - thus not a straight up fight completely valid for refuting cons position.
The argument concerning caps reflexes and sheild allowing defensive nullification of Batman’s tools - the remaining balance is down to stamina - with cap beating Batman by attrition.
I would have loved to see more of an argument, but I would hand this to pro as a result of the above.
I know this wasn't a serious debate, but i wanted to have more of a back and forth at the very least. Since my opponent did not respond much it left me with nothing to argue against. I understand that this could be partially due to the holiday season being a bit more hectic than we would like and therefore do not fault him.
I almost accepted the challenge.
Thank you for voting. I would like to have argued this a bit more but i didn't really get points to argue against.
thanks to me pming him vvvvvvvvv
sorry for the delay, it looks like the issue has been fixed
What are the issue you are having?
I am having some issues posting on this forum
That is more or less my stance. I believe that captain america is physically and tactically superior to batman, however batman does have the resource advantage. Yet i have had too many batman fanboys argue against me, which is why i made the post.
Without Alfred and Lucius Fox's expertise to aid him and make custom anti-Captain-America suit and weapons etc, Batman is losing this fight.
If you allowed Intel and other things, Batman is absolutely winning this fight.
sorry i was going to be taking captain Americas side, again this is my first time with this and i should have made my position clearer. Also the reason i didn't allow upfront knowledge is because it would cause too much trouble trying to figure out how much information one could pull up on the other. However Batman is no pushover, he is arguably the best hand to hand combatant in the DCU, he is a brilliant strategist able to come up with plans on the spot, his speed and strength are also incredible for someone who is supposed to be a human with no meta human abilities or artificial assistance, not to mention his vast array of tools built into his suit and in his utility belt.
Oh, and the description also doesn't specify which side Pro and Con take on this debate. So the person accepting the debate has no way of knowing which hero they are advocating for.
He is saying your debate description ("no upfront knowledge about the other") is effectively preventing Batman from using one of his most powerful assets; His intellect, skills as a detective and knowledge base about his common foes.
Batman (depending on which version of him we are talking about) is still a competent fighter even without those assets, but he becomes a significantly less compelling character. You may as well be asking, "Can Captain America beat some random ninja in a bat costume?"
The debate description
What do you mean outruling
All the ways Batman dominates (Intel, strategy beyond powers etc) you're outruling.
I believe that the first couple of rounds should be used to establish a baseline on what each one can and can not do as well as what attributes one has over the other.