15 reasons why the JL beats the Avengers

[MetalDog]

Been a long time since I read a DC comic.  Only Superman was as powerful then as he is now.  More likely they've changed and updated the characters.  Even so, might be a lean in this writers stance. 


http://screenrant.com/justice-league-vs-avengers-better-more-powerful/

[JasonPratt]

"Dark origins give an edge in the heat of battle." 

The Marvel rogue gallery in the films hasn't stood out (although so far the same could be said for the DCFU... I know, not the official acronym, but seems (F)itting, (U)-know? As an abbreviation of Warner Brothers' mission statement?) But the comics themselves average things out in competency, even if not necessarily in fun or meaningful reading.

The first reason that makes real sense in-universe is experience in teamwork. Although that only counts for the comics canon. The Avengers tend to spat more, the JL tend to work together more.

Reason #11 is the same reason restated poorly and incoherently.

Reason #12 is viable: the JLU has a deeper bench (even though strictly speaking I'd say Black Panther beats Batman.)

Reason #10 sounds good until (1) the Vision has most of the same powers and (2) it depends totally on no Avenger using fire. For goodness sake, Batman by himself beat a whole team of White Martians, theoretically stronger than Jon'n, who had already succeeded in beating the JL. The JL even joked in captivity about how badly Batman would beat them!

Reason #7 is great until Doctor Strange nixes Superman in any number of ways. Granted the JL has no small shortage of magicians, including at least theoretical access to ludicrous winners like the Specter (the somewhat-rebel angel of God's wrath) and the Phantom Stranger (who is even more of a "we win" button than Batman, since he exists to ex machina out of no-win situations), but keeping core members in mind, the Sorcerer Supreme trumps a lot of JL's roster.

Reason #6 is more problematic for the Avengers, if only because the JL has no less than 3 Flash-level speedsters, two of whom are Superman-level power-punchers who can also tank damage (namely Superman himself and Wonder Woman), not even counting Captain Marvel (another Flash-level speedster who can tank and punch at Superman level), and not even counting extended members of their various families (the Superman family, the Shazam family, the Flash family, where "family" here indicates allies with basically the same powersets). This is likely to be the main reason for a crushing JL win.

Reason #5 -- eh. Not to shade Aquaman, but Namor is more physically capable, has access to similar magical sci-fi artifacts, and is even usually on better terms with his Atlanteans (meaning he's more likely, by some degree, to have access to the national superpower of being war leader of Atlantis.) I will however admit that Arthur's main advantage is decisive: not only how well he gets on with sea life, which Namor can only partially replicate with artifacts, but that Aquaman is capable of magically dominating any life form whose species originated in the ocean (partially thanks to the real-life hypersea theory that says we brought the ocean with us in our blood, in effect). Aquaman by himself could defeat the Avengers, if he put his mind to it (so to speak). And most of the Justice League, since his power works on alien ocean-based life, too. King Arthur is radically overpowered.  8) That said, if Doctor Strange can level the playing field against the many speedsters and strike before Arthur pulls the last-ditch option (which he typically refuses to do on principle), Aquaman only retains a wavery advantage over Namor, and only if they fight underwater. If Namor (who can fly) gets Aquaman out of and away from the water, the edge goes to him.

Reason #4 -- if Green Lantern is around, he's potentially a game ender, agreed. (Not even counting a whole corps like him.) Though again Doctor Strange can counter-trump him, Strange can't deal with everything at once.

Reason #3 -- this is dumb, mainly because it makes tacticals the decisive factor, and Rogers should be able to tie Batman on that whether one-on-one or in group planning. In a one-on-one fight, Batman wins on applied tech and a wider, deeper set of martial skilz. But a vs fight between Cap and the Bat wouldn't settle a fight between the groups (usually); and at the level of tech, the Avengers have a significant edge with at least two major tech sources (Stark and t'Challa).

Reason #2 -- Diana or (the original!) Captain Marvel beats Thor on speed in any case. So I agree with the verdict, not entirely with the rationale, and I wouldn't put it at #2 for a whole team win. Weirdly the author forgets to mention that Diana can lift the hammer, although this is shown in the clipart. The fact that she, Superman, and probably Marvel can use the hammer -- adding Thor's power to their own! -- would be a more solid #2.

Reason #1 -- this should read "many more tanky-punch god-level-speeders", but instead makes an appeal based on the proposition that the Avengers wouldn't die for a win. Which is insultingly dumb, even if JL member deaths (temporary) are more famous.

[Nefaro]

DC = generally 'meh' in comparison. 

I've always thought that.  When I was a kid, many of their characters just seemed so old-fashioned and more one dimensional compared to Marvel's. 

I suppose that was largely due to X-Men comparisons at the time, but I've always had that impression about most of DC's in-house stuff (for someone who never went full comic nerd, anyway).

Still get the same impression after the genre has become a big thing in film.

[JasonPratt]

For a long time Marvel definitely took the lead in experimental writing. DC has caught up long ago, but I wouldn't say your earlier evaluation was wrong. There's a place for both kinds of writing -- something the industry seems to have forgotten.

[Nefaro]

For a long time Marvel definitely took the lead in experimental writing. DC has caught up long ago, but I wouldn't say your earlier evaluation was wrong. There's a place for both kinds of writing -- something the industry seems to have forgotten.

I'm not averse to DC's old classics.  Many of their characters just seem less ... real.  I suppose that's what I'm saying.  Thinner on personality/story and a bit cheesier for it. 

That's not to say Marvel hasn't had a share of that.  Maybe less so, however.

I was very disappointed that the Constantine (Hellblazer) tv series wasn't continued, though.  DC could kick out some unusual & lesser known ones that I would enjoy.  Although that ball just doesn't wanna keep rolling, unfortunately.  :-\

[Sir Slash]

I've never been a big fan of DC but the "Gotham" TV show on Fox has kept my attention pretty well for it's.... what, three season run now? I don't know how close to absolute DC doctrine it is but it does entertain. And, feeling kind of like an old pervert, the girl who plays the girl who will become Catwoman, is kind of Hot to look at.  :-"