Ok so, you say in one sentence "non-stone thanos is killed easily" and then immediately say non-thanos is strong enough to fight off the entire avengers united. so which is it? Is he a badass because of the stones? or because he himself is a badass? Because you can't have it both ways from a writing standpoint. If he was ONLY a true threat in IW because he had a stone, and thus had a massive power boost, then you don't get to have him going toe to to with ALL of the avengers, avengers+ actually, WITHOUT the stones.
Perhaps I worded it poorly in my initial statement. What I meant is you can't have him be a threat on par with an Avengers team in IW that added up to a smaller number of people than Endgame, where the fights seem equal, and thus there is dramatic tension, and base it on him having magic rocks. Only to turn around, and have that same character, WITHOUT the magic rocks that made him equal to the...we'll just say Avengers 6 (the 6 main ones that fought him in most encounters), be of a strength that makes him on par with ALL the Avengers. Like 100+ Avengers. Non-stone Thanos fought a larger, more coordinated ARMY, than Stone Thanos, and in both cases, it's framed as being "roughly equal footing" for the combatants. Because dramatic tension. That undercuts the...I hate to say this about magic rocks but, "logic" of your film, when you do that.
You don't get to say Level 5 Thanos with a regular sword is a bigger threat, than level 99 Thanos with his Ultimate Weapon, and have it make any sense at all, logically, or narratively. Especially when it's established that the REASON he's a threat at all, is the Ultimate Weapon.
