Poll: If Spiderman was to fight Batman...

[Holarchy]

Let's say some sick plot from Doctor Heinz Doofenshmirtz himself forced Spiderman and Batman to fight each other (Yes, I know different universes blah blah) for some reason or they just had a genuine argument over how the new furniture should be arranged, who would win? NO TIES ALLOWED. TIED FIGHTS ARE FOR THE UNWORTHY! Just out of idle curiosity.

Provide some evidence as to why you made your choice if you'd like, let your inner nerd shine, there's no wrong answers. Unless you pick Spiderman. (I kid, I kid)

 

[Blobpie]

Batman, if given enough prep time

 

[Jonluw]

Vs threads are frowned upon.

[sub]Spiderman, because I'm a biased little shit. He's stronger and has web shooters.[/sub]

 

[Holarchy]

Vs threads are frowned upon.

[sub]Spiderman, because I'm a biased little shit. He's stronger and has web shooters.[/sub]

Heh, I didn't know. Don't personally see what's so wrong about them, unless a massive flame war starts. Don't like them, don't comment on them.

 

[Jonluw]

Vs threads are frowned upon.

[sub]Spiderman, because I'm a biased little shit. He's stronger and has web shooters.[/sub]

Heh, I didn't know. Don't personally see what's so wrong about them, unless a massive flame war starts. Don't like them, don't comment on them.

It's not like they're frowned upon by me, i.e., I don't like them. It's an unspoken rule in the forums that we don't do them.

There used to be a clause in the forum rules/code of conduct explaining that vs threads aren't accepted, but it seems they've removed it now.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

How could they fight? They are after all, one and the same.

Spoiler

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Batman is only good in his own universe and with plot armour to boot.

Any encounter with a real superhero and he's fucked.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

The formula for most "Super Heroes vs. Batman" fights is "The super hero wins the first fight with no time to plan, Batman wins any subsequent fights once he knows what to do".

Considering Batman has beaten Superman before, who is leagues beyond Spider-Man, it's safe to say Batman could do it. It's kind of cheap writing, but there you go.

 

[Kinokohatake]

Spider senses win every time. Batman throws a punch? Dodged. Batarang? Dodged. Batmans not strong enough to break out of the webbing and one good punch will lay Batman out flat.

 

[Kinokohatake]

The formula for most "Super Heroes vs. Batman" fights is "The super hero wins the first fight with no time to plan, Batman wins any subsequent fights once he knows what to do".

Considering Batman has beaten Superman before, who is leagues beyond Spider-Man, it's safe to say Batman could do it. It's kind of cheap writing, but there you go.

Yes but Spiderman doesn't have a glowing rock weakness. It's literally the only reason he can beat Superman at all. You wan't a crazy fight? Slade vs anyone. If you haven't read Identity Crisis, do it. Best Slade fight scene ever.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Spiderman. Batman would actually lose against most superheroes if it wasn't for fan service and lazy mary sue writing.

Ok to put it another way, just because the writers went with Batman doesn't mean it actually made any goddamn sense.

For a comparison take WWE. Lets say Brock Lesner was fighting Mick Foley. The writers can write a scenario where Foley wins but realistically speaking he would get killed every time.

Batman can be as smart and skilled as he wants. Spiderman has superhuman strength, agility, his webs and the spider sense oh and also is a genius and pretty tactical. But no, Batman always wins because "BATMAN'S THE BEST EVARRR!!111!!"

Batman's awesome in his own universe. Trying to fit him in with superheroes just doesn't work though. At least not in anything greater than a support role.

This man speaks the truth, and he will be crucified for it.

Personally I've always hated the Batman wins because he will magically have some infallible scheme secretly prepared that will go off without a hitch Excuse in verses topics, because it's a complete cop-out. It just reduces him to a one trick pony deus ex machina, which ruins any balance or discussion.

With Spidey verses Batman it would be close, I think it would all depend on how many extra gadgets Batman had on him. Spidey would have greater athletic ability and manoeuverability (web slinging and wall crawling) and greater strength, so in close combat Spidey would win (Mutated-spider strength ftw!) but Batman has various vehicles and gadgets, and he would have a fair chance of immobilising Spidey. I would say giving Batman time to think out the situation and prepare would tip the battle in his favour, but only slightly, and it would only work so far as other factors played to his advantage (being able to find a suitable location, spotting Spidey before he attacked etc.)

It's an interesting match-up, Spidey has defeated the Green/Hobgoblin before, who is pretty much a more brazen Batman with a glider.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

The formula for most "Super Heroes vs. Batman" fights is "The super hero wins the first fight with no time to plan, Batman wins any subsequent fights once he knows what to do".

Considering Batman has beaten Superman before, who is leagues beyond Spider-Man, it's safe to say Batman could do it. It's kind of cheap writing, but there you go.

Yes but Spiderman doesn't have a glowing rock weakness. It's literally the only reason he can beat Superman at all. You wan't a crazy fight? Slade vs anyone. If you haven't read Identity Crisis, do it. Best Slade fight scene ever.

Batman comes up with a formula to neutralize Spidey's webs. Then its just Batman vs. A guy with super strength and agility, which Batman has dealt with before.

 

[scorptatious]

If unprepared, Batman would most likely lose against Spiderman. Due to Spidy's spidersense and webbing, Batman would be at a pretty big disadvantage.

Although with proper planning, Batman could probably find a way to beat him.

 

[Nerexor]

The formula for most "Super Heroes vs. Batman" fights is "The super hero wins the first fight with no time to plan, Batman wins any subsequent fights once he knows what to do".

Considering Batman has beaten Superman before, who is leagues beyond Spider-Man, it's safe to say Batman could do it. It's kind of cheap writing, but there you go.

While true, the main ingredient for anyone beating Superman hinges around his weaksauce weakness of kryptonite. Spidey does not have such an obvious weakness, making it more difficult, as Batman doesn't have an "oh look you lose this fight now" button. Batman might have a chance if he could disable Spidey's web shooters though.

At that point its more even.

tl;dr
Spiderman with web shooters vs Batman, Batman loses. The web shooters are ridiculously versatile (sometimes to the point of breaking suspension of disbelief) gadgets that let Spidey trap opponents and zip around a battle zone with gleeful ease.

Spiderman without web shooters (batman disables them or through plot armor avoids spidey long enough for him to run out of web ammo) then Batman has a high, but not 100% chance of winning due to greater combat experience, training, and adaptive gadgetry. If spidey gets in enough hits though, bat-armor or not the bat is going down.

Reasoning:

Spiderman has superhuman reflexes, but Batman's are hardly shabby either due to training and radar/sonar/magical senors or whatever he has in that cowl.

Spiderman has super strength, but Batman has a lot of experience in dealing with that already, not negating the advantage but definitely mitigating it.

Spiderman sans web shooters is reduced to hand to hand combat, which he (as far as I've seen) has no formal training in but relies on his speed, reflexes, and strength instead. Batman would have all his gadgets, combat experience, and ridiculous amounts of martial arts training.

Spiderman has his insulting jokes. Batman has dry retorts, and his experience with truly crazy opponents means they aren't likely to rattle him or get him angry like they do most of Spidey's opponents.

Both are highly intelligent. Spiderman is usually a pretty tactical thinker, but Batman has a lot of expertise in tactical take downs against supers (otherwise he would get pasted every time he does anything in JLA).

 

[Jonluw]

It's not like they're frowned upon by me, i.e., I don't like them. It's an unspoken rule in the forums that we don't do them.

There used to be a clause in the forum rules/code of conduct explaining that vs threads aren't accepted, but it seems they've removed it now.

The only time I see them being "frowned upon" are when people like you say they are frowned upon here.

I have yet to meet an actual person who hated them.

Well, they're still disliked by old people such as me. But I guess with the surge of new users who were never around to know the old forum rules, the general consensus might've shifted.
I don't know what the official policy on vs threads are these days. All I know is that they used to be banned, and that I never heard anything about them being unbanned.
In my mind, it will always live on as an unspoken rule.

 

[Jonluw]

]Well, they're still disliked by old people such as me. But I guess with the surge of new users who were never around to know the old forum rules, the general consensus might've shifted.
I don't know what the official policy on vs threads are these days. All I know is that they used to be banned, and that I never heard anything about them being unbanned.
In my mind, it will always live on as an unspoken rule.

2010 is old user territory now?

I was under the impression 2008 and maybe early 2009 was "old user" territory.

Yes, I am being pedantic.

I know I only signed up in 2010. I've been around the forums since '07 though.
Was way too nervous to join before that.

 

[EeveeElectro]

Don't like them, don't comment on them.

Don't be silly. It's pretty much impossible for people on here to live by that rule. If they don't like something they'll make sure everyone knows. >.<

OP: I'm going for Batman probably because I'm a much bigger fan of him and he just seems better IMO.
Would be an epic fight though...

 

[Jonluw]

]Well, they're still disliked by old people such as me. But I guess with the surge of new users who were never around to know the old forum rules, the general consensus might've shifted.
I don't know what the official policy on vs threads are these days. All I know is that they used to be banned, and that I never heard anything about them being unbanned.
In my mind, it will always live on as an unspoken rule.

2010 is old user territory now?

I was under the impression 2008 and maybe early 2009 was "old user" territory.

Yes, I am being pedantic.

I know I only signed up in 2010. I've been around the forums since '07 though.
Was way too nervous to join before that.

Yeah, being on the forums during the console wars was a pretty bleak time.

Yeah, that wasn't fun.
I don't think I remember much from console war threads from way back, aside from a lot of standard responses of "[console I don't like] sucks, [console I like] is best", but I remember getting myself into a good flame battle over Sony's new lollipop thingy and Kinect soon after joining.
That's the nice thing about lurking. You can just skip annoying shit.

 

[Jonluw]

Yeah, that wasn't fun.
I don't think I remember much from console war threads from way back, aside from a lot of standard responses of "[console I don't like] sucks, [console I like] is best", but I remember getting myself into a good flame battle over Sony's new lollipop thingy and Kinect soon after joining.
That's the nice thing about lurking. You can just skip annoying shit.

It was really weird for me, I was a PS2 user who went with a 360 at the time because of a better selection of games knowing full well that when the PS3 went down in price and up in game choice I would get one too (this being the first generation of consoles I was earning my own money). So I was loyal to neither side. The fanboy argument got thrown around a lot. Which just baffled me because it was my first experience with console wars as this was my first time being part of a gaming community.

Heh, I was a 360 fanboy, myself. (Cut me some slack, I was 13)
I may not remember much of the goings on in the forum, but I did spend a lot of time arguing with my friends over which console was (would be) better. Of course, I knew nothing about proper discussion, so I could neither make good rational arguments nor recognize when they had a point. Denial played a rather large part in keeping me a 360 fanboy.

...

I still don't like the PS3, mind.

It's strange though.
I'm trying to think back to my lurking days, and I honestly can't remember a lot from when I was 13.
My most vivid thread memory is about some thread with stories about annoying customers. It was made by MaxTheReaper, I think.
Other than that, all I can remember is I'd just discovered webcomics and was busy reading my way through the archives of A modest destiny [http://www.squidi.net/comic/index.php] and Questionable content; I was watching episodes of Naruto on youtube, and I was trying to cope with life at middle school.
It's really mostly a haze. Weird.

 

[Crazy Zaul]

Spidey, being a physicist would be smart enough to know that being batman would cost a lot like for some reason everyone except Ra's is too braindead to figure out, go to the batcave and whoop ass.