General & Others Now that Gaban has had his Old Legend Showcase keep the same energy when Luffy shows ya’ll who the real legend is!
- Thread starter DonWick
- Start date
It was during the Kaido fight that Bo put Luffy > Mihawk. It’s less about Luffy and more about Mihawks lack of feats. That’s literally all it is. If Mihawk gets feats that put him > Luffy I’d change my mind.
You’re right I have Shanks > Luffy it’s because of feats lol. The way that Shanks handled Kid, Greenbull, and his haki was compared to Joyboy puts him at another level for me. If Mihawk does something similar then I’ll give him the same credit.
You’re right I have Shanks > Luffy it’s because of feats lol. The way that Shanks handled Kid, Greenbull, and his haki was compared to Joyboy puts him at another level for me. If Mihawk does something similar then I’ll give him the same credit.
Funny if true
"Luffy would die in my head if Xy" And luffy wouldnt die against kaido when he didnt keep falling in the sea and getting saved getting fed, getting brought to prison etc. or what?
Absolute joke argument this is why no one takes this shit seriously
Imu absolute shat on swordsman chop up luffy instantly, imu being a infinitly stronger swordsman then mihawk ever will be
This shit with "luffy would die if x" is giga cope
"Luffy would die in my head if Xy" And luffy wouldnt die against kaido when he didnt keep falling in the sea and getting saved getting fed, getting brought to prison etc. or what?
Absolute joke argument this is why no one takes this shit seriously
Imu absolute shat on swordsman chop up luffy instantly, imu being a infinitly stronger swordsman then mihawk ever will be
This shit with "luffy would die if x" is giga cope
No Shanks had feats before Wano, stopping the war, Mihawk not wanting to fight him, BB not wanting to fight him but being willing to fight everyone else, stopping Akainu mid attack with ease, cracking WBs ship with haki alone, all of that screams powerhouse.
I don’t hate Mihawk brother but he hasn’t done shit.
I don’t hate Mihawk brother but he hasn’t done shit.
when i say luffy would die, you stupid cunt, I'm talking about in a 1v1 powerscaling sense, that should be obvious
A 1v1 fight where there is no one else present, with set conditions. In that 1v1 powerscaling scenario which is what is used when people rank characters strength, Luffy would lose to Mihawk.
The entire basis of your point presumes I'm trying to say how it would go in the actual plot/story where we know the MC has plot armor to survive anything and anyone
If marineford didn't make that painfully obvious with how mihawk couldn't kill pre-ts luffy and akainu also failed despite saying he wouldn't let luffy escape
So thanks for exposing how stupid you are with your pointless response, did you actually think when I say Mihawk vs Luffy I mean if mihawk encounters luffy in the story luffy would die? that's already been disproven dumbass
But here you are trying to bring up narrative plot armor in an attempt to argue against my point in a 1v1 powerscaling setting
A 1v1 fight where there is no one else present, with set conditions. In that 1v1 powerscaling scenario which is what is used when people rank characters strength, Luffy would lose to Mihawk.
The entire basis of your point presumes I'm trying to say how it would go in the actual plot/story where we know the MC has plot armor to survive anything and anyone
If marineford didn't make that painfully obvious with how mihawk couldn't kill pre-ts luffy and akainu also failed despite saying he wouldn't let luffy escape
So thanks for exposing how stupid you are with your pointless response, did you actually think when I say Mihawk vs Luffy I mean if mihawk encounters luffy in the story luffy would die? that's already been disproven dumbass
But here you are trying to bring up narrative plot armor in an attempt to argue against my point in a 1v1 powerscaling setting
1. oh okay so you're pulling this stunt, you're choosing literal feats over narrative portrayal, so you have kinemon > dragon, since Kinemon for example undoubtedly has more feats than dragon like his durabilty feat of taking kaidos attacks. Which is why he also scales over a character like katakuri for example.
While using this methodology is sound, it is sound only up until a certain point, where you have to logically assume a characters strength based on their portrayal.
But if you literally want to ignore everything about Mihawk's portrayal, you can go ahead, but that is illogical.
Really it seems you're being a bit disingenuous when you say "that's all it is haha". For example if we analyse a feat you just brought up, Shanks one shotting Kidd right:
The attack Shank's used to one shot kidd is his swordsmanship, and you and I both know that attack was not anywhere near the strongest sword attack Shanks can do, especially after seeing what gaban just did. And you wouldn't say gaban>shanks either even though he showed a stronger attack with a weapon.
The fact that Mihawk's swordsmanship is superior to shanks's, should tell you that Mihawk's sword techniques would also have the ability to one shot kidd. If you disagree because he "simply hasn't shown a feat" of him doing something like this:
You're actually choosing the more illogical take, even with what you think is sound reasoning to base off of literal feats, because you're trying to say the strongest swordsman has weaker attacks than that one instance of shanks using divine departure and not going all out.
So I wouldn't rate that methodology too highly when it comes to tackling topics like this.
2. Also another flaw in that line of argumentation is:
What move has shanks shown that is stronger than bajrang gun? because he hasn't actually shown a move as powerful as that. You might go "shanks haki was compared to joyboy though" but the problem here is enough hasn't been shown to understand that comparison especially if we use your methodology.
You understand that his haki being compared to joyboy is not a feat, it's a narrative statement, similar to mihawk's title (a statement you're choosing to believe without the literal feat you claim we need) . According to your own logic, for it to have any validity he'd have to go all out, so we can directly make that comparison between shanks haki and joyboys.
Because for all we know, if the giants saw bajrang gun, with the scale and haki it was letting off they might have compared that to shanks's haki as well, just like the haki joyboy let off. Shanks would have to show something stronger for that statement to isolate shanks and joyboy alone in another tier.
So with that being said, I don't know why you're so certain shank's is > luffy, other than his portrayal , like the joyboy comparison, and if you are consistent you would have mihawk > luffy for the same reasons.
Because based on what we've seen, for example I don't know why shanks one shotting kidd is special, when it's perceivable that bajrang gun could obliterate kidd and his crews ship. Especially since Kidd's crew is fodder besides Killer, and both have them haven't shown anything anywhere near it's level, to where they are capable of handling it
3. So hopefully you understand why this line of logic doesn't particularly fly, you're choosing to hyper-impose it on Mihawk because of whatever reasons, but even I don't believe luffy is > shanks. Because I accept Shanks's portrayal, just like I accept Mihawk's portrayal, and both of them are portrayed on another tier while Luffy is still learning to master g5 and his haki.
While using this methodology is sound, it is sound only up until a certain point, where you have to logically assume a characters strength based on their portrayal.
But if you literally want to ignore everything about Mihawk's portrayal, you can go ahead, but that is illogical.
Really it seems you're being a bit disingenuous when you say "that's all it is haha". For example if we analyse a feat you just brought up, Shanks one shotting Kidd right:
The attack Shank's used to one shot kidd is his swordsmanship, and you and I both know that attack was not anywhere near the strongest sword attack Shanks can do, especially after seeing what gaban just did. And you wouldn't say gaban>shanks either even though he showed a stronger attack with a weapon.
The fact that Mihawk's swordsmanship is superior to shanks's, should tell you that Mihawk's sword techniques would also have the ability to one shot kidd. If you disagree because he "simply hasn't shown a feat" of him doing something like this:
You're actually choosing the more illogical take, even with what you think is sound reasoning to base off of literal feats, because you're trying to say the strongest swordsman has weaker attacks than that one instance of shanks using divine departure and not going all out.
So I wouldn't rate that methodology too highly when it comes to tackling topics like this.
2. Also another flaw in that line of argumentation is:
What move has shanks shown that is stronger than bajrang gun? because he hasn't actually shown a move as powerful as that. You might go "shanks haki was compared to joyboy though" but the problem here is enough hasn't been shown to understand that comparison especially if we use your methodology.
You understand that his haki being compared to joyboy is not a feat, it's a narrative statement, similar to mihawk's title (a statement you're choosing to believe without the literal feat you claim we need) . According to your own logic, for it to have any validity he'd have to go all out, so we can directly make that comparison between shanks haki and joyboys.
Because for all we know, if the giants saw bajrang gun, with the scale and haki it was letting off they might have compared that to shanks's haki as well, just like the haki joyboy let off. Shanks would have to show something stronger for that statement to isolate shanks and joyboy alone in another tier.
So with that being said, I don't know why you're so certain shank's is > luffy, other than his portrayal , like the joyboy comparison, and if you are consistent you would have mihawk > luffy for the same reasons.
Because based on what we've seen, for example I don't know why shanks one shotting kidd is special, when it's perceivable that bajrang gun could obliterate kidd and his crews ship. Especially since Kidd's crew is fodder besides Killer, and both have them haven't shown anything anywhere near it's level, to where they are capable of handling it
3. So hopefully you understand why this line of logic doesn't particularly fly, you're choosing to hyper-impose it on Mihawk because of whatever reasons, but even I don't believe luffy is > shanks. Because I accept Shanks's portrayal, just like I accept Mihawk's portrayal, and both of them are portrayed on another tier while Luffy is still learning to master g5 and his haki.
Last edited:
These are just portrayal lol.
Mihawk clowned an armada of 50 ships alone and followed some from grand line to east blue.
'Not wanting to fight Mihawk'
You really don't understand the dynamics do you?
He is straight up called WSS, black blade owner only two exists in the entire world, 3.59 B bounty, canonically called stronger than Shanks.
Is that doesn't scream powerhouse to you, I don't know what will.
You're simply denying Mihawk>Shanks because you don't like it. Stop with you don't hate 'Mihawk' to play safe.
Mihawk clowned an armada of 50 ships alone and followed some from grand line to east blue.
'Not wanting to fight Mihawk'
You really don't understand the dynamics do you?
He is straight up called WSS, black blade owner only two exists in the entire world, 3.59 B bounty, canonically called stronger than Shanks.
Is that doesn't scream powerhouse to you, I don't know what will.
You're simply denying Mihawk>Shanks because you don't like it. Stop with you don't hate 'Mihawk' to play safe.
Stunt? This has been how ranked characters since Oro Jackson 🤣. Read my posts and you’ll see. I’m just not going to rank Dragon or Mihawk until they do something. But if I have to I’ll have Dragon > Mihawk to based on being Luffy’s dad because it’s a showmen troupe.
but if you want my ranking idk or care where either of them fall. I only scale with narrative in the absence of feats so Dragon gets more grace because Mihawk has feats Dragon doesn’t. All of Mihawks feats point to him being weaker than Shanks. Could be be stronger? Sure, but until I see it he’s not. He could also be Imu child but until it’s stated I don’t care.
but if you want my ranking idk or care where either of them fall. I only scale with narrative in the absence of feats so Dragon gets more grace because Mihawk has feats Dragon doesn’t. All of Mihawks feats point to him being weaker than Shanks. Could be be stronger? Sure, but until I see it he’s not. He could also be Imu child but until it’s stated I don’t care.
I don’t hate Mihawk. What could he have done to make me hate him? I like everything about Mihawk from his design to his personality. I just enjoy clowning the Zoro agenda. Yall think I hate Zoro to even though he’s still my favorite character behind Luffy. The only thing I hate is agenda so I attack it.
You didn't really address anything I said, and then went on to talk about mihawk vs shanks, when the focus was about mihawk vs luffy.
But I've demonstrated why the way you rank characters is flawed. I'm showing you why you being comfortable having shanks > luffy like it's a given doesn't make sense given the way you're explaining how you rank mihawk.
I'm not so egotistical to expect someone to engage with literally everything I say, but I think I've brought up some seriously good points that should make you at least think about reconsidering how you go about things
If you want to ignore them that's up to you, but your methodology isn't consistent and contradicts what you've been saying. Which is why people are believing you just hate mihawk, because you aren't being consistent with how you treat him vs other characters.
But I've demonstrated why the way you rank characters is flawed. I'm showing you why you being comfortable having shanks > luffy like it's a given doesn't make sense given the way you're explaining how you rank mihawk.
I'm not so egotistical to expect someone to engage with literally everything I say, but I think I've brought up some seriously good points that should make you at least think about reconsidering how you go about things
If you want to ignore them that's up to you, but your methodology isn't consistent and contradicts what you've been saying. Which is why people are believing you just hate mihawk, because you aren't being consistent with how you treat him vs other characters.