Regarding major firepower.
I'll keep this short. The average Super Weight
for named characters in my 'verse is positively ridiculous. It goes so far beyond necessary it isn't even funny. I've got a group of people whose weakest members are confused for capital G gods, and whose strongest member eats the actual gods.
And yet my conflict revolves around one poor fuck trying to defend the Earth from them.
Now it helps that he is actually in a position where he is capable of fighting them, and just flat out destroying the Earth is not their main objective. As a matter of fact, they need to use Earth for something, so while they care little for collateral damage, they can't just flat out destroy it. They need it at least mostly
So the question here is this. Is it believable for me to say the reason the worst
thing that happens to the planet is Africa being reduced to slag is these people didn't really feel the need to wash the planet clean of any large land masses to deal with this one little shit standing in their way? On the one hand, as General Knoxx
put it, it'd be like mowing your lawn with a nuclear weapon. On the other hand, results are results, and I usually try to avoid the "I'VE BEEN HOLDING BACK" schtick whenever I can, because it seems stupid.
Except now I need it. So, does not simply wiping out all life on Earth seem like a stupid course of action, or an appropriately proportioned response to the problem?