Originally posted by beta ray bob
wait just to clarify this, does thor have mjolnir in this "durability test"cause if he does then it's no doubt that he wins, also he fought the destroyer many times, once or twice with loki in it and lets not forget the fact that he took a few hits from surtur way back in thor #351
nice sig by the way
Originally posted by Soljer
Taken out by a bullet? When? Thor's taken barrages of assault weapons. He's taken artillery rounds to the face. He's taken nukes. He's taken planet destroying blasts.A bullet taking him out? Yeah, right. And Captain America could one-shot the Hulk.
Anyways, fact of the matter is, Thor is more DURABLE than the Hulk, but the Hulk would last much longer due to his healing factor. I mean, when hit with the same attack, the Hulk takes more actual DAMAGE, but it heals over. Thor takes LESS damage, but it stays with him.
His durability is somewhat like Wonder Woman's, which is why he has to block bullets. That's the main reason why I excluded bullets and and such from this thread.
Originally posted by Accel
He was knocked out by a shotgun shell to the face somewhere in an issue of Black Panther a while back. He's also stated around this time that bullets can leave marks and welts on him if they make contact.His durability is somewhat like Wonder Woman's, which is why he has to block bullets. That's the main reason why I excluded bullets and and such from this thread.
Oh! A Black Panther issue!
Why didn't you say so? Thor's white. :-P.
But seriously, he's taken artillery shells to the face. Why would a shotgun shell even tickle a nose hair?
Originally posted by Soljer
Oh! A Black Panther issue!Why didn't you say so? Thor's white. :-P.
But seriously, he's taken artillery shells to the face. Why would a shotgun shell even tickle a nose hair?
I believe that's why some folks are giving Hulk the nod here, since his durability's been more consistent.
I agree Accel. Plus Thor's durability is mainly of the energy projection
type and not to much of the physical type. So all in all I say that Hulk can take physical hits better (even without his healing) than Thor and about equal to Thor in energy. Thus making his durability slightly greater than Thor's. But throw in the healing regeneration then it is clear that Hulk's durability exceeds Thor's. This is like Wolverine with a serious healing upgrade.
Erm, why WOULD you throw in the regeneration? That isn't durability. Regeneration doesn't factor into durability.
...
Invulnerability and regeneration are two entirely separate powers. For example: Spiderman is more DURABLE than Wolverine. Wolverine's healing factor, however, would allow him to last longer than spiderman in a fight.
He's still less durable, though.
🙂.
Originally posted by Soljer
Erm, why WOULD you throw in the regeneration? That isn't durability. Regeneration doesn't factor into durability....
Invulnerability and regeneration are two entirely separate powers. For example: Spiderman is more DURABLE than Wolverine. Wolverine's healing factor, however, would allow him to last longer than spiderman in a fight.
He's still less durable, though.
🙂.
Regeneration has everything to do with durability.
Just look at the definition by Marvel. Also look at all the character's who can heal fast durability stats on cards and handbooks. Now using your definition of durability then you have a point. But using marvel's definition and its has everything to do with it.
i dont want to stir further sh!t but, isnt thor asgardian, meaning a "god", whose physiology differs from others, who by virtue of birth was already granted nigh invulnerability to begin with...
and i personally dont see anything wrong with hulk's healing factor affecting his durability, i mean isnt he durable because of his healing factor, its part of it...its like saying hulk isnt strong if it werent for the gamma radiation...
this isnt thor vs bruce banner, its thor vs hulk, and the hulk persona comes with the stength and healing factor...
just my two cents...