Every fanboy does. If it was Hulk vs. Thor without Mjolnir, I would give him a heavy majority because he could eventually ragdoll Thor and wear that crazy durability down. But as of right now, Thor has to much going for him to lose against anyone in MCU so far.
And for the. Amped IM versus Veronica part. The armor seem to be same material just HB has a lot more of it. And the HB suit is extremely slow it would bever even land a hit against the regular suit or Thor. And would get torn to shreds after awhile.
Originally posted by ShadowFyreHulk is obviously more durable than Thor is. The portrayals have been very clear.
I think it's hilarious that both Thor's offensive and durability feats surpass Hulk's by a wide margin and thats not even debatable. Thor can dish out more damage and has withstood explosions that dwarf the building collapse and Tony's HB punches.
Hulk got knocked out with a punch from Hulkbuster. Granted, he wasn't paying attention and it caught him unawares. But then again, Hulk has punched Thor when Thor was not prepared for it either, TWICE! And in neither of those times was he knocked out.
Fact of the matter is, we've seen Hulk get knocked out. We have never seen Thor get knocked out.
Where has Hulks durability been shown to be greater? Because Thor dodged gunfire? So did Supes in mos doesent mean he cant take it, its the smart thing to do.
The hardest hit Hulk has taken was the building collapsing on him. The hardest hit Thor has taken atomized every building in a multiple block radius, and reduced multiple millions of tons of earth and steel to rubble.
Where is all the math people that like throwing numbers around? Is there anyway to calculate the difference in the two? Doesent even seem the slightest bit comparable to me.
Originally posted by FrothByteHulk wasn't even aware as you admit but we have seen Hulk and Thor fight. Hulk looked to be winning when the fight was interrupted by fighter jets.
Hulk got knocked out with a punch from Hulkbuster. Granted, he wasn't paying attention and it caught him unawares. But then again, Hulk has punched Thor when Thor was not prepared for it either, TWICE! And in neither of those times was he knocked out.Fact of the matter is, we've seen Hulk get knocked out. We have never seen Thor get knocked out.
That sort of logic really on face value is bad. I think you know that too.
Originally posted by ShadowFyre
Where has Hulks durability been shown to be greater? Because Thor dodged gunfire? So did Supes in mos doesent mean he cant take it, its the smart thing to do.The hardest hit Hulk has taken was the building collapsing on him. The hardest hit Thor has taken atomized every building in a multiple block radius, and reduced multiple millions of tons of earth and steel to rubble.
Where is all the math people that like throwing numbers around? Is there anyway to calculate the difference in the two? Doesent even seem the slightest bit comparable to me.
This great point you brought up will be dodged and you'll hear "Hulk has better durability feats!" again.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Hulk wasn't even aware as you admit but we have seen Hulk and Thor fight. Hulk looked to be winning when the fight was interrupted by fighter jets.That sort of logic really on face value is bad. I think you know that too.
As mentioned previously, not just by me but by almost everyone else here, Hulk was not winning that fight. That's like awarding the round to the boxer who landed the last 2 hits just before the bell rang instead of awarding it to the boxer who dominated the entire round.
Originally posted by FrothByteTo me it's clear he was in a better position than Thor as the fight ended. He was. We aren't scoring this like a boxing matchup.
As mentioned previously, not just by me but by almost everyone else here, Hulk was not winning that fight. That's like awarding the round to the boxer who landed the last 2 hits just before the bell rang instead of awarding it to the boxer who dominated the entire round.