Comic Battle >> View Post
·
Post By
Knight

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 8,314
In Reply To
Poltargyst

Member Since: Sat Nov 29, 2008
Posts: 2,720
Subj: Re: Rank in terms of hard durability
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 at 11:29:15 am EDT (Viewed 80 times)
Reply Subj: Re: Rank in terms of hard durability
Posted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 at 08:56:16 pm EDT (Viewed 87 times)

Previous Post

There is hard durability, which is what is asked for by the OP, and then there is damage soak. And then there is durability vs. physical attacks or durability vs. EP, heat, cold, radiation, etc.

No one is questioning Thor's damage soak, his ability to take one hell of a beating before dropping. It is his hard durability that is in question. Thor standing in the sun...awesome display of durability vs. heat and radiation. Not informative, though, about Thor's hard durability vs. physical attacks.


Hasn't Thor taken Wolverine's Adamantium Claws to the face and they only managed to scratch him? Pretty sure that counts as much higher Durability than Thing (who failed to take a claw hit from Logan), Colossus, Luke Cage and Iron Man. There is simply no way in the world those guys I just mentioned have ANY degree of durability that is higher than Thor.





It's interesting that a hero/villain performs one amazing feat, or use a power they haven't used for 20+ years, and that automatically propels them to a high status despite scans and evidence to the contrary. I don't know what is worse, selective feat picking that has only been done once or twice 20, or more, years ago or ignoring evidence from scans or the lack thereof. We need to stop putting our favorite heroes/villains on pedestals and start putting them where they really belong.
Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2017 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2017 by Alvaro Ortiz and Dave Galanter. Software Copyright © 2003-2017 Powermad Software