Originally Posted by Otaku (Post 2499900)

Maybe I'm just not getting it... but tanks seem both more and less common IRL than how Bathawk's statement reads. Well, that or my dubious understanding of GURPS is at work again, so I'm going to risk sharing my own take on this.

Unless we're in a setting where nearly all warfare is restricted to tanks, anything with "versus tanks" seems more niche than -40% indicates. I mean, even if you successfully keep it secret (Secret?) that your Damage Resistance only applies against attacks made by (or perhaps even from) tanks, you've got everything else on the battlefield to worry about. Or are tanks really that heavily present on the battlefield?

Okay, so what is the "more common" part? If we invert things, and your DR is against everything except tanks, once again you'll need to keep it secret (Secret?) because tanks aren't that far away in (for example) the United States of America. Well, in the American Midwest, anyway. We're not a war zone [insert sports joke here/], but there are a lot of military bases (outposts? Depots? Not sure what all to call them) here. I mean, most of them aren't the Army or Marines, but the Army Reserve or the National Guard... but that's enough for this to be a big issue. At least, once this gap in your defenses is known. Yeah, getting the tanks to where you (your tank-vulnerable character) are before you can flee is a nightmare, between getting authorization for the tanks and transporting them... but sooner or later, your character is probably getting shot by a tank. Barring an amazing dodge or other mitigating circumstances.

Originally Posted by Bathawk (Post 2499996)

I figured -40% because a tank has the ability to attack with bullets (usually a -40% defensive limitation) and other forms of attacks (cannon, simply running a target over)...and while yes, a tank is probably less common on a WWII battlefield than infantry, if I KNOW I'm invulnerable to tank damage, and given the choice, I'm going to charge that Tiger tank instead of the pillbox of infantry...so it's probably not worth as much as say a -60% limitation

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth (Post 2500006)

Note that on real battlefields tanks rather like to have infantry close by as support. Largely because tanks have bad stealth and bad perception and can readily be ambushed by anti-tank weapons if they don't have somebody around to spot the threat for them. (And in a defensive arrangement with pillboxes the tank would definitely tend to position behind the infantry positions, so unless you're a speedster or bulletproof charging it isn't going to go well.)

Originally Posted by Otaku (Post 2500030)

What makes me think a Limitation like "Only against tanks" is pretty severe, >

Originally Posted by Lovewyrm (Post 2499907)

Chuck boulders at it until the tank crew gives up.

Edit: Or use your super powers to relocate people before the tanks arrive at the destination.
What's the point of punching a tank? You think they'll call off the war efforts over that?

(This feels like some cartoony stuff to me and I'm not usually a fan of that, especially when it's for 'war' stuff.)

Originally Posted by King Leonidas (Post 2500034)

if the Hero can carry a 50 cal and fly above it and shoot it with 50 BMG AP he can kill it

Originally Posted by sir_pudding (Post 2500280)

Few, if any tanks have less than DR 60 on the top. Typically in modern tanks, this will be still around DR 1000

Originally Posted by The Colonel (Post 2500220)

Superhumans punching tanks is prime WWII era pulp, so yes, very cartoony and silly - but probably not more cringeworthy than that often shown clip of the Hulk swinging an Abrams about by the cannon barrel.

Originally Posted by johndallman (Post 2500307)

Did you mean DR 100? The 4e T-72 on p. 244 of High-Tech ha DR 180 on top of the turret, and DR 90 on top of the body.