Tulak Hord vs Yoda

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



zephiel7
For those of you who don't know Tulak was an ancient Sith Lord, arguably the best duelist ever known.

Lets say this is duel takes place in the Dune Sea of Tatooine.

DiamondBullets
During one of his kung fu flips, Yoda gets sand in his eyes; rendering him incapable of fighting. Hord wins.

Captain REX
One does not need eyes to fight! Just look at Jerec or Kreia.

Tulak should be the superior swordsman here.

w00t2112
Tulak takes yoda, def in a lightsaber duel and most likely in a lightsaber + force duel

Fishy
I would say Tulak, but apparantly it can be doubted if he even know how to really use a lightsaber so i'm going to say we have no prove

Darth Traya
We can't really say, but If Tulak lives up to his reputation then he should WTFpwn Yoda into smithereens.

IKC
Or not, since what we know about him is inconclusive - Best lightsaber user of the Ancient Sith, when all the others even until the end of the Golden Age used Sith Swords?

Impossible to judge, really.

Fishy
Originally posted by IKC
Or not, since what we know about him is inconclusive - Best lightsaber user of the Ancient Sith, when all the others even until the end of the Golden Age used Sith Swords?

Impossible to judge, really.

He was the dark lord of the Sith, he would still have been better with a lightsaber then any of them were with Sith Swords.

Numan
Though we don't know enough about Tulak Hord, he must have been comparable to Marka Ragnos and Naga Sadow simply because his tomb was one of the 5 shown on Korriban (the tombs of Naga Sadow, Marka Ragnos, Ludo Kressh and Ajunta Pall were also shown) and was one of the largest in the valley of the dark lords.

Numan
Lightsabers are clearly superior to sith swords. The only reason that uber sith like Ragnos and Sadow didn't use them was because they probably didn't have the knowledge to make them.

Faunus
Originally posted by Numan
Lightsabers are clearly superior to sith swords. The only reason that uber sith like Ragnos and Sadow didn't use them was because they probably didn't have the knowledge to make them.

WTF? Their warswords could be enhanced with Sith alchemy and magic to the point where they can withstand lightsabers, as well as radiate dark energies.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b311/JawaKing_987/BattleoftheSith.jpg

You see Kressh and Sadow each holding massive warswords, and swining them so quickly they leave residual energy in their wake. No, I'd say that a good swordsman could handle a lightsaber-duelist fairly well.

Numan
There is no way to tell how fast the sword is actually going (the energy could be from the power of the sword for instance) yet the nature of the sword tells us it is not as fast as a lightsaber. The lightsaber is virtually weightless and yet is undoubtedly more powerful than a sith sword. It is also probably much more tiring fighting with a sith sword. I actually think that it is likely that Tulak Hord was the most powerful sith lord ever.

Hello Friend
If TOTJ comics are like that, thank god I didn't waste money on them.

Darth Traya
Tulak Hord the greatest? Phfft, I doubt he would be able to stand against a Sith sword.

Fishy
There is no evidence for him being the most powerful he was powerful sure but the most powerful?

And a lightsaber is useful in the hands of physically weak people like Jedi and Sith of later ages, but the Sith in that time... Sith like Ragnos Sadow Kressh, they could handle Sith Swords with ease. Sadow had a lightsaber once but choice not to use it. Ajunta Pall who would have been trained in the art of using lightsabers since he joined the Jedi Order dropped his lightsaber in favour of a Sith sword and he was human...

The weapon is not as important as the one that uses it. For a person like Yoda to wield a Sith sword it would be suicide, for somebody like Ragnos... I doubt he would really be bothered by the weight.

Fishy
Originally posted by Darth Traya
Tulak Hord the greatest? Phfft, I doubt he would be able to stand against a Sith sword.

If he lived in a time when there were Sith Swords then he sure as hell managed to stand up against them and destroy the one's that used them.

Numan
Sadow had a lightsaber once but choice not to use it.

Where did you get this info from.

Darth Traya
Originally posted by Fishy
If he lived in a time when there were Sith Swords then he sure as hell managed to stand up against them and destroy the one's that used them.

I was referring to other users like Sadow or Kressh. I'm trying to point out that being a lightsabre master does not > being a sith sword master.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
Sadow had a lightsaber once but choice not to use it.

Where did you get this info from.

Other people at this forum stick out tongue I think Nai or somebody like that once said it....

And Traya, sorry misunderstood you there... I thought you were saying he couldn't beat any Sith Sword master...

Numan
Surely then Tulak Hord would have had the choice as well yet he still chose a lightsaber and I would definitely hold the judgement of the best lightsaber duelist (pre KOTOR times in the opinion of Traya) over the judgement of someone whose sword was more powerful than he was.

Numan
Lets look at the pros and cons for sithswords and lightsabers.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
Surely then Tulak Hord would have had the choice as well yet he still chose a lightsaber and I would definitely hold the judgement of the best lightsaber duelist (pre KOTOR times in the opinion of Traya) over the judgement of someone whose sword was more powerful than he was.

Yeah he choice to use a lightsaber and he was the greatest fighter of that Era and apparantly one of the best if not the best lightsaber duellist ever... Doesn't make him the most powerful sith ever though.

And Ajunta being weaker then his blade? So what, that only speaks for his blade and his resourcefelness. The guy lived as a spirit for 21.000 years and was still partly sane, at least more so then Exar Kun who only lived as a spirit for 4.000 years. The guy most have done something right to live as a spirit for that long. And he created the blade, meaning he was one hell of a weapon smith.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
Lets look at the pros and cons for sithswords and lightsabers.

depends on what you are used to, what you like and what kind of enchantments you can put on them... For somebody like Ragnos a lightsaber would be useless, the Sword would not feel heavy in his hand and he could put less of his physical power into a lightsaber. A blade however with all his strength and weight behind it would be incredibly powerful and effective.

For people like Yoda carrying around a sword would be suicide, fighting with it would be impossible.

Faunus
Lol. Unless you gave Yoda a little dagger or switchblade. . .

Fishy
Well a little dagger wouldn't be real effective in a fight against somebody with a sword twice your size...

Can you imagine Yoda holding up a little green dagger against Ragnos and his freaking huge ass Sith sword?

Numan
Lightsabers are extremely light and therefore do not require as much energy to swing around. They are extremely powerful and the energy beam is more powerful than any other blade (to my knowledge). Lightsabers can also very effectively be used with the force (such as throwing them, levitating them etc.). The only bad things you could say about a saber is that the energy cell can overcharge and it cannot be used underwater.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
Lightsabers are extremely light and therefore do not require as much energy to swing around. They are extremely powerful and the energy beam is more powerful than any other blade (to my knowledge). Lightsabers can also very effectively be used with the force (such as throwing them, levitating them etc.). The only bad things you could say about a saber is that the energy cell can overcharge and it cannot be used underwater.

And Sith swords could not be thrown around using the force? "Size matters not" afterall.

They may be light as hell, but being light has its disadvantages as well. And there are some materials that can block a lightsaber, either because of advanced magics or because of the material itself.

I mean Vodo made a freaking wooden staff more powerful then a lightsaber. The force power that could have been put and likely was put into most Sith Blades would by far exceed that. Making sure that no lightsaber would just cut through it.

Darth Traya
Originally posted by Numan
Lightsabers are extremely light and therefore do not require as much energy to swing around. They are extremely powerful and the energy beam is more powerful than any other blade (to my knowledge). Lightsabers can also very effectively be used with the force (such as throwing them, levitating them etc.). The only bad things you could say about a saber is that the energy cell can overcharge and it cannot be used underwater.

Did you just listen to what Fishy said? To most people in the ancient sith empire, whether or not a weapon was lighter made no difference.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
depends on what you are used to, what you like and what kind of enchantments you can put on them... For somebody like Ragnos a lightsaber would be useless

He could use a hilt that would suit his fighting technique.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
He could use a hilt that would suit his fighting technique.

Yes a hilt weighing 50 kilo's is going to be a good idea...

Would that not defeat the purpose of a lightsaber? And if you are going to make it heavy as hell why not use a blade at the same time, a blade that you could enchant with all kinds of things making it far more effective then a lightsaber?

Numan
Originally posted by Darth Traya
Did you just listen to what Fishy said? To most people in the ancient sith empire, whether or not a weapon was lighter made no difference.

How would it not make a difference? A lighter weapon consumes less energy than a heavier weapon. And lightsabers are probably more powerful than sith swords.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
How would it not make a difference? A lighter weapon consumes less energy than a heavier weapon. And lightsabers are probably more powerful than sith swords.

The last thing is wrong, as clearly shown in many sources, and by the fact that some people actually used Sith Swords. People like Ajunta Pall who were used to lightsabers actually choice swords over it.

and again if you are as big and strong as an elephant a few kilo's more or less will not matter. What will matter is the power that you can put into a swing and the ways you can enchant the blade... Which is obviously easier to do with a sword then with a lightsaber.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Yes a hilt weighing 50 kilo's is going to be a good idea...

Would that not defeat the purpose of a lightsaber? And if you are going to make it heavy as hell why not use a blade at the same time, a blade that you could enchant with all kinds of things making it far more effective then a lightsaber?

No, a hilt just like one of a sith sword yet without the heavy blade which weighs the most.

Fishy
But the weight wouldn't matter to him, it would just make him more powerful. Also a Sith sword can have enchantments that a lightsaber can not have, making them the prefered weapon for a lot of people.

Numan
Weight does not equal power.

Numan
As is shown in TOTJ, the only advantage of the enchantment would be the added power, which would still not match a lightsaber.

Fishy
Neither does lack of weight..

What it does equal however is the amount of pressure you can put into each blow. Imagine me hitting you as hard as I can with a feather and then with a brick? Which will hurt more.

Now imagine you have a shield, and the weapons are both deadly. The poisoned feather hits you, you block it. It doesn't matter you can do that a billion times. I hit you on the shield with a brick it hurts the weight pushes you down...

Now if i'm as strong as an ant and weigh as much as an elephant why would I care about using a brick or a feather? Its not like I will really notice, what I do know however is that when challenging somebody that can block my attacks the brick is going to be more effective because I will smash and smash until his defence falls...

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
But the weight wouldn't matter to him, it would just make him more powerful. Also a Sith sword can have enchantments that a lightsaber can not have, making them the prefered weapon for a lot of people.

How physically strong do you think he is?

Numan
Neither does lack of weight.

The lack of weight makes it easier to swing the blade and would be less energy consuming.

Fishy
Incredible strength both physically and in the force...

It doesn't really matter the guy is huge a blade like that might weigh a lot but when somebody like Revan could wield blades a bit like that and a weakling like Tavion could also use a weapon like that, then somebody of incredible strength should be able to do so easily without getting tired really.

Originally posted by Numan
Neither does lack of weight.

The lack of weight makes it easier to swing the blade and would be less energy consuming.

If you are powerful as hell and physical weak people could handle those weapons quite well then its not really going to be a problem for Sith Lords

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Neither does lack of weight..

What it does equal however is the amount of pressure you can put into each blow. Imagine me hitting you as hard as I can with a feather and then with a brick? Which will hurt more.

Now imagine you have a shield, and the weapons are both deadly. The poisoned feather hits you, you block it. It doesn't matter you can do that a billion times. I hit you on the shield with a brick it hurts the weight pushes you down...

Now if i'm as strong as an ant and weigh as much as an elephant why would I care about using a brick or a feather? Its not like I will really notice, what I do know however is that when challenging somebody that can block my attacks the brick is going to be more effective because I will smash and smash until his defence falls...

That analogy does not apply to this argument. A brick is more powerful than a feather where a lightsaber is probably more powerful than a sith sword.

Fishy
If both kill on impact neither one will be more powerful.

Look I have given you a dozen examples already, the clear fact is that a lot of Sith prefered a blade over a lightsaber. They had their reasons, are you honestly doubting thousands of years of war loving warriors? They would have created the greatest weapons of all and used them into perfection.

Numan
"If both kill on impact neither one will be more powerful."

Yet in a duel they would collide.

Fishy
If both kill on impact then surely the brick would be more useful if somebody is blocking your attacks. Blocking something light can be done a million times, blocking something a thousand times heavier is going to be very hard to do a lot of times... The defence will fall faster. You can just bash them down. And if your physically powerful enough to wield a weapon that can do that, it would be nothing short of stupid if you would not.

Numan
"Look I have given you a dozen examples already, the clear fact is that a lot of Sith prefered a blade over a lightsaber. They had their reasons, are you honestly doubting thousands of years of war loving warriors? They would have created the greatest weapons of all and used them into perfection."



Yet as technology prosperred, Sith started using lightsabers again.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
"Look I have given you a dozen examples already, the clear fact is that a lot of Sith prefered a blade over a lightsaber. They had their reasons, are you honestly doubting thousands of years of war loving warriors? They would have created the greatest weapons of all and used them into perfection."



Yet as technology prosperred, Sith started using lightsabers again.

Name one real Sith?

Exar was not a Sith, Revan was not a Sith, Nadd was not a Sith... They were Sith Lords in name not in race..

The Sith Race used swords because they were physically powerful enough to do something like that.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Blocking something light can be done a million times, blocking something a thousand times heavier is going to be very hard to do a lot of times... The defence will fall faster.

As I said before weight does not equal power.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Name one real Sith?

Exar was not a Sith, Revan was not a Sith, Nadd was not a Sith... They were Sith Lords in name not in race..

The Sith Race used swords because they were physically powerful enough to do something like that.

I didn't mean the sith as a race.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
As I said before weight does not equal power.


Come on seriously, do you honestly believe that if I would put up a shield and you would hit me with a lightsaber it would make my defence fall as fast as when you would hit me with a Sith Sword?

Well maybe in your situation but lets put Ragnos up there... If he put all his weight into an attack with a lightsaber it would still not pack the same punch as when he would put half his weight into an attack with the might Sith Sword. blocking the attacks from the Sword would exhaust me, the attacks from a lightsaber... It would be doable.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
I didn't mean the sith as a race.

Yet after the Sith Race died out, they didn't use Sith Swords anymore becuase they weren't physically powerful enough to do that. And all the Sith Lords that came after that were trained with lightsabers from birth. Not to mention the fact that retraining yourself with another weapon well the weapon would have to be damned good in order to do something like that.

Ajunta Pall his weapon was good enough for that, but I don't think a lot of others if any for tha tmatter wree. So really its only logical that they started using lightsabers from that moment on, they simply did not have the power and the few that did (Malak, Sion, Vader) would spend to much time learning how to use a new weapon to make it really effective.

Numan
The lightsaber is more powerful. It's as simple as that. Ragnos would create more power with a saber than with a sith sword.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
The lightsaber is more powerful. It's as simple as that. Ragnos would create more power with a saber than with a sith sword.

Its not as simple as that, because you are wrong. There is nothing to support your case, if anything you are just saying the same thing over and over again without even trying to argue my points. You are just making stupid statements, meaning you lose.

If a lightsaber would have been better then they would have used a lightsaber, because they obviously had the stuff to do so.

Numan
"Yet after the Sith Race died out, they didn't use Sith Swords anymore becuase they weren't physically powerful enough to do that."

Ajunta was human and he used a sith sword.

Fishy
If you would read the rest of my post you would see I already adressed that.

But seeing as for some reason you can't do it the first time I'll just quote myself

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Its not as simple as that, because you are wrong. There is nothing to support your case, if anything you are just saying the same thing over and over again without even trying to argue my points. You are just making stupid statements, meaning you lose.

If a lightsaber would have been better then they would have used a lightsaber, because they obviously had the stuff to do so.


I haven't argued your point? Sorry Fishy bit I have repeatedly quoted what you have been saying, acknowledged your explanation and then countered by proving you wrong. How have I not argued your point?

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
I haven't argued your point? Sorry Fishy bit I have repeatedly quoted what you have been saying, acknowledged your explanation and then countered by proving you wrong. How have I not argued your point?

You still haven't explained anything.



No explanation given.



No explanation given, not even anything to counter my analogy.

You are just stating things, come up with evidence show us some things that make sense give reasons except for saying "It just is."

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
If you would read the rest of my post you would see I already adressed that.

But seeing as for some reason you can't do it the first time I'll just quote myself

You call that addressing it. Don't be silly. All you have done is point out that you think that somehow the sith swords of Ragnos and Kressh etc. were heavier than Pall's. That is a illogical guess.

Fishy
I never said they were heavier then Palls... When did I ever say that? Show me where I said that?

I did say however that it would take a lot of time to learn to use another weapon then the one you have used your entire life. It would take time to learn how to use a Sword when you are used to a lightsaber. A lightsaber which is the Jedi his weapon of choice.

After the Sith species died out all the new Sith were ex-Jedi. Learning to use a Sith Sword would take time they often didn't have. And most of them didn't have the physical power to wield one either.

Numan
How powerful a lightsaber is is quite obvious. Hardly any material can stand up against it. It is dangerous to even touch one. It can cut through walls. Plenty of other things to.

Numan
I never said they were heavier then Palls... When did I ever say that? Show me where I said that?

You were implying it. Your point wasn't very clear and you didn't evaluate on it.

Fishy
And touching a poisonous sith blade is smart now? Sith Swords can block a lightsaber attack so can a lot of other things. A lightsaber might be more useful if you are trying to destroy a wall (which btw: any self respecting Sith would do thruogh the force) but we are not arguing that now are we? We are arguing the power of a Sith sword compared to a lightsaber.

In the hands of a Sith a real Sith the power of the sword would be far greater then that of a lightsaber. So its obviously not obvious...

Numan
Just give me one thing I have said that I didn't evaluate on and I will give you an explanation if I have not done so already. But no hard feelings Fishy, you've debated well.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
I never said they were heavier then Palls... When did I ever say that? Show me where I said that?

You were implying it. Your point wasn't very clear and you didn't evaluate on it.

Yes I implied there blades were heavier when I didn't even mention them at all... I didn't even mention their blades their time, just that after their deads people started using lightsabers, because they were trained with that from the start and because most of them didn't have the physical power to wield such blades. So even if they could it wouldn't be worth the time to retrain yourself (unless of course you had Pall his blade)

That is what I said in the post, yes that clearly means i'm implying the Sith swords became heavier over time. How foolish of me not to have seen that.

Illustrious
Originally posted by Numan
How powerful a lightsaber is is quite obvious. Hardly any material can stand up against it. It is dangerous to even touch one. It can cut through walls. Plenty of other things to.

Enchanted sith swords cut stuff up pretty good. As soon in the comic when Ludo's blade cut right into the wall.

Also, you neglect to mention that a hit to the body with a lightsaber or a sith saber would still be pretty much equivalent to a dead guy.

A sith sword has the advantage of having a counter balance. You could put effort into your swing. Ever try using a sword that is hilt heavy? It is clearly not easy. You obviously don't have much experience with using swords. The weight would not matter for someone who is immensely strong physically and has the force to further aid their power.



Yet somehow a lightsaber being light makes it more effective? How so?

A sith sword can channel sith enchantments, sith magic, dark side energies, etc. Tavion in JK:A had a mega drain that used a sith sword, and she -- a relative weakling -- had no trouble swinging the blade very quickly and effortlessly. There's nothing to suggest someone like Ragnos or Sadow would be better off with a lightsaber.

In fact, because of the ancient Sith's reliance on Dark Side powers + Sith Alchemy + Sith Magic, it seems like it would more than likely make it worse for them to use a lightsaber.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
And touching a poisonous sith blade is smart now? Sith Swords can block a lightsaber attack so can a lot of other things. A lightsaber might be more useful if you are trying to destroy a wall (which btw: any self respecting Sith would do thruogh the force) but we are not arguing that now are we? We are arguing the power of a Sith sword compared to a lightsaber.

In the hands of a Sith a real Sith the power of the sword would be far greater then that of a lightsaber. So its obviously not obvious...

Touching a poisonous sith blade would only be harmful because of the poison. The poison does not make the blade more powerful, only more harmful on contact. Touching a lightsaber is harmful because of the power of the energy beam.

Illustrious
Originally posted by Numan
Touching a poisonous sith blade would only be harmful because of the poison. The poison does not make the blade more powerful, only more harmful on contact. Touching a lightsaber is harmful because of the power of the energy beam.

Exactly the point. A sith sword with dark side energies will still cut through the body similarly to a lightsaber. Getting cleaved in two by either weapon will still involve your body dropping to the floor in two chunks. Effectively, there is little difference. The only difference you could argue is that a lightsaber would melt through a door or something faster, which is irrelevant in combat.

If anything, a sith sword may be more effective in combat because any glancing blows will cause poison effects, instead of simply cauterizing the wound.

Numan
"In fact, because of the ancient Sith's reliance on Dark Side powers + Sith Alchemy + Sith Magic, it seems like it would more than likely make it worse for them to use a lightsaber."

We are arguing about what would be a better weapon and not what the sith would use better.


"Yet somehow a lightsaber being light makes it more effective? How so?"


It is less energy consuming. You obviously don't have much experience with physics. More energy is required to lift something which is heavier than somehting else.

Fishy
Saying my analogy is flawed without giving a reason.



Even though the weight of a Sith Sword would help break the defence of lets say a lightsaber... So why wouldn't it be more powerful?



The Sith race we were arguing about never started using lightsabers. The sith as a whole did and I already explained to you why.



Because putting a lot of physical power into an attack could not possibly make the attack more effective?



Statement nothing shown to support this



Already adressed in my post before this one was said.



Illogical and wrong conclusion from my post.



Sith swords however can as shown.



Read a few things above.

These are pretty much all your reply's from page 3 except for 2

Which would be



Which also doesn't show anything and



Which again means nothing.

Have fun expanding on all those posts

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
"In fact, because of the ancient Sith's reliance on Dark Side powers + Sith Alchemy + Sith Magic, it seems like it would more than likely make it worse for them to use a lightsaber."

We are arguing about what would be a better weapon and not what the sith would use better.


"Yet somehow a lightsaber being light makes it more effective? How so?"


It is less energy consuming. You obviously don't have much experience with physics. More energy is required to lift something which is heavier than somehting else.

Like I said in the first post before this debate got started.

In the hands of a real Sith the Sith Sword would preform much better then a lightsaber. Thats what you are arguing.

Numan
Originally posted by Illustrious
Exactly the point. A sith sword with dark side energies will still cut through the body similarly to a lightsaber. Getting cleaved in two by either weapon will still involve your body dropping to the floor in two chunks. Effectively, there is little difference. The only difference you could argue is that a lightsaber would melt through a door or something faster, which is irrelevant in combat.

If anything, a sith sword may be more effective in combat because any glancing blows will cause poison effects, instead of simply cauterizing the wound.

Yes but it would have no effect in a duel as the duelists would be striking at the opponent and parrying the opponents blows. A lightsaber would be a more effective weapon because it requires less energy to use and yet is still more powerful.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
Yes but it would have no effect in a duel as the duelists would be striking at the opponent and parrying the opponents blows. A lightsaber would be a more effective weapon because it requires less energy to use and yet is still more powerful.

Again with the power of a Sith the energy use would not be much higher then it would be when the guy would use a lightsaber. And if the Jedi just once blocks a Sith attack which they would obviously need to do they would be hammered into the ground by the pure power of the blow. The Jedi would also not be able to push the Sith Sword back up and stop the saberlock, giving the Sith a huge advantage in the fight.

Illustrious
WTF? You are trying to argue which weapon is better universally? So you are assuming that every individual would use it the same.

A lightsaber would be virtually useless with a nonforce sensitive. Put him in battle, and he'd get pwned by blaster fire. With a force sensitive it is more effective.

See? Different circumstances result in different preferences. The Sith would prefer a Sith Sword. Arguing "which is ze more powerful" is pointless.



This is quite laughable. I have far more experience in physics than you do, I can almost guarantee.

Unless your point of victory is trying to tire out your opponent, it has little relevance. Someone like Sadow, Kressh, or Ragnos had no problem wielding a sword and did not look like they got tired from its use.

You're simply arguing parameters that have no practical application. For a sith that's used to sith magic, alchemy, and enchanted weapons, then clearly a sith sword is better.

Numan
How about you give me them one at a time. I have to go to bed in like ten minutes. I don't have time to answer to 100 different things.

Fishy
And to add on that last point, Ajunta Pall could use a Sith blade. Revan could use the same blade. Tavion could use Ragnos his sceptre + blade...

The weight may be higher then that of a Lightsaber a lot higher then that of a lightsaber but if it doesn't tire people like them out quickly what chance would it have of quickly tiring out people like Ragnos?

If anything it would tire out the Jedi who would need to put far more physical strength which he does not have at least not on the level of Ragnos into blocking the attacks.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
How about you give me them one at a time. I have to go to bed in like ten minutes. I don't have time to answer to 100 different things.

You should have thought of that when you first posted it... Why don't you just answer them all in one big post, and if you can't finish the post then save it in a notepad file and finish it tomorrow.

Illustrious
You're the one not understanding physics Numan.

In order for someone to BLOCK a blow, they have to expend the energy to produce the force necessary to decelerate the weapon.

Now a heavier, stronger weapon with a counterbalance that is easier to swing will have far greater force than a light weapon that's got all its mass in the hilt. Basic rotational mechanics will tell you that while the force it takes to wield a heavier weapon is greater, the force output makes up for it, easily.

In order for the Jedi to repel an attack with a Sith Sword, it would take far more energy than with another lightsaber. The result is that the Jedi would also get tired.

Yes, if we are in a marathon to see who can swing around their weapon the longest, the lightsaber is superior. But for practical application: no, it is not.

Numan
Illustrious you have not only proved nothing in terms of a sith sword being more powerful than a lightsaber but you have selectively quoted what I have said to your advantage and have ignored things I have already said that counteract what you are saying. You also don't seem to get the point of the argument. We were originally arguing about how Tualk would do (with a saber) against Ragnos or Ludo (with sith sword). Non force-sensetives are not involved.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
Illustrious you have not only proved nothing in terms of a sith sword being more powerful than a lightsaber but you have selectively quoted what I have said to your advantage and have ignored things I have already said that counteract what you are saying. You also don't seem to get the point of the argument. We were originally arguing about how Tualk would do (with a saber) against Ragnos or Ludo (with sith sword). Non force-sensetives are not involved.

No what you were claiming is that people like Ragnos would do better with a Lightsaber, which is flawed...

You also haven't made one good point yet, I quoted everything you said on the third page, when you offered to expand on your posts. Everything because nothing made a point.

What you said was that a Lightsaber in all cases was superior to a Sith Sword. I started argueing it was not because Sith used Sith Swords and gave reasons. You haven't given a single reason as to why they would preform better with a lightsaber... Not one, except for "The lightsaber is more powerful it r0xx0rz"

Start bringing in some real points or just admit defeat.

Numan
Originally posted by Illustrious
You're the one not understanding physics Numan.

In order for someone to BLOCK a blow, they have to expend the energy to produce the force necessary to decelerate the weapon.

Now a heavier, stronger weapon with a counterbalance that is easier to swing will have far greater force than a light weapon that's got all its mass in the hilt. Basic rotational mechanics will tell you that while the force it takes to wield a heavier weapon is greater, the force output makes up for it, easily.

In order for the Jedi to repel an attack with a Sith Sword, it would take far more energy than with another lightsaber. The result is that the Jedi would also get tired.

Yes, if we are in a marathon to see who can swing around their weapon the longest, the lightsaber is superior. But for practical application: no, it is not.

That is completely wrong and I suggest you take Physics class again because you need it. A sword with the magority of the weight in its blade would be harder to swing than one with the weight in its hilt. It's common sense.

Illustrious
Originally posted by Numan
Illustrious you have not only proved nothing in terms of a sith sword being more powerful than a lightsaber but you have selectively quoted what I have said to your advantage and have ignored things I have already said that counteract what you are saying. You also don't seem to get the point of the argument. We were originally arguing about how Tualk would do (with a saber) against Ragnos or Ludo (with sith sword). Non force-sensetives are not involved.

When have I selectively quoted? I've quoted your ENTIRE post. Meanwhile, you did this:



Who's selectively quoting? Begins with a N and ends with a uman.

It's not my fault you aren't understanding basic physics. Rotational mechanics indicate the force is far greater from a swing with a sword with a counterbalance than a lightsaber.

The use of the nonforce sensitive was an analogy to point out how flawed your argument was. The situation is different, just like Fishy mentioned. Ragnos and Sadow would obviously prefer a sith sword, a small, relatively weak (physically, not in the force) force user like Yoda would obviously go for the lightsaber.

It is not universal.

Tulak with a saber will not fare well aganst Ragnos because Ragnos is physically strong enough to wield a blade rather effortlessly. Tavion, who is much weaker, can do it!

Then you have to add the counterbalance and the rotational mechanics. Tulak will have to spend a lot of energy trying to parry and defend against the blows. Then add in the sith enchantments + sith magic and possible poison, and the game is all be wrapped up.

Like I said, unless you're arguing that getting cleaved in two with a sword is fundamentally different than getting cleaved in two with a lightsaber, there's no argument there.

Numan
Ok whatever, goodnight. We'll continue this tommorow.

Fishy
Yay smile More chances of constantly repeating myself tomorrow, I can't wait stick out tongue

Illustrious
Originally posted by Numan
That is completely wrong and I suggest you take Physics class again because you need it. A sword with the magority of the weight in its blade would be harder to swing than one with the weight in its hilt. It's common sense.

No shit. I already said that if you took the same guy and put him in a marathon of just swinging a weapon, the lightsaber would win. In combat, it's not true.

But unless your arguing that Ragnos would have difficulty swinging a sword, your point is moot.

And guess what? You didn't address any of my points, you just went back to going "no I'm right, you're wrong."

What a hypocrite.

It's not wrong. Rotational mechanics. The torque is greater with the mass centered further from the axis of rotation. More torque = more force, more force means it takes more force to STOP. Got it? It's not up to me to break it down into laymen's terms so you can understand.

You know about as much physics as my dog. Don't bother arguing with that point.

Fishy
Originally posted by Illustrious
No shit. I already said that if you took the same guy and put him in a marathon of just swinging a weapon, the lightsaber would win. In combat, it's not true. And guess what? You didn't address any of my points, you just went back to going "no I'm right, you're wrong."

What a hypocrite.

But unless your arguing that Ragnos would have difficulty swinging a sword, your point is moot.

It's not wrong. Rotational mechanics. The torque is greater with the mass centered further from the axis of rotation. More torque = more force, more force means it takes more force to STOP. Got it? It's not up to me to break it down into laymen's terms so you can understand.

You know about as much physics as my dog. Don't bother arguing with that point.

Your dog is pretty smart for a dog then... To bad we still haven't found an animal that could think logically...

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Yay smile More chances of constantly repeating myself tomorrow, I can't wait stick out tongue

No need to turn nasty. I have already said that there are no hard feelings and that you are a worth opponent in terms of debating. We'll just continue this tomorrow but in the meantime maybe you could reread everything I have said and you will find the answers there.

Lord Darkstar
I just finished reading this entire thread and I must say that I found none of the answers that you claim are there

Btw, well done Fishy and Illustrious

Dark Aristokrat
I second that.

xxxpoppunker182
k well i've only actually read up half of page 4 but if the converstaion kept goin on how it was then i didn't really need to. but numan let me try and explain to you what they've been sayin

think of a lightsaber k and how powerful it is

k now imagin a sword that threw DIVINE INFLUENCE we'll say made the sword more powerful than the lightsaber you follow? basically saying you have a lightsaber and a sword but God makes the sword exactly as powerful and everything as the lightsaber even weight. the sith COULD do that ok but ontop of that were able to enhance the blade to become even more powerful. does that make sense?

and then with the entire wieght does not equal power thing he isnt saying that because it ways more it is more powerful. so lets try a scenairo

k lets say you are impervious to pain so you can't phycically get hurt.
now you and i are hangin out and i have a styrofoam club with me and a metal club with me. Now lets state that the styrofoam club and the metal club are exactly the same other than the material they're made out of.i hit you as hard as i can with the styrofoam club and you didn't feel anypain and nothing really happened. now i hit you with the metal club you didn't feel anypain but it would make you stumble. why would you stumble you're probably thinking. the mass of the metal club is enough to physically move you from where you are standing. and the mass of the styrofoam club isn't great enough to move you. does that make sense?

Dark Aristokrat
No, because you need to type slower, proofread, and use commas and periods better.

Numan
Saying that the sith were able to make their swords more powerful than lightsabers is just a guess.

Numan
Lightsabers were extremely powerful. They could cut through hard metal doors, it is extremely dangerous to touch the blade of a lightsaber and hardly any weapons can stand up against them. The sith sword was also made extremely powerful through sith magic and alchemy and I am not saying that it can't stand up to a lightsaber, it definitely can. But is it as powerful? It has given no evidence at all of it being more powerful. There are no examples of a sith sword having power quite like the power of the lightsaber shown earlier in my post. And I know this is quite off the topic of what is more powerful but there is no evidence to show sith swords can even block blaster fire (in issue #3 of the Golden Age of The Sith, Sadow and his crew of Massassi were able to kill many sith with blasters found on Starbreaker 12). If anything the dark side augmentations of electricity etc. show that the sword must be incredibly powerful but still not more powerful than a lightsaber. So overall in terms of power I would say that the lightsabers win.



In reply to Fishy saying that the sith as a species were physically stronger than the jedi, there is no proof of this. The exiled jedi were able to settle on Korriban and make the primitive sith slaves. Ajunta Pall, a human was able to wield arguably the most powerful sith sword there was (until the dark side power of the sword overwhelmed him). Looking at the comics they don't look much stronger than humans (in the TOTJ comic, when Sadow is going through the ritual of becoming dark lord of the sith, he screams in agony as he is bitten by those scorpion/bugs). So seeing as there is no proof for the sith species being physically stronger, there is no proof that the sith as a species would be useless with lightsabers.

The lightsaber was also less energy consuming. The hilt hardly weighed much and the blade nothing at all. Because of this the lightsaber would be extremely easy to carry (if needed to be drawn quickly it could) and easy to use. The sith sword would be extremely hard to use on the other hand. The weight of the sword does not give it as much power as

Numan
the lightsaber and would be extremely tiring to use, even for the sith who have not yet been proven to be physically stronger than humans. It would also be really awkward to carry. And in reply to illustrious, the fact that most of the weight is concentrated in the blade would make it even harder to swing with as the center of mass would be farther away from the pivot.

So to recap the lightsaber is stronger, less energy consuming and better than the sith sword in every way. I have provided enough proof for this and have evaluated everything that I have said. If I missed something just say so, because I probably did.

Numan
Originally posted by Illustrious
No shit. I already said that if you took the same guy and put him in a marathon of just swinging a weapon, the lightsaber would win. In combat, it's not true.

But unless your arguing that Ragnos would have difficulty swinging a sword, your point is moot.

And guess what? You didn't address any of my points, you just went back to going "no I'm right, you're wrong."

What a hypocrite.

It's not wrong. Rotational mechanics. The torque is greater with the mass centered further from the axis of rotation. More torque = more force, more force means it takes more force to STOP. Got it? It's not up to me to break it down into laymen's terms so you can understand.

You know about as much physics as my dog. Don't bother arguing with that point.

That use of Science simple doesn't work in this case because the lightsaber completely goes against science. There is no material on Earth that is similar to the beam of the lightsaber. You need to think deeper into the subject Illustrious. Why is the torque greater when the mass is further away from the pivot? It is all to do with power. The lightsaber may be lacking weight and the centre of mass might be in the hilt, but the power of the lightsaber is all stored up in the blade. The lightsaber is basically the perfect weapon. The centre of mass is close to the pivot, enabling faster swings and yet the power is focused in the blade. The reason that the reasoning you used works for the sith sword is because the power in the sword comes from the blade and so it is logical that if the centre of mass is further away from the pivot, the greater the torque is but in a lightsaber, the power comes from the energy beam which weighs nothing so though the centre of mass is

Numan
closer to the pivot, the source of the power is in the blade, ergo the source of power is furthur from the pivot, and so the torque is furthur increased. Sorry about the multiple posts BTW. I think these 5 posts cover the issue.

Fishy
Can you just not see that in the hands of a Sith Lord of tremendous physical strength a sith sword that does weigh something but not a lot when used by them would give them an edge? They are hitting a Jedi with something heavy the Jedi will have to put more power into blocking the attack. The Sith attacker however would not exhaust himself by attacking because 1.) He'll be used to it 2.) his physical strength allows him to do shit like that for hours.

Making the Sith sword more effective, again you haven't really answered any of our points you just made statements.

Numan
You still haven't proved that the species sith are stronger than humans yet BTW. And jedi are used to lightsabers, yet they still get tired during a duel.

Numan
"Making the Sith sword more effective, again you haven't really answered any of our points you just made statements."

Look at my 2 posts above. They are in reply to Illustrious' argument which is the most valid out of all of the arguments for a sith sword.

Fishy
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/98/Marka_Ragnos_01.jpg/430px-Marka_Ragnos_01.jpg

http://www.swg1.net/encyclo/images/naga_sadow.jpg

Just look at that..

And then Kreia her quote

"Of incredibly strength both physically and in the force" - When talking about Ragnos...

Numan
But they were probably the most physically strong in the whole of the sith order at the time. Look at the sith slaves for instance.

Numan
BTW Fishy do you think we should make this a thread in the Lit. forum because people probably want to discuss Hord v. Yoda.

Fishy
Why we will just lose half the discussion...

And what slaves? The massassi they weren't Sith, other Sith were also stronger then normal humans. and the blades they wielded could be used by normal humans so its not like the weight is enormous either.

Numan
How do you load up those pictures? Then I can show you.

Dark Aristokrat
Ludo Kressh took a sword wider than his body and broke it with his bare hands. Illustrious posted the pic on another thread around here.

Numan
Actually he smashed the sword against a table and it crumbled. That in fact shows that the sword was not powerful enough to cut into the table. Thanks for that Janus.

Dark Aristokrat
Originally posted by Numan
Actually he smashed the sword against a table and it crumbled. That in fact shows that the sword was not powerful enough to cut into the table. Thanks for that Janus.

You're about to get pwned, smartass.

First off, Sith Swords are enchanted, as shown here:

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/1598/sithswordenergy3lv.jpg

And that's Random Mook's sword, too. That's not the DLOS type blade. Ragnos, Ludo, and Naga Sadow's blades were twice as thick as that and half again times as long.

Second, here's Random Massassi Mook X shanking the hell out of a Hutt with ease. In case you aren't familiar with how hard and thick Hutt skin is, in the Han Solo trilogy we learn that people can't effectively use most blasters on them.

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/9823/huttbeingstabbed5vv.jpg

Third, Sith blades and lightsabers are shown clashing here. Note the relative ease with which the Sith warrior blocks the Jedi's overhand hammer blow.

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/3908/sithsaberclash1nm.jpg


And lastly, the coup de grace, here's Ludo breaking the Sith sword on the table as you suggested. So apparently that table is stronger than a lightsaber and is possible made of cortosis or special ore. Your point? Are you going to argue that Sith swords are weaker than lightsabers even though they are clearly shown to contend with lightsabers? By your logic, that table is the mightiest weapon in the land.

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/5989/swordbreak7gg.jpg

Numan
First of all I wasn't trying to be a smartass and I wasn't in any way taking the piss out of you. Don't take what I said in the wrong way. But common now. You didn't just pwn me and I'm sure you could on many occasions but I was't actually trying to mock you so don't call me a smartass.

Numan
"First off, Sith Swords are enchanted, as shown here:"

I know that they are enchanted, I was saying earlier that the enchantments were nothing special and didn't make the swords better than sabers.

"And that's Random Mook's sword, too. That's not the DLOS type blade. Ragnos, Ludo, and Naga Sadow's blades were twice as thick as that and half again times as long."

They were actually the same size. Someone else scanned a picture of Sadow with his sword earlier. They are clearly around the same size.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
First of all I wasn't trying to be a smartass and I wasn't in any way taking the piss out of you. Don't take what I said in the wrong way. But common now. You didn't just pwn me and I'm sure you could on many occasions but I was't actually trying to mock you so don't call me a smartass.

Well everybody in this thread pwned you... Because you have no foot to stand on.

Even if you would ignore science then it would be a very simple thing to say that.

Sith knew about lightsabers
A lot of them had the chance to use lightsabers
They prefered Swords
If lightsabers were trully that much better they would have used lightsabers.
Ergo, lightsabers aren't better.

They can be depending on who uses them, just like Sith swords can be better depending on who uses them. Ignore everything else and just think logiclaly about the Sith and you should realise that, what I just said is true. When you realise that read the rest of the thread again and just admit defeat.

Numan
"Third, Sith blades and lightsabers are shown clashing here. Note the relative ease with which the Sith warrior blocks the Jedi's overhand hammer blow."

Don't confuse how great the Sith are with how great the sith swords are. If they are overwhelming the jedi, it is because the particular sith are better than the jedi shown.

Dark Aristokrat
Originally posted by Numan
First of all I wasn't trying to be a smartass and I wasn't in any way taking the piss out of you. Don't take what I said in the wrong way. But common now. You didn't just pwn me and I'm sure you could on many occasions but I was't actually trying to mock you so don't call me a smartass.
Well, the "thanks for that one Janus" did not strike me as a compliment, so naturally I was not thrilled with you. But whatever. Neither here nor there. And no, the swords are not the same size. I have to get some work done, but in about 35 mins I can scan you a pic. They're vastly different. And the main point is that Sith warriors used Sith blades all of their long lives, and the blades ARE shown to be able to withstand direct hits from lightsabers. So the point about the table is moot. If anything, you should be impressed with Ludo's physical strength to shatter a blade that can withstand a direct hit from a lightsaber.

Numan
We have different opinions Fishy. But don't make the debate personal. I have now answered to everything said to me, so if you say that I haven't than you are just wrong.


"Sith knew about lightsabers
A lot of them had the chance to use lightsabers
They prefered Swords
If lightsabers were trully that much better they would have used lightsabers.
Ergo, lightsabers aren't better."

That is a terrible argument. There could be many reasons why they used swords over lightsabers.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
"Third, Sith blades and lightsabers are shown clashing here. Note the relative ease with which the Sith warrior blocks the Jedi's overhand hammer blow."

Don't confuse how great the Sith are with how great the sith swords are. If they are overwhelming the jedi, it is because the particular sith are better than the jedi shown.

Prove? For all we know the Jedi won the battle.. We see a sith sword blocking a Jedi Lightsaber. Thats what we see, thats what we know.

Numan
Originally posted by Dark Aristokrat
Well, the "thanks for that one Janus" did not strike me as a compliment, so naturally I was not thrilled with you. But whatever. Neither here nor there. And no, the swords are not the same size. I have to get some work done, but in about 35 mins I can scan you a pic. They're vastly different. And the main point is that Sith warriors used Sith blades all of their long lives, and the blades ARE shown to be able to withstand direct hits from lightsabers. So the point about the table is moot. If anything, you should be impressed with Ludo's physical strength to shatter a blade that can withstand a direct hit from a lightsaber.

I wasn't complimenting you or taking the piss out of you. My point isn't really moot. I'm sure if the material of the table was completely replaced by a lightsaber beam constructed in the same shape and the same size, the sword would shatter. It doesn't disprove my point at all. that picture just shows that lightsabers are stronger than sith swords. It is unlikely that the table was made out of a material that a lightsaber couldn't cut through.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
We have different opinions Fishy. But don't make the debate personal. I have now answered to everything said to me, so if you say that I haven't than you are just wrong.


"Sith knew about lightsabers
A lot of them had the chance to use lightsabers
They prefered Swords
If lightsabers were trully that much better they would have used lightsabers.
Ergo, lightsabers aren't better."

That is a terrible argument. There could be many reasons why they used swords over lightsabers.

Many?

Name five... thats not a lot

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Prove? For all we know the Jedi won the battle.. We see a sith sword blocking a Jedi Lightsaber. Thats what we see, thats what we know.

Yes that is all we know but that doesn't mean that the only interpretation that we can come up with is that the swords are stronger than lightsabers. If you want to prove that, then you have to prove that it wasn't just due to the fact that the sith was actually more powerfulthan the jedi.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
Yes that is all we know but that doesn't mean that the only interpretation that we can come up with is that the swords are stronger than lightsabers. If you want to prove that, then you have to prove that it wasn't just due to the fact that the sith was actually more powerfulthan the jedi.

I'm not saying more powerful i'm saying more powerful in the hands of a Sith compared to a lightsaber. Lightsabers are more powerful in the hands of most man and things like Yoda.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Many?

Name five... thats not a lot

It is debatable whether they knew how to construct lightsabers, it is likely that the sith philosophy taught them about sith alchemy and so it was the natural choice. It is true that the sith could have perceived them being stronger than lightsabers but than again the sith aren't the smartest race in the galaxy. That reason is good enough.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
I'm not saying more powerful i'm saying more powerful in the hands of a Sith compared to a lightsaber. Lightsabers are more powerful in the hands of most man and things like Yoda.

You still haven't proven that sith swords were better for sith than lightsabers. I clearly understand your point but you have not supported it with reasons that I have not basically disproved.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
You still haven't proven that sith swords were better for sith than lightsabers. I clearly understand your point but you have not supported it with reasons that I have not basically disproved.

Like you disproved my arguments on the third and fourth page? BTW: You still have an entire page of posts to expand on...

And like already said a thousand times when a powerful Sith puts his weight into an attack with a heavy weapon its going to hurt more then a weightless weapon and swining the thing around isn't going to be to much trouble for them...

Now again, many reasons name 5.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
It is debatable whether they knew how to construct lightsabers, it is likely that the sith philosophy taught them about sith alchemy and so it was the natural choice. It is true that the sith could have perceived them being stronger than lightsabers but than again the sith aren't the smartest race in the galaxy. That reason is good enough.

Oh Ragnos is an idiot now? Sadow? Kressh? Have you seen what those guys created, build supported ruled? Doubtable that they even knew about lightsabers... You know the guy who'se name is in the title of this topic... Tulak Hord.. He knew how to use a lightsaber. You know why this entire debate started? Because he lived in a time when there were lightsaber wielders and Sith Sword users...

Its not doubtable the Sith knew about lightsabers, its a proven and established fact and they still prefered swords.

Numan
You still nedd to think? Why does a heavy weapon make it so powerful? Answer the question and I will explain the rest to you.

Fishy
Because you can put more weight in the attack, more weight equals more pressure and a harder blast. Its harder to block an attack like that. Now answer the questions instead of just saying i'm not.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Oh Ragnos is an idiot now? Sadow? Kressh? Have you seen what those guys created, build supported ruled? Doubtable that they even knew about lightsabers... You know the guy who'se name is in the title of this topic... Tulak Hord.. He knew how to use a lightsaber. You know why this entire debate started? Because he lived in a time when there were lightsaber wielders and Sith Sword users...

Its not doubtable the Sith knew about lightsabers, its a proven and established fact and they still prefered swords.

Reread what I said. It is debatable whether the sith knew how to CONSRUCT a lightsaber. Tulak's saber could have simply been passed down frm the last dark lord.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
Reread what I said. It is debatable whether the sith knew how to CONSRUCT a lightsaber. Tulak's saber could have simply been passed down frm the last dark lord.

Fine, just start answering questions from now on and start debating...

Ajunta Pall knew how to use a lightsaber he used to be a Jedi, Jedi knew lightsabers. He knew how to create them yet he prefered a Sith Sword.

Tulak Hord became the best lightsaber wielder in that era, and lightsaber users could make lightsaber users of later era's look like children playing with toys. Thats more then one... Also are you honestly saying that a civilization that could create star ships that could travel through all of space would be stupid enough not to be able to analyze one lightsaber (that they would have had other information about) and then re-create it. If you want to argue that Tulak did not want to give the knowledge away it still wouldn't explain why they didn't use lightsabers after his dead...

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Because you can put more weight in the attack, more weight equals more pressure and a harder blast. Its harder to block an attack like that. Now answer the questions instead of just saying i'm not.

So basically for the power that it can produce. It is power that is vital. In this case the weight produces the power. Now think about the beam of the lightsaber. It is completely weightless but yet provides the vital thing needed. Power. You are going nowhere with this argument about what weighs more.

Numan
Sometimes it is just a matter of preferance. He was clearly interested in Sith Alchemy and excelled at it. That does not mean it was better.

"Tulak Hord became the best lightsaber wielder in that era, and lightsaber users could make lightsaber users of later era's look like children playing with toys. Thats more then one... "

More than one what?

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
So basically for the power that it can produce. It is power that is vital. In this case the weight produces the power. Now think about the beam of the lightsaber. It is completely weightless but yet provides the vital thing needed. Power. You are going nowhere with this argument about what weighs more.

Are you honestly saying that hitting somebody thats blocking your attack with a lightsaber is going to hurt as much as when you do it with a sith sword?

Imagine Dooku old and physically weak. He could stand up at least for a small time against some of the greatest ligthsaber users ever. Now imagine that lightsaber user being an equally great fighter only with a Sith Sword. Dooku would be pulverized into the ground because he wouldn't have the strength to keep blocking the attacks.

Dark Aristokrat
Originally posted by Numan
I wasn't complimenting you or taking the piss out of you. My point isn't really moot. I'm sure if the material of the table was completely replaced by a lightsaber beam constructed in the same shape and the same size, the sword would shatter. It doesn't disprove my point at all. that picture just shows that lightsabers are stronger than sith swords. It is unlikely that the table was made out of a material that a lightsaber couldn't cut through.
...

No, it DOESN'T show that lightsabers are stronger than sith swords, since the other picture CLEARLY shows that a strong overhand chop from a lightsaber using BOTH hands didn't cleave the Sith/massassi's blade. Now, the only idea that makes any sense with Ludo is that either he A ) was wearing a ceremonial sword at the time which is weaker and not meant for battle, or B ) the table was strong as shit. And considering that Sith blades shown in KOTOR and elsewhere are also noted for being lightsaber resistant, your point falls apart.



WTF? Are you not with it or something? If I have a large heavy sword, like this one:

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/4268/nagablade9hi.jpg

It's going to straight up **** you up. I don't know where you get the idea that a weightless lightsaber blade is better than a heavy, mean ass sith blade.

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/8540/sithblades4kj.jpg

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
Are you honestly saying that hitting somebody thats blocking your attack with a lightsaber is going to hurt as much as when you do it with a sith sword?

Imagine Dooku old and physically weak. He could stand up at least for a small time against some of the greatest ligthsaber users ever. Now imagine that lightsaber user being an equally great fighter only with a Sith Sword. Dooku would be pulverized into the ground because he wouldn't have the strength to keep blocking the attacks.

That is completely wrong. I have numerously proved that sabers are more powerful, therefor they would be harder to block.

Numan
"No, it DOESN'T show that lightsabers are stronger than sith swords, since the other picture CLEARLY shows that a strong overhand chop from a lightsaber using BOTH hands didn't cleave the Sith/massassi's blade. Now, the only idea that makes any sense with Ludo is that either he A ) was wearing a ceremonial sword at the time which is weaker and not meant for battle, or B ) the table was strong as shit. And considering that Sith blades shown in KOTOR and elsewhere are also noted for being lightsaber resistant, your point falls apart. "


That is completely wrong. The picture goes to show that sith swords are lightsaber resistant but does not show that they are more powerful, and the picture of ludo smashing his sword against the table shows that they can't be as strong as sabers as sabers can cut through pretty much every material, and for the ones it can't, it doesn't mean it would crumble on impact.

Numan
"WTF? Are you not with it or something? If I have a large heavy sword, like this one:
It's going to straight up **** you up. I don't know where you get the idea that a weightless lightsaber blade is better than a heavy, mean ass sith blade. "

You keep on assuming that weight is the only source of power. Think back to why the heavy blade would xxxx me up. It is to do with how powerful it is. The lightsaber is clearly more powerful so your point on it being weightless is moot. You just can't handle being wrong.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
That is completely wrong. I have numerously proved that sabers are more powerful, therefor they would be harder to block.

No you haven't, you only made statements no proof. I haven't seen one single piece of evidence. PROVE UP.

When you asked me if I could show you all the points you didn't expand on I gave you an entire page, all your posts on that page to expand, all those posts on that page had no meaning to the debate they were just useless statements.

What you are doing here is saying lightsabers are more powreful, and then you ask us to prove that Sith Swords can be more powerful. When we do you say we haven't proven anything yet and that your evidence is superior, when you haven't shown any.

Numan
Originally posted by Fishy
No you haven't, you only made statements no proof. I haven't seen one single piece of evidence. PROVE UP.

When you asked me if I could show you all the points you didn't expand on I gave you an entire page, all your posts on that page to expand, all those posts on that page had no meaning to the debate they were just useless statements.

What you are doing here is saying lightsabers are more powreful, and then you ask us to prove that Sith Swords can be more powerful. When we do you say we haven't proven anything yet and that your evidence is superior, when you haven't shown any.

I have given more and more logical info than you or aristokrat have. You need to prove up because hardly anything you have said has made sense and been valid. You dn't prove that sith swords are more powerful. You try to and then I prove how what you say is wrong.

Fishy
Originally posted by Numan
I have given more and more logical info than you or aristokrat have. You need to prove up because hardly anything you have said has made sense and been valid. You dn't prove that sith swords are more powerful. You try to and then I prove how what you say is wrong.

If you have then go through the thread again... Just go through it, read the post where I posted all the shit you still have to answer and then answer it.

After that make a list of every piece of evidence you have given... I promise you the second part of your post will be nihil.

Numan
Give me a piece of evidence in favour of swords that I have not proven wrong.

Fishy
Read the thread pick a random post. And stop asking us to do everything when you haven't done shit yet. All you have done for the last page or 3 is making statements and asking us to prove up when you haven't done so yourself. You start proving things.

IKC
Okay, that's enough.

Here's a real life demonstration: Get Mr. Universe Arnold Schwarzenegger and give him a freaking claymore (read: greatsword. About as tall as he is and reasonably wide)

Then, get a midget with a rapier. Have Arnold swing the claymore at the midget with the rapier and watch as the rapier breaks like a twig (at worst) or falls into the midget (at best) along with the greatsword. Midget is promptly cleaved in two, Arnold wins.

Mass matters.

Fishy
Originally posted by IKC
Okay, that's enough.

Here's a real life demonstration: Get Mr. Universe Arnold Schwarzenegger and give him a freaking claymore (read: greatsword. About as tall as he is and reasonably wide)

Then, get a midget with a rapier. Have Arnold swing the claymore at the midget with the rapier and watch as the rapier breaks like a twig (at worst) or falls into the midget (at best) along with the greatsword. Midget is promptly cleaved in two, Arnold wins.

Mass matters.

I've already said that a dozen times, prepare to be ignored.

Numan
Originally posted by Illustrious
No shit. I already said that if you took the same guy and put him in a marathon of just swinging a weapon, the lightsaber would win. In combat, it's not true.

But unless your arguing that Ragnos would have difficulty swinging a sword, your point is moot.

And guess what? You didn't address any of my points, you just went back to going "no I'm right, you're wrong."

What a hypocrite.

It's not wrong. Rotational mechanics. The torque is greater with the mass centered further from the axis of rotation. More torque = more force, more force means it takes more force to STOP. Got it? It's not up to me to break it down into laymen's terms so you can understand.

You know about as much physics as my dog. Don't bother arguing with that point.

That use of Science simple doesn't work in this case because the lightsaber completely goes against science. There is no material on Earth that is similar to the beam of the lightsaber. You need to think deeper into the subject Illustrious. Why is the torque greater when the mass is further away from the pivot? It is all to do with power. The lightsaber may be lacking weight and the centre of mass might be in the hilt, but the power of the lightsaber is all stored up in the blade. The lightsaber is basically the perfect weapon. The centre of mass is close to the pivot, enabling faster swings and yet the power is focused in the blade. The reason that the reasoning you used works for the sith sword is because the power in the sword comes from the blade and so it is logical that if the centre of mass is further away from the pivot, the greater the torque is but in a lightsaber, the power comes from the energy beam which weighs nothing so though the centre of mass is

Numan
closer to the pivot, the source of the power is in the blade, ergo the source of power is furthur from the pivot, and so the torque is furthur increased. Sorry about the multiple posts BTW. I think these 5 posts cover the issue.



Try proving this wrong.

Numan
Originally posted by IKC
Okay, that's enough.

Here's a real life demonstration: Get Mr. Universe Arnold Schwarzenegger and give him a freaking claymore (read: greatsword. About as tall as he is and reasonably wide)

Then, get a midget with a rapier. Have Arnold swing the claymore at the midget with the rapier and watch as the rapier breaks like a twig (at worst) or falls into the midget (at best) along with the greatsword. Midget is promptly cleaved in two, Arnold wins.

Mass matters.

Mass matters in this case to provide power. The heavier it is, the more powerful. But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue.

Dark Aristokrat
Originally posted by Numan


No, it isn't completely wrong. You're completely wrong. Your brain doesn't want to wrap around the idea that Sith Lords can contend with lightsaber users.

First off, lightsabers can't cut through Sith swords. It's SW EU fact. You are not overriding this with your opinion. So if lightsabers can't cut through sith swords, how can you say sith swords are weaker?

You can't.

Ludo breaking his blade on the table isn't evidence of sith blade weakness; it's evidence of his strength and the strength of the table. Naturally, a lightsaber can't shatter, but likely it could not pass through the table either. And since there ARE metals and materials in the Sith empire which lightsabers cannot penetrate (Case in point, their blades) I can imagine the idea of the table being -very- strong and resistant to damage. If it was just a stone table, Ludo would have likely crumbled that side of it considering how hard he hit it with a solid object.

Dark Aristokrat
Originally posted by Numan
Mass matters in this case to provide power. The heavier it is, the more powerful. But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue.

WTF? It's the Force BEHIND the goddamn blade compounded with the weight of the blade against a lightsaber which has ONLY weight in the handle and being held by someone who's physically smaller!

Are you that damn ignorant of how things work?

Numan
"First off, lightsabers can't cut through Sith swords. It's SW EU fact. You are not overriding this with your opinion. So if lightsabers can't cut through sith swords, how can you say sith swords are weaker?"

My baseball bat is stronger than my btother's cricket bat. It can't cut through it.

Dark Aristokrat
...

You really are off your rocker.

IKC
Please, remove your asshat before posting again. You clearly don't know what the hell I mean by power.

By power, I mean the force with which the man can swing his blade. His power is increased because of the simple fact that he is swinging a heavier object. I never claimed a freaking lightsaber would break, such would be ridiculous. However, it will be driven into the wielder's body if they try to block such an attack.

Numan
Originally posted by Dark Aristokrat
WTF? It's the Force BEHIND the goddamn blade compounded with the weight of the blade against a lightsaber which has ONLY weight in the handle and being held by someone who's physically smaller!

Are you that damn ignorant of how things work?

Mass matters in this case to provide power. The heavier it is, the more powerful. But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue. As I have said countless times before.

Fishy
So lets put your brothers cricket bat in the hand of a 3 month year old baby and then give you a basebal bat. If you would hit the cricket bat with the basebal bat it might not break its still going to be pushed down because of the power, and the power of the baby would never be able to push the basebal bat back up as long as you are still wielding it.

Numan
Just face it Aristokrat. You have lost this debate. Be a man and admit it so we can wrap things up and go on to another debate.

Fishy
Face it? You haven't made one single point... Not One, you are ignoring the power of a human body and the strength they could put into an attack. Numan I hate to say this to people, but really you are an idiot. Even now after I have called you on it a Billion times you refuse to list your points, you refuse to directly debate our points instead you just make statements...

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>