Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Every Sith and Jedi have a war on Dantooine.
Now who will win?

thats kinda hard some some were both. So does it mean that both sides have that individual? Like two Dookus, two Anakins, Revans so on and so forth? If so, I say Jedi. Revan, all the others and a good Anakin and Vader (as he did turn good in ROTJ), they'd be almost unstoppable.

Sith, if the ancient Sith are included

Yes, 2 Revans and 2 Anakins.
And There will be a hard battle even if the ancient sith were in it.
Think about it.
Mass chaos.
Sneak attacks every where.
And Marka would just get beaten by Jaden all over again.

There's too many factors in this one.

And it's said that the second time Revan was far more powerful than his Sith self, so he'd own himself (wow that sounds funny), plus his pre sith self...a Jedi Anakin and Jedi Vader ('i just mean the suited version, i know hes no longer Vader once not with the Sith anymore) Plus the highest version of Luke, both Jedi Councils. It'd be tough, but the Jedi take it.

Marka would get beaten by Jaden? Oh you mean his spirit in a weak dark jedi apprentice's body.. Riiiiight

The Jedi don't have a chance, the Ancient Sith (and those who learned from them) assure it.

1. This has been done before

2. There are too many variables to decide the fate of this battle

3. The real Ragnos would wtfpwn Jaden with one finger or less.

Shouldn't the Jedi outnumber "Sith"?

After Bane there could have only been 2 Sith at a time, for a thousand years.

So the Jedi pretty much have 1000 years worth more dudes.

Correction. That was the rule of the new sith, which doesn't mean there were only 2. For all you know there could have been hundreds, even thousands in hiding or with the brotherhood of darkness

Yep, gotta point on the Sith outnumbering the Jedi.
And it's great to vision this battle.

Like I said, the ancient sith would be the x factors in this battle. Ragnos, Kressh, Sadow and Simus, along with other ancient sith lords would wtfpwn the Jedi. I wish we knew more about the original dark jedi because my guess is they're uber powerful too.

Well yeah, Sith in the last 1000 years (New Sith).

Unless you include Dark Jedi. Then it really gets ugly.

Originally posted by tdtd
Correction. That was the rule of the new sith, which doesn't mean there were only 2. For all you know there could have been hundreds, even thousands in hiding or with the brotherhood of darkness

No. It is made perfectly clear that Darth Bane is the last of his kind after the Brotherhood of Darkness activated the though bomb.

Other than Bane and his follow Rule, there were no other Sith.

Where is this written

George Lucas' brain, obviously enough. And all the lines where the Jedi go 'z0mg! the Sith are back?!'

The Sith are too power-hungry to go and hide when faced with extinction. That's what the Jedi do.

Also, it says somewhere that the Brotherhood of Darkness has faced massive defeats and all of their warriors have been pushed to Ruusan (not in the comic, elsewhere). Since Bane and Zannah are the only ones (Sithwise) to survive the thought bomb, safe to say that there are no others.

perhaps

It's a pretty solid definitely.

Well the ancient sith are ancient for a reason.... there HAD to be equally powerful Jedi inorder to evade that sith ruling era.

Not to mention that the Jedi came first, for however many centuries and millenia that was.

The Sith are heavily outnumbered.

Yea but the Sith aren't restricted to anything while the Jedi are in terms of moving to the dark side so the Sith have more effective force powers to unleash.

...so? We've got at least 2000 years more Jedi than Sith. Unless all the Sith know the most powerful tricks (which they don't), they'd be killed due to the sheer numbers of Jedi coming their way.

Are we talking about Masters or masters and apprentices?

Does the first post specify? No? Then it probably means everyone who was ever a Jedi or Sith fighting each other.

Sith win because of Darth Nihilus.

I highly doubt Nihilus can drain countless Jedi without getting beheaded.

I hate sounding biased, but I see the Sith winning. No "trick" or "maneuvar" the Jedi have ever done, could compare to those of the Ancients and Nihilus.

Numbers is the only advantage the Jedi have, but since when do superior numbers guarantee victory?

Superior numbers in normal battles are usually by thousands and such.

In this battle, it's possibly millions more than the Sith.

Then you get the super-weapon like powers of Ragnos and Nihilus and the like.

God I hate the Sith.

Well, you'll have Odan, Vodo, and Nomi running around, cutting people off from the Force and WTFpwning them. You'll have Luke, Yoda, Mace, Kyp, Ulic, Jacen, Thon, Revan (?), and dozens of other recognized pwnagat0rs slaughtering Sith by the hundreds, thousands, and then the're'll be all those millions upon millions of other Padawans, Knights, and Masters engaging and mobbing the severely outnumbered Sith. I doubt that Sadow will get the necessary time and focus to create his illusions, and with so many powerful Jedi about, even Ragnos is going down. Jedi Order winz!

Why doesn't Luke just manipulate a black hole and destroy everybody.

Why doesn't Nihilus just WTFdrain everyone? Because there're powerful people on both sides.

On the other hand, you have people like Kun and Sadow going Kamehameha all over the place, Ragnos zapping the hell out of people with that wand, Nihilus draining, Traya instakilling, Revan/Hord(?)/Kun saber pwning, and little Sidious sitting in the corner cooking up a huge Force Storm.

The Jedi probably win, but no planet can survive this.

My point is there are certain beings that know tactics to end the fight soon. Examples would be the thought bomb, the black hole manipulation, the illusion technique, and anything Ragnos can come up with, with his titanic and terrifying grasp of zee dark side

You guys know nothing.

Jesus would come down and WTF pwn them.

The Jedi may have the numerical advantage (which is highly questionable, given that the Ancient Sith were an entire civilization and will include the Sith people), but the forces of the Dark Side have the offensive power advantage. Either they all huddle up a la Bane's force storm and destroy them en masse or they use their own individual super weapons.

Then again, you could have all the Jedi unite in that neat little attack they used against Kun on Yavin 4, or do everything from gravity manipulation to cutting their enemies off from the Force.

They might be able to do that but what's to say that the combined might of the Sith can't break through the Wall of Light? I'm going to say that the Sith win because their powers are far more offense-oriented in nature.

Lose Lose sitution.
1)with their numbers, the jedi would onslaught the sith.
2) the sith are power-hungry idiots. Even if the Sith somehow managed to win, they would start killing each other(or what's left of them).

Originally posted by IKC
They might be able to do that but what's to say that the combined might of the Sith can't break through the Wall of Light? I'm going to say that the Sith win because their powers are far more offense-oriented in nature.

Now THAT would be interesting.

The Jedi perform that Wall of Light trick while the Sith, led by Bane, perform the Wall of Destructive Lightning trick.

BOOM! Muahahahahahahahahahaha...

Just a quick question, if Rangos is the most powerful, why would they be led by Bane?

And thats EXACTLY how they would see it...I'm the best, I'm the leader...and they would self destruct. The Jedi are cohesive and work well together. But what about Luke's emerald lightning or whatever its called? Couldn't that take out a few hundred sith at a time? Or does it not work like that?

No idea. there's been a lot of arguments about Luke's lightning working on other force users. hard to tell facts from fiction

I didn't say they'd be led by Bane, I said it would be in the same manner as Bane used it. Probably way more powerful though. I bet they could destroy the galaxy with it.

Originally posted by Captain REX
Now THAT would be interesting.

The Jedi perform that Wall of Light trick while the Sith, led by Bane, perform the Wall of Destructive Lightning trick.

BOOM! Muahahahahahahahahahaha...

thats what i was referring to.

Originally posted by Xepeyon
No idea. there's been a lot of arguments about Luke's lightning working on other force users. hard to tell facts from fiction

There have been a lot of arguments. On one hand we can say that it was never shown to be used on a force user, which doesn't necessarily mean it can't. On the other hand, there had to be an enormous amount of energy for it to work on a being outside the force, so why wouldn't it be able to work on a force user, effectively or not?

The Sith will take this one. As IKC mentioned, their offensive powers are far greater than the Jedi's and not to mention the fact that they have people like Ragnos, Nihilus and Sadow on their side.

Originally posted by ThoraxeRMG
Yes, 2 Revans and 2 Anakins.
And There will be a hard battle even if the ancient sith were in it.
Think about it.
Mass chaos.
Sneak attacks every where.
And Marka would just get beaten by Jaden all over again.

Really? Marka in his own body possessing his scepter and his prime abilites would wipe the floor with the strongest of the Jedi, adding Sadow and Kressh will be enough to smash the best of the Jedi.

Revan isn't so much a factor, Kun will easily curbstomp him. Face it in brute power and strength the Sith are superior.

Really how are the Jedi going to win? They're lose their the best of their Order in less than 5 seconds, remember how Kun curbstomped the best of jedi of his time? If the Jedi actually have the time to conjure up their wall of light, why can't Sadow confuse them all with illusions that would literally wipe out most of the padawans and knights.

And where are they going to find a black hole? There aren't any near Dantooine, also, if they tried to make a star go nova and become a black hole its likely Sadow will blow it up first.

Dont forget the Sith get their entire race including their beasts.

Either Luke or Sadow will end up destroying everybody.

WTF? In comparison to the Dark Siders, Luke's a ****ing pipsqueak. And Sadow will end up destroying everybody on his own? Bullshit.

The only two you could possibly say that for are Nihilus or Marka Ragnos.

Which dark siders would that be? Why don't you just stop arguing and admit that you hate Luke, know nothing about his abilities, nor care. If you notice Luke can destroy everyone with a black hole MAYBE. You have no evidence of Ragnos force powers so that's a ridiculous statement. Nihilus can't eat everybody without getting killed.. At least we know Sadow can blow up a star....

Let's see, all the Sith up to and including Exar Kun. How about that?

I'll put the following in BIG WORDS so you can understand: Luke cannot summon black holes, dumbass. He controlled one. That's the extent of his "zOMG< FANBOYGASM" nonapplicable feat war bullshit.

ALL of the dark siders? LOL! Oh of course including Exar Kun.. Because he's SHOWN TO USE THE AMULET THAT WOULD BE WITH SADOW, AGAINST FORCE USERS. Way to prove your point, dumbass.

Way to not understand how versus fights work. All characters are presumed to have all of their battle gear that they can carry (i.e. Sadow can't carry his ship, ergo he doesn't have it).

And it is shown that Kun created another amulet anyway. QED.

Ah and it says that Kun created it where? And the amulet is shown to do what exactly? Thanks for proving your infallible arguments as usual IKC!

Logical fallacies:

Argumentum ad hominem - "To the man." Use of personal attacks and insults to discredit or weaken an opponent's argument.

Burden of Proof (Appeal to Ignorance) - Description of Burden of Proof

Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance. This sort of reasoning typically has the following form:

1. Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
2. Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X.



It is logical to assume that he created it because the one he got for his left hand (which he did not create) was kept and worn by the Massassi priest Zythmnr before Kun recovered it. If there was another amulet the Massassi would have kept it in similar conditions as the first, but they are not shown to have done so. Therefore, it is likely that Kun himself made it either from schematics he may have found or by simply copying the first one.

It is logical to assume it has identical properties to the first one until we have a logical premise to assume that it has different properties. We don't.

Well...this isnt another Luke vs Kun fight, besides even if Luke can beat Kun, there is no way he'll get past Sadow, adding Ragnos who was superior to Sadow, there is no way the Jedi win, seeing as DN Luke is their absolute best.

Ah there we go IKC, you're proving my point with every thread. Dodging the obvious questions, unable to prove up, and using the dictionary as your justification to dodging the questions and arguments you can't answer nor construct. IKC, the master debater.

Originally posted by Faunus
Stow it already with the ''zOMg! ur a fanboy1'' IKC, unlike any of you, as actually provided proof for his stance. And so far, I haven't seen anyone successfully beat them down. So until you can do so, stfu.

Your logical fallacies, tdtd include:

Ad hominem

Begging the Question - Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning" typically has the following form.

1. Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the truth of the conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly).
2. Claim C (the conclusion) is true.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because simply assuming that the conclusion is true (directly or indirectly) in the premises does not constitute evidence for that conclusion. Obviously, simply assuming a claim is true does not serve as evidence for that claim. This is especially clear in particularly blatant cases: "X is true. The evidence for this claim is that X is true." (Important!)

Among others, of course.

tdtd, you're getting off topic, can you and IKC lay off each other? Argue in a Kun vs (insert time period) Luke

I didn't bring it up our master debater did.. Then he proceeded to dodge the questions with his dictionary.. Amazing debater..

Originally posted by tdtd
I didn't bring it up our master debater did.. Then he proceeded to dodge the questions with his dictionary.. Amazing debater..

Ad hominem.

Hasty generalization.

Begging the question.

Straw man.

Four logical fallacies in just under two real sentences.


I refer you to Faunus' quote. It's still applicable.

Stop using the dictionary so much, stop dodging the question, and stop agreeing with the only person that gave you a compliment, all because you can't take the time to formulate another argument. You seem to have no problem copying the dictionary though, in all that time you could have formed an argument. Again thanks for proving my point IKC..

Not sure it's a logical fallacy, but complaining about me pointing out your logical fallacies sure is hilarious.



Straw man.

Begging the question



A poorly-disguised attempt at:

Appeal to Majority (ad populum) - Appeal to perceived popular prejudices and ideas to prove an argument.



The hasty generalization.

Straw man.



Begging the question

Straw man

Ad hominem?



Begging the question.

Straw man.



Begging the question.

The hasty generalization.

About 12 logical fallacies in just three sentences.

Still lying to yourself because you can't formulate an argument in all that time you took to copy the dictionary?

Originally posted by tdtd
Still lying to yourself because you can't formulate an argument in all that time you took to copy the dictionary?

Ad hominem.

Hasty generalization.

Straw man.

Begging the question.


You're averaging about 4 logical fallacies per post, not counting that whopper.

Originally posted by tdtd
Still lying to yourself because you can't formulate an argument in all that time you took to copy the dictionary?

Continue dodging a debate..

Originally posted by tdtd
Continue dodging a debate..

Hasty generalization

Begging the question

Straw man

Originally posted by tdtd
Still lying to yourself because you can't formulate an argument in all that time you took to copy the dictionary?


Denial

Originally posted by tdtd
Denial

Ad hominem

Straw man

Begging the question

Wow, you managed three with just one word.

Refer to my previous posts since you can't comprehend the difference between an accurate statement and a personal attack, before continuing to use the dictionary for your posts

Err this forum has become...IKC vs tdtd

You're still committing:

Hasty generalization

Straw man

Begging the question

And youre still dodging the debate while I offer proof for my "claim". Nice..

Originally posted by w00t2112
Err this forum has become...IKC vs tdtd

It's more like tdtd vs. his penchant for committing logical fallacies and his ability to keep posting them.

It's the Emperor's New Clothes all over again.

Originally posted by tdtd
And youre still dodging the debate while I offer proof for my "claim". Nice..

Straw man

Hasty generalization

Begging the question (x2)

Originally posted by IKC
It's more like tdtd vs. his penchant for committing logical fallacies and his ability to keep posting them.

It's the Emperor's New Clothes all over again.


I'd say it's more like IKC's inability to form an argument, while his defense consists of vocabulary terms he doesn't understand.. It's a treat to read though.

to read his posts or your arguments?

Originally posted by tdtd
I'd say it's more like IKC's inability to form an argument, while his defense consists of vocabulary terms he doesn't understand.. It's a treat to read though.

Ad hominem(x2)

Appeal to ridicule - The Appeal to Ridicule is a fallacy in which ridicule or mockery is substituted for evidence in an "argument." This line of "reasoning" has the following form:

1. X, which is some form of ridicule is presented (typically directed at the claim).
2. Therefore claim C is false.

Hasty generalization

Straw man

Begging the question

Ok so just say youre in denial and youre using definitions that don't even apply to this argument. Now either stop embarassing yourself and formulate and argument that you could have done hours ago, or keep up the good laugh.

Originally posted by tdtd
Ok so just say youre in denial and youre using definitions that don't even apply to this argument. Now either stop embarassing yourself and formulate and argument that you could have done hours ago, or keep up the good laugh.

Ad hominem

Appeal to ridicule

Hasty generalization

Straw man

Begging the question



I'll tell you, I had a great laugh when I saw that you stated that my pointing out your logical fallacies are inapplicable to an argument.

OK, you guys can get back on topic ><

I'm trying to but I'm enjoying IKC dodge an argument and spend hours copying the dictionary with things he doesn't understand.

I am on topic, sir. He continues to make logical fallacies, and I continue to point them out.

lol...your arguments are so...random

Originally posted by tdtd
I'm trying to but I'm enjoying IKC dodge an argument and spend hours copying the dictionary with things he doesn't understand.

Appeal to ridicule.

Ad hominem.

Begging the question.

Hasty generalization.

Straw man.

They are random indeed IKC.. Btw just because you claim my arguments are logical fallacies doesn't make it true Now research that again.

Originally posted by tdtd
They are random indeed IKC.. Btw just because you claim my arguments are logical fallacies doesn't make it true Now research that again.

Except you continue to make them. I'll be sure to point out exactly where they are next time.

is this another arguement?

Originally posted by IKC
Except you continue to make them. I'll be sure to point out exactly where they are next time.

You claiming it doesn't make it so

Originally posted by tdtd
You claiming it doesn't make it so

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=397527&from=thread&pagenumber=4#post6237056

Originally posted by IKC
http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=397527&from=thread&pagenumber=4#post6237056

What's that? You made a claim and provided proof to back it up?? Hmm.... That sounds familiar I think i've seen that somewhere.. Oh wait.... Good job IKC

Straw man

You making a claim doesn't make it true.

Straw man.

Originally posted by tdtd
You making a claim doesn't make it true.

Embarassing yourself has become a daily occurance for you.. Oh damnit that's a claim!

Hasty generalization

Begging the question

Ad hominem

Appeal to ridicule

Straw man

JEDI!!

Originally posted by JaehSkywalker
JEDI!!

get wtfpwned.

Originally posted by w00t2112
get wtfpwned.

Yes.

Uh, there are people on the Sith side who can (probably easily) take out Skywalker.

Ragnos
Sadow
Simus
Kressh
Maybe Kun
Nadd would give him a tough fight.

but it doesn't say all the Sith vs. Skywalker...he has EVERY Jedi that ever roamed on his side.

its hard because every author is gonna make THEIR character more powerful or give reasons to why they would be tougher, so until we can get these authors together and write something where they can all swallow their pride, and accept the fact that their characters can in fact see defeat from another authors, everything stated kinda a moot point.
But if the second time Revan was extremely more powerful that his former Jedi and Sith self, then he would prolly have no real difficulty with some of the higher up sith lords.

Uh, Revan wasn't all that powerful to begin with, Subjekt. He'd still get his ass curbstomped.

Anything to the contrary is pure speculation and thus inadmissable.

Quantifying Revan's power is no more speculatory then quantifying how powerful Marka Ragnos was.

Except Ragnos had a better reputation from more reputable people in a time where the average Sith warrior could beat the hell out of the average Revan's "Sith" (Dark jedi).

but it doesn't say all the Sith vs. Skywalker...he has EVERY Jedi that ever roamed on his side.

Skywalker is the Jedi's top dog. The Sith's top dog is Ragnos, someone who exceeds Skywalker. Yes, the Jedi are more numerous... but the Sith have stronger "God tier" characters

Originally posted by Revolver Ocelot
Except Ragnos had a better reputation from more reputable people in a time where the average Sith warrior could beat the hell out of the average Revan's "Sith" (Dark jedi).

Read the Ragnos thread that I made and I showed how your average sith lord really wasn't too powerful.

Originally posted by namun69
Quantifying Revan's power is no more speculatory then quantifying how powerful Marka Ragnos was.

oh shit, numan is back!

Originally posted by namun69
Read the Ragnos thread that I made and I showed how your average sith lord really wasn't too powerful.

You mean how you tried to show that this Dark Lord wasn't powerful, and ended up making him seem even more godly.

The sith had Ragnos, Simus, Pall, Hord, Sadow, Kressh, Nihilus, Sion, Traya and Bane. Oh and Sidious and Kun. The jedi have Revan, The Exile, Ulic Quel Droma, Nomi Sunrider, Bass, Urr, Hoth, Yoda, Windu, Durron, Luke Skywalker and Jacen Solo.

One word, Nihilus.

The sith had Ragnos, Simus, Pall, Hord, Sadow, Kressh, Nihilus, Sion, Traya and Bane. Oh and Sidious and Kun. The jedi have Revan, The Exile, Ulic Quel Droma, Nomi Sunrider, Bass, Urr, Hoth, Yoda, Windu, Durron, Luke Skywalker and Jacen Solo.

I think it's painfully obvious who outclasses who.

Obviously.

Originally posted by namun69
Obviously.

Just STFU, kid. STFU...

Well I meant the battle to be
Every Dark Sider user
VS.
Every Light Side user
NOTE: There are 2 version of a character who went to both sides.
Like 2 Revans, 2 Anakins and 2 Ajunta Palls
Just every one with their Lightsaber and their force powers.

um, i think nihilus would win, because he could just stay waaaayyyyyyy behind the frontines and eat everyone.

Luke skywalker was a darksider for like.....four chapters...so is he on both sides to?

He was only a darkside in DE, and for only part of it which would be less than a year by the time frame.

And he crassoed over mainly to learn how to defeat the darkside, so does that count?

We could always cut Luke in half and see if that works.

Yes because he learned new techniques during his tutelage with the reborn emperor

I wish to note that tdtd is receiving his final warning for trolling earlier in this thread. Three warnings gets a three-day ban.

Continue with the debate. Tdtd, if you have an issue, PM me, don't make a scene.

Originally posted by tdtd
Yes because he learned new techniques during his tutelage with the reborn emperor

True, and there will be 3 Lukes
Luke (Lightside)
Luke (Darkside)
And the Dumb Luuke
Evil clone of Luke. Which was a dumb idea kinda.