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

Force, sabers, all out

Battle takes place on flat neutral terrain

No one?

Team 2. Maul vs. Katarn should be a good one, but I feel that Malgus takes down Koon.

Solid, solid thread. Koon and Katarn are balanced as duelists and Force Users, while Maul is the best duelist here by a fair margin, but the worst Force User, and the same goes for Malgus but the other way around. Going to favour Team 2 though. Dueling will be the most prevalent aspect of this fight, and Maul will beat either of them in a duel. Malgus can hold off either of them with his Force power advantage and capable dueling skill, although he'd lose to Plo IMO. Even if he would lose to whoever he fights, Maul is beating the other guy, and then Maul would win the last 1v1.

Plo above Kyle?

I don't know who's better between them.

Fair enough, it is close.

Katarn Plo koon Yhea they will **** them yhea.. Errm who they figth..... Eeeer nevermind holly shit !!
hey loose they loose !!!

Both Kyle and Maul are combat experts, so I guess they are somewhat even. Not much known about Plo Koon. His perhaps best feat is fending off Ventress, while having broken arm. He lost to Opress but everyone had hard time dealing with his strength in first encounter, so it doesn't prove anything.

Even if team 2 characters are stronger, Kyle knows battle meld, so he and Koon should fight better as a team. Either team has a chance to win.

Kyle and Maul are definitely not equal as duelists. Kyle could present mid-difficulty to Maul in a duel, but that's it.

Koon didn't lose to Savage in terms of saber skill - he lost because his mask was ripped off. Savage was perhaps getting the better of him seeing as he was dodging blasters bolts from Clones while dueling Koon, and he landed a kick on him, but even then neither of those elements are conclusive to Savage winning, so it was an even fight.

Originally posted by ILS


Koon didn't lose to Savage in terms of saber skill - he lost because his mask was ripped off. Savage was perhaps getting the better of him seeing as he was dodging blasters bolts from Clones while dueling Koon, and he landed a kick on him, but even then neither of those elements are conclusive to Savage winning, so it was an even fight.


How the heck does Savage kicking Koon on the floor then ripping his mask off make them "equal"?

Opress actually performed better against Plo Koon then he did agianst Adi Gallia (before he used Tk on her that is).

Opress battered Koon, fair and square.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
How the heck does Savage kicking Koon on the floor then ripping his mask off make them "equal"?

Opress actually performed better against Plo Koon then he did agianst Adi Gallia (before he used Tk on her that is).

Opress battered Koon, fair and square. You're completely overstating the "victory"

Kicking someone on the floor, or kicking them at all, doesn't mean you're the better duelist. People get kicked all the time in duels and it isn't conclusive of anything. The fight goes on. Neither of them faltered in their saber skills. Savage ripping his mask off shows a certain level of cunning but how you could try and translate that into a dueling win is beyond me.

Pre-Waifu Malgus - Team 2 or even split

Post-Waifu Malgus - Team 2

There is no way to figure out who is a better duelist. Kyle and Maul are not connected in any way to make any parallels.

Katarn after little Jedi training defeated 7 Dark Jedi and Jerec. That shows a great talent and potential.

He is the battlemaster of NJO and I remember in on of the books he was mentioned as unarmed combat expert as well, that means that like Maul he is as skilled and versatile as it gets.

Luke compared a Sith to be a match for Kyle and Kyp. Luke put that Sith on the defensive but still failed to defeat him. It implies that someone of Kyle's level is not an easy opponent for Luke.

As of Koon, agree, that fight is circumstantial and doesn't prove anything.

Originally posted by ILS
You're completely overstating the "victory"

Kicking someone on the floor, or kicking them at all, doesn't mean you're the better duelist. People get kicked all the time in duels and it isn't conclusive of anything. The fight goes on. Neither of them faltered in their saber skills. Savage ripping his mask off shows a certain level of cunning but how you could try and translate that into a dueling win is beyond me.


Yeah except he didn't just kick him on the floor, and simultaneously fight off clone troopers. He also ripped his mask off. You can't just ignore that. If he didn't have a mask, that would have punch in the face. And you really don't want to be punched in the face by a physical beast like Opress.

Btw I never said he's better at dueling. Just that he's more powerful in overall close combat (Sabers included).

Originally posted by Arhael
There is no way to figure out who is a better duelist. Kyle and Maul are not connected in any way to make any parallels.

Katarn after little Jedi training defeated 7 Dark Jedi and Jerec. That shows a great talent and potential.

He is the battlemaster of NJO and I remember in on of the books he was mentioned as unarmed combat expert as well, that means that like Maul he is as skilled and versatile as it gets.

Luke compared a Sith to be a match for Kyle and Kyp. Luke put that Sith on the defensive but still failed to defeat him. It implies that someone of Kyle's level is not an easy opponent for Luke.

As of Koon, agree, that fight is circumstantial and doesn't prove anything.
1. Yes, there are definitely ways of figuring out who the better duelist is. Accolades, quality of opponents fought and defeated, and so on. All areas where Maul outstrips Kyle, by the way.

2. That's nice and all but people frequently overblow this feat. He defeated seven Dark Jedi... one by one, and none of them have half-decent dueling feats to begin with. It's a good endurance feat, and it's nice that he did it with little training, but defeating opponents of such a low quality isn't putting you on par with one of the most skilled duelists in Sith history, who was more than a match for one of the most skilled Jedi in history along with his padawan, who was approaching him in skill.

3. Simply being battlemaster means little to me when we're this far up the foodchain. And Kyle being vaguely listed as an "unarmed combat expert" most certainly doesn't put him on par with Maul, who had mastered numerous martial arts as a teenager, and had mastered numerous martial arts that Sidious himself described as "exotic", which is a pretty big deal when you consider just how large the galaxy is for something to be considered exotic. That's without even mentioning his Teras Kasi, or his myriad of martial arts feats.

4. Could you be any more vague with this feat? I mean, I don't know who you're talking about or the context or anything, really, so this doesn't mean much to me either.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Yeah except he didn't just kick him on the floor, and simultaneously fight off clone troopers. He also ripped his mask off. You can't just ignore that. If he didn't have a mask, that would have punch in the face. And you really don't want to be punched in the face by a physical beast like Opress.

Btw I never said he's better at dueling. Just that he's more powerful in overall close combat (Sabers included). I'm not ignoring it, I'm just saying that it's not as simple as "Savage beat Koon" - he beat him a very specific way, so it's worth mentioning.

He isn't really a better lightsaber duelist, or at least not by much. The lightsaber duel itself that they had was even. Which is what I'm saying, Savage beat him through means other than sabers.

Team 2 solidly.

Originally posted by ILS


He isn't really a better lightsaber duelist, or at least not by much. The lightsaber duel itself that they had was even. Which is what I'm saying, Savage beat him through means other than sabers.


Fair enough. Koon actually seemed a bit better in Sabers to me as he tagged Savage's cloak.

But overall, in close combat, I still give Savage the win, simply because he did. It's very much like his win over Ventress. He didn't outduel her, her simply smacked her head and that disarmed her.

Im going with Team 2

Originally posted by ILS
4. Could you be any more vague with this feat? I mean, I don't know who you're talking about or the context or anything, really, so this doesn't mean much to me either.

Does this imply that you are unfamiliar with Katarn, yet willing to say he loses?

If I had to guess, I think this would be in reference to FOTJ when Luke fought High Lord Taalon on...the planet The Ones inhabit.

Originally posted by Vorpal Ruin
Does this imply that you are unfamiliar with Katarn, yet willing to say he loses?

If I had to guess, I think this would be in reference to FOTJ when Luke fought High Lord Taalon on...the planet The Ones inhabit. I'm unfamiliar with the feat because no description of it was given, so I said it didn't mean much to me until I actually had the specifics of it. But I am fairly certain in saying that Katarn isn't as good a duelist as Maul, I've been in several debates involving Kyle with people who've read near enough all of his appearances and him being Maul's equal with a blade is definitely a first for me.

Originally posted by ILS
1. Yes, there are definitely ways of figuring out who the better duelist is. Accolades, quality of opponents fought and defeated, and so on. All areas where Maul outstrips Kyle, by the way.

2. That's nice and all but people frequently overblow this feat. He defeated seven Dark Jedi... one by one, and none of them have half-decent dueling feats to begin with. It's a good endurance feat, and it's nice that he did it with little training, but defeating opponents of such a low quality isn't putting you on par with one of the most skilled duelists in Sith history, who was more than a match for one of the most skilled Jedi in history along with his padawan, who was approaching him in skill.

3. Simply being battlemaster means little to me when we're this far up the foodchain. And Kyle being vaguely listed as an "unarmed combat expert" most certainly doesn't put him on par with Maul, who had mastered numerous martial arts as a teenager, and had mastered numerous martial arts that Sidious himself described as "exotic", which is a pretty big deal when you consider just how large the galaxy is for something to be considered exotic. That's without even mentioning his Teras Kasi, or his myriad of martial arts feats.

4. Could you be any more vague with this feat? I mean, I don't know who you're talking about or the context or anything, really, so this doesn't mean much to me either.

1. It is impossible to compare quality of opponents between different areas, that's the problem.

2. If they don't have feats, it only means that we don't know how capable they were. You don't know what was their quality. You assume that they were low quality, which is likely to be true but you still don't know.

3. Being battlemaster means that skill wise he was one of the most competent of the order. "Exotic" training is good but it doesn't make Maul better. Windu, Yoda, Dooku, Luke, Kenobi, Anakin and many other characters did not need "exotic" training to be as good as they are. If someone is called "expert" that's all we need to know that they are as skilled as it gets.

4. "Gaalan struck at Luke, high, low, a series of subtle and sophisticated blows that would have bewildered any lesser duelist. He was good; Luke gave him that. He might have been a match for an expert swordsmaster such as Kyp or Kyle Katarn. He would have been too much for a comparatively diffident duelist such as Cilghal, or even Luke as he had been back at Sinkhole Station, at low ebb in physical and mental strength.

But Luke, despite recent exertions, had had time to recover. He parried each of Gaalan's blows, and his ripostes-his blade skittering off Gaalan's and thrusting now at the Sith Lord's face, now at shoulder or knee or torso-came increasingly close to touching flesh.

Luke considers Kyle and Kyp - sword experts. It, also, shows that Luke can't easily defeat an opponent of such caliber. Anyone who can keep up with Luke should be really good. Also, Kyp is has very high potential, Kyle being on parr with him is impressive too.

Originally posted by Arhael
1. It is impossible to compare quality of opponents between different areas, that's the problem.

2. If they don't have feats, it only means that we don't know how capable they were. You don't know what was their quality. You assume that they were low quality, which is likely to be true but you still don't know.

3. Being battlemaster means that skill wise he was one of the most competent of the order. "Exotic" training is good but it doesn't make Maul better. Windu, Yoda, Dooku, Luke, Kenobi, Anakin and many other characters did not need "exotic" training to be as good as they are. If someone is called "expert" that's all we need to know that they are as skilled as it gets.

4. "Gaalan struck at Luke, high, low, a series of subtle and sophisticated blows that would have bewildered any lesser duelist. He was good; Luke gave him that. He might have been a match for an expert swordsmaster such as Kyp or Kyle Katarn. He would have been too much for a comparatively diffident duelist such as Cilghal, or even Luke as he had been back at Sinkhole Station, at low ebb in physical and mental strength.

But Luke, despite recent exertions, had had time to recover. He parried each of Gaalan's blows, and his ripostes-his blade skittering off Gaalan's and thrusting now at the Sith Lord's face, now at shoulder or knee or torso-came increasingly close to touching flesh.

Luke considers Kyle and Kyp - sword experts. It, also, shows that Luke can't easily defeat an opponent of such caliber. Anyone who can keep up with Luke should be really good. Also, Kyp is has very high potential, Kyle being on parr with him is impressive too.
1. No, it's not. Maul has several accolades to suggest he is one of the best Sith duelists in history. Qui-Gon Jinn is one of the best duelists to ever be produced by the Jedi Order. Obi-Wan Kenobi by TPM was skilled enough to hold his own against Jinn as a duelist. And Maul was "more than a match" for them during the duel at Theed, even collectively. In fact, even when Kenobi was drawing on Force Rage he was "no match" for Maul, and when Maul had a leg injury on Tattooine he was still fighting evenly with Jinn in their first duel. Comparatively Kyle is lacking accolades to compare and he hasn't bested any opponents of this calibre. So Maul is better.

2. You could literally say this about any character, but then where does it get you? A character having a lack of feats isn't an argument. It just means they are unproven as duelists and therefore less impressive than someone who is, until they actually gain some feats/accolades of their own.

3. Wait, so you're going to pick on the one word "exotic" and ignore everything else I said regarding Maul's martial arts training, but then laud Kyle being called an "expert" as some kind of massive achievement? A magnaguard could be considered an "expert", but in the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter.

4. Luke subjectively stating that they are sword experts is nice and all, but it pales in comparison to actual feats, and Maul's objective accolades are better than this anyway. Luke wasn't finding it easy to defeat that Sith Lord because as per your own quote he was fatigued at the time, and despite that he pretty easily deflected the guys blows and then nearly took him out with his own offence, so really he wasn't much of a challenge for Luke even while he was tired.

Originally posted by ILS
I'm unfamiliar with the feat because no description of it was given, so I said it didn't mean much to me until I actually had the specifics of it. But I am fairly certain in saying that Katarn isn't as good a duelist as Maul, I've been in several debates involving Kyle with people who've read near enough all of his appearances and him being Maul's equal with a blade is definitely a first for me.

It's cool. It just seems like a vast majority of people are eager to jump to conclusion based simply on what other people throw in front of their face, without actually ever having first hand experience with the source. It's kinda lazy, and certainly understandable, but also frustrating imo.

Because someone doesn't hand you info on a silver platter, people think they're correct, and that's dumb. I understand debate, but don't think that winning a debate makes you correct in your assertion, especially when you have a lack of knowledge concerning the topic of debate. It's typically why I don't usually voice an opinion concerning so many characters; I can read what other posters say too, but that's really not a great source, imo, and facts are misrepresented and taken out of context so often that it's maddening. I don't have the patience for debate. People are stupid, all of us, and will believe whatever they want; I know that.

This is certainly not a personal attack on you or anything, just a statement in general.

Originally posted by Vorpal Ruin
It's cool. It just seems like a vast majority of people are eager to jump to conclusion based simply on what other people throw in front of their face, without actually ever having first hand experience with the source. It's kinda lazy, and certainly understandable, but also frustrating imo.

Because someone doesn't hand you info on a silver platter, people think they're correct, and that's dumb. I understand debate, but don't think that winning a debate makes you correct in your assertion, especially when you have a lack of knowledge concerning the topic of debate. It's typically why I don't usually voice an opinion concerning so many characters; I can read what other posters say too, but that's really not a great source, imo, and facts are misrepresented and taken out of context so often that it's maddening. I don't have the patience for debate. People are stupid, all of us, and will believe whatever they want; I know that.

This is certainly not a personal attack on you or anything, just a statemeaddnt in general. well said