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

Anakin Skywalker, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and Ahsoka Tano

Vs Agent Kolar, Saesee Tiin, Kit Fisto, and Mace Windu

Ahsoka's a nonfactor.

Mace vs. Invisible Hand Anakin is...probably in Anakin's favor.

That leaves Obiwan and Soresu holding off 3 guys, though. Might not end well for him.

I go for team 1. I agree ahsoka at the level she left the temple couldn't defeat ventress or Barris, so she would be defeated. So that does leave obi wan vs fisto, kolar, and tinn while anakin fights Windu. I'd go with anakin, as he is a better duelist than Windu and he's regarded as a 9/10 by the stunt coordinator up there with Sidious.

B-Team wins. Mace can hold up to Anakin, whereas Obi-Wan's Soresu can delay Kit and Saesee but he is unlikely to beat both at once. Agen should defeat Ahsoka decisively, then comes back to aid Mace or the others against either Anakin or Obi-Wan.

Originally posted by SunRazer
B-Team wins. Mace can hold up to Anakin, whereas Obi-Wan's Soresu can delay Kit and Saesee but he is unlikely to beat both at once. Agen should defeat Ahsoka decisively, then comes back to aid Mace or the others against either Anakin or Obi-Wan.

Ahsoka is a factor. She won't win any fights but she has been able to hold her own against Grievous and Ventress. She will be hard to defeat and keep one of the team busy while the others finish their oponents

Windu >/= Anakin

Kit Fisto = Obi-Wan Kenobi

Seasee Tiin or Agen Kolar > Ahsoka Tano.

One of either Tiin or Kolar is free to assist Windu or Fisto here.

B team wins.


Wait.... Agent Kolar? Agent Kolar solo godstomps and the sheer strength of his godstomp tears through the fabric of space to kill Vitiate, Kun, Sidious, Caedus, and Abeloth.

He is then elected Grand Master, Master of the Order, Weapons Master, Battlemaster, Historian and Barsen'thor. Then he proceeds to get in bed with Aayla Secura, Shaak Ti, Ventress, Padme, Leia, Jaesa, Vette and Scarlett Johannson.

Agent Kolar.

I'm glad you understand who he truly was, his sexiness and his brown turd stained face was truly a disguise for who he truly was.

the Ultimate Jedi weapon who defeated Darth Sidious and led him to his destruction

http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111028221233/starwars/images/a/a2/KolarCouncil2-ROTS.jpg

RIP Sweet prince....

All hail Lord Kolar!
All hail Lord Kolar!
All hail Lord Kolar!
All hail Lord Kolar!
All hail Lord Kolar!
All hail Lord Kolar!

http://m.cdn.blog.hu/he/hello90/image/word10.gif

I'm leaning B-team because Mace.

The B-Team takes it

Invisible Hand Anakin > Mace windu

Dooku was stated to be >= Windu, and Anakin was clearly >>> Dooku at the height of his focus.

Thus it comes down to how fast Anakin can kill Mace, because he will kill Mace just will he do it fast enough to come to Obi Wans aid.

Originally posted by AncientPower


Kit Fisto = Obi-Wan Kenobi




Nah. No way Fisto could stalemate Maul and Sith Anakin, or batter Opress.

Intersting figth.

Anakin > Windu, but the fight will be cool.

Kenobi < Fisto and Tiin

Kolar > Ahsoka

B-team wins.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Nah. No way Fisto could stalemate Maul and Sith Anakin, or batter Opress.

Couldn't Obi-Wan hold off Mace while Anakin rolfstomps the other 3? That's the easiest way from team 1 to win imo.

Why do people think Obi-Wan increased exponentially during the Clone Wars while Fisto sat on his ass eating cheese? During the Cestus deception, Kit Fisto was his noticeable superior, while purposefully hampering his own speed (the thing that actually allows him to compete in dueling.)

Even if Obi-Wan increased that much and Kit sat on his arse for three years, it would be a close fight.

So what? We're just supposed to pretend Fisto improved to ROTS Kenobi's level with Zero feats to place him there?

That's like saying Anakin was no match for Dooku in AOTC therefore he was no match for him in ROTS, because Dooku wasn't just sitting on his ass for 3 years while Anakin was improving.

Also Fisto apparently being Kenobi's superior in Cestus Deception means very little considering Fisto got solidly beaten by Ventress in that same novel. Then not long after Kenobi solidly beat Ventress in TCW Movie.

Kenobi's feats are way above Fisto's. That's why he's placed firmly higher.

Also didn't fisto himself say that kenobi would have been a better choice for the strike team against Sidious.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
So what? We're just supposed to pretend Fisto improved to ROTS Kenobi's level with Zero feats to place him there?

That's like saying Anakin was no match for Dooku in AOTC therefore he was no match for him in ROTS, because Dooku wasn't just sitting on his ass for 3 years while Anakin was improving.

Also Fisto apparently being Kenobi's superior in Cestus Deception means very little considering Fisto got solidly beaten by Ventress in that same novel. Then not long after Kenobi solidly beat Ventress in TCW Movie.

Kenobi's feats are way above Fisto's. That's why he's placed firmly higher.

That's not what I'm saying, besides, people plateau, and Anakin learned much faster than most. I'm not saying Fisto remained his superior at all, just that it would be a good fight.

And if you're going to use the Ventress fight, at least be slightly aware why she won.

Too strong in B teams favor, Anakin and Mace would be a long duel and he's getting ganked after Obi-Wan gets ganked.

Originally posted by Selenial


And if you're going to use the Ventress fight, at least be slightly aware why she won.


I'm very aware of the excuses that she studied him first.

She beat him solidly. End of.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I'm very aware of the excuses that she studied him first.

She beat him solidly. End of.

That's also because Fisto's Style is stated as being inherently weak to Makashi.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I'm very aware of the excuses that she studied him first.

She beat him solidly. End of.

Well that's wrong, so obviously no. She realized his style, yes, that's important. What's more important is that Ventress is a duelist who relies on Speed, not strength.

Kit Fisto's form is inherently shit for dueling, the wide arcs required leave practitioners open almost constantly. His way of eliminating this weakness was his ferocious speed, and unfortunately Ventress was capable of matching him in this department, leading it to come down to her form vs his.

Her form was basically designed to beat his. If you wanted to tailor someone specifically to take down Kit Fisto, you'd basically be creating Ventress.

I see DP is continuing his shameless and transparent smear campaign against the noble and venerable Master Fisto.

Kit's definitely on par with Obi-Wan. He manhandled Grievous just as {if not more} decisively and was chosen to be Mace's backup for Sidious while Kenobi was sent after Grievous, a much less dangerous and formidable figure.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
I see DP is continuing his shameless and transparent smear campaign against the noble and venerable Master Fisto.

Kit's definitely on par with Obi-Wan. He manhandled Grievous just as {if not more} decisively and was chosen to be Mace's backup for Sidious while Kenobi was sent after Grievous, a much less dangerous and formidable figure.


Oh and the Obi-Wan hater is back.

I knew it wouldn't be long before your Kenobi hatred showed up on this thread.

Yet still failing to produce any evidence (as per usual) that puts Fisto on par with someone whose consistently proven himself to be on par with the likes of Darth Maul and Darth Vader.



Originally posted by Nargaroth
That's also because Fisto's Style is stated as being inherently weak to Makashi.


Yeah also a lame excuse.

No style is inherently weak to another. They all have their advantages and disadvantages.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Yeah also a lame excuse.

No style is inherently weak to another. They all have their advantages and disadvantages.

That is genuinely one of the most retarded things I've ever heard.

Originally posted by Selenial
That is genuinely one of the most retarded things I've ever heard.


Then clearly you need to brush up on SW fighting styles from scratch.

Oh and grow some common sense while you're at it.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Then clearly you need to brush up on SW fighting styles from scratch.

Oh and grow some common sense while you're at it.

I can't tell if you're serious.

Originally posted by Selenial
I can't tell if you're serious.


Like I said, grow yourself some common sense. You'll work it out when you do.

Originally posted by Selenial
That is genuinely one of the most retarded things I've ever heard. LOL. No offence DP but it's true, and your post was almost self-contradictory.

Originally posted by ILS
LOL. No offence DP but it's true, and your post was almost self-contradictory.


What?

Feel free to point out the self contradiction.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Like I said, grow yourself some common sense. You'll work it out when you do.

"Because the ancient Jedi did not have lightsaber-wielding enemies, Form I does not address the lightsaber-to-lightsaber combat." - Cin Drallig

No, please, do continue.

Originally posted by Selenial
"Because the ancient Jedi did not have lightsaber-wielding enemies, Form I does not address the lightsaber-to-lightsaber combat." - Cin Drallig

No, please, do continue.


You do realise you've not actually made an argument there right?

Evidence is supposed to support your argument, not make it for you. You'll realise when you grow some common sense.


As for the proof you've provided, all you're actually doing is proving Fisto 's style is inherently weak at duelling period.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh and the Obi-Wan hater is back.

sick burn bro

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I knew it wouldn't be long before your Kenobi hatred showed up on this thread.

even sicker burn, bro!

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Yet still failing to produce any evidence (as per usual) that puts Fisto on par with someone whose consistently proven himself to be on par with the likes of Darth Maul and Darth Vader.

Sure. All we need do is compare their performance/s against Grievous. Fisto beat dat ass and required Grievous to summon backup. Meanwhile, the ol' general regularly takes on Obi-Wan alone unaided and Obi-Wan struggles more than Fisto did.

Between that and the fact that Fisto was chosen to serve as backup against Sidious whilst Obi-Wan was sent to face a far weaker adversary... I'd say that's definitely evidence enough to infer parity between the two.

Remember, I'm not saying Fisto > Obi-Wan, but that the two are simply on par. Which they are.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
You do realise you've not actually made an argument there right?

Evidence is supposed to support your argument, not make it for you. You'll realise when you grow some common sense.


As for the proof you've provided, all you're actually doing is proving Fisto 's style is inherently weak at duelling period.

I made the argument, to which you replied something hilariously wrong. The evidence just proved you wrong totally, if you wish to re-read my argument you can find it above.

And yes, that's exactly what I said. If you wish me to go find quotes about Makashi being a form designed to fix the shortcomings of Form I then I'll be happy to, but it's probably easier if you fix your ignorance by consulting Wookieepedia.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
sick burn bro



even sicker burn, bro!


Whatever you say my stalker.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
Sure. All we need do is compare their performance/s against Grievous. Fisto beat dat ass and required Grievous to summon backup. Meanwhile, the ol' general regularly takes on Obi-Wan alone unaided and Obi-Wan struggles more than Fisto did.


Yeah beating Grievous isn't nearly enough to put him on par with Maul or Vader.

Not that he actually did beat him anyway.

And FYI Kenobi faced Grievous + 2 Magnaguards in "Grievous Intiruge" which ended with the 2 Magnaguards trashed, and Grievous running. Whilst Fisto is the one who ran from Grievous + Magnaguards.

Sorry brah, you'll have to do better.




Originally posted by The_Tempest
Between that and the fact that Fisto was chosen to serve as backup against Sidious whilst Obi-Wan was sent to face a far weaker adversary...


Geez desperate much?

I asked for evidence. Not your own personal (and pretty twisted) interpretation of the events in ROTS.


Originally posted by The_Tempest
I'd say that's definitely evidence enough to infer parity between the two.


Nah brah. That's called speculation. Look it up if you don't get the meaning.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Remember, I'm not saying Fisto > Obi-Wan, but that the two are simply on par. Which they are.




Oh it's a fact now? Cool story. Feel free to give me this magical source that made this a fact.

Filoni (or word of god as you put it so many time) claims end of S4 Maul and Opress were no match for Kenobi without the element of surprise. Care to give ANY Evidence at all, that Fisto is even close to that level.

I mean seriously, ANY Evidence. Any whatsoever.

I'm listening.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Whatever you say my stalker.

I'm continuing to espouse a platform I've defended for a long time.

Didn't you just waltz into a random thread in the EU section specifically to troll me?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Yeah beating Grievous isn't nearly enough to put him on par with Maul or Vader.

Sorry bra, you'll have to do better.

I never said it did. I simply said we can use their respective performance/s against the same adversary to gauge their abilities. And in that light, Fisto performed on par with Obi-Wan.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Geez desperate much?

I asked for evidence. Not your own personal (and pretty twisted) interpretation of the events in ROTS.

That is indeed evidence. Obi-Wan was chosen to pursue Grievous while Fisto was kept in reserve against Sidious. But you're certainly free to think Grievous is a more formidable adversary than Sidious.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Nah brah. That's called speculation. Look it up if you don't get the meaning.

"brah"

The naked hostility and regurgitating my affectionate epithets... you're fraying pretty rapidly.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh it's a fact now? Cool story. Feel free to give me this magical source that made this a fact.

Filoni (or word of god as you put it so many time) claims end of S4 Maul and Opress were no match for Kenobi without the element of surprise. Care to give ANY Evidence at all, that Fisto is even close to that level.

I mean seriously, ANY Evidence. Any whatsoever.

I'm listening.

Curiously, nothing said by Filoni there puts Obi-Wan > Fisto. mmm

Which means you're using evidence to draw conclusions otherwise not spelled out for your own argument. And yet the burden of proof should be higher for me? Hardly.

It's not my fault my case is stronger than yours. Once you calm down and breathe a bit, you'll understand. You always come around to my way of thinking anyway.

Obi-Wan struggles more than Fisto did.

Not always. Obi-Wan seems to get more proficient at fighting Grievous as the series goes on.

Fisto was chosen to serve as backup against Sidious whilst Obi-Wan was sent to face a far weaker adversary...

Obi-Wan was sent to Utapau before anyone knew there would be an imminent need to choose backup against Sidious. When the time came he was unavailable.

Originally posted by Darth Luminous
Not always. Obi-Wan seems to get more proficient at fighting Grievous as the series goes on.

He also has more battles against Grievous to reference {which is, according to the ROTS script, the reason Obi-Wan was sent off against Grievous}. Fisto's only known encounter with the general was extremely impressive.

Originally posted by Darth Luminous
Obi-Wan was sent to Utapau before anyone knew there would be an imminent need to choose backup against Sidious.

Not really. They sent Yoda to Kashyyyk specifically to lure Sidious out of hiding and that was before Obi-Wan was sent after Grievous.

Originally posted by Darth Luminous
Not always. Obi-Wan seems to get more proficient at fighting Grievous as the series goes on.



Obi-Wan was sent to Utapau before anyone knew there would be an imminent need to choose backup against Sidious. When the time came he was unavailable.

Actually, they were luring Sidious out by sending Yoda to Kashyyyk, so they were actually hoping Sidious would attack.

Edit: Damn, Temp beat me.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
I'm continuing to espouse a platform I've defended for a long time.

Didn't you just waltz into a random thread in the EU section specifically to troll me?


Yeah after you came in here and creepily mentioned my name without actually addressing me or my arguments as per usual..

You really are in complete denial of your own doings aren't you?Geez I honestly think you should seek professional help.

Like I said in the other thread, anytime you want a debate, I'll trash you as per usual.

But seriously quit the stalking. It's really disturbing.




Originally posted by The_Tempest
I never said it did. I simply said we can use their respective performance/s against the same adversary to gauge their abilities. And in that light, Fisto performed on par with Obi-Wan.


Not really. Considering Kenobi's come across Grievous many times, and Fisto once. So do you compare Kenobi's first performance against Grievous. Do you compare his best or his worst performance?

Or do we compare his ROTS Performance considering we know that was Peak Kenobi, and Peak Grievous. Even that wouldn't be fair, as Fisto didn't take on Peak Grievous.

Not only that but going by Filoni's words (the word of god as described by Tempest), Grievous is the worst medium to compare opponents against. As he has to be fought in a very particular manner. If that's done, he will be defeated by any Jedi, if not, he will be a massive threat to any Jedi.

So the grievous thing all you got? Or you gonna up your game?





TOriginally posted by The_Tempest
hat is indeed evidence. Obi-Wan was chosen to pursue Grievous while Fisto was kept in reserve against Sidious. But you're certainly free to think Grievous is a more formidable adversary than Sidious.


LMAO.. The no.1 priority was to stop Grievous so Palpatine would have no more excuses to carry on the war, and that would draw out the Sith Lord.

So Kenobi was chosen for the no.1 priority, which required a Master with more experience than frigging Skywalker. The whole Council unanimously agreed Kenobi was the most Cunning and Tenacious Master on the Council, and that he should go.

Windu went on to compare Kenobi's sword prowess to his own.


So yeah. I think you need to go back to the ROTS Movie and Novel, but without those Kenobi hatred goggles. So you might see more clearly what was actually happening, and Why Kenobi was sent to Grievous (which actually couldn't have been made more clear for those of us without the Kenobi hating goggles).



Originally posted by The_Tempest
"brah"


I'm still waiting for an actual decent argument here BRAH.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
The naked hostility and regurgitating my affectionate epithets... you're fraying pretty rapidly.


I'm kicking your Kenobi hating butt. As per usual.




Originally posted by The_Tempest
TCuriously, nothing said by Filoni there puts Obi-Wan > Fisto. mmm


No but his statements clearly put Kenobi above S4 Maul and Opress combined.


mmm mmm



Originally posted by The_Tempest
Which means you're using evidence to draw conclusions otherwise not spelled out for your own argument. And yet the burden of proof should be higher for me? Hardly.

The burden of proof on you to put Fisto in the same Top-Tier League Kenobi has been placed in? Hell yeah.

Of course you can always go back to your "But he was beating Grievous" LMAO

Funny thing is you will cling back to that. Grasping for any straws you can as per usual.


Originally posted by The_Tempest
It's not my fault my case is stronger than yours. Once you calm down and breathe a bit, you'll understand. You always come around to my way of thinking anyway.




Then why am I kicking your butt as per usual?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
What?

Feel free to point out the self contradiction. You said "no style is inherently weak to another" and followed it with "they all have their advantages and disadvantages" - that's the point, some work well against others, because of their adv.'s and disadv.'s. I said "almost" because you may be operating on the mindset that 7 different lightsaber styles can have varying strengths and weaknesses without causing any kind of conflict with each other, which, while certainly plausible, is also a massive stretch, and evidently not true, either.

For instance, Shii-Cho is inherently poor against Makashi; hence Fisto's decisive loss to Ventress. However it's also very strong against multiple blades or opponents; hence his decisive win over Grievous. Another example is that Drallig points out that it's almost impossible for a Niman practitioner to defeat one of Makashi (no doubt due to Niman's more generalist take on lightsaber combat, which would logically fall victim to a far more precision-based form like Makashi). It's also been noted that a Juyo practitioner is one of (or the only; the exact wording escapes) the only people who can break the defence of a Soresu practitioner because of it's sheer dedication to overwhelming strength, speed and ferocity. Ataru is weak against two or more opponents and only a true master of the form can compensate for this weakness. Soresu by itself will prove insufficient to end a fight against someone if that opponent doesn't tire out or make a mistake, because outside of those scenarios arising, it has little to no offensive properties. Djem So lacks mobility. Juyo leaves one exposed to being counter-attacked by Force attacks. The list goes on and on; form usage can drastically alter a combat situation depending on the circumstances.

https://sanjosebarstool.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/george-lucas-u-mad-meme-270x300.jpg

It pleases me that you've plummeted so far into obvious e-rage. It's giving me quite the e-rection. excellent



We can {and should!} compare Fisto's lone outing against any and all of Kenobi's.



Actually, the Grievous Fisto battled was so fresh we might as well have called him the Prince of Bel Air.

http://redeeminggod.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/will_smith.jpg

Brand new armor, hometurf advantage, and the benefit of backup. When Grievous battled Obi-Wan in ROTS, the state of his armor is unattested and he eschewed backup.



Your point escapes me {and you as well, I think}.

In no way does Filoni claim or infer that Grievous is "the worst medium to compare opponents against." The only way that would be true is if Grievous were somehow susceptible to the exact same level of curbstomp from any opponent. In other words, if Ahsoka {a Padawan} could take on/take down Grievous as easily as a reputable Master {such as Kit or Obi-Wan}.

But that's not true. So he remains an effective measuring stick.



Nonsense. The no.1 priority was to stop Sidious. Grievous was, in comparison, a relatively minor obstacle.



No, Fisto was chosen for the no.1 priority {stopping Sidious}. Obi-Wan was elected to tackle a low-rent flunky tbh.



Actually, he implied that Obi-Wan's swordsmanship was superior to his and Yoda's. You're free to pursue that line of thought, if you wish.



I know why Obi-Wan was sent after Grievous. The question is: do you know why Fisto was kept in reserve against Sidious? mmm



You're free to show us all where Filoni puts Obi-Wan above S4 Maul and Opress combined.



The burden of proof is for anyone who makes a claim, DP.

You're drawing conclusions inferred from evidence. That's all well and good. The problem, however, is when you hold others to a higher standard regarding the burden of proof. Why, that's just downright hypocritical, if you ask me.







http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lruf2dLh4W1qcs5q8.gif

Your anger has clearly deepened, but you've got a long way to go before you can pull that off successfully. excellent

So after the last few pages I am not dissuaded that:


Originally posted by AncientPower
Kit Fisto = Obi-Wan Kenobi

Originally posted by The_Tempest
They sent Yoda to Kashyyyk specifically to lure Sidious out of hiding


Says who?



Still nonsense. The Jedi had no idea that a fight with Sidious would happen before Obi-Wan got back. Fisto even says in the novel that he would feel better if either Yoda or Kenobi were there.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
{which is, according to the ROTS script, the reason Obi-Wan was sent off against Grievous}.

According to the ROTS script, what is the reason why Yoda was sent to Kashyyyk?

The ROTS novel explains that sending Yoda to Kashyyyk was a ploy by the council to lure Sidious out of hiding with the strongest Jedi Master far from Coruscant.

Kit wanting Obi-Wan to be present is irrelevant; obviously Kit would want all the help they could get when tackling the Sith Master. That doesn't mean anything as it pertains to this discussion.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
The ROTS novel explains that sending Yoda to Kashyyyk was a ploy by the council to lure Sidious out of hiding with the strongest Jedi Master far from Coruscant.

Kit wanting Obi-Wan to be present is irrelevant; obviously Kit would want all the help they could get when tackling the Sith Master. That doesn't mean anything as it pertains to this discussion.




I see you're grasping for Straws as per usual.



Originally posted by The_Tempest



Your point escapes me {and you as well, I think}.

In no way does Filoni claim or infer that Grievous is "the worst medium to compare opponents against." The only way that would be true is if Grievous were somehow susceptible to the exact same level of curbstomp from any opponent. In other words, if Ahsoka {a Padawan} could take on/take down Grievous as easily as a reputable Master {such as Kit or Obi-Wan}.

But that's not true. So he remains an effective measuring stick.







Oh really?

Either you haven't read all Filoni's commentary, or you purposefully turn a blind eye to what he says as it suits your own desires. I suspect the latter:

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/03/21/star-wars-the-clone-wars-looking-back-at-season-4?page=3

"I still don't believe that, at this point -- one-to-one -- that Grievous could really take out someone like Ventress in a lightsaber fight. I mean, it's just me, but he doesn't have the Force. He can't wield it. I don't see how he can hope to be as proficient as a Jedi or a Sith could be fighting with a lightsaber, which is why he's always willing to dirty play at the end of the day."

"Yeah, it's in the movie. Mace Windu says, "General Grievous will run and hide, as he always does." He's an interesting character for all that thought. And obviously, you know, he's adept at using lightsabers, but I always thought his thing was fear. If you are afraid of the many swirling blades, then you'll parish staring at them. But if you can just focus through it, you can defeat that opponent "


So in case you're not really comprehending what's written here due to your usual attempts to blind side yourself to 75% of what Filoni says, whilst desperately clinging onto the 25% of his statements you like, I'll explain.

Filoni (or word of god as per Tempest) is clearly saying here that ANY Jedi/Sith is capable of beating Grievous as long as he's fought the right way:

"I don't see how he can hope to be as proficient as a Jedi or a Sith could be fighting with a lightsaber, which is why he's always willing to dirty play at the end of the day."


On the other hand Filoni (word of god as per Tempest) clearly states that Grievous can be a major threat to ANY Jedi/Sith if they battle him the wrong way:

"I always thought his thing was fear. If you are afraid of the many swirling blades, then you'll parish staring at them."

And again, fight him the Right Way and:

"But if you can just focus through it, you can defeat that opponent"


So yeah according to Filoni (word of god as per Tempest) Grievous is definitely not a reliable medium as which to compare other Jedi with.

Funnier yet, he compares Grievous directly to Ventress saying he's below her in Sabers. The same Ventress who both Kenobi and Opress have proven themselves to be superior to. And again Filoni has clearly stated that Kenobi is superior to both end of S4 Maul and Opress combined. I can embarrass you with that piece of evidence as well if you like.



So yeah consider your ass kicked as per usual. I expect pages worth of biased speculation in response to this, and probably months worth of personal stalking.

mmm

So says the guy who {kinda?} addressed exactly one of my many points before fleeing.

One might very well think that you're really not up for an actual debate here.



Your conclusion has no basis in the evidence cited. Where does Filoni claim that Grievous is an unreliable standard for comparison?

Across 6 seasons of The Clone Wars, we see a considerable number of foes engage Grievous to varying degrees of success and failure. The only way Grievous wouldn't be an adequate medium for comparison is if anyone who engaged Grievous could defeat him with the same level of ease as any other potential fighter. {E.g., someone like Ahsoka beating Grievous's ass as thoroughly as someone like Yoda.}

But that's not what Filoni says nor is that what happens. So I can only conclude that this is a transparent attempt to invalidate Kit's performance against Grievous. Perhaps because it makes you uncomfortable to see that he performed so well against an opponent that Obi-Wan himself has been known to struggle with. mmm



That's funny? No one is suggesting Grievous is the equal of someone like Ventress, Obi-Wan, or Kit Fisto. He's obviously not.



I already invited you to provide the quote:



Curious that you've yet to actually do so and instead opt for bluster. mmm



http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lnzghp5Z591qdzxj5.gif

Tangling with quan has definitely frazzled what little semblance of civility you had left. {protip: that drastic shift suggests that he's successfully gotten to you as a troll.} Your relative {and quick!} hostility with Selenial and your aggressiveness towards me are all wildly entertaining. I am well pleased by your transformation. excellent

But you've got a long way to go before you can successfully troll me, DP. {Besides, I remember how quickly you conformed to my stance on the whole Maul/Opress/Sidious platform despite aggressively arguing otherwise for months.} stoned

There was more to my post btw. Feel free to address it.

Originally posted by |King Joker|


Source: Ultimate Star Wars

USW seems to have a different take on Grievous than Filoni.


Yes but Filoni as per Tempest is word of god, so that's what I'm embarrassing his own arguments with.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
mmm

So says the guy who {kinda?} addressed exactly one of my many points before fleeing.

One might very well think that you're really not up for an actual debate here.


I've given you clear evidence against your main point. You will simply ignore it as usual.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
Your conclusion has no basis in the evidence cited.

LMAO


Originally posted by The_Tempest
Where does Filoni claim that Grievous is an unreliable standard for comparison?



Very clearly here:

"If you are afraid of the many swirling blades, then you'll parish staring at them. But if you can just focus through it, you can defeat that opponent"


^ He's given the exact reasons why any Jedi/Sith would defeat Grievous or be defeated by Grievous, which has almost nothing to do with their actual combat ability compared with other Jedi/Sith as he's clearly stated here:

"I don't see how he can hope to be as proficient as a Jedi or a Sith could be fighting with a lightsaber"



But by all means keep grasping for whatever straws you can, just like you've done for years since Filoni clearly stated Opress fought better than Fisto+Tiin+Kolar.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Across 6 seasons of The Clone Wars, we see a considerable number of foes engage Grievous to varying degrees of success and failure.

It's clearly explained above why that is. Try understanding what Filoni (word of god as per Tempest) is saying.


Originally posted by The_Tempest
The only way Grievous wouldn't be an adequate medium for comparison is if anyone who engaged Grievous could defeat him with the same level of ease as any other potential fighter. {E.g., someone like Ahsoka beating Grievous's ass as thoroughly as someone like Yoda.}


Ahsoka wasn't even a fully trained Jedi. And yet even she managed to fight off Grievous one time. By your own medium of comparison Kenobi should be capable of stomping Grievous anytime he fights him. Which he actually is as per Filoni.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
But that's not what Filoni says nor is that what happens. So I can only conclude that this is a transparent attempt to invalidate Kit's performance against Grievous. Perhaps because it makes you uncomfortable to see that he performed so well against an opponent that Obi-Wan himself has been known to struggle with. mmm


Addressed very clearly above.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
That's funny? No one is suggesting Grievous is the equal of someone like Ventress, Obi-Wan, or Kit Fisto. He's obviously not.


So then you admit Kenobi solidly defeating Ventress in TCW Movie in and of itself is a far better showing than Fisto's performance against Grievous right?

Good. You're basically finishing my argument off for me.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
I already invited you to provide the quote:



Curious that you've yet to actually do so and instead opt for bluster. mmm


That's pretty funny, because you've definitely asked me for that quote in the past, and I definitely provided it. You must have used your selective reading of Filoni's quotes as per usual:

Filoni (word of god as per Tempest) said regarding Kenobi getting subdued by Maul and Opress end of S4 this:


http://uk.ign.com/articles/2012/03/21/star-wars-the-clone-wars-looking-back-at-season-4?page=4

"There was an original version where, in the hologram, Savage was standing with Maul when they communicate with the Jedi Temple, but I said, "This really doesn't work if they're both there." Because are not aware of the connection between them. So if he's not there, it's actually more believable that they could surprise Obi-Wan and actually take him out. That was a very difficult thing to set up to make you believe that they could take out Obi-Wan."




Don't worry, I'm sure it's nothing he wouldn't say about Kit Fisto:

http://www.starwars.com/video/wrath-of-the-sith


1:24-1:32


"You know getting taken out by Sidious is pretty good, ranks up there.. He puts up a better fight than the Jedi Council did, I'll say that much for him."


Ooops!




Originally posted by The_Tempest
Tangling with quan has definitely frazzled what little semblance of civility you had left. {protip: that drastic shift suggests that he's successfully gotten to you as a troll.} Your relative {and quick!} hostility with Selenial and your aggressiveness towards me are all wildly entertaining. I am well pleased by your transformation. excellent


I see you've been following me all over KMC, checking who I'm talking, obsessing what I'm up to.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
But you've got a long way to go before you can successfully troll me, DP. {Besides, I remember how quickly you conformed to my stance on the whole Maul/Opress/Sidious platform despite aggressively arguing otherwise for months.} stoned

There was more to my post btw. Feel free to address it.


Don't need to Trolll you. That's your game.

I just successfully kick your butt over and over and over.

excellent

(Would you mind addressing the rest of my argument before I respond to your post here? I'd like to give a complete rebuttal.)

Originally posted by The_Tempest
excellent

(Would you mind addressing the rest of my argument before I respond to your post here? I'd like to give a complete rebuttal.)


Ok later.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
"I mean, it's just me..." I know. Which is why I don't understand why people put so much weight into those comments, seeing as how it's just his opinion and now it is contradicted by official sources.

Indeed. Filoni is a reliable source on various matters, but he's making it quite clear this is his opinion.

Not that that opinion supports DP's argument. Neither Kenobi nor Fisto were lacking in resolve, they were on the same level playing field. You need more than resolve to defeat Grievous, to defeat anybody, you need skill.

And aside from resolve that is all that contributed to their respective and similar victories.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
I know. Which is why I don't understand why people put so much weight into those comments, seeing as how it's just his opinion and now it is contradicted by official sources. Don't worry, the silent majority overrules the rabble.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
"I mean, it's just me..."So what your saying is that you admit the absurdity of your own argument? I see.


No I'm using Filoni's words against Tempest, as he clings to his words when/how they suit his argument referring to them as (word of god).

In any case, whatever the source books say, Filoni's words should certainly be taken into consideration when citing evidence from his own damn series. And that only further supports my argument, that Fisto beating Grievous in a series from a guy with those kind of views, isn't proof of him being on par with Kenobi. Not even close.

Kenobi has consistently proven himself to be on par with Darth Maul (which the same source book says is one of the deadliest and best trained Sith in the Sith's entire history), and Darth Vader.

You can't just keep referring to Cestus Deception (where Fisto in incapable of defeating Ventress), or TCW episode where he beats Grievous (created by a guy with the views I've stated) to prove he's on par with the likes of Maul and Vader.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
No I'm using Filoni's words against Tempest, as he clings to his words when/how they suit his argument referring to them as (word of god).

In any case, whatever the source books say, Filoni's words should certainly be taken into consideration when citing evidence from his own damn series. And that only further supports my argument, that Fisto beating Grievous in a series from a guy with those kind of views, isn't proof of him being on par with Kenobi. Not even close.Ah I see, so your ridiculing Tempest for "clinging" to Filoni's words as and when they suit his argument, while hiding behind Filoni's words now that they happen to suit your argument.

Good work sir.
And Kenobi himself stated Fisto was one of the greatest Jedi duelists in the Order's history:
Your point?It proves that Fisto is on par with Kenobi, that is enough.

Sure Kit beat GG but it was under different circumstances than when Kenobi-wan beat GG.

Kit Fisto had fog which let him use stealth on GG. Furthermore Kit was wielding two blades while GG was wielding 3/4.

But when Kenobi-wan beat GG they were in a neutral environment with GG wielding all 4 blades. Plus GG was going all out and fighting harder than he ever had before.

Kit beat a GG who was missing a lightsaber, taking the fight less seriously, and while exploiting the environment

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Ah I see, so your ridiculing Tempest for "clinging" to Filoni's words as and when they suit his argument, while hiding behind Filoni's words now that they happen to suit your argument.

Good work sir.


Do you actually have an argument here, or are you learning from Tempest's method of "if in doubt attack the person whose argument you don't like"

I've already explained, if you bothered reading, that when comparing fights in HIS series, HIS words are still pretty relevant.





Originally posted by Beniboybling
And Kenobi himself stated Fisto was one of the greatest Jedi duelists in the Order's history:


So? Dock's called the same. Does that make Fisto and Dooku equals? Do you have any idea how to make a logical argument?

There's nothing, no indication anywhere to even hint Fisto is a match for the likes of Ventress, Maul, Opress and Vader. Kenobi is.



Originally posted by Beniboybling
Your point?It proves that Fisto is on par with Kenobi, that is enough.


No. It proves he WAS on par with him very early in the Clone Wars in a novel in which Fisto was clearly no match for Ventress. Kenobi has proven himself far and beyond Ventress level consistently since then.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Do you actually have an argument here, or are you learning from Tempest's method of "if in doubt attack the person whose argument you don't like"

I've already explained, if you bothered reading, that when comparing fights in HIS series, HIS words are still pretty relevant.Lol sure thing.That's besides the point, the point is Maul's accolades doesn't make Fisto out of his league.
Aside from that duel he had with Grievous...I don't know what your talking about, but I'm talking about Grievous.

Originally posted by The_Tempest


Actually, the Grievous Fisto battled was so fresh we might as well have called him the Prince of Bel Air.



Brand new armor, hometurf advantage, and the benefit of backup. When Grievous battled Obi-Wan in ROTS, the state of his armor is unattested and he eschewed backup.


It was also a Grievous with no where near the training he had by the time he got decimated by Kenobi in ROTS. As Grievous himself points out before his fight with Kenobi, despite him and Kenobi having clashed blades plenty times before.


Originally posted by The_Tempest
Nonsense. The no.1 priority was to stop Sidious. Grievous was, in comparison, a relatively minor obstacle.

Grievous in and of himself wasn't that important. But his role in the politics after Dooku's death was crucial. The Jedi Council knew they would have to/could force Palpatine to give up power after Grievous's destruction, and that would draw out Darth Sidious.

The film and novel makes this perfectly clear.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
No, Fisto was chosen for the no.1 priority {stopping Sidious}. Obi-Wan was elected to tackle a low-rent flunky tbh.

So is your argument that Tiin, Kolar and Fisto are all =/> Kenobi because they stayed behind.

Also you seem to not be able to make the proper distinction between who was chosen to do what in what order.

It was never that Fisto was chosen first to tackle Sidious over Kenobi. No, Kenobi was chosen first to destroy Grievous once and for all. He was chosen over Fisto for that, leaving Fisto/Tiin/Kolar to help Mace against Sidious. Are the 3 of them combined superior to Kenobi. Of course.

So this speculative stance of yours really doesn't have much relevance to the topic at hand. There's no evidence anywhere that Fisto is on par with Kenobi.




Originally posted by The_Tempest
Actually, he implied that Obi-Wan's swordsmanship was superior to his and Yoda's. You're free to pursue that line of thought, if you wish.


He implied Kenobi was =/> himself as a swordsman only. He implied Kenobi might be even superior to Yoda in a sword fight against Grievous only.

The fact that Windu is even thinking along those lines proves:

1) Windu sees Kenobi as one of the top 3 elite swordsmen on the Council.

2) It further proves my point about Grievous being a terrible medium to compare different Jedi against.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
I know why Obi-Wan was sent after Grievous. The question is: do you know why Fisto was kept in reserve against Sidious? mmm


Explained above.




Originally posted by The_Tempest
The burden of proof is for anyone who makes a claim, DP.



LOL It's not for me to prove someone's on par with one of the deadliest and best trained Sith of all time.

By that argument you could randomly put Kanan or Ahsoka on par with Darth Maul, and you're saying it would be up to me to prove he's not that good?

Nope, the burden of proof is on you to place Fisto on such a tier. And FYI, Fisto's performance against Sidious compared to that of Maul's and even Opress's performance (as confirmed by Filoni) doesn't exactly help Fisto's case.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
You're drawing conclusions inferred from evidence. That's all well and good. The problem, however, is when you hold others to a higher standard regarding the burden of proof. Why, that's just downright hypocritical, if you ask me.

Nah, all I've done is provide proof and reasoning for the league Kenobi is in.

You on the other hand are speculating on situations in a completely new way to how they've always been interpreted. And then actually trying to pass that pretty biased speculation as proof no less.

Things like "oh why was Kenobi there, and why was Fisto here?" is frankly far far away from solid evidence.

Kenobi-wan>>Kit. Just deal with it

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Lol sure thing.


Ah yes, if in doubt just roll with the LOL'S

Originally posted by Beniboybling
That's besides the point, the point is Maul's accolades doesn't make Fisto out of his league.


So... Better feats, and better accolades, don't make Maul better than Fisto?

Urm, yes they almost certainly do.

Heck Fisto's got nothing to even put him on Opress's level. In fact it's been clearly stated Opress fought better against Sidious than Fisto was even capable of.



Originally posted by Beniboybling
Aside from that duel he had with Grievous...I don't know what your talking about, but I'm talking about Grievous.


Ah right, everyone who beats Grievous is in the same league now? So Eeth Koth also on par with Kenobi then?

As I thought, There doesn't seem to be any logical approach to your arguments.

It's more a case of, "I've decided Fisto is on par with Kenobi, and will make the any facts I can find support that theory."


Originally posted by WildBantha88
Kenobi-wan>>Kit. Just deal with it





They do need to learn to deal with it.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
It was also a Grievous with no where near the training he had by the time he got decimated by Kenobi in ROTS. As Grievous himself points out before his fight with Kenobi, despite him and Kenobi having clashed blades plenty times before.

He points out in ROTS that Dooku trained him in the Jedi arts, not that he'd had more training. Are you suggesting that Grievous hadn't been trained in the Jedi arts at all prior to his confrontation with Obi-Wan on Utapau?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Grievous in and of himself wasn't that important.

Precisely!

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
But his role in the politics after Dooku's death was crucial. The Jedi Council knew they would have to/could force Palpatine to give up power after Grievous's destruction, and that would draw out Darth Sidious.

The film and novel makes this perfectly clear.

Busting your balls aside, obviously eliminating Grievous was important. But still nowhere near as important as defeating Darth Sidious. Fisto was kept in reserve to be part of the more important task. Why would they logically assign a more crucial task to an inferior warrior?

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
So is your argument that Tiin, Kolar and Fisto are all =/> Kenobi because they stayed behind.

Yeah, my argument is and has always been that the meat and potatoes of the Jedi Council are more or less on par with one another with the obvious exceptions/prodigies {Yoda, Mace, Anakin} being noted.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Also you seem to not be able to make the proper distinction between who was chosen to do what in what order.

It was never that Fisto was chosen first to tackle Sidious over Kenobi. No, Kenobi was chosen first to destroy Grievous once and for all. He was chosen over Fisto for that, leaving Fisto/Tiin/Kolar to help Mace against Sidious. Are the 3 of them combined superior to Kenobi. Of course.

So this speculative stance of yours really doesn't have much relevance to the topic at hand. There's no evidence anywhere that Fisto is on par with Kenobi.

The order of assignments is irrelevant because both warriors {Obi-Wan & Kit} and both goals {eliminating Grievous & eliminating Sidious} were established and considered before either decision was made. It wasn't like they'd already sent Obi-Wan to Utapau before factoring in a possible confrontation with Sidious. As you say, the goal was to get Grievous as part of an effort to lure Sidious out of hiding.

Obi-Wan was chosen to tackle a far lesser assignment with a far less dangerous quarry. Fisto was to be deployed on a far more important assignment involving a far more dangerous adversary.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
He implied Kenobi was =/> himself as a swordsman only. He implied Kenobi might be even superior to Yoda in a sword fight against Grievous only.

No, he implied that because Kenobi's mastery of Soresu addresses no fundamental weakness whereas Mace's Vaapad and Yoda's Ataru do, that Obi-Wan was the superior swordsman. We know that this obviously isn't true and that Mace and Yoda, despite Mace's pep talk, are both superior swordsmen and Force users to Obi-Wan.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
The fact that Windu is even thinking along those lines proves:

1) Windu sees Kenobi as one of the top 3 elite swordsmen on the Council.

You're trying to conform Mace's remarks to suit your conclusion. He doesn't say Obi-Wan is top 3. He implies that Obi-Wan is better than both he and Yoda. You're welcome to pursue that line of thought if you wish, but don't put words in Mace's mouth.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
2) It further proves my point about Grievous being a terrible medium to compare different Jedi against.

But again, he's not, as various combatants perform to varying degrees of success with Grievous.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
LOL It's not for me to prove someone's on par with one of the deadliest and best trained Sith of all time.

By that argument you could randomly put Kanan or Ahsoka on par with Darth Maul, and you're saying it would be up to me to prove he's not that good?

Nope, no one is asking you to prove a negative. I'm asking you to prove that Obi-Wan is on a different tier than Fisto.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Nope, the burden of proof is on you to place Fisto on such a tier. And FYI, Fisto's performance against Sidious compared to that of Maul's and even Opress's performance (as confirmed by Filoni) doesn't exactly help Fisto's case.

A pretty weak argument when you consider that, per George, only Mace and Yoda can "compete" with Sidious. {Meaning Obi-Wan, like Kit, can't.} Filoni himself says that Maul and Opress can't compete with Sidious either. He was toying with them and yet "unleashed his full fury" {The New Essential Chronology against Mace's B-Team. What you're seeing is the difference between a Sidious courting battle {"The Lawless"} versus a Sidious going immediately for the kill {ROTS}.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Nah, all I've done is provide proof and reasoning for the league Kenobi is in.

Nah, you assert Obi-Wan is better because he has more feats to draw on. The feat-only approach has gotten you into trouble in the past {Barriss, anyone?}.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
You on the other hand are speculating on situations in a completely new way to how they've always been interpreted. And then actually trying to pass that pretty biased speculation as proof no less.

'Bias'.

Your preference for Obi-Wan is well-established. I have nothing against Kenobi; suggesting that he's on par with another all-time great {Fisto} only means that I think they're both that awesome.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Things like "oh why was Kenobi there, and why was Fisto here?" is frankly far far away from solid evidence.

It's a pretty damn good question to ask tbh. That Fisto was kept in reserve against a greater adversary in no way suggests a great disparity with Obi-Wan. Doesn't make any sense to keep 3 losers on-hand to tackle the galaxy's greatest threat and simultaneously send their 3rd {or first, if you take Mace's pep talk at face value} best fighter to handle a relatively minor obstacle like Grievous.

Between that fact, the fact that neither one are considered to be remote competition for Sidious, their comparable performances against the General, numerous accolades for Kit's own ability, and the fact that Fisto was established to be greater than Obi-Wan at one point during the war... I'd say my case makes itself pretty well.

There's no reason to believe there's any real disparity between Kit and Obi-Wan.

Tempest, I see you haven't yet addressed the article I provided where Filoni puts Kenobi above S4 Maul + Opress combined, saying it simply wouldn't be believable that a newly resurrected Maul and Opress combined could take a ready Obi-Wan without the element of surprise.

But given that I've been slow replying to you, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you will address that at some point.


Originally posted by The_Tempest
He points out in ROTS that Dooku trained him in the Jedi arts, not that he'd had more training. Are you suggesting that Grievous hadn't been trained in the Jedi arts at all prior to his confrontation with Obi-Wan on Utapau?


Given that Grievous has tangled many times with Kenobi during TCW, it's only logical to assume that Grievous has only brought this point up in ROTS, because he's had Further training since they last met. Why else suddenly mention that after already having fought him so many times.

Do you at least agree that Grievous was trained by Dooku during TCW? And therefore would logically be better trained by the end of TCW than near the beginning of TCW?



Originally posted by The_Tempest
Precisely!



Busting your balls aside, obviously eliminating Grievous was important. But still nowhere near as important as defeating Darth Sidious. Fisto was kept in reserve to be part of the more important task. Why would they logically assign a more crucial task to an inferior warrior?


Because there was logic to where everyone had to be. Yoda himself wasn't there, to draw out the Sith Lord. That doesn't mean they kept Mace there because Mace =/> Yoda.

Kenobi wasn't there because it was of utmost importance to destroy Grievous this time, again to draw out the Sith Lord. So again the fact that Fisto/Tiin/Kolar were chosen to stay behind doesn't mean each one of them is =/> Kenobi.

As someone else has already pointed out to you, Fisto himself remarks he wishes Kenobi was there.


Btw, the reason I wasn't addressing these points at first was because other people were addressing them just nicely.


Originally posted by The_Tempest
Yeah, my argument is and has always been that the meat and potatoes of the Jedi Council are more or less on par with one another with the obvious exceptions/prodigies {Yoda, Mace, Anakin} being noted.


Actually there was a time when you were not even placing Anakin in the elite. First couple of seasons of TCW, you remarked that TCW is proving that neither Anakin or Kenobi are exceptional Jedi (I assume you meant compared with the other notable Jedi, and were basing that on the fights Fisto/Koth put against Grievous and Luminara put against Ventress).

Well your theory of the majority of Council Members being pretty much on par came to a crash when Adi Gallia fought alongside Kenobi against Maul and Opress. Also when in the Old EU comic Sith Hunters (which was contributed to by both Filoni and Katie Lucas) Opress dominated Plo Koon in their fight.

So who are these meat and potatoes of the Jedi Council? Because they already seem to exclude Adi Gallia and Plo Koon? And are all these meat and potatoes of the Jedi Council on par with Darth Maul and Darth Vader as Kenobi has consistently proven himself to be?



Originally posted by The_Tempest
The order of assignments is irrelevant because both warriors {Obi-Wan & Kit} and both goals {eliminating Grievous & eliminating Sidious} were established and considered before either decision was made. It wasn't like they'd already sent Obi-Wan to Utapau before factoring in a possible confrontation with Sidious. As you say, the goal was to get Grievous as part of an effort to lure Sidious out of hiding.

Obi-Wan was chosen to tackle a far lesser assignment with a far less dangerous quarry. Fisto was to be deployed on a far more important assignment involving a far more dangerous adversary.


Addressed above.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
No, he implied that because Kenobi's mastery of Soresu addresses no fundamental weakness whereas Mace's Vaapad and Yoda's Ataru do, that Obi-Wan was the superior swordsman. We know that this obviously isn't true and that Mace and Yoda, despite Mace's pep talk, are both superior swordsmen and Force users to Obi-Wan.


I don't have the exact quote with me but I'm almost certain he was saying Kenobi was the best swordsman "to tackle Grievous" due to his total mastery of a very pure form.

Again proving Grievous is not the best medium for comparing different Jedi combat abilities with.

Windu did however imply that as a Pure Swordsman, Kenobi might be on par with or perhaps even better than himself. Naturally however a reasonable amount of modesty should be accounted for in that statement.




Originally posted by The_Tempest
You're trying to conform Mace's remarks to suit your conclusion. He doesn't say Obi-Wan is top 3. He implies that Obi-Wan is better than both he and Yoda. You're welcome to pursue that line of thought if you wish, but don't put words in Mace's mouth.


Funny, because you almost definitely seem to be trying to conform the order of events, and who was given what assignment, to suit your own conclusion as well.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
But again, he's not, as various combatants perform to varying degrees of success with Grievous.


I've already showed you how the creators of TCW were thinking of Grievous. Going by that he's certainly not a great medium to compare Jedi, because it just depends mind set and/or on who worked out the best way to battle him.

But if you really insist on him as a fair medium, would it be fair to compare Grievous's One full on fight with Fisto, to Kenobi's first full on fight with Grievous? Because that was in fact in "Grievous Intrigue" if you check the correct chronological order of TCW:

http://www.starwars.com/news/star-wars-the-clone-wars-chronological-episodeorder

And comparing it Kenobi seems better tbh. Kenobi in that fight is taking on Grievous's spinning blades in a pretty tight space. Plus he's fighting off a Magnaguard simultaneously. (Grievous actually initally challenged Kenobi with 2 Magnaguards).

And yet it was Grievous who ran from Kenobi in that instance. This was also on Grievous's own ship, so also his "home turf." Compare that to Fisto, who never actually "defeated" Grievous despite fighting him out in the open, and when it was Fisto who ran as soon as Magnaguards showed up.

Kenobi may have had more fights to have more impressive performances against Grievous (like in ROTS), but he also had more fights with which to look "bad" against Grievous.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
Nope, no one is asking you to prove a negative. I'm asking you to prove that Obi-Wan is on a different tier than Fisto.

Nah, you assert Obi-Wan is better because he has more feats to draw on. The feat-only approach has gotten you into trouble in the past {Barriss, anyone?}.




Firstly Barriss what? If anything Barriss's performance against Skwyalker further proves you can't reliably compare fights against just 1 opponent, otherwise yeah Barriss seems almost on par with Count Dooku

And if you can't use fights against just 1 Dark Jedi as an appropriate medium, then you certainly can't use 1 Non-Force sensitive as an appropriate medium. Especially not one who has been specifically stated by TCW creators will lead to inconsistent fights depending on the Jedi mindset, and technique used to fight him.

If you really think that 1 Force sensitive is honestly a really good comparison medium as which to compare Jedi, then I give you these 2 fights:

?v=_Vtj5YxDcCk

and

?v=zEu_U78XFg4


and conclude from them that clearly Kenobi > Maul

See how that works

Originally posted by The_Tempest
A pretty weak argument when you consider that, per George, only Mace and Yoda can "compete" with Sidious. {Meaning Obi-Wan, like Kit, can't.} Filoni himself says that Maul and Opress can't compete with Sidious either. He was toying with them and yet "unleashed his full fury" {The New Essential Chronology against Mace's B-Team. What you're seeing is the difference between a Sidious courting battle {"The Lawless"} versus a Sidious going immediately for the kill {ROTS}.


Again you seem to take the quotes of Filoni and Lucas you like and ignore what you don't like.

Filoni states Grievous's fights against Jedi will be very inconsistent depending on their mind set.

Filoni states Opress put up a better fight against Sidious than the Jedi Council. (Which is consistent and makes perfect sense given Opress eats Council Members for breakfast).

The fact that neither Opress or the Jedi Council members in question can compete with Sidious does not negate Opress simply putting up a better fight than them. After all Fisto certainly put up a better fight against Sidious than Kolar and Tiin did. Without question.

Just because there were certainly parts of the fight where Sidious toyed with the brothers, doesn't mean he was toying with every Saber strike he made. That's why Filoni made those comments, and that's why his comments are not inconsistent with anything else he said.




Originally posted by The_Tempest
Your preference for Obi-Wan is well-established. I have nothing against Kenobi; suggesting that he's on par with another all-time great {Fisto} only means that I think they're both that awesome.


In terms of "my preferences" I'll have you know I prefer Maul to Kenobi. And yet I put them on par with each other, because that's what the evidence shows.

As for Fisto being great, that doesn't mean you're not lowballing Kenobi in this case. Because Kenobi is great. But putting Dooku down to Kenobi's level would still be a great disservice to Dooku. And comparing Dooku to Kenobi based on nothing but their individual encounters with Anakin (one opponent who actually is a force sensitive), would be terribly misleading.



Originally posted by The_Tempest
It's a pretty damn good question to ask tbh. That Fisto was kept in reserve against a greater adversary in no way suggests a great disparity with Obi-Wan. Doesn't make any sense to keep 3 losers on-hand to tackle the galaxy's greatest threat and simultaneously send their 3rd {or first, if you take Mace's pep talk at face value} best fighter to handle a relatively minor obstacle like Grievous.
Between that fact, the fact that neither one are considered to be remote competition for Sidious, their comparable performances against the General, numerous accolades for Kit's own ability, and the fact that Fisto was established to be greater than Obi-Wan at one point during the war... I'd say my case makes itself pretty well.



Addressed already. But FYI asking good questions, and drawing conclusions is speculating.


Originally posted by The_Tempest

Between that fact, the fact that neither one are considered to be remote competition for Sidious, their comparable performances against the General, numerous accolades for Kit's own ability, and the fact that Fisto was established to be greater than Obi-Wan at one point during the war... I'd say my case makes itself pretty well.

There's no reason to believe there's any real disparity between Kit and Obi-Wan.


I think I've provided a pretty thorough case of:

1) The top tier league Kenobi is in.
2) Shown that using a single non-force sensitive is NOT a good medium of comparison,
3) That even if we compare Kenobi's 1st fight with that non-force sensitive he still looked better than Fisto,
4) Comparing fights with a different non-force sensitive he looks Better than Maul, and
5) That most Jedi Council Members are NOT on par with each other.


So if you want to prove that Fisto is above Most other Council members and on par with Kenobi and Maul (as in clearly above the likes of Ventress and Opress) than the Onus of proof is on you. Because not only does Kenobi have more "feats" than Fisto like you like to point out, but he has "far Superior" feats to Fisto, which you try to put aside.



As I final note I would like to point out how much better the more sensible debating is now, without the constant cockiness, insulting (on both sides) and silly GIFS.

Kenobi has defeated Maul and Vader. Fisto has done nothing that compares.

Kenobi > Fisto.

It really makes little sense that any Jedi past their "Bear Clan" years would have significant trouble with Grievous. Grievous can't use the Force. You could just Force push him and stuff like that. How can he defend against it, other than possibly magnetizing himself to the floor?

Originally posted by Darth Luminous
It really makes little sense that any Jedi past their "Bear Clan" years would have significant trouble with Grievous. Grievous can't use the Force. You could just Force push him and stuff like that. How can he defend against it, other than possibly magnetizing himself to the floor? simple. GG is far too durable for that tactic to do anything other than send him flying. GG is a guy who has tanked being crashed into by speeder bikes and thrown through stone statues. He goes flying, gets up, and comes back at you. And most Jedi can't generate that level of power anyways. Ahsoka was only able to push him back a bit, and by feats Ahsoka is on the level of most typical Jedi Masters. Unless your Mace Windu TKing GG isn't an option. And GG dominates in sabers

He goes flying, gets up, and comes back at you.

Or he runs away.

And most Jedi can't generate that level of power anyways.

Why not? Isn't it all about belief in the Force?

Ahsoka was only able to push him back a bit, and by feats Ahsoka is on the level of most typical Jedi Masters.

If Ahsoka can Force-push a Retail Droid out of frame, why can't she do the same thing to Grievous?

Unless your Mace Windu TKing GG isn't an option.

Unless you're Obi-Wan, Kit, Ventress, etc.

Ashoka could probably hold either Saesee or Kolar at bay for awhile considering she did so with equal or stronger foes like Ventress or Grievous.
Obi-Wan could handily defeat either of Fisto, Kolar or Tinn i'm not sure if he could beat 2 but if he could the 3rd would probably beat ashoka by that point

Mace would kill Anakin.

Team 2 wins

Obi-wan is not 'handily' defeating three of the greatest Jedi swordsman ever.

Originally posted by Darth Luminous
Not always. Obi-Wan seems to get more proficient at fighting Grievous as the series goes on.


That's the point. If Kenobi were just absolutely better, then that wouldn't be the case. Kenobi wouldn't require several shots at the same opponent to only do just as good as a playful Fisto if he were solidly above Kit.

Imagine what Fisto would do if he had the same amount of shots at Grievous. I mean, in his first fight against the cyborg, he could have ended him quickly, but he instead allowed Grievous back on his feet and continued to batter him.

Unless you're suggesting that Kenobi surpassed Fisto as the series went on, but even his last fight with Grievous didn't show it. I mean, we could presume Grievous got absolutely better than when he fought Fisto, but logically, Fisto should have increased even more so, being a force user and all. He has precognition and force enhanced speed (among other force using abilities that would serve in a saber duel) that would be honed over the course of time, whereas Grievous doesn't. I've never heard of him receiving upgrades every month. He's a cyborg who can adapt to saber forms within a few exchanges, which is an advantage he had when he faced Kit. Nothing changed about him, other than skill perhaps, but same for Fisto.

Force users have more to improve, hence Kenobi finally defeating Grievous solidly, when he otherwise could not.

DP, I'm also curious, what's wrong with being on par with Fisto? He's a beast. Also, Kenobi was floored by an unarmed Viszla, who wasn't even using his weaponry at the time, and at one point forcing Kenobi to use the force. Where were you getting at with those videos?

Tempest is a trained/experienced fighter, and anyone who has even a little training or experience wouldn't think of Kenobi as being solidly above Fisto based on their respective showings against the same opponent, unless theirs a difference in circumstance, but in this case the circumstance favored Kenobi more than it did Fisto, so there goes that. I've never seen anything from Temp to indicate that he has a bias against Obi Wan. He just doesn't see him as being right below Anakin, with everyone else far below that, and I agree with him on that, as there's nothing conclusive to support that notion.

Because Kit took one of his sabers in combat, you mean.



Lol @ Grievous holding back against Kit and Mace.



He actually gets progressively worse at it.

Originally posted by NewGuy01

He actually gets progressively worse at it.

That makes sense though. Grievous was able to analyze and develop counters Mace's Vaapad in seconds. By the time of the Clone Wars Grievous had likely thoroughly analyzed Kenobi's Soresu. Kit Fisto's Shi-Cho was likely unfamiliar to Grievous, had they had a second encounter I doubt Fisto would have defeated him so soundly.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66


DP, I'm also curious, what's wrong with being on par with Fisto? He's a beast.


Because of this:


Originally posted by ares834
Kenobi has defeated Maul and Vader. Fisto has done nothing that compares.

Kenobi > Fisto.




To say Kenobi and Fisto are equals, would be to say Fisto and Maul are equals, or heck even that Fisto and Vader are equals! Whatever great showings Fisto has, he really doesn't have the right to be put in the same league with 2 of the Most Powerful Sith Lords of all time.

If you want to argue extenuating circumstances for those wins/draws of Kenobi, that's fine. But I don't buy it, especially not against Maul.


Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Also, Kenobi was floored by an unarmed Viszla, who wasn't even using his weaponry at the time, and at one point forcing Kenobi to use the force. Where were you getting at with those videos?

Maul was also disarmed by Vizsla, and certainly seemed to give Maul a much harder longer fought fight.

Now I'm not arguing your points about the different ways in which those 2 fights played out. But Fisto and Kenobi's fights against Grievous have also played out very differently. Rarely has Kenobi fought Grievous 1 on 1 out in the open like that.

My point was to compare Jedi based singular fights against a Non-Force sensitive (especially with Grievous's intimidating twirling blades scenario as explained by Filoni) is not the best comparison mode at all. Filoni certainly seems to agree with that in Grievous's case, and he was the supervising director of all these Fisto/Kenobi fights against Grievous.

I mean heck Ahsoka looks better than Kenobi if we compare her fight against Cad Bane to one of Kenobi's worse showing against him.

Whilst something like Kenobi vs Maul, is a fight comparing 2 opponents with the same kind of Jedi/Sith powers, and that has been a very consistent thing for Kenobi. 3/3 fights he's shown he's in Maul's league during TCW series.

In fact Filoni thinks S4 Maul and Opress combined couldn't beat Kenobi without the element of surprise.

So despite many low showings, Kenobi clearly gets his s*** together when up against Maul.



Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Tempest is a trained/experienced fighter,


That's good for him. But I'm willing to bet he's not as good a fighter as Arhael who also makes arguments for Kenobi based on real life fighting.

Next thread: Tempest vs Arhael real life


Let's face it everyone has certain biases in debates, so there's no point in bringing up who has better real life experience to decide whose probably got the better points.


Originally posted by NewGuy01


He actually gets progressively worse at it.


Which kind of proves Grievous was improving more throughout TCW than Kenobi was. Likely due to his training with Count Dooku throughout TCW.

to that post.

Fisto's performance against Grievous is no more impressive than Kenobi's in RotS.
Fisto took out one Griveous' arm due to taunting and hiding in mist then used a Force push to floor Grievous.

Kenobi engaged Grievous in a fair saber fight and took out two arms without taunting or hiding before Force pushing him as well.

Fisto did manage to drive Grievous back with use of second lightsaber but it doesn't prove anything. Kenobi utilizes defensive style, so driving someone back can't be expected of him even against inferior opponents.


That's good for him. But I'm willing to bet he's not as good a fighter as Arhael who also makes arguments for Kenobi based on real life fighting.

Next thread: Tempest vs Arhael real life

Lol

Windu struggled against Grievous too. Fisto is on par with Windu confirmed.