Canon Ben Kenobi + Rebels Ahsoka vs ROTS Yoda

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



Rockydonovang
Two near equals for the apprentice of the most powerful sith in history face off against the most powerful force user in history up until Sidious himself

|King Joker|
Yoda.

UCanShootMyNova
Yoda.

Kurk
This is stupid; Yoda obviously

darthbane77
Yoda blitzes

relentless1
Yoda

NewGuy01
Rebels Ben and Rebels Ahsoka vs Rebels Yoda would have been a thematically cooler thread. uhuh

nfactor1995
Ben and Ahsoka aren't near equals for Vader tbh. Yoda wins either regardless.

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by nfactor1995
Ben and Ahsoka aren't near equals for Vader tbh. Yoda wins either regardless.
1 fought evenly with him

The other challenged him on a ds nexus for almost two minutes

Seem like near equals to me

nfactor1995
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
1 fought evenly with him

The other challenged him on a ds nexus for almost two minutes

Seem like near equals to me

Challenging someone doesn't really make you an equal or near equal. Near equal implies that you'd be capable of taking rounds out of 10, maybe even up to 5 (but more like 2-3). Do you honestly think Ahsoka or Ben are beating Vader 3-5 times out of 10 fights? If so, why?

Also wasn't Ben being pretty quickly overwhelmed by Vader in their ANH fight? Sure he was sort of holding his own, but it's not like he had a chance at winning from what I've heard about the supplementary material (i.e. not the movie).

Petrus
Yoda wins.

And Rebels Ben and Ahsoka aren't Vader's equals, but they sure as hell aren't that much below him, especially Ben.

DarthAnt66
Originally posted by nfactor1995
Near equal implies that you'd be capable of taking rounds out of 10, maybe even up to 5 (but more like 2-3).
Not really. I'd argue Kenobi's form is created in such a way that he can equal out many combatants he couldn't beat.

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by Petrus
Yoda wins.

And Rebels Ben and Ahsoka aren't Vader's equals, but they sure as hell aren't that much below him, especially Ben.
hence why i said near equals

Darth Thor
Ben Kenobi might be a near equal to Vader.

But I'd say Ahsoka is closer to Maul than Vader given their fights against Inquisitors and against each other.

DarthAnt66
Pretty sure Canon has Ben = Vader in skill, but Vader edges out due to physical strength.

Lucas seemed to think Ben >> Vader in the Force, though.

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Ben Kenobi might be a near equal to Vader.

But I'd say Ahsoka is closer to Maul than Vader given their fights against Inquisitors and against each other.
Nah, that's easily attributed to malachor being a nexus.

The Fact that Ahsoka was able to contend with vader for almost 2 minutes(50 seconds off screen) and only started clearly being at a clear disadvatage for the last 20 seconds or so on a ds nexus makes me think that on even ground she'd be right below vader and on par with ben tbh.

And I'd argue the nexus is pretty significant given it elevated the inquisitors from being stomped by ahsoka to being able to individually able to hold their own against her.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Nah, that's easily attributed to malachor being a nexus.


The DS Nexus which the Story Group can't confirm amplified Maul and Vader in combat.

Even Filoni has made zero mention of any such amp.

So yeah speculation.


Originally posted by Rockydonovang


And I'd argue the nexus is pretty significant given it elevated the inquisitors from being stomped by ahsoka to being able to individually able to hold their own against her.


Actually Ahsoka's stomping the Inquisitors (off Malachor) was pretty similar to the level at which Maul was stomping them (on Malachor), hence further evidence Maul and Ahsoka are approx on par.

MythLord
Ahsoka solos. She tanked a Force Push from Vader and even landed one on him. Let me just remind you how Vader practically one-shoted Yoda's equal, Sidious, with a Force Wave:
http://www.blastr.com/sites/blastr/files/styles/width_1280/public/DarthVader001_02-03-600x464.jpg?itok=m7xpa5iQ

Add to that Ahsoka didn't get incapacitated by Sidious' lightning as per Filoni, whereas Yoda did... And it's clear that Ahsoka solos.

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Actually Ahsoka's stomping the Inquisitors (off Malachor) was pretty similar to the level at which Maul was stomping them (on Malachor), hence further evidence Maul and Ahsoka are approx on par.

Stomping seems a very one-sided view on it, the Inquisitors at least held their own as many times as they were defeated.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Stomping seems a very one-sided view on it, the Inquisitors at least held their own as many times as they were defeated.


Against who? Maul or Ahsoka?

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Against who? Maul or Ahsoka?

Ahsoka. Maul never really faced one for a prolonged time so drawing a deceisive conclusion is difficult.

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by Darth Thor
The DS Nexus which the Story Group can't confirm amplified Maul and Vader in combat.

Even Filoni has made zero mention of any such amp.

So yeah speculation.





Actually Ahsoka's stomping the Inquisitors (off Malachor) was pretty similar to the level at which Maul was stomping them (on Malachor), hence further evidence Maul and Ahsoka are approx on par.
1. Hnery Gilroy implied it, and as no one has provided evidence saying otherwise, we can just take it as word of authority

Maul only stomped one inqusitor and did it by way of force choke.

DarthDuelist9
The amp is only a possibility according to Hidalgo himself so stop making your omown reality

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
The amp is only a possibility according to Hidalgo himself so stop making your omown reality
post the quote/link

As it is, malachor being a possible nexus doesn't contradict it being a nexus as gilroy implied it to be.

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
post the quote/link

As it is, malachor being a possible nexus doesn't contradict it being a nexus as gilroy implied it to be.

I'll have to search my twitter account. Hidalgo didn't deny that Malachor's a nexus, he said it was only a possibility that the planet amped the fighters.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Ahsoka. Maul never really faced one for a prolonged time so drawing a deceisive conclusion is difficult.


Yeah but that Rocky's point, that it was because of the DS Nexus.



Originally posted by Rockydonovang
1. Hnery Gilroy implied it, and as no one has provided evidence saying otherwise, we can just take it as word of authority

2. Maul only stomped one inqusitor and did it by way of force choke.


1. Henry Gilroy's comment can't be used when he himself says he doesn't know and you have to ask Filoni Lol
DD9 asked Hidalgo himself on Twitter who also can't give a definitive answer on that. And yet you can Lol

2. I suggest you watch the episode again. He stomped the Inqs on every level. Engaged 3 on his own at 1 point.


Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
The amp is only a possibility according to Hidalgo himself so stop making your omown reality


thumb up

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Yeah but that Rocky's point, that it was because of the DS Nexus.

2. I suggest you watch the episode again. He stomped the Inqs on every level. Engaged 3 on his own at 1 point.


The nexus could very well have played a role but other things might also be important to take into account. For example the fact that the Inquisitors could've grown between Future of the Force and Twilight of the Apprentice, heck both Ezra and Kanan advanced solidly because of their confrontations with the Inquisitors. Another might be how the Fifth Brother takes a total different approach towards Ahsoka (more defensive) compared to the fight in Future of the Force which makes him lasting longer a logical result.

Maul confronted the three of them, sure, but nothing suggests he could stomp them in a one vs one fight consecutively. Take a look at how the Fifth Brother is surviving Maul's offense after already fending off Ahsoka for almost 2 minutes.

Rockydonovang
@darththor
I suggest you rewatch the episode. Maul never stomped any of the inquisitors barring the use of the force which Ahsoka has also done. He kicked off oen and then briefly held off two landing a blow before when dealing with the 5th brother individually. He then fell back when the third inqusitor reentered the fight. and engaged. Then the 8th brother and then 7th sister attacked him indiidually with maul landing a kick(which doesn't constitute a stomp btw) on the 8th brother and then engaging the 7th sister in a blade lock. Then when the other two attacked they were met by kanan and ahsoka and fled.

While we can obviously infer maul superior to each inquisitor individually(which is obvious), we have no way to compare a showing as brief and inconclusive as that vs what Ahsoka did to the inquisitors in future of the force. Hence the "maul fared just as well as ahsoka did" argument is baseless and doesn't remotely counter and isn't even relevant to my point.

We saw the inquisitors, specifically 5th brother do far better vs ahsoka on malachor than he did outside.


I'd like to see what pablo said. Regardless the inqusitors possibly being amped means its a possibility. And evidence supports it with gilroy's commentary, which feloni has yet to deny, the inqusitors far outperforming themselves vs ahsoka here than in their last fight outside malachor, and maul being able to match ahsoka dspite being authoritatively inferior on even ground not just per feloni, but per the hole crew of revels("we all felt that"wink.

In fairness you can argue that its not definitive so we shouldn't assume so which is fair. but then you shouldn't be making assertions on where on Ahsoka stands aside form what we you can definitively conclude.

Its equally fair for me to look at the evidence supporting the idea darksiders were amped, even if its not definitive, and raise ahsoka based on that inference. at least untill we get something saying they weren't amped

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
The nexus could very well have played a role but other things might also be important to take into account. For example the fact that the Inquisitors could've grown between Future of the Force and Twilight of the Apprentice, heck both Ezra and Kanan advanced solidly because of their confrontations with the Inquisitors. Another might be how the Fifth Brother takes a total different approach towards Ahsoka (more defensive) compared to the fight in Future of the Force which makes him lasting longer a logical result.

Maul confronted the three of them, sure, but nothing suggests he could stomp them in a one vs one fight consecutively. Take a look at how the Fifth Brother is surviving Maul's offense after already fending off Ahsoka for almost 2 minutes.
1, It's perfectly possible growth partially played a role

2. thumb up

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Rockydonovang

I'd like to see what pablo said. Regardless the inqusitors possibly being amped means its a possibility. And evidence supports it with gilroy's commentary, which feloni has yet to deny, the inqusitors far outperforming themselves vs ahsoka here than in their last fight outside malachor, and maul being able to match ahsoka dspite being authoritatively inferior on even ground not just per feloni, but per the hole crew of revels("we all felt that"wink.

In fairness you can argue that its not definitive so we shouldn't assume so which is fair. but then you shouldn't be making assertions on where on Ahsoka stands aside form what we you can definitively conclude.

Its equally fair for me to look at the evidence supporting the idea darksiders were amped, even if its not definitive, and raise ahsoka based on that inference. at least untill we get something saying they weren't amped

It's not just Malachor which is different between both confrontations though, you've got to ask yourself if it's realistic that Malachor's amp would be as big as you claim it is because that would also indicate that Ahsoka might be Vader's equal on even ground. This goes directly against Filoni's idea of how you can't touch Vader and so on.

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
It's not just Malachor which is different between both confrontations though, you've got to ask yourself if it's realistic that Malachor's amp would be as big as you claim it is because that would also indicate that Ahsoka might be Vader's equal on even ground. This goes directly against Filoni's idea of how you can't touch Vader and so on.
Except I never argued ahsoka=vader.

I just said Ahsoka is a "near equal" of vader.

Rockydonovang
Also there's no reason to assume maul couldn't hold his own vs vader. As should be obvious while Kenobi is superior to maul, and is beyond his ability to beat per authority, the short fight, as rebels recon made abundantly clear wasn't because ben was vastly above maul, but for a mix of reasons.

I see no reason to assume there's some massive gap between vader, ahsoka, kenobi and maul. All of whom could be relatively close to each other

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Except I never argued ahsoka=vader.

I just said Ahsoka is a "near equal" of vader.

Yes but you claimed that the Inquisitor's superior performance could be solely the effect of Malachor's nexus, but if you would make the amp so big it would also affect the whole "Vader's untouchable" idea which Filoni and his team support.

I think that it's reasonable for us both to accept that Malachor's nexus played a role in the Inquisitors favor combined with other reasons (different approach, improved abilities)?

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Yes but you claimed that the Inquisitor's superior performance could be solely the effect of Malachor's nexus, but if you would make the amp so big it would also affect the whole "Vader's untouchable" idea which Filoni and his team support.

I think that it's reasonable for us both to accept that Malachor's nexus played a role in the Inquisitors favor combined with other reasons (different approach, improved abilities)?
thumb up I think that's perfectly fair.

I'm just saying Ahsoka should be fairly close to vader even if she can't beat him, which is also true of ben kenobi.

DarthDuelist9
Yeah, agreed.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9


Maul confronted the three of them, sure, but nothing suggests he could stomp them in a one vs one fight consecutively. Take a look at how the Fifth Brother is surviving Maul's offense after already fending off Ahsoka for almost 2 minutes.


The Inquisitors were clearly outmatched by Maul. I can't believe this is even being questioned.

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by Darth Thor
The Inquisitors were clearly outmatched by Maul. I can't believe this is even being questioned.
no one's questioning maul's superiority, people are questioning the extent of it.

There's no basis to compare maul's performance to ahsoka's performance given how inconclusive the saber bouts, and so it can't be used as an counter against my point

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Darth Thor
The Inquisitors were clearly outmatched by Maul. I can't believe this is even being questioned.

One on one? Sure nobody's questioning that, but Maul's wasn't dominating all of them. He first landed a kick on the SS and then attacked the FB but when they started to work together, while he was still evading and landing hits yet to a far lesser effect.

Rockydonovang
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
One on one? Sure nobody's questioning that, but Maul's wasn't dominating all of them. He first landed a kick on the SS and then attacked the FB but when they started to work together, while he was still evading and landing hits yet to a far lesser effect.
thumb up

Darth Thor
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
One on one? Sure nobody's questioning that, but Maul's wasn't dominating all of them. He first landed a kick on the SS and then attacked the FB but when they started to work together, while he was still evading and landing hits yet to a far lesser effect.



But he was also holding his own against 3 of them simultaneously.

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Darth Thor
But he was also holding his own against 3 of them simultaneously.

Yes he was but it's quite difficult to determine the value of that situation since they were attacking with max two at the same time. It's a 3 vs 1 scenario which makes it extremely messy for the Inquisitors to properly attack without interfering with another fighter. Don't get me wrong, Maul showed an amazing anount of attacking power but it was clear he couldn't keep that offensive going for a longer time.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Don't get me wrong, Maul showed an amazing anount of attacking power but it was clear he couldn't keep that offensive going for a longer time.


Not sure where that was made "clear"

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Not sure where that was made "clear"

When we saw the Inquisitors getting back into the game and Maul landing less effective hits on them.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
When we saw the Inquisitors getting back into the game and Maul landing less effective hits on them.


It was never once shown he couldn't carry on battling all 3.

DarthDuelist9
Originally posted by Darth Thor
It was never once shown he couldn't carry on battling all 3.

I'm not saying he couldn't hold off the three of them, which he did, only that he can't keep an offensive going for a longer duration of time than we've seen. We don't know what would've happened if Ahsoka and Kanan didn't come to help him.

YousufKhan1212
Yoda.

Darth Thor
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
I'm not saying he couldn't hold off the three of them, which he did, only that he can't keep an offensive going for a longer duration of time than we've seen. We don't know what would've happened if Ahsoka and Kanan didn't come to help him.


^ That's my point, "we don't know."

You're making it like it's a fact he he couldn't keep it up for much longer.

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