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

All combatants are in their respective primes.

Starting distance is 12 meters; who wins and why?

Valk spites

Dooku and Windu win, because movies are awesome.

Now you're getting it.

Originally posted by MythLord
Now you're getting it.

https://media.tenor.com/images/d8de3bbf03ad4a7e3744ff650517f662/tenor.gif

Team dominates

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Dooku and Windu win, because movies are awesome.

Mace would solo, Dooku could be argued to, Team stomps

Either Dooku or Mace would not solo this. Both are arround Revan's level, while Valkorion is closer to Yoda or Sidious. But two of them at once? They take a huge majority, perhaps beats him every single time.

Mace and Dooku win.

Dooku.

A weakened spirit of Valkorion can dominate Arcann, the Outlander(who appears to be empowered by Revan) and Vaylin, after being kamikaze'd by Dramath(who can evidently hold his own against Vaylin in Force power).

Yeh he's definitely not losing to a less powerful duo.

Yep and all that before 3-4 massive power growths, Valkorion could stomp a dozen of this team.

Valk rapes.

Windu deflects Valk's lightning into his face while the Count follows up with a coup de grace.

Damn, this is what KMC has come to?

Novel Vitiate can potentially beat this duo, let alone Valk.

Originally posted by AncientPower
A weakened spirit of Valkorion can dominate Arcann, the Outlander(who appears to be empowered by Revan) and Vaylin, after being kamikaze'd by Dramath(who can evidently hold his own against Vaylin in Force power).

Yeh he's definitely not losing to a less powerful duo. Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Damn, this is what KMC has come to?

Novel Vitiate can potentially beat this duo, let alone Valk.

I like these guys.

You've always had poor taste, Bane.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Damn, this is what KMC has come to?

Novel Vitiate can potentially beat this duo, let alone Valk.

Your Vitiate wank continues to perplex. mmm

Originally posted by darthbane77
I like these guys.

Good.

If more people liked common sense, it wouldn't be such a rare thing these days.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Your Vitiate wank continues to perplex. mmm

I sometimes wonder myself, I mean, he's a legit terrible character and all.

Originally posted by MythLord
You've always had poor taste, Bane. If by "poor taste" you're referring to opinions that are actually intelligent and not reliant on idiotic bias or need to lowball certain characters, than yes, I have bad taste.

DC, Sheev vs Valk?

Originally posted by darthbane77
If by "poor taste" you're referring to opinions that are actually intelligent and not reliant on idiotic bias or need to lowball certain characters

No, I think he was referring to your opinions.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
DC, Sheev vs Valk?

Peak Sheev wins against any non-Mortis level Force sensitive. I do rank Valk number 3 slightly behind Luke, however.

It takes Arcann, Vaylin(Spirit), The Outlander, Dramath(Spirit), Revan(Spirit), Darth Marr(Spirit) and Satele Shan(Spirit) to even compete with Valkorion's weakened spirit in a Force contest, never mind Valkorion in his prime physical form.

So exactly why is Peak Sheev his clear superior? It only took a melded Luke, Leia and fetal Anakin Solo to sever prime Palpatine from the Force.

Consider me unimpressed.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Peak Sheev wins against any non-Mortis level Force sensitive. I do rank Valk number 3 slightly behind Luke, however.

Atta boy.

Originally posted by AncientPower
It takes Arcann, Vaylin(Spirit), The Outlander, Dramath(Spirit), Revan(Spirit), Darth Marr(Spirit) and Satele Shan(Spirit) to even compete with Valkorion's weakened spirit in a Force contest, never mind Valkorion in his prime physical form.

So exactly why is Peak Sheev his clear superior? It only took a melded Luke, Leia and fetal Anakin Solo to sever prime Palpatine from the Force.

Consider me unimpressed.

Well, that just means even fetus Anakin is better than Arcann. Great PT wank.

Originally posted by darthbane77
If by "poor taste" you're referring to opinions that are actually intelligent and not reliant on idiotic bias or need to lowball certain characters, than yes, I have bad taste.

"Actually intelligent" and "not reliant on idiotic bias"?

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Damn, this is what KMC has come to?

Novel Vitiate would easily beat this duo, let alone Valk.

Fix'd

Originally posted by The_Tempest
DC, Sheev vs Valk?



No, I think he was referring to your opinions. Originally posted by MythLord
Well, that just means even fetus Anakin is better than Arcann. Great PT wank.



"Actually intelligent" and "not reliant on idiotic bias"? The only cancerous opinions I've seen here are you morons who seem to believe just about any PT character is superior to just about any ToR character. Seriously, Dooku>Valkoorion? Give me a break. I'd be more than happy to have debates here to prove that my stances are entirely valid, but I dislike being ganged up on 3 v 1 by the Status Quo brigade. So I sit here and laugh my ass off at your idiotic opinion, comfortable in the knowledge that most of you are idiots.

You seem triggered, my son.

Originally posted by darthbane77
The only cancerous opinions I've seen here are you morons who seem to believe just about any PT character is superior to just about any ToR character. Seriously, Dooku>Valkoorion? Give me a break. I'd be more than happy to have debates here to prove that my stances are entirely valid, but I dislike being ganged up on 3 v 1 by the Status Quo brigade. So I sit here and laugh my ass off at your idiotic opinion, comfortable in the knowledge that most of you are idiots.

I suppose the reverse, just about any TOR character can beat any PT character, is acceptable to you? Not that the guy who thinks Revan is greater than or equal to Darth friggin Sidious has the credibility to attack the opinions of others...

Originally posted by darthbane77
The only cancerous opinions I've seen here are you morons who seem to believe just about any PT character is superior to just about any ToR character. Seriously, Dooku>Valkoorion? Give me a break. I'd be more than happy to have debates here to prove that my stances are entirely valid, but I dislike being ganged up on 3 v 1 by the Status Quo brigade. So I sit here and laugh my ass off at your idiotic opinion, comfortable in the knowledge that most of you are idiots.

I don't recall if I've ever said Dooku > Valkorion so maybe push back with that moaning, sweetheart; though honestly, Revan being >/~ RotS Sidious is more cancerous than that.

Originally posted by MythLord
Revan being >/~ RotS Sidious is more cancerous than that.
At least Revan has some feats/hype to compare with the likes of Sidious - the argument for Dooku being > Valkorion boils completely and utterly down to "he didn't get stomped by Yoda, dere4 he's better than Valk!1!!".

I don't know how you deem the latter less cancerous than the former, tbh.

Originally posted by slayne
At least Revan has some feats/hype to compare with the likes of Sidious, whereas the argument for Dooku > Valkorion boils completely and utterly down to "he didn't get stomped by Yoda!!1!".

I don't know how you deem the latter less cancerous than the former, tbh.

Well, when Revan was utterly stomped by an inferior of Sidious's inferior and Dooku seemingly tired out a near equal of Sidious's it's not hard to understand why some would hold a different view.

Originally posted by AncientPower
It takes Arcann, Vaylin(Spirit), The Outlander, Dramath(Spirit), Revan(Spirit), Darth Marr(Spirit) and Satele Shan(Spirit) to even compete with Valkorion's weakened spirit in a Force contest, never mind Valkorion in his prime physical form.

So exactly why is Peak Sheev his clear superior? It only took a melded Luke, Leia and fetal Anakin Solo to sever prime Palpatine from the Force.

Consider me unimpressed.

I never exactly stated Sidious was the "clear superior" as I can see a case being made either way. However, this argument, isn't the best of ways to go about it.

Skywalker's are walking plot devices, and when pushed, they can exceed levels far surpassing what they should be capable of - E.I. Luke demolishing Vader, or Anakin embarrassing Dooku. So it's not exactly odd to think the combined might of three Skywalkers with top 5 level potential, in a time of dire, becoming astronomically more powerful than they should be at a specific time.

...

Lame pissing contest and bias opinions aside, what is the actual argument for this team being able to even contend with Valkorion?

Originally posted by slayne
At least Revan has some feats/hype to compare with the likes of Sidious - the argument for Dooku being > Valkorion boils completely and utterly down to "he didn't get stomped by Yoda, dere4 he's better than Valk!1!!".

I don't know how you deem the latter less cancerous than the former, tbh.

If he can contend with Yoda, then he can contend with Valk, obviously. Meanwhile, Revan got stomped by someone inferior to both Sidious and Yoda, considerably. So... yeah it's still more cancerous.

Not only is Valkorion's Yoda superior in the Force, but the two approaches the Force in two completely different manners. Yoda mainly just sticks to TK, while Valk has abilities such as telepathy, TK, Force lightning, drain, Darkside destruction at his disposal.

In general, Valkorion is much more destructive and unchanneled fighter than Yoda is, and sports abilities Dooku can't counter, even if I, or anyone else, wre to take him standing p to Yoda's full might serious.

Originally posted by Deronn_solo
I never exactly stated Sidious was the "clear superior" as I can see a case being made either way.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-5N5-hBUFOZw/VmUEDmpfmRI/AAAAAAAAFWw/gwbo2oUSiSA/s500-p/Darth%2BVader83.gif

For some time, your intermittent posts have seemed almost entirely dedicated to the wank of Valkorion and SWTOR. I've long found it perplexing, for not only are Valkorion and SWTOR bad things in general, but Sheev stands conclusively superior to them by way of evidence.

Explain yourself, my son, and return to the comfort of His Imperial Majesty's embrace.

Originally posted by MythLord
I don't recall if I've ever said Dooku > Valkorion so maybe push back with that moaning, sweetheart; though honestly, Revan being >/~ RotS Sidious is more cancerous than that. Not you specifically, but I HAVE seen that opinion shared. The Dooku>Valk thing I mean. But no, I've never argued (not that I remember) that Revan was above ROTS Sidious, but to say they're equals in entirely supportable.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
You seem triggered, my son.



I suppose the reverse, just about any TOR character can beat any PT character, is acceptable to you? Not that the guy who thinks Revan is greater than or equal to Darth friggin Sidious has the credibility to attack the opinions of others... Considering I can and have argued successfully for SoR Revan=Yoda/ROTS Sidious, I think your stance on that is laughably wrong. The difference between me and everyone else, is I don't accept every little accolade or statement as factual unless it's supported by something else, the fact that few people actual do what, to me, seems logical, is baffling.

Originally posted by darthbane77
Considering I can and have argued successfully for SoR Revan=Yoda/ROTS Sidious,

Since no iteration of Revan is equal to Sidious or Yoda, that's not possible.

Originally posted by darthbane77
The only cancerous opinions I've seen here are you morons who seem to believe just about any PT character is superior to just about any ToR character. Seriously, Dooku>Valkoorion? Give me a break. I'd be more than happy to have debates here to prove that my stances are entirely valid, but I dislike being ganged up on 3 v 1 by the Status Quo brigade. So I sit here and laugh my ass off at your idiotic opinion, comfortable in the knowledge that most of you are idiots.

They are only cancerous because you deem it so. Have you seen any reasoning behind them? No? Well, why exactly are they cancerous, then? Because they disagree with your opinions? Yeah, that seems to be about it. The classic appeal to personal incredulity: "I can't possibly see how that could be true so it must be false." or as you deem it, "idiotic."

It's quite ironic how you deem others idiots, yet manage to come out with some of the most putrid and leukemia-inducing arguments that fly in the face of all logic in the history of debating - case in point being you calling us idiots, a declaration based on a logical fallacy, and thus being illogical in and of itself. You're reminding me more and more of Member S_W_LeGenD every time you post: arrogant and condescending as hell, while at the same time too stupid to understand that his arguments are retarded and make no sense, and viewed by virtually everyone here as a total moron yet thinks of himself as the King of debating and most other people as his inferiors; too stupid to get a clue.

If you are so eager to prove you are worth your salt, then go ahead. I'll gladly anally violate you so hard in a debate that there'll be nothing but blood coming out of you for the next two months. It'll be just you and me, no outside intervention, classic 1v1, just as you want. Come on, if I'm such an idiot, then surely you can easily beat me, right?

Originally posted by Azronger
They are only cancerous because you deem it so. Have you seen any reasoning behind them? No? Well, why exactly are they cancerous, then? Because they disagree with your opinions? Yeah, that seems to be about it. The classic appeal to personal incredulity: "I can't possibly see how that could be true so it must be false." or as you deem it, "idiotic."

It's quite ironic how you deem others idiots, yet manage to come out with some of the most putrid and leukemia-inducing arguments that fly in the face of all logic in the history of debating - case in point being you calling us idiots, a declaration based on a logical fallacy, and thus being illogical in and of itself. You're reminding me more and more of Member S_W_LeGenD every time you post: arrogant and condescending as hell, while at the same time too stupid to understand that his arguments are retarded and make no sense, and viewed by virtually everyone here as a total moron yet thinks of himself as the King of debating and most other people as his inferiors; too stupid to get a clue.

If you are so eager to prove you are worth your salt, then go ahead. I'll gladly anally violate you so hard in a debate that there'll be nothing but blood coming out of you for the next two months. It'll be just you and me, no outside intervention, classic 1v1, just as you want. Come on, if I'm such an idiot, then surely you can easily beat me, right? I actually don't consider you an idiot. Within the past couple weeks, I've gained a bit more respect for you.

As for my arguments, they only fly in the face of what YOU deem logical. Perhaps you, or others here, remember someone by the name Darth Pariahus, he's a good friend of mine, and is one of the most logical people I know, and honestly, his opinions of KMC are pretty much the same as mine.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Since no iteration of Revan is equal to Sidious or Yoda, that's not possible. Considering that's not correct, it is possible.

I simply decided to take my talents to the losing side. Lord knows they need the help.

I'm the anti-KD, sorta speak.



Valk's intrinsic and "supreme" potential + the strength of two planets and thousands of Sith Lords and thousands of years + near limitless knowledge to pull from, to hone, and maximize said power. to it's fullest extent.

I don't agree with it, or necessarily make that argument , as I place Valk at 3, but logically - at least from where I sit - a case could be made using the aforementioned as a base.

So people finally come arpund to the truth, both sides are riddled with people who want to genuinely argue moronic stances with no standing in feats.

More at 11.

The sad thing is that genuinely intellectual people on both sides actually entertain this bullshit. I'm guilty of this.

Do I think Prime Revan is approaching Yoda? Absolutely, why? Because first of all, his novel incarnations were far from his prime so that's irrelevant when discussing his far more powerful incarnation.

I have Arcann and Malgus in very high regard, equal to some of the lesser Vader incarnations, why? Because they have absolutely insane durability feats which Vader would be proud of, ignoring the cross-era references.

I have DE Palpatine and Valkorion on roughly the same tier, with Darth Nihilus beneath them. Why? Because they each have insane planetary feats.

Do I have Exar Kun approaching RotS Sidious? Yes, indeed I do. Why? Because that's literally been the point of his character since its inception. I even remember the very old interviews where Exar Kun was supposed to be a new type of Sith, unlike Vader or the Emperor.

People like to throw out their own common sense and trash anything that doesn't support their own agenda, the ancient Sith are pparently sub-Dooku tier shit now. Which makes absolutely no aense when actually considering the lore. Which is the most insane part of all of this, if we don't like the lore they're a part of, we decide to troll and trash everything to do with that era.

It started with Bane era and now it's everywhere that isn't remotely somehow connected to the movie era.

If you manage to not get stomped by Vader, now you're top 10 worthy. But that only goes for Vader, try and apply the same scaling to a TOR character and all of a sudden everybody's featless and a laughingstock.

This is all bullshit, literally breaking forum rules with status quo'ing and nobody cares to do anything about it.

You wonder why I argue against this? Because it killed the forum.

Originally posted by AncientPower
literally breaking forum rules

To be fair, that one's kind of irrelevant at this point.

Originally posted by AncientPower
If you manage to not get stomped by Vader, now you're top 10 worthy. But that only goes for Vader, try and apply the same scaling to a TOR character and all of a sudden everybody's featless and a laughingstock.

Not true at all. For first, not every Era in universe has a top fighter on Sidious/Yoda's level. TOR's is a lucky one, that it has. Sidious at the time of ROTS is stated to be the most powerful Sith Lord in history. That doesn't mean, that Plagueis or Vitiate can't be on his tier - they are.
And just as Vitiate is in Sidious/Yoda's tier, his inferior, Revan, is in their inferiors tier. Which puts Revan in Vader (overated as hell)/Anakin, Mace, Dooku's tier.
Then we have guys like Malgus, Kenobi, Maul, and others. If Malgus is tier below Revan and tier below Baras, it puts Baras to Fisto's group.

Just my opinion and I guess i wont change that.

Originally posted by darthbane77
I actually don't consider you an idiot. Within the past couple weeks, I've gained a bit more respect for you.

I've done little to no debating in the past couple of weeks... So makes sense.

Originally posted by darthbane77
As for my arguments, they only fly in the face of what YOU deem logical. Perhaps you, or others here, remember someone by the name Darth Pariahus, he's a good friend of mine, and is one of the most logical people I know, and honestly, his opinions of KMC are pretty much the same as mine.

'k. Don't really care about your friend agreeing with you, but it makes sense that if he shares your interpretation of events, just perhaps in a more articulated fashion, that you'd consider him one of the most logical people.

Unfortunately, it doesn't always work with "oh, up to interpretation"; There's some things you cannot interpret differently or deny since they are indeed fact. Someone who believes the Earth is flat or gravity doesn't exist has a right to his own intepretation, but that doesn't mean they're in the right when scientific facts and a plethora of evidence is against them.

The same goes for fictional universes. Obviously Spider-Man can never beat Thor, Catwoman can never beat Martian Manhunter and by the same token Revan can never beat Sidious. There's some form of established hierarchy that every franchise has.

Originally posted by darthbane77
Not you specifically, but I HAVE seen that opinion shared. The Dooku>Valk thing I mean. But no, I've never argued (not that I remember) that Revan was above ROTS Sidious, but to say they're equals in entirely supportable.
Yes, you said that. I can search the quote, if you don't believe me.
Originally posted by darthbane77
Considering I can and have argued successfully for SoR Revan=Yoda/ROTS Sidious, I think your stance on that is laughably wrong. Considering you were stomped in every Yoda/Sidious vs Revan debate, no, it wasn't succesful.

Anyway, yes, I agree that Valk >> Dooku, and I can see an argument that Valk > Yoda in the Force (not in power, but due to his more esoteric abilities). And also, I agree that some TOR lowballing is ridiculous. But so is some TOR wank - Thanaton ~ Dooku, Revan ~ Sidious? C'mon.

Anyway, for this match, I think Valk wins, but it isn't a stomp.

Jesus Christ, Azronger.... I looked at your profile and I swear I stepped in fanboy:

Revenge of the Sith Darth Sidious is more powerful than The Phantom Menace Darths Sidious and Plagueis combined

Darth Sidious can defeat an infinite army of Darth Vaders by himself

The Ultimate Palpatine Essay

This reads as well as something Goebbels would write about Hitler during the early days of WWII.

LMAO
Originally posted by The_Tempest

Wait, u alive?
You are now on SpaceBattles, I've heard?

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Jesus Christ, Azronger.... I looked at your profile and I swear I stepped in fanboy:

Revenge of the Sith Darth Sidious is more powerful than The Phantom Menace Darths Sidious and Plagueis combined

Darth Sidious can defeat an infinite army of Darth Vaders by himself

The Ultimate Palpatine Essay

This reads as well as something Goebbels would write about Hitler during the early days of WWII.

Lol. Define fanboy.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
LMAO

Wait, u alive?
You are now on SpaceBattles, I've heard?

Indeed.

And yeah, but I hardly ever do SW Versus debating these days.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Yes, you said that. I can search the quote, if you don't believe me.
Considering you were stomped in every Yoda/Sidious vs Revan debate, no, it wasn't succesful.

Anyway, yes, I agree that Valk >> Dooku, and I can see an argument that Valk > Yoda in the Force (not in power, but due to his more esoteric abilities). And also, I agree that some TOR lowballing is ridiculous. But so is some TOR wank - Thanaton ~ Dooku, Revan ~ Sidious? C'mon.

Anyway, for this match, I think Valk wins, but it isn't a stomp. If I ever argued that any version of Revan was >ROTS Sidious, that was a mistake, and is one I don't make anymore. Also, I've only ever been "stomped" here, because I know I won't be taken seriously. And I have actually performed well here, SunRazer and I actually had a very good debate a while back. But there's no point in me trying to defend my stances because they'll be laughed off anyway.

Originally posted by Azronger
Lol. Define fanboy.

Someone who argues without pause in favor of their favorite character and completely oblivious to their own bias.

Here, I made you a list:

The Commandments of Fanboyism.

I. Thou shalt not adhere to logic if and when it impedes the progress of your biased argument.

II. Thou shalt insult the opposition as a diversionary tactic when thy arguments are proven horribly false.

III. Thou shalt not admit under any circumstances that thou art lost concerning thy argument.

IV. Thou shalt use hyperbole liberally throughout thy argument.

V. Thou shalt not reply directly to any well-formulated rebuttals or questions.

VI. Thou shalt always retreat back to an earlier defeated point when thy latest point runs aground.

VII. Thou shalt not respect the equally valid sources of thy opposition and should seek to destroy their credibility with extreme prejudice.

VIII. Thou shalt play the victim when thy argument is being destroyed and thy own personal ignorance coming under fire.

IX. Thou shalt exclusively debate topics which deal with thy most favorite, unreproachable characters.

X. Thou art infallible in so much as thou crusade against the opposition with all the lowly weapons of thy craft.

Amen.

(PS: I lied. I made this for Gideon a long time ago.)

Holy hell does that take me back.

Originally posted by darthbane77
If I ever argued that any version of Revan was >ROTS Sidious, that was a mistake, and is one I don't make anymore. Also, I've only ever been "stomped" here, because I know I won't be taken seriously. And I have actually performed well here, SunRazer and I actually had a very good debate a while back. But there's no point in me trying to defend my stances because they'll be laughed off anyway.
Good.

What? At least other TOR-brigade members take you seriously, it seems. And no, you were stomped because Revan >/~ Yoda is retarded.

I don't remember a good debate between the two of you. But considering that Nova is an extremely good debater, it isn't that bad.

Considering that you laugh of stances like Anakin > Revan and Plagueis > Valkorion, it is the same for us, actually.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Someone who argues without pause in favor of their favorite character and completely oblivious to their own bias.

Here, I made you a list:

The Commandments of Fanboyism.

I. Thou shalt not adhere to logic if and when it impedes the progress of your biased argument.

II. Thou shalt insult the opposition as a diversionary tactic when thy arguments are proven horribly false.

III. Thou shalt not admit under any circumstances that thou art lost concerning thy argument.

IV. Thou shalt use hyperbole liberally throughout thy argument.

V. Thou shalt not reply directly to any well-formulated rebuttals or questions.

VI. Thou shalt always retreat back to an earlier defeated point when thy latest point runs aground.

VII. Thou shalt not respect the equally valid sources of thy opposition and should seek to destroy their credibility with extreme prejudice.

VIII. Thou shalt play the victim when thy argument is being destroyed and thy own personal ignorance coming under fire.

IX. Thou shalt exclusively debate topics which deal with thy most favorite, unreproachable characters.

X. Thou art infallible in so much as thou crusade against the opposition with all the lowly weapons of thy craft.

Amen.

(PS: I lied. I made this for Gideon a long time ago.)

Does the fact that this list pertains to you at least as much as Azr give you any pause before posting it?

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Someone who argues without pause in favor of their favorite character and completely oblivious to their own bias.

Here, I made you a list:

The Commandments of Fanboyism.

I. Thou shalt not adhere to logic if and when it impedes the progress of your biased argument.

II. Thou shalt insult the opposition as a diversionary tactic when thy arguments are proven horribly false.

III. Thou shalt not admit under any circumstances that thou art lost concerning thy argument.

IV. Thou shalt use hyperbole liberally throughout thy argument.

V. Thou shalt not reply directly to any well-formulated rebuttals or questions.

VI. Thou shalt always retreat back to an earlier defeated point when thy latest point runs aground.

VII. Thou shalt not respect the equally valid sources of thy opposition and should seek to destroy their credibility with extreme prejudice.

VIII. Thou shalt play the victim when thy argument is being destroyed and thy own personal ignorance coming under fire.

IX. Thou shalt exclusively debate topics which deal with thy most favorite, unreproachable characters.

X. Thou art infallible in so much as thou crusade against the opposition with all the lowly weapons of thy craft.

Amen.

(PS: I lied. I made this for Gideon a long time ago.)

Good. I am not a fanboy

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Good.

What? At least other TOR-brigade members take you seriously, it seems. And no, you were stomped because Revan >/~ Yoda is retarded.

I don't remember a good debate between the two of you. But considering that Nova is an extremely good debater, it isn't that bad.

Considering that you laugh of stances like Anakin > Revan and Plagueis > Valkorion, it is the same for us, actually.

Maybe, but not that I notice. Maybe I just don't pay enough attention to detail. But no, the idea of Revan being around Yoda's level isn't retarded. I don't actually hold them equal btw, I DO hold Yoda above Reborn Revan, the difference is simply a small one.

I wouldn't expect you to, it was probably approaching a year ago now honestly, the only people who MIGHT remember it, are Ant and Syndi. I think I saved pics, I think, but I'm not positive. Even Nova said I didn't do half bad. But I suppose saying it is useless without the pics to prove it, so it's irrelevant I guess.

Plagueis>Valkorion I can understand to a degree, depending on how you interpret certain things (blurbs for example), so while I strongly disagree with the Plagueis>Valkorion/Vitiate narrative, I admit it has at least a decent basis. As for Anakin>Revan, that's a stance I don't believe has any basis whatsoever. If I've ever been disrespectful to any (with the exceptions of Rocky and Quan), than I'm sorry.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Does the fact that this list pertains to you at least as much as Azr give you any pause before posting it?

It doesn't, because my stances have largely changed with time and with evidence. Hell, before I came to KMC I didn't give a rat's ass about ancient Sith, and I knew Exar Kun as KotOR body armor description better than I knew his actual storyline.

Meanwhile, you've conceded once to me in about 12 years and backtracked on it the next week. This was after I took screenshots of the Yoda v. Sidious fight and in painstaking detail pointed out that Sidious was dominated in the fight and that he conclusively lost the Force battle.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose

Meanwhile, you've conceded once to me in about 12 years and backtracked on it the next week. This was after I took screenshots of the Yoda v. Sidious fight and in painstaking detail pointed out that Sidious was dominated in the fight and that he conclusively lost the Force battle.
Why do you remember that?

it was the pinnacle of his so far shitty life

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Why do you remember that?

The thread was favorited in Chrome and I reread it a few weeks ago. Sadly, most of the scans didn't survive the hosting after all these years.

Originally posted by toplel
it was the pinnacle of his so far shitty life

I would ask which sock are you etc. but the truth is I don't really care.

you do, that sentence right there is an indirect inquiry lmao, i'll be nice and give you the answer: i'm lord lucien's sock

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
It doesn't, because my stances have largely changed with time and with evidence. Hell, before I came to KMC I didn't give a rat's ass about ancient Sith, and I knew Exar Kun as KotOR body armor description better than I knew his actual storyline.

Seems pretty apparent that your stances have remained exactly the same, given the Kun wank and Sidious lowballing.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Meanwhile, you've conceded once to me in about 12 years and backtracked on it the next week. This was after I took screenshots of the Yoda v. Sidious fight and in painstaking detail pointed out that Sidious was dominated in the fight and that he conclusively lost the Force battle.

It's really not my fault that all of the relevant source material directly contradicts your analysis and interpretation of the movie.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Seems pretty apparent that your stances have remained exactly the same, given the Kun wank and Sidious lowballing.



It's really not my fault that all of the relevant source material directly contradicts your analysis and interpretation of the movie.

1. Erm, no. Kun 'wank' as you term it is respect given due to the actual feats and mastery described in the source material. Material which you ignored or poo-poo'd for over a decade. Sidious 'lowballing' is a nice way of saying I refuse to suck the dark lord's wrinkly prick like most of SWVF. I've pointed out his rather low showings in comparison with other Sith outside of his own era. A lot of his "omg so win" stuff is largely unsubstantiated by his movie showings, like him mastering every saber style known to man while being a closet Sith lord and full time senator, but still being floored by Mace and Yoda.

2. The movie was, at the time of the argument, the highest form of canon and is held to be correct over a looser interpretation by lower forms of canon, of which the novelization is one.

In terms of Yoda, we have on-screen evidence of him dominating the saber fight. The script confirms that Sidious was disarmed. We later have on-screen evidence of Sidious being dominated in the Force and Yoda losing due mainly to a ring out.

That's as objective as debates get in this arena.

how the fck does the movie suggest yoda dominated dooku?

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
1. Erm, no. Kun 'wank' as you term it is respect given due to the actual feats and mastery described in the source material. Material which you ignored or poo-poo'd for over a decade. Sidious 'lowballing' is a nice way of saying I refuse to suck the dark lord's wrinkly prick like most of SWVF. I've pointed out his rather low showings in comparison with other Sith outside of his own era. A lot of his "omg so win" stuff is largely unsubstantiated by his movie showings, like him mastering every saber style known to man while being a closet Sith lord and full time senator, but still being floored by Mace and Yoda.

2. The movie was, at the time of the argument, the highest form of canon and is held to be correct over a looser interpretation by lower forms of canon, of which the novelization is one.

In terms of Yoda, we have on-screen evidence of him dominating the saber fight. The script confirms that Sidious was disarmed. We later have on-screen evidence of Sidious being dominated in the Force and Yoda losing due mainly to a ring out.

That's as objective as debates get in this arena.

1. Any one of us could easily use the same rationale for our position: the reputation Sidious enjoys here is "respect due" from the abundant source material and our lack of support for Kun is because we refuse to buy into the debunked antediluvian party line that OMG ancient stuff is soooo cool!!1! After all, Kun couldn't defeat a wannabe Ent and his greatest feats are thoroughly outclassed by Sidious's. 👍

2. Your analysis of the movie is and has always been contradicted by canon authorities, which almost unanimously agree that Sidious > Yoda.

Kekekek

Have you seen the PowerDVD clips tho?

Wrong thread.

Valkorion stomps again.

There's a lot wrong with this. Chiefly that secondary sources describing events which we can physically review are not equal or superior evidence.

First off, sources saying "Yoda lost, because Sids is teh powerfulz" should never supplant actual on-screen evidence for the same reason why eyewitness testimony would never supplant a camera recording of an event.

Second, I'll just repost this from 2008:

Originally posted by Janus Marius
I have limited time to, Escape, so let me just post the following to get the argument started:

Here's the first real attack of the saber fight:

http://i25.tinypic.com/15x4u1j.jpg

Yoda does a leaping attack, back initially exposed. Sidious already had his blade up. He comes right down with it.

Next scene:

http://i27.tinypic.com/26201zp.jpg

Yoda deflects his cleave without any effort or change in his jump direction. And lands and does a jump back which makes Sidious flail about and pull a stupid face:

http://i25.tinypic.com/mb7nsw.jpg

Clearly, he's not in control of the fight at that moment, being unbalanced by Yoda's attack. Next, Yoda bounces again off of the center pod, this time behind Sidious' attacking shoulder. Watch the sequence to see how Sidious barely gets in a defense, and only in front of himself:

http://i28.tinypic.com/2zrjaqw.jpg

http://i25.tinypic.com/35izqsn.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/2bsmfq.jpg

So now Sidious has lost any advantage and is in a saber lock of sorts with his opponent. Despite being taller, physically stronger, and having a longer blade (Equally more leverage), Yoda again controls the engagement and breaks the saber lock, initiating another leap attack:

http://i26.tinypic.com/14vig03.jpg

http://i31.tinypic.com/idc0hk.jpg

http://i28.tinypic.com/2qvcim8.jpg

To be continued

Originally posted by Janus Marius
... And then during this twisting flip, Yoda hits Sidious' saber, but Sidious doesn't hit Yoda at all:

http://i29.tinypic.com/2j2f243.jpg

http://i30.tinypic.com/egsv2h.jpg

... And the swing which nearly connects is neatly caught by Yoda without any strain or effort:

http://i29.tinypic.com/2iqev6c.jpg

And then Sidious snarls in fruitless rage and swings his blade like it's a scythe before it cuts to the Obi versus Anakin fight.

There's the first part. I'll do the rest tonight so you all can review it entirely, but so far it's near conclusive. This is Sidious and Yoda on even ground, not Sidious in the center on flat ground and Yoda on the slippery sides, dancing like a bee. So it's pretty evident that Yoda would take a neutral setting and whup Sidious' ass.

Additionally, the ROTS script supports the gap in on-screen coverage of how Sidious somehow became saberless. Gideon/Tempest tried very earnestly to assert that he somehow put it away in his robe for safe keeping in the middle of a heated battle, but that's obvious rubbish. The script supports that Yoda disarmed Sidious, and absent any other convincing argument, this seems to be the most valid conclusion to support.

So we have obvious screen grabs of Yoda making Sids look like a tool, and then he later disarmed him (almost as easily as Mace did).

Point - Yoda.

--

Now, about the Force battle. Yoda was dominant in this too. Examine this -

http://i29.tinypic.com/2hn85c7.jpg

Sidious initiated the Force lightning. Yoda, despite being an ancient small puppet on the side of a mostly sleek senate pod, caught the attack almost on his lap. He, with effort, reversed it. Sidious, using his amazing Sith power which cannot be rivaled ever in KMC, does this:

http://i28.tinypic.com/2q8n3nk.jpg

^ That's the face of mastery and power, folks.

The resulting explosion knocks both back. However, Sidious has a rail to grab on to and survive; Yoda falls from a significant height and is saberless and wounded. He decided to retreat, because victory is unlikely given the environmental circumstances which robbed him of his superiority over Sidious.

Force Part 2: The Pod Chucking Fun.

Sidious throws various pods at Yoda. Yoda dodges most of them, with some difficulty, because he's very old and probably infested with gout.

Finally, tired of Sid's shit, he catches one at point blank range:

http://i25.tinypic.com/2ext43o.jpg

Let's examine Sid's amazing Force powers here.

HD Video of the Fight

At ~2:37-39, you can see Sidious manipulate several pods. The thing is, the audio has the same 'whirling' sound as is used when the pods' antigrav device is manipulated. In other words, he's not throwing/TKing the pods, he's TKing their controls. The whirling accompanies the movement of each pod as it comes crashing down at Yoda. It's pretty evident.

But wait, there's more.

At about ~3:10-12, Yoda catches a pod, while Sidious laughs tactically. The whirling continues until Yoda rotates the pod, and sends it flying back up at the dark lord. The whirling is absent as it ascends. Sidious, with his great powers of super amazingness as supported by various C-canon excerpts, blurbs, and supplemental materials which provide much fanwank, leaps aside, unable to stop it.

Force battle, point Yoda.

In conclusion, Yoda was superior.

/debate.

http://i.imgur.com/izcOK4m.gif

Originally posted by The_Tempest
1. Any one of us could easily use the same rationale for our position: the reputation Sidious enjoys here is "respect due" from the abundant source material and our lack of support for Kun is because we refuse to buy into the debunked antediluvian party line that OMG ancient stuff is soooo cool!!1! After all, Kun couldn't defeat a wannabe Ent and his greatest feats are thoroughly outclassed by Sidious's. 👍

2. Your analysis of the movie is and has always been contradicted by canon authorities, which almost unanimously agree that Sidious > Yoda.

Tsk tsk:

Originally posted by Gideon
Taking into consideration the sheer amount of opposition and thinking about it reflectively, I suppose there is no way to conclude that I'm the one who has come to the right conclusion, I suppose I'm just not seeing something. I'm going to concede the argument without quarter or objection.

You've had more than a week to come up with something and that's the best you can do?

https://media.tenor.com/images/03f6dbaece3904a751ca14142c53491e/tenor.gif



Close, but not quite: Your personal interpretation of the movie is not equal or superior the dozens of canon sources that describe the events of the movie, which almost all conclude the same thing: Sidious is stronger than Yoda and won the fight.

Because you're not a canon authority, you see.

Yea, basically. In fairness, there was actually a couple of things stealth pointed out which I never noticed, and I suppose there's an argument to be made for a movie-only interpretation, but when it comes down to it, canon/legends basically unanimous agree the fight was either
a. a sids victory
or
b. a stalemate
Which is why Sids is >/= Yoda.

While the movie supersedes all else, your interpretation of the movie is not = to the movie itself

I'm sorry Stealth Moose. While I agree your scans for Yoda and Sidious's duel further supports the idea that Yoda is RotS Sidious's superior with the blade your analysis on their Force engagement is only an opinion that actively goes against canon which makes it wrong and thus irrelevant.

my mans stealthmoose posting 2008 star wars debating arguments in 2k17 this nigga is more ancient than allah, im weak

Valk slags both of them instantly with laser vision.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
You've had more than a week to come up with something and that's the best you can do?

https://media.tenor.com/images/03f6dbaece3904a751ca14142c53491e/tenor.gif



Close, but not quite: Your personal interpretation of the movie is not equal or superior the dozens of canon sources that describe the events of the movie, which almost all conclude the same thing: Sidious is stronger than Yoda and won the fight.

Because you're not a canon authority, you see.

G-canon > C-Canon.

It's pretty damn obvious why my 'interpretation' of the evidence is more valid for the purpose of a what-if debate than generic statements which contradict the movie itself.

Let's make this simple:

1. G-canon includes GL stuff. The movies themselves. The stuff we can objectively measure because we can all see the same evidence. i.e. the screen grabs, the HD Youtube link.

2. C-canon includes stuff based on GL's work but not made by him. This includes blurbs, summarizations by secondary sources, novelizations which contradict the movie version of events, Clone Wars novels which allude to the events in question, supplemental evidence like sourcebooks (most of which are written from an in-universe perspective).

3. When a disagreement arises which covers movie events, movie evidence is the only objective measurement to use. All else is subjective. As GL/Chee said and as you've parroted at least once - the further you go from the movies, the 'muddier' things get.

4. I've brought up a detailed rebuttal with G-canon evidence. You can say it's 'my interpretation', but it's very reasonable assumptions made using measurable evidence. It was solid in 2008, and it's just as solid now. Azwrongers' fanwank quick-link evidence does not remove its validity.

5. The idea of 'canon disagrees with you' isn't an argument at all. It's a status quo argument based on the viewpoints of forum members who largely don't defend their claims or accept claims wholesale which already agree with their bias. Given that Yoda's superiority has a strong case using the most objective evidence we can find, and holds up to point by point scrutiny, the idea of "no ur wrong" isn't a counter argument; it's an unsubstantiated refutation.

6. In other words, I'm not wrong because people simply said I am. They have to prove up or shut up. Using C-canon cherry picked sources to ignore actual on-screen evidence is not definitive and is actually dishonest intellectually.

http://i.imgur.com/QKLhfJ9.gif

Opinion of G canon doesn't trump C canon though... so...

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Opinion of G canon doesn't trump C canon though... so...

Saying you disagree with my assessment would mean a lot more if you could provide specifics as to where I am wrong using the same evidence.

Having to use vague descriptions from C-canon like "Sids was teh too stornk" isn't conclusive, since Sidious' power didn't win the fight; a long fall and lack of a handrail did.

Let's break this down again:

1. Yoda won the saber fight. This is axiomatic. He outfought Sidious, got inside of his guard several times, won saberlocks, and disarmed him.

2. Yoda won the Force battles. With the pods, Sidious was unable to contest Yoda's single returned pod, despite it being slower and coming at an upward angle against gravity. Sidious' pods, meanwhile, are stopped instantly when Yoda defends himself. Additionally, Yoda won the DBZ style lightning struggle, despite being caught off-guard and having little purchase on the pod.

3. At no point is Sidious' power a determining factor in his victory. Given that I've shown how he loses both major parts of the duel, and won via circumstance, some C-canon blurb saying "Yoda couldn't deal with teh best Sith evah" lacks the validity.

4. Given what I've posted, do you really think Sidious would win on flat ground, without the benefit of ringing out Yoda incidentally?

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
4. Given what I've posted, do you really think Sidious would win on flat ground, without the benefit of ringing out Yoda incidentally? Yes

Originally posted by Sinious
Yes

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/8d/be/83/8dbe83234c9b3f5986dc4960e20365e7--memes-funny-stuff.jpg

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/8d/be/83/8dbe83234c9b3f5986dc4960e20365e7--memes-funny-stuff.jpg
canonically substantiated claims are unsubstantiated?

Team, lmfao.
And Sidious is canonically superior to Yoda as of ROTS, per Starwars.com.

Originally posted by Stealth Moose
4. Given what I've posted, do you really think Sidious would win on flat ground, without the benefit of ringing out Yoda incidentally?

Yoda would have the edge in that setting.

Sidious vs Yoda was fought on neutral ground. Sidious won.

Just to check...are we using Legends or Canon versions of Dooku and Mace?

Hey Moose, who wins this thread, iyo?

Windu can solo

Valkorian.

@Stealth Moose

1. 'Canonical statements' mean jackshit without evidence to back them up, especially when they consist of C-canon attempting to masquerade as G-canon.

1. I'm sorry then. We're not going to agree on this. Canonical statements mean more then your opinion to me.

'Canonical statements' say Sids knew and somehow mastered all seven forms of lightsaber combat. G-canon shows Sidious losing both of his duels against Mace and Yoda. Should we accept blindly C-canon meant to embellish actual canon, or use reason to evaluate the evidence we can actually substantiate.

How does Sidious losing to Mace and Yoda mean he didn't master all 7 forms of lightsaber combat? We should accept stated facts regardless of our opinions.

It's really really simple: without evidence, it cannot be defended. Saying Sidious was more powerful in the Force than Yoda requires evidence, which the movie does not provide. Indeed, Yoda actually throws back everything Sids uses. Comparatively, Yoda does not use the Force offensively, and when he does, Sidious doesn't try to defend himself against it.

The movie doesn't need to provide it when another source does.

You could say "Him not stopping the pod isn't evidence of being unable to do so", and in a certain light, you're right. However, if you assert "He could do so, he just chose not to, because leaping to the side is better", this begs the question of why he didn't just stop the pod as well. After all, he would have to do less work than Yoda did; he had gravity on his side. He also had all the time in the world.

Because he chose not, it's as simple as that. A logical reason being it was simply less energy to move out of the way.

It also makes me wonder why every time Yoda counters his Force powers he pulls a scared face. I mean, I use a scared face when I assert my Force dominance over others, but that's just because I'm really good.

I don't really care why Sidious makes spoopy faces. Unless it supports a point that isn't contradicted by actual canon it's irrelevant to me.

2. Your Plageus evidence doesn't quite aid your assertion here. I'll break it down yet again:

- Yoda leaps to the pod to confront Sidious.
- Sidious looses a bolt of lightning, which causes Yoda to lose his blade and react. Yoda nearly falls from his perch.
- Sidious applies more power, and the concentration of the energy is farther from him, because Yoda caught it barely and he's pouring more of it.
- Yoda grimaces, and begins to push back the attack, despite being caught off guard and hanging on to a precarious perch.
- Sidious makes his Scared Face of Dominance, and then the energy goes rogue, blasting back both combatants. We -clearly- see Sidious catching a rail, while Yoda cannot do the same and falls, being effectively ringed out.

Yes.

Can you point out to me where Sidious won the Force duel? Did he use his amazing Force powers to grab a rail? Is that it? I'll concede that point. After all, the greatest Sith user evah must have won against the greatest light side user evah by virtue of good hand grip. A shame he lost that power when Vader benchpressed him into the abyss.

Ah ah ah. I never said he won the Force duel. I said, and I quote ""I disagree that he won the lightning match as well" ( in reference to Yoda ) in regards to your claim that Sidious had caught him off guard.

3. As I've said repeatedly, 'canonical statements' which are themselves vague assertions based on evidence we can both see for ourselves can be evaluated using reason, instead of blind acceptance. This isn't the Bible; you can freely question their validity and for intellectual integrity, should.

I'm sorry. I can't question a statement of fact unlike yourself. You're just too much of an enlightened individual for me. Your gospel means nothing to this sinner.

The movie, which is the most easily interpreted evidence, the one which best fits GL's vision, and per the old canon rules before Disney, superceded all other forms of canon, has evidence which clearly shows Yoda dominating in the saber fight, and dominating or at least stalemating in the Force fight.

I disagree. At best it had evidence indicating your position. And if these C canon sources didn't exist to clarify events I might even agree with your interpretation. Unfortunately, they do exist, and I find myself compelled to side with their version of events over yours'.

The assertion that Sidious won either aspect of the duel does not reflect in the evidence. Secondary evidence of a lesser nature which supports your assertion is not absolute and requires scrutiny.

Interpretations of higher canon evidence doesn't beat clarifications of lower canon imo. That's my position and I'm not going to be changing it anytime soon.

4. Why?

For the reasons listed above.

in canon sids was amped by the ascent of the darkside and otherwise they were equals

That's assuming the balance being tipped in one direction or the other hinders the other side. That would certainly raise my placement of Bane and the other RoT Sith up to late Plagueis and Sidious.

No, there's a quote, that literally says yoda and sidious were equals but the ascendant darkside gave sids the edge.

I don't even think it' sthe unblancing thing, it's the whole order 66 shizz

Not sure what you're referring to tbh.

Yoda and Sidious are not equals. Starwars.com outright states Sidious overwhelmed Yoda.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Not sure what you're referring to tbh.
ant found it and posted it on hangouts, I shall post
note: it only applies to canon, no tlegends

sidious beating infinite vaders is some of the funniest shit ive ever heard LMAO

Originally posted by toplel
sidious beating infinite vaders is some of the funniest shit ive ever heard LMAO

Here is my case:

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=15988500#post15988500

While I don't think Sidious could beat infinite Vaders, the case is good.

"good"

Originally posted by thesithmaster
While I don't think Sidious could beat infinite Vaders, the case is good.

Thank you

Valkorion crushes them, honestly.

windu can solo. Vapaad isn'ta one-time thing, And yes, Mace can compete with Sidious.

^^^

Unlikely.

People mistakenly assume that Vaapad is sort of a God Card that translates into victory in all situations. Where is the evidence?

Vaapad enabled Mace Windu to exchange blows with Palpatine and cope with the latter's Force Lightning - all good. However, this is one side of the coin. The other side is that Palpatine faked his defeat in order to manipulate Anakin Skywalker. So we have a murky picture in this case.

There is no guarantee that Windu can respond to Valkorion's Dark Blast or cope with his FLS and other powers. Valkorion may also choose to affect the mind of his opponent, reducing the effectiveness of his subject and/or easier to defeat.

'Cuz Vaapad' isn't an argument

The GTCSN system no longer exists, Moose.

Originally posted by S_W_LeGenD
^^^

Unlikely.

People mistakenly assume that Vaapad is sort of a God Card that translates into victory in all situations. Where is the evidence?

Vaapad enabled Mace Windu to exchange blows with Palpatine and cope with the latter's Force Lightning - all good. However, this is one side of the coin. The other side is that Palpatine faked his defeat in order to manipulate Anakin Skywalker. So we have a murky picture in this case.

There is no guarantee that Windu can respond to Valkorion's Dark Blast or cope with his FLS and other powers. Valkorion may also choose to affect the mind of his opponent, reducing the effectiveness of his subject and/or easier to defeat.
That there are circumstances present in Mace winning doesn't mean that Mace's contention was circumstantial. Factually, per word of god, Mace can compete with Sidious in an all-out bout.
The superconducting loop applied to power in general, not specific abilities. Aside from the superconducting loop, Valk will have trouble getting the opportunity to use the force when faced with the offensive onslaught of a duelist bordering on the level of the best duelists in the entire mythos(up until that time at least).

Valkorion wins.

An ironic sentiment coming from the man whose argument is best summarized as "I don't like what your sources say, therefore they're wrong."

The canon tier system (G, T, C, etc.) no longer applies since the canon/Legends split back in 2014. A thing is canon or it is Legends. Legends is not canon.
Many, many sources disagree with your interpretation of the film. Your interpretation of the film doesn't override those sources. I'm sure most of the writers involved with Star Wars are familiar with even the extremely obscure film known as... Episode III.
Your argument that Sidious just can't be a master of all forms of combat because he's challenged by another master of all forms of combat (with more experience) and a high-end master of multiple forms in Mace is hella weak, even for you. Yours is a textbook appeal to incredulity with absolutely no evidence to support it. We have a valid source explicitly stating he is and nothing to explicitly contradict it beyond your age-old dislike of a character.

In summary, the only confirmation bias here is - per usual - yours. In the face of explicit evidence, you bring nothing to the table beyond indignation and tears.

It's been 12 years, Moose. Take your L and

http://66.media.tumblr.com/6037fea34d316243ca57de50eb27868d/tumblr_oa9d26cgrr1tpafe6o1_500.gif

@StealthMoose: I was trying to be generous and not push a reality you were clearly unwilling to accept onto you but to clarify, siding with a canonical source over a random fan's interpretation of a scene isn't an opinion or bias. It's simply common sense.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
@StealthMoose: I was trying to be generous and not push a reality you were clearly unwilling to accept onto you but to clarify, siding with a canonical source over a random fan's interpretation of a scene isn't an opinion or bias. It's simply common sense.

kek

Originally posted by Azronger
The GTCSN system no longer exists, Moose.

In the eyes of what is or isn't part of the Disney canon, true.

It's still an accurate tool for measuring the objectivity of evidence. It's really sad that I have to even use it when people are just going "DERR IS CANON CUZ IT SAYS X" and I'm actually going over the direct source in question instead of a blurb. It would be like taking a book quiz based simply on the author's cousin's take on three chapters. No, that actually might be more accurate.

Naysayers: "This source, which I've indicated is canon (canon apparently being unable to be analyzed), is more valid than your actual examination of the event in question using canon which exists before my canon and upon which my canon is supposedly based etc."

Me: "FFS, you have eyes and ears. Analyze the fight. You can't hide behind absolute statements when actual evidence contradicts it. This is Logic 101."

Originally posted by The_Tempest
An ironic sentiment coming from the man whose argument is best summarized as "I don't like what your sources say, therefore they're wrong."

The canon tier system (G, T, C, etc.) no longer applies since the canon/Legends split back in 2014. A thing is canon or it is Legends. Legends is not canon.
Many, many sources disagree with your interpretation of the film. Your interpretation of the film doesn't override those sources. I'm sure most of the writers involved with Star Wars are familiar with even the extremely obscure film known as... Episode III.
Your argument that Sidious just can't be a master of all forms of combat because he's challenged by another master of all forms of combat (with more experience) and a high-end master of multiple forms in Mace is hella weak, even for you. Yours is a textbook appeal to incredulity with absolutely no evidence to support it. We have a valid source explicitly stating he is and nothing to explicitly contradict it beyond your age-old dislike of a character.

In summary, the only confirmation bias here is - per usual - yours. In the face of explicit evidence, you bring nothing to the table beyond indignation and tears.

It's been 12 years, Moose. Take your L and

http://66.media.tumblr.com/6037fea34d316243ca57de50eb27868d/tumblr_oa9d26cgrr1tpafe6o1_500.gif

1. No, that's not how to summarize my statement. But you were always the lord of strawmans and that's not likely to change anytime soon.

2. See above. The caste system of old Legends canon still makes axiomatic sense, because the works of George Lucas are always superior to works which draw conclusions on it from secondary authors and creators. It takes ten minutes tops to write a blurb or holocron article; it took days or weeks to film, revise, and choreograph the Sids/Yoda fight. You cannot with any reasonable sanity expect me to believe that GL was mistaken in showing Sidious as visibly inferior and "MUH CANON" is the absolute arbiter of the truth.

3. The Trump angle of "everyone knows it" is adorable, but you should try sourcing your arguments a bit. Perhaps you've gotten lazy in your old age. Here, I'll make this simple for you - The events of the movie, as noted by me and easily cross-examined by everyone who owns internet access or a copy of the DVD, supports the idea that Sidious was NOT superior in the Yoda/Sids fight, and actually was disarmed, failed to achieve mastery in the Force battles, and won because he had a handrail.

I'm sorry this really hurts your ten plus year streak of "Sidious is Gawd", but the truth sometimes hurts.

4. The entire side-argument of him being unlikely to have 'mastered' all seven forms of Lightsaber combat was a direct example indicating the disconnect between G canon and C canon; the fact that you overlooked or ignored the context means you should read slower, or with someone to help you. GL doesn't show Sidious dominating actual bonafide master swordsmen. He only shows him dominating (at the time) no-feat wonders in what might be the worst choreographed fight scene since Equilibrium's intro. Sidious acts erratically and the Jedi Masters take him seriously, but he is very easily disarmed by both. Hell, Mace -frontkicks- his weapon from his hand; that's amateur hour at its finest.

The support for Sidious NOT being a master of all seven forms of lightsaber combat is likely given the evidence. He had less opportunities to practice, fewer people to learn from and practice with, and he is dominated by actual Jedi masters.

The support for Sidious knowing all seven forms of combat and mastering them is.... a line of C-canon.

Ready for your predictable response tho.

https://media.tenor.com/images/6a691763cd17f1a2fb8467899e654fc7/tenor.gif

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
@StealthMoose: I was trying to be generous and not push a reality you were clearly unwilling to accept onto you but to clarify, siding with a canonical source over a random fan's interpretation of a scene isn't an opinion or bias. It's simply common sense.

Common sense is neither common nor exactly sensible. It's often a cover-word for "I can't provide my argument, so I'm going to assume you're wrong and than claim it's self-evident".

If you can't provide the argument, but you intend to believe in "MUH CANON" as holy and unapproachable, then we're done. You can't be reasoned with, and at this point you're being obtuse.

https://i.imgur.com/w3hUyFC.gif



Indeed: I suppose my summary lent your argument more credibility than it actually deserved. But I'm generous like that with old friends.



No, it doesn't. The caste system no longer applies because what is canon and what is Legends are two mutually exclusive categories. Ergo, no reason to "rank" how canon a non-canon thing is. I'm trying to determine a simpler combination of words to convey the point, but I'm not sure this is possible.



Contrary to your insinuations, you're not the only person who's watched or reviewed Episode III. It stands to reason that the writers involved with Legends and canon continuity are familiar with Revenge of the Sith.

It's kind of a big deal.

Probably even listed in the job requirements.



If your threshold for humiliation can withstand source after source after source explicitly contradicting your own interpretation, then sure. I'll post sources and screenshots for as many as I can find when I get home.



There is no G and C canon.



More irony from the man whose entire argument is predicated on a false premise, because:





Yes, we're familiar with your scintillating commentary on the fight scene. No one disputes that the choreography is terrible. What people dispute are the ridiculous conclusions you and you alone draw from one badly choreographed scene while simultaneously discarding shittons of evidence to the contrary in order to satisfy your 12 year grudge against a fictional character who's more powerful, important, and successful than Marka Ragnos.



If by "evidence" you really mean "the abundant nerd!rage of a defeated Antediluvian" and only if we exclude the actual evidence... such as the valid source that specifically calls him one, then yeah, sure.



This is how Star Wars prodigies often work, my friend.



I know this is the heart of the matter for you: having witnessed the absolute annihilation of the Antediluvian platform ages ago. But again, I beseech you:



It's long past time, my friend.

Originally posted by The_Tempest

Contrary to your insinuations, you're not the only person who's watched or reviewed Episode III. It stands to reason that the writers involved with Legends and canon continuity are familiar with Revenge of the Sith.

Does the familiarity of those writers and such matter, though? I ask this seriously.

Hear me out on this.

"The Death of the Author" is an essay on literary criticism written by Roland Barthes in the late sixties. He posits that the audience/reader/viewer must separate a work from it's creator in order to break free from the "interpretative tyranny" of the author/writer. This is to say that this is generally something one reasonably does when there are several conflicting interpretations from the authority of a said work.

I mean, we look to these authorities for confirmation to inform these hypothetical battles and "versus" situations but how unbreakable is that really? Most of these discussions involve individuals going back and forth like they're discussing genuinely objective facts about these enormously subjective bodies of work. Film-making is one part industry and another part art, fundamentally. The latter is obviously the facet of film-making that is most relevant in all of these discussions.

In all honesty, why wouldn't what takes place on the screen take precedence? I question whether or not author/writer intent is important enough or even matters enough to have any sort of weighty merit among these disagreements. Especially with a fictional universe like Star Wars? With so many changes, contradictions, swathes of periods being considered "unofficial" (Legends), etc?

What we see matters and there is likely more than one interpretation that is "correct." It doesn't necessarily translate to, "What will go, goes." However, it would seem that the author/writer is not capable of holding infallible dominion over the intention of what they create.

Hypothetical incoming:

If GL himself woke up tomorrow and said Yoda was the weakest character in the SW universe? Or if a collection of writers/current authorities said that, I don't know, Jocasta Nu was the strongest? I mean, what would you really have to say? Is it enough to suggest that it is the most reasonable decision to concede because they created these works, whether it's an old intention to change these characters or a relatively embryonic one?

If Nu was the strongest, how could it be possible with how she's dispatched? If Yoda is the weakest, how was he not defeated every time? "It doesn't matter, the creators and authorities said so" isn't good enough and to be honest? In these disagreements? I don't think it has been for a long time.

What we see and reasonable interpretations seem to have the highest degree of jurisdiction. Things like improvisation, author contradiction, a writer changing his mind? These things throw a wrench into the works regarding author/writer interpretation as being a preeminent authority about the work itself. "They created it" is lacking when considering the circumstances and the very nature of any specific artistic work or even the world-building involved.

The thing about author interpretation is that it suffers from the same limitations as reader/audience interpretation; It can be paradoxical, change over time, and might not be the best explanation. As Barthes surmised, a writer's interpretation of his own works are no more valid than the interpretations of any of the readers/audience and that a solitary vision and/or "right" interpretation is to "impose a limit on that text."

Translating that to discussing these versus battles, it's veracity becomes clear. Arguments are useless because claims by writers have been made about Sidious' apparent mastery over everything, from lightsabers to perhaps even to the force (at least the latter was the case in Legends but not any longer. See what I mean?) Considering the work is intrinsically subjective, the claims (even from writers and authors) are bound by that precondition.

The highest authority is always the work itself. If there can be reasonable arguments made and points demonstrated with enough clarity utilizing that aforementioned work, I don't see how a writer coming along and saying, "Nope" is substantial enough. It leaves much to be desired.

I am going to catch a star system of shit for what I'm about to say but both of your positions come from a place that seems to be slightly askew of how to interpret the work. For one, you have Tempest claiming writer/author authority is the greatest factor when determining who's who, which I find faulty for all the reasons I mentioned above. On the other hand, you have Janus discussing the "objectivity" of the evidence, which seems to do no justice to the work itself.

I would only lean towards Janus' position because it favors the work itself which, through what I just explained, seems to be the more reasonable position when interpreting the abilities and interactions of fictional characters.

That's just my two cents anyway.

Valk could honestly turn any force wielder below the Ones into his slave.

Originally posted by godemperortrump
Valk could honestly turn any force wielder below the Ones into his slave.
Asides Revan.

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Asides Revan.
Was that supposed to say 'besides?' Because Vitiate did... he just couldn't a second time, which didn't matter because he melted Revan's face

Mace solos.

Any hax willbe recpericotaed with vappad which isn't a one-time amp.

up

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Contrary to your insinuations, you're not the only person who's watched or reviewed Episode III. It stands to reason that the writers involved with Legends and canon continuity are familiar with Revenge of the Sith.

It's kind of a big deal.

Probably even listed in the job requirements.
lmaooo