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

- Sabers
- Force
- All-Out

How hard does Vader die?

Vader stomps.

Vader stomps indeed.

Lucas has Vader on Dooku/Maul level, all of which are greater than Ventress.

Lmao. The guy's also said that Old Ben's far more powerful than Vader, so what's saying he's right this time? He's contradicted himself on this issue before, so he's not reliable in this case I'm afraid.

Originally posted by RealistRacism
The guy's also said that Old Ben's far more powerful than Vader Quote?

It's Lucas' ESB notes, and they have been shared here heaps...

A lot of stuff can be logically retconned though.

Everyone here says that Lucas' word extends to the EU, Canon and all other material. So does his statement of "You have to be either Mace or Yoda to compete with the Emperor" still stand despite Luke defeating him, Plagueis would also logically be able to compete, then we see Maul do it briefly in TCW etc. If Lucas' word was actually treated as fact, we wouldn't see characters before and after his statement compete with Sidious. The Maul = Dooku = Vader garbage is exactly the same.

We know that Dooku is way ahead of Maul, by virtue of being vastly superior to General Grievous, Kenobi's stated equal (who is Maul's solid superior). Not only do we have a line of scaling, but Dooku is said to have easily defeated Kenobi on the Invisible Hand - despite having the near-invincible Anakin Skywalker as backup - once again proving he's far better than Maul;
"After a short struggle, Dooku easily swatted Obi-Wan Kenobi aside, leaving him to duel with a frightened Anakin alone while the captive Chancellor Palpatine looked on." - From one of the Relaunched Fact Files. I can find the issue number if needed.

If Lucas says something, and then we see that's demonstrably not the case... are we not supposed to believe our eyes? Or do we blindly follow what we know to not be true? His word is canon unless we see the converse, and that's what's going on here. Maul and Vader are Ventress-tier trash, and Dooku reigns supreme

The entirety of that middle paragraph is literal horsecrap :/

Expected better tbh

Dooku >> Kenobi = Grievous > Maul is fact. You contribute nothing gtfo.

Alright then, go ahead and debunk it

Lmfao what a shit argument, no wonder you never debate seriously.

Dooku >> Kenobi is a thing, as the quote I posted points to. I'm sorry but that excuse just doesn't cut it anymore. Kenobi can't be caught off guard when he's looking right at Dooku, and running towards him. Unless the argument here is that Obi-Wan is the stupidest combatant in history? In either case, they both lead to him being << Dooku.

Kenobi hasn't always beaten Grievous at all, and TCW is still legitimate. It's in the Fact Files which addresses not only The Clone Wars program anyway.

Grievous not being far off Dooku is completely unfounded. You're just dumb

Grievous sucks tbh

Lmao, then Maul's superior does as well.

I don't think Ventress has any relevant Edge against Vader. Sabers would be the closest but Anakin did square off with Dooku who was vastly superior so his experience would give him a solid advantage.

The relaunched fact files are Disney canon. And no matter how hard you try to ignore it or twist around it or try to sideline it, it is canonical that Kenobi did not have his active barrier up when Dooku choked him.

And no it's not retarded at all. In fact it has been made clear repeatedly across sources that he left himself open trying to bullrush him there On that note I should probably compile a list of all sources where someone who did not gesture to defend was choked, ragdolled or sent flying. Pretty sure all PT era material is consistent in at least this note, regardless who the opponents are or whether it is legends or canon

Vader stomps

Originally posted by RealistRacism
Everyone here says that Lucas' word extends to the EU, Canon and all other material. So does his statement of "You have to be either Mace or Yoda to compete with the Emperor" still stand despite Luke defeating him, Plagueis would also logically be able to compete, then we see Maul do it briefly in TCW etc. If Lucas' word was actually treated as fact, we wouldn't see characters before and after his statement compete with Sidious. The Maul = Dooku = Vader garbage is exactly the same.

We know that Dooku is way ahead of Maul, by virtue of being vastly superior to General Grievous, Kenobi's stated equal (who is Maul's solid superior). Not only do we have a line of scaling, but Dooku is said to have easily defeated Kenobi on the Invisible Hand - despite having the near-invincible Anakin Skywalker as backup - once again proving he's far better than Maul;
"After a short struggle, Dooku easily swatted Obi-Wan Kenobi aside, leaving him to duel with a frightened Anakin alone while the captive Chancellor Palpatine looked on." - From one of the Relaunched Fact Files. I can find the issue number if needed.

If Lucas says something, and then we see that's demonstrably not the case... are we not supposed to believe our eyes? Or do we blindly follow what we know to not be true? His word is canon unless we see the converse, and that's what's going on here. Maul and Vader are Ventress-tier trash, and Dooku reigns supreme

Since when did Dooku start becoming overrated on this site?

Originally posted by RealistRacism
Lmao, then Maul's superior does as well.


Well you have to firstly prove Kenobi is Mauls superior (looks like some want to count Canon only when it comes to that), and then justify to me how Grievous and Kenobi are equals.

The only parity I see between Grievous and Maul is in the missing genitals department. Where Vader has them both beat (just barely).

In before a fifty page discussion between Thor and RR.

OT-Vader one shots.

Originally posted by LordOfTheLight
The relaunched fact files are Disney canon. And no matter how hard you try to ignore it or twist around it or try to sideline it, it is canonical that Kenobi did not have his active barrier up when Dooku choked him.

And no it's not retarded at all. In fact it has been made clear repeatedly across sources that he left himself open trying to bullrush him there On that note I should probably compile a list of all sources where someone who did not gesture to defend was choked, ragdolled or sent flying. Pretty sure all PT era material is consistent in at least this note, regardless who the opponents are or whether it is legends or canon
That doesn't matter. Since when do we disregard Canon here? The new Canon is when both Maul and Vader are in their primes, so it should be counted in this case. Kenobi's victory against Grievous is only attributed to him facing off against the latter multiple times and therefore working out how he fights, it makes complete sense.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Well you have to firstly prove Kenobi is Mauls superior (looks like some want to count Canon only when it comes to that), and then justify to me how Grievous and Kenobi are equals.

The only parity I see between Grievous and Maul is in the missing genitals department. Where Vader has them both beat (just barely).
Lmao, we don't have to use Canon only but this is when Maul's in his prime. Everyone always uses him as shown in TCW, after his power growth but now that that doesn't suit, you're a Legends guy Thor? You've always conceded Maul's inferiority to Kenobi be it Canon or Legends, but now that Grievous is above him, you've got to panic up some response. Just admit GG's better

Grievous is his canonical equal; "Obi-Wan Kenobi and Grievous often fought to a stalemate when they clashed, so equally matched were they as warriors. Eventually though, Kenobi was to learn how to best the cyborg."

Trash that's been dealt with already.

Originally posted by RealistRacism


Lmao, we don't have to use Canon only but this is when Maul's in his prime. Everyone always uses him as shown in TCW, after his power growth but now that that doesn't suit, you're a Legends guy Thor? You've always conceded Maul's inferiority to Kenobi be it Canon or Legends, but now that Grievous is above him, you've got to panic up some response. Just admit GG's better

Grievous is his canonical equal; "Obi-Wan Kenobi and Grievous often fought to a stalemate when they clashed, so equally matched were they as warriors. Eventually though, Kenobi was to learn how to best the cyborg."


Except Kenobi has only beaten down Maul in direct combat in Rebels

You can say Kenobi grew between their last clash and ROTS, but so did Maul.

Lol Canonically Kenobi consistently had Grievous on the run every time he TKd him.

Even in Sabers Canon Greivous has gotten his limbs chopped off by both Fisto and Ventress, and fought evenly against Koth who had a wounded arm.

Theres literally nothing to put Grievous on par with Maul. Ventress is the better comparison tbh.

Arguments that Maul can take peak Kenobi are worthless at this point tbh. Everyone knows Kenobi wins.

Originally posted by DarthCaedus77
Arguments that Maul can take peak Kenobi are worthless at this point tbh. Everyone knows Kenobi wins.


Because of Rebels, which is pure Disney Canon.

The rules are that the fall back position is Legends and Lucas canon only. No Disney Canon unless the OP states so.

And even if Legends/Lucas Prime Kenobi would take Prime Maul, its pretty clear from all the evidences that it would be a fight between near equals. To the extent that its not even worth bringing up Kenobi as Mauls superior.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Because of Rebels, which is pure Disney Canon.

The rules are that the fall back position is Legends and Lucas canon only. No Disney Canon unless the OP states so.

And even if Legends/Lucas Prime Kenobi would take Prime Maul, its pretty clear from all the evidences that it would be a fight between near equals. To the extent that its not even worth bringing up Kenobi as Mauls superior.

No, not cause of Rebels and I'm talking about Legends lol.

ROTS Kenobi>Maul, it's not debatable.

Originally posted by DarthCaedus77
No, not cause of Rebels and I'm talking about Legends lol.

ROTS Kenobi>Maul, it's not debatable.


No not at all. Very debatable.

The Rebels scenario is when something becomes non debateable. There was nothing like that prior to that.

Thor's new radical turn of Maul > Kenobi is brilliant. Grievous is = Obi-Wan as per the New Fact Files, which covers Canon and Legends content, so stop pretending this is based solely on the TV programs.

Grievous > Maul is fact now.

Originally posted by RealistRacism
Thor's new radical turn of Maul > Kenobi is brilliant. Grievous is = Obi-Wan as per the New Fact Files, which covers Canon and Legends content, so stop pretending this is based solely on the TV programs.

Grievous > Maul is fact now.


LOL What?

No the fact files state they fought equally on numerous occasions through TCW, as if Maul and Kenobi did not. Only difference being Maul did not repeatedly get TKd by Kenobi and repeatedly run from him.

Also nowhere have I stated Maul > Kenobi. They were clearly peers during TCW, and there's nothing to suggest that massively changed by ROTS.

Maul already beat Grievous twice in SOD. So that's some strange facts you're trying to convince others of.

Tell me about Ventress vs Grievous. Maul and Kenobi are simply a tier above them both.

The legacy Vader left behind

https://images4.alphacoders.com/653/653613.jpg

They aren't excuses Thor... they're circumstances stated in a Canonical source. Maul won via dun moch the first time, over a Kenobi who had just been bashed and knocked out multiple times, but it's nice to see you're still ignoring that fact. Lmao. No one honestly takes Kanan pushing him off a cliff as the reason why he's trash, it's just amusing to do so. The same way that we'll laugh at Anakin for being overpowered by Hondo.

Wtf? Maul did just that... pushed him off a cliff. On neutral ground - as these 'versus fights' typically take place on - Grievous would be pushed and he'd just get up. How convenient for Maul that there are some huge canyons he can hurl an opponent - with no force wall - in. This isn't a victory, lmfao.

Maul didn't blitz Grievous. Maul off-balanced him with a force-wave and then tackled him, hardly a blitzing. On neutral ground, Grievous would've just been pushed backwards and recovered fine. But again, he was limited in his movement, something that's stated to have hindered him in RotS and in his earlier TCW fights. If you're saying this to imply superior speed, Maul is roughly on par with Kenobi in that area in S4, whilst Grievous is faster than Kenobi in S7. But ignorance is bliss, I guess.

So when Grievous basically one-shots Kenobi in S7, that's not a clearer display of superior martial skill than Maul using cheap psychological tricks and pushing Obi-Wan against a wall? Grievous performs far better against late TCW Obi-Wan, than Maul did against his mid-TCW version.

S7 Grievous >> S7 Obi-Wan > S4 Obi-Wan = Maul

Originally posted by RealistRacism
They aren't excuses Thor... they're circumstances stated in a Canonical source. Maul won via dun moch the first time, over a Kenobi who had just been bashed and knocked out multiple times, but it's nice to see you're still ignoring that fact.


Oh please. You're talking about a Maul who hadn't even fought in 10+ years.

In fact if you want to refer to canon for a sec (by the same director no less), Kanan gave the Inquisitor his best fight yet AFTER being properly tortured for days. And you're whining about a Jedi Master being slapped around a bit before a fight against a combatant who just hasnt fought in 10+ years and just got put on these new chicken legs.

I mean really

Originally posted by RealistRacism
Lmao. No one honestly takes Kanan pushing him off a cliff as the reason why he's trash, it's just amusing to do so. The same way that we'll laugh at Anakin for being overpowered by Hondo.


Good. So you agree Kanan never really beat Old Maul. As long as we are keeping things consistent

Also its hard to keep up with whats a joke and whats serious. Like Im still half sure you're joking here calling Grievous > Maul. But refuse to give Grievous fanboys that ammunition for later on.



Originally posted by RealistRacism
Wtf? Maul did just that... pushed him off a cliff. On neutral ground - as these 'versus fights' typically take place on - Grievous would be pushed and he'd just get up. How convenient for Maul that there are some huge canyons he can hurl an opponent - with no force wall - in. This isn't a victory, lmfao.


Okay, but you need to be aware of your environment, and if nothing else Maul overpowered him right?

So best we can deduce from that is Maul >/= Grievous.




Originally posted by RealistRacism
Maul didn't blitz Grievous. Maul off-balanced him with a force-wave and then tackled him, hardly a blitzing. On neutral ground, Grievous would've just been pushed backwards and recovered fine. But again, he was limited in his movement, something that's stated to have hindered him in RotS and in his earlier TCW fights. If you're saying this to imply superior speed, Maul is roughly on par with Kenobi in that area in S4, whilst Grievous is faster than Kenobi in S7. But ignorance is bliss, I guess.


Thats a lot of WOULD HAVES you are using for Grievous. Surely with 3 different encounters there should not be this many COULD HAVE WOULD HAVE SHOULD HAVES.

Ill concede there was a level of parity between them, but Maul seemed to always have the edge. So like I said Ill give you Maul >/= Grievous, which Id accept if I was you, because you really have nothing to put Grievous standing higher than that against Maul.


Originally posted by RealistRacism
So when Grievous basically one-shots Kenobi in S7, that's not a clearer display of superior martial skill than Maul using cheap psychological tricks and pushing Obi-Wan against a wall? Grievous performs far better against late TCW Obi-Wan, than Maul did against his mid-TCW version.

S7 Grievous >> S7 Obi-Wan > S4 Obi-Wan = Maul


You're doing too many mental gymnastics here comparing to Kenobi. Maul fought that same Grievous that one-shot Kenobi. So its amusing you're using his victory over Kenobi as some kind of measuring stick and not just Mauls direct confrontations against Grievous.

Like I said Im willing to give you SOD/ROTSMaul >/= Late TCW/ROTS Grievous. I would take that if I were you.

-

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Oh please. You're talking about a Maul who hadn't even fought in 10+ years.

In fact if you want to refer to canon for a sec (by the same director no less), Kanan gave the Inquisitor his best fight yet AFTER being properly tortured for days. And you're whining about a Jedi Master being slapped around a bit before a fight against a combatant who just hasnt fought in 10+ years and just got put on these new chicken legs.

You know muscle memory is a thing, right Thor? In any case, Karness Muur was able to wield a lightsaber just fine, and compete with Darth Krayt despite not having used the weapon for thousands of years. Maul's trained a lot longer and harder in that area - going by his "most efficiently trained" and other training-related accolades - than Muur, so how is 10 measly years going to be enough time off to diminish his combative prowess? There's also Sidious, who had no time at all to go practice during his time as Chancellor, yet was perfectly able to fight on par with Mace... Brilliant framing, but that's just not reality. Kenobi wasn't merely 'slapped around a bit,' he was bashed and knocked out twice... Let's go into it;

On Raydonia; Kenobi takes Savage's elbow and fist to the face. Dazed, Obi-Wan then gets up and is smashed by an annoyed Opress' all-out punch (in the head) with a combination of fist and lightsaber hilt. This is what knocks him out the first time. Keep in mind that Savage could already crack thick, rock slabs with his punches pre-transformation (which massively multiplied his strength, as you know).

On the Ship; Obi-Wan gets backhanded, thrown into crates, hurled onto the floor, and then punched in the face once more (all while still evidently dazed from the first K.O), knocking him out again.

We've already had the discussion about the legs before, with nearly everyone involved agreeing that if Maul wasn't a complete retard, he would've gotten used to them by the time of this fight. You've conceded this issue before, just give it up and save me the time of re-typing all of my points.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
I mean really Good. So you agree Kanan never really beat Old Maul. As long as we are keeping things consistent Also its hard to keep up with whats a joke and whats serious. Like Im still half sure you're joking here calling Grievous > Maul. But refuse to give Grievous fanboys that ammunition for later on.
I'm mostly serious, as in I do believe Grievous > Maul, but my arguments are dramatised to really humiliate Maul. Well every one of those 2 Grievous fanboys in the history of SW debating can use whatever I'm posting, as you haven't properly addressed anything, which I've grown accustomed to.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Okay, but you need to be aware of your environment, and if nothing else Maul overpowered him right? So best we can deduce from that is Maul >/= Grievous.
Erm... I'm sure Grievous was aware of his surroundings... there's just nothing he could do about it. We've seen that GG has no problem tanking force attacks and getting right back up all guns blazing, but he can't do that when he's pushed against a wall in a tight space. Kenobi did something similar to him in S3, it was just missing the tackle (due to Jedi restraint probably). Based off that do we conclude Kenobi > Grievous? You might, had there not been a source stating they're equals. So this feat of Maul's was partially replicated by early CW Kenobi, whom Grievous would paste in S7.

Grievous was taken off guard... you know, like how Maul was with the dog, bounty hunter, Padawans etc. So it does happen Thor, as you know all too well. The 'overpowering' was due to what I said before; the surprise attack. Also, not being able to break free (if that's what you're alluding to) is not indicative of Maul's superiority. It's easier to keep someone against a wall than it is to break free from that position, and it's safe to say that had the situation been reversed, the result would've been the same for Maul.


Originally posted by Darth Thor
Thats a lot of WOULD HAVES you are using for Grievous. Surely with 3 different encounters there should not be this many COULD HAVE WOULD HAVE SHOULD HAVES. Ill concede there was a level of parity between them, but Maul seemed to always have the edge. So like I said Ill give you Maul >/= Grievous, which Id accept if I was you, because you really have nothing to put Grievous standing higher than that against Maul.
What are you saying? There are a lot of 'would haves' because I'm speaking about a hypothetical situation without the circumstances we see in Son of Dathomir. Are you okay?


Originally posted by Darth Thor
You're doing too many mental gymnastics here comparing to Kenobi. Maul fought that same Grievous that one-shot Kenobi. So its amusing you're using his victory over Kenobi as some kind of measuring stick and not just Mauls direct confrontations against Grievous.
Are you thick? The direct confrontations between Maul and Grievous are rife with circumstance, as I've explained, and are far too short to actually reach a verdict. There are no mental gymnastics, just simple reason which you haven't yet properly addressed.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Like I said Im willing to give you SOD/ROTSMaul >/= Late TCW/ROTS Grievous. I would take that if I were you.
I won't rest until Maul is below Carth Onasi, where he should be. But that's okay, because concessions like these make me happy, as I recall not long ago you had Maul >(&gt Grievous right? If you were me, maybe you wouldn't lose on this issue so much. As the premier Maul lowballer here, I do know a lot about him, and I'm sure I'd make a better case for him being > Grievous than you

While Maul isn't below Grievous Darth Thor's performance proving it is, embarrassing.

Originally posted by RealistRacism
You know muscle memory is a thing, right Thor? In any case, Karness Muur was able to wield a lightsaber just fine, and compete with Darth Krayt despite not having used the weapon for thousands of years. Maul's trained a lot longer and harder in that area - going by his "most efficiently trained" and other training-related accolades - than Muur, so how is 10 measly years going to be enough time off to diminish his combative prowess? There's also Sidious, who had no time at all to go practice during his time as Chancellor, yet was perfectly able to fight on par with Mace... Brilliant framing, but that's just not reality. Kenobi wasn't merely 'slapped around a bit,' he was bashed and knocked out twice... Let's go into it;

Urm yeah, muscle memory only counts when you still have those muscles lol. Maul is literally missing half his body, so will have to retrain those fake muscles. Not to mention his muscle memory for the last 10 years will be based on Spider Legs Lmao

Urm Sidious had practice against the Maul bros. Not to mention he lost to Mace who is less powerful than himself

Yes Kenobi was slapped around a bit. There was nothing broken or bashed in. He had some bruises but was not rubbing anything in pain once the combat began (unlike in his S6 fight with Dooku where Dooku hurt is ribs and he literally had his hand covering them during the fight). Ergo no indication of anything serious.



Originally posted by RealistRacism
On Raydonia; Kenobi takes Savage's elbow and fist to the face. Dazed, Obi-Wan then gets up and is smashed by an annoyed Opress' all-out punch (in the head) with a combination of fist and lightsaber hilt. This is what knocks him out the first time. Keep in mind that Savage could already crack thick, rock slabs with his punches pre-transformation (which massively multiplied his strength, as you know).


None of this is getting anything smashed in.

As for Savages feats, well Kenobi is quite durable, plus Maul clearly specified to Savage he wants Kenobi alive.


Originally posted by RealistRacism
On the Ship; Obi-Wan gets backhanded, thrown into crates, hurled onto the floor, and then punched in the face once more (all while still evidently dazed from the first K.O), knocking him out again.


Again, nothing was smashed in. Nothing broken. He didn't appear in any kind of major pain in any specific part of his body during the fight like he did against Dooku.

Kenobi is a Jedi Master. Kanan as a Padawan can get over days of torture and still give his best performance against the GI, yet Kenobi cant take a bit of a beating before hand to tackle a guy who hasn't fought in 10+ years and just got metal humanoid legs put on for the first time.


Originally posted by RealistRacism
We've already had the discussion about the legs before, with nearly everyone involved agreeing that if Maul wasn't a complete retard, he would've gotten used to them by the time of this fight. You've conceded this issue before, just give it up and save me the time of re-typing all of my points.


Urm no I think you're getting confused with the SECOND time he got new legs put on.

Maul blatantly wasnt back to form lol. Ergo why hes specifically stated to be far more powerful by the next episode. Yes hes not a retard, hence why he took Kenobi by surprise with Savages help.. duh!


Originally posted by RealistRacism
I'm mostly serious, as in I do believe Grievous > Maul, but my arguments are dramatised to really humiliate Maul. Well every one of those 2 Grievous fanboys in the history of SW debating can use whatever I'm posting, as you haven't properly addressed anything, which I've grown accustomed to.


Oh jeez.


Originally posted by RealistRacism
Erm... I'm sure Grievous was aware of his surroundings... there's just nothing he could do about it. We've seen that GG has no problem tanking force attacks and getting right back up all guns blazing, but he can't do that when he's pushed against a wall in a tight space. Kenobi did something similar to him in S3, it was just missing the tackle (due to Jedi restraint probably). Based off that do we conclude Kenobi > Grievous? You might, had there not been a source stating they're equals. So this feat of Maul's was partially replicated by early CW Kenobi, whom Grievous would paste in S7.


No, weve seen Kenobi clearly giving him issues with TK attacks on multiple occasions. In S2 and S3 and ROTS Grievous flees after being TKd by Kenobi. In ROTS hes disarmed of his weapons. Maul has displayed greater TK than Kenobi.


Originally posted by RealistRacism
Grievous was taken off guard... you know, like how Maul was with the dog, bounty hunter, Padawans etc. So it does happen Thor, as you know all too well. The 'overpowering' was due to what I said before; the surprise attack. Also, not being able to break free (if that's what you're alluding to) is not indicative of Maul's superiority. It's easier to keep someone against a wall than it is to break free from that position, and it's safe to say that had the situation been reversed, the result would've been the same for Maul.


Nah he was physically blitzed. Grievous saw Maul come in and take out his droids. Neither of them had their Sabers out, but Maul physically blitzed Greivous before Grievous could react, and then had him surrender with his Saber to Grievous neck.



Originally posted by RealistRacism
What are you saying? There are a lot of 'would haves' because I'm speaking about a hypothetical situation without the circumstances we see in Son of Dathomir. Are you okay?


He physically blitzed him in a tight environment, and TKd him in an open environment.

The first fight had Grievous sending several magna guards to SOFTEN Maul up, and Maul telling Grievous that Grievous isnt his equal, implying both combatants know Maul is the superior.

So thats literally 3/3 different encounters where Maul is the implied superior.

If anything the context was Grievous kick on Maul which was done after a bit of dun moch with Grievous noting the state of the battle and Maul getting frustrated over it.



Originally posted by RealistRacism
Are you thick? The direct confrontations between Maul and Grievous are rife with circumstance, as I've explained, and are far too short to actually reach a verdict. There are no mental gymnastics, just simple reason which you haven't yet properly addressed.


Yeah the definition of thick isnt someone who doesnt simply accept whatever you are saying.

There are obvious mental gymnastics here. You are using a quote that states Grievous and Kenobi were equal as some kind of proof that Grievous is above Maul, when theres no proof even ROTS Kenobi is above The Lawless/SOD Maul Lmao. Your logic is stupid for 3 reasons:

1) Maul fought on par with Kenobi 3 times during TCW S4 & S5, each time on his Chicken Legs no less.

2) They both seem to have the TK advantage over Grievous and Maul has displayed superior TK to Kenobi.

3) Maul and Grievous faced each other 3 times. Sure Grievous did well against him, but Every Single Time in different environments and under different circumstances Maul was the one who was implied superior.



Originally posted by RealistRacism
I won't rest until Maul is below Carth Onasi, where he should be. But that's okay, because concessions like these make me happy, as I recall not long ago you had Maul >(&gt Grievous right? If you were me, maybe you wouldn't lose on this issue so much. As the premier Maul lowballer here, I do know a lot about him, and I'm sure I'd make a better case for him being > Grievous than you


Well upon discussion I do appreciate Grievous not getting stomped by Maul and actually putting up decent fights.

Besides Id prefer to just agree to that and finish this nonsense.

Urm thats great that both you and DC think you can make a better case than me that Maul > Grievous. Except Im specifically tackling your nonsense logic that Grievous = Kenobi > Maul. And not taking into account overall feats.

Originally posted by DarthCaedus77
While Maul isn't below Grievous Darth Thor's performance proving it is, embarrassing.


Oh by all means make your superior case against Realists flawless fact file logic, so I can have a good laugh at it.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Oh by all means make your superior case against Realists flawless fact file logic, so I can have a good laugh at it.

The hurt ego here lol.

Tfw when Grievous lowkey solos Maul and TCW Kenobi together :/

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Oh by all means make your superior case against Realists flawless fact file logic, so I can have a good laugh at it.
Lmao. Excuse me for using a legitimate source, as opposed to quotes from a voice actor

Originally posted by Darth Thor
1) Maul fought on par with Kenobi 3 times during TCW S4 & S5, each time on his Chicken Legs no less.
Really? He used Dun Moch to win against a concussed Kenobi, then fled out of fear of being killed despite having his brother as aid. When was the third time?

Originally posted by Darth Thor
2) They both seem to have the TK advantage over Grievous and Maul has displayed superior TK to Kenobi.
Everyone has a TK advantage over Grievous you clown, he has no force defense

Even Padawan Ahsoka can push Grievous away, and yet GG is her confirmed superior whilst holding back. You can't base a matchup between Grievous and another force wielder purely off how many pushes they land on him.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
3) Maul and Grievous faced each other 3 times. Sure Grievous did well against him, but Every Single Time in different environments and under different circumstances Maul was the one who was implied superior.
And in each of those circumstances/environments there was something that allowed Maul to get the upper hand. I'm so sick of your fake ignorance on this issue.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Well upon discussion I do appreciate Grievous not getting stomped by Maul and actually putting up decent fights. Besides Id prefer to just agree to that and finish this nonsense. Urm thats great that both you and DC think you can make a better case than me that Maul > Grievous. Except Im specifically tackling your nonsense logic that Grievous = Kenobi > Maul. And not taking into account overall feats.
It isn't nonsense Thor, it's outright stated. The reasons Kenobi is able to defeat him in RotS are that he's fought against GG throughout the war so much, and knows that by limiting his movement he can win. When he doesn't do that, we see the result in S7. You can leave this conversation here and not reply Thor, but nothing you've said really disproves my arguments.

If ever I want a marathon conversation with you about Maul, all I need to do is dangle a little bit of bait and you bite

^ Huh was actually gonna respond to that drivel.


Originally posted by DarthCaedus77
The hurt ego here lol.


Lol no. You tried to trigger me. You failed.

Now get out of your Moms basement and go kiss a girl. Or boy if you're into that.

DarthThor is so not triggered that he responded to a two-week old comment everyone else forgot about. Everyone else but him, apparently...

Anyway might as well leave a summary of my responses:

1) Muscle Memory. Though Im not a scientist, I am into fitness training and I KNOW Muscle memory in training wont work on a body thats never been trained.

Heres a wiki article that discusses how its down to new nuclei being formed in the cells which always remain in those muscle cells:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_memory_(strength_training)

So if nothing else this means Mauls upper body will be lacking sufficient strength until he starts lifting weights again. You can talk about Force Enhanced strength if you want, but clearly that wont be a thing with Artificial limbs, and the strength of those limbs will just have to suffice.

However Realist is right in that Muscle Memory regarding skills and martial arts is all in the brain.

But, again Im not a scientist, and unfortunately its hard to look up how getting a new body would effect your muscle memory, but Im pretty sure that memory is in relation to your current body and motor neurones. Your brain remembers how they work, and if youre put into a completely different body especially one of a different size, its a pretty safe bet you will have to retrain those muscle memories to adapt to the new body. But again thats just an educated guess.

That said EVEN WITH Muscle memory in your SAME Body, people need practice to be back at the level they were at. The only difference is you can reach your previous level of skill fairly quickly. Certain skills will come instantaneously like riding a bike. But lets be realistic. Just because I was good at bowling 10 years ago, doesn't mean Im going to instantly be just as good the next time I go. Practice makes perfect. Not practice then off for 10 years, then practice again. Point being its clearly not always Instantaneous even under normal circumstances.

I mean if a black belt who hasnt fought or practiced in 10 years goes up against a current black belt (of the same level) but who has been working up to that for the last few years, then who do you think is going to win that fight? Same with Basketball, same with any other sport or discipline. Sure you can do the martial arts equivalent of riding a bike pretty instantaneously. But youre not going to be on the level that you were at 10years ago when you were practising every day.

I mean this is just common sense, so I have no idea why its even a discussion.

Let alone talking about someone whose not practiced in 10 years AND has a completely different pair of lanky and clunky legs. And let alone the fact that these new mechanical legs are not responsive to The Force the same way your previous biological legs were.

On top of all that, Maul had trouble TKing a frigging Lightsaber into his hand right after getting revived. So you cant honestly be dense enough to watch that scene and think, MAUL NEEDED NO PRACTICE AT ALL.

I know youre not that dense, but you are trolling, because this really shouldnt even be a conversation. Maul clearly faced MAJOR COMBAT DISADVANTAGES in that episode. Not refutable at all.


2) Its not just about science, its about how things work in Canon.

We all have a quote on this site from Matt Martin that Rebels Maul was Older and OUT OF PRACTICE. Hes also stated something similar about Old Ben. Ive mentioned Force Enhanced strength and coordination above. Well we really dont know how that works, but clearly in Canon it requires consistent practice to be working at its best.

Moreover Filoni made a clear statement that Maul was disadvantaged on those Chicken Legs, and didnt have the same mobility with them. He also made it clear Maul was still in recovery as of Revival. So I dont understand why this is even being discussed, except to deny canon facts to support certain agendas.

And then further, we have clear dialogue from Savage of Mauls improvement from Revenge to Revival. He was shocked at the large power jump in such a short time. So where did that come from? Obviously because he had been getting back into fighting shape, mentally and physically.

And AGAIN Maul had Trouble TKing a damn Lightsaber when he just got revived. I mean Jeez. Talk about Major Reaching.

3) No I dont just go by a random voice actor. I go by Directors commentary as well. You know commentary that supports what we see, over a single fact file which directly contradicts what we see on screen.
Fact files can be taken as solid canon for things we can't possibly know or see on screen. Things like the number of Lightsaber forms Palpatine has mastered, or the extent of Mauls training. Thats where Fact Files are useful.

And you certainly dont take ONE statement from ONE Fact file and cling to it like its some kind of undeniable fact even when it contradicts what we see on screen and contradicts Director commentary of those on screen showings.

And then on top of that we Take this ONE FACT File and perform numerous Mental Gymnastics with it to decide Grievous is > Maul (never stated or ever even implied in any fact files). Hilarious.

4) Also Hilarious Im being accused of hypocrisy here according to when it suits my agenda. And yet these same guys who claim getting Metal Chicken legs and not fighting in 10+ years make absolutely NO difference to Mauls combat abilities, yet these exact same guys claim Vader is crap because he has cybernetic limbs and that Old Ben is crap because hes not fought in a long time. I mean really whose using double standards here? (INB4 someone claims I am without explaining where or how I am).

5) Kenobi literally got slapped around a little. Nothing broken, and no cuts. He spent most the time unconscious, so the little beating we see him get is literally all he got. That doesnt compare to Kanan being tortured for days on end. Hardly being able to stand, and yet putting up his best fight to date against the GI.

And no it wasnt just because he was in the Zone or Let go of his fear. Watch the fight, that only happened AFTER Ezra got knocked out. Im talking about before then.

Now I realise we are skirting between Canon and Legends here, but given both shows had the same director, it states something about Creator intentions.

Point being if a Padawan can recover so quickly and get back into the fight, then surely a Jedi Council Member can, after not enduring anywhere close to that level of pain and torture. All Kenobi had to do was wake up properly. So maybe, just maybe we should take Filoni at his word when he states that Kenobi lost BECAUSE he wasnt MENTALLY Ready for that fight.

6) Maul and Kenobi fought 3 times. Once in Revenge and Twice in Revival. When Maul fled he did not have much back up from Savage, because Savage had already been cut up Jeez. And talking about letting go of fear or being on the Zone, Kenobi CLEARLY WAS in the Zone when fighting off Maul and Savage. And yet still never once put Maul down.

Maul always held his own against Kenobi during TCW, despite being on his disadvantaged chicken legs.

And whats this OH BUT HE USED DUN MOCH Nonesense? He knew he was gonna be at a major disadvantage, which is why he didnt really want to take him on 1 v 1 in Revenge. So he uses a bit of dun much to gain the edge. So frigging what? Dooku uses Dun Moch all the time. So do none of those victories count? Heck Grievous used Dun Moch on Maul before kicking him. But oh that was Grievous being a bad ass right?

Both combatants were facing disadvantages in the first fight, but the Major disadvantage was clearly all Mauls. But he managed to switch that around and beat Kenobi by gaining the mental edge. Which actually was a pretty bad ass scene.

FYI he began kicking Kenobi around prior to the Dun Moch. But tbf Kenobi was clearly winning before then until he got distracted with watching out for Ventress.

But again this was just fight number 1 (a fight Maul actually won) out of 3 fights, none of which Kenobi ever outright put Maul down in. Maul ALWAYS Held his own.

7. Maul has fought Grievous 3 times in SOD:

Fight 1, Inconclusive, but lines from both combatants suggest they both know Maul > Grievous.

Fight 2: Maul Physically blitzes Grievous. You can cry and whine about it all you want but thats exactly what happened.

Fight 3: Maul ended the conflict by TKing Grievous.

Every single encounter implied Maul was superior, even if 2/3 fights were not fought until the end. Whilst no canon source anywhere has ever suggested Grievous >/= Maul. Not once.

Of course Every Jedi/Sith has the TK Advantage. Yet not all of them can have much of an effect on Grievous via TK. Kenobi and Maul however clearly can. So for Kenobi and Maul that is a MAJOR Advantage they both have against Grievous.

And of course you/Realist is completely sick and tired of me ignoring the CONTEXT of those 3 fights. I mean one time the environment was too tight for Grievous, the other time the environment was too open for Grievous. I mean jeez what nonsense. They fought 3 times in 3 different environments. And every time the clear implication was Maul was the superior.

Jeez you really should have accepted my Maul >/= Grievous proposal, because now youre just looking like a butthurt fanboy.

Originally posted by MythLord
DarthThor is so not triggered that he responded to a two-week old comment everyone else forgot about. Everyone else but him, apparently...


Or perhaps he just came back to respond to Realist today?

You see its not hard to think. Perhaps you need to get out of your moms basement for some fresh air as well.

Christ

Lmfao, Thor waits until someone is restricted to respond. The terrible formatting really compliments the shit arguments nicely.

Yeah I was actually waiting for him to get banned. I messaged Galan myself to ban him.

Obviously couldnt be because I was occupied through the holidays or anything.

Let me know when any of you clowns actually has a decent case for Grievous here.

At some point this forum will consist solely on Darth Thor replying to banned people.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Or perhaps he just came back to respond to Realist today?
And also to exclaim just how not triggered he is.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
You see its not hard to think. Perhaps you need to get out of your moms basement for some fresh air as well.
You really need to come up with better, more original insults.

^ Wasnt an insult dude. Was advice.

But its funny you took it as an insult.

wolff lost

Originally posted by Darth Thor
^ Wasnt an insult dude. Was advice.

But its funny you took it as an insult.
If you say so.

Why don't you just get outta yer moms basement carthage! and stop being mean to the nicest person to grace the KMC forums!

Originally posted by MythLord
Why don't you just get outta yer moms basement carthage!


Ah you were triggered after all

Nah, just mocking your apparent basement fetish. you might be projecting
I mean, at least I don't reply to people two weeks later just to prove how "not triggered" I am.

Maybe you'd like to wait for a mod to ban me before getting into a pissing contest?

Oh so Triggered.

The irony.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/3oriNZN3vh5XFSr8Gc/source.gif