So why are we only allowed to look at lightning tanking feats? If anything, your attempt to dissociate lightning feats from other applications of the Force just renders your entire argument moot, since Vader isn't even going to use lightning on Arcann; he's going to use telekinesis.
Now, given your own [bizarre] dismissal of any correlation between different kinds of Force abilities, we have to just look directly at Arcann's telekinetic showings, which are very minimal compared to Vader's. We therefore conclude that Vader snaps his pitiful neck without ever needing to care about his ability to block lightning that can kill humans in cockpits.
__________________ Join the new Star Wars vs. forum: Suspect Insight Forums (not url'd for spam prevention)
Gosh give it up LeG. If Vader had tanked more potent Force energy, in whatever form, than what Valkorion unleashed on Arcann, he can withstand what Valkorion unleashed on Arcann. That is basic shit that even you can work out.
And overloading Yoda's tutanimis > downing starships. This is also elementary. Legend's argument essentially implodes on itself yeah. We only need ask him what evidence he has that Arcann could have withstood the energy explosions Vader did on Malachor and the Death Star for proof of that.
Also the lightning didn't even physically damage the ships, it just killed the crew members, possibly by conducting through the hulls. So yeah, Galen taking out AT-AT's with lightning is far more impressive.
__________________ Join the new Star Wars vs. forum: Suspect Insight Forums (not url'd for spam prevention)
The ability to power a machine capable of such allows us to estimate how much energy was behind the feat. This is basic logic.
I'd say Galen powering the hyper drive of an enormous frigate massively pre prime and destroying supports that were several stories high and thicker then a TIE is better actually.
Fair enough.
Maybe it coursed through the conductive material called metal that makes up the outer layer of ships? Lol.
You haven't addressed my point.
Last edited by UCanShootMyNova on Aug 30th, 2016 at 05:59 PM
The argument of 'more potent Force energy' is utterly flawed and misleading.
In real life, energy exists in different forms such as light, heat, mechanical, gravitational, electrical, sound, chemical, nuclear and vice versa. Can you expect a living being to have similar level of resistance against all forms of energy? I do not.
Analogy: Queen Hornet is a bee that is strong and deadly enough to kill hundreds of Honey Bees single-handedly but it cannot tolerate as much heat as a Honey bee can.
Similarly, Force powers differ from each other in nature and their isn't a universal defense against all of them. Your examples reveal that Darth Vader can shrug-off a potent explosion of Dark Side energy through his defenses, but they (in no way or form) affirm that he can deflect Palpatine-TIER Force Lightning.
First, learn a thing or two about Force lightning:
Force Lightning causes excruciating pain as it weakens an individual's life, and is nearly impossible to deflect.
Taken from Jedi vs. Sith: The Essential Guide to Force
&
Called "Sith lightning," these charges cause excruciating pain and weaken life, and it is a challenge for even the most powerful Jedi Masters to deflect such bursts.
Taken from Star Wars: The Ultimate Visual Guide
No where it is stated that explosions of Dark Side energy - that Darth Vader shrug-off - were manifestations of Force lightning.
Even the likes of Yoda and Revan could not shrug-off Palpatine-TIER Force lightning. I don't fancy Darth Vader's chances against it either.
Arcann's defenses could be superior to that of Yoda?
Don't try to lecture me about elementary when you are presenting illogical arguments to make your case.
SWTOR game engine is not powerful enough to simulate such complex forms of destruction. You only get an idea of what happened to the target through in-game dialogue.
For example: Valkorion's attack (Chapter 1) not just killed Darth Marr but also destroyed his body, but we don't see destruction of Darth Marr's body on-screen. However, Darth Marr confirmed this during a conversation with the Outlander as a Force ghost (Chapter 12).
Vitiate's Force lightning - centuries before his prime - was potent enough to superheat metal and/or melt it. This was implied in a novel.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Aug 31st, 2016 at 05:13 AM
Once again, by your own logic, Arcann's lightning defense has nothing to do with his telekinetic defenses, which are what actually matter here since Vader won't be using lightning.
So going by your own logic, what are Arcann's TK defense feats? None? Oops - I guess Vader just snaps his neck, right?
__________________ Join the new Star Wars vs. forum: Suspect Insight Forums (not url'd for spam prevention)
Registered: Aug 2014
Location: The balance of the Force
Nah he's on point, when the Knights of Zakuul come to surround them and Valkorion roflstomps them, there are meant to be hundreds, but in the scene there aren't even forty.
__________________
Within your furnace heart, you burn in your own flame. This is how it feels to be Anakin Skywalker.
But where does it say Arcann is better at telekinesis? Given that Legend is trying to prevent us from observing that a user's abilities in different areas of the Force are correlated with one another.
__________________ Join the new Star Wars vs. forum: Suspect Insight Forums (not url'd for spam prevention)
I have played many games and I can testify that SWTOR game graphics are substandard. Its particle physics are simply terrible.
Now, try to comprehend my argument:
"SWTOR game engine is not powerful enough to simulate such complex forms of destruction. You only get an idea of what happened to the target through in-game dialogue.
For example: Valkorion's attack (Chapter 1) not just killed Darth Marr but also destroyed his body, but we don't see destruction of Darth Marr's body on-screen. However, Darth Marr confirmed this during a conversation with the Outlander as a Force ghost (Chapter 12).
Vitiate's Force lightning - centuries before his prime - was potent enough to superheat metal and/or melt it. This was implied in a novel."
I don't like repeating a point again and again. You claim to be an intellectual, you should not have any trouble in understanding my point then.
The kind of detail you are looking for can only be found in a novel or in conversations.
Last edited by S_W_LeGenD on Aug 31st, 2016 at 05:19 AM
So you're telling me that the programmers at Bioware couldn't make some plumes of smoke fly out of the ship, and for the hulls to get damaged?
There's "substandard" and then there's "inept to the point of ridiculousness - oh, wait, because Legend is just making up a BS excuse to peddle his pet theory again!"
Nice job dodging my question: where's the dialogue telling us that the ships were physically destroyed?
That Vitiate uninjured could superheat metal isn't as impressive as taking out military grade, armored starships from hundreds of meters away, .i.e. your original claim, is it? Another classic Legendism.
__________________ Join the new Star Wars vs. forum: Suspect Insight Forums (not url'd for spam prevention)
That was YOUR claim, sweetie. Just saying that the visuals aren't disproof isn't enough; you still haven't provided active evidence for your case, to which you have the burden of proof.
Now, have you given up yet?
__________________ Join the new Star Wars vs. forum: Suspect Insight Forums (not url'd for spam prevention)
Aug 30th, 2016 05:16 PM
