Those examples show people in postitions of power postitions that others desperatley want which is exactly the case with Ragnos.
And guess what? They don't work. Because they aren't filled with twisted dark-siders who kill for power. That alone doesn't fit. That's like saying how come the most powerful members of the Jedi Order aren't always on the council. Because the ideology is different!
Do we know Simus is powerful? I'm not saying he's not but name one person he killed. Name one offensive power he had. do you even know what he looked like? Before you hail him as a God except for keeping his head alive in a jar (which I've seen nothing about) what's he done?
It was said EXPLICITLY that he was the most powerful of his time. There's no doubt, it wasn't speech, it was narration. I don't know about you, but if someone is told as the most powerful of his time by the storywriter, I'll believe it.
do you know if he fought his way to the top or assasinated his superiors in their sleep a la sidious? How impressive was Simus the truth is we don't know you guys are basically saying,"because we don't know he must be really really strong because of that one thing he did that way it supports our arguement" then get mad at me when I bring up the possibility that for all we know he could have sucked. hypocrites.
You're not bringing up the possibility, you are downplaying the facts. There's a difference.
Ragnos either went unchallenged or didn't make up your bloody minds, if he didn't then it's not to hard to sustain such a postition.
Do you know what unchallenged is? He never had a serious attack on his throne, that doesn't mean they didn't try, or that he didn't fight them off. It doesn't mean he was unquestioned; It never says he was uninvolved, it just says he wasn't challenged to the throne.
I go re-read my bloody post about the assumptions all I say is that we don't know, when you assume that he's powerful it's fine but when I assume the contrary you've got a problem with it please stop speaking out of both sides of your mouth like this, all you have are assumptions and guesses the only facts you have go as follows:
You're speculating, we're deducing.
Here's an example, since you seem a little slow:
All dogs are furry
Bob is a dog.
Therefore, Bob is furry. This is called a syllogism. This isn't speculation, it's not like saying "Bob must be fast", which is speculation because the facts don't support it. The facts support Ragnos being powerful, not like the halfass speculation you toss around.
Ragnos was a sith who killed simus and ruled other powerful sith. what do we know about simus, nothing so don't assume he's that great if you don't know just like I won't assume he's garbage until I see some proof. he ruled other powerful sith did he deserve that rule, once again nobody knows so lets not make assumptions. That leaves us with thats right...NOTHING. so we'll take this nothing and now compare it to pages full of reasons supporting Revan.
So beating someone known as the most powerful of his time is nothing?
Ruling over an empire for over a century where the ideology is the strong shall rule, and Sith Lords regularly compete for the position of Dark Lord is nothing? Where Ragnos had Sadow and Kressh, two extremely powerful Sith Lords in their own right under his foot is nothing?
ragnos was a sith lord😖o were hundreds of others
Ragnos killed a sith magician:do you know how many people have killed sith even powerful ones it's an insanely long list.
Ragnos ruled powerful sith;good for him that doesn't mean he was one
LMFAO. Way to weight facts. Here are the real ones.
Ragnos was the Sith Lord with the most illustrious rule: there was only 1 of those: Ragnos.
Ragnos killed Simus who was considered the most powerful of his time: Not to many people were able to do that, now were they?
Ragnos ruled for a century, longer than any other Sith we know of, over the high period of the Sith Empire, he had two powerful Sith Lords under his foot who never were able to depose of him: NOT true for other Sith Lords.
Everything about Ragnos tells about his singularity.
And then we have Kreia saying explicitly that Ragnos had immense physical strength and a frightening grasp on the force. Oh wait, that doesn't count either for you, right?
Revan had the highest level of battle pre-cog out of anybody ever which means no one exceeded his level of pre-cog.
He attained a very high level of precog, but to say no one has ever, or will ever exceed him is being a fanboy.
Revan learned multiple PLANETS worth of info on the sith more then anyone ever.
More than those people who spend their entire lives surrounded by individuals that owned those artifacts? More than people like Nadd and Kun who plundered the tombs BEFORE Revan and probably took all the goodies they could get their hands on? Please.
Revan is deemed to be THE GREATEST strategist ever right up there with thrawn.
And Ragnos is deemed the most feared, but apparently for you, that's not good enough. So why should this be? And why would this matter in a straight up saber duel? Revan would still die.
Revan resisted Malachor v's tempation without completely cutting himself off from the force he was the only one to do so.
The Sith Empire made no attempt to do this. The Sith believe in passion, they follow that ideology because it makes them powerful, and they LIKE/WANT/CRAVE power. Hence why you see the Sith attacking Dark Lords and higher ups, because they want power. You see practically every Dark Lord of the Sith being backstabbed and betrayed except one: care to take a guess as to who?
there's many more but i'm anxious to see what you wrote when i wrote this.
You better bring those out, because the ones you gave are crappy speculatory assumptions.