Tulak Hord vs Yoda

Originally posted by IKC
Okay, that's enough.

Here's a real life demonstration: Get Mr. Universe Arnold Schwarzenegger and give him a freaking claymore (read: greatsword. About as tall as he is and reasonably wide)

Then, get a midget with a rapier. Have Arnold swing the claymore at the midget with the rapier and watch as the rapier breaks like a twig (at worst) or falls into the midget (at best) along with the greatsword. Midget is promptly cleaved in two, Arnold wins.

Mass matters.

Mass matters in this case to provide power. The heavier it is, the more powerful. But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue.

Originally posted by Numan
[BThat is completely wrong. The picture goes to show that sith swords are lightsaber resistant but does not show that they are more powerful, and the picture of ludo smashing his sword against the table shows that they can't be as strong as sabers as sabers can cut through pretty much every material, and for the ones it can't, it doesn't mean it would crumble on impact. [/B]

No, it isn't completely wrong. You're completely wrong. Your brain doesn't want to wrap around the idea that Sith Lords can contend with lightsaber users.

First off, lightsabers can't cut through Sith swords. It's SW EU fact. You are not overriding this with your opinion. So if lightsabers can't cut through sith swords, how can you say sith swords are weaker?

You can't.

Ludo breaking his blade on the table isn't evidence of sith blade weakness; it's evidence of his strength and the strength of the table. Naturally, a lightsaber can't shatter, but likely it could not pass through the table either. And since there ARE metals and materials in the Sith empire which lightsabers cannot penetrate (Case in point, their blades) I can imagine the idea of the table being -very- strong and resistant to damage. If it was just a stone table, Ludo would have likely crumbled that side of it considering how hard he hit it with a solid object.

Originally posted by Numan
Mass matters in this case to provide power. The heavier it is, the more powerful. But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue.

WTF? It's the Force BEHIND the goddamn blade compounded with the weight of the blade against a lightsaber which has ONLY weight in the handle and being held by someone who's physically smaller!

Are you that damn ignorant of how things work?

"First off, lightsabers can't cut through Sith swords. It's SW EU fact. You are not overriding this with your opinion. So if lightsabers can't cut through sith swords, how can you say sith swords are weaker?"

My baseball bat is stronger than my btother's cricket bat. It can't cut through it.

...

You really are off your rocker.

But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue.

Please, remove your asshat before posting again. You clearly don't know what the hell I mean by power.

By power, I mean the force with which the man can swing his blade. His power is increased because of the simple fact that he is swinging a heavier object. I never claimed a freaking lightsaber would break, such would be ridiculous. However, it will be driven into the wielder's body if they try to block such an attack.

Originally posted by Dark Aristokrat
WTF? It's the Force BEHIND the goddamn blade compounded with the weight of the blade against a lightsaber which has ONLY weight in the handle and being held by someone who's physically smaller!

Are you that damn ignorant of how things work?

Mass matters in this case to provide power. The heavier it is, the more powerful. But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue. As I have said countless times before.

So lets put your brothers cricket bat in the hand of a 3 month year old baby and then give you a basebal bat. If you would hit the cricket bat with the basebal bat it might not break its still going to be pushed down because of the power, and the power of the baby would never be able to push the basebal bat back up as long as you are still wielding it.

Just face it Aristokrat. You have lost this debate. Be a man and admit it so we can wrap things up and go on to another debate.

Face it? You haven't made one single point... Not One, you are ignoring the power of a human body and the strength they could put into an attack. Numan I hate to say this to people, but really you are an idiot. Even now after I have called you on it a Billion times you refuse to list your points, you refuse to directly debate our points instead you just make statements...

Originally posted by Fishy
So lets put your brothers cricket bat in the hand of a 3 month year old baby and then give you a basebal bat. If you would hit the cricket bat with the basebal bat it might not break its still going to be pushed down because of the power, and the power of the baby would never be able to push the basebal bat back up as long as you are still wielding it.

This is a crap analogy, just like your last one. We are arguing about the weapons and not about the user. My point was that something can be stronger tha something else and yet still not be able to cut into it.

Originally posted by Numan
This is a crap analogy, just like your last one. We are arguing about the weapons and not about the user. My point was that something can be stronger tha something else and yet still not be able to cut into it.

And your point is wrong. You are an idiot. A lightsaber is not "stronger". It may have better cutting power because it is energy, but if it can't cut through a sith blade, the POINT IS ****ING MOOT.

Originally posted by Fishy
Face it? You haven't made one single point... Not One, you are ignoring the power of a human body and the strength they could put into an attack. Numan I hate to say this to people, but really you are an idiot. Even now after I have called you on it a Billion times you refuse to list your points, you refuse to directly debate our points instead you just make statements...

quote: (post)
Originally posted by Dark Aristokrat
WTF? It's the Force BEHIND the goddamn blade compounded with the weight of the blade against a lightsaber which has ONLY weight in the handle and being held by someone who's physically smaller!

Are you that damn ignorant of how things work?

Mass matters in this case to provide power. The heavier it is, the more powerful. But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue.

Here is one of my many points provided. As I have said many times, there is no need to get personal. I am reporting you for tha because it was a direct uncalled for insult.

Originally posted by Numan
This is a crap analogy, just like your last one. We are arguing about the weapons and not about the user. My point was that something can be stronger tha something else and yet still not be able to cut into it.

We are arguing about the power of a weapon in the hands of a user. The basebal bat will be weaker then a cricket bat when a 3 month old baby wields it and you wield the cricket bat.... Turn it around the baesbal bat will pwn.

what does that mean? The wielder is the one that makes it matter.

A gun is more powerful then a lightsaber if wielded by a none force senstive, give a lightsaber to a Jedi and it will be far more effective then a gun.

Give yoda a sith sword and it will weaken him, give Ragnos a lightsaber and it will weaken him.

Let Ragnos fight with a blade and he will pwn Yoda by physical power wiht a lightsaber the pure physical power he could put in an attack would be less ergo his attack would be weaker...

What the hell don't you get?

I don't think that's an insult. It's more like evident truth.

How about you respond to my post, Numan.

Apparently a lightsaber is better than a sith blade in strength... even though it can't cut through a heavier sith blade.

Mass matters in this case to provide power. The heavier it is, the more powerful. But the beam of the lightsaber is an example of power without the need mass. Therefor the point that the lightsaber would crumble under a sith sword because of the weight is moot. This completely disproves the whole weight issue.

Here is one of my many points provided. As I have said many times, there is no need to get personal. I am reporting you for tha because it was a direct uncalled for insult.

I wouldn't call it uncalled for, but you have fun reporting me. I guess that if I get a warning I deserve it.

Now on to the rest of that post

You are once again ignoring the power of impact, the impact of a gigantic blade wielded by a gigantic and powerful person will be harder then that of a lightsaber.

Originally posted by Fishy
We are arguing about the power of a weapon in the hands of a user. The basebal bat will be weaker then a cricket bat when a 3 month old baby wields it and you wield the cricket bat.... Turn it around the baesbal bat will pwn.

what does that mean? The wielder is the one that makes it matter.

A gun is more powerful then a lightsaber if wielded by a none force senstive, give a lightsaber to a Jedi and it will be far more effective then a gun.

Give yoda a sith sword and it will weaken him, give Ragnos a lightsaber and it will weaken him.

Let Ragnos fight with a blade and he will pwn Yoda by physical power wiht a lightsaber the pure physical power he could put in an attack would be less ergo his attack would be weaker...

What the hell don't you get?

Sorry about not getting your point. Your lack of grammar and punctuation makes it hard to understand you sometimes. However your point is not valid. You have yet to prove that a sith sword would be better suited for a sith lord than a lightsaber would.

Originally posted by Fishy
I wouldn't call it uncalled for, but you have fun reporting me. I guess that if I get a warning I deserve it.

Now on to the rest of that post

You are once again ignoring the power of impact, the impact of a gigantic blade wielded by a gigantic and powerful person will be harder then that of a lightsaber.

No, this is apparently disproven because Ludo broke one on a table of unconfirmed material. And just gloss over the fact that Sith blades are shown in the comics as being able to contend with lightsabers.