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.
I did not ignore it, I disproved it.
Originally posted by Numan
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.
I and others have proven it a dozen times already. The power put into the strike will be harder and therefor harder to block by a lightsaber wielding opponent.
Originally posted by Dark Aristokrat
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.
You obviously have not read what I prieviously posted because that was not wha I used to disprove it. It was in reply to msomething you have said and although valid, not one of my solid solid points that completely disprove this.
Originally posted by Numan
You obviously have not read what I prieviously posted because that was not wha I used to disprove it. It was in reply to msomething you have said and although valid, not one of my solid solid points that completely disprove this.
WTF? Why don't you restate your entire argument, point by point, in your next post? I mean, make a grand argument, with all the points and evidence and logic behind it and don't just say "You're wrong, I disproved you".
There is no evidence to suggest that a sith sword is more powerful than a lightsaber, whereas there is plent of evidence to suggest that a lightsaber is more powerful than a sith sword. I have named them already so why don't you reread pages 4-6. Hiw about this. Both of you write your strongest arguments and send them to me and I will mail you back.
Originally posted by Numan
There is no evidence to suggest that a sith sword is more powerful than a lightsaber, whereas there is plent of evidence to suggest that a lightsaber is more powerful than a sith sword. I have named them already so why don't you reread pages 4-6. Hiw about this. Both of you write your strongest arguments and send them to me and I will mail you back.
How about you stop doing this. And we continue doing this in public, for the last few pages we have done nothing more then post evidence analogy's scans whatever. You haven't shown us one thing, its your turn to prove up. Do so or admit defeat.
Lightsabers were extremely powerful. They could cut through hard metal doors, it is extremely dangerous to touch the blade of a lightsaber and hardly any weapons can stand up against them. The sith sword was also made extremely powerful through sith magic and alchemy and I am not saying that it can't stand up to a lightsaber, it definitely can. But is it as powerful? It has given no evidence at all of it being more powerful. There are no examples of a sith sword having power quite like the power of the lightsaber shown earlier in my post. And I know this is quite off the topic of what is more powerful but there is no evidence to show sith swords can even block blaster fire (in issue #3 of the Golden Age of The Sith, Sadow and his crew of Massassi were able to kill many sith with blasters found on Starbreaker 12). If anything the dark side augmentations of electricity etc. show that the sword must be incredibly powerful but still not more powerful than a lightsaber. So overall in terms of power I would say that the lightsabers win.
In reply to Fishy saying that the sith as a species were physically stronger than the jedi, there is no proof of this. The exiled jedi were able to settle on Korriban and make the primitive sith slaves. Ajunta Pall, a human was able to wield arguably the most powerful sith sword there was (until the dark side power of the sword overwhelmed him). Looking at the comics they don't look much stronger than humans (in the TOTJ comic, when Sadow is going through the ritual of becoming dark lord of the sith, he screams in agony as he is bitten by those scorpion/bugs). So seeing as there is no proof for the sith species being physically stronger, there is no proof that the sith as a species would be useless with lightsabers.
The lightsaber was also less energy consuming. The hilt hardly weighed much and the blade nothing at all. Because of this the lightsaber would be extremely easy to carry (if needed to be drawn quickly it could) and easy to use. The sith sword would be extremely hard to use on the other hand. The weight of the sword does not give it as much power as
the lightsaber and would be extremely tiring to use, even for the sith who have not yet been proven to be physically stronger than humans. It would also be really awkward to carry. And in reply to illustrious, the fact that most of the weight is concentrated in the blade would make it even harder to swing with as the center of mass would be farther away from the pivot.
So to recap the lightsaber is stronger, less energy consuming and better than the sith sword in every way. I have provided enough proof for this and have evaluated everything that I have said. If I missed something just say so, because I probably did.
This is some.
Originally posted by Numan
There is no evidence to suggest that a sith sword is more powerful than a lightsaber, whereas there is plent of evidence to suggest that a lightsaber is more powerful than a sith sword. I have named them already so why don't you reread pages 4-6. Hiw about this. Both of you write your strongest arguments and send them to me and I will mail you back.
...
I read your other posts. They were refuted at each and every turn. Your idea that a lightsaber is stronger despite it having no weight at all is ridiculous and spits in the face of logic and physics. Your point of Ludo breaking his sword on a table of unknown material is moot because I showed scans of sith blades easily taking overhead two handed chops from jedi knight lightsabers. So far, there is no evidence to suggest that a lightsaber is better in strength or durability and certainly nothing to prove that a lightsaber user has an advantage over a sith swordsman.
So "hiw" about this: you actually make a damn effort to put all of your arguments into one post, complete with evidence, or you stfu and stop wasting our time.
Originally posted by Numan
That use of Science simple doesn't work in this case because the lightsaber completely goes against science. There is no material on Earth that is similar to the beam of the lightsaber. You need to think deeper into the subject Illustrious. Why is the torque greater when the mass is further away from the pivot? It is all to do with power. The lightsaber may be lacking weight and the centre of mass might be in the hilt, but the power of the lightsaber is all stored up in the blade. The lightsaber is basically the perfect weapon. The centre of mass is close to the pivot, enabling faster swings and yet the power is focused in the blade. The reason that the reasoning you used works for the sith sword is because the power in the sword comes from the blade and so it is logical that if the centre of mass is further away from the pivot, the greater the torque is but in a lightsaber, the power comes from the energy beam which weighs nothing so though the centre of mass is closer to the pivot, the source of the power is in the blade, ergo the source of power is furthur from the pivot, and so the torque is furthur increased. Sorry about the multiple posts BTW. I think these 5 posts cover the issue.
This is valid.
Originally posted by Illustrious
No shit. I already said that if you took the same guy and put him in a marathon of just swinging a weapon, the lightsaber would win. In combat, it's not true.But unless your arguing that Ragnos would have difficulty swinging a sword, your point is moot.
And guess what? You didn't address any of my points, you just went back to going "no I'm right, you're wrong."
What a hypocrite.
It's not wrong. Rotational mechanics. The torque is greater with the mass centered further from the axis of rotation. More torque = more force, more force means it takes more force to STOP. Got it? It's not up to me to break it down into laymen's terms so you can understand.
You know about as much physics as my dog. Don't bother arguing with that point.
That was in reply to this.
Originally posted by Numan
Lightsabers were extremely powerful.
Hyperbole. Unrelated.
They could cut through hard metal doors, it is extremely dangerous to touch the blade of a lightsaber and hardly any weapons can stand up against them.
Again, Sith blades cannot be cut through by lightsabers. Moot.
The sith sword was also made extremely powerful through sith magic and alchemy and I am not saying that it can't stand up to a lightsaber, it definitely can. But is it as powerful?
What the **** is this? Weapon Feat Wars? A Sith blade cannot be broken by a lightsaber and it has more weight and is wielded by strong, centuries old warriors who have more sith magics and dark side than anyone before or since. What the hell is your point?
It has given no evidence at all of it being more powerful. There are no examples of a sith sword having power quite like the power of the lightsaber shown earlier in my post.
Absence of proof is not proof of absence. And lay off of the circular reasoning and hyperbole.
And I know this is quite off the topic of what is more powerful but there is no evidence to show sith swords can even block blaster fire (in issue #3 of the Golden Age of The Sith, Sadow and his crew of Massassi were able to kill many sith with blasters found on Starbreaker 12).
Sith didn't use blasters. They had no training in deflecting it. How is them not deflecting the ambush party's blasters conclusive proof that sith blades can't handle blaster bolts.
If anything the dark side augmentations of electricity etc. show that the sword must be incredibly powerful but still not more powerful than a lightsaber. So overall in terms of power I would say that the lightsabers win.
...
So sith blades are powerful, but you feel that lightsabers are more powerful. Ergo, they are? Idiotic.
In reply to Fishy saying that the sith as a species were physically stronger than the jedi, there is no proof of this.
Show me a jedi in the series that could break a broadsword with his bare hands.
The exiled jedi were able to settle on Korriban and make the primitive sith slaves. Ajunta Pall, a human was able to wield arguably the most powerful sith sword there was (until the dark side power of the sword overwhelmed him).
Unsupported speculation. It leads nowhere. give it up.
Looking at the comics they don't look much stronger than humans (in the TOTJ comic, when Sadow is going through the ritual of becoming dark lord of the sith, he screams in agony as he is bitten by those scorpion/bugs).
So showing pain and not "looking" stronger means they are not stronger?
So seeing as there is no proof for the sith species being physically stronger, there is no proof that the sith as a species would be useless with lightsabers.
First, there is no proof against it, but there is proof for it. You're just too damn ignorant to accept it. And secondly, no one was saying that. Stuff it.
The lightsaber was also less energy consuming. The hilt hardly weighed much and the blade nothing at all.
To swing. But it required exponentially more energy to block a heavy swing from a sith blade. And this is moot, since Sith warriors trained for decades to use their blades which were heavier and they had more physical strength.
Because of this the lightsaber would be extremely easy to carry (if needed to be drawn quickly it could) and easy to use.
You could say that about a fork. Can it beat a shotgun?
The sith sword would be extremely hard to use on the other hand. The weight of the sword does not give it as much power as
Ridiculous. You really are an idiot.
Lightsabers were extremely powerful. They could cut through hard metal doors, it is extremely dangerous to touch the blade of a lightsaber and hardly any weapons can stand up against them. The sith sword was also made extremely powerful through sith magic and alchemy and I am not saying that it can't stand up to a lightsaber, it definitely can. But is it as powerful? It has given no evidence at all of it being more powerful. There are no examples of a sith sword having power quite like the power of the lightsaber shown earlier in my post. And I know this is quite off the topic of what is more powerful but there is no evidence to show sith swords can even block blaster fire (in issue #3 of the Golden Age of The Sith, Sadow and his crew of Massassi were able to kill many sith with blasters found on Starbreaker 12). If anything the dark side augmentations of electricity etc. show that the sword must be incredibly powerful but still not more powerful than a lightsaber. So overall in terms of power I would say that the lightsabers win.
Again this depends on the wielder, a lightsaber in the hands of Yoda is far more effective then a Sith Sword.
Put Yoda up against Ragnos which a lightsaber Yoda will be able to block many attacks and last for a long time.
Give Ragnos a Sith Sword and Yoda a Sith sword and Yoda will die with the first attack becuase he can't lift the weapon.
Give Ragnos his sword and Yoda his lightsaber and the attacks that Ragnos will throw at Yoda will be far to strong for him to block, the impact of mass weight against no weight even when it doesn't break trhough will be enormous and to much for Yoda to handle. He would break under the pressure of Ragnos his attacks, he would not do this at all or as fast if Ragnos was using a lightsaber.
In reply to Fishy saying that the sith as a species were physically stronger than the jedi, there is no proof of this. The exiled jedi were able to settle on Korriban and make the primitive sith slaves. Ajunta Pall, a human was able to wield arguably the most powerful sith sword there was (until the dark side power of the sword overwhelmed him). Looking at the comics they don't look much stronger than humans (in the TOTJ comic, when Sadow is going through the ritual of becoming dark lord of the sith, he screams in agony as he is bitten by those scorpion/bugs). So seeing as there is no proof for the sith species being physically stronger, there is no proof that the sith as a species would be useless with lightsabers.
Like I already said, Ajunta Pall using a blade only speaks in favour of the Sith Sword as he was a human that was able to handle the weight, so obviously your argument about it making people tired is stupid. He was also somebody who at the start of his live got trained in the arts of a lightsaber. Meaning he changed weapons after living with one weapon for a long time. Why would he do that unless it made him more powerful? Especially when you consider the fact he lived in a time when the Sith were still fighting for control.
Also when Ajunta arrived the Sith didn't have the weapons or the force powers to stand up against Jedi. And pain equals strength now?
And we always have Kreia and other sources that name the ancient Sith as those with incredible physical strength. Are you going to argue those as well.
The lightsaber was also less energy consuming. The hilt hardly weighed much and the blade nothing at all. Because of this the lightsaber would be extremely easy to carry (if needed to be drawn quickly it could) and easy to use. The sith sword would be extremely hard to use on the other hand. The weight of the sword does not give it as much power as
As you just pointed out even a normal human could use a powerful Sith Sword. So obviously the weight wasn't enough to make the user tired fast. The lightsaber is also easy to carry but would that make it more effective in a fight when the weapon is already out? Besides during most of earths history people carried around swords, didn't stop them from moving fast. And the weight of the sword simply gives an advantage when you hit at your opponent. Its not more powerful per say when you put the two next to each other, but it is more powerful in the hands of a Sith Lord then a Lightsaber would be in the hands of a Jedi.
I have named them already so why don't you reread pages 4-6
Am I the only who thinks its funny that a debate thats being going on since page 3 only has about 2 to 3 small paragraps "supporting" of proof.