Darth Maul vs ROTJ Vader

Started by Darth Vious10 pages

Originally posted by Lightsnake
*Checks* Nope, Luke's still fast.

Luke might have been fast, but he was not moving as fast as Maul. If Luke could break down Vader's defences, then someone moving twice as fast would do so a lot easier.

Originally posted by Lightsnake
And Vader. Beat. Maul. Get this through your head. It shows rather clearly Vader IS superior

Get it through your head. The comic is not canon If you won't accept it from me, JollyJim told you as well. The comic counts for nothing. Also, stabbing yourself to get to an opponent is hardly beating them, infact, it's an act of desperation, hardly one of superiority.

Originally posted by jollyjim311
Yeah, I just skipped reading a lot of stuff.

Vious, you won't admit defeat. You won't listen to reason. You're a hypocrite. You can just leave and make everyone a lot happier.


I'll admit defeat when I'm actually presented with proof that Luke was moving faster than Maul, and that's never going to happen.
I'm not a hypocrite, because I've said nothing hypocritical.
Don't like what I read, don't read it. Simple as that.

It shows this: Vader was tactically superior to Maul when Maul was being aided in the Dark Side by three Prophets! And according to Leland Chee, that comic's continuity.
And speed= victory now? I think Rise of Darth Vader showed Vader compensating for his lack of speed.

Vader was not slow. Even if he was, he could have just used the force to augment his speed.

Just because Maul could spin his blade quicker does not have the same effect.

Lukes style was basically Djem So. Therefore the strikes he was swinging were goddamn powerful. Speed is not essential here

(As previously stated a rapier and a claymore are deadly swords and both can kill but blocking the claymore is a lot harder than the rapier)

He broke through Vaders defence, not eluded or evaded the defence as most cases whilst speed is the factor but BROKE through it. Smashed it. I can tell you it is easy to block speed strikes but harder to block power strikes.

Remember Makashi lost to Djem So and Makashi is the ultimate in dueling bladework.

taking this into account, also with Vaders new style that mixed Makashi, Soresu and Djem So, then you have a style that was basically unbeatable.

Maul killed Bondarra and Qui Gon. He had to stun Qui Gon first.

Assant sacrificed/suicided and she even held him off for a while. He had trouble with a padawan and died by a padawan.

Maul against Vader would be similar mix to Tyranus against Vader. Speed and Dexterity would be no match for Pure Brute Force.

Lets look at this objectively Obi Wan has the upper hand with Maul until Maul uses Force Push (Watch the Movie, it shows this)

10 years later Obi Wan gets F'd up in seconds against Tyranus. Therefore it is logical that Tyranus would beat Maul.

Anakin beats Tyranus, then gets an even more unbeatable style after the lava flow beauty and therapuetic skin treatment.

Conclusion - Vader only improved as he aged, therefore by the time of ROTJ he was better than when he axed Tyranus, so he would have axed Maul.

I think this speed thing determined from the movies is getting out of hand. Are we going to say that TPM Obi-Wan could pwn AOTC Obi-Wan because he moved faster in TPM?

As I pointed out, speed would not be of assistance here at all

Originally posted by Archangelysses
Just because Maul could spin his blade quicker does not have the same effect.

Lukes style was basically Djem So. Therefore the strikes he was swinging were goddamn powerful. Speed is not essential here

(As previously stated a rapier and a claymore are deadly swords and both can kill but blocking the claymore is a lot harder than the rapier)

He broke through Vaders defence, not eluded or evaded the defence as most cases whilst speed is the factor but BROKE through it. Smashed it. I can tell you it is easy to block speed strikes but harder to block power strikes.


I agree with that, but not this:
Originally posted by Archangelysses
Remember Makashi lost to Djem So and Makashi is the ultimate in dueling bladework.

Dooku lost because Anakin physically grabbed him. He did not break through the Count's defences as Luke did against Vader.
Djem So is the form that best counters Makashi, but it does not necessarily mean victory for the user, particularly when both fighters use agressive styles.

Originally posted by Archangelysses
taking this into account, also with Vaders new style that mixed Makashi, Soresu and Djem So, then you have a style that was basically unbeatable.

But it was beaten, you said that yourself, and, to make matters worse, it was beaten by a half-trained boy swinging wildly, not through actual skill.

Originally posted by Archangelysses

Maul killed Bondarra and Qui Gon. He had to stun Qui Gon first.

Even had he not stunned Qui-Gon first, Maul would have eventually won, as Ataru's weakness is it's relatively poor defenses.

Originally posted by Archangelysses

Lets look at this objectively Obi Wan has the upper hand with Maul until Maul uses Force Push (Watch the Movie, it shows this)

The movie also shows Maul regain all the ground he initially lost from Obi-Wan's charge, when his saber was cut in two, and he goes back on the offensive.

Originally posted by Archangelysses

Anakin beats Tyranus,

As above, Anakin overpowered Dooku, he did not actually out-duel him. Even at his most furious, none of his blows touched Dooku. Yes, he forced the Count on the defensive, but given the 60 year gap in their ages, is it any wonder Anakin was strong enough to do that? Djem so is a form that relies on strength, Makashi does not.

Originally posted by Archangelysses
then gets an even more unbeatable style after the lava flow beauty and therapuetic skin treatment.

In the novelization of RotS, Mace pointed out that both his and Yoda's styles of fighting were to compensate for weaknesses, and that is the case of Vader's hybrid style. It is something done to compensate for his weaknesses following his maiming. As above, that 'unbeatable style' was beaten by a half-trained boy.

Originally posted by Archangelysses

Conclusion - Vader only improved as he aged, therefore by the time of ROTJ he was better than when he axed Tyranus, so he would have axed Maul.

I disagree that Vader improved as he aged. He learned to compensate for horrific injuries, but that does not necessarily constitute 'improvement', particularly when you compare RotJ Vader to AotC Anakin. Vader was a shadow of his former self, not an improvement. So because of that, the A, B, C argument simply does not apply.
In RotJ, Vader was a physical wreck compared to his youth. Maul on the otherhand, was the same age as Anakin in RotS, and had spend his entire life being trained as a Sith Warrior. If Luke's strength enabled him to overcome Vader, then Maul, who was much more highly trained, would have no difficulty in doing the same.

Personally? Vader took a big dive. He lost because he didn't want to fight his son... He was willing to die for his son.

Originally posted by Generic Hero
Personally? Vader took a big dive. He lost because he didn't want to fight his son... He was willing to die for his son.

That's true, however, he didn't have to do so in such a way as would mean getting his hand cut off.

How do you do those quote thingies

He was owned before his hand got cut off

He was just sitting there basically and did not even try. Plus Luke used the dark side there, pure anger. Just like his father against Dooku.

However, whilst Anakin did grab Dooku. Do you think that Dooku could have actually won that fight

Originally posted by Archangelysses
He was owned before his hand got cut off

This is true. He was well and truly beaten back by Luke's attack. However, if Luke was able to do that, then Maul would have been able to do the same thing much easier, having not only had decades more training than Luke, but decades of training in agression, which Luke did not have.

Originally posted by Archangelysses
However, whilst Anakin did grab Dooku. Do you think that Dooku could have actually won that fight

Had it carried on purely duelling, then who knows. Anakin put up a good fight against Dooku in AotC, but Dooku was still able to cut his arm off. I think ultimately, Anakin would have again, become over-confident and left himself open, and to someone of Dooku's experience, that means losing appendages.
Of course, that's just speculation.

Originally posted by Archangelysses

However, whilst Anakin did grab Dooku. Do you think that Dooku could have actually won that fight

Hmmmm. Had Obi-Wan not been there Dooku would have won. But he got so tired he wasnt able to break out of the physical grip of Anakin when he grabbed him. Had they kept on duelling I would say they each had a 50/50 chance. Had Kenobi not been there at all though Dooku would have won.

Ok this is a dumb Question, obviously Darth Maul would win, i mean common darth vader is a guy 50 year old guy in a stiff suit, and Darth Maul has the advantage with agility, this fight would end in less than two minutes with Maul being the victor no offense Vader fans.

Ok umm think about this, Darth Vader is a 49 year old man in a stiff suit and Darth Maul definately has the advantage in agility you have to admit and no offense Vader fans but i think this fight would be over in less than 2 minutes with Maul being the victor.

Whoops i did this one twice.hehe

This wouldnt even be a fight Darth Maul would take it, Darth Vader is 0% speed and agility, and Darth Maul would own him within 2 minutes.

Haha umm sorry ppl i keep commenting this one all the time haha.