Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
Awsome..Maul fanboy super13
Yeah, you're on my bad side. **** off.
Originally posted by fascistcrusader
Maul fanboyism strikes again....
Instead of entering into a logical fallacy by appealing to my motives, why don't you refute my argument? And I'm a woman, idiot.
Not to mention, calling me a "fanboy" (simply the idea proposed behind it) is ridiculous. Why don't you do some homework on the SWVF and learn who you're talking to?
Originally posted by Advent
Yeah, you're on my bad side. **** off.
What if I told you you looked really awesome in that outfit last Saturday?
Instead of entering into a logical fallacy by appealing to my motives, why don't you refute my argument? And I'm a woman, idiot.
Maybe he's afraid of getting pwned in a debate? I dunno.
Originally posted by Blax_Hydralisk
What if I told you you looked really awesome in that outfit last Saturday?
I did, didn't I? But then again, this would mean you were spying on me. **** off.
Maybe he's afraid of getting pwned in a debate? I dunno.
...You're teetering on the edges now. You don't have to **** off.
Originally posted by AdventIll concede what i said earlier because i was going by what wookie said, anyways you proved me wrong.
I'd say its much more dependent upon what Vader does with the Force, because engaging him in a lightsaber duel would be stupid on his part. He'd lose.
Originally posted by AdventI'll concede what i said, but as i said earlier before i made the unsupported claim of vader evenly matching maul, vader got lucky meaning that i acknoledged the fact that he was losing and beat maul due to a circumstance, not due to skill.
Maul displays clear signs of superiority throughout the entire duel sans two points (lightsaber cut in half, death [which can be attributed more to chance and desperation on Vader's behalf than actual skill]). Whether he had his lightsabers combined or not didn't change shit. On-panel evidence trumps your personal opinion.
Originally posted by Advent"It could go either way" as in what vader does, i believe he has a chance to beat maul if he uses the force rather than engaging him in a saber duel as you pointed out that he would clearly lose.And what leads you to believe "it could go either way" otherwise? Support your claim.
If he chooses to face maul in a saber duel, then thats where vader will get beaten.
I changed my opinion to this after you posted the scans. BTW where did you get those scans? I can't seem to access swtimeline.ru
Originally posted by fascistcrusader
"Fanboy" is a term with no bearing on gender, males and females alike can be fanboys. I am an idiot.
Show me where the term 'fanboy' is defined by a reasonable authority and how your presented definition matches that of said reasonable authority's.
'Fanboy' implies gender association (as grammatically it suggests masculinity in some form or another). I am a female, therefore using the word to describe me makes no sense. If 'fanboy' was recognized as an actual word, you'd have a point. But it isn't.
And I did refute your argument. Vader already beat Maul. I am an idiot.
Are you fucking blind, fascistcrusader?
Originally posted by Advent
The book you're referring to is Resurrection, where Vader fights something appearing to be Darth Maul. And it is canon. Leland Chee has confirmed this in his blog. However, it is not confirmed as to what we are seeing in the form of Darth Maul. He notes several possibilities, such as: a clone, illusion, or a vision like what Luke faced on Dagobah.So, because of such, it is irrelevant to bring it up as you cannot compare their power. For all we know, it was a slower version of Maul. For all we know, it was a weaker version of Maul. Of course, that doesn't leave out alternative guesses, but its inconclusive, and you cannot compare his speed in the comic to the movie.
I clearly explained that the evidence presented in the book is meaningless and why. The onus lies on you to provide proof of the contrary and to present a viable counterargument. Since you'd done neither of the aforementioned, I was justified in asking you to address the actual argument rather than appeal to my motives and commit a logical fallacy.
You have two options at this point: put up or shut up.
No, it is not meaningless. Regardless of it it was "really" Maul or not, it fought like Maul, had Maul's skill, had his strength, and was created from the force by people powerful in the darkside. If anything it was more powerful than the "real Maul, meaning it is you who has no point.
Stop being a fanboy, Vader beat Maul or something that was stronger than Maul.
Originally posted by fascistcrusader
No, it is not meaningless. I am an idiot.
You cannot conclusively prove that it was equal to or greater than the actual Darth Maul. Ergo, it is meaningless. Is the concept of logic that hard to grasp for you?
Regardless of it it was "really" Maul or not, it fought like Maul. I am an idiot.
I'm not denying that his approach to combat wasn't similar. But to assume because he displayed the same fighting style, it accounts for all attributes is asinine. And suggesting that it does is a fallacy of composition because while it may look and fight in the same manner, it doesn't necessarily have to have the same adeptness in skill (see: Count Dooku's dopplegänger reference below).
had Maul's skill. I am an idiot.
Why? Because you typed it out?
had his strength. I am an idiot.
Why? Because you typed it out?
and was created from the force by people powerful in the darkside. I am an idiot.
Count Dooku's dopplegänger was far less powerful than the real deal to the point where ten months after AOTC, Anakin was able to defeat it. Moreover Leland Chee has no idea of the means of which this Maul was created and leaves it open to numerous possibilities (and the possibilities he lists show that simply because it was created in the image of one particular Force user, doesn't mean it has the equal powers of said particular Force user).
If anything it was more powerful than the "real Maul, meaning it is you who has no point. I am an idiot.
Asserting a likelihood based on no reasoning at all doesn't make it so. What you're failing to take into consideration is that its inconclusive. Because of such, its inadmissible and meaningless. None of your unsupported bullshit crack claims will change this.
Stop being a fanboy. I am an idiot.
To stop something means you must've been doing it before. Since I've never been a 'fanboy', I cannot stop. You can stop being a complete and utter moron though.
Vader beat Maul or something that was stronger than Maul. I am an idiot.
Put up or shut up, there's no middle ground.
Darth Vader wins. In a duel in the SW universe, there is no real luck. When Obi-Wan and Anakin fought, Obi-Wan took advantage of Anakin's unstable state. He didn't win by "luck". When Obi-Wan killed Darth Maul, he was (as much as I'd hate to say it) able to take Maul by surprise and sever his torso. He didn't win by "luck" there, either.
Same way, when Vader killed the second Maul, he took advantage of his overconfidence and apparently, his momentary lack of defense. Whether it be in trait, personality strengths, actual skill or some other quality, Vader has something that allowed him to triumph over Maul. However marginally, Vader is superior to Maul.
Originally posted by Captain REX...or in Advent's and my case, curse like a sailor who stubbed his toe. 😛
Best to follow it or people just get annoyed.
I'd say Vader. Maul's biggest weakness is he cockiness aswell as his ego, if Vader takes advantage of that like he did in the fight with the resurrected Maul, chances are he has a good chance at winning, albeit, not easily, however.
The resurrected Maul fight has not been declared as canon.
And "Maul's biggest weakness is his cockiness" ? Maul is deadly, cocky or not (and he wasn't). And (even though it's irrelevant) just because he overestimated his opponent once doesn't mean he was cocky. Hell, he's so serious he almost doesn't speak. How can you know if he's cocky?
Originally posted by 0°Mandalore°0Yes, it has. Read the NEC, and Leland Chee confirmed him to be resurrected in the comic.
The resurrected Maul fight has not been declared as canon.
And "Maul's biggest weakness is his cockiness" ? Maul is deadly, cocky or not (and he wasn't). And (even though it's irrelevant) just because he overestimated his opponent once doesn't mean he was cocky. Hell, he's so serious he almost doesn't speak. How can you know if he's cocky?
So is Vader, yet he isn't cocky, though I would rate him slightly less than Maul in the skill department, but not by much.
TWICE. He was toying with Obi-Wan and gloating when he shouldve finished him off, the same goes for his duel with Vader. If that isn't arrogance or cockiness, I certainly don't know what is.
How does being serious not allow you to speak? Ive seen and met lot's of people who were dead serious and yet still speak.
How do I know? Cause I actually payed attention to the movies and comics.
Originally posted by City Hunter
Yes, it has. Read the NEC, and Leland Chee confirmed him to be resurrected in the comic.So is Vader, yet he isn't cocky, though I would rate him slightly less than Maul in the skill department, but not by much.
TWICE. He was toying with Obi-Wan and gloating when he shouldve finished him off, the same goes for his duel with Vader. If that isn't arrogance or cockiness, I certainly don't know what is.
How does being serious not allow you to speak? Ive seen and met lot's of people who were dead serious and yet still speak.
How do I know? Cause I actually payed attention to the movies and comics.
It is canon? Hell, that's f*cked up.
Right, twice. I bet he has defeated far more than 2 opponents.
I'm sorry, that's not what I meant. I must've not made myself clear. But anyways, serious or not, Maul almost doesn't speak, does he?
Originally posted by 0°Mandalore°0Maybe, maybe not.
It is canon? Hell, that's f*cked up.Right, twice. I bet he has defeated far more than 2 opponents.
I'm sorry, that's not what I meant. I must've not made myself clear. But anyways, serious or not, Maul almost doesn't speak, does he?
But have any of them ever been on Vader's level?
Yes, but what does that have to do with anything? You can be serious and cocky at the same time aswell.
City Hunter and Xepeyon above are WRONG. Both of your conclusions are based solely on the duel in Resurrection, which makes you incorrect on more than one level. The first being that everything that happened in the comic was dependent upon the location. If the location isn't Kalakar Six (and even if it was, it would have to be in the same place), then there's nothing to suggest Maul would be in the same position he was at the end of the duel. The second being that there's no way to prove definitively (or even the more likely) that the Maul we witnessed is as strong as the real one. Given that, it leaves open the possibility to suggest that TPM Maul wouldn't make that same mistake or be in that predicament.
Reasonably Maul is the more adept duelist when it comes down to prowess with a blade as demonstrated in my initial post. You're telling me that Vader is then only relying on the chance Maul would momentarily stop or rather the chance that Maul will do something irrational before he kills him in direct lightsaber confrontation, which is fucking stupid because there's nothing to indicate that he would in circumstances where there's no bullshit story or plot necessity keeping Vader alive.
Originally posted by Xepeyon
Whether it be in trait, personality strengths, actual skill or some other quality, Vader has something that allowed him to triumph over Maul.
Only pertaining to that particular situation, something you're clearly not taking into account.
However marginally, Vader is superior to Maul.
Uh, because you are operating under the nonsensical idea that defeating an opponent makes you superior ACTUALLY MEANS that defeating an opponent makes you superior? No, that's not how it works. What if Darth Maul hadn't wasted any time? What if the lightsaber blow that struck Vader had killed him? You're basically saying that because neither of these happened, Vader is better due to taking advantage of one situation denying all evidence which points out that Maul has the capabilities of dispatching Vader in a lightsaber battle. Whereas Vader does not and would, as outlined above, be appealing to his arrogance as his only means of victory.
The main problem with your logic is that Maul also possesses qualities which would allow him to defeat Vader. Simply because they didn't in Resurrection doesn't mean they wouldn't elsewhere. Just like how Vader's hatred was enough to overcome Maul in the end doesn't mean it would elsewhere.
Double.
Originally posted by Advent
Both of your conclusions are based [b]solely on the duel in Resurrection, which makes you incorrect on more than one level. The first being that everything that happened in the comic was dependent upon the location. If the location isn't Kalakar Six (and even if it was, it would have to be in the same place), then there's nothing to suggest Maul would be in the same position he was at the end of the duel. The second being that there's no way to prove definitively (or even the more likely) that the Maul we witnessed is as strong as the real one. Given that, it leaves open the possibility to suggest that TPM Maul wouldn't make that same mistake or be in that predicament.[/B]
Ignore this part, City Hunter. Although I still believe your reasoning to be absurd, your conclusion is based more on Maul's personality rather than relying specifically on the comic. This paragraph is for Xepeyon only, I apologize for misreading your post.
The rest, however, still applies to you.