Galen Marek vs Yoda

So how do you think would win Gideon? Becuase I'm of the opinion that Vader roughly = ROTS Sids because of his 80% of the improved OT Sids accolade, and Marek beat him.

Originally posted by Nephthys
So how do you think would win Gideon?

Yoda.

Becuase I'm of the opinion that Vader roughly = ROTS Sids because of his 80% of the improved OT Sids accolade, and Marek beat him.

Well, that's difficult to say with any great accuracy. The Revenge of the Sith novelization says, in the final chapter concerning Anakin, that when Vader was told that Padme was dead, all of the rage and anger and destruction that ensued in the laboratory was actually directed at Sidious himself. But "in the end [Anakin] could not touch the shadow [Palpatine]."

Certainly there is never an indication to my knowledge that suggests that Darth Vader was ever during the course of his existence on par with Yoda.

In raw strength, perhaps, he could put up something of a fight. A noticeable struggle, certainly. And I would be willing to entertain the idea that he could have been on par with Yoda or Sidious, but it just doesn't seem right or likely.

So I guess you could say I could be swayed either way.

Of course, what does power mean? Obviously Force abilities [not to go down Illustrious's route and say "lulz politix!"😉 but Force strength or Force skill?

There is a profound difference.

Gideon
Well, that's difficult to say with any great accuracy. The Revenge of the Sith novelization says, in the final chapter concerning Anakin, that when Vader was told that Padme was dead, all of the rage and anger and destruction that ensued in the laboratory was actually directed at Sidious himself. But "in the end [Anakin] could not touch the shadow [Palpatine]."

Personally I think they're close, but Palpatine still has the edge. I don't know that he increased in power by a full quarter between the end of the PT and the OT.

Touche.

Like I said, there's a great difference between power and skill; I could conceive Vader having 80% of Palpatine's raw power, but not in skill or knowledge.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
But Batman is a ‘character’. The ‘narrator’ in the ROTS novelization says: “This truth: that he, the avatar of light, Supreme Master of the Jedi Order, the fiercest, most implacable, most devastatingly powerful foe the darkness had ever known.”

There is a huge difference between a character saying something and the narrator.

I see. Okay, fair enough.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
Which ones? I can’t think of anyone else except for Darth Malak and maybe Bastila.

Juhani, Yuthura Ban and Uthar Wynn, Darth Bandon and a pair of Dark Jedi, Bastila Shan twice, Darth Malak.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
He did win against Dooku, in a way. You don’t have to kill someone or bring them to their knees to ‘win’.

True, but what was Yoda's goal? To stop Dooku from escaping, and Dooku escaped. Not a defeat certainly, but not a 'pure win' either.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
And we know Yoda is better. Because of ‘facts’. You don’t have to beat many others who are clearly weaker than you to prove you’re better. He could’ve easily finished off Assaj Ventress in the first episode of the Clone Wars before she could even do anything, but he just talked enough so she had time to run.

Fact is that Yoda has proven less, but the few things he has, like stalemating Sidious are more impressive than anything Galen did.

Good point. Quality over quantity after all.

Just to clarify, I do think that Yoda would win a duel (Galen would have a very slight chance but that's all). I just don't think it'll be as easy as many here seem to think.

Originally posted by Gideon
Could chilled monkey be one of Nebaris's accounts? I shall command REX to go on the hunt.

Sure, go ahead.

Originally posted by Gideon
What is it with people throwing out hyperbole to statements they don't like? Interpretation of canon statements isn't up to us; we are not supreme authorities when it comes to... er... "canon law" (I apologize for infringing on Catholicism).

I just think that in a debate, using facts and looking at what the characters in question have actually achieved means more than saying stuff like "the handbook says Batman is the best martial artist in the world so he wins" (even though the comics suggest otherwise). Again, actions speak louder than words.

Originally posted by Gideon
Yoda is top tier.

Did I say otherwise?

All I said was Yoda has never won a duel (in the sense of 'total victory'- do you claim otherwise?) and that he isn't beating Galen effortlessly.

Sorry If I've offended anyone. I really don't want thi to get ugly.

Originally posted by chilled monkey
Juhani, Yuthura Ban and Uthar Wynn, Darth Bandon and a pair of Dark Jedi, Bastila Shan twice, Darth Malak.

Okay, nothing personal, but I strongly dislike the fact that many people think he actually (canon) defeated all these people. Is it stated in any novel or just anywhere else outside the game that he defeated these people?

Juhani, Malak, Bastila (only once), yes, you actually 'had' to beat them alone to continue the game (maybe with the help of grenades or mines). But Revan could've easily just stood on the side lines when someone else won the duel for him.

Uthar, may have had help from Yuthura plus he poisoned the guy. Darth Bandon, Dark Jedi and the first time you beat Bastila, all with help from his dear companions.

Yeah there is no definitive source detailing Revan's accomplishments.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Yeah there is no definitive source detailing Revan's accomplishments.

He beat Malak and was stated by Bane to be one of the greatest sith lords ever.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
He beat Malak and was stated by Bane to be one of the greatest sith lords ever.

Oh, because both of those mean a lot.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC Juhani, Malak, Bastila (only once), yes, you actually 'had' to beat them alone to continue the game (maybe with the help of grenades or mines). But Revan could've easily just stood on the side lines when someone else won the duel for him.

Just as a side note, the Old Republic Campaign guide does specify that it was Revan who dueled and defeated all these people.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC Uthar, may have had help from Yuthura plus he poisoned the guy. Darth Bandon, Dark Jedi and the first time you beat Bastila, all with help from his dear companions.

Same as above, the guide claims Revan was too much for Bandon to handle. It also makes mention of Bandon's allies and directly says that it was Revan who killed Bandon. Strictly said it seems like a 3v3 match.

EDIT - Although what any of this has to do with Galen Marek vs Yoda, I have no idea.

What the hell does Revan have to do with this fight? Is he a spectator or something?

Originally posted by Autokrat
Just as a side note, the Old Republic Campaign guide does specify that it was Revan who [b]dueled and defeated all these people.

Same as above, the guide claims Revan was too much for Bandon to handle. It also makes mention of Bandon's allies and directly says that it was Revan who killed Bandon. Strictly said it seems like a 3v3 match.[/B]

Thanks.

Originally posted by Autokrat
EDIT - Although what any of this has to do with Galen Marek vs Yoda, I have no idea.

Originally posted by GenomeFrozener
What the hell does Revan have to do with this fight? Is he a spectator or something?

Basically some posters were claiming that Yoda would easily beat Galen in a lightsabre fight. I pointed out that Yoda has never actually won a duel, while Galen has won plenty.

I was then asked how many duels Revan had won, so I obliged by providing an answer.

Threads sometimes go off on tangents like that.

Originally posted by chilled monkey
Basically some posters were claiming that Yoda would easily beat Galen in a lightsabre fight. I pointed out that Yoda has never actually won a duel, while Galen has won plenty.

I was then asked how many duels Revan had won, so I obliged by providing an answer.

Threads sometimes go off on tangents like that.

That's not even remotely a valid argument. Saying that Yoda could not take Galen because we have never seen him "win" a lightsaber duel on screen is a logical fallacy.

There is plenty of available proof to show that Yoda was a master at lightsaber combat, able to go toe to toe with the likes of Sidious and Dooku.

Well he didn't actually technically say that in exact terms, he was simply using it as supporting evidence.

Originally posted by chilled monkey
I like Yoda, but he's never actually 'won' a single duel that we've seen.

Dooku- escaped both times.

Sidious- draw.

Galen has won at least 7 duels-

Rahm Kota.
Kazdan Paratus
Shaak Ti
Maris Brood
Darth Vader
2 Shadow Guards (maybe more)

To say nothing of his numerous training sessions with PROXY.

Even Yoda isn't beating him effortlessly.

This post has two facts and a conclusion. The implication then is that the conclusion was based upon the facts presented, such that:
Given: Yoda has won zero fights
Given: Starkiller has won seven fights
Conclusion: Yoda will struggle against Starkiller.

That certainly doesn't seem like a mere piece of supporting evidence. It seems like a [ds]piss-poor[/ds] foundation to argue from.

It might strongly imply that he was of such a belief that the facts that he presented directly and adequately reach that conclusion, but again, and as I was saying, as far as what is directly and exactly stated, there is no faulty usage of logic. The only thing that can be said for sure was that he was using those facts as supporting evidence.

So then I can see two options:
1. That he did intend for that comparrison (number of matches won) to be the deciding factor in Yoda's performance against Starkiller

or

2. That he did not intend for that comparison to be sufficient to prove his case and has left his assertion ("Even Yoda isn't beating him effortlessly."😉 unsupported.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
So then I can see two options:
1. That he did intend for that comparrison (number of matches won) to be the deciding factor in Yoda's performance against Starkiller

or

2. That he did not intend for that comparison to be sufficient to prove his case and has left his assertion ("Even Yoda isn't beating him effortlessly."😉 unsupported inadequately supproted..

😄

Except that Autokrat has observed, as have others (including me), that the evidence he submitted was unacceptable. To consider it supporting evidence is to ignore the definition thereof.

What he gave as evidence isn't evidence so it is unsupported.