Originally posted by Darth_Glentract
Not when Sith have shown to be much more powerful than Jedi on a one-on-one basis.
No. SOME sith have shown to be stronger than SOME Jedi on a one on one. Explain four Jedi utterly holding back a Sith Army on Coruscant in their 'Golden Age' otherwise, or Raskta Lsu killing more Sith than fell to the Thought Bomb, or General Murtauggh killing the Dark Underlord
Glentract
We are already talking about the best of the best. Those "three of the best" he killed are still dramatically weaker than top level people.
Tiin, Kolar, and Fisto were "celebrated swordsmen" (The Complete Visual Dictionary) and highly reputed by Anakin Skywalker, Mace Windu, and Obi-Wan Kenobi; enough that Kenobi and Skywalker both agree that they were among the very best that the Order ever produced. Fisto, in particular, has demonstrated enough skill with the blade to outduel General Grievous in the Clone Wars television series. The fact that they were unable to contend with Sidious isn't due to a lack of skill, but Palpatine's superior command and aptitude for the Force.
Glentract
Also, I never said he was bad at combat, it's just inferior to his political skills.
I would agree that his penchant for manipulation outweighs his talent with the blade, but that doesn't change the fact that he's among the very best in either category.
Glentract
Kun, Ragnos, and Bane were not crafty like Sidious. That wasn't their game.
While I can't speak for Kun, I can tell you that Ragnos and Bane were crafty like Sidious. The Essential Guide to the Force and Dark Side Sourcebook make it very clear that Ragnos's rule was unnaturally long due to his skills in manipulation; he used his rivals like pawns on a chessboard and pitted them against one another, rather like Sidious's sadistic displays during the Empire's reign. Bane, too, opted for subtlety rather than blatant warlord tactics and it was his philosophy that Sidious used to defeat the Republic.
The only difference is that Sidious did his manipulations on a far greater scale than either Bane or Ragnos.
Glentract
You know me, I don't take outside quotes with much merit anyway. I've said for the longest time that we need to look at feats first and foremost, with in-universe quotes being very important as well. What an out of universe person might have said doesn't change what is actually portrayed in the books, comics, movies, etc so should have no higher authority than fan generated consensus.
I do know you, and I clearly recall a time when you were willing to accept any statement... so long as it pertained to a character you liked. We don't cherrypick anymore. If it's a canon statement and not contradicted by another (higher) source, it's incontrovertible.
Originally posted by Lightsnake
Oh, honestly. When have the Sith shown a consistent basis to be more powerful than the JEdi on one on one? Revan as a Jedi would be a match for any Sith. Yoda-who, my apologies was the strongest to that point...you'd need to prove Yoda's inferiority to any other Sith for that to be viable. And no Sith has shown to be stronger than Yoda.
QFT. And at long last, LS and I finally agree on something. This is a day that will live in infamy. 😄
Originally posted by mattatom
You cannot deny though there are more offensive Dark Side powers than the Light Side have. Oh and Autokrat is saying that just because the sith have more offensive powers it doesn't make them stronger.
I did not word my statement properly.
What I should have said is that Dark Side powers are more... potent in an offensive situation. I did not mean to say that the DS was stronger than the LS.