Star Wars Battle of who's the bigger fanboy.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Alright then, let me rephrase it. I wasn't to you, you little pedant. There's enough of us from the SW forums to understand what I meant.

We here in the MVF have no problem talking about SW without bringing in the EU, and there are some die hard fans here. Me, DDM, Robtard, sadako, Impediment, and many others. So what I said rings true. It's not difficult to talk SW, movies only.

I have actually proposed an anything versus forum, but the moderators immediately shot it down. It'd put an end to the "screen feats only" bullshit.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You make a post here, it's public and anyone can respond to it. You want to keep it to one person? Private messaging.

Unless of course a fellow poster is a pedantic little know-it-all who relishes in proving any point he can to soothe his ego. In which case, I guess issues will arise.

Originally posted by ares834
"If Anakin hadn't got all beat-up, he [B]could have beat the Emperor."

It is not guaranteed nor is any time frame given. However, considering the first part of that quote says, "You have to be either Mace or Yoda to compete with the Emperor." It is infered that Anakin's slaying of the Emperor would take some time.

And the video game is not a movie, nor is the non-canon ending even considered in the EU. [/B]

Prove me wrong. 😐

Seems the quote directly applies to the pre-chopped and burned Vader directly in context with everything else that was being said...ESPECIALLY if you consider the "you have to be Mace or Yoda" part being followed up with "if Anakin wasn't hurt."

You're so horrendously bias that you will never admit it. It's fact. Anakin could have beaten Sidious in a saber duel before he was chopped and burned. Time frame: immediate. 🙂

Originally posted by ares834
When people talk about "force feats" they clearly are talking about actual attacks with the force not skills with a lightsaber. Hell even Dooku differentiates between the two, “It is obvious that this contest cannot be decided by our knowledge of the Force… but by our skills with a lightsaber.” So while that is likely his most impressive feat most don't consider it an actual "force feat" per se.

And those people are clearly wrong because a saber duel amongst force users is very force intensive. Just because they don't understand that, does not make the "common understanding" correct.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I will post a statement in a public forum for all to read. Those who know what I'm talking about, will know. Those who (like yourself) who don't, will inquire what I mean (which you did). I will explain myself (as I did), and the issue will be settled.

Unless of course a fellow poster is a pedantic little know-it-all who relishes in proving any point he can to soothe his ego. In which case, I guess issues will arise.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
I know what you're talking about. It was an adjustment for me. One simply has to know where and when to draw the line. It's not that hard.

U mad, bro? You seem mad.

He's probably mad because your point is retarded, RJ. lol

And for the record, DDM's skewing of GL's quotes aside, what scenes from the movies support the idea that Anakin was ever a match for the Emperor?

And it seems a little strange to me to assume that GL intended for Anakin, even in the suit, to be a match for Sideous, when he's stated that losing his arms and legs made him "about 80% of Sideous" in terms of power and potential. That's one the most idiotic statements GL has ever made, I think, but it suits this discussion.

Just saying, you know?

Movies.

EU.

Keep them separate. For the record, I am of the opinion that the movies and EU are linked, I consider them one in the same. And trust me, I have taken a fair amount of shit over it.

We should start a petition for an anything vs forum.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
He's probably mad because your point is retarded, RJ. lol

Imma hafta agree with Lucien on this one: it's hard to talk Star Wars without some of the very easily clarified EU stuff. The novelizations of the films, alone, would make this discussion much easier to deal with. Waaaaaaaaaaaaay less that could be argued about.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Imma hafta agree with Lucien on this one: it's hard to talk Star Wars without some of the very easily clarified EU stuff. The novelizations of the films, alone, would make this discussion much easier to deal with. Waaaaaaaaaaaaay less that could be argued about.

Nope, not hard. Unless you mean difficult as in exasperating, then yes, I agree, but not difficult to actually do.

yeah, based on the movie alone, Anakin would never have a prayer against Sidious. He couldn't beat Obi-Wan, who "ready to face sidious, would never be"

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Just saying, you know?

Movies.

EU.

Keep them separate. For the record, I am of the opinion that the movies and EU are linked, I consider them one in the same. And trust me, I have taken a fair amount of shit over it.

We should start a petition for an anything vs forum.

That aside, agreed with DDM. Arguing Star Wars without bringing up EU is not only hard but, imo, it's pointless and stupid. It's like trying to figure out how to solve a retardedly hard math problem on your own even though the textbook is right next to you and it explains it perfectly. I mean FFS, we all know that Qui-Gon Jinn is a badass, but I was able to squash your sentiment that he was a badass by just pointing out that he displayed no badassery in the movies. That's whack.

its like if they posted online if Inception ended in a dream state or not, and we refused to allow that little piece of information in a discussion, and instead argued it forever.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
You know, you pretty much do it on a regular basis. Here, and on the phone. We did earlier.

Nope, not hard. Unless you mean difficult as in exasperating, then yes, I agree, but not difficult to actually do.

That's only "sort" of. All the time we bring up the EU on all the places you bring up.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Well, the thing is, what you were just saying was kind of irrelevent in relation to the content of his post. He said that it was hard for him to discuss this without discussing EU.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
It is [b]really hard to talk about Star Wars without using EU or novelized material. [/B]

He didn't say "It's hard for me to discuss Star Wars without brining up EU, so I am now going to break the rules and bring up EU." Obviously, it's because he knows he's not aloud to do so, that he commented on how hard it was. I think you either misunderstood his post or jumped the gun, there.

Originally posted by dadudemon
[B]Prove me wrong. 😐

Seems the quote directly applies to the pre-chopped and burned Vader directly in context with everything else that was being said...ESPECIALLY if you consider the "you have to be Mace or Yoda" part being followed up with "if Anakin wasn't hurt."

You're so horrendously bias that you will never admit it. It's fact. Anakin could have beaten Sidious in a saber duel before he was chopped and burned. Time frame: immediate. 🙂

Except that contradicts the statement.

"You have to be either Mace or Yoda to compete with the Emperor. If Anakin hadn't got all beat-up, he could have beat the Emperor."

The first sentance dictates that, Yoda and Mace are the only ones who can, during at least the movies, compete with the Emperor. That means no one else in the movies is able to. This makes sense considering that Palps cut down three Jedi Masters in seconds and Yoda points out that Kenobi will be ultimately ineffective against the Sith Lord.

The second sentance says that had Anakin won the duel he could have beat the Emperor. However, no time frame is given to this statment. So when taken with the context of the sentance before it means that Anakin, as he appears in the movies, would be unable to "compete with the Emperor" but if he hadn't been hurt he eventually could.

However, even if we take it as you do, GL uses the word "could" rather than "would" meaning it is uncertain that Vader would be victorius.

And those people are clearly wrong because a saber duel amongst force users is very force intensive. Just because they don't understand that, does not make the "common understanding" correct.

Sure, but saber dueling isn't purely use of the force. As Dooku himself acknowledges there is a diffrence between battling with the force and battling with a saber. Heck, lets consider the duel on Mustafar. Anakin is clearly superior to Kenobi in the sabers department, but is merely equal when it comes to use of the force. Clearly there is a diffrent set of skills required.

Hence the terms "saber feats" and "force feats". Both require the use of the force but one is simply its use the other the use of both saber skills and an entirely diffrent set of force skills.

Originally posted by ares834
Except that contradicts the statement.

"You have to be either Mace or Yoda to compete with the Emperor. If Anakin hadn't got all beat-up, he could have beat the Emperor."

Except that it doesn't and in fact that is exactly my point. The rest of what you said literally is rubbish. You lack an understanding of context in that statement which has lead you to a rubbish conclusion.

Originally posted by ares834
Sure, but saber dueling isn't purely use of the force. As Dooku himself acknowledges there is a diffrence between battling with the force and battling with a saber. Heck, lets consider the duel on Mustafar. Anakin is clearly superior to Kenobi in the sabers department, but is merely equal when it comes to use of the force. Clearly there is a diffrent set of skills required.

Hence the terms "saber feats" and "force feats". Both require the use of the force but one is simply its use the other the use of both saber skills and an entirely diffrent set of force skills.

Everything you just said missed my point entirely. Amazing. It's like you wanted my post to have said something, and responded to that, instead.

And, "saber feats." HA! You just mad that up. No one says "saber feats."

And to your "different set" point:

And those people are clearly wrong because a saber duel amongst force users is very force intensive. Just because they don't understand that, does not make the "common understanding" correct.

Originally posted by dadudemon
[B]Except that it doesn't and in fact that is exactly my point. The rest of what you said literally is rubbish. You lack an understanding of context in that statement which has lead you to a rubbish conclusion.

Because it makes sense that Anakin can compete with the Emperor when the quote says in no uncertain terms that only Yoda and Mace can do so. Not to mention everything else points to Anakin being unable to do. Namely the fact that he was unable to defeat even Kenobi who is apparently no match for the Empeor at all.

Everything you just said missed my point entirely. Amazing. It's like you wanted my post to have said something, and responded to that, instead.

I'm showing that there is a direct distinction between battling with the force and battling with a saber. Something you seem to ignore when you lump battling with a saber into the force feat department.

And, "saber feats." HA! You just mad that up. No one says "saber feats."

What else would you call it? "Saber skills"? It's completley irrelivant what it is namedbut there is a clear difference between battling with thee force and battling with a saber.

And to your "different set" point:

And those people are clearly wrong because a saber duel amongst force users is very force intensive. Just because they don't understand that, does not make the "common understanding" correct.

All right then I ask this: how much did Anakin use the force in his duel with Dooku? Can you prove that it was his greatest display of the force?

I always found that a bit weird. Lucas saying that Anakin "could" have beaten Palpatine, but has Yoda flat-out tell Kenobi that he's not powerful enough. The same Kenobi who stymied pre-burnt up Anakin and ultimately got the best of him.

I really don't think the guy put much thought in to his story sometimes.

Originally posted by ares834
Because it makes sense that Anakin can compete with the Emperor when the quote says in no uncertain terms that only Yoda and Mace can do so. Not to mention everything else points to Anakin being unable to do. Namely the fact that he was unable to defeat even Kenobi who is apparently no match for the Empeor at all.

"Seems the quote directly applies to the pre-chopped and burned Vader directly in context with everything else that was being said...ESPECIALLY if you consider the "you have to be Mace or Yoda" part being followed up with "if Anakin wasn't hurt."

You're so horrendously bias that you will never admit it. It's fact. Anakin could have beaten Sidious in a saber duel before he was chopped and burned. Time frame: immediate."

Originally posted by ares834
I'm showing that there is a direct distinction between battling with the force and battling with a saber. Something you seem to ignore when you lump battling with a saber into the force feat department.

And you're, "clearly wrong because a saber duel amongst force users is very force intensive. Just because [you] don't understand that, does not make the 'common understanding' correct."

Originally posted by ares834
What else would you call it? "Saber skills"? It's completley irrelivant what it is namedbut there is a clear difference between battling with thee force and battling with a saber..

K. Choose to ignore that saber duels are very force intensive. I'll be over here in reality...I mean fiction. I mean the reality created inside of the fictional universe. lulz

Originally posted by ares834
All right then I ask this: how much did Anakin use the force in his duel with Dooku? Can you prove that it was his greatest display of the force?

How much did Dooku use the force against Yoda before it came to saber blows (lol)?