Which period of the galactic history is the golden era for the Sith?

Golden Age

1) A period of great peace, prosperity, and happiness.
2) the most flourishing period in the history of a nation, literature, people, etc.
3) a time period when some activity or skill was at its peak

By the first definition, probably Markas Ragnos' empire. Ajunta's exiles supposedly succumbed to infighting IIRC and they were still laying the groundwork for the Sith, so I wouldn't consider their era the zenith.

By the second definition, probably Vitiate's empire (don't know much about Krayt's empire, other than it being huge). Revan just had a war. His empire never really had time to prosper. Vitiate ruled for like a thousand years or something like that. He was at war for only part of that and even then, the Sith seemed to be flourishing. The RoT Sith were in hiding and there were only two of them, so it's kind of hard to say they were flourishing,

By the third definition, probably the Rule of Two Sith. The followers of the Rule of Two were some of the most powerful Sith in the mythos.

Yeah, on average, the Banite Sith were easily the most powerful.

Originally posted by red8
By the first definition, probably Markas Ragnos' empire. Ajunta's exiles supposedly succumbed to infighting IIRC and they were still laying the groundwork for the Sith, so I wouldn't consider their era the zenith.

By the second definition, probably Vitiate's empire (don't know much about Krayt's empire, other than it being huge). Revan just had a war. His empire never really had time to prosper. Vitiate ruled for like a thousand years or something like that. He was at war for only part of that and even then, the Sith seemed to be flourishing. The RoT Sith were in hiding and there were only two of them, so it's kind of hard to say they were flourishing,

By the third definition, probably the Rule of Two Sith. The followers of the Rule of Two were some of the most powerful Sith in the mythos.

This is an excellent way to approach it. 👆

About Banith sith being the most powerful in the mythos, I'll have to disagree though Im not sure what you mean. Personally, from the rule of two, I consider only Bane, Plagueis and Sidious in top 10 sith.

Originally posted by Sinious
This is an excellent way to approach it. 👆

About Banith sith being the most powerful in the mythos, I'll have to disagree though Im not sure what you mean. Personally, from the rule of two, I consider only Bane, Plagueis and Sidious in top 10 sith.

Unfortunately there is very little information on the Banite as a whole. But we can infer that they were insanely powerful based on:

1) Bane's philosophy worked. The Rule of Two lasted for one-thousand years because it worked. Each cyle of the apprentice surpassing the master would cause the Sith to become stronger. Bane was already a monster. Zannah, IMO, had already surpassed Bane in DoE at least force-wise and probably completely surpassed him down the road. Cognus probably surpassed her eventually. Gravid caused a setback, but the Banite Sith bounced back.

2) The final results. Plagueis and Sidious were the culmination of Bane's philosophy and they were absolute powerhouses.

Originally posted by red8
Unfortunately there is very little information on the Banite as a whole. But we can infer that they were insanely powerful based on:

1) Bane's philosophy worked. The Rule of Two lasted for one-thousand years because it worked. Each cyle of the apprentice surpassing the master would cause the Sith to become stronger. Bane was already a monster. Zannah, IMO, had already surpassed Bane in DoE at least force-wise and probably completely surpassed him down the road. Cognus probably surpassed her eventually. Gravid caused a setback, but the Banite Sith bounced back.

2) The final results. Plagueis and Sidious were the culmination of Bane's philosophy and they were absolute powerhouses.

Well the unknown characters aren't supposed to be used for individual based arguments. Also it didn't go as you've described it. Every new sith came into the RoT wasn't stronger than prior. With that logic Sidious would be stronger than the Son lol. Its most likely that most of the apprentices killed their masters by cunning. What you have said is true though about the last 3 sith masters of the order. Tenebrous was stronger than an average sith of RoT and Plagueis was stronger than him. Of course Sidious toped that as the peak sith of the order and brought the promised destruction upon the galaxy.

The fact remains, every member of that order was trained with the ambition of becoming the Dark Lord. They also all had access to an incredible wealth of Sith knowledge and skills. Even if they didn't necessarily get stronger through each generation, due to many of them killing their master through cheating, they were all immensely powerful through their vast knowledge, great ambition, and training to one day be the Dark Lord of the Sith.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
The fact remains, every member of that order was trained with the ambition of becoming the Dark Lord. They also all had access to an incredible wealth of Sith knowledge and skills. Even if they didn't necessarily get stronger through each generation, due to many of them killing their master through cheating, they were all immensely powerful through their vast knowledge, great ambition, and training to one day be the Dark Lord of the Sith.

Who ever argued about this?

Originally posted by Sinious
Well the unknown characters aren't supposed to be used for individual based arguments.

This isn't the Versus subforum, so making educated inferences is, to the best of my knowledge, acceptable.

Also it didn't go as you've described it. Every new sith came into the RoT wasn't stronger than prior.

Aside from the setback of Darth Gravid, do you have any evidence of this statement? I'm sure there may have been ups and downs, but the overall trendline would be moving up.

With that logic Sidious would be stronger than the Son lol.

I am not sure what sort of confusion could have led you to that conclusion. The Son was not a Sith and he was not part of the Rule of Two. Why would Sidious be stronger than the Son by my logic?

Its most likely that most of the apprentices killed their masters by cunning.

No matter how they killed their masters, he overall trendline of the Sith becoming more powerful suggests that the apprentices eventually surpassed their masters. Plagueis eventually surpassed Tenebrous even though he killed him through cunning. Sidious eventually surpassed Plagueis even though he killed him through cunning.

It's because Sinious foolishly places Darth Bane in the top tier, and because of that if every generation became stronger one would have to be far more powerful than even that.

Which, you know, Sidious kinda was.

I rate Darth Bane highly. I place him above people like Maul, Dooku, Vader, and Malgus.
But I don't believe the Rule of Two would have lasted one-thousand years if it didn't work.

There is a catch though. Over those thousand years, there were roughly 30 Sith Lords. Each one had to be trained from scratch to surpass their masters. So the gap between apprentice and master (for most of them) would not have been too large. Then there was the setback with Darth Gravid.

So even if you place Bane in the top tier, it still wouldn't mean that Sidious was somehow more powerful than the Son. I do believe Sidious would beat Bane rather comfortably though.

Malgus, Dooku, and Maul are all superior to Bane by order of feats. Other than ROT and getting covered in bugs Bane is only useful for engendering the rule of two. He is mediocre as a duelist

Originally posted by Sinious
Well the unknown characters aren't supposed to be used for individual based arguments. Also it didn't go as you've described it. Every new sith came into the RoT wasn't stronger than prior. With that logic Sidious would be stronger than the Son lol. Its most likely that most of the apprentices killed their masters by cunning. What you have said is true though about the last 3 sith masters of the order. Tenebrous was stronger than an average sith of RoT and Plagueis was stronger than him. Of course Sidious toped that as the peak sith of the order and brought the promised destruction upon the galaxy.

Seeing how you rely on a bunch of implications to elevate Vitiate, I don't see why you couldn't do the same with Sidious without coming to a very exaggerated conclusion, especially if he is one of your favorite characters.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Seeing how you rely on a bunch of implications to elevate Vitiate, I don't see why you couldn't do the same with Sidious without coming to a very exaggerated conclusion, especially if he is one of your favorite characters.

He is actually my favorite but let me get this straight, you want me to assume Sidious is more powerful than the son?

I elevate Vitiate based on what I see and I don't exaggerate characters that I like and underrate the ones I don't. Thats something you do actually.

Originally posted by Sinious
He is actually my favorite but let me get this straight, you want me to assume Sidious is more powerful than the son?

I elevate Vitiate based on what I see and I don't exaggerate characters that I like and underrate the ones I don't. Thats something you do actually.

Originally posted by Sinious
He is actually my favorite but let me get this straight, you want me to assume Sidious is more powerful than the son?

I elevate Vitiate based on what I see and I don't exaggerate characters that I like and underrate the ones I don't. Thats something you do actually.

Yeah, the point flew directly above your head (or more likely right through it). Sidious doesn't have to be on the son's level to be far above Bane, which is why I said it would be a very exaggerated conclusion to suggest it.

Sidious isn't your favorite character. Anyone who reads your posts would know you're a Vitiate wanker. You suggested that Vitiate is above Sidious because he ruled over the dread masters, whereas you believed Sidious wouldn't be capable of doing the same. Vitiate ruling over a large number of powerful force users isn't a display of actual force power, it's an implication of power, which is what you cling to the most. If Sidious was truly your favorite character, you'd cling to implications as well. With the Banite sith, the master sought out an apprentice with the potential to become more powerful and to eventually replace him. Now this doesn't mean that every single apprentice had to surpass their master in combat, but logically somewhere down the line, there should be a pretty big gap in force power between Bane and the last members of the sith. With Sidious being the last of the order, and one of history's greatest combatants, he should be well above Bane. The fact that you don't take that as an implication, would suggest that Sidious isn't your favorite character.

Also, what characters have I exaggerated? I can't help it that Sidious has a ton of off nexus feats to draw from--feats that would indicate he would hand Vitiate his ass pretty solidly. Vitiate is powerful, and is absolutely one of the most powerful sith in history, but his implications and accolades are not enough to put him on Sidious' level in raw combat, considering Sidious has accolades that are even better. Palpatine is a combatant to the fullest and an extremely powerful force user; Vitiate is just an extremely powerful force user.

Vitiate is an extremely powerful force user with a nexus and prep and beneficial factors. Nothing supports that claim when he's stripped of those things and forced to rely on just himself

Made an edit to the first paragraph. I worded it like I did believe Sidious to be on the son's level. lol

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Also, what characters have I exaggerated?.

Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Sidious isn't your favorite character. Anyone who reads your posts would know you're a Vitiate wanker. You suggested that Vitiate is above Sidious because he ruled over the dread masters, whereas you believed Sidious wouldn't be capable of doing the same. Vitiate ruling over a large number of powerful force users isn't a display of actual force power, it's an implication of power, which is what you cling to the most. If Sidious was truly your favorite character, you'd cling to implications as well. With the Banite sith, the master sought out an apprentice with the potential to become more powerful and to eventually replace him. Now this doesn't mean that every single apprentice had to surpass their master in combat, but logically somewhere down the line, there should be a pretty big gap in force power between Bane and the last members of the sith. With Sidious being the last of the order, and one of history's greatest combatants, he should be well above Bane. The fact that you don't take that as an implication, would suggest that Sidious isn't your favorite character.

I don't know why I bother with you about this since I don't care what you think but I'll clarify this once and for all.

I first met the character Sidious when I wasn't even 10. All my friends hated the ugly bad guy and was happy when Vader finally did the "right' thing where I was freaking pissed when he died. Ive hated everything about PT yet I've watched ROTS for countless times only because of that character. Palpatine wasn't just my favorite character in SW, he was my fave amongst all fictional movies/books I've read. The main reason I also enjoy the character Vitiate so much is the similarity between them. I also like Vitiate's more inhuman style of talking and the way he removed himself from every material concern.

The reason I debate about Vitiate more is because there is no need to defend Palpatine here. Every 1on1 sith versus thread will automatically end up with him being declared the victor. Vitiate on the other hand is being extremely underrated here. If Sidious was underrated also, I would give the same attention to him as well. Another reason is, I don't like post ROTJ and the comic book material of that era so I have limited info about its details. Ive gathered the info about Sidious' parts but thats it and even then its kind of limiting my debating about DE Sidious.

Are you blind or stupid? Even in my "Vitiate might be the most powerful sith thread", I said that DE Sidious would take him in a 1on1 battle. I rank Sidious higher than Vitiate and I have stated this a few times. I also rank Sidious higher than Bane. Bane is at the edge of my top 5 sith list where Sidious is no.1.

Also, what characters have I exaggerated? I can't help it that Sidious has a ton of off nexus feats to draw from--feats that would indicate he would hand Vitiate his ass pretty solidly. Vitiate is powerful, and is absolutely one of the most powerful sith in history, but his implications and accolades are not enough to put him on Sidious' level in raw combat, considering Sidious has accolades that are even better.

You exaggerate PT era characters when they are to face TOR era characters. You probably agree with Carthage about Dooku > Vitiate

Palpatine is a combatant to the fullest and an extremely powerful force user; Vitiate is just an extremely powerful force user.

If you present arguments like this more often, people including me will respect your opinions more.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Dooku. Ventress. Palpatine. Kenobi. Yoda. Skywaker. Virtually every Prequel trilogy character...

How so? Because I list their feats?