Accolades can be just as important as feats, especially if the accolade in question has a connection to a character you're arguing for or against. However, a character from the PT era with top tier feats has more going for him/her in regards to a vs matchup than a character from an earlier era with a good accolade, since most of the time the accolade would have no connection to the PT era character on account of the PT character not even yet being born/existing. The only time I'll take an accolade over the feats of a PT era character is if it confirms superiority over another character from the same era with superior feats to the PT era character.
Most here do it backwards, though, and want to put people like Scourge above Maul and Anakin, despite the fact that the latter two not only have superior feats, but superior accolades as well. That's kind of lowballing Maul and Anakin; not because Scourge sucks, but because he doesn't have enough to put him quite on par. Scourge is an implied powerhouse but so are Maul and Anakin, on top of having a plethora of feats to back it up.
Also, under Ventress's entry on the official website, Ahsoka is regarded as being a notable force user, so people having a hard time with her doesn't necessarily indicate a lack of ability on their part or qualify as a low showing, especially since the website implies that Ventress besting her is an indication of how good Ventress is. Let's face it, Ahsoka has some very good force feats and above average saber feats. Just thought I'd point that out.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Feats can be just as important as feats, especially if the accolade in question has a connection to a character you're arguing for or against. However, a character from the PT era with top tier feats has more going for him/her in regards to a vs matchup than a character from an earlier era with a good accolade, since most of the time the accolade would have no connection to the PT era character on account of the PT character not even yet being born/existing. The only time I'll take an accolade over the feats of a PT era character is if it confirms superiority over another character from the same era with superior feats to the PT era character.Most here do it backwards, though, and want to put people like Scourge above Maul and Anakin, despite the fact that the latter two not only have superior feats, but superior accolades as well. That's kind of lowballing Maul and Anakin; not because Scourge sucks, but because he doesn't have enough to put him quite on par. Scourge is an implied powerhouse but so are Maul and Anakin, on top of having a plethora of feats to back it up.
Also, under Ventress's entry on the official website, Ahsoka is regarded as being a notable force user, so people having a hard time with her doesn't necessarily indicate a lack of ability on their part or qualify as a low showing, especially since the website implies that Ventress besting her is an indication of how good Ventress is. Let's face it, Ahsoka has some very good force feats and above average saber feats. Just thought I'd point that out.
I regard feats are more important in general, but I think your assertion also makes sense.
As for Ashoka, I regard her as having a lot of potential more than anything, but I haven't seen anything impressive from her in terms of Force feats. She is an impressive duellist for her age, though.
Originally posted by Nargaroth
I regard feats are more important in general, but I think your assertion also makes sense.As for Ashoka, I regard her as having a lot of potential more than anything, but I haven't seen anything impressive from her in terms of Force feats. She is an impressive duellist for her age, though.
For the most part, I do too. That's why I emphasized the word can.
Ahsoka has some pretty good TK feats. I can't recall much at the moment, other than moving a very large object quite casually in the movie. I know she has a lot more, but I can't think of any at the moment.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
For the most part, I do too. That's why I emphasized the word can.Ahsoka has some pretty good TK feats. I can't recall much at the moment, other than moving a very large object quite casually in the movie. I know she has a lot more, but I can't think of any at the moment.
Ok.
Wait, now that you mention it, I recall that she collpsed a large wall that crushed several droids in the movie. That's a good feat considering that it only required moderate effort.
Originally posted by SIDIOUS 66
Accolades can be just as important as feats, especially if the accolade in question has a connection to a character you're arguing for or against. However, a character from the PT era with top tier feats has more going for him/her in regards to a vs matchup than a character from an earlier era with a good accolade, since most of the time the accolade would have no connection to the PT era character on account of the PT character not even yet being born/existing. The only time I'll take an accolade over the feats of a PT era character is if it confirms superiority over another character from the same era with superior feats to the PT era character.Most here do it backwards, though, and want to put people like Scourge above Maul and Anakin, despite the fact that the latter two not only have superior feats, but superior accolades as well. That's kind of lowballing Maul and Anakin; not because Scourge sucks, but because he doesn't have enough to put him quite on par. Scourge is an implied powerhouse but so are Maul and Anakin, on top of having a plethora of feats to back it up.
Also, under Ventress's entry on the official website, Ahsoka is regarded as being a notable force user, so people having a hard time with her doesn't necessarily indicate a lack of ability on their part or qualify as a low showing, especially since the website implies that Ventress besting her is an indication of how good Ventress is. Let's face it, Ahsoka has some very good force feats and above average saber feats. Just thought I'd point that out.
Agreed entirely, since my post was concerning era Bias. I also think writing styles cross era come into the equation as well.