Not really man. After I countered your post you just kept on calling me dumb and saying I'm wrong because two people agreed with you. People are free to have their own interpretation of the quote without being rendered idiots in the process. The same can't be said for people who take shit like this so seriously that they feel the need to berate others with insults because they don't conform.
Originally posted by Marco1907
Anakin >> Vader in terms of speed, as my last video suggests that.
Anakin was faster, stronger, more agile and had superior stamina. Possibly even technique.
I believe that Bane's body is faster then Vader's. But Vader's wrists are at least as fast as Bane, so I don't think, that Bane would take an advantage from his marginal speed advantage.
Since Bane was unable to overhelm Zannah with his strikes, I assume, that Vader strenght combined with his Force reserves were superior to Banes. It quite important in a Djem So vs Djem So fight. Their forms were acctually quite similar - both were basing on Djem So, with elements of Makashi and Juyo (and Soresu in Vader's case aas I remember).
Vader also is more expierenced against the best duelists - I really doubt, that Kas'Im - who was veeery good - was above of top masters of "Jedi Prime Era / Golden Age". He would be equal to masters like Fisto or Ti or Kolar at best (still, I place them above him). The same with Lsu (she was possibly more equal to CW's masters then Kas'Im though).
Vader could compete with TPM Maul in a lightsaber battle. And Maul is far above Kas'Im or Lsu.
So Vader in my opinion.
Vader's wrists? The heck? Bane has better speed feats than Vader, who is extremely inconsistent in terms of speed and often clumsy. Vader will need more than wrist speed to block a dozen lightsabers at once speed.
Zannah's style involved not directly engaging her opponents strength, but instead pushing their blows to the side with her spinning blades. She'd basically trained specifically to counter Bane's superior strength. So him not overwhelming her isn't a mark against Bane. I could make the same arguments for the dozen or so physically inferior duelists Vader has failed to overwhelm with his strength. Bane was strong enough to rip a durasteel door off it's hinges, crush a mans head with one stomp and disarm a Jedi Master in one strike. He is up there with Vader.
In terms of skill Kas'im is above most in that "Golden Age". At the very least he was a complete and utter master of all saber forms and styles and Bane knew everything Kas'im could put out. So Bane's knowledge of combat is very extensive. Vader won't be surprising him.
Bane is also far above Kas'im and Lsu in a straight fight.
Originally posted by Nephthys
In terms of skill Kas'im is above most in that "Golden Age".
Yeah, true. During CW Jedi Order had possibly... I don't remember, about 8 thousands of Jedi? And possibly at least a 2 thousands masters, I assume. There is a huge possibility, that Kas'Im would be in top25 or top20 of that Order. But the finest masters, like Fisto, Kolar, Koon would be above him.
Cin Drallig also knew all of lightsaber forms (as I remember he even refused to teach Anakin form 7). Does it place him above masters like Fisto, Koon or Bulq? Nope. Perhaps he was better then them (I doubt it personally) but not because he was a masters of all lightsaber's forms.
I think that most of people in KMC underrate Bane, but you're the one who overate him - as well as Zannah and most guys of his era - terribly.
Originally posted by McP
Yeah, true. During CW Jedi Order had possibly... I don't remember, about 8 thousands of Jedi? And possibly at least a 2 thousands masters, I assume. There is a huge possibility, that Kas'Im would be in top25 or top20 of that Order. But the finest masters, like Fisto, Kolar, Koon would be above him.
Cin Drallig also knew all of lightsaber forms (as I remember he even refused to teach Anakin form 7). Does it place him above masters like Fisto, Koon or Bulq? Nope. Perhaps he was better then them (I doubt it personally) but not because he was a masters of all lightsaber's forms.I think that most of people in KMC underrate Bane, but you're the one who overate him - as well as Zannah and most guys of his era - terribly.
I meant that he would be above masters such as Fisto and Koon. Drallig knew all 7 forms yes, but not to the same extent as Kas'im did. Kas'im was noted to have quickly mastered all forms and then spent decades perfecting every aspect of them as well as creating sequences and moves for them, which demonstrates an extreme level of understanding and grasp of them of them well beyond the norm even for absolute masters.
Well Bane is the Sith'ari, aka the God of the Sith. It only makes sense that he would be extremely powerful as the prophecy said that he would be. My value of Bane also stems from many other's arguing in his favor. Sadly they are not here anymore to give my arguments the support and credibility they once held.
Originally posted by The_Tempest
Mace created the deadliest lightsaber form. Kas'im just mastered the traditional ones. Which, while really good, isn't as impressive.
Vapaad was created as an extension of Juyo though, it's not as if he made it up by scratch, just like Kas'im developed upon existing styles. Windu also developed Vapaad with the help of Sora Bulq, while Kas'im isn't noted as being aided.
Furthermore, Kas'im developed upon all existing forms while Windu only developed upon Juyo. So while that may indicate greater skill with that particular branch, I would argue Kas'im's knowledge is more broad and versatile.
Originally posted by ILS
Not really man. After I countered your post
Your counter which was blatantly wrong you mean
Originally posted by ILS
you just kept on calling me dumb and saying I'm wrong because two people agreed with you.
No, not because 2 people agreed with me (it was in fact 3/4 people), but because you were clearly explained his correct meaning, but just carried on grasping for straws.
Originally posted by ILS
People are free to have their own interpretation of the quote without being rendered idiots in the process.
It's not a novel, where people can have different interpretations of the text. Filoni knows exactly what he meant, and has explained himself more than once.
I've even provided more quotes from him on that fight to make his interpretation clear.
If you weren't grasping for straws you'd clearly understand his context.
Originally posted by ILS
The same can't be said for people who take shit like this so seriously that they feel the need to berate others with insults because they don't conform.
It was a pretty simple sentence to comprehend in the English language, especially when heard in full context. More so when someone's explained it to you.
But you still insisted on following your own ideas. And this coming from a guy whose accused me of not reading books more than once, so apparently prides himself as being an intellectual SW fan whose more into SW Literature than Visuals, yet doesn't seem to comprehend some basic English, even after it's explained to him.
I personally refuse to believe your comprehension is that bad. I know you're really just grasping for straws, and being too arrogant to simply admit you were wrong on this.
Originally posted by ILS
I mean, that's all well and good but I'm still sitting here waiting for a rebuttal.DP, are you one of the distressed Viszla fans Filoni was talking about?
No I'm actually a big Maul fan.
Fine, even though you've been given more than enough of an explanation, I'll give you more of a rebuttal.
Firstly if he's actually saying it was a "fake fight", then that would automatically render his intention of not having Vizsla fans shouting at him pointless. So your interpretation is clearly wrong there.
Secondly and more importantly, he's clearly explained himself. So if it was "an ACT by Maul" then he would have explained that Maul had to make this fight "Look like" it's real so he's holding himself back on every level.
However instead Filoni after saying "That's a whole ACT" goes on about what an important part this fight was, and how he wants TO SHOW Mandalorian armor against a Force User, and how Vizsla deserves to go down properly.
Now let's for a second take your silly interpretation. Filoni doesn't even say Maul's the one whose acting. He just says this fight is a whole Act. So where does he say exactly who is acting and for what purpose? Oh that's right, he doesn't.
He goes on to say, TO DO IT RIGHT, TO MAKE IT EXCITING, THAT'S A WHOLE ACT.
So what you honestly think that Maul is Acting, to make the fight exciting? Even though nobody's even mentioned Maul's name when it comes to this apparent ACTING thing?
He goes on to say "That's a whole Act Because Pre-Vizsla fans are going to mob me in future, if he goes down too easily."
So what then? Pre-Vizsla fans are going to be Happier with Maul putting up A Pretend fight?!
He's just shot himself in the foot there going by your interpretation.
When he says "That Sword fight, that's a whole Act." He means An Act like An Act of a Play. As in a whole big sequence of this episode.
Here's the whole statement for you again. I've underlined the relevant parts. Now without grasping for straws, and taking Act with the correct meaning I've given you read it again, and hopefully you will finally get it:
"We had a pretty big strategy meeting about how we could force Vizsla into the fight so that we could get this One on One battle and really show the Madalrian armor at work against someone that has the Force.
This sword fight, that's a whole Act practically. To do it right, to make it exciting, that's a whole Act, because the fans of Pre-Vizsla are going to mob me at Celebration in the future, if Vizsla goes down too easily. This is not going to be a Boba Fett into the Sarlaac pit.
Vizsla's going to unload everything he has at Maul to try and win this fight."
If you still don't get it then I can't help you. But contrary to your belief, getting in the last rebuttal does not make you win the argument. I've already won this debate. So there's no further need for me to say anything if you keep grasping for straws and giving further silly rebuttals.
Firstly if he's actually saying it was a "fake fight", then that would automatically render his intention of not having Vizsla fans shouting at him pointless. So your interpretation is clearly wrong there.Not necessarily. Viszla fans getting to see Viszla unload his full arsenal in a badass fight is more entertaining and dignifying than losing in a manner comparable to Boba Fett being knocked into a Sarlacc by a blind Han Solo. Filoni stated that Viszla fans would maul him if he went down too easy, which has no bearing on Maul's intentions or how hard he was trying.
Secondly and more importantly, he's clearly explained himself. So if it was "an ACT by Maul" then he would have explained that Maul had to make this fight "Look like" it's real so he's holding himself back on every level.To be honest it kind of goes without saying that Maul was the one putting on an act. Viszla was only fighting Maul, therefore the only one who would be putting on an act would be Maul.However instead Filoni after saying "That's a whole ACT" goes on about what an important part this fight was, and how he wants TO SHOW Mandalorian armor against a Force User, and how Vizsla deserves to go down properly.
He wasn't saying "act" in the context of it being a very important act in a sequence of events. He was saying "act" in the context of Maul acting like the fight was exciting in order for Viszla to put up a fight and not die too easily for the sake of his fans.
Maul puts on an act, Viszla gets to have his fight, and then he dies without his fans being upset at him being another Boba into the Sarlacc. Has nothing to do with it being an "Important ACT" ect, and the coolness of seeing Mando armor against a Force User also has no bearing on how hard Maul was trying.
Now let's for a second take your silly interpretation. Filoni doesn't even say Maul's the one whose acting. He just says this fight is a whole Act. So where does he say exactly who is acting and for what purpose? Oh that's right, he doesn't.Who else would be putting on the act that allows the fight to look more exciting than it should? Viszla? Savage? Bo Katan maybe?
He goes on to say, TO DO IT RIGHT, TO MAKE IT EXCITING, THAT'S A WHOLE ACT.Yup. He says before what you quotes "this sword fight - that's an act".
So what you honestly think that Maul is Acting, to make the fight exciting?Now he's getting it.
Even though nobody's even mentioned Maul's name when it comes to this apparent ACTING thing?Who the hell else would be putting on the act to make it look exciting?
He goes on to say "That's a whole Act Because Pre-Vizsla fans are going to mob me in future, if he goes down too easily."They'd be happier than if Maul took him out in seconds, which was why he referenced the embarrassment of the Boba Fett example.So what then? Pre-Vizsla fans are going to be Happier with Maul putting up A Pretend fight?!
He's just shot himself in the foot there going by your interpretation.He has a tendency to do that anyway.
When he says "That Sword fight, that's a whole Act." He means An Act like An Act of a Play. As in a whole big sequence of this episode.You can tell from his tone of his voice and the context of what he's saying that he isn't just saying "this is an important act in the episode". He's saying the sword fight itself is an act, that is being "done right to look exciting", an act that is being done so Viszla doesn't die too easily for his fans sake. Only Maul could have been doing the acting. He's referring to pretence, not a simple deed being done.
Here's the whole statement for you again. I've underlined the relevant parts. Now without grasping for straws, and taking Act with the correct meaning I've given you read it again, and hopefully you will finally get itSeeing the Mandalorian Armor go up against a Force User has no bearing on Maul's intentions.
Him referring to the sword fight exclusively as an "act" further indicates that Viszla has no business sword fighting Maul.
The Sarlacc reference was in reference to how easily Viszla would die, not how Maul chose to conduct himself in the fight.
f you still don't get it then I can't help you. But contrary to your belief, getting in the last rebuttal does not make you win the argument. I've already won this debate. So there's no further need for me to say anything if you keep grasping for straws and giving further silly rebuttals.😮💨
Originally posted by DARTH POWER
No I'm actually a big Maul fan.Fine, even though you've been given more than enough of an explanation, I'll give you more of a rebuttal.
Firstly if he's actually saying it was a "fake fight", then that would automatically render his intention of not having Vizsla fans shouting at him pointless. So your interpretation is clearly wrong there.
Secondly and more importantly, he's clearly explained himself. So if it was "an ACT by Maul" then he would have explained that Maul had to make this fight "Look like" it's real so he's holding himself back on every level.
However instead Filoni after saying "That's a whole ACT" goes on about what an important part this fight was, and how he wants TO SHOW Mandalorian armor against a Force User, and how Vizsla deserves to go down properly.
Now let's for a second take your silly interpretation. Filoni doesn't even say Maul's the one whose acting. He just says this fight is a whole Act. So where does he say exactly who is acting and for what purpose? Oh that's right, he doesn't.
He goes on to say, TO DO IT RIGHT, TO MAKE IT EXCITING, THAT'S A WHOLE ACT.
So what you honestly think that Maul is Acting, to make the fight exciting? Even though nobody's even mentioned Maul's name when it comes to this apparent ACTING thing?
He goes on to say "That's a whole Act Because Pre-Vizsla fans are going to mob me in future, if he goes down too easily."
So what then? Pre-Vizsla fans are going to be Happier with Maul putting up A Pretend fight?!
He's just shot himself in the foot there going by your interpretation.
When he says "That Sword fight, that's a whole Act." He means An Act like An Act of a Play. As in a whole big sequence of this episode.
Here's the whole statement for you again. I've underlined the relevant parts. Now without grasping for straws, and taking Act with the correct meaning I've given you read it again, and hopefully you will finally get it:
"We had a pretty big strategy meeting about how we could force Vizsla into the fight so that we could get this One on One battle and really show the Madalrian armor at work against someone that has the Force.
This sword fight, that's a whole Act practically. To do it right, to make it exciting, that's a whole Act, because the fans of Pre-Vizsla are going to mob me at Celebration in the future, if Vizsla goes down too easily. This is not going to be a Boba Fett into the Sarlaac pit.
Vizsla's going to unload everything he has at Maul to try and win this fight."
If you still don't get it then I can't help you. But contrary to your belief, getting in the last rebuttal does not make you win the argument. I've already won this debate. So there's no further need for me to say anything if you keep grasping for straws and giving further silly rebuttals.
👆
Pretty much. By act he was referring to an act of the show not Maul putting on one.
Do people really think that this use of the word "act" is just referring to "a thing done" or "a deed", going by the dictionary definition, opposed to pretence?
If Filoni wanted to highlight that the sword fight was an important part of the episode and series (which he actually did already), he would have said "this is an important act in the episode".
He wouldn't be saying
"this whole sword fight, that's an act, practically, - to do it right, to make it exciting, that's an act"and here's the important part where he explains to us why this is an act, something you don't need to do for "a thing done"
because the fans of Pre-Vizsla are going to mob me at Celebration in the future, if Vizsla goes down too easily.
So let me get this straight. This is an act, which is intentionally being done right, and being made exciting, because if it wasn't "done right" and "made exciting" fans of Viszla would be upset at Viszla dying in a manner comparable in embarrassment to Boba Fett being taken out by a blind Han Solo - and it's being used in the context of "a thing done"? No, it's being used in it's definition of pretence. "Doing an act right". If it wasn't pretence the act wouldn't be being "done right" - it would just be done. There is no need to do something right if it's a simple act. If you're putting on an act you need to do it right. That's the important difference.