Originally posted by Col. Valerian
Lol, you're seriously going to base your assessment on a mere kick? You have to be kidding me.
I genuinely find the notion of taking any of that fight serious after Sidious had both Savage and Maul choked out hilarious tbh
When you have both dead to rights and decide to let them go and "**** it, let's duel", you're not taking either all that seriously
"A mere kick" that was a good enough placed kick to pass through the best Sith duelist in history?
Mauls saber duel with Sidious puts him above some of the greatest duelists in history as it is. Agen Kolar and Kit Fisto were the finest swordsman of their generation, a generation of 10,000 Jedi. They get a lot of shit for their loss to Sidious, but the fact is Sidious is simply that good, and Maul actually kept up with him, even if it was only for 10-20 seconds...
You're honestly going to need Filoni to outright say Sidious was taking Maul seriously at any point in that fight for me to buy it
Its possible, but his general ability to end it at any time he wanted, as shown by his opening move and his fairly casual usage of TK through out the entire duel tells me he was being vindictive more than anything
Nothing concrete exists in the scene that I remember that'd tell me otherwise :hmm
Originally posted by Col. Valerian
You seriously think Maul or Ventress are superior to the guy who defeated Vitiate...?
Spoiler:
PS. You clearly need to grasp the current trends on this forum, that are based more on logic and evidence than ever before imho.
E.g. nexus feats are no longer treated as representative of one's power, more in depth analysis is made in relation to the circumstances of fights etc.
Originally posted by Selenial
"A mere kick" that was a good enough placed kick to pass through the best Sith duelist in history?Mauls saber duel with Sidious puts him above some of the greatest duelists in history as it is. Agen Kolar and Kit Fisto were the finest swordsman of their generation, a generation of 10,000 Jedi. They get a lot of shit for their loss to Sidious, but the fact is Sidious is simply that good, and Maul actually kept up with him, even if it was only for 10-20 seconds...
Sidious was toying with them. It's so clear it truly baffles me how people take this fight seriously. He wasn't even trying hard, could've ended the duel at any moment. He was having fun. That's it.
And even if he wasn't, and Maul did manage to land the kick, so what? He landed a kick, he didn't even come close to winning. By a long, long shot.
'Greatest duelists in history' is a massive overstatement. They were amongst the finest swordsmen of the Order. It's definitely something, but not enough to put them remotely above or in the same level as HoT.
In the words of Satele Shan: "You are our greatest warrior... And our best hope."
Herself included. Someone who managed to battle a powerful (though not peak) Malgus evenly and actually put him on his ass. What does that tell you about HoT's prowess as a warrior? Pretty high praise, I'd say. The Knight story revolves around the notion that the main protagonist is a Jedi who mainly focuses on mastery of lightsaber and TK. He certainly kills a good number of powerful Sith throughout the story, Vitiate included. Nothing suggests Maul is as good a combatant as HoT overall, even as deadly and skilled as he is.
Originally posted by Stigma
Apparently, I'm just going to reiterate the point mentioned above.
But yeah, Maul is a superior duelist going by feats. He might very well be more powerful in the force too.PS. You clearly need to grasp the current trends on this forum, that are based more on logic and evidence than ever before imho.
E.g. nexus feats are no longer treated as representative of one's power, more in depth analysis is made in relation to the circumstances of fights etc.
There is more than enough evidence to suggest HoT is a powerhouse. It's unbelievable to me that you'd say it's very possible for Maul to be more powerful in the Force.
Originally posted by Stigma
PS. You clearly need to grasp the current trends on this forum, that are based more on logic and evidence than ever before imho.
E.g. nexus feats are no longer treated as representative of one's power, more in depth analysis is made in relation to the circumstances of fights etc.
Eh
You guys do ok
Baffled by plenty of your precedents (seemingly no powerscaling between skills, leading the wild fluctuations in stats [like, you seem to go along with Starkiller's TK (would require energy comparable to high end nukes to alter that StarDestroyer's trajectory) well enough, but cite a bit feat like him incinerating some Storm Troopers with Force Lightning (a gigajoule feat at best being generous)?]), but so long as its not spacebattles (where perfect defense is taken literally and hyperbole seems to run rampant) I don't really feel the need to prod them :hmm
Originally posted by ChaosTheory123
EhYou guys do ok
Baffled by plenty of your precedents (seemingly no powerscaling between skills, leading the wild fluctuations in stats [like, you seem to go along with Starkiller's TK (would require energy comparable to high end nukes to alter that StarDestroyer's trajectory) well enough, but cite a bit feat like him incinerating some Storm Troopers with Force Lightning (a gigajoule feat at best being generous)?]), but so long as its not spacebattles (where perfect defense is taken literally and hyperbole seems to run rampant) I don't really feel the need to prod them :hmm
Your point is that SK has crazy feats? :maybe