Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Point still stands that in Future of the Force she had no problem being overwhelming and aggressive.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
I provided evidence and you just called it "dumbass", I think it's pretty clear who has the better argument.
I also fail to see why they'd just be standing there.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
A nexus you have no idea how powerful it is or how it even works considering Gilroy himself admitted he isn't the guy who's deciding about things like that.
The problem here is that Maul with an indeterminately large dark side boost is above Ahsoka by an indeterminate amount, and you think that on its own is solid enough grounds to suggest that Ahsoka and Maul can't possibly be roughly on par?
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
There could be multiple explanations regarding Ahsoka performing worse then in Future of the Force, it's hardly conclusive evidence that they experienced negative effects from the nexus.
The problem with this argument is that you were the one who argued that there couldn't be much of an effect if the nexus didn't weaken the lightsiders, effectively asserting that the absence of an effect supports your theory, then when Beni suggested a negative effect, you said it couldn't be definitively tied to the nexus.
The reason you pushing this doesn't make much sense is that while you could argue the performance disparity wasn't a result of the nexus, that disparity itself existing makes it ambiguous enough that you can't prove the absence of a negative nexus effect against the lightsiders, which takes away your ability to prove the notion that the nexus had little to no impact.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Anything can be a time period, it's "an amount of time". Context man, context. The Emperor is theoretically available since he isn't trapped on a planet.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
Indeed, he just ragdolled the 7th sister when he got serious...The 7th Sister lasted 50 seconds against Ahsoka in Future of the Force, that's hardly impressive for Ahsoka.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9
"far more logical" without actual evidence? Good job
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9It's a logical explanation, because it's obvious that not every character will perform as effectively against one opponent than another would. As Beni pointed out, Maul's Juyo would have been incredibly effective against the Inquisitors because of its extremely complicated move set, and the chance that the Inquisitors may have been particularly off-guard to deal with the Sith Lord's incredibly brutal offense that Ahsoka doesn't really employ.
First, there is no objective evidence that Maul's fighting style was the reason he performed better then Ahsoka & Kanan against the Inquisitors in Twilight of the Apprentice.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9She's visibly not as aggressive in "Future of the Force", and actually frequently pauses her offensive for dialogue in that fight with the Seventh Sister, not keeping any sustained barrage going. There's also the fact that she was likely passing up potential lethal openings given her unwillingness to kill the Inquisitors.
Second, Ahsoka's fighting style is at least as aggressive and overwhelming as Maul's, looking at how she in Future of the Force was the aggressor when fighting two Inquisitors.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9So, what were Ahsoka and Maul doing for over a minute if not fighting? Was Ahsoka just listening to Maul drone on about his evil plans? And the lack of mobility between the two in the first unseen portion can very well point to parity between them.
The fight between Maul and Ahsoka isn't long enough to be conclusive evidence, they fought for something around 20 seconds without any interruption while for example Darth Vader only began pushing any kind of advantage against Ahsoka after 20 seconds in their fight. Now before you're going to bring up the fight lasted another extra minute, we never see them starting to fight when the screen cuts to Ezra climbing the temple while when we get back to them (after the minute) they're standing in the exact same position as before with the only difference being that they are in a bladelock. This would indicate that they've only started to fight recently because when we look at the rest of the fight, both fighters are jumping all over the place (clearly showing that neither of them are stationary fighters) so we can accurately extrapolate that they haven't fought for long when we cut back to them after the 1 minute break. So Maul being significally above Ahsoka isn't contradicted, not even remotely.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9I think it's pretty obvious that a dark side hotspot is pretty much a nexus, come on now. The Inquisitors were likely using a lightsaber assisted Force flight ability that they were able to accomplish because said dark side nexus. I feel like these aren't far-fetched conclusions to make, and honestly pretending to need more evidence as to how the Inquisitors could all of a sudden fly (when it's mentioned in the context of talking about dark side hotspots) is being a little obtuse.
1. There is not conclusive evidence on that either, Gilroy commented during DragonCon that it was a "Dark Side hotspot" and it "allow the Inquisitors to fly" but he also added that he isn't the right person to ask that kind of questions to. We have no idea how the Inquisitors could fly in the first place, let alone that Malachor actively enhanced the lightsaber combat skill of Dark Side users while also taking into account that none of the Light Side users (Ahsoka, Ezra, Kanan) experienced any negative effects that should come along with the nexus.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9She isn't a Jedi, and she refrained from killing them because she made the conclusion that more Inquisitors would enter the equation if she did, which would have increased the Rebels' problems. I think I should point out that she even refrained from killing the Fifth Brother when she destroyed his lightsaber, so that's even more evidence that she passes up killing blows when against the Inquisitors, even on Malachor.
2. She preferred not to kill the Inquisitors but she never said that she wouldn't do it when it was necessary, same kind of mentality most Jedi have. It also didn't stop her from incapacitating (and pushing advantages when she had the chance) the 5th Brother and 7th Sister in Future of the Force so I very much doubt it would hinder her more then any Jedi in the mythos.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9I think this has been covered.
3. Well it actually does, the entire context (where, how,...) is similar if not exactly the same in both situations (even their fighting style) so give me one good reason why a perfectly valid equation with the same reference point (Inquisitors, environment,...) shouldn't be correct?
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9"Time period" does not mean season 2, the "time period" would be the general era, in which Filoni clarifies that in this era, Ahsoka's only true superiors are Vader and the Emperor. Maul being the logicial choice to protect Ezra against Inquisitors also isn't some definitive statement of superiority over Ahsoka you're desperately trying to make it out to be.
The thing is, Filoni's quote never implied that Ahsoka > Maul, you pulled that part of the interview completely out of it's context. He (Filoni) is talking why Ahsoka is absent for most of the rest of the season (=> rest of season 2 = context) and that the main reason is that there isn't the right opposition available at that time period (= context = rest of season 2), which is absolutely correct since Maul is trapped on Malachor and thus only the Emperor and Vader are possibly available to fight her. Quite the opposite is actually claimed on the episode guide of TotA where it confirms that Maul's the strongest member of the group (which included Ahsoka) and leaves out the possibility that they would be on par (since it refers to it as "THE logical choice"😉.
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9You're trying to peddle some ABC logic with the Inquisitors and you're latching on to a quote that doesn't prove anything. Ahsoka stalemated Maul for over a minute, and your argument against that involves accepting some ridiculous idea that Maul and Ahsoka stood still for well over a minute and just decided to start fighting a couple seconds before the screen cut back to them.
In the end all the evidence is pointing at Maul being superior, accolades (episode guide) & feats (Inquisitors). Everything you brought up is either reaching (e.g. Ahsoka not wanting to kill the Inquisitors, Maul's fighting style which would be better suited to counter the Inquisitors) or based on personal interpretation (e.g. Maul fighting with Ahsoka for the full minute offscreen).
This pleases me. Maul's fall has turned into an endless loop as he drops through the dephs of a bottomless pit. 🙂
Also
Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
... I've literally been saying this from day f*cking one and everybody disregards it but when you say it it's taken seriously?What the actual f*ck?
( Not mad at you DMB. Just the nonsense that goes on here. )
Originally posted by DarthDuelist9https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy-QbberpXM
Great, the Ahsoka brigade has awakend.