Originally posted by Deronn_solo
Kenobi getting dominated by Maul wasn't a momentary laps, it was flat-out one person opposing their superior power on the other. In this case, Maul being the former while Kenobi, unfortunately, being the latter.
DC's double standards are quite amazing. On one hand we have Kenobi getting ragdolled when fighting 1vs2, and after a shipcrash, and when his defenses were visibly down. On the other hand we have Starkiller being ragdolled twice in the Wii version, once in the PC version, the prima guide backing up both sources, and Witwer acknowledging that Vader can wreck Starkiller and he was gaming him in TFU II, and underestimating him in TFU I.
And which one he thinks is a clear sign of domination? The former.
Originally posted by cs_zoltan
DC's double standards are quite amazing. On one hand we have Kenobi getting ragdolled when fighting 1vs2, and after a shipcrash, and when his defenses were visibly down. On the other hand we have Starkiller being ragdolled twice in the Wii version, once in the PC version, the prima guide backing up both sources, and Witwer acknowledging that Vader can wreck Starkiller and he was gaming him in TFU II, and underestimating him in TFU I.And which one he thinks is a clear sign of domination? The former.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
I mean it was
A. Kenobi who had the rest of season 5+season 6+dark desciple+the outer rim seiges to grow
B. Maul's only done this witch circumstantial factors at play
1. If you can actually prove he grew enough to bridge the sizable gap that was there at the time of the ragdoll, I'll buy it. Until then, it's nothing but baseless conjecture with little to actually back it up.
2. What were those favorable circumstances? LMAO. Kenobi ran up and was flat out chocked for an extended period of time while Maul was fighting, maneuvering around, etc and Kenobi couldn't break the hold until Maul willingly released him.
When did starkiller break out of vader's hold? I really hope you aren't basing this off ant's cav with elimist.
That was my interpretation of the image until AZ's post made me re-watch the video and see otherwise. However, just throwing someone once that fought through a horde of enemies prior, doesn't prove superiority, lmao. It's literally like saying Yoda is > Palpatine because he momentarily broke through Palpatine defenses and sent him flying like a ragdoll.
There's no proof off a monetary lapse.
Yes, and a 2-3 seconds throwing doesn't prove Vader can dominate him either.
Furthermore in the tfu comic, vader was able to dominate the crap out of marek right before(as in like the same day) marek went to fee the rebels.
Scan, pls.
IIRC, in the novel, during their final battle aboard the Deathstar, both were trading TK attacks [that impacted with the power of jack hammers or something like that] and neither was really able to gain any sort of ground. So this so called domination in the comic is something I need to see.
And galen marek has no relevance here.
Given Marek is stated to be 'Killers inferior and Vader couldn't dominate him, yeah it kinda is.
___
All in all, prove me wrong - I don't care if Vader can dominate Starkiller, as I don't like the latter as a character anyway. But the crux of this thread is ranking Luke, and you still didn't comment on two of my points: What makes DE Luke > Vader and what makes DE Luke > Starkiller?
Originally posted by Deronn_solo
1.2. What were those favorable circumstances? LMAO. Kenobi ran up and was flat out chocked for an extended period of time while Maul was fighting, maneuvering around, etc and Kenobi couldn't break the hold until Maul willingly released him.
If you can actually prove he grew enough to bridge the sizable gap that was there at the time of the ragdoll, I'll buy it. Until then, it's nothing but baseless conjecture with little to actually back it up.[/B]
Originally posted by Deronn_solo
That was my interpretation of the image until AZ's post made me re-watch the video and see otherwise. However, just throwing someone once that fought through a horde of enemies prior, doesn't prove superiority, lmao. It's literally like saying Yoda is > Palpatine because he momentarily broke through Palpatine defenses and sent him flying like a ragdoll.Yes, and a 2-3 seconds throwing doesn't prove Vader can dominate him either.
Scan, pls.
IIRC, in the novel, during their final battle aboard the Deathstar, both were trading TK attacks [that impacted with the power of jack hammers or something like that] and neither was really able to gain any sort of ground. So this so called domination in the comic is something I need to see.
Given Marek is stated to be 'Killers inferior and Vader couldn't dominate him, yeah it kinda is.
___
All in all, prove me wrong - I don't care if Vader can dominate Starkiller, as I don't like the latter as a character anyway. But the crux of this thread is ranking Luke, and you still didn't comment on two of my points: What makes DE Luke > Vader and what makes DE Luke > Starkiller?
Vader chokes marek from page 98-99
Originally posted by cs_zoltan
DC's double standards are quite amazing. On one hand we have Kenobi getting ragdolled when fighting 1vs2, and after a shipcrash, and when his defenses were visibly down. On the other hand we have Starkiller being ragdolled twice in the Wii version, once in the PC version, the prima guide backing up both sources, and Witwer acknowledging that Vader can wreck Starkiller and he was gaming him in TFU II, and underestimating him in TFU I.And which one he thinks is a clear sign of domination? The former.
honestly, your effort to display me as some kind of dishonest debater while completely ignoring exactly what my argument is, is pretty pathetic, tbh.
Originally posted by cs_zoltan
Then defend yourself.
I'm pretty sure we've discussed this subject multiple times in the past before, why should I bother doing it again?
If you want to perceive it as a double standard, fine, be my guest. Just don't go classlessly mentioning in completely unrelated threads.
It was hardly unrelated. You said first that Vader ragdolling Starkiller was just an opportune attack. And I challenged your arbitrary claims on what is opportune and what isn't by the most obvious example I had.
Shit slinging aside what do you base it on that Vader can't dominate Starkiller? Besides the TFU I duel, which is irrelevant. I tell you why if you insist on it.
It was hardly unrelated. You said first that Vader ragdolling Starkiller was just an opportune attack. And I challenged your arbitrary claims on what is opportune and what isn't by the most obvious example I had.
Yeah, it pretty much is.
I don't know he we can compare Starkiller getting grabbed and tossed for 2-3 seconds, Maul actively owning Kenobi for several pages while dodging attacks and shit. Defenses down or not [which is retarded with in itself], he had sufficient enough time to power through it but he failed until Maul let go.
The two showings are hardly comparable.
What the f-uck are you even talking about? Only because they first shown Kenobi 4 pages after the ragdoll doesn't mean it lasted that long. That's a baseless speculation. It lasted 1 page, and as soon as Maul was attacked he dropped Kenobi. You can tell that easily from the visuals, Maul no longer has the TK visual around his hand.
As for Vader, him choking Galen was longer than 2-3 seconds in the Wii version. On top of that Witwer confirms that Vader was holding back in TFU II, as well as undersestimating Galen in TFU I. Also in TFU I Galen unbalances Vader with dun moch, so him not ragdolling Galen there and then is not a compelling case.
On top of it all Witwer also said that in TFU III Vader would've wrecked Starkiller in a fair fight at the start of the game, showing a vast gap between them in a short time after TFU II. Now you could say that TFU III never happened, but it still shows authorial intent. They always had Vader as more powerful, and only letting him lose circumstantially, going as far as they didn't even want to have Vader as the main villain in TFU I, but a secret apprentice, because they didn't think Galen should beat Vader.
Originally posted by Deronn_solo
He's physically dominating yes, but his Force feats in nearly every other category is inferior. Particularly, telekinetic power.
Physical augmentation is derived from one's overall command of the Force, and Luke shits on both Vader and Starkiller with his speed and strength. Logically, he'd be at least in their league in applications of TK.
And who can lift the biggest pile of shit is hardly ever a factor, unless the opponents are in the ragdoll range or close to it.
And when did he run 10 miles in two seconds?
From the audio drama we discover that the Storm ate the ship in about six seconds. So when it had eaten half, three seconds would have passed. In that three seconds, Luke had run across the entire distance of the ship while battling Stormtroopers at the same time, activated the controls of an Imperial Shuttle and flown off.