Originally posted by SunRazer
Not really. Some people have been putting AotC Anakin as comparable to Dooku for quite a while, with Dooku being the one getting the sudden raise recently rather than Anakin.I mean, I just find it funny. Some of you peeps (not saying you specifically) criticize PT fans for wanking characters when it turns out that they have showings or accolades that you had no idea about. Instead of coming on board with the fact that you might not know everything about the character and having intelligent discussion with the newfound info, you then attempt damage control by producing little works of satire (ie. AotC Anakin vs Valkorion). And then you wonder why SW debating's gone to shit, because it's no longer about the better argument, but character preferences.
Well it seems to me like it's a combination of PT hyping and SWTOR low-balling/hating. Especially when AOTC Anakin being roughly on par with Arcann seems to me to be a pretty new view (I haven't seen it argued much if at all until like the past couple days, though I could've just been unaware), especially when there are quite a few who would put Arcann as a Vader level combatant. I'm not really opposed to characters getting sudden rises in placement, but when it really seems like the rise is more so at the expense of an entire era and the goal seems to be to ridicule and bring down an era as a whole, that's where I'll be resistant because it feels like the whole point of the arguments is to diminish an era that the person/people hate rather than objectively trying to raise a certain individual character (SWTOR being the era in question here, which people seem to viciously hate).
And especially when we've got stuff floating around right now like Dooku one-shotting Arcann, Dooku being above Valkorion, Darth Bane curbstomping AOTC Anakin (who some have suggested can match Arcann who I have above Darth Bane, and really haven't seen a good case made that Bane is decisively above Arcann...), Darth Bane stomping Arcann, the Hero of Tython being unimpressive, Arcann being decisively sub-ROTS Obi-Wan in Force power etc. (not necessarily stuff that you believe or have said personally, but what I've heard from at least one if not more users on each point) and it more just feels like people have an agenda against SWTOR characters because they don't like SWTOR, rather than honestly just hyping a PT character.
Because I'm really not against the PT being hyped up more and more, but if its at the sole expense of SWTOR characters, something feels off.
Also quite a few of my threads are trying to determine the extent of the new-found hype for certain characters (i.e. multiple people asserting that AOTC Anakin roughly = Arcann, so I'll make a few AOTC Anakin and Arcann threads pitting them against other powerful combatants to see where the limits are). I try not to make troll threads, though I'm sure some of them might be perceived that way, for whatever reason.
yea nfactor, when almost half of this forum is still arguing crap like valk>yoda, arcann>vader, valk~de sidious, vitiate>plagueis, malgus>dooku, revan>anakin ect. I find it hard to sympathize with the, tor era is getting lowballed!!! view
stwor used to be rated ridiculously high, with yoda being less powerful than valk or revan being able to stomp anakin being generally accepted facts(despite largely the same evidence being available that the opposite was true) up untill less than a year ago.
Now people are not ignoring or baselessly dismissing evidence anymore.
Originally posted by nfactor1995
Well it seems to me like it's a combination of PT hyping and SWTOR low-balling/hating. Especially when AOTC Anakin being roughly on par with Arcann seems to me to be a pretty new view (I haven't seen it argued much if at all until like the past couple days, though I could've just been unaware), especially when there are quite a few who would put Arcann as a Vader level combatant. I'm not really opposed to characters getting sudden rises in placement, but when it really seems like the rise is more so at the expense of an entire era and the goal seems to be to ridicule and bring down an era as a whole, that's where I'll be resistant because it feels like the whole point of the arguments is to diminish an era that the person/people hate rather than objectively trying to raise a certain individual character (SWTOR being the era in question here, which people seem to viciously hate).And especially when we've got stuff floating around right now like Dooku one-shotting Arcann, Dooku being above Valkorion, Darth Bane curbstomping AOTC Anakin (who some have suggested can match Arcann who I have above Darth Bane, and really haven't seen a good case made that Bane is decisively above Arcann...), Darth Bane stomping Arcann, the Hero of Tython being unimpressive, Arcann being decisively sub-ROTS Obi-Wan in Force power etc. (not necessarily stuff that you believe or have said personally, but what I've heard from at least one if not more users on each point) and it more just feels like people have an agenda against SWTOR characters because they don't like SWTOR, rather than honestly just hyping a PT character.
Because I'm really not against the PT being hyped up more and more, but if its at the sole expense of SWTOR characters, something feels off.
Also quite a few of my threads are trying to determine the extent of the new-found hype for certain characters (i.e. multiple people asserting that AOTC Anakin roughly = Arcann, so I'll make a few AOTC Anakin and Arcann threads pitting them against other powerful combatants to see where the limits are). I try not to make troll threads, though I'm sure some of them might be perceived that way, for whatever reason.
It's easy to play the PT hype card since it's the "dominant" era at the moment, but for pretty much every claim you've named there there's equally absurd claims from the TORies. Not exactly here to play to agendas, so I'll skip that, but I reckon it'd help if we started basing our arguments on evidence more than just assuming that other people know what we're talking about and making claims that might end up looking ridiculous.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
yea nfactor, when almost half of this forum is still arguing crap like valk>yoda, arcann>vader, valk~de sidious, vitiate>plagueis, malgus>dooku, revan>anakin ect. I find it hard to sympathize with the, tor era is getting lowballed!!! viewstwor used to be rated ridiculously high, with yoda being less powerful than valk or revan being able to stomp anakin being generally accepted facts(despite largely the same evidence being available that the opposite was true) up untill less than a year ago.
Now people are not ignoring or baselessly dismissing evidence anymore.
Revan>Anakin and Revan>Vader are not at all factually incorrect or invalid positions to hold. For the rest of your matchups, I would agree with how you would view the outcome (Yoda>Plagueis>Valk, Dooku>Malgus, Vader>Arcann).
Originally posted by nfactor1995
Revan>Anakin and Revan>Vader are not at all factually incorrect or invalid positions to hold.
Revan>a Yoda/Sids level duelist with yoda/sids level raw power and yoda+speed/strength is beyond laughable.
Anakin is factually yoda/sids level, revan is factually far below yoda/sids inferior.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
I didn't say anything about revan>vader.Revan>a Yoda/Sids level duelist with yoda/sids level raw power and yoda+speed/strength is beyond laughable.
Anakin is factually yoda/sids level, revan is factually far below yoda/sids inferior.
Anakin is Yoda/Sids level at full potential, which we only saw on Mortis and maybe you could argue we saw it against Dooku. Baseline ROTS Anakin definitely isn't Sidious tier. More like Dooku tier.
Originally posted by nfactor1995
Anakin is Yoda/Sids level at full potential, which we only saw on Mortis and maybe you could argue we saw it against Dooku. Baseline ROTS Anakin definitely isn't Sidious tier. More like Dooku tier.
Originally posted by Rockydonovang
1. Anakin at full potential is vastly above both. Why are you brining potential into this?
2. Anakin never surpassed them but he was very much on their level per numerous objective statements and authoritative quotes.
Wait, is the Anakin you are referring to here Knightfall Anakin?
Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Reread my statement and try again.
I might've worded it differently but I meant the exact same thing. Equating Anakin to a 9 or equating a 9 to Anakin; the point is that once you're a 9, that's it. There's no more difference except in style.
And the point is that Gillard said it, not me. I'm citing him as evidence because again, his word sits above yours.
If anything else was lost in translation you'd have to explain it to me.
Originally posted by SunRazer
I might've worded it differently but I meant the exact same thing. Equating Anakin to a 9 or equating a 9 to Anakin; the point is that once you're a 9, that's it. There's no more difference except in style.And the point is that Gillard said it, not me. I'm citing him as evidence because again, his word sits above yours.
If anything else was lost in translation you'd have to explain it to me.
Something that's contradicted. I'm well aware that Gillard's word sits above mine. If his word is actively contradicted by G canon then I don't care.