Rebels Ahsoka vs SoD Maul

Started by Rockydonovang5 pages
Rockydonovang freedom fighter

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Where did I say it wasn't referring to sword fights?

I suggest you read my interpretation of Filoni's comments on "growth" again, and then get back to me.

Because it's been explained to you many times by myself and others, including on your own thread on the issue on comic vine.


That they learned something? Yea, them leraning something that helped them grow as combatants would make sense as that fits with the context of their statement. It still indicates they're better. Any other kind of growth here can be dismissed as there's nothing referring to that kind of growth in the context of the statement.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Pablo Hidalgo clearly stated he can't confirm if Malachor amped Vader's and Maul's performance over the Jedi. And yet miraculously you seem to know something the head of the canon group doesn't.

No, Hildago said anything about an inability to confirm this. What he did was acknowledge it being a possibility, one which we have confirmation of with Henry Gilroy
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Now sure you could argue that it's a possibility that we should all be aware of, so Maul and Ahsoka stalemating probably favours Ahsoka more, but stop making out it's some kind of fact that Ahsoka was clearly disadvantaged in her fights against Maul and Vader.

Something being possible does not exclude it from being true. Hildago has confirmed the possibility, Gilroy has indicated the possibility to be true. In order for there to be a contradiction here, Hidalgo has to outright state the nexus was "only a possibility.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
LOL, so my interpretation of pretty clear cut source material quotes should be dismissed, but your interpretation of vague director comments are somehow canon?

It's "pretty clear cut" in your opinion. And you've yet to substantiate give a reason why it's "super clear cut".

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Okay buddy, but I think you're gonna have to up your game if you actually want to convince people that Ahsoka is factually > Maul, or that Rebels Mau is factually > SOD Maul Lol.

Given that I've provided evidence, and you haven't, I'm not the one that needs to step up here. You like making claims, now back your claims up.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
I never said it's stated Rebels Maul has grown weaker. But Maul thinks he's past his prime

Maul never says anything regarding his progression or regression as a combatant. It would be nice if you could substantiate your claims with evidence that actually exists.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
, Witwer talks of Maul's prime being in his past

In a statement which never refers to combative ability. Lets try and providing relevant evidence for a change.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
, Filoni and Witwer both call Rebels Maul "broken" and "stuck in the past".

Indeed, as a character, which can also be said of TCW Maul.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
And sure that's all speculative and not evidence.

It's not even speculative, neither of the quotes you provided say what you're trying to say they say.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
But then you do excel using vague comments as evidence.

You call these comments vague, and have yet to provide an alternative explanation which doesn't blatantly ignore the context of the quote.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Fact is though most people here just don't believe SOD Maul would be as clumsy and desperate in combat as we've seen Rebels Maul be

We've seen Maul struggle with non force sensitives, pirates, and a dog. Harping on low showings is a horrible way to construct an argument.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
, and we all know SOD/The Lawless Maul has far far better feats going for him.

Rebels Maul is in the range of a force user who's feats several years pre-prime trample all over anything SOD Maul has done.

You've yet to explain why contending with TCW Kenobi is more impressive than contending with Ahsoka who is close to an ROTS Kenobi+ duelist.

Using Maul vs Sidious doesn't work as Sidious wasn't even fighting at full speed with Maul which renders the showing a non showing.

Not to mention that even if I grant you Rebels Maul being<SOD Maul, all you would have managed to prove is that Maul could possibly beat Ahsoka, not that she would.

Arguing that Maul would beat Ahsoka remains an unarguable stance.

Rockydonovang freedom fighter

@ Kurk, I can't quote and reply for some reason, so make do with the formatting

1. That Maul is stronger than Ahsoka in terms of striking strength is baseless and contradicted. ROTS Ahsoka was able to hold ROTS Maul in place and in Rebels we see Ahsoka send Maul flailing backwards. Force augmentaion can both compensate for and even exceed physical degradement. Given Maul managed to improve as a duelist and that older sith like Dooku have remained physiclally superior to their younger selves, we have no reason to think maul has physiclally degraded.

-> Your example with Sidious is bunk as Sidious simultaneously overpowered the strength of both Maul and Oppress.

-> Maul has only ever manhandled Kenobi when he was already a physical and mental wreck. As it is, Kenobi's blows have done more to Maul than vice versa so I'm not sure what comparison you're trying to draw here.

-> Maul tackled Grevious when he caught him by suprise. Ahsoka as a padawan has been able to disorientate him in the midst of a saber duel.

Ahsoka holding Maul in place with her strength vastly pre-prime and then sending him flailing backwards would indicate Ahsoka to be the stronger of the two.

2. Ahsoka managing to exploit her agility against Vader is no different from Vader exploiting his strength to gain an advantage against Ahsoka, something Maul, who Ahsoka has held in place and sent flailing backwards has little chance of replicating.

Kurk Restricted

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
@ Kurk, I can't quote and reply for some reason, so make do with the formatting

[QUOTE=16321837]
1. That Maul is stronger than Ahsoka in terms of striking strength is baseless and contradicted. ROTS Ahsoka was able to hold ROTS Maul in place

The Ahsoka novel? I never read it, but brief encounters don't really mean much. Maul briefly fought Windu and Secura in SoD but that doesn't mean he can handle their strength for an extended period.

and in Rebels we see Ahsoka send Maul flailing backwards.[/b]
Yes, she does, but that doesn't trump all. I can point to times in the late clone-wars where Dooku physically over-powers Anakin, yet the later is also seen over-powering the former. Even though the general consensus is that Anakin is physically more powerful, Dooku is often able to send him flailing too. I'll touch on why in the next point.

Force augmentaion can both compensate for and even exceed physical degradement. Given Maul managed to improve as a duelist and that older sith like Dooku have remained physiclally superior to their younger selves, we have no reason to think maul has physiclally degraded.[/b]

If we can agree that each individual force user has a finite amount of "force reserve" so to speak, based on their level of midichlorians, which regenerates over time, we should also be able to agree that a biologically weaker user will have to continuously spend more of their reserve augmenting their speed and strength than a biologically superior one.
The bigger the discrepancy, the faster the weaker user will experience force exhaustion.

Dooku being stronger than his former self is due to the power-growth he experienced when he embraced the dark-side, not to any biological growth as you've said. That doesn't necessarily mean that older Dooku would beat his younger self in a test of endurance because he is spending more of his reserves just to sustain his body every second of the fight than his younger and more fit self.

Let's use two relatively evenly matched force users like TCW Dooku and Anakin. Let their strength in the force be 25,000 and 15,000 respectively (these are arbitrary, unit-less figures used only for analogous purposes).

From a strictly biological stance, meaning if neither were force sensitives, Anakin would by far be the superior combatant due to his physique. Because both are force users though, they are able to augment their physical abilities.

Let's say that Dooku has to expend 30 units every second for every 2 units Anakin spends just to match his natural strength and speed. And remember, being that he's an old man he will tire faster and have to spend even more energy as he fatigues more, so really it should exponential.

Dooku's remaining units = -(30)x(seconds elapsed)+ total reserve 25,000
(y=mx+b)
vs
Anakin's remaining units = -(2)x(seconds elapsed) + total reserve 15,000

Whereas Anakin wouldn't be spending any units on augmentation and wouldn't naturally tire nearly as quickly. If he did choose to augment, Dooku would need to factor that in to his passive units spent to match him.

The point is that even though Dooku may be the more powerful force user, meaning he can afford to spend more units that Anakin in quick bursts (e.g TK, lightning, etc) since he has a greater reserve, in a pro-longed physical combat setting where he has to passively spend energy augmenting his physicals more than Anakin, he will eventually intercept him and become the weaker of the users.

Apply this now to Maul and Tano. It is possible for Tano to over-power Maul in a short burst at the cost of expending more units. If she continuously tried to over-power him she'd suffer from force exhaustion. Remember her fight with Vader and my points in the first post. She was able to match Vader in the beginning and even outmaneuver him, but after the cutaway she was visibly being over-powered.


-> Your example with Sidious is bunk as Sidious simultaneously overpowered the strength of both Maul and Oppress.

-> Maul has only ever manhandled Kenobi when he was already a physical and mental wreck. As it is, Kenobi's blows have done more to Maul than vice versa so I'm not sure what comparison you're trying to draw here.[/b]


Kenobi has never demonstrated similar strength against Maul. He has been man-handled by both him, Grievous, and Darts D'nar whereas Maul has over-powered Savage, who in turn over-powered Kenobi. Maul's feat against the Rathtar is nothing Kenobi or Tano have replicated. the point of comparing Kenobi to Maul is to set a standard, which is average human male. What does Tano bring the table which puts her above Maul biologically?


-> Maul tackled Grevious when he caught him by suprise. Ahsoka as a padawan has been able to disorientate him in the midst of a saber duel.

Ahsoka holding Maul in place with her strength vastly pre-prime and then sending him flailing backwards would indicate Ahsoka to be the stronger of the two.

2. Ahsoka managing to exploit her agility against Vader is no different from Vader exploiting his strength to gain an advantage against Ahsoka, something Maul, who Ahsoka has held in place and sent flailing backwards has little chance of replicating. [/B]


Everything said here goes back to the original argument.

Darth Thor Senior Member

Maul and Ahsoka were literally in 1 blade lock in the Ahsoka novel.

Rockydonovang freedom fighter

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Maul and Ahsoka were literally in 1 blade lock in the Ahsoka novel.
Right, a bladelock where Ahsoka is able to hold Maul in place long enough to spring the trap. It's a showing of physical strength.

Darth Thor Senior Member

Which might have been like 2 seconds. What makes you think Maul was using his full strength? Did it even state if he was using both arms?

Rockydonovang freedom fighter

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Which might have been like 2 seconds. What makes you think Maul was using his full strength?

Because in a fight, you try and bring your full strength to bear in bladelocks? Why would Maul not utilize his full strength in a bladelock?

Darth Thor Senior Member

"She responded with all her strength"

So we Know she used all her strength. Unlikely Maul used all of his given how he was mocking her and sees her as a sub-par opponent.

And she shouts "Now" like straight after. So she needed all her strength to block him for like a second or two.

Rockydonovang freedom fighter

Originally posted by Kurk
The Ahsoka novel? I never read it, but brief encounters don't really mean much. Maul briefly fought Windu and Secura in SoD but that doesn't mean he can handle their strength for an extended period.

Maul never tried to hold Windu in place.
Originally posted by Kurk
Yes, she does, but that doesn't trump all. I can point to times in the late clone-wars where Dooku physically over-powers Anakin, yet the later is also seen over-powering the former. Even though the general consensus is that Anakin is physically more powerful, Dooku is often able to send him flailing too. I'll touch on why in the next point.

Dooku has never sent Anakin flailing backwards. And yes, Anakin has been able, even as of TCW, consistently overpower him in bouts of strength, hence why Anakin is considered physically stronger. Your assertion that Maul can somehow gain an edge on Ahsoka via strength when their only bout of strength ended up with Maul being overpowered is unsubstantiated nonsense.
Originally posted by Kurk
If we can agree that each individual force user has a finite amount of "force reserve" so to speak, based on their level of midichlorians, which regenerates over time, we should also be able to agree that a biologically weaker user will have to continuously spend more of their reserve augmenting their speed and strength than a biologically superior one.
The bigger the discrepancy, the faster the weaker user will experience force exhaustion.

BS. A force user's potential does not dictate their force reserves, their actual level of power does. Rebels Maul has had a decade to grow in power and hence has larger force reserves than his TCW counterpart as well as better augmentation. And there is no precedent in canon for a character physically degrading at Maul's age as of rebels when augmentation is taken into account.
Originally posted by Kurk
Dooku being stronger than his former self is due to the power-growth he experienced when he embraced the dark-side, not to any biological growth as you've said. That doesn't necessarily mean that older Dooku would beat his younger self in a test of endurance because he is spending more of his reserves just to sustain his body every second of the fight than his younger and more fit self.

Where the power growth stemmed from is irrelevant. the point is power growth can exceed biological degradement, and hence your assertion that Rebels Maul. on a nexus no less, would be physically weaker than his TCW self is completely unsubstantiated.
Originally posted by Kurk
Let's use two relatively evenly matched force users like TCW Dooku and Anakin. Let their strength in the force be 25,000 and 15,000 respectively (these are arbitrary, unit-less figures used only for analogous purposes). From a strictly biological stance, meaning if neither were force sensitives, Anakin would by far be the superior combatant due to his physique. Because both are force users though, they are able to augment their physical abilities.

They're not evenly matched evenly matched force users, Dooku is more powerful at this point.

Originally posted by Kurk Let's say that Dooku has to expend 30 units every second for every 2 units Anakin spends just to match his natural strength and speed. And remember, being that he's an old man he will tire faster and have to spend even more energy as he fatigues more, so really it should exponential.

Dooku's remaining units = -(30)x(seconds elapsed)+ total reserve 25,000
(y=mx+b)
vs
Anakin's remaining units = -(2)x(seconds elapsed) + total reserve 15,000

Whereas Anakin wouldn't be spending any units on augmentation and wouldn't naturally tire nearly as quickly. If he did choose to augment, Dooku would need to factor that in to his passive units spent to match him.

The point is that even though Dooku may be the more powerful force user, meaning he can afford to spend more units that Anakin in quick bursts (e.g TK, lightning, etc) since he has a greater reserve, in a pro-longed physical combat setting where he has to passively spend energy augmenting his physicals more than Anakin, he will eventually intercept him and become the weaker of the users.

No offense, but I'm not taking any of this into consideration. These are all numbers you've drawn from thin air and hence your fan calcs are little more than pointless conjecture. Give me a source for these numbers or stop trying to peddle these calcs of yours as a valid basis for an argument.

Originally posted by Kurk
Apply this now to Maul and Tano. It is possible for Tano to over-power Maul in a short burst at the cost of expending more units. If she continuously tried to over-power him she'd suffer from force exhaustion. Remember her fight with Vader and my points in the first post. She was able to match Vader in the beginning and even outmaneuver him, but after the cutaway she was visibly being over-powered.

This comparison fails because there's nothing that equates Maul's strength with Vader's. Ahsoka never overpowered Vader physically, rather, she outmaneuvered him with her speed. Vader is very clearly stronger than Maul. Vader drives Ahsoka back. Maul gets driven back. Maul failed to replicate what Vader did with his strength and hence this comparison you're drawing is bunk.

Originally posted by Kurk

Kenobi has never demonstrated similar strength against Maul. He has been man-handled by both him


Kenobi has incapped, disorientated, and stunned Maul physically, even when physically compromised. Maul has been unable to replicate Kenobi's success physically even when Kenobi was already a physical wreck. I don't care if you want to make thisbe because of skill or strength. Maul's physical strength has meant jack sh!t to him when facing Kenobi.
Originally posted by Kurk
, Grievous

When in a direct fight, all that has physically happened between the two would be Maul being kicked back by Grevious. Maul has done nothing to imply he wouldn't get physically manhandled by Grevious whose physical feats hilariously outclass his. And BTW, Kenobi has bent Grevious's arm like a cheap spoon, something I've never seen Maul do.
Originally posted by Kurk
, and Darts D'nar whereas Maul has over-powered Savage, who in turn over-powered Kenobi.

Kenobi staggered Oppress with a punch when he could barely stand up and then in season 5 physically mandhandled him while landing blows on and driving back Maul. Whatever physical superiority Maul may or may not have to Kenobi, it's done absolutely crap for him in terms of their actual fights and hence isn't relevant.

Originally posted by Kurk

Maul's feat against the Rathtar is nothing Kenobi or Tano have replicated. the point of comparing Kenobi to Maul is to set a standard, which is average human male. What does Tano bring the table which puts her above Maul biologically?


That's because neither have ever faced a Rathar. If we look at how they've directly fared against each other, we'd come to a conclusion opposite of th eone you're drawing off of nothing. Maul has done nothing to suggest he can win anything against Ahsoka by virtue of his physical strength and hence this is nonsense.

Base biology means sh!t in comparison to force augmentation, hence why Sidious can simultaneously overpower maul and oppress and Yoda can physically school 4 younger council masters with his agility.

The only direct physical confrontation between Maul and Ahsoka has had Maul sent flailing backwards and Maul driven back. Hence trying to claim Maul can do something to Ahsoka physically is unsubstantiated conjecture.

Kurk Restricted

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Maul never tried to hold Windu in place.

The post before mine already pointed out that Tano poured all her strength to hold-back Maul while the latter mocked her and called her a sub-par opponent, insinuating that Maul didn't need to put in nearly as much effort.


Dooku has never sent Anakin flailing backwards. And yes, Anakin has been able, even as of TCW, consistently overpower him in bouts of strength, hence why Anakin is considered physically stronger.[/b]

Exhibit 1:

Exhibit 2:

I have more too.

Your assertion that Maul can somehow gain an edge on Ahsoka via strength when their only bout of strength ended up with Maul being overpowered is unsubstantiated nonsense.[/b]

An anomaly more than anything. I just directed you to a fight where Dooku over-powers Anakin the entire time. I would label it an anomaly too.


BS. A force user's potential does not dictate their force reserves, their actual level of power does. Rebels Maul has had a decade to grow in power and hence has larger force reserves than his TCW counterpart as well as better augmentation.

I mis-worded that part. Yes it's the power that determines it not potential.

And there is no precedent in canon for a character physically degrading at Maul's age as of rebels when augmentation is taken into account.

What do you mean? That in canon characters are immune from the effects of aging? Nonsense. Augmentation compensates but it takes more energy. It then becomes a question of "has this character grown enough in the force to compensate for their physical handicap?" I don't believe that theory is stated to be canon either, but then what's the point if we can't apply common sense?


Where the power growth stemmed from is irrelevant. the point is power growth can exceed biological degradement, and hence your assertion that Rebels Maul. on a nexus no less, would be physically weaker than his TCW self is completely unsubstantiated.

There is no confirmation that Malachor aided in Maul's performance. Do planetary nexuses even exist in canon?


They're not evenly matched evenly matched force users, Dooku is more powerful at this point.

Maybe more skillful, but not significantly more powerful if at all. I don't want to debate this here.


No offense, but I'm not taking any of this into consideration. These are all numbers you've drawn from thin air and hence your fan calcs are little more than pointless conjecture. Give me a source for these numbers or stop trying to peddle these calcs of yours as a valid basis for an argument.

Fair enough. Like I said it's arbitrary. Don't rely on numbers then. Substitute x and y. Y, the finite reserve of energy a user has, will decrease with time, x, multiplied by the amount of energy a user has to use to augment their physical abilities. As their body fatigues they will need to compensate more for that. It should make sense unless Disney believe jedi are demigods who never tire because "da force".

This comparison fails because there's nothing that equates Maul's strength with Vader's.

I didn't claim that they were equal in strength.

Ahsoka never overpowered Vader physically, rather, she outmaneuvered him with her speed.

She did both in the beginning.
Exhibit 3:

Exhibit 4:

After the cutaway she quit the acrobatics and was unable to push back any of Vader's strikes. Why? Because she was fatiguing.

Vader is very clearly stronger than Maul.

I don't deny it.
Vader drives Ahsoka back. Maul gets driven back. Maul failed to replicate what Vader did with his strength and hence this comparison you're drawing is bunk.

I would be inclined to agree with you if we had more than one fight between Tano and Maul where she demonstrated consistency, but we only have one. Circumstances vary with every fight. The Dooku vs Anakin example from earlier is great example of inconsistencies and why only one showing can not be relied on.

I will respond to the rest later.

quanchi112 Disney

Maul wins.

FreshestSlice Eternal Commander

Kurk making some hella stupid and contradictory arguments tbh.

Kurk Restricted


Kenobi has incapped, disorientated, and stunned Maul physically, even when physically compromised.

You'll have to forgive my foggy memory on that...


Maul has been unable to replicate Kenobi's success physically even when Kenobi was already a physical wreck. I don't care if you want to make thisbe because of skill or strength. Maul's physical strength has meant jack sh!t to him when facing Kenobi.

What success of Kenobi physically are you referring to? I'm inclined to agree that Maul's strength has never given him any sort of real advantage in his fights against Obi-Wan.


When in a direct fight, all that has physically happened between the two would be Maul being kicked back by Grevious. Maul has done nothing to imply he wouldn't get physically manhandled by Grevious whose physical feats hilariously outclass his. And BTW, Kenobi has bent Grevious's arm like a cheap spoon, something I've never seen Maul do. Very few users exist who wouldn't get man-handled by Grievous. What's the canonical source for the Kenobi feat?

[QUOTE=16321959]
Kenobi staggered Oppress with a punch when he could barely stand up

Oh come on. You said yourself how augmentation over-rides fatigue.

and then in season 5 physically mandhandled him while landing blows on and driving back Maul.

I only remember him kicking down Savage with a flying kick from a height.

Whatever physical superiority Maul may or may not have to Kenobi, it's done absolutely crap for him in terms of their actual fights and hence isn't relevant.

If this was legends, I would push the point, but unfortunately I'm having trouble finding much on Maul's physicals in canon. I will concede on this point.


That's because neither have ever faced a Rathar. If we look at how they've directly fared against each other, we'd come to a conclusion opposite of th eone you're drawing off of nothing. Maul has done nothing to suggest he can win anything against Ahsoka by virtue of his physical strength and hence this is nonsense.
Touche, but it's likewise with Tano.


Base biology means sh!t in comparison to force augmentation, hence why Sidious can simultaneously overpower maul and oppress and Yoda can physically school 4 younger council masters with his agility.

At the power difference between someone like Sidious and Maul yes it means sh1t. But because Tano and Maul are on the same tier, the smaller factors add up.


The only direct physical confrontation between Maul and Ahsoka has had Maul sent flailing backwards and Maul driven back. Hence trying to claim Maul can do something to Ahsoka physically is unsubstantiated conjecture. [/B]

I will say that Maul is not Savage, meaning he's not going to overpower anyone (in canon at least). However, he has demonstrated an affinity for incorporating martial arts into his move-sets and has made use of his strength specifically there. Go back to TPM. Look at his first TCW fight with Kenobi. He managed to land a kick on Sidious. Ahsoka is going to have to put up with that.

Kurk Restricted

Originally posted by FreshestSlice
Kurk making some hella stupid and contradictory arguments tbh.
At least I don't try to pass myself off as hot sh1t.

Darth Thor Senior Member

Maul physically grappled and overpowered Grievous in SOD issue 2. Kenobi was hilariously outclassed by Grievous in a physical match up in ROTS.

But in a Lightsaber fight Kenobi seems to be able to handle strength. Given he parried off Anakin whose obviously the stronger combatant.

Darth Thor Senior Member

Kenobi being a "physical wreck" while facing Maul in "Revenge" is also a laughable point. This has also been debunked multiple times with clear comments from Filoni stating that Maul was the clear disadvantaged onein that fight. He was the actual physical and mental wreck.

Kenobi's excuse in comparison is piss poor when seeing how a Padawan novice like Kanan put up his best performance against the GI after being tortured for days.

FreshestSlice Eternal Commander

Originally posted by Kurk
At least I don't try to pass myself off as hot sh1t.

That...really doesn't have any impact whatsoever on what was said. You still have to make sense, no matter how low an opinion of yourself that you have.

Rockydonovang freedom fighter

Originally posted by Darth Thor
"She responded with all her strength"

So we Know she used all her strength. Unlikely Maul used all of his given how he was mocking her and sees her as a sub-par opponent.

And she shouts "Now" like straight after. So she needed all her strength to block him for like a second or two.


Just saw this

This bladelock happens after Ahsoka turns Maul's attempt at dun moch back on him and pisses him off. So yes, I'd imagine Maul would be trying with this bladelock

Rockydonovang freedom fighter

Originally posted by Kurk
The post before mine already pointed out that Tano poured all her strength to hold-back Maul while the latter mocked her and called her a sub-par opponent, insinuating that Maul didn't need to put in nearly as much effort.

Yea, Ahsoka had pissed Maul off at this point so nah, Maul was trying here.
Originally posted by Kurk
Exhibit 1:

Exhibit 2:


Yea, that's not remotely similar to what Ahsoka did to Maul or what Anakin has done to Vader sustained bouts of strength.

Originally posted by Kurk
An anomaly more than anything. I just directed you to a fight where Dooku over-powers Anakin the entire time. I would label it an anomaly too.

Since it's the only relevant showing here, you have no way of calling this an anomaly

Originally posted by Kurk
What do you mean? That in canon characters are immune from the effects of aging?

No, what I mean is that at the age Maul is at as of Rebels, his 40's/50's, there's no precedent for characters physically degradement exceeding their augmentation. Dooku shows that even at 70, you can still be physically superior to your 20 year old self.
Originally posted by Kurk
It then becomes a question of "has this character grown enough in the force to compensate for their physical handicap?" I don't believe that theory is stated to be canon either, but then what's the point if we can't apply common sense?

And you have failed to provide any evidence for Maul's physical degradement exceeding his force growth.
Originally posted by Kurk
There is no confirmation that Malachor aided in Maul's performance. Do planetary nexuses even exist in canon?

🙄
Being more powerful wouldn't improve abilities that are dependent on augmenting yourself with the force?

Originally posted by Kurk
Fair enough. Like I said it's arbitrary. Don't rely on numbers then. Substitute x and y. Y, the finite reserve of energy a user has, will decrease with time, x, multiplied by the amount of energy a user has to use to augment their physical abilities. As their body fatigues they will need to compensate more for that. It should make sense unless Disney believe jedi are demigods who never tire because "da force".

You're assuming the reserves would decrease when more powerful force users have larger force reserves, hence this formula you're trying to use hinges on unsubstantiated assumption. 🙁
Originally posted by Kurk
I didn't claim that they were equal in strength.

Then how Vader can perform vs Ahsoka is irrelevant to how Maul would perform against Ahsoka. 👆
Next.
Originally posted by Kurk
She did both in the beginning.
Exhibit 3:

Exhibit 4:


Pushing back a strike isn't the same as overpowering someone in a sustained bladelock
Originally posted by Kurk
After the cutaway she quit the acrobatics and was unable to push back any of Vader's strikes. Why? Because she was fatiguing.

Right, because Vader is strong enough to tire Ahsoka out with his blows. Maul isn't as strong as Vade which means this comparison you're trying to draw will lead you nowhere.
I don't deny it.
Originally posted by Kurk
I would be inclined to agree with you if we had more than one fight between Tano and Maul where she demonstrated consistency, but we only have one. Circumstances vary with every fight. The Dooku vs Anakin example from earlier is great example of inconsistencies and why only one showing can not be relied on.

You can't claim this is inconsistent when there's nothing for it to be inconsistent against.

Darth Thor Senior Member

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Just saw this

This bladelock happens after Ahsoka turns Maul's attempt at dun moch back on him and pisses him off. So yes, I'd imagine Maul would be trying with this bladelock

Complete and unsubstantiated speculation as usual. You have a habit of making things up. The last part of the Dun Moch was Maul saying to Ahsoka "One last attempt at glory to impress a master who had not further use for you" to which Ahsoka replied "That's no True!"

So clearly as far as Maul knew he was winning the Dun Moch exchange and clearly enjoying toying with a sub-par opponent.

Then We Know as a Fact that Ahsoka used ALL HER STRENGTH just to block one blade lock.

Maul is clearly stronger than ROTS Ahsoka Lol. Get over it.