Who did it better? Vader or Maul??

Both Sith Lords have scenes where they completely destroy fodder; Vader in Rogue One against Rebel Troops, Maul in Clone Wars s7 against Clone Troopers, who do you think did it better?

Vader. It was better framed.

👆

The sense of utter helplessness from the Rebels was just depicted better, imo.

The Vader scene was way better. Maul's corridor scene was actually pretty lame. Not sure why people loved it so much... The scene where he enters and destroys the hyperdrive was pretty great though.

Yeah I feel like they were kinda different in style. Maul's was more about showing off with his force abilities whereas Vader's was just complete terror and a feeling of helplessness.

Originally posted by relentless1
Both Sith Lords have scenes where they completely destroy fodder; Vader in Rogue One against Rebel Troops, Maul in Clone Wars s7 against Clone Troopers, who do you think did it better?

In the cntext of the story? Vader's. Maul having such an easy time with the troopers makes zero sense given he literally said "i need a lightsaber to havea fighting chance" lmao

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
In a vacuum? Maul's. No flash, no excess, just effiency. No need to make shit look cool, the story spoke for itself.

In the cntext of the story? Vader's. Maul having such an easy time with the troopers makes zero sense given he literally said "i need a lightsaber to havea fighting chance" lmao

Mail was probably deceiving her to try and get a lightsaber off of her - he knew he'd be okay either way

Of course he wanted a lightsaber to improve his survival chances LMAO