Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Unamped Malak Round 1: Force, sabers, all out

Round 2: Takes place on the Malachor Superweapon

Who wins

Ahsoka dissolves Malgus like a ship

Malak annihilates her(legends>>Canon)

No one annihilates anyone. Who wins? Ahsoka.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
No one annihilates anyone. Who wins? Ahsoka.

Doubtful, Canon characters don't have the speed feats, to contend with legends characters. Jax Pavan has a feat that puts him at near FTL Speeds, Malak in return should scale to him, considering he should above the likes of karness muur, who was superior to Post ROTS Vader, and made him seriously consider overthrowing Sidious.

Nor does Ahsoka scale to feats from the likes of Yareal Poof, who prevented a bomb which had the power to kill a planet or kill all life on the surface. Malak should be greater.

Malak, has insanely better feats to scale from while Ahsoka being canon, prevents her from touching such feats she may of seen if, she wasn't an only Canon character.

Ahsoka.

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Doubtful, Canon characters don't have the speed feats, to contend with legends characters. Jax Pavan has a feat that puts him at near FTL Speeds, Malak in return should scale to him, considering he should above the likes of karness muur, who was superior to Post ROTS Vader, and made him seriously consider overthrowing Sidious.

Nor does Ahsoka scale to feats from the likes of Yareal Poof, who prevented a bomb which had the power to kill a planet or kill all life on the surface. Malak should be greater.

Malak, has insanely better feats to scale from while Ahsoka being canon, prevents her from touching such feats she may of seen if, she wasn't an only Canon character.
Ahsoka displayed a distinct speed edge against someone who a decade pre-prime was accurately deflecting blaster fire right back at dozens of shooters. What does Malak have that's on par?

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Ahsoka displayed a distinct speed edge against someone who a decade pre-prime was accurately deflecting blaster fire right back at dozens of shooters. What does Malak have that's on par?

Being scaled to a guy(Jax pavan), who was reflecting "lazer beams" which were stated to be moving at the "speed of light"


"I-Five suddenly whipped up his left hand, index finger extended, and fired a laser beam at Jax. The laser beam splashed off the ionized fire that suddenly coated the length of the blade, which Jax had automatically raised to block the beam.

"That's how," I-Five said. "The speed of light is just under three hundred kilometers per second. You are currently seven-point-three meters from me. Your Force-augmented anticipatory reflex action obviously is working fine. You just have to let them."

There is other microsecond/Nanosecond feats he can scale too, but the one above is sufficient enough.

Seriously, her speed feats don't hold a candle to legends.

He raised the blade before the beam was fired. Thus why the text calls it:

"Your Force-augmented anticipatory reflex action obviously is working fine."

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
He raised the blade before the beam was fired. Thus why the text calls it:

"Your Force-augmented anticipatory reflex action obviously is working fine."

Still doesn't change he reacted to a laser, and no he didn't raze his blade before and, he did it when the lazer was fired from 7.3m away. I don't think there would of been a need to mention the speed of light.

You can anticipate where something his or will be, but not react to it, he did.

Why is that quote always mistexted with the kilometer bit?



Three hundred thousand, not three hundred.

Originally posted by Zenwolf
Why is that quote always mistexted with the kilometer bit?



Three hundred thousand, not three hundred.

I got it from his respect thread, that's probably why. I'll give you the full paragraphs.

Well that has it right there. Huh...

Malak, but Tano can give him a good fight.

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Still doesn't change he reacted to a laser, and no he didn't raze his blade before and, he did it when the lazer was fired from 7.3m away. I don't think there would of been a need to mention the speed of light.

You can anticipate where something his or will be, but not react to it, he did. But even in the text u posted it says-

"Jax, blindfolded, whipped up the energy sword, countering each burst by knowning, before it was fired, which direction it would come from."

He was able to counter them by knowing where they coming from before they we're fired. If he wasn't reacting to them until they we're fired like u say, how would knowing where they we're coming from help him, let alone be the reason for his ability to block them?

Ahsoka, but not because of the recent PT wank resurgence.

Ahsoka in 'sabers, Malak in Force.

Originally posted by Ursumeles
Ahsoka in 'sabers, Malak in Force.
So I take it Malak has something in the league of withstanding ship disintergrating explosions?

And before anyone tries to bring it up, Ahsoka was off balance when Vader tkd her, aside from that, Vader, who regularly abuses tk in canon, neglected to attempt directly tking Ahsoka in almost 2 minuites despite having every reason to do so.

Using Logic, its evident that Vader knew he wouldn't be tking Ahsoka to any significant degree.

But I'm sure Malak can do better

Wtf even is this ship disintegration shit you keep citing?

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Ahsoka, but not because of the recent PT wank resurgence.
As usual instead of actually trying to counter or argue against what's used for resurgence, those against it prefer whining about it, and appealing to incredulity rather than actually addressing it.

Malak

Via scaling, Malak should take this.

Nah.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Nah.

Originally posted by nfactor1995
Via scaling, Malak should take this.
Via near parity to a vastly superior force user, Ahsoka stomps

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Wtf even is this ship disintegration shit you keep citing?

It's this thing.

https://youtu.be/GVndPQC7LA0?t=107

He's saying Vader tanked an explosion similar cause the Sith weapon on Malachor was powered by Kyber crystals.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Malak, but Tano can give him a good fight.

To be honest, I give Ahsoka the edge although it's a very good fight.

Malak, yeah. Decent fight.

Originally posted by Zenwolf
It's this thing.

https://youtu.be/GVndPQC7LA0?t=107

He's saying Vader tanked an explosion similar cause the Sith weapon on Malachor was powered by Kyber crystals.
*Vader's barrier tanked it. If it was simply durability, Vader's cape would have been totally destroyed

We don't know what happened.

:/

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
We don't know what happened.

Has this guy, ever had his mind changed about a Tor versing a PT or a Trilogy character in favor of the Tor Character.

Sounds like next, he will argue that Valkorian would lose to the likes Ezra.

Admittedly that was really weak.

Originally posted by UCanShootMyNova
Admittedly that was really weak.

Nah, when he completely ignores evidence that you shove directly in his face, Without a substantial counter argument.
You stop taking him seriously, because there is no point, It's a waste of time.

Check the Revan vs ashoka thread.

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Has this guy, ever had his mind changed about a Tor versing a PT or a Trilogy character in favor of the Tor Character.

Sounds like next, he will argue that Valkorian would lose to the likes Ezra.
I have.

If you're going to attack me instead of my arguments though, I suggest you take a break

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Nah, when he completely ignores evidence that you shove directly in his face, Without a substantial counter argument.
You stop taking him seriously, because there is no point, It's a waste of time.

Check the Revan vs ashoka thread.
This is petty as fck.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Wtf even is this ship disintegration shit you keep citing? and how exactly does it factor into a saber duel? Has ahsoka diplayed the ability to withstand anything on that level?

Originally posted by deathslash
and how exactly does it factor into a saber duel? Has ahsoka diplayed the ability to withstand anything on that level?
It's not about the saber duel, it about telekinetic prowess.

For sabers, Ahsoka is authoritatively above maul who's pre-prime incarnations happen to be tier 8's and a tier above combatants who represent the peak of lightsaber combat in the mythos and are among the best in history

*Ahsoka is below all versions of Maul especially his Rebels version which is a pathetic shadow of his former self.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
It's not about the saber duel, it about telekinetic prowess.

For sabers, Ahsoka is authoritatively above maul who's pre-prime incarnations happen to be tier 8's and a tier above combatants who represent the peak of lightsaber combat in the mythos and are among the best in history I'm still waiting for you to prove that she has tk anywhere near that level.
Originally posted by thesithmaster
*Ahsoka is below all versions of Maul especially his Rebels version which is a pathetic shadow of his former self.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
*Ahsoka is below all versions of Maul especially his Rebels version which is a pathetic shadow of his former self.
Canon and authority disagrees with you. But tell me why your opinon trumps either

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
I have.

If you're going to attack me instead of my arguments though, I suggest you take a break

Where, you never responded to my arguments over on the Ahsoka vs Revan thread. I countered everything you threw at. And you just ignored evidence that literally shits on your feats.

Canon disagrees with me? More like, a twisted quote. Maul and Kenobi had "growth" and a short fight because: they knew each other's moves inside out due to fighting multiple prolonged fights before. And Maul's showings are much lower compared to his SOD version.
And Filoni's statement about Ahsoka>Maul isn't about Tano>Maul at all. The quote's context is:
Back in TCW, they couldn't put Yoda in a story against the Separatists because he'd kick every single oppponent's ass easily, from B1 Battle Droids to Ventress/Grievous/Dooku, making the good guys win far too easily. Now, they kinda have the same problem with Ahsoka. She can kick the asses of everyone in the opposition, the GALACTIC EMPIRE. In the GALACTIC EMPIRE, only Vader and Sidious can match her. The Inquisitors, Stormtroopers, Death troopers etc. all lose. Is Maul an Imperial? Nope. The quote doesn't apply to him.
And Maul has a quote OUTRIGHT putting him as superior to Tano. It was on Malachor, yeah, but Malachor only "potentially" amped the Dark Siders. And Maul has better feats. Tano required forty seconds to land a hit on Seventh Sister and two on Fifth Brother who attacked separately- Maul landed two hits on Fifth Brother, one on Seventh Sister and another one on Eighth Brother while they were attacking him in a 3v1 all at the same time. In twenty seconds.
Maul>Ahsoka even as of Rebels. Actual feats >>>> twisted quotes, and feats prove SOD Maul>>Rebels Maul.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
And Maul's showings are much lower compared to his SOD version. Maul obviously didn't have the same opportunities to accomplish the same level of feats he accomplished in TCW in Rebels, so comparing Maul's feats in Rebels to his feats in TCW without any consideration of that fact is ridiculous and disingenuous. There's no Sidious in Rebels for Maul to hold his own against, so obviously a straight comparison would make TCW Maul look superior, but that isn't how debating this thing works. Prove that Rebels Maul is a "pathetic shadow of his former self", plz.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
And Maul has a quote OUTRIGHT putting him as superior to Tano. No, he doesn't. Maul being the logical choice to pair Ezra with does not in the slightest outright prove his superiority to Ahsoka. Let's outline a couple very important factors that people like you love to forget.

First and foremost, character #1 being more effective than character #2 against similar opposition doesn't mean character #1 > character #2 -- that's called ABC logic and is retarded. In some scenarios, a comparison between two character's fights between the same opponents can be a good barometer to measure how they stack up against each other, but it is ultimately a moot point if the two characters fight later on and there's no distinct advantage the other way. That's what happened with Maul and Ahsoka. You've been claiming that Maul's performances against the Inquisitors are far superior to Ahsoka's, so I wonder why Maul's supposedly obvious superior abilities didn't garner him much of an edge when he actually came into conflict with Ahsoka. mmm Care to explain?

Secondly, Maul had every intent and desire to kill all of the Inquisitors, while Ahsoka did not. Ahsoka expressed her reluctance to use lethal force against the Inquisitors in a previous episode, citing that if she and the Jedi killed the Inquisitors, more would come, like what happened after the Grand Inquisitor died. The reluctance would, and did, manifest in a passing up of opportunities and an overall lack of aggressiveness. She'd obviously be less effective against the Inquisitors than Maul.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
And Maul has better feats. Tano required forty seconds to land a hit on Seventh Sister and two on Fifth Brother who attacked separately- Maul landed two hits on Fifth Brother, one on Seventh Sister and another one on Eighth Brother while they were attacking him in a 3v1 all at the same time. In twenty seconds. Um... what's your definition of hit? Because Ahsoka smashed the Seventh Sister in the face with her lightsaber hilt in the first five seconds.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Maul>Ahsoka even as of Rebels. Maul had ample time to prove that and failed, sorry. I also love how you say you're prioritizing "actual feats" over "twisted quotes" when your "actual feats" consists of ABC logic and your quote that supposedly proves Maul > Ahsoka is being hilariously misconstrued as factual evidence that Maul is better than Ahsoka.

https://i.imgflip.com/1481fj.gif

Sorry for lack of formatting, but on mobile ATM.
Maul still had much better feats as of SOD. Yeah, he didn't have some of the opportunities, but from what we saw, his feats are just... better. Much better. He stomped four MagnaGuards, wrecked GG with the Force (canon GG still beat mid TCW Kenobi) wrecked Savage, pulled down a shuttle while grievously injured, and wrecked late TCW Kenobi with the Force. Those feats are much better than anything Rebels Maul brings to the table.
And the crew is about to fight enemies. Maul is the logical choice to pair up with Ezra. To fight. Given Ezra is the weakest, and they're about to fight, then the fairest team is... the strongest with the weakest. And given the quote is talking about fighting, it is putting Maul above Ahsoka.
And how can it be ABC Logic when Ahsoka fought two Inqusitors and Maul fought THREE? It's not the exact same opposition. Ahsoka beat two Inquisitors in forty seconds. Maul was wrecking those two PLUS another Inquisitor in half the amount of the time. Maul did not gain a distinct advantage in an inconclusive fight in which Ahsoka ran away. The fight was inconclusive, thus a victor can not be determined from that. One of Ahsoka's styles is also Djem So- Djem So is very good at counterattakcing and specializes in it:
"Djem So follows the same philosophy of turning an enemy's attack back on him or her, it is optimized for lightsaber to lightsaber combat. Its signature move is fluid riposte, which deflects a forceful enemy attack and immediately counter attacks."
The Jedi Path: A Manual for Students of the Force
Which gives her an inherent advantage over Juyo, that leaves openings and thus is vulnerable to counterattack.
"While its attacks can eviscerate defenses- even the blocks of a Form III master- Form VII leaves its practitioner vulnerable to counter attack."
The Jedi Path: A Manual for Students of the Force
Ahsoka, with a style advantage, had no disadvantage or advantage against Maul in a brief duel. Obviously Maul can't beat Ahsoka quickly, but he can beat her in a protracted duel. Especially when he wrecking THREE Inquisitors harder than Ahsoka wrecked TWO, meaning it's not ABC Logic.
Also, why did Ahsoka hold back? She had no problem in going full out to defeat them. Not fighting to kill =/= not fighting to your full potential. And LOL at her not using the Force. She outright Force Pushed Fifth Brother.
Didn't remember the hilt smack, so conceded on that matter. Still, it's not as good as kicking them around in a 3v1 then smacking one in a 1v1. Yes, 1v1. Fifth Brother wasn't attacking in that instance.
And Maul proved that he was >Ahsoka by wrecking three Inquisitors harder than she wrecked two. Maul's team was superior. It's not ABC Logic, given the team's were not the same. The team Maul fought had one more member. And my quote proves Maul>Ahsoka because they were teaming up to fight. If they were teaming up to prove who is the better dancer, than that would mean nothing, but given its context is about fighting, it applies perfectly fine.
Maul>Ahsoka.

Joker arguing Tano > SoD Maul is pretty cringe-worthy, tbh.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Joker arguing Tano > SoD Maul is pretty cringe-worthy, tbh.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Joker arguing Tano > SoD Maul is pretty cringe-worthy, tbh.

Lover's quarrel?

Originally posted by Haschwalth
Where, you never responded to my arguments over on the Ahsoka vs Revan thread. I countered everything you threw at. And you just ignored evidence that literally shits on your feats.
I didn't respond becoz I had real life stuff to do and was responding to other people as well. Stop being petty. You can bring this up in the Ashoka vs are an thread, if you're so f Jin desperate I'll try to give you a response later today.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Joker arguing Tano > SoD Maul is pretty cringe-worthy, tbh.
You mean aside from Ahsoka being authoritatively > a canonically better version of Maui, matching, driving back and sending said version of maul flailing back on a DS nexus?

Or am I mistaken for questioning the canonocity of polls?

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Maul still had much better feats as of SOD. Yeah, he didn't have some of the opportunities, but from what we saw, his feats are just... better. Much better. He stomped four MagnaGuards, wrecked GG with the Force (canon GG still beat mid TCW Kenobi) wrecked Savage, pulled down a shuttle while grievously injured, and wrecked late TCW Kenobi with the Force. Those feats are much better than anything Rebels Maul brings to the table. I don't think you understand the point. Comparing Maul's feats from TCW and Rebels is pointless because Maul had far more opportunities to showcase his abilities against other opponents in TCW and far fewer opportunities in Rebels. You can't draw the conclusion that TCW Maul > Rebels Maul based on feats that Rebels Maul didn't have the chance to replicate. That's common sense.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
And the crew is about to fight enemies. Maul is the logical choice to pair up with Ezra. To fight. Given Ezra is the weakest, and they're about to fight, then the fairest team is... the strongest with the weakest. And given the quote is talking about fighting, it is putting Maul above Ahsoka. How did you manage to so completely and utterly miss the point? Let me try to be more clear...

Darth Maul

Is More Effective
Effective: adjective
1.
successful in producing a desired or intended result.

Against the Inquisitors

Because of the Circumstances (see my previous post)

That Favored Maul And Did Not Favor Ahsoka

Therefore IN A FIGHT

Maul would be the LOGICAL Choice

Do you know what that means? It means Maul can fight better against the Inquisitors and provide a more suitable defense of Ezra because he has a more brutal fighting style and he actually wants the Inquisitors dead.

Also, seeing as how Maul has lived on Malachor for presumably years now, he would actually know the layout of the temple intimately and have knowledge of the terrain and would, therefore, be more capable of defending Ezra. Pairing Ezra with Ahsoka, who is clueless with the layout of the area, would be pretty retarded as she wouldn't have any knowledge of safe areas to go to or advantages to exploit against the Inquisitors.


Originally posted by thesithmaster
And how can it be ABC Logic when Ahsoka fought two Inqusitors and Maul fought THREE? Um, because your entire argument is: Maul >> Inquisitors, Ahsoka > Inquisitors, therefore Maul > Ahsoka. That's ABC logic. Oh, and just to make sure, you do know that Maul didn't actually beat all three Inquisitors at the same time, right?

Originally posted by thesithmaster
It's not the exact same opposition. what

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Ahsoka beat two Inquisitors in forty seconds. Maul was wrecking those two PLUS another Inquisitor in half the amount of the time. And I'm sure Ahsoka could have beaten them much faster if she was so inclined, but what was evident during that fight was that Ahsoka was hardly taking them that seriously since she paused her assault for conversation and later on deactivated and martially stomped the Seventh Sister barehanded. What becmes apparent later on is that Ahsoka had no intention on killing the Inquisitors, which obviously means that she would have been passing up openings and would have an overall less vicious offensive. This conversation is overall pretty pointless, since I laid out the reasons why Maul being more effective against the Inqusitors does not mean he is overall superior to Ahsoka.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Maul did not gain a distinct advantage in an inconclusive fight in which Ahsoka ran away. So, the guy who is the clear superior to Ahsoka made absolutely no headway in a fight that was a minute and forty seconds in total length? I find that to be odd. And the reason why Ahsoka ran away is that Ezra was activating a superweapon, not because of Maul's prowess.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Ahsoka, with a style advantage, had no disadvantage or advantage against Maul in a brief duel. Ahsoka's primary forms are Jar'Kai, Ataru and Shien, with Djem So taking a backseat, so I find it highly unlikely that Ahsoka could have exploited that supposed disadvantage in Maul's Juyo with her Djem So, which in terms of technical skill, I have no doubt is inferior to Maul's Juyo. Funnily enough, Maul actually mastered her primary form -- Jar'Kai -- which garnered praise from Darth Plagueis; so if anyone was in a position to exploit certain forms, I'm sure it would be Maul. Maul also mastered Niman which is a jack-of-all-trades form so he likely worked that into his style to cover any weak spots. Do you any other excuses as to why Maul was stonewalled?

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Obviously Maul can't beat Ahsoka quickly, but he can beat her in a protracted duel. A protracted duel happened and Maul made no gains.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Also, why did Ahsoka hold back? i told you why, please pay attention.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
She had no problem in going full out to defeat them. Not fighting to kill =/= not fighting to your full potential. Who will be the more effective fighter, the one who is trying to kill you or the one that is only trying to disarm/subdue you? It's the former.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
And LOL at her not using the Force. She outright Force Pushed Fifth Brother. The **** are you talking about?

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Didn't remember the hilt smack, so conceded on that matter. Still, it's not as good as kicking them around in a 3v1 then smacking one in a 1v1. Yes, 1v1. Fifth Brother wasn't attacking in that instance. He was like two feet away from Ahsoka which is why she Force pushed him away literally one second later. And the vast majority of the time Maul kicked the Inquisitors, the other two weren't attacking either, lmao.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
And Maul proved that he was >Ahsoka by wrecking three Inquisitors harder than she wrecked two. Maul's team was superior. It's not ABC Logic, given the team's were not the same. The team Maul fought had one more member. And my quote proves Maul>Ahsoka because they were teaming up to fight. If they were teaming up to prove who is the better dancer, than that would mean nothing, but given its context is about fighting, it applies perfectly fine.
Maul>Ahsoka.

https://media.giphy.com/media/pb8wayp1KafJK/giphy.gif

this has all been addressed so i won't waste my time with it. hopefully you've seen the light by the end of this post.

Rebels maul is canonically "very good" compared to his TCW self. Period.

As it is, Rebels Maul's in the general range of a force user in Vader who's demonstrated vastly superior power to sod maul and who scales of Maul's superior in Kenobi.

It should be painfully obvious rebels maul is better.

Whether or not Maul is better on malachor(which he isn't) doesn't dismiss that authority puts Ahsoka above maul on even ground

Originally posted by thesithmaster
*Ahsoka is below all versions of Maul especially his Rebels version which is a pathetic shadow of his former self.

mmm

One does admirably against Vader. The other gets stomped by Ben in three moves.

Originally posted by ares834
mmm

One does admirably against Vader. The other gets stomped by Ben in three moves.

But-but Maul was massively post prime!!!!

Rebels recon isn't canon, sithmaster's fanon is!

Rebels Recon is canon, but Maul was never stated to be in prime there. Nice try though.
And my fanon? Maul has much better feats yet it's still my fanon? Perfect reasoning.
And I love the argument that you can't put a character far above the other even if said character demonstrated much better feats. If Rebels Maul never demonstrated such feats, we can only speculate. And by actual feats, SOD Maul>>SWR Maul.
Vader as of Rebels being much more powerful than SOD Maul is funny. He's done nothing to suggest that apart from getting super injured by an explosion which apparently disintegrated ships, but we need to believe that even though it isn't proven.

Originally posted by ares834
mmm

One does admirably against Vader. The other gets stomped by Ben in three moves.

https://comicvine.gamespot.com/star-wars-universe/4015-57038/forums/battle-misconceptions-darth-maul-vs-old-ben-kenobi-1881378/#3

Yawn. The only point there even worth considering is that Maul was not at his best.

Originally posted by ares834
Yawn. The only point there even worth considering is that Maul was not at his best.

So, the fact that Ben was undefeatable in that specific instance, the fact Ben baited Maul into rushing the duel and using a move Obi-Wan specifically knew how to counter, and the fact Maul underestimated Ben+got cocky aren't even worth considering? Even though they heavily favor Ben and heavily hinder Maul?

lol nowadays everyone is amped if something semi-emotional is happening to them. stop it

Kenobi wasn't amped, stop making crap up.

Nowhere in the quote you used does it say Kenobi was externaly boosted. All that luke is ever mentioned is as a reason for Kenobi deciding to fight Maul even though he didn't want to.

And regardless, it's been outright confirmed that Kenobi's too good for Maul by Feloni whose word is still>yours

also, you realize Kenobi switched back to a soresu stance, BEFORE, Maul attacked?

Originally posted by ares834
Yawn. The only point there even worth considering is that Maul was not at his best.
That's canonically bs

Originally posted by thesithmaster
. He's done nothing to suggest that apart from getting super injured by an explosion which apparently disintegrated ships, but we need to believe that even though it isn't proven.
It's been proven to you before, you've just chosen to selectively ignore it since it doesn't fit your, "rebels vader is pathetic narrative".

Given that Vader's cape hasn't completely disntergrated its obvious Vader made use of a telekentic barrier. Even if it withstood just a portion of an attack potent enough to dissolve freighters, it absolutely dwarfs anything you can provide for sod maul.

As for the rest, I'm getting tired of repeating myself.

The question asked is why as the fight so short, one of the reasons given is they're very good fighters and that same explanation references the lengthy fights maul and Kenobi had in TCW.

In other words, Rebels Maul is very good compared to his tcw incarnation as a fighter.

That you find the above to be vague but then take voice actor opinions which never mention combative ability as worth mentioning is rather telling.

For anyone who wants an in depth explanation, here:
https://comicvine.gamespot.com/profile/kbroskywalker/blog/rebels-mauls-growth/131038/

It never has been proven to me before. You're assuming things. Assumption.
And Maul+Kenobi "had growth" while fighting each other due to fighting each other many times and knowing each other's styles, hence no need for a prolonged fight again.
And Kenobi tricked Maul. That isn't being a far superior duelist, that's Kenobi having knowledge of what Maul would do given his previous fights. He knew Maul would go for that move due to seeing him do so. No other combatant could have guessed it, given Kenobi was the only one who saw Maul smack Jinn. That's not being a far superior duelist.
And Ataru is an energetic form, unlike Soresu.
And Ben wasn't amped? Filoni outright stated he was undefeatable due to protecting Luke. Who's saying crap, now, huh?
And he never switched to Soresu stance.

These unsubstantiated fan-fictions are becoming pathetic. If denials are becoming ignoring what we saw in the show and statements from writers, then this isn't even worth my time. You want to debunk that, do it with proof.

Yeah, Ben wasn't amped, and I also don't think that he was intentionally trying to bait Maul (if he was trying to bait Maul, then that definitely doesn't speak too well to Maul's intelligence or tactical ability). The whole fight was symbolic and I don't think we should really read into it too much. What is apparent and what shouldn't be ignored, though, is that Maul used the exact same move-set he used in TPM, which Kenobi was prepared to defend against and dismantle given his familiarity with the moves. The fact Maul used the exact same moves, to me, indicates that he was expecting an easy victory, but unfortunately for him, Kenobi transformed into a much different and evolved fighter, and easily beat him. I think the main takeaway is that Maul vs. Kenobi on Tatooine is very circumstantial to the both of them, so using it to lowball Maul or highball Kenobi doesn't make sense.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
If denials are becoming ignoring what we saw in the show
Such as Ahsoka sending Maul flaling backwards and driving him back?
Originally posted by thesithmaster

and statements from writers, then this isn't even worth my time.
]
Like Gilroy's implication of malachor being a nexus, Feloni's putting Ahsoka above Maul on even ground, and a canonical statement from Rebels Recon placing rebels maul above sod maul?
Originally posted by thesithmaster
You want to debunk that, do it with proof.
As usual you don't even grasp the most basic concepts of debating while hypocritically trying to attack the credibility of the dude you're facing.

Burden of proof is on the one who makes a claim, not on the dude trying to disprove it. You need to prove something first for me to disprove it.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
These unsubstantiated fan-fictions are becoming pathetic.
] Something about rocks and glasses houses comes to mind

Did I ever dispute Kenobi>Maul? No. I disputed the fact Kenobi can curbstomp Maul.

I don't remember quoting you

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Such as Ahsoka sending Maul flaling backwards and driving him back?

How about a two-handed Ahsoka overpowering Maul in a bladelock which hardly is a showing of superiority?

Like Gilroy's implication of malachor being a nexus, Feloni's putting Ahsoka above Maul on even ground, and a canonical statement from Rebels Recon placing rebels maul above sod Maul?

I ignored Gilroy's implication because it doesn't imply in the least Malachor is a nexus. It is a nexus, yeah, because Hidalgo said so. That nexus, however, only "potentially" amped the Dark siders and wasn't a "single-game buff" as per Hidalgo.
Filoni was talking about the quote in a storytelling purpose. No one but Sidious and Vader could match Ahsoka FROM HER OPPOSITION, the GALACTIC EMPIRE. Is Maul an Imperial? Nope.
And Rebels recon never puts Rebels Maul above SOD Maul. You twisting quotes to suit your purposes is meaningless. It says they had growth. But it specifically referred to Maul vs Kenobi. They had evolved from prolonged fights due to having multiple prolonged fights before and knowing each other inside out.
As usual you don't even grasp the most basic concepts of debating while hypocritically trying to attack the credibility of the dude you're facing.
Hypocritically? Says the guy that twists quotes and sources at every turn to suit him? Lmao.
Burden of proof is on the one who makes a claim, not on the dude trying to disprove it. You need to prove something first for me to disprove it.
I have proven. Now you disprove it. I have had the burden of proof, but now I no longer have it given I have already proven it. Or do I have the burden of proof AFTER proving the statement?

Something about rocks and glasses houses comes to mind
What?

Ah dammit, the formatting got butchered.

I did not quote you on the response where I was quoting King Joker

Originally posted by ares834
mmm

One does admirably against Vader. The other gets stomped by Ben in three moves.


And Filoni laughs his ass off.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
And Filoni laughs his ass off.

He wasn't the only one.

Thta's what the maul fan base gets for constantly b!itching about how underrated he is on cv even when ppl are holding him on par with dooku

He's closer to Dooku than Ahsoka.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
He's closer to Dooku than Ahsoka.
Based on your fanon? perhaps

Based on canonical and authoritative statements, or even Ahsoka and Maul's fights in rebels, not a chance.

->Ahsoka sent maul flailing backwards on, and briefly drove maul back, and otherwise fought evenly with him on an implied ds nexus

->Ahsoka was beyond the ability of someone who can put up a barrier capable of withstanding ship dissolving explosions to directly tk(ahsoka was off balance when vader pushed her)

->Ahsoka fought evenly for more than a minute with Maul's superior before said superior finally gained a clear upperhand

->Ahsoka is authoritatively>Maul on even ground

Ahsoka's>Maul, fanon aside.

I'd love for you to try to actually debate me here rather than dodge said points, but I sense you realize that the position you're trying to argue from isn't an arguable one.

As it is, there's room for discussion on Ahsoka vs dooku, there isn't any on Ashoka vs maul

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Based on your fanon? perhaps

Based on canonical and authoritative statements, or even Ahsoka and Maul's fights in rebels, not a chance.

->Ahsoka sent maul flailing backwards on, and briefly drove maul back, and otherwise fought evenly with him on an implied ds nexus

->Ahsoka was beyond the ability of someone who can put up a barrier capable of withstanding ship dissolving explosions to directly tk(ahsoka was off balance when vader pushed her)

->Ahsoka fought evenly for more than a minute with Maul's superior before said superior finally gained a clear upperhand

->Ahsoka is authoritatively>Maul on even ground

Ahsoka's>Maul, fanon aside.

I'd love for you to try to actually debate me here rather than dodge said points, but I sense you realize that the position you're trying to argue from isn't an arguable one.

Well yeah, Ahsoka's close to or possibly better than Maul in Rebels.

I'd favor SoD Maul solidly over prime Ahsoka though, no question.

You mean aside from rebels maul being canonically better?
Or should we take out of context voice actor opinons instead

Starwars.com isn't Canon

I don't think anyone is "canonically better" than anyone else unless specifically demonstrated to be so, BTW.

Canon doesn't work like that.

Rebels recon is.

Unless you're still trying to peddle crap from the maul was the weakest quote

Rebels Recon isn't "Canon" - the content stated doesn't immediately become lore and put restrictions on future works, lmfao. If Pablo said it, then it's arguably Canon, but still probably not.

Feats?
Fine, Rebels Maul is in the general range of a force user(vader) who's feats fckin annihlate sod maul's

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Feats?
Who are you talking to here. mmm

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Rebels Recon isn't "Canon" - the content stated doesn't immediately become lore and put restrictions on future works, lmfao. If Pablo said it, then it's arguably Canon, but still probably not.
Rebels reconis officially licesend sw material that I spublished on episode guides which are part of canon.

They're canon.

And besides, it's not like there's any offfical contradictions here

The Starwars.com team doesn't have any authority to make Canon statements that apply to and restrict the entire saga, lmfao.

Hell, I'd say even if a published book flat-out stated Ahsoka > Maul, it's still not absolute, based on how the story group is handling the continuity.

Starwars.com is reviewed by the lucas film story group.

And the only thing being restricted is your personal opinon

I'm under the impression Starwars.com is specifically not reviewed by the story group, according to Pablo on Twitter who says his team doesn't work on that.

I'll find the quote about it being canon. Till then, Feloni's uncontradicted authoritative explanation for what he oversaw trumps your fanon

Filoni's statements aren't Canon either, BTW.

EDIT: And I question the story group's vetting process and what such means, also. The story group thought it was fine for a book to put Maul as a better duelist than Dooku and Vader as a better duelist than Sidious. It seems they don't really care about that sort of stuff / leave it to the author and/or fans to decide.

Filoni never even said Rebels Maul is at his combat peak.

Also I'd take Sam Witwer's opinions over Filoni's any day.



Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Starwars.com isn't Canon

I don't think anyone is "canonically better" than anyone else unless specifically demonstrated to be so, BTW.

Canon doesn't work like that.


Exactly.

Originally posted by DarthAnt66
Filoni's statements aren't Canon either, BTW.

EDIT: And I question the story group's vetting process and what such means, also. The story group thought it was fine for a book to put Maul as a better duelist than Dooku. It seems they don't really care about that sort of stuff / leave it to the author and/or fans to decide.
1. I didn't say they were canon, I said, uncontradicted authority explaining something they have authority over

2. Wasn't that debunked by elimnist in the how powerful is ahsoka thread?

1. I'm pretty sure I've seen Filoni's statements on the matter and disagreed with your interpretation over it, so it's not remotely definitive enough to mean anything especially considering it's not Canon.

2. Nope. I literally emailed the author of the book and they confirmed it was for lightsaber dueling. It shows that the story group doesn't care for that.

Rebels Maul>Ahsoka. Denying canonical statements is pathetic.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Rebels Maul>Ahsoka. Denying canonical statements is pathetic.
It's too bad there's none that exist that say maul>ahsoka

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
It's too bad there's none that exist that say maul>ahsoka

It's too bad there is and you keep twisting it to suit your purposes. Maul was "potentially" amped. He beat three Inquisitors harder than Ahsoka beat two (not the same team, the team Maul faced also had Eighth Brother) and Ahsoka took 40 seconds to dispatch SS in a 1v1, Maul immediately Force Pushed Eighth Brother away in two moves and stomped SS. Maul's feats are better. And he fought Ahsoka to a standstill despite she using Djem So which gives her an advantage over Juyo.

Maul being the "logical choice" to pair with Ezra makes the most sense considering not only is Maul indisputably one of the two strongest people in that group and Ezra the weakest, but because Maul could also protect Ezra better being intimately familiar with the layout and mechanisms of the temple, and because Maul is the only one who really knew what to do with the holocron that Ezra was carrying.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
He beat three Inquisitors harder than Ahsoka beat two (not the same team, the team Maul faced also had Eighth Brother) and Ahsoka took 40 seconds to dispatch SS in a 1v1, Maul immediately Force Pushed Eighth Brother away in two moves and stomped SS. Maul's feats are better. And he fought Ahsoka to a standstill despite she using Djem So which gives her an advantage over Juyo.
Joker has already countered you on this. Why don't you respond to his counters instead of going on as if he'd never made them?

They're about to fight, though. Maul is the best guy to protect Ezra IN A FIGHT. Which means, that in a fighting sense, Maul>Ahsoka.

I countered that point plenty of times and you didn't respond, so please shut the **** up, lmao.

I love when people lose debates and then still continue to spew the same shit in other threads without countering the unaddressed points. Like, at least have the courtesy to keep your debunked views to yourself if you can't argue them for shit.

Yeah right. Debunked views. Sure. If they're gonna fight, and Maul is best suited to protect the weak link, I think it's pretty obvious that they're saying Maul is the superior fighter of the group.
And Maul>>THREE Inquisitors, Ahsoka>TWO Inquisitors isn't ABC Logic. The teams weren't the exact same. At least learn what ABC Logic is before calling other people's arguments ABC Logic.
You can yell around "I won", but you just denied a canonical statement because of apparent environmental advantage when the episode makes clear Maul has been in that underworld location all the time. Debunk this.
If Maul has a canonical statement putting him as superior to Ahsoka, we cannot deny it. End.

As usual peddling bs. Maul never beat the three inqusiors, Ahsoka outclassed the two inqusitors and was confirmed to ""never be in danger" facing them.

If said canonical statement said anything other than Maul was the best to protect Ezra, you might have a point, but it didn't, so it's pointless to bring up here

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Yeah right. Debunked views. Sure. If they're gonna fight, and Maul is best suited to protect the weak link, I think it's pretty obvious that they're saying Maul is the superior fighter of the group.
And Maul>>THREE Inquisitors, Ahsoka>TWO Inquisitors isn't ABC Logic. The teams weren't the exact same. At least learn what ABC Logic is before calling other people's arguments ABC Logic.
You can yell around "I won", but you just denied a canonical statement because of apparent environmental advantage when the episode makes clear Maul has been in that underworld location all the time. Debunk this.
If Maul has a canonical statement putting him as superior to Ahsoka, we cannot deny it. End. You're hopeless, lol. I've addressed all of this nonsensical trash before and you ignored it, so I'm not wasting my time with you anymore.

Now you know what it's like trying to defend ahsoka on cv joker

"Nonsensical trash" hasn't been addressed. You believe you have, but that doesn't make it a reality. But given people will just say my arguments are trash because I don't bow to Lady Tano, then I'm just letting it be. Bye-bye.
And Maul wasn't beating the Inquisitors? Yeah. He just kicked SS in the face, knocking her out for some time, landed two hits on FB which left him vulnerable weren't it for Maul being forced to dodge a strike from another Inquisitor, then Maul just did with EB the same he did with SS. Not beating them at all. No.

You're dense, lmfao.

Quote and respond to joker's arguments(and I mean all of what he said, not cropped quotes) or drop the bluster.

Rather than addressing anything he's said you've simply repeated what you've already said and what Joker already responded to

I'm not going to counter because it's likely I won't even get a response. I'm not going to waste my time on this.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Quote and respond to joker's arguments(and I mean all of what he said, not cropped quotes) or drop the bluster.

Rather than addressing anything he's said you've simply repeated what you've already said and what Joker already responded to And completely misconstruing what I was saying.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
I'm not going to counter because it's likely I won't even get a response. I'm not going to waste my time on this. LMFAO WHAT, why wouldn't you get a response?

Thesithmaster, what's your zodiac sign?

Not seeing why Joker should respond when you've failed to do so

Originally posted by |King Joker|
And completely misconstruing what I was saying.

LMFAO WHAT, why wouldn't you get a response?

Umm... because you said you didn't want to waste time on this? In this page?

And my Zodiac sign is Cancer.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Not seeing why Joker should respond when you've failed to do so

Read the entire page please. Especially Joker's post at seven something P.M.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
Read the entire page six please. Especially Joker's post at seven something P.M.

He said he's not wasting time on you because you aren't legitimately responding to him.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
He said he's not wasting time on you because you aren't legitimately responding to him.

Hmm... OK. Then I might respond. If I do though, it probably won't be today.

It wouldn't be wasting my time if you actually responded to my previous post -- I meant it's a waste of my time responding to your future posts consistening of addressed points.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
He said he's not wasting time on you because you aren't legitimately responding to him.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
And my Zodiac sign is Cancer. http://i.imgur.com/w3hUyFC.gif

Originally posted by |King Joker|
http://i.imgur.com/w3hUyFC.gif

Hmm... I'm very interested to hear why.

Oh, it's just that your sign correlates with your arguments.

Which thread is it where Sithmaster hasn't responded?

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Oh, it's just that your sign correlates with your arguments. :

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Which thread is it where Sithmaster hasn't responded?
Virtually every thread he attempts to respond in, and yet doesn't bother to actually address the points his opponent brings up

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Which thread is it where Sithmaster hasn't responded?

This one. I might respond tomorrow though.

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Virtually every thread he attempts to respond in, and yet doesn't bother to actually address the points his opponent brings up

Proof please.

Originally posted by thesithmaster
And my Zodiac sign is Cancer.

Not surprising.

Originally posted by Darth Thor
Which thread is it where Sithmaster hasn't responded? My post on page 3 of this thread.

Joker stomped sithmaster horribly. Hilarious.

That said, Ant, why is SoD Maul "solidly" above Rebels Ahsoka? I'm fine with a slight ">", but solidly is quite the strong word.

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Joker stomped sithmaster horribly. Hilarious.

That said, Ant, why is SoD Maul "solidly" above Rebels Ahsoka? I'm fine with a slight ">", but solidly is quite the strong word.

Care elaborating on how I was "stomped horribly"?

Not only did you not respond to Joker's post on page 3, (which in and of itself isn't necessarily stompage), you seemingly went on to lampshade joker's post and keep saying the same shit to other users, as joker pointed out:

Originally posted by |King Joker|
I love when people lose debates and then still continue to spew the same shit in other threads without countering the unaddressed points. Like, at least have the courtesy to keep your debunked views to yourself if you can't argue them for shit.

Stomped.

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Not only did you not respond to Joker's post on page 3, (which in and of itself isn't necessarily stompage), you seemingly went on to lampshade joker's post and keep saying the same shit to other users, as joker pointed out:

Stomped.

I will respond to it.
And I can't post my argument? Even though it hasn't been successfully debunked? OK. Didn't know that.

You can't have your arguments responded to, then in the very same thread, parrot those same arguments that were responded to. You can't say Joker failed to debunk your arguments, while not having responded to him.

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
You can't have your arguments responded to, then in the very same thread, parrot those same arguments that were responded to. You can't say Joker failed to debunk your arguments, while not having responded to him.

Well, I will have free reign to do so tomorrow

Gewd.

Is there any discussion actually happening here regarding Malak vs Ahsoka? (You know, the point of this thread)

On that topic, I'd say scaling above Darth Nihilus (via implied parity with Darth Revan, at least on board the Star Forge) gives Malak at the absolute worst the ability to compete with Ahsoka. Scaling above someone who can pull capital ships from the surface of a planet into orbit puts Malak's TK as immensely impressive. Stasising KOTOR Revan for like 30 seconds is a better Force feat than anything I've seen Ahsoka do (no I don't think Force pushing Vader like 10 feet is mega impressive, especially since Ahsoka had to exert herself a pretty solid amount to do it, and the attack did nothing at all to Vader). Also very impressive is stasising Bastila, then proceeding to fight and defeat Revan on the Leviathan all while continuing to hold Bastila in stasis (remember that Bastila, only 2 planets later on Rakata Prime, fought Revan, Jolee, and Juhani all at the same time, and even finished the fight by knocking them all to the ground with a Force wave). He even managed, at one point on the Leviathan, to hold Bastila and Carth in stasis, while also holding Revan with a Force whirlwind, all at the same time.

We also have the fact that his mere thoughts and approaching presence caused disturbances in the Force that Bastila felt, and he was powerful and corrupting enough that Bastila basically said she would fall back to the dark side if she re-entered his presence (on the Star Forge, after Revan beat her and brought her back to the light).

Malak having the saber skills to compete with KOTOR Revan on the Star Forge is also immensely impressive. The fight on the Star Forge was described by Drew to be a brutal duel that would have stretched over multiple pages if it had been written in a novel. Remember, KOTOR Revan (as of the Star Forge)>Darth Revan>Mando Wars Revan, who was stated to have learned literally everything the Jedi could teach him (which would logically include any and all things related to lightsaber combat), combined with the fact that Revan also mastered the Echani style of combat, which puts heavy emphasis on precognition (which of course grants its own advantages in a melee fight).

Malak beat Bastila who is in the same tier as Obi and Dooku. How does that stack up???

Originally posted by nfactor1995
Is there any discussion actually happening here regarding Malak vs Ahsoka? (You know, the point of this thread)
. Stasising KOTOR Revan for like 30 seconds is a better Force feat than anything I've seen Ahsoka do (no I don't think Force pushing Vader like 10 feet is mega impressive, especially since Ahsoka had to exert herself a pretty solid amount to do it, and the attack did nothing at all to Vader).


What is it with the strawmen? Ahsoka pushing vader isn't what makes her so impressive(and no one's fcking argued that in almost a year now), it's that Vader, who's tk barrier can withstand explosions that can dissolve starships, didn't find it worth his time to attempt to tk Ahsoka until Ahsoka was off balance and had her defenses down despite Vader regularly abusing tk in canon.

In other words, using common sense, it's clear that Vader, a vastly impressive force user can't tk Ahsoka to any significant degree which suggests they're fairly close to each other as force users.
That Ahsoka is a near equal of Vader is rather obvious when you realize that Ahsoka managed to have an upper hand or fight evenly with Vader for more than a minuite before finally being put on the backfoot despite them fighting on an implied nexus.

Why are you so mean to n-factor kek

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
Why are you so mean to n-factor kek
It's called tough love bro

But like specifically him and almost no one else

Originally posted by XSUPREMEXSKILLZ
But like specifically him and almost no one else
the deeper the broship, the tougher the love

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
What is it with the strawmen? Ahsoka pushing vader isn't what makes her so impressive(and no one's fcking argued that in almost a year now), it's that Vader, who's tk barrier can withstand explosions that can dissolve starships, didn't find it worth his time to attempt to tk Ahsoka until Ahsoka was off balance and had her defenses down despite Vader regularly abusing tk in canon.

In other words, using common sense, it's clear that Vader, a vastly impressive force user can't tk Ahsoka to any significant degree which suggests they're fairly close to each other as force users.
That Ahsoka is a near equal of Vader is rather obvious when you realize that Ahsoka managed to have an upper hand or fight evenly with Vader for more than a minuite before finally being put on the backfoot despite them fighting on an implied nexus.

To respond to your 1st paragraph:

1. You realize that Force barrier =/= TK power right? Like, there really isn't any evidence of correlation (unless you can provide some that's clearly demonstrating that someone's TK is directly proportional and related to their barrier?).
2. Where is it stated or implied that the Malachor explosion dissolves starships?
3. Ahsoka was BARELY off-balance when he pushed her. Heck she didn't even lose her footing or show that she was flailing backwards, all she did was take like one step back, then Vader shoved her off the platform (casually at that). Also, proof that her defenses were down?

To respond to your 2nd paragraph:

Vader was driving Ahsoka back and had her on the defensive for like 90% of the fight, and she was clearly struggling to keep up with him during much of it, while he never really once indicated significant struggle. Yeah she can "contend" with him (which really just means hold her own and survive, there doesn't seem to be any point in that fight in which Vader is in any real danger of losing, from what I see) as evidenced by the fact that she survived as long as she did, but this puts her out of Malak's range...why exactly?

As stated before, Malak scales above Darth Nihilus, via being roughly (arguably) on par with Darth Revan, who is superior to Mando-Wars Revan, who is stated to be superior to Nihilus. Nihilus has very impressive TK - in fact, what has Vader done to put himself either on par with, or noticeably above Nihilus in that department?

Nihilus himself has one-shot Darth Traya, who has impressive feats and accolades in her own right. Nihilus also stasised (or stunned or whatever he did) Meetra, Canderous, and Visas Marr on board his ship, before making the fatal mistake of attempting to drain Meetra. This Meetra shortly after this encounter went on to defeat Darth Sion multiple times and defeated Darth Traya herself, all on the significant dark side nexus of Malachor V. Yet before attempting to drain her, Nihilus had her (and her party) dead to rights. And Malak directly scales above this level of power.

And again, you didn't respond to basically any of my post, so I'll post it all again here for you to properly address.