Shaak wins pretty comfortably, 10/10.
Ahsoka was matched by Rebels Maul over the course of a marathon duel. TCW/SOD Maul > Rebels Maul:
General Grievous has trounced SOD Maul, dismissing him after a single clash:
In fact, Grievous has done the same thing to TCW Maul's peers, like Obi-Wan Kenobi:
And Asajj Ventress:
So what have we established? General Grievous >>> Asajj Ventress/Obi-Wan Kenobi/TCW Maul > Rebels Maul = Ahsoka.
Now, an exhausted Shaak was able to hold her own against Grievous for a decent amount of time:
Grievous wasn't even able to legitimately outduel her -- he abused his strength advantage and smacked Shaak's blade out of her hand with sheer brute strength, as opposed to actively piercing her guard through superior skill, with a slash, strike or stab.
In summary:
A younger Ahsoka held her own against Grievous for the same amount of time and even go a force push in.
That's PIS. No one that young should be able to compete with Grievous. Setting that aside, it's also an inconsistency. The majority of teenage Ahsoka's feats portray her as vastly beneath that level of combative prowess. We've got:
Ahsoka was dark side amped when she fought Anakin, and still failed spectacularly. The same Anakin is consistently portrayed as a relative peer of TCW Ventress, and I already covered how Grievous treated her.
As for Vizsla, he was clowned by 22 bby Obi-Wan, who is even worse than the Kenobi that Grievous thrashed.
2 showings to 1.
Grievous and Kenobi have been at each other’s neck throughout the clone wars each making the other retreat in different occasions.
Not at all. Grievous has consistently blazed through Obi-Wan's defenses within seconds of engaging him, throughout the entire war:
Kenobi only enters Grievous' general range by ROTS.
Ventress out dueled grievous and was going to kill him if the droids didn’t interfere.
That was when she became enraged, after Grievous taunted her and killed a fellow Nightsister in front of her. Prior to that, Ventress was being trounced.
Also Maul did the same to grievous and shoved him out a hole in the wall.
That was on Dathomir, which is a major dark side nexus. When Grievous faced him on even ground, Maul got the Ventress/Kenobi treatment.
I dont’t see why superior strength would apply to Skaak Ti and not everyone else here.
Ahsoka isn't Grievous. She isn't going to smack Shaak's blade from her hands. But the point of bringing that up was to show that Grievous didn't even outduel Shaak, he prevailed through other means. So in reality it was a stalemate, though Shaak knew she wasn't as good as him.
Ahsoka as a teenager survived a fight with Grievous
I already addressed this:
That's PIS. No one that young should be able to compete with Grievous. Setting that aside, it's also an inconsistency. The majority of teenage Ahsoka's feats portray her as vastly beneath that level of combative prowess. We've got:
Ahsoka was dark side amped when she fought Anakin, and still failed spectacularly. The same Anakin is consistently portrayed as a relative peer of TCW Ventress, and I already covered how Grievous treated her.
As for Vizsla, he was clowned by 22 bby Obi-Wan, who is even worse than the Kenobi that Grievous thrashed.
2 showings to 1.
And in all honestly do you think Grevious would have done better against Vader because I’d laugh if that’s the case
You can laugh all you want, but that doesn't make it any less true. By feats, Grievous would have positively trounced that pre-prime version of Vader, who struggles against peers of a weaker Maul than the one Grievous nigh-instantly dismissed.
All feats point to Rebels Maul being > TCW
Doesn't matter, since we have a statement putting TCW Maul above his Rebels incarnation, which means he just absorbs those feats to a higher degree.
Better feats don't invalidate outverse scaling. The scaling just becomes all the more impressive.
and that statement is definitely not canon as Matt always posts his opinion (ex: he said Luke never matched Vader)
No, Martin tends to make clear whether he's speaking from opinion or fact:
"I think" versus "for sure." You can tell from what perspective he's speaking. And in this case, it's fact.
Dave Filoni explicitly said once “only Sidious or Vader can match Ahsoka blow for blow” he said that as a fact, but later Maul matches her which proves the statement is false. Nobody’s statements are 100% canon unless they are backed up by feats in which the Maul statement is NOT at all
That makes as much sense as me claiming that because there are a few inconsistent feats, no feats are canon unless backed by statements.
Dave Filoni choosing to go and objectively, visibly retcon one of his statements in no conceivable way has anything to do with Matt Martin -- member of the Lucasfilm Storygroup, who has an official say on what is and is not canon -- declaring that Rebels Maul is a worse fighter than TCW Maul.
Ahsoka lasted a minute against Vader who is > Anakin.
Prove that Rebels Vader is stronger than Anakin.
Kenobi lasted a little longer
No, a LOT longer.
against a weaker opponent
Proof that Rebels Vader > ROTS Vader? Last I checked, ROTS Vader has parity with ROTS Obi-Wan, who is comparable to General Grievous, who trounced SOD Maul, who is canonically superior to Rebels Maul, who basically matched Rebels Ahsoka, who near-equaled Rebels Vader.
with circumstance (him being extremely emotionally conflicted).
Vader wasn't emotionally hindered.
So Ahsoka is roughly above Kenobi,
No, she's solidly below him.
Rebels Maul is roughly equal to Rebels Ahsoka who contended with Vader.
Which just shows how weak Vader is at this point.
TCW Maul on the other hand was stomped by Grievous....Vader >>>>> Grievous. The statement is invalid and is just an opinion that is devoid of feats to help support it.
Clearly Vader does not >>>> Grievous, that's just your assumption. Since Vader struggles against people stated to be weaker than people Grievous has few issues against, you are obviously wrong.
Youre willing to use this statement as canon to fuel your agenda, but yet you write off TCW Ahsoka doing better against Grievous than Maul did as PIS
Because it is. Are you seriously going to contend that teenage Ahsoka performing far better against Grievous than Obi-Wan Kenobi himself (and by default, her own friggin master, Anakin) isn't PIS? Or Maul, for that matter.
despite Ahsoka being consistently portrayed at that level
That's entirely untrue. As of right now, Ahsoka has 1 feat that portrays her as vastly >>>> Kenobi, Anakin & Maul. She has 2 that show otherwise.
(fighting with Vizsla,)
Anti-feat:
Next.
Grievous
Objective PIS, balanced out by the above feat, and outweighed by this:
Try again.
Ventress,
Canceled out by this:
Consistently, Maul ~ Obi-Wan ~ Ventress ~ Anakin >>>>> child Ahsoka. As it should be. Only by Rebels does she legitimately reach their level, and I have absolutely no problem with that.
With the Grievous feat, you're arguing that teenage Robin being far superior to Batman wouldn't be PIS. With the future Maul feat, you're arguing that teenage Robin being a peer of Batman isn't PIS. Sad.
you just used a feat of Ahsoka....when she was like 13 years old fighting an assassin capable of beating Jedi masters....AS AN ANTI FEAT
Try to follow the conversation. You brought up 13 year old Ahsoka's feats against Ventress:
"You're willing to use this statement as canon to fuel your agenda, but yet you write off TCW Ahsoka doing better against Grievous than Maul did as PIS despite Ahsoka being consistently portrayed at that level (fighting with Vizsla, Grievous, Ventress, and soon Maul himself)."
I simply canceled it out.
Omg I don’t know where to begin...I’m just going to copy and paste what I said in the other thread:
“yes that is exactly my argument and then there is of course the fact that General Grievous fodderized TCW Maul, and Darth Vader is >>>>>> General Grievous so therefore Maul stalemating someone that was able to give Vader a good fight makes Rebels factually his prime by feats
I already addressed this:
Clearly Vader does not >>>> Grievous, that's just your assumption. Since Vader struggles against people stated to be weaker than people Grievous has few issues against, you are obviously wrong.
In my opinion statements are only canon if the feats back them up
And it's just that: your opinion. It's not how canon works.
(and of course it depends who the statement is coming from. For example Dave Filoni (head off animation and the director of both TV shows) has more validity than anyone else).
Filoni answers to the Storygroup, so no.
Also the guy that gave the statement always says his opinion on Star Wars and posts what he thinks. It’s not like he is reaching out to Filoni to ask these questions, he is just saying what he thinks and that is not good enough for most (nearly all) people on this site.
I already addressed this:
No, Martin tends to make clear whether he's speaking from opinion or fact:
"I think" versus "for sure." You can tell from what perspective he's speaking. And in this case, it's fact.
The quote has no validity as canon on this site,
The quote has total validity in canon continuity.
Vader > Rebels Ahsoka >|= Rebels Maul > General Grievous > TCW Maul > TCW Ahsoka
General Grievous >>>> SOD/TCW Maul > Rebels Maul = Rebels Ahsoka =/< Rebels Vader. Teenage Ahsoka is many orders of magnitude below them all.
Lastly, more feats that back up my statement: TCW Ahsoka (a MUCH weaker version of Ahsoka) is about to duel TCW Maul (what he is referring to as “prime” Maul) and this is the “big battle” of the final season, so she is likely going to give him a hard fight (I can guarantee this duel will at least last over a minute which is like a marathon for Star Wars duels). So that shows that TCW Ahsoka isn’t that far behind TCW Maul (otherwise the duel would be a stomp and wouldn’t be hyped up as the big fight of this season), so therefore if TCW Maul was contended with by a novice Ahsoka, how the hell would a weaker Maul be capable of stalemating a MUCH stronger Ahsoka? Oh yea it’s because Rebels Maul is prime Maul as backed up by every single feat possible
This is all meaningless because:
Also, about this:
Oh yea it’s because Rebels Maul is prime Maul
Versus this:
TCW Ahsoka (a MUCH weaker version of Ahsoka) is about to duel TCW Maul (what he is referring to as “prime” Maul)
You're contradicting yourself. Pick one.
Being hit by Vizsla is not anti-feat
Vizsla has always been shown to be a threat to users of force, If he was always easily defeated by jedis and then he dominated Ahsoka then one could claim anti feat...
I myself had never tried to argue she contended with Ventress until you tried to bring up her losing as a literal novice (like her second fight ever)
Yes, you did:
Youre willing to use this statement as canon to fuel your agenda, but yet you write off TCW Ahsoka doing better against Grievous than Maul did as PIS despite Ahsoka being consistently portrayed at that level (fighting with Vizsla, Grievous, Ventress, and soon Maul himself). Also another thing that backs up Rebels Maul > TCW Maul is that TCW Ahsoka is going to contend with TCW Maul, yet a supposedly weaker Maul was able to stalemate a FAR superior version of Ahsoka (Rebels)....Yea no, the feats do not back it up at all
Then I canceled it out, plain and simple.
don’t bring it up again because it doesn’t pertain to the argument
I didn't bring it up in the first place, you did.
You debunked absolutely nothing and there is no help for you tbh. I’ve debunked everything you just said
Saying such doesn't make it so. Anyone can go back and read that you've just been repeating yourself for some time now.
You argument: how can a teenager compete with fully grown masters....age in Star Wars does not matter in the slightest.
So me using 13 year old Ahsoka is perfectly legitimate, since age is meaningless.
Why don't adolescents regularly become promoted to Jedi Knights, if age is meaningless? Why wasn't 12 year old Anakin the most powerful Jedi ever, if age is meaningless? Why does adult Ahsoka >>>> teenage Ahsoka, if age is meaningless? Why did your god Dave Filoni state that age is not meaningless, if age is meaningless?
"Ventress just happens to be older than Ahsoka, and farther down in her training, so she's more powerful than Ahsoka."
The basic truth of practice makes perfect is one of the most fundamental concepts of reality, lol.
You can have an aptitude for certain things and just be superior in combat.
Talent is worthless against people with decades of training and experience, unless you have decades of study as well.
Ahsoka has feats that are consistent
You keep saying this, yet they are not, and I have shown why.
while injured and tired she contended with Pre Vizsla,
Who was stomped by early war Obi-Wan:
We've been over this.
she contended with Grievous
PIS, and inconsistent.
(who had no reason to not try and was actively trying to prevent her escape, so that’s just your personal head canon and it has no validity here),
As usual, you're not following the conversation. I was talking about 13 year old Ahsoka's duel with Grievous. Do try and keep up.
and she’s going to contend with Maul in the next episode whether you like it or not. This has been hyped up as the “big fight” of the season, and therefore she is obviously going to contend.
This doesn't need to be addressed since it hasn't happen, and thus you are speculating.
Like I said consistency means it’s factually not PIS,
Like I said, it's not called Plot Induced Inconsistency. It's Plot Induced Stupidity. It's not hard to understand. Something stupid. Consistent stupidity is still stupidity.
Also I’ve found another beautiful quote from your god Matt Martin. He said character skills are based on story needs, so therefore if his statements are as canon as you want them to be vs fights using the Star Wars universe shouldn’t even be possible because every fight just depends on the story needs...
That has nothing to do with anything we're discussing here. I did not bring to bear a quote from Matt Martin about fights, and I never have, and I never will, because he is nonsensical in regard to how fights work, and I have argued this repeatedly in other threads.
Martin is making a statement about a state of being, not a fight. Do not conflate the two.
Like I said he posts his opinion and nothing else. Not canon in the slightest
That's your own headcanon, I've already posted quotes from him showing otherwise.
Vader > Rebels Ahsoka >|= Rebels Maul > Grievous > TCW Maul > TCW Ahsoka
Utterly baseless.
Go lean the English language, because I explicitly used the word “until”. I only used it because you used an earlier Ahsoka vs Ventress fight which isn’t fair or correct. Please reread what I wrote I said “I didn’t use Ventress...UNTIL you did” which means I did
Once again, you're not following the conversation. You accused me of bringing up early war Ahsoka's duel with Ventress, and using it as evidence.
You were the one who first brought her up, and tried to use her. I simply countered with another feat from the same time period. In other words, I didn't use Ventress until you did.
You can’t cancel out a later war feat with an earlier one because Ahsoka was stronger later therefore eliminating your idea.
What are you talking about? It's literally the same time period. This isn't 22 bby Ahsoka versus 19 bby Ahsoka. Both took place in the same year as Attack of the Clones, it's the same Ahsoka. You really need to start paying attention.
Lol talent is far from useless, THATS just another head canon from you.
I didn't say talent is useless. I said talent was useless without extensive training. Without training, talent is just unrealized potential. Even if you do train, it takes decades to fully realize your potential. Otherwise, Anakin would already be on par with the Father, and any talented musician could just take a few lessons and go play in Carnegie hall.
Look for a quote that says talent is “useless”....didn’t think so.
Strawman.
Cassandra Cain can literally beat the best fighting in the DC universe,
She is basically a precog.
and Jean a younger and less skilled telepath can beat Xavier a much older telepath with decades more experience.
That's power.
Your argument is (expletive omitted) talent matters just as much as experience and you do not get to decide if doesn’t
I'm sorry, but more training = skill. That's reality. Children will never be as skilled as adults who put in the same effort but have done it far longer. Practice makes perfect. This is as basic a fact as gravity existing. Flailing around with irrelevent examples won't make your fantasy true.
That's why Rebels Ahsoka is more skilled than child Ahsoka. Because she has trained longer, and is older. Talent is useless without training.
You’re choosing what you want to be canon.
No... you are ignoring official canon sources for positively no reason, except that you don't like what they say.
Matt’s statement just proves he posts his opinion on the Star Wars universe.
We've been over this. Martin speaks from opinion, and as an official source. It's not either one or the other, lol. And he makes sure to distinguish when he's saying something as fact, and whether he's speaking from his own opinion:
The difference between "I think" and "for sure" is fairly obvious. Martin is not speculating in this quote, he's making a declarative statement:
Deal with it. Like it or not, Martin is literally a creative executive at Lucasfilm. His word absolutely carries weight, and he is an official source:
It's not hard to understand.
By feats I’ve proven like 3 times not Rebels Maul is superior to TCW Maul which contradicts the statement and makes it null and void.
You haven't done this once. You've just parroted the same debunked talking points over and over.
Maul in rebels contended with Ahsoka who is above Grievous (who stomped Maul) by Vader scaling
I already addressed this multiple times. Vader being massively above Grievous is your own baseless assumption, and it's clearly disproven by Matt's statement and Maul scaling.
it’s the opposite of a head canon.
Nope, it's pure headcanon.
You’re just trying to use my words hehehe.
I'm sorry, I didn't realize you claimed the commonly used phrase "headcanon" as your own.
I posted factual statements from his twitter that prove he posts whatever he thinks as fact. Therefore nothing he posts can be taken as definitive canon.
No, you didn't. What kind of garbage logic is that?
Because that makes sense...
He had opinions on both and he posts them. He felt that Maul was “out of practice”,
He didn't say he felt like Maul was out of practice. He said Maul is out of practice. End of story.
which isn’t true because there were inquisitors being sent to kill him on a consistent basis.
Prove it, and that doesn't even mean he couldn't atrophy in skill.
(His lightsaber was made out of a broken inquisitors lightsaber)
So, 1 Inquisitor.
Honestly literally wait until Friday and my argument is proven to be factual which will be funny.
You can try and speculate, but I will wait for the actual evidence to come out before forming my views.
Regardless, it's impossible for you to win. I've already addressed how the Maul fight will never mean anything due to blatant PIS, and even if it did, that just makes her showings 2 to 2. So everything would cancel out, and she's still the fodder she should be.
No, actually, it's still 2 to 1 in favour of my position. The PIS Grievous feat and the future PIS Maul feat contradict each other, and therefore do not serve the same side.
17 year old Ahsoka competing with General Grievous significantly levels her above Asajj Ventress, Obi-Wan Kenobi & TCW Darth Maul, all of whom were trounced by Grievous. And Anakin, who scales to Ventress.
17 year old Ahsoka competing with TCW Maul places her in the tier of Ventress, Obi-Wan & Anakin.
Ahsoka cannot both be comparable to Ventress, Anakin, Obi-Wan & Maul, yet also be vastly superior to them. Thus, they contradict each other and are separate positions.
Meanwhile, two feats place late-war Ahsoka as vastly beneath Anakin/Obi-Wan, and their relative peers. Struggling against Pre Vizsla, and being stomped by a holding back Anakin.
So really, there's no way for you to win.
If a much much much weaker version of Ahsoka contends with TCW Maul
Prove that TCW Ahsoka is much weaker than Rebels Ahsoka.
(what you desire to be prime Maul despite every bit of evidence I’ve shown to say otherwise),
You mean, what Matt Martin, an official source on canon stated, despite your baseless preconceived views.
then how in the world could a stronger Ahsoka contend with a weaker Maul....oh wait it’s because Maul got more powerful as well and Rebels is his prime.
No, that would just mean that TCW Ahsoka is close to Rebels Ahsoka. All of your ludicrous scaling chains are hinged on your own baseless assumptions, like Vader >>>>> Grievous or Rebels Ahsoka >>> TCW Ahsoka.
Let me rephrase weak Ahsoka can contend with TCW Maul, but Rebels Maul (supposedly weaker Maul) has a stalemate with Rebels Ahsoka. If TCW Ahsoka can contend with TCW Maul Rebels Ahsoka would destroy him
Let me reiterate. Teenage Ahsoka will never be anywhere near TCW Maul, who is factually stronger than Rebels Maul. Rebels Ahsoka was matched by a past-prime Maul, when General Grievous trounced a superior Maul but failed to accomplish this against an exhausted Shaak Ti.
Log in to comment