Savage Opress vs. Ahsoka Tano

@rgr:

I agree in that he didn't go deep enough to harm Vader, but a millimeter is really underselling it.

Regardless, as I said before, Vader's helmet is a unique advantage. If he was a normal fighter, that blow would have grazed flesh rather than his armor. It's like dueling Deadpool and stabbing him. Yes, he can regenerate, but you still technically won the duel, because that would have been a victory blow for any normal duelist.

@lord_tenebrous: Why? If Vader's helmet is bigger than his head and it was only grazed in such a way it didn't leave any visible mark (unlike Ahsoka's strike which slashed it), then how can you say the attack would have touched his head, let alone kill him?

Regarding your claim that dodging indicates superiority because it is more difficult than parrying, it's only your personal interpretation and not actually backed by showings. Ezra dodged blows from the Grand Inquisitor, Ahsoka dodged blows from Ventress, Vizsla dodged blows from Maul, Barriss dodged blows from Anakin, TCW Obi-Wan, Anakin and Ventress dodged blows from Dooku,..

Vader could stomp two Savages

@rgr:

"Why? If Vader's helmet is bigger than his head and it was only grazed in such a way it didn't leave any visible mark"

We clearly saw it do damage, the fact that it didn't show anything later on would just be an artistry error. 

"(unlike Ahsoka's strike which slashed it),"

She cut deeper because she took him off guard.

"then how can you say the attack would have touched his head, let alone kill him?" 

To Koth, Vader's helmet is essentially his head, so that's what Koth will content himself with hitting. If Vader was a normal fighter, like, say Dooku or Obi-Wan, his blade would have cut them. The fact that Vader can tank it is just his own edge, like when Gallia was able to kick Savage. The effect isn't important, it's the fact that they were able to do it in the first place.   

"Regarding your claim that dodging indicates superiority because it is more difficult than parrying, it's only your personal interpretation and not actually backed by showings. Ezra dodged blows from the Grand Inquisitor, Ahsoka dodged blows from Ventress, Vizsla dodged blows from Maul, Barriss dodged blows from Anakin, TCW Obi-Wan, Anakin and Ventress dodged blows from Dooku,.." 

When a fighter is dodging blows it's generally showing them in a favourable light. Like this instance: 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/R934d2rVAgDonvwMA

And this one:

https://photos.app.goo.gl/FpfNiifCwFowu4QD6

And this one:

https://photos.app.goo.gl/yN17SiNWdmXxdp4YA

And this one:

https://photos.app.goo.gl/XJQMMQWkYHbcvoFn7

And this one:

https://photos.app.goo.gl/sEfaxCpz4mcEpAAn9

And this one: 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/siSE3k48eiG8pkMD9

And this one: 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/AWW5GzEoYeHdjZ9q9

Etc.

@lord_tenebrous said:

@rgr:

"Or it was indeed a milimeter deep and thus negligible, which means Vader dodged that blow." 

If it was only a millimeter, we wouldn't have seen such damage sparking from his helmet, and pieces of his helmet in the air. 

"Koth knows full well that's not his head, so a milimeter deep scratch would not accomplish anything" 

Koth has no idea what species Vader is, or how thick his helmet is. Furthermore, again this contradicts nothing, because if Vader's helmet had not been there, Koth would have tagged his head. The fact that Vader wears a helmet means that Koth will be more loose in his swing, due to ambiguity. If Vader had no helmet, and was a regular fighter, Koth would be attacking the same way, except the general area he's cutting towards is pure head.  

"Most of the examples you provided depict warriors who were forced to dodge"

None of the examples showed people who were forced to dodge. Dooku has and could have dismissed Ventress with TK and retrieved his lightsaber. Likewise, Kenobi was toying with Ventress and could have done the same thing. 

"because they were unarmed"

Only 3 were of (willingly) unarmed fighters.

"(in some cases, disarmed by their opponents)."

Kenobi allowed himself to be disarmed, he was playing around with Ventress. Dooku was knocked into a wall, and the impact made him let go of his weapon. 

"It doesn't mean superiority,"

It does.

"it means they had to resort to that."

No, it does not. Not usually.

"The examples I provided earlier show that vastly inferior warriors can also dodge strikes from their superiors." 

Your examples were:

- Ezra dodged blows from the Grand Inquisitor (exception to the rule)  

- Ahsoka dodged blows from Ventress (Ahsoka was portrayed as comparable to Ventress, proves nothing) 

- Vizsla dodged blows from Maul (Maul wasn't serious) 

- Barriss dodged blows from Anakin (Barriss was portrayed as comparable to Anakin, proves nothing)  

- TCW Obi-Wan, Anakin and Ventress dodged blows from Dooku,.. (Dooku is never serious against any of them during the war) 

My examples are: 

- Savage dodging Halsey's attacks

- Sidious dodging Savage's attacks 

- Dooku dodging Ventress' attacks

- Dooku dodging Savage's attacks 

- Kenobi dodging Ventress' attacks

- Anakin dodging Ahsoka's attacks 

- Maul dodging Kenobi's attacks

As I said, dodging is generally an indication of superiority. 

"Plus, more nimble, acrobatic fighters would naturally be more prone to dodging. During their fight, Ahsoka dodges way more than Vader does, but Vader doesn't need to do it to have her on the ropes." 

No, he doesn't, but her being able to do so shows how close to his level she is as a fighter.

@lord_tenebrous: I think our points have already been made clear for readers to judge. Let's agree to disagree.

@chaos239 said:

Maul struggled with Viszla because he only had a lightsaber, whereas Vizla had a lightsaber and was using all kinds of deadly mandalorian equipment and gadgets that Maul didn't possess. Dooku was completely unarmed when he couldn't escape those pirates.

There's no need to dismiss them as PIS when there's already in-universe explanations in place.

What? Resurrection's depiction of Vader vs Maul is wrong because Vader didn't use the Force against Maul? Vader did use the Force against Maul, twice. Vader Force to trigger the blasters of the fallen stormtroopers at Maul, but Maul easily deflects the bolts, and shoves the dead stormtroopers into the lava. Vader once again used the Force to hurl a platform at Maul, but Maul dodged the attack. Resurrection still holds up in Legends context because we have even more recent sources stating that Maul and Maul are fairly close.

Dave Filoni, in 2012, has said that Maul is "kind of in the Vader-realm," indicating that Maul is at least somewhat close to Vader:

Dave Filoni: And then Savage is a very poorly trained Dark Side wielder. He's all... He's all aggression and power. He's kind of like the Hulk - but he doesn't have a lot of discipline, he doesn't have a lot of know how. Maul is a super dangerous threat because he’s been trained for years, he’s really adept, but he’s broken. So he’s kind of in the Vader-realm, and he’s a bit severed from what he knew, which was having a master, but he’s well trained by Sidious in all types of Sith ways, not the least of which is manipulation.

Source -- Weekly ForceCast: May 4, 2012,

We have another source from 2014 saying that Vader vs Maul is close:

"It's a close call, and these two Sith are well-matched in terms of fighting skiils. But Vader's tactical experience, which he's displayed in everything from construction projects to invasions and space battles, gives him the edge here. Whereas Darth Maul lets anger and arrogance affect his fighting, Vader always seems calm during combat (even a double-edged lightsaber is unlikely to faze him!). However, you get the feeling these two apprentices of Darth Sidious could learn a lot from each other - if only Maul wasn't a goner by the time Vader came along.."

Source -- Star Wars UK Magazine Volume 7 Issue #4 (2014).

Sources from 2012 and 2014 invalidate your stance, so you're just grasping at straws.

Ahsoka stomps

@rgr:

Alrighty

The most powerful Siths are Vader and Sidious

All these attempts to try downplaying Canon Vader and Palpatine are quite useless

About fight Ahsoka wins

@richard96:I know he did, but he made this statement years after Resurrection was in-continuity, in fact the story's canonicity has been retconned twice which is kind of a mess. I still think Resurrection holds merit for its depiction of Vader vs Maul, but I'm only saying this because it was in-continuity for a while and also because the it was published in late 2001, 2 years after The Phantom Menace came out. Back then, lots of Star Wars fans, especially ones who liked the highly choreagraphed lightsaber fights in The Phantom Menace, were obsessed with the idea of a Vader vs Maul battle because they're both cool and menacing villains, they were eager to know how they compare and who would win had they fought. Resurrection was thus was published to answer that question:

"Vader vs Maul.The Brawl to settle it all!

64 amazing pages featuring Darth Vader and Darth Maul in a duel to the death!"― Star Wars Tales Issue #9: Resurrection Cover.

It's also alluded to in the comic itself:

Dark Side Prophets: Maul will prove himself by slaying you. The Emperor will be pleased. Of course, you could refuse the duel and attempt to destroy all of us here and now. You might even succeed. But such a deed would diminish you in the Emperor's eyes, would it not? And you would always wonder. Doubt would always nag at you. You could never be certain whether Darth Maul was your better... Unless you take up this challenge. So... Will you face him?

Source ― Star Wars Tales #9: Resurrection.

The old archived Star Wars website and the Dark Horse publisher reinforces this, saying that Resurrection is an answer to the Vader vs Maul debate:

"Ladies and Gentlemen! Boys and Girls! Droids and Jawas! Prepare yourselves for the battle of the century! In this corner, weighing in at 220 pounds, the terror from Tatooine, the Dark Lord of the Sith, the former Anakin Skywalker -- DARTH VADER! And in this corner, weighing in at 175 pounds, a killer of Jedi, the Naboo Annihilator, Darth Sidious' #1 apprentice -- DARTH MAUL! Make sure you're here on September 12th, 2001 for the answer to the question on everyone's lips: "Who's tougher? Vader or Maul?" Let the BATTLE begin!

Darth Maul had a screen time of approximately fifteen minutes in EPISODE I, but his fame is hardly over. Maul has, by far, been the character most requested by our readers to further explore. How to do it? Easy. Have him knuckle up against Darth Vader. Maul is vicious, physical, and primal. Vader is focused and calculating...but still has the faintest trace of humanity. Both have succumbed to the Dark Side of the force. Both are ambitious. But Sith law says there's only room for one." ―StarWars.com Cargo Bay: Star Wars Tales #9 Description

"Ladies and Gentlemen! Boys and Girls! Droids and Jawas! Prepare yourselves for the battle of the century! In this corner, weighing in at 220 pounds, the terror from Tatooine, the Dark Lord of the Sith, the former Anakin Skywalker -- DARTH VADER! And in this corner, weighing in at 175 pounds, a killer of Jedi, the Naboo Annihilator, Darth Sidious' #1 apprentice -- DARTH MAUL! Make sure you're here on September 12th, 2001 for the answer to the question on everyone's lips: "Who's tougher? Vader or Maul?" Let the BATTLE begin!

Darth Maul had a screen time of approximately fifteen minutes in EPISODE I, but his fame is hardly over. Maul has, by far, been the character most requested by our readers to further explore. How to do it? Easy. Have him knuckle up against Darth Vader. Maul is vicious, physical, and primal. Vader is focused and calculating...but still has the faintest trace of humanity. Both have succumbed to the Dark Side of the force. Both are ambitious. But Sith law says there's only room for one."―Dark Horse Publisher's Summary

The old archived Star Wars website once again makes it clear, saying that Resurrection was published to answer the Vader vs Maul debate:

"Star Wars Tales #9sets out the answer the heated fan debate -- who's tougher: Darth Maul or Darth Vader? Sith doctrine clearly states that there can only be one survivor in this match." ― StarWars.com: September 2001 Comics.

Star Wars Insider reinforces it even further:

"It's an uphill battle whenever a storyteller has to live up to advance hype. And what could garner more hype than a knockdown, drag-out brawl between two of the baddest villains to ever menace movie audiences. Writer Ron Marz and illustrator Rick Leonardi deliver in this on-of-a-kind slugfest between the classic trilogy's Darth Vader and the prequels' death machine, Darth Maul." ― Star Wars Insider 83.

Star Wars Figurine collection alludes it:

"One of the most imaginative and visually challenging of those stories was the spectacular fight for supremacy among the Sith between Darth Maul and Darth Vader as told in the third volume of the Star Wars Tales series." ―Star Wars: The Official Figurine Collection #45

@yousufkhan1212: Whatever the canonicity status of Resurrection was in Legends, it's outdated for Disney canon. Lucas said this two years before it was made:

We've actually never seen real Jedi at work, we've only seen crippled half-droid half-men and young boys that have learned from these old people. So to see a Jedi in his prime fighting in the prime of the Jedi, I want it to be a much more energetic and faster version of what we've been doing"

- George Lucas, Star Wars Episode I: Fights Featurette.

You see, to justify the better choreography in the prequels, Lucas decided that even TPM Obi-Wan was a better fighter than the "not real Jedi" in the OT. Vader's power was retconned later on, with Purge, Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader, The Force Unleashed and other stories. Star Wars: Jedi Battles established in 2014 that ANH Vader was "even stronger" than ROTS Anakin.

This is the trend that Disney followed, as stated in Star Wars: I Am a Sith (2016):

@rgr said:

@yousufkhan1212: Whatever the canonicity status of Resurrection was in Legends, it's outdated for Disney canon. Lucas said this two years before it was made:

We've actually never seen real Jedi at work, we've only seen crippled half-droid half-men and young boys that have learned from these old people. So to see a Jedi in his prime fighting in the prime of the Jedi, I want it to be a much more energetic and faster version of what we've been doing"

- George Lucas, Star Wars Episode I: Fights Featurette.

You see, to justify the better choreography in the prequels, Lucas decided that even TPM Obi-Wan was a better fighter than the "not real Jedi" in the OT. Vader's power was retconned later on, with Purge, Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader, The Force Unleashed and other stories. Star Wars: Jedi Battles established in 2014 that ANH Vader was "even stronger" than ROTS Anakin.

This is the trend that Disney followed, as stated in Star Wars: I Am a Sith (2016):

I agree that Resurrection can't be used for Disney Canon... But for pete's sake, I'm not entertaining the "Legends Vader is sub-TPM Kenobi" argument.

@yousufkhan1212 said:

Nor am I. It's more like Legends Vader is all over the place. He was sub-TPM Kenobi in 1999, around Maul and Dooku circa 2004 and stronger than them in 2014.

Ahsoka.

@rgr: That quote is taken far too literally. Lucas never even said he was sub-TPM Kenobi, he said that he wanted the lightsaber fights in the Prequels to have much faster and more energetic choreagraphy than the OT did because the Prequel era were the prime of the Jedi, which is a given because there's literally hundreds, if not thousands of Jedi, whereas they're virtually existent in the OT.

@yousufkhan1212: He said that we'd "never seen real Jedi at work" and compared that to the TPM characters that were "fighting in the prime of the Jedi". The implication seems pretty clear to me.

Of course, it doesn't make sense when factoring in other material, because Vader's intended power level changed over the years. Pablo Hidalgo said in Star Wars Insider #72 (2003): "As Vader, Anakin is more machine than man, and being a half-droid construct has seriously hampered his lightsaber prowess. Luke, though not as skilful as the young Jedi of the prequels, is still a formidable opponent, and he is very strong in the Force." Then, in 2010, he wrote Head-to-head, which claims Vader would beat post-ROTS Yoda and ROTJ Luke would beat ROTS Anakin.

@alextheboss: When? He didnt become his master until after he beat him.

That was a rage amped Maul. Not relevant considering in Star Wars even non dark side users perform feats they normally aren't capable of with a rage amp. EG Luke vs Vader, Savage Vs Dooku and Ventress, Obi Wan VS. TPM Maul, Obi Wan VS. Maul and Savage...Maul Vs. Sidious.

@lord_tenebrous: Exactly. No only was there circumstances in that fight, but that was one instance against a pre prime Savage (before Maul took him as an apprentice) using a factor that Ashoka doesnt have.

Savage is just too durable, strong and powerful with the force when enraged.

My opinion might change depending on how Ahsoka does against Maul during the final season of TCW. But for now, nothing she's done leads me to think she takes Savage in an all out fight.

Ahsoka

Ahsoka easily

Ahsoka

@rgr:

Lucas wasn't talking about their prowess as fighters. He was talking about the way they fought. Ben and Vader aren't "real Jedi" in the sense that they aren't elaborate and energetic, they don't fight the way Lucas wants the Jedi in the prime to fight. Because they're half droid cripples and weak old men. Luke is young but what he has learned is what the old people have taught him, so he doesn't fight the way the Jedi in their prime do.

@lord_tenebrous:

This is Hidalgo's full quote:

So, his interpretation of Lucas' words is the same as mine, because it is the most straightforward one. Dave Filoni, who was working daily with Lucas in TCW and had direct insight from him said:

Because when I was a kid, the Jedi were a much bigger mystery than they are now. We never really saw one except Obi-Wan, and he was old. And then we got to meet Yoda, but he was old. And Luke, let's face it, he was never really the best. I have a notion that anyone on the Council could really kick his butt.

Insider #62 stated:

When Obi-Wan Kenobi duels his former apprentice Darth Vader on the Death Star, both combatants know that they are but shadows of their former selves. Neither has fought another lightsaber-wielder for many years. Kenobi is an older man, and Vader is a cyborg crippled by the lingering pain of the injuries that make his life-support suit necessary.

George Lucas reiterated his vision in another interview for StarWars.com:

The thing is, in IV, V, and VI, you didn’t really get to see real Jedi in action. To me, that was something that a lot of people would want to see.

[...]

We needed to establish that, but at the same time, we wanted the ultimate sword fight, because they were all very good. It sort of predisposes the sword fight between Anakin and Obi-Wan later on. There’s real purpose to it. You have to establish the rules and then stick with them. The scene illustrates just how Jedi and Sith fight and use lightsabers.

John Knoll, lead visual effects supervisor for the prequels, said:

It wasn’t lost on me that all throughout the original trilogy you’ve never seen Jedi at their prime fighting. You saw Obi-Wan versus Darth Vader; Darth Vader now kind of getting up there in age. In Empire, it’s Luke who’s a kid who’s never really done this before, has just sort of started his training, fighting against Vader who is not really going at him particularly hard. Now you go to a situation where you have two Jedi that are in their prime against this baddie that is supposed to be also at his prime, just going at it. It was clear that the choreography had to be something really very dramatic and special because the expectations would be pretty high for this.

So yeah, Lucas' intent was for the OT warriors to be inferior to the PT warriors. But again, this changed over the years.

savage blocks 1-2 strokes before getting outsped and sliced. Perhaps he survives the first cut but ahsoka just cuts him down the second time. at best he gets a force push in, which should connect, but she resists it enough to not be seriously injured. Ahsoka wins 10/10

@rgr:

A) Erroneous interpretations are erroneous interpretations. Lucas never said or implied that he was talking about how good Vader/Luke/Ben were in a fight. He was specifically talking about HOW they fought. The prequels are the Jedi in their prime, they fight in a more energetic way than Vader and Ben do, because the latter are crippled half-droids and weak old men. Luke is the only one with the capacity for it, but all he's learned is from Ben and Vader.

B) Filoni has nothing to do with Lucas' statements.

C) This contradicts nothing.

D) Outdated C-canon sources have nothing to do with Lucas' statements.

E) Knoll has nothing to do with Lucas' statements.

If you asked Lucas if every single Jedi in the prequels >> Vader, he'd laugh.

@lord_tenebrous: Lucas would think differently of Vader now, yes. But only after he realized it didn't make sense for Vader to be weaker than TPM Obi-Wan, or else Sidious would have replaced him immediately. But Lucas did think that back in 1999, as explained by himself and the people who worked with him.

@yousufkhan1212: you know that are canon sources right? and no my stance still matters,resurrection is still pointless to a debate like this

@rgr: source of pablo stating vader could beat post rots yoda?

@el_mago: Resurrection is usable in debates, I'm afraid:

"Star Wars Tales #9 sets out the answer the heated fan debate -- who's tougher: Darth Maul or Darth Vader? Sith doctrine clearly states that there can only be one survivor in this match." ― StarWars.com: September 2001 Comics.

@el_mago said:

Star Wars: Head-to-head:

@yousufkhan1212: non canon even then and absolutely non canon now.

@rgr: that a canon book?

Ahsoka in a good fight.

It wasn't always non canon, and even in this case, it's irrelevent because Lucasfilm published the comic to "answer the heated fan debate," which yeno... Happens on the kind of forums that we make a hobby out of using right now?

@finalkingthanos said:

No, it was written in 2010. Canon material is post April 2014.

Ahsoka smack Oppress with the force then she begs him to get up again so she can kill him.

@rgr: Interesting book anyway

Ahsoka beats him

@finalkingthanos: Yeah, I don't debate Legends because I see no point in it tbh, but I think this book kinda shows what was the prevailing viewpoint in the last few years before the current canon was born.

@the_fub:

When? He didnt become his master until after he beat him.

There is a time skip between the seasons and we see them fighting jedi together. Maul just randomly wanted to be called the master, that doesn't mean they didn't train together before. We never see them train together after he says that either.

That was a rage amped Maul. Not relevant considering in Star Wars even non dark side users perform feats they normally aren't capable of with a rage amp. EG Luke vs Vader, Savage Vs Dooku and Ventress, Obi Wan VS. TPM Maul, Obi Wan VS. Maul and Savage...Maul Vs. Sidious.

In the deleted scene during that fight Maul was doing way better than Savage. But like I said, even ignoring that they were doing about the same. On his own Savage couldn't even touch Sidious. Even if Maul wasn't amped, he still wouldn't do that badly.

@yousufkhan1212: retconned by chee years later

Chee didn't retcon the comic's reason for existence at all.

@rgr: i would agree with that

@alextheboss: Theres a time jump, but it's not all that substantial and it's unlikely that he gave Savage hands on training if he wasnt his master. Tips probably sure, but it makes zero sense for Maul to have spared with Savage, beat him, then Savage to think he could challenge him. Clearly he was unaware of his power hence his words once Maul beat him.

As for Maul doing the same without an amp, he never did. Deleted scenes are just that, deleted scenes. They were deleted for a reason, that was not what they wanted to portray. Savage didnt touch him, but he fought him off for like 13 seconds while his brother was unconscious. Showing massive growth from when he was casually outdueled by Dooku just a season prior, and his brother after that.

@the_fub:

Clearly he was unaware of his power hence his words once Maul beat him.

He was unaware of his current power, but that doesn't mean he wasn't trained at all, just that they haven't sparred recently. I agree Maul may not have been directly training him, but they were fighting jedi and other creatures across the galaxy, which could be considered training.

As for Maul doing the same without an amp, he never did. Deleted scenes are just that, deleted scenes. They were deleted for a reason, that was not what they wanted to portray.

Deleted scenes can also be deleted due to time constraints or pacing issues.

Savage didnt touch him, but he fought him off for like 13 seconds while his brother was unconscious. Showing massive growth from when he was casually outdueled by Dooku just a season prior, and his brother after that.

Sidious was just playing with him, but yeah, he did show improvement.

@alextheboss: That's not training, at least not from Maul persay. Training is what Dooku did with him.

Yeah but when the directors of the clone wars were talking about that scene, they mentioned how they wanted to portray Sidious as being damn near untouchable. The actual quote is floating around the vine somewhere, I'll try and find it.

He was toying with them sure but was clearly out to kill Savage at that point as he didnt need him. It's even obvious that he was out to kill Savage more so then his brother in the scene when Savage only has one side of his blade ignited, and Sidious swings with both blades to kill Savage and Savage reignites the second half.

Could he have done it faster? Maybe. But he didnt. Still an insane amount of improvement from casually being stomped by Dooku early on to losing to his brother after five seconds. Regardless of where that improvement came from.