Starkiller vs ROTJ Luke

The lord of hunger wrote:Vader is by scaling and feats superior to starkiller imao actually to many to post them

This isn't an argument. Respond or concede, your choice.

HP ragdolling LOH as expected.

@Azronger Being impartial and non biased.

@The Apprentice: As far as TFU 1 is concerned I've concurred with the notion that Galen defeated Vader swiftly and decisively upon acquiring new strength a multitude of times, so let's analyse the TFU 2 fight, shall we?

SK recovering his strength doesn't matter as I very much doubt he was fully recovered when he faced Vader given that it takes Force Users a lot longer than a few minutes to recover from Force fatigue.

Did you ever consider the possibility that perhaps these force wielders were worse off than Starkiller was, hence their inability to instantaneously recover? We have numerous examples in the lore of force users, such as Dooku and Jaina recovering lost reserves in a matter of seconds. Starkiller's exhaustion is never mentioned again following the disintegration of the clones - when it would make logical sense to dwell upon the idea, to cement the possibility that in spite of his victory on the death star, Starkiller may actually lose the fight. Instead, the real reason is cited, Vader is fighting better than he did on the death star - as per Starkiller himself, ergo, it's Vader's own improvement that is the sole reason for his ability to compete, as opposed to non-existent exhaustion.

What? Vader fighting more cautiously is noted as a factor yes, but then the text goes on to talk about how Vader "knew the measure of his former apprentice now" and because of this "his lightsaber seemed to arrive a split second before Starkiller's, every time." This clearly states Vader had familiarity with SK, the last duel didn't just teach him to fight cautiously.

The text also states that "the same was true in reverse", it's something that goes both ways, not an advantage exclusive to Vader. The real reason for Vader's ability to compete is him simply fighting better, as noted by Starkiller himself.

Well, it's likely Starkiller was hindered when Vader ragdolled him, given that Starkiller states Vader's plan by killing Juno was an attempt to destabilise him:

Interestingly enough, you're misinterpreting this quote. Destabilise, in this context, is referencing him bringing Starkiller back to the dark side, not using his mental state to defeat him in combat. More to the point however, your little tangent about Starkiller's hinderance based on speculation from HK-47's comments aside, we see a noticeable increase in Starkiller's performance upon becoming enraged:

The Force Unleashed 2 wrote:"Juno!" A black-gloved hand grabbed his shoulder. He pulled away, howling with rage. His fallen lightsabers snapped into his hands and came instantly to life. With both blades moving in tandem, he struck out at his former Master using all his strength, all his rage, all his grief. Darth Vader blocked the blow, but only just. Starkiller pushed, and the Dark Lord stumbled backward. Instead of pursuing the attack, Starkiller went to go to Juno, but once again Darth Vader stood in his path.

...

They fought like the Sith Lords of old, raging back and forth across the roof of the spire, uncaring what happened around them.

Upon becoming enraged Starkiller nearly kills Vader instantly, yet later, once Starkiller let's go of his hatred, they fight on even ground, showing that rage does indeed bolster his performance. So Starkiller would be even more powerful than ever when Vader proved "too powerful" for his former apprentice.

Basically, Vader is equal to Starkiller in sabers circa TFU 2, and more powerful in the force by a good margin, but Starkiller can win via lightning, ergo, they're perfect equals. By the time of ROTJ Luke is equal to a more powerful and skilled iteration of Vader in both sabers and the force, ergo, he's a superior combatant. And unlike with Vader, Starkiller can't target his vulnerable cybernetics with lightning (Because he doesn't have any):

In simple terms:

Luke=ROTJ Vader>>TFU 2 Vader>>Starkiller in force power.

Luke=ROTJ Vader>>TFU 2 Vader=Starkiller in sabers.

TL;DR Luke wins.

DC77 (Reborn) wrote:@The Apprentice: As far as TFU 1 is concerned I've concurred with the notion that Galen defeated Vader swiftly and decisively upon acquiring new strength a multitude of times, so let's analyse the TFU 2 fight, shall we?

SK recovering his strength doesn't matter as I very much doubt he was fully recovered when he faced Vader given that it takes Force Users a lot longer than a few minutes to recover from Force fatigue.

Did you ever consider the possibility that perhaps these force wielders were worse off than Starkiller was, hence their inability to instantaneously recover? We have numerous examples in the lore of force users, such as Dooku and Jaina recovering lost reserves in a matter of seconds. Starkiller's exhaustion is never mentioned again following the disintegration of the clones - when it would make logical sense to dwell upon the idea, to cement the possibility that in spite of his victory on the death star, Starkiller may actually lose the fight. Instead, the real reason is cited, Vader is fighting better than he did on the death star - as per Starkiller himself, ergo, it's Vader's own improvement that is the sole reason for his ability to compete, as opposed to non-existent exhaustion.

What? Vader fighting more cautiously is noted as a factor yes, but then the text goes on to talk about how Vader "knew the measure of his former apprentice now" and because of this "his lightsaber seemed to arrive a split second before Starkiller's, every time." This clearly states Vader had familiarity with SK, the last duel didn't just teach him to fight cautiously.

The text also states that "the same was true in reverse", it's something that goes both ways, not an advantage exclusive to Vader. The real reason for Vader's ability to compete is him simply fighting better, as noted by Starkiller himself.

Well, it's likely Starkiller was hindered when Vader ragdolled him, given that Starkiller states Vader's plan by killing Juno was an attempt to destabilise him:

Interestingly enough, you're misinterpreting this quote. Destabilise, in this context, is referencing him bringing Starkiller back to the dark side, not using his mental state to defeat him in combat. More to the point however, your little tangent about Starkiller's hinderance aside based on speculation from HK-47's comments, we see a noticeable increase in Starkiller's performance upon becoming enraged:

The Force Unleashed 2 wrote:"Juno!" A black-gloved hand grabbed his shoulder. He pulled away, howling with rage. His fallen lightsabers snapped into his hands and came instantly to life. With both blades moving in tandem, he struck out at his former Master using all his strength, all his rage, all his grief. Darth Vader blocked the blow, but only just. Starkiller pushed, and the Dark Lord stumbled backward. Instead of pursuing the attack, Starkiller went to go to Juno, but once again Darth Vader stood in his path.

...

They fought like the Sith Lords of old, raging back and forth across the roof of the spire, uncaring what happened around them.

Upon becoming enraged Starkiller nearly kills Vader instantly, yet later, once Starkiller let's go of his hatred, they fight on even ground, showing that rage doe indeed bolster his performance. So Starkiller would be even more powerful than ever when Vader proved "too powerful".

Basically, Vader is equal to Starkiller in sabers circa TFU 2, and more powerful in the force by a good margin, but Starkiller can win via lightning, ergo, they're perfect equals. By the time of ROTJ Luke is equal to a more powerful and skilled iteration of Vader in both sabers and the force, ergo, he's a superior combatant. And unlike with Vader, Starkiller can't target his vulnerable cybernetics with lightning (Because he doesn't have any):

In simple terms:

Luke=ROTJ Vader>>TFU 2 Vader>>Starkiller in force power.

Luke=ROTJ Vader>>TFU 2 Vader=Starkiller in sabers.

TL;DR Luke wins.

Finally someone with common sense

Yeah, you needed me to have some after failing dramatically at doing anything yourself.

DC77 (Reborn) wrote:Yeah, you needed me to have some after failing dramatically at doing anything yourself.

My opinión still stands tbh

About 50% of your post was wrong, as was most of BOD's, hence why I only addressed certain points.

im pretty sure TFU2 Vader > Starkiller in sabers, but alright

The fight was a stalemate. Vader only started to win once he got a rage amp, which has been shown to "double" his strength.

Sk had two lightsabers to fight with, and iirc vader was pretty easily defending himself from his attacks, almost casually

DC77 (Reborn) wrote:@Azronger Being impartial and non biased.

And are you impartial and unbiased?

@Azronger Yes, I am.

@lorenzo.r.2nd:

Sk had two lightsabers to fight with, and iirc vader was pretty easily defending himself from his attacks, almost casually

A) SK having 2 sabers doesn't qualify as an advantage.

B) Vader and SK were well matched, as is made explicitly clear by the novelization.

C) Don't comment on things with baseless speculation, only comment if you're familiar with the source material.

A) thats legit hilarious. 

B) Ah, ok. 

Darth Vader is the embodiment of all evil. Under the guidance of Emperor Palpatine-aka Darth Sidious- Lord Vader controls the Galactic Empire with an iron fist. He's an unparalleled lightsaber combatant and an even more capable Force wielder. 


Prima Official Game Guide ^^




No one was a match for the lightsaber skills of the dark lord of the Sith.



Star Wars Galaxies Trading Card Game: The Shadow Syndicate


Him easily beating the dark apprentice pretty easily supports this too (guess what, he was with Vader for longer than SK ever was, meaning better training was ensued, since thats literally the only thing Vader did in his free aside from torturing and killing jedi, so he is already above people likely more skilled than SK)


Oh and: 


Vader made no move to defend himself when Starkiller reached the very top of the cloning tower. Determined to prove him wrong, Starkiller didn't waste time announcing his intentions. He just lunged. Only at the very last moment did Vader raise his blade to block the blow, and even then the move seemed almost casual, disinterested. Starkiller struck again, with both lightsabers. Vader blocked one blade and used telekinesis to throw the other off target. The platform buckled and twisted, sending Starkiller flying. 



From ur loved novel. "raise his blade to block the blow, and even then the move seemed almost casual, disinterested. Starkiller struck again, with both lightsabers. Vader blocked one blade and used telekinesis to throw the other off target". This proves that A) SK did have an advantage by having two lightsabers, as Vader had to use TK to move it aside, and B) he was indeed casual about it.

Dc please be more cordial to new members.

@lorenzo.r.2nd: Never stop trying brother. This'll be fun:

A) thats legit hilarious.

Which is why you have no counter?

B) Ah, ok.

Glad you agree.

Prima Official Game Guide ^^

Not interested in a hyperbolic statement that has no impact on Vader's standing next to Starkiller. Next.

Star Wars Galaxies Trading Card Game: The Shadow Syndicate

Same as above. Next.

Him easily beating the dark apprentice pretty easily supports this too (guess what, he was with Vader for longer than SK ever was, meaning better training was ensued, since thats literally the only thing Vader did in his free aside from torturing and killing jedi, so he is already above people likely more skilled than SK)

Citation needed for Vader beating the dark apprentice. Next.

From ur loved novel. "raise his blade to block the blow, and even then the move seemed almost casual, disinterested. Starkiller struck again, with both lightsabers. Vader blocked one blade and used telekinesis to throw the other off target". This proves that A) SK did have an advantage by having two lightsabers, as Vader had to use TK to move it aside, and B) he was indeed casual about it.

A) Consider the fact that there's numerous edges provided by one blade as well, it's a balance, there's advantages and disadvantages to both, and Starkiller uses 2 blades in every fight anyway, so it's irrelevant. Next.

B) Selectively cherry picking a quote from the novel doesn't change the overall product, which presents them as equals who go back and forth constantly. I can take 2 lines that favour Starkiller and try to pass it off as legit as well, but I won't because I take into account the whole novel, not whichever lines favour my side.

Oh, we done? Nice. Now you can stop pretending like you know the first thing about TFU 2.

DarthSkywalker0 wrote:Dc please be more cordial to new members.

I find the irony of you talking about being cordial to anybody amusing, but I'll oblige in any case.

Welp, someone's being a bit of a jerk to a new member. 

ur funny guy to be sure. u remind me of me sometimes. just more cocky, and all the bad traits that i have multiplied by 11


1) im not gonna argue something as obvious as this. ill just take the L here cuz i dont like ignorance. im hyped to see what ur super smart comeback is gonna be though. wonder if its gonna be original. maybe just a reuse, like saying next or something like that. oh well.

2) prove that both are hyperbolic. take ur time too. 

3) dont feel like doing this, when u have already acknowledged the existence of this feat before. man, someone as smart and wise and knowledgeable as u about TFU 1 and 2 asking for source and citations? oof man, my previously high opinion of u just went from 0 to -5 right about now.

A) amazing how u think that everything u say is now a fact simply because u said it. i would like to know why u think 2 blades are not better than 1. i mean, in Path Of Destruction, Bane goes from completely beating his master, to kriff his pants once his master pulls out his second blade into the fight. Obi Wan fighting maul and savage when he gets another blade. Hell, even the non canon comic of Vader fighting Maul shows Maul winning after he gets his saber cut in half by Vader, lending him in return two new sabers. 

B) Go right ahead. take 2 lines and prove me wrong. just dont choose any two that can easily be countered, unlike the one i chose, which u never countered. 

oh yeah are done alright. I dont need to know a single thing about Star Wars in the first place to win a debate against u, my man. Having a brain is enough.

I dont need to know a single thing about Star Wars in the first place to win a debate against u, my man.

@lorenzo.r.2nd:

ur funny guy to be sure. u remind me of me sometimes. just more cocky, and all the bad traits that i have multiplied by 11

Agreed, barring the bad debating skill. That I don't have multiplied by 11, but divided by 1000.

1) im not gonna argue something as obvious as this. ill just take the L here cuz i dont like ignorance. im hyped to see what ur super smart comeback is gonna be though. wonder if its gonna be original. maybe just a reuse, like saying next or something like that. oh well.

So, you have no counter? Nice, good to know. I accept your concession.

2) prove that both are hyperbolic. take ur time too.

If we interpret them literally, it means Vader>Sidious, which is obviously false.

3) dont feel like doing this, when u have already acknowledged the existence of this feat before. man, someone as smart and wise and knowledgeable as u about TFU 1 and 2 asking for source and citations? oof man, my previously high opinion of u just went from 0 to -5 right about now.

I'm asking for a citation because I know it never happened. I want to know when you think it happened.

A) amazing how u think that everything u say is now a fact simply because u said it.

No, I think it's a fact because it's supported by logic.

i would like to know why u think 2 blades are not better than 1.

Because it's a tradeoff. 2 blades gives you more angles to attack from, and is more likely to provide openings if you coordinate an attack with both at once, but 1 blade means you have both your hands free to utilise, and defend against power strikes. If 2 blades were better 100% of the time all Jedi and sith would use 2, rather than 1.

i mean, in Path Of Destruction, Bane goes from completely beating his master, to kriff his pants once his master pulls out his second blade into the fight. Obi Wan fighting maul and savage when he gets another blade.

Yeah, sure, you can cherry pick examples from the lore under specific circumstances in which 2 blades proved advantageous, that doesn't mean they're better inherently. Also, it's worth emphasising that Starkiller will have 2 sabers in any hypothetical matchup, rendering your point irrelevant, something you ignored entirely from my last post (I wonder why?).

B) Go right ahead. take 2 lines and prove me wrong. just dont choose any two that can easily be countered, unlike the one i chose, which u never countered.

Literally any point in the fight where they're going back and forth and trading advantages as equals. As for a counter, Vader only "seemed" casual because he was fighting cautiously having lost their last bout, not because he was genuinely disinterested. The novel confirms Vader was doing everything his power to stop Starkiller, and that they were at a stalemate, constantly trading advantages.

oh yeah are done alright. I dont need to know a single thing about Star Wars in the first place to win a debate against u, my man.

oh yeah are done alright.

Having a brain is enough.

Claims to have a brain while f*cking up his grammar. I'd say this is ironic but that's pretty self evident. Stop trying with the fighting words bro, you just aren't there yet.

@DC77 (Reborn) @Lorenzo.r.2nd Can the pair of you stop being twats to each other (and to others, in DC's case) for a few hours? Jesus.

This is my way of coping with stress, anger, self hatred and resentment. Always has been.

Then find a healthier way to deal with it than belittling new users or rising to bait.