Ventessel
-
Posts
747 -
Joined
Content Type
Forums
Blogs
Events
Articles
Downloads
Gallery
Posts posted by Ventessel
-
-
They sucked because I always played Imperial and they just didn't die!
Oh and those Bothans, sneaky little...About a half dozen guys in my platoon got together once and started up a tournament with two xboxes for Battlefront 2, and you should have seen the tactics that emerged. Wookies were definitely powerful against the AI, but unless you were good at using the grenade launcher, they were screwed over at mid-range. A quick burst with the blaster rifle, followed by an instant switch to the pistol to off-set the drop in accuracy let you kill a Wookie in seconds flat (assuming you landed all headshots, which soon became the terrifying norm).
Bothans never really came into play, surprisingly. They were too weak and slow to be effective. They could be useful against heroes, but you were just as likely to get knocked over with the Force and killed accidentally as you were to get in a solid assassination. And when the Bothans used their regen field, they were the first targets to be eliminated.
-
Luke isn't perfect(which is what a real Mary Sue is), he just has vast power at his command.
Anyway I had a post, but it got deleted and I smacked myself so hard it made an echo...so if this thread is still going later i'll put up the post again but it should be quite obvious that
GM Luke > Revan.
It's tough to say "Luke is/isn't perfect" because he' s been written by at least a dozen different authors in the EU. Now, that being said, there is a definite trend towards making him the "perfect protagonist" and increasing his power levels more and more until there is no challenge left before him but to face a "force god". That's lame story writing, and even worse characterization.
Timothy Zahn was the only author to really portray Luke in an interesting light, where he didn't win at the end of the day because he whipped out the protagonist shield and smashed everyone with it.
-
The only problem I had with it, was the fact everyone just abused The Force and kept everyone down. So it was really unbalanced for the more ranged normal chars, I get that its force user vs non but its a game...so should be balanced.
No, forcibly balanced games are boring. Make the weapons powerful and interesting, and not quite too hard to abuse skillfully. I hate it when a game is so "well balanced" for multiplayer that it becomes uninteresting and pointless to even have different weapons.
One of the best FPS games I've ever played was Halo: CE. You constantly agonized over what weapon to keep and which one to leave behind, because they were all different and interesting, and powerful under the right conditions. But you always kept the pistol. It was that good.
Same thing with the Force, you use it because it's your edge. Jedi can smack you down and lay waste to everyone at close range, but it requires skill to execute those maneuvers. A good player can take down Jedi with snipers and rockets easily.
-
My god....
IT'S FINALLY HAPPENING!
Now to wait for a kotor 3 exploring the revan novel whilst actually making surik look like revans equal *cough*
Perhaps thisis what you're looking for?
Although Surik is not Revan's equal. Which is why she doesn't look like it in the novel. Which is canon.
-
I like the analogy you used but here's the thing. The F/A 18A and the F/A 18F superhornet, are almost completely different fighters. I mean yes the F18 super hornet uses many parts from the original, but it's actually 40% bigger, carries a much higher payload, and the airframe was made more durable.
Same thing with the T65A X-wing and then the XJ series of Xwings. It's actually more like comparing a 68 Camero, to a 2010 Camero.
Same, name almost completely different cars. Only similarity between the T65s that Luke flew and the XJ3 which was the standard fighter of the war, was that they looked the same. Inside COMPLETELY different beast.
Of course, but there is only so far you can push the envelope on the X-Wing model. You can resize it, refine it, enhance its structural integrity, and revamp the internal systems, but eventually you will need to switch over to a new design concept. I feel that the E-Wing was abandoned rather early, and could easily be developed further.
It's design allows for more efficient power routing to the engines and weapons systems, and maneuvers faster than an X-Wing, although it's not quite nimble enough to be considered an interceptor.
I also feel that the X-Wing design has become rather tired and old, and would like to see new concepts explored in Star Wars. Perhaps the E-Wing isn't that design, but it would be nice to see something. The new films will hopefully create a new generation of visual concepts for space fighters.
-
There was a one year gap between each Harry Potter film? Interesting, I wasn't aware of that. I'm no expert on how films are produced, I'll admit that, so it would seem it is possible to produce good quality films in such a short space of time. That is encouraging.
I think your right about actors as well. Nonetheless Lucas does attempt to strike a balance between the more well known actors and less well known actors and I think Lucas is right in choosing (disagree with me if you will) less well known actors for the main part e.g. Mark Hamill and Hayden Christensen. If it had been someone more well known I think it would have been harder to engage in the universe. For example whenever I see Downey Jr. on the screen I don't think 'Iron Man' or 'Sherlock Holmes' I think: Robert Downey Jr. is you get what I mean. Although admittedly Samuel L. Jackson worked well.
The thing with the casting in the Avengers is that aside from Downey Jr, you actually see a very similar setup to the casting in the Star Wars films. A handful of really well known actors (Christopher Lee, for example) alongside established and talented but otherwise "faceless" actors who are cast because they fit a character very well.
Captain America and Thor were cast well, but they are also fairly simple characters. Cap is compelling in his direct, unflinching manner and his absolutely pure moral compass, the actor portrays him so well that you almost feel guilty for not measuring up to that man's standards. And Robert Downey Jr. plays Iron Man very well, just the way Christopher Lee played Saruman. Er.... Count Dooku. And Alec Guinness stepped easily into the role of Obi-Wan.
Quite honestly, there is nothing in the franchise management of Disney's portfolios which gives me any reason to worry. They've selected outstanding writers, directors, and financed the whole thing while not letting anyone's ideas run too far away and endanger the franchise. The casting will probably be done well, just like everything else.
-
I was under the impression that StealthXs and XJs and the like were completely new spaceframes, not upgraded older ones, and that most, if not all, X-wings in service with the GA by CivWar II were not refurbished, modernized CivWar I relics. Of those, only the XJ3 was introduced before the Series IV E-wing, and only by a margin of a couple of years.
The segment of Mercy Kill that takes place on Kuratooine indicates that baseline T-65s have indeed been sold off to third parties, museums, and so forth, and the Wraiths' reaction to finding them seems to me to be a strong indication that the GA's military does not employ pre-XJ models anymore.
Well, they may be new production runs, but they're essentially refinements of the initial design. The StealthX and accompanying variants used different materials in their design, and perform well, but they're really stretching the limits of what the T-65 build is capable of.
The X-Wing seems very similar to the F-18, which had a solid 30 year run as a dominant and versatile airframe, but there is a certain point where production methods can't continue to refine the old base model, and packing in new avionics, power systems, and weapons will only get you so far.
-
Won't happen. The X-wing has had so many upgrades, it will continue to be the fighter of choice for a LONG time to come. You'll probably see the E-wing in the Fighter/bomber role, replacing the B and Y-wings.
Sorry but like you said, X-wings, will never be replaced because they are too iconic.
That doesn't make any sense, why would you use a dedicated space superiority fighter exclusively as a bomber? Or even primarily?
The E-Wing is an escort fighter; it balances speed with firepower, and has much stronger armor and shielding than the old X-Wing. The upgrades to the X-Wing really just make it passable. After the Second Galactic Civil War, you're looking at an airframe that is over forty-five years old. The E-Wing is about half that age, and it really only left the prototype phase during the YV War, so it's effective combat usage has been about fifteen years at that point. If anything, the Alliance should be scaling up its efforts to phase out the X-Wing and sell off those older models to third parties.
-
Sidious was obviously holding back for the entirety of his fight with Mace Windu. Why?
He chose to fight him with a lightsaber, and only a lightsaber. Not once did he use the Force against Mace, because Sidious wanted a protracted fight, and he knew that Mace would be able to keep up and probably convincingly kick the crap out of him in a straight fight. But that's ok, because he needed that to happen for Anakin to reach that tipping point of rejecting the Jedi.
At any point he could have blasted Mace to pieces with the Force, just as he did with Yoda (who was stronger than Mace with the Force).
-
We've already mentioned how the movie makes him look to have thrown the fight much more then the book. He never does that "unlimited power" line in the book.
Really, it just comes down to how you chose to interpret it. I definitely agree that the movie implies he was toying with Mace, but the book less so (as in it gives space for either side to work) and I personally prefer to believe Mace was a match for him. I prefer characters are not too OP and actually have threats to them every now and then. I think Mace putting up a fight with Sidious and almost ruining his plans in the final hour makes Sidious a more interesting and respectable character, so I chose to believe thats how it went down rather then the more common belief that Sidious was just putting on a show and was never really threatened by anything. I think that makes him too godly and beyond any form of audience empathy.
Audience empathy? I hope you don't have empathy for a galaxy conquering, manipulative scumbag. Perhaps you meant sympathy? Even so, Sidious isn't a sympathetic character at all, nor should he be. He's Evil with a PhD in Diabolical Scheming.
I think mostly companions are nearly identical in roles to KOTOR more than luke, t7 is like t3, doc is like carth. and don't ever say again its based on obiwan, that chump ewan mcgregor spoiled the role old obi-wan did awesome.Whoa, there, pal. Ewan did a superb job of portraying a younger Obi-Wan. He is a consummate actor and blended smoothly from Episode I into Episode IV. His performance was possibly the strongest in the entire Prequel Trilogy, along with Ian McDiarmid.
And Mace uses Vaapad. Vapaad doesn't even exist in this game. And couldn't really properly depict it anyways. The movie certainly completely failed to. Vaapad is supposed to be so complex its like watching the Tasmanian Devil turn into a miniature tornado.The movie didn't need to "depict" Vaapad. It was implicit in Mace's style and speed. He was smooth and aggressive during his duel with Palpatine, and you can infer that he was definitely a master swordsman. The particulars of his style are largely irrelevant except in philosophical discussions of his ability to flirt with the Dark Side and channel his anger productively.
You can see the result of his philosophy and mental state with how he easily transitions from fighting ferociously into a calm standoff with Anakin and Palpatine. He's in control, but aggressive. That's basically Vaapad in a nutshell.
The description of his "whirlwind attack" is from a comic book. The author and illustrators have such a laughably poor grasp of swordplay that they make Hollywood choreographers look like veteran combat instructors. Vaapad is a combat philosophy that guided Mace Windu's use of Form VII, and he made personal refinements to the technique just as any master combatant does, developing his own repertoire.
-
The E-Wing was superior to the X-Wing, and even outperformed the later models of the vaunted T-65.
The initial problems were mostly related to working out the kinks in programming with the R7 and the synthetic tibanna gas used for the cannons. Once those were resolved, you had a faster, more powerful, more durable fighter with better targeting capabilities and a more powerful astromech unit.
There were a few reasons that the X-Wing kept getting dragged out with a new upgrade every book, however. For starters, I don't think any of the EU authors were willing to widely distribute a model of droid that made R2 totally obsolete (he was, but fans are way too sentimental). Furthermore, I don't think Del Ray was willing to publish a book that didn't prominently feature scenes with X-Wings being flown.
Now, it does make some sense for the X-Wing to be upgraded and used long after its prime. From a logistical standpoint, there are tons of spare parts, the crews and pilots know the machines well, and there are a plethory of older airframes which can be retrofitted for a fraction of the cost of buying a new fighter.
However, I think we should see the E-Wing take over most of the multi-role/escort missions previously performed by the X-Wing, at least within the well funded Navy of the Galactic Alliance. Third parties would likely continue to use recycled X-Wings, since they're affordable and reliable.
-
All tragic heroes are flawed. That's the point. Anakin couldn't have been this cool, collected and self-assured in the prequels. If he had been, then it would have been ridiculous for him to have fallen. It's why his son was similarly flawed in the OT and only after seeing where he was headed turned forever from evil (Dark Empire did not happen. ).
Well, see... it's the "hero" part which seems to be lacking. Sure, he's got awful luck and things go really badly, but it's pretty much all his fault. That is something you see in classic tragedy, but normally the hero has redeeming qualities and it's his one fatal flaw that undermines his best efforts to do good.
Anakin is chock full of flaws, but it appears that 'Ol Lucas forgot to give him any heroic characteristics. He's a great warrior... but then again, so was General Grievous. He's a superb pilot... but that's not really heroic, is it? He loves Padme... but then again, Hitler probably loved Eva Braun. Romantic entanglements don't qualify you as a hero, either.
So, ah... where is the heroism of Anakin? We see none of it in the films, which is kind of a big problem if the saga is, as Lucas claims, the "Tragedy of Darth Vader". In fact, we only see him begin to have some redeeming qualities in the later portions of the Clone Wars animated series, almost as though it was an afterthought and Lucas realized, "Oh no! I forgot to actually make the 'tragic hero' a hero! Better fix that somehow..."
-
The Jedi Code is fine. It needs no changing. What needs changing is how it is interpreted. Because, as it stands, only the wisest of Jedi have been able to fully understand the Code.
Actually, that seems to indicate that it could use some heavy revisions. If your organization's defining charter is so vaguely worded and obscure that only the wisest members are able to divine it's meaning and interpretation, that's a fairly serious problem.
As long as the Jedi were just a religious affiliation of sorts, it was ok to have a relatively open ended creed that could be read in many different ways, just as many actual religious texts are in the real world. However, if Luke is creating the Jedi Order as it was under the Old Republic, an organization of adjudicators and guardians, it would be crucial to have a concise, clear Jedi Code that governed their actions.
-
...and we shall have peace.
Well, more like Disney shall have monies. But that's ok, because if they're cashing in on sweet new Star Wars films, I'm totally fine with coughing up my moderately hard-earned dollars.
-
As for originality, there is a difference between traditional and cliche. Star Wars is traditional, its the Hero's Journey, its playing on mythology and fantasy that's at that underpins the whole saga. Avengers is cliche. The notion of 'Avenger's Assemble' is not cliche, thats traditional. But aliens coming to the planet and using a high tech device to invade the planet is overdone and unoriginal, and it brought the movie down. But anyway I'm not going to continue this debate because its likely going to descend (if it has not already) into an exchange of personal insults.
Alright, you're literally arguing over a razor thin semantic line between what you feel was an acceptable use of tired old cliches versus a nod to traditional plot elements.
The Avengers had a neat concept with the dimensional portal and the invading swarms. It wasn't a complicated plot device, merely a "MacGuffin" to facilitate the real plot, which was the character drama. Loki was a superb villain, and everyone else played their parts marvelously with great dialogue constructions that fit within the established dimensions of their personalities.
The original Star Wars film is also a classic, linear plot (even more linear than Avengers) with equally inexplicable motives for the Empire as those of the Chi-tari (or whatever those aliens were; again, I don't care since they were ancillary to the primary entertainment value of the film). It was a well-executed plot, with vibrant characters that carried the film along. Pretty much just like Star Wars when you get down to it.
-
If by "damage" you mean, "make it more popular than ever and open it up to an audience far wider than its core fanbase, like they did with Marvel", then yes.
Yes! Once more Star Wars shall rule popular culture!
-
The logic presented supports the conclusion given, that "one can [say Vitiate is the more powerful sith and simultaniously have any respect at all for the thousand year Rule of Two]".
It does not prove that Vitiate is the more powerful Sith, but then it was never intended to- it may however imply (intentionally) that the rule of two does not necessitate that Sidious be the most powerful Sith ever, any more than the lack of the word 'ever' prevents that being a possibility.
Whilst I could probably present a reasoned argument that Vitiate is the stronger Sith I am not going to, as I do not believe it to be the case. Sidious is probably the more powerful of the two, it is the reasoning people are using to convey this that is flawed.
For instance:
George Lucas also explicitly stated Sidious never became a clone, which could be used to argue all of Sidious' powers and feats occuring post-ROTJ never happened. Dodgey reasoning, I know, as Lucas has also pretty much dismissed the entirety of the EU. Taking Lucas' comments as law is wrong, as he himself admits he doesn't even know about half of the story that is now Star Wars; he is, by any reasoned analysis, a source of limited reliability. A source that can be used, of course, but not one that is above dispute.
Chee I cannot comment on, as I have never actually seen direct quotes from him or links to such quotes, only here-say regarding what he has or has not said. Such here-say should always be taken with a pinch of salt. Nor, unfortunately, do I have a clear idea of his exact job or how credible a source it makes him. Does he read everything related to Star Wars, or even care ultimately who may or may not be the most powerful being in existence? If so, how does one apply for this job?
An author has also stated Revan used both sides of the Force simultaneously, yet that is disputed frequently on these forums. It may directly contradict previously established canon, yet nothing is to prevent canon being rewritten or expanded upon. Whoever reads and approves such works must have let it pass. Again, I am of the opinion it is likely impossible to use both sides of the Force simultaneously, let the point remains; authors are not always right, narrative includes a certain amount of artistic flare that often ignores or confuses the grounding of such debates.
As for source books, they frequently become dated and are over written, revised or otherwise left without more recent information. As an example, I would guess there are old republic source books in circulation that still maintain Revan left into the unknown regions and was never seen again; something we now know not to be the case. Did the latest source book occur since the creation of Vitiate as a character and comment on him or Sidious in such a way that would strengthen one side of the argument or the other?
Pointless bickering and whining would indeed be pointless
. Reasoned debate regarding the two characters is only as pointless as other such debates about characters that frequently occur on these forums. I have absolutely no problem with canon, or with the idea that Sidious is the most powerful Sith to have ever existed. The problem lies with how otherwise respectable debaters constantly rant (i.e. without reasoning) this fact and then proceed to be demeaning about anyone who presents a different opinion. Wolf started this thread with reasoning as-to why Sidious is the most powerful Sith of all time in a manner that could roughly be considered a constructed argument, but as admitted it isn't absolute - or even balanced. Those that have attempted to balance it have been met with less than reasoned response, which is a shame. TL;DR; this argument, like any, can and should be handled with reason. Not with responses of "this is canon because [someone] said so and like sheep we must agree", because when it comes down to it that simply isn't true.
What a breath of fresh air that was to read.
-
Just to be a broken record, nobody can say Vitiate is the more powerful sith and simultaniously have any respect at all for the thousand year Rule of Two. To claim Sidious was even only equal to any Sith of this era is to claim the Rule of Two accomplished nothing during a millennium of research and training.
Thats all I have to say on this subject anymore. Debating the merits of their actual depicted accomplishments is just arbitrary.
The rule of two was a survival mechanism to keep the Sith from being exterminated from the Jedi. They changed their methods and opted to strike from concealment instead of wage outright war.
Also, who wrote the novelization of Revenge of the Sith?
-
I'm quite sick of this whole "Vapaad is the reason Mace stood a chance against Sidious" thing.
Vapaad is just a term for Mace's saber technique. He was basically the only Jedi in the order to grow a pair and realize that aggression is a vital part of combat. He accepted that and "drew on his inner darkness" to channel his aggression.
This is a fundamental aspect of effective fighting, the ability to control your aggression, essentially keeping it on tap and ramping it up when you need to fight aggressively while still being able to dial down and not expose yourself to counterattack.
Add to this that Mace was a masterful saberist, possibly the best in the Jedi Order in his day, and you have a man who not only knows the technical aspects of combat, but maintains a razor sharp mentality. It is his mindset and willingness to embrace his "dark side" that leads to him being so dangerous, especially when compared to Jedi who are unwilling or unable to fight aggressively. Also, he was played by Samuel L. Jackson...
-
What I see here that you guys have a very short-sighted view about everything. First thing, being the most powerful doesn't neccessary mean more succesful nor that you are unbeatable. Second, some of GL statements are pretty much subjective. Like "Vader would have been more powerful than Sidious if he was not defeated by Obi-Wan. With all his injuries, he has 80% (if I'm not mistaken) of Sidious's power." What the hell is 80% of Palpatine's power? To gain or lose 1% what the guy have to do? That is pretty much subjective for me.
Precisely.
Even the statements by GL are simply estimations, used to gauge the relative strengths of characters. There are so many factors which can affect a confrontation between two Force Users that no hard and fast power scale can be used to pick one over another.
-
Fair enough, I wished to get Revan back into matches because I know how to do it justice, he was more a message than an actual fighter.
I will follow the next matches closely, but you will probably find same fanboyism in Bane or Exan Kun maybe even more?
It goes against every cautionary bone in my body, but I can't let a statement like that stand. Revan was a consummate fighter, he just also had a very unique view of the Force and made some interesting choices.
As for "fanboyism", I hate that term. While it exists, far more often I see people throwing that term "across the aisle" to support their own arguments, as opposed to actually pointing out when people are ignoring inconvenient facts/imagining their favored character to be invincible. When you're dealing with characters in the power tier of Revan, Exar Kun, and Bane (who stand up there with Vader, Malgus, etc.) it's really a knife's edge of difference between their combat abilities and accomplishments.
-
Title: Heir to Chaos
Author: Ventessel
Class: None, set 40 ABY
A rewrite of the Second Galactic Civil War, with a number of original characters among the canonical cast.
Deadpan snarkers, cynical intelligence agents, noble Jedi, steadfast soldiers, and a myriad of colorful underworld characters will clash in this struggle for the heart of the galaxy.
-
This is very interesting to read, since most of these reasons are what initially got me writing my fanfic. I was irritated by the motivations behind Jacen Solo, the strange pointlessness of the Second Galactic Civil War, etc.
I think that having Jacen become a Sith Lord was just rather awkwardly done. Having Lumiya pop out and convince him to kill his own aunt? Far more believable were his later motivations in the series, where he saw himself as making hard choices to keep the Alliance intact.
I think that one of the interesting things about the era is that you can have individual characters who are clearly defined as good and evil, but the factions they serve cannot always make the clear cut moral decisions that they would like to.
-
That was great, not once did Ford "break character". Absolutely hilarious.
).
. Reasoned debate regarding the two characters is only as pointless as other such debates about characters that frequently occur on these forums. I have absolutely no problem with canon, or with the idea that Sidious is the most powerful Sith to have ever existed. The problem lies with how otherwise respectable debaters constantly rant (i.e. without reasoning) this fact and then proceed to be demeaning about anyone who presents a different opinion. Wolf started this thread with reasoning as-to why Sidious is the most powerful Sith of all time in a manner that could roughly be considered a constructed argument, but as admitted it isn't absolute - or even balanced. Those that have attempted to balance it have been met with less than reasoned response, which is a shame.
Why the post-ROTJ era sucks!
in STAR WARS Discussion
Posted
Just because he's the creator of the character doesn't mean he can define that character's morality arbitrarily. He can portray the character's perspective, and provide clarification, but at the end of the day, all he can say is that Thrawn didn't think he was evil which is a far cry from actually not being evil.