Beniboybling Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 I said Durge is stronger on strength, still he+Ventress at that time is surely stronger than TCW Ventress. And GG is a super Jedi killer, only Durge might have more Jedi killing number than him in the whole clone war. Even Mace Windu, in LoE could not beat him in short time and he was able to analyze most of the moves of Vaapad during the battle then adjust his technique, Mace also mentioned it in RotS novel. In the battle he easily chopped down 4 jedi in a few moments before he captured Palpatine. Take out the 'super' and I think TCW has stayed true to Grievous. The old Grievous most certainly would not have lost in that duel with Obi-Wan in the RotS seeing as he managed to fight and defeat 6 Jedi at once (two of them on the Jedi Council) - does that not sound ridiculous to you? If we forget what happened in the comics and the mini-series and just focus on RotS TCW Grievous makes sense. No Jedi/Sith that defeats him in the series contradicts what happens in the films. As for what is said in the RotS novel I can only say that that should be retconned - purely because a Grievous of that power who could kill 4 jedi masters at once, would not have been so easily beaten by Obi-Wan. P.S. If you still disagree, how do you think the fights in TCW should have gone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowpokeking Posted November 11, 2012 Author Share Posted November 11, 2012 (edited) Take out the 'super' and I think TCW has stayed true to Grievous. The old Grievous most certainly would not have lost in that duel with Obi-Wan in the RotS seeing as he managed to fight and defeat 6 Jedi at once (two of them on the Jedi Council) - does that not sound ridiculous to you? If we forget what happened in the comics and the mini-series and just focus on RotS TCW Grievous makes sense. No Jedi/Sith that defeats him in the series contradicts what happens in the films. As for what is said in the RotS novel I can only say that that should be retconned - purely because a Grievous of that power who could kill 4 jedi masters at once, would not have been so easily beaten by Obi-Wan. P.S. If you still disagree, how do you think the fights in TCW should have gone? Well he didn't have a good performance or didn't choose the right tactic at that time, only used that fan style which clearly slowed him down rather than move quickly and only use fan style when more than 1 opponents moved close, but still, Obi Wan almost got killed. As for those Jedi, they are knights, not masters. I think he should not lose to Ventress and certainly NOT to the Gungans at least, also Savage should not "steal" the killing of Galia from him. Actually his performance in RotS could be affected by Mace Windu's choke on his chest. Edited November 11, 2012 by Slowpokeking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beniboybling Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Well he didn't have a good performance or didn't choose the right tactic at that time, only used that fan style which clearly slowed him down rather than move quickly and only use fan style when more than 1 opponents moved close, but still, Obi Wan almost got killed. As for those Jedi, they are knights, not masters. I think he should not lose to Ventress and certainly NOT to the Gungans at least, also Savage should not "steal" the killing of Galia from him. Actually his performance in RotS could be affected by Mace Windu's choke on his chest. Obi-Wan only almost got killed because he lost his lightsaber. And those jedi, 3 of them were masters and one was a knight. As for the battle between him and Ventress, I partially agree with you, I'm really undecided. If Grievous beat her, it would undermine her as a powerful Sith, everything seems to indicate she should win. Both were trained by Dooku, by Ventress was trained more, and she has the Force. As for the Gungans, don't judge them all by Jar Jar. Why certainly not Gungans? They're not weak. But anyway, this has got me thinking. While I'm still adamant that the mini-series is overpowered, it seems to me that Grievous performs better when fighting multiple combatants and his performance is a lot poorer when one-on-one. He's designed for mass combat, and when pitted against a single enemy, he falters. Would you not agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurbere Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 Obi-Wan only almost got killed because he lost his lightsaber. And those jedi, 3 of them were masters and one was a knight. As for the battle between him and Ventress, I partially agree with you, I'm really undecided. If Grievous beat her, it would undermine her as a powerful Sith, everything seems to indicate she should win. Both were trained by Dooku, by Ventress was trained more, and she has the Force. As for the Gungans, don't judge them all by Jar Jar. Why certainly not Gungans? They're not weak. But anyway, this has got me thinking. While I'm still adamant that the mini-series is overpowered, it seems to me that Grievous performs better when fighting multiple combatants and his performance is a lot poorer when one-on-one. He's designed for mass combat, and when pitted against a single enemy, he falters. Would you not agree? To answer your question: yes. It seems to me that Grievous uses a highly modified version of the Shii-Cho formed. Adpated to his speed, strength and use of multiple weapons. Mixing the fighting styles of the seven forms to create a unique fighting form. He was designed, no trained to kill Jedi. He seems to excell at fightning multiple enemies and even some enemies standing alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slowpokeking Posted November 11, 2012 Author Share Posted November 11, 2012 (edited) Obi-Wan only almost got killed because he lost his lightsaber. And those jedi, 3 of them were masters and one was a knight. As for the battle between him and Ventress, I partially agree with you, I'm really undecided. If Grievous beat her, it would undermine her as a powerful Sith, everything seems to indicate she should win. Both were trained by Dooku, by Ventress was trained more, and she has the Force. As for the Gungans, don't judge them all by Jar Jar. Why certainly not Gungans? They're not weak. But anyway, this has got me thinking. While I'm still adamant that the mini-series is overpowered, it seems to me that Grievous performs better when fighting multiple combatants and his performance is a lot poorer when one-on-one. He's designed for mass combat, and when pitted against a single enemy, he falters. Would you not agree? I'm talking about the 4 knights he killed in LoE. Ventress is mostly a Dark Jedi rather than Sith, she wasn't that cold blood and followed Sith code tightly like real Sith. Well Gungans are not that weak but as a powerful guy like GG he should not get owned by them. Well they also should let him kill more Jedi in TCW rather than retcon the Jedi he had killed and gave the credit to Savage. Like I said in the OP, he didn't let people feel he's a deadly opponent in TCW, that's why I welcomed Maul's return. He only made like less than 5 episodes' appearance but we all feel he's dreadful and scary as an enemy. That's why I like the 2D CW so much, sure it's a bit overpowered but the villains are portrayed so well. Even Dooku, he didn't fight the republic/jedi directly but you see he's really cunning and powerful, stay behind the stage and train others to kill the Jedi. In 2D CW and a few other EU, you might argue about GG's power but we certainly see he's very smart and adaptive in battle, know to adjust his tactic base on opponent and hide his other 2 hands for ambush, but this was not seen much in TCW. Edited November 11, 2012 by Slowpokeking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beniboybling Posted November 11, 2012 Share Posted November 11, 2012 In 2D CW and a few other EU, you might argue about GG's power but we certainly see he's very smart and adaptive in battle, know to adjust his tactic base on opponent and hide his other 2 hands for ambush, but this was not seen much in TCW. I think in TCW the focus more on his skills as a general/commander rather than on the battlefield fighter. They also seem to be focusing and fleshing out him personality a lot more. I still think he's a great if not better villain than the original series - unless you think being super tough makes you a good villain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilknick Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Some of you guys talk about the strengths of characters in this universe as it you're talking about rock, paper, scissors. As if all blind men automatically randomly defeat Boba Fett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts