Is there a reason that jedi are the only faction targeted by abilities?

"Khayman;834875" wrote:
Not entirely accurate. Considering Kenobi handed Anakin his **** and if not for said Whinakin, Mace would have ended Sidious. Coupled with Yoda losing his saber, high ground(oh look someone who knows not to attack the high ground) and being outnumbered he was an even match if not highly probably to defeat Sid. The Sith are strong but the Jedi had the means to defeat them. Granted we would have no movies if the Jedi win. So a moot argument haha.

Kenobi defeated Anakin only because he was able to maneuver the battle into an area in which he would have an advantage. Anakin was far more powerful than Obi-Wan and Obi-Wan knew that. It is only because of Kenobi's tactical prowess and Anakin's blind rage that he was able to manipulate the battle until he was in a dominant position (the high ground).

There is a popular (and not ungrounded) theory that Sidious allowed Mace to defeat him in order to sway Anakin completely to the dark side.

As for Yoda's fight with Sidious, one can read the novelization of Ep. 3 (fully canon, btw) where it says that Yoda had lost before the battle even began. The jedi had spent over a millenium trying to prevent the return of the sith and they were only prepared to fight the sith as they knew them from the past. But the sith had spent all those years changing and adapting and becoming more powerful. The jedi were not equipped to defeat this new breed of sith, and that's why Yoda chose to flee. Neither he nor Sidious even needed their lightsabers to duel, but Yoda knew he was beaten, and that his best hope was to live to fight another day.

So if you would like to argue that the jedi had the means to defeat the sith, you will find no shortage of counterarguments.

It's only fair when you think that there has been only 2 Sith present at the same time, when there are gazillions of Jedi running around "keeping" peace.

We all know how it ends.

JKA should get an anti-sith buff since he defeated Dooku, granted he got his butt handed to him in Attack of the Clones but made Dooku look like a toy in Revenge of the Sith. Kenobi should get one because reasons (and he made Darth Maul become two peices, Yoda because Dooku fled rather than face him. Windu for almost killing Sid. And if we ever get Jedi Luke he should get one too.

"Unimatrix010;835254" wrote:

"Thor_Odinson1;834942" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;834740" wrote:
I totally agree. I keep reading suggestions to introduce more sith, who of course all have massive bonuses against Jedi. I totally understand that some zeta abilities and the general are pretty dope, but your common Jedi really isn't that fancy. Absolutely not necessary to have special counters for them.

I say Jedi should have some kind of defensive bonus vs sith. Who knows better how to defend against sith than the Jedi?

So +1 for sure

Um. What? Did you watch the movies? The sith arrange the slaughter of the entire jedi order save for a few lucky ones who managed to escape. These "lucky" ones are then systematically hunted down and executed by Vader. There are few jedi who deserve any anti-sith abilities. Only Windu, Kenobi, and Jedi Luke (who isn't even in game) really deserve any. Yoda does to an extent, but his tenacity up satisfies that since most sith rely on debuffs.

While that is true, it doesn't make special bonuses vs Jedi any more logical. After all, the message here is that Sith fight even better vs Jedi. Now you could argue that they are passionate about killing them or that it's basically their prime motive - and that would also make sense. But why is a Sith better at defeating a Jedi as opposed to, say, a rebel dude? One also wields the force, the other has but a little blaster in his hand. Again, Sith might be more passionate about killing a Jedi than effortlessly destroying a random dude, but the Jedi would certainly put up more of a fight.

Yes, your Sith friends slaughtered all the Jedi - but that wasn't exactly a fair fight as you well know. Without EP's genius plots, the Sith wouldn't stand a chance to rule the galaxy - simply because they were vastly outnumbered. But that's not the point here anyway. Sith fight better, makes sense. Jedi are natural protectors of the weak, see the Code for that.

So all I'm really saying is that a Sith being better at defeating a Jedi than anything else, like a droid, rebel, you name it, doesn't make sense to me.

But then again, not very much in this game makes sense that way, so whatever.

The fact remains that the only times we saw a sith defeated before Luke, the sith were only apprentices, and even Luke needed his daddy to save him. Also remember that when Anakin and Kenobi had their first duel Anakin had turned to the dark side 7 minutes ago and hadn't really been trained yet. You really think Kenobi would've stood a chance against Papa Palp when even Yoda knew his only option was to flee?

"Vertigo;834879" wrote:

"Klocko;834744" wrote:
There's plenty of specific anti-rebel, anti-droid, anti-Empire, and anti-scoundrel abilities. Not sure how Jedi are being singled out here.

What are the anti-scoundrel abilities? Didn't know about those.

Although, yes, the OP is probably more complaining, it is true that there are way more anti-jedi abilities than they have anti-abilities as a faction. They only have Eeth and Ima with their anti-droid skills.
Sidious, Dooku, Maul, Vader, EP, HK, IG-100, General Grievous and Cad Bane all have anti-jedi abilities.
There are no anti-sith abilities at all.
Ugnaught, Jawa, Dathcha, Ima, and Eeth koth are the only ones with anti-droid abilities.
Wedge, HRSc, HRSol, Baze, Biggs, Cassian, and Chirrut have anti-empire abilities.
Veers, Vader, GMT, and EP all have anti-rebel abilities.
Theres a much higher number of anti-jedi abilities than other abilities. 9 anti-jedi, 7-anti empire, 5 anti-droid, and only 4 anti-rebel abilities, not to mention there aren't any anti-scoundrel or anti- sith abilities. Or Anti-nightsister, or anti-resistance/anti-first order. Theres 7 anti-empire abilities and theres far less empire characters in the game than rebels or jedi.

They don't seem to be evenly distributed, and I'd like to see a few more anti-_____ abilities, although it does occasionally create niches for characters rather than making them overall useful.

Thank you for this, I didn't want to go through every character's abilities. Eeth's double damage vs. droids is still less damage than most toons. IGD works well, but I rarely face droids because I get dunked on by B2. Jedi just aren't up to par with other factions, at least not at gear 8 to 10. I can handle Lando + Wiggs, but add EP and it's an automatic loss. Idgaf if it makes canonical sense... wiggs being overpowered for so long was far from that. Call it whining if you will, I just think it's a bit silly that the jedi, which struggle to stay in competition, are targeted by more abilities than other factions. I am not asking for anti-darkside abilities. Maybe synergy of a sort or some buff on a future jedi that will allow them to compete.
Please, internet warriors, before attacking me, look at my roster and help me create a team that can beat:
Wiggs, STH, Lando, EP
EP (l), Maul, TFP, RG, Sid

Both are teams in my shard that I could beat previously. Can I beat this or did my shard just get order 66'd?

"Unimatrix010;835324" wrote:

"MBL_66;835311" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;835254" wrote:

"Thor_Odinson1;834942" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;834740" wrote:
I totally agree. I keep reading suggestions to introduce more sith, who of course all have massive bonuses against Jedi. I totally understand that some zeta abilities and the general are pretty dope, but your common Jedi really isn't that fancy. Absolutely not necessary to have special counters for them.

I say Jedi should have some kind of defensive bonus vs sith. Who knows better how to defend against sith than the Jedi?

So +1 for sure

Um. What? Did you watch the movies? The sith arrange the slaughter of the entire jedi order save for a few lucky ones who managed to escape. These "lucky" ones are then systematically hunted down and executed by Vader. There are few jedi who deserve any anti-sith abilities. Only Windu, Kenobi, and Jedi Luke (who isn't even in game) really deserve any. Yoda does to an extent, but his tenacity up satisfies that since most sith rely on debuffs.

While that is true, it doesn't make special bonuses vs Jedi any more logical. After all, the message here is that Sith fight even better vs Jedi. Now you could argue that they are passionate about killing them or that it's basically their prime motive - and that would also make sense. But why is a Sith better at defeating a Jedi as opposed to, say, a rebel dude? One also wields the force, the other has but a little blaster in his hand. Again, Sith might be more passionate about killing a Jedi than effortlessly destroying a random dude, but the Jedi would certainly put up more of a fight.

Yes, your Sith friends slaughtered all the Jedi - but that wasn't exactly a fair fight as you well know. Without EP's genius plots, the Sith wouldn't stand a chance to rule the galaxy - simply because they were vastly outnumbered. But that's not the point here anyway. Sith fight better, makes sense. Jedi are natural protectors of the weak, see the Code for that.

So all I'm really saying is that a Sith being better at defeating a Jedi than anything else, like a droid, rebel, you name it, doesn't make sense to me.

But then again, not very much in this game makes sense that way, so whatever.

The fact remains that the only times we saw a sith defeated before Luke, the sith were only apprentices, and even Luke needed his daddy to save him. Also remember that when Anakin and Kenobi had their first duel Anakin had turned to the dark side 7 minutes ago and hadn't really been trained yet. You really think Kenobi would've stood a chance against Papa Palp when even Yoda knew his only option was to flee?

Palps destroyed the whole order AND overthrew the friggin galaxy, without anyone noticing until it was too late. Certainly an indicator, that the dark side has its perks. However, it was more complicated than that. Sith had been basically gone for what, 1000 years? The Jedi simply didn't see it coming and weren't even remotely prepared. Then we all remember Yoda's concern about quite some of the younger Jedi: Arrogance.

So we agree? Lol that's one of the points I was trying to make. All the Jedi we have in this game are from that time, we don't have any of the heroes of the old republic who had been fighting sith their entire life in the game

"ObviouslyNot;835348" wrote:

"MBL_66;835333" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;835324" wrote:

"MBL_66;835311" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;835254" wrote:

"Thor_Odinson1;834942" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;834740" wrote:
I totally agree. I keep reading suggestions to introduce more sith, who of course all have massive bonuses against Jedi. I totally understand that some zeta abilities and the general are pretty dope, but your common Jedi really isn't that fancy. Absolutely not necessary to have special counters for them.

I say Jedi should have some kind of defensive bonus vs sith. Who knows better how to defend against sith than the Jedi?

So +1 for sure

Um. What? Did you watch the movies? The sith arrange the slaughter of the entire jedi order save for a few lucky ones who managed to escape. These "lucky" ones are then systematically hunted down and executed by Vader. There are few jedi who deserve any anti-sith abilities. Only Windu, Kenobi, and Jedi Luke (who isn't even in game) really deserve any. Yoda does to an extent, but his tenacity up satisfies that since most sith rely on debuffs.

While that is true, it doesn't make special bonuses vs Jedi any more logical. After all, the message here is that Sith fight even better vs Jedi. Now you could argue that they are passionate about killing them or that it's basically their prime motive - and that would also make sense. But why is a Sith better at defeating a Jedi as opposed to, say, a rebel dude? One also wields the force, the other has but a little blaster in his hand. Again, Sith might be more passionate about killing a Jedi than effortlessly destroying a random dude, but the Jedi would certainly put up more of a fight.

Yes, your Sith friends slaughtered all the Jedi - but that wasn't exactly a fair fight as you well know. Without EP's genius plots, the Sith wouldn't stand a chance to rule the galaxy - simply because they were vastly outnumbered. But that's not the point here anyway. Sith fight better, makes sense. Jedi are natural protectors of the weak, see the Code for that.

So all I'm really saying is that a Sith being better at defeating a Jedi than anything else, like a droid, rebel, you name it, doesn't make sense to me.

But then again, not very much in this game makes sense that way, so whatever.

The fact remains that the only times we saw a sith defeated before Luke, the sith were only apprentices, and even Luke needed his daddy to save him. Also remember that when Anakin and Kenobi had their first duel Anakin had turned to the dark side 7 minutes ago and hadn't really been trained yet. You really think Kenobi would've stood a chance against Papa Palp when even Yoda knew his only option was to flee?

Palps destroyed the whole order AND overthrew the friggin galaxy, without anyone noticing until it was too late. Certainly an indicator, that the dark side has its perks. However, it was more complicated than that. Sith had been basically gone for what, 1000 years? The Jedi simply didn't see it coming and weren't even remotely prepared. Then we all remember Yoda's concern about quite some of the younger Jedi: Arrogance.

So we agree? Lol that's one of the points I was trying to make. All the Jedi we have in this game are from that time, we don't have any of the heroes of the old republic who had been fighting sith their entire life in the game

Also the sith pretty much incorporated the rule of 2 because the jedi were stronger.

From what I remember it wasn't because the Jedi we stronger, but because the sith were always fighting each other due to their lust for power and it kept holding them back from reaching their potential.

"ObviouslyNot;835366" wrote:

"MBL_66;835358" wrote:

"ObviouslyNot;835348" wrote:

"MBL_66;835333" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;835324" wrote:

"MBL_66;835311" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;835254" wrote:

"Thor_Odinson1;834942" wrote:

"Unimatrix010;834740" wrote:
I totally agree. I keep reading suggestions to introduce more sith, who of course all have massive bonuses against Jedi. I totally understand that some zeta abilities and the general are pretty dope, but your common Jedi really isn't that fancy. Absolutely not necessary to have special counters for them.

I say Jedi should have some kind of defensive bonus vs sith. Who knows better how to defend against sith than the Jedi?

So +1 for sure

Um. What? Did you watch the movies? The sith arrange the slaughter of the entire jedi order save for a few lucky ones who managed to escape. These "lucky" ones are then systematically hunted down and executed by Vader. There are few jedi who deserve any anti-sith abilities. Only Windu, Kenobi, and Jedi Luke (who isn't even in game) really deserve any. Yoda does to an extent, but his tenacity up satisfies that since most sith rely on debuffs.

While that is true, it doesn't make special bonuses vs Jedi any more logical. After all, the message here is that Sith fight even better vs Jedi. Now you could argue that they are passionate about killing them or that it's basically their prime motive - and that would also make sense. But why is a Sith better at defeating a Jedi as opposed to, say, a rebel dude? One also wields the force, the other has but a little blaster in his hand. Again, Sith might be more passionate about killing a Jedi than effortlessly destroying a random dude, but the Jedi would certainly put up more of a fight.

Yes, your Sith friends slaughtered all the Jedi - but that wasn't exactly a fair fight as you well know. Without EP's genius plots, the Sith wouldn't stand a chance to rule the galaxy - simply because they were vastly outnumbered. But that's not the point here anyway. Sith fight better, makes sense. Jedi are natural protectors of the weak, see the Code for that.

So all I'm really saying is that a Sith being better at defeating a Jedi than anything else, like a droid, rebel, you name it, doesn't make sense to me.

But then again, not very much in this game makes sense that way, so whatever.

The fact remains that the only times we saw a sith defeated before Luke, the sith were only apprentices, and even Luke needed his daddy to save him. Also remember that when Anakin and Kenobi had their first duel Anakin had turned to the dark side 7 minutes ago and hadn't really been trained yet. You really think Kenobi would've stood a chance against Papa Palp when even Yoda knew his only option was to flee?

Palps destroyed the whole order AND overthrew the friggin galaxy, without anyone noticing until it was too late. Certainly an indicator, that the dark side has its perks. However, it was more complicated than that. Sith had been basically gone for what, 1000 years? The Jedi simply didn't see it coming and weren't even remotely prepared. Then we all remember Yoda's concern about quite some of the younger Jedi: Arrogance.

So we agree? Lol that's one of the points I was trying to make. All the Jedi we have in this game are from that time, we don't have any of the heroes of the old republic who had been fighting sith their entire life in the game

Also the sith pretty much incorporated the rule of 2 because the jedi were stronger.

From what I remember it wasn't because the Jedi we stronger, but because the sith were always fighting each other due to their lust for power and it kept holding them back from reaching their potential.

Holding them back from being stronger than the jedi.

Lol, ok I will just agree with you here. My knowledge of the old eu has diminished over the years, all of it seems to blend together. Huehue. atleast now we get to debate who snoke is.

Snoke? You can't be calling him by his first name! That's Darth Jar Jar to you sir. Mr. Binks if you're nasty.