>>714133360
>probably but I think it ties the best to the movie
It doesn't really work with the movies. Like at all. Power levels are ridiculous and cannot co-exist in the same narrative as the films. And without these power levels the very plot of the cartoon doesn't work. And the plot of the movies wouldn't work. Grievous is an entirely different character, because Lucas hadn't figured him out yet, and what was shown in the 2D-cartoon was just Genndy's interpretation. Battle of Coruscant as depicted in the cartoon does not mesh with what was shown in the movie. There are no signs of a massive surface battle that just occurred in the Senate district, the movie suggests that it was a covert extraction, since it was planned by Palps in the first place.
>there was also no ashoka which never makes sense since anakin never mentions having a padawan in EP3
She was no longer his Padawan and she left the Jedi Order. The movie did not necessitate her being mentioned. Just like the original movies did not necessitate the mention of Qui-Gon Jinn. Or most of the prequel characters for that matter. The movie never said he did not have a Padawan, or could not have one. The only requirement for having one is being a Jedi Knight. Which he was.
>I don't know why they created that stupid character
>Ahsoka was created, says Lucas, "Because I needed to mature Anakin. The best way to get somebody to become responsible and mature is to have them become a parent or a teacher. You have to think about what you're doing and set an example. You look at your behavior and the way you do things much differently. The idea was to use her to make Anakin become more mature. We've made her a more extreme version of what Anakin was—a little out there, independent, vital and full of life, but even more so. He gets a little dose of his own medicine."
Yoda assigned him a Padawan to settle him down and force him into being more responsible, and to, ultimately, teach him how to let go of attachments.