EPTThanks OP for informing about the series, even with the lack of some stuff it's really enjoyable.
Deadliest Warrior - Page 2
| Blogs > Chanted |
|
NeonFlare
Finland1307 Posts
Thanks OP for informing about the series, even with the lack of some stuff it's really enjoyable. | ||
|
passby20
United States47 Posts
The Spartan vs. Ninja episode was just stupid though. + Show Spoiler + In single combat ninja would win every time without breaking a sweat. Get yourself a phalanx of spartans (i.e. a group of soldiers who were only effective in groups) and a bunch of ninjas and you have yourself a battle. | ||
|
Spike
United States1392 Posts
especially when it came to the samurai vs. viking match. it was just a collage of lolstereotypes, i.e. samurais are smart while vikings are barbaric, mostly leather armor with bits of metal compares with chain mail and shield, and the worst of them all is the samurai's superior speed advantage. If the viking was decked out in full plate mail, then sure, the movement restriction would be more noticeable; but come on, he was in chain mail. The advantage of a shield should not be understated. The bald guy even demonstrated the strength and maneuvers of a shield and the "simulation" just ignores all this. The viking literally threw away a perfectly good shield, wtf? The others were less cringe worthy. The pirate one was hilarious. I should just analyze less and enjoy the cheesiness. | ||
|
littlechava
United States7221 Posts
On May 05 2009 06:31 vnlegend wrote: These episodes are available at Spike.com, the website of SpikeTV, the show's producer. There are around five 15-30 second commercials breaks. unfortunately they only have the pirate vs knight episode up right now :[ some of these matchups are pretty strange, gladiator vs apache, spartan vs ninja, WTF? | ||
|
Spike
United States1392 Posts
I especially liked how the pirate survived 2-3 hits to the head with a morning star which is basically a 1 hit KO to an unarmored opponent. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On May 05 2009 06:59 passby20 wrote: The show's complete bs, but it's a hell of a lot of fun to watch and the premise is ridiculous/ hilarious enough (2 guys from completely different eras see each other in the woods and have the sudden urge to kill one another... who wins?) to make it worth watching. The Spartan vs. Ninja episode was just stupid though. + Show Spoiler + In single combat ninja would win every time without breaking a sweat. Get yourself a phalanx of spartans (i.e. a group of soldiers who were only effective in groups) and a bunch of ninjas and you have yourself a battle. I totally don't agree I really think that one would be a tossup. Sure the spartan may train mostly for group combat, but he's bigger and stronger than the ninja. he has armor and a shield. i do think that the ninja should come out ahead but spartans were pretty badass. On May 05 2009 07:20 Spike wrote: Just rewatched the pirate episode again and it's still great. I especially liked how the pirate survived 2-3 hits to the head with a morning star which is basically a 1 hit KO to an unarmored opponent. yeah i was like "wtf" every time lol | ||
|
Manbear
Canada306 Posts
on Google and for me the first result every time is some forum that has the whole episode uploaded 1 Apache vs Gladiator + Show Spoiler + http://www.mmashare.com/deadliest-warrior-1-apache-vs-gladiator-t5633.html 2 Viking vs Samurai + Show Spoiler + http://www.mmashare.com/deadliest-warrior-episode-2---viking-vs-samurai-t5630.html 3 Spartan vs Ninja + Show Spoiler + http://www.mmashare.com/deadliest-warrior-e03-----spartan-vs-ninja-t5672.html 4 Pirate vs Knight + Show Spoiler + http://www.mmashare.com/deadliest-warrior-e04--pirate-v-knight-t5905.html The only problem for this method with me is that it appears to only allow you to watch 75ish mins per day, on the upside no commercials which is sweet. | ||
|
Spike
United States1392 Posts
is also good. | ||
|
goldrush
Canada709 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + I really don't think that you can compare the two in single combat in the woods, during the sunlight, because there would be NO POINT to the ninja doing that. The ninja has the initiative. He can force the enemy to keep alert for hours and even days and tire him out. There is NO REASON to attack him in that scenario. Shit, at least wait for darkness. Now, even if the ninja is on the defensive, he can just run away. He has no armor and given similar fitness, he should be able to outrun the Spartan. So in either case, the ninja would probably have the initiative. So, the ninja attacks from cover. Instead of using poisoned ranged weapons (that he can supposedly throw with great accuracy and if it lands, is a OHKO), he decide to jump out of his hiding and MANLY attack the spartan with his sword. Alright, maybe he might miss sometimes, but the ability to choose the place to attack is a huge advantage to maximize your odds of killing the guy right away. And yes, the neck was vulnerable. Then, the ninja decides to try and stand toe to toe with the spartan. With an armored guy. What the hell. Like I said, why not just run away and pick a better spot? Instead of taking advantage of the Spartan wearing armor, he increases its usefulness by attacking him. Even if he didn't run away at first, after the Spartan missed with his spear throw, why not run away THEN? The scenario was so skewed towards the spartan that it was ridiculous. Hopefully they explained why they made that simulation the way that they did somewhere and it made sense. Because otherwise, you're taking a light infantry/skirmisher type fighter from one era and pitting him against a heavy infantry fighter from another era and forcing them to do close combat with each other. | ||
|
KissBlade
United States5718 Posts
Edit: Didn't notice it was on Spike. Ignore rant on historical accuracy >.<. | ||
Spazer
Canada8036 Posts
Also, I cringe every time somebody speaks. It's like you can boil everything they say down to "HOLY SHIT I'M HARDCORE!" | ||
|
Wotans_Fire
United Kingdom294 Posts
And the vikings were not undisciplined drunkards. How the hell do you reach Canada without discipline? they were capable of great craftmanship. | ||
|
AzureEye
United States1360 Posts
On May 05 2009 06:06 Freyr wrote: Wait...so what time period exactly? You should look that up. Also...greatest sword skill? Where is this coming from? That is pop culture nonsense. I'm sure there have been plenty of fantastic swordsmen from Japan, but there is precious little to suggest that they were any better than the elite of other countries. You should do some serious academic research and then decide if the conclusions you're drawing are in any way remotely valid. I guess time period is really irrelevant because we're comparing the prime time of each category but if you want a specific date, anytime before the Meiji Restoration before the dominance of gunpowder should be good. Just because you're a Samurai doesn't mean you're deadly but some of them are trained in old traditional sword schools that have been perfecting swordmanship for generations. But realistically speaking, even if I believe that Japanese samurai swordmanship was one of the best, there is no way I can prove it. I do know that Vikings were not completely iron armored, full plate mail like Knights, more like chainmails, and they won't give you enough protection from the Katana. Meaning, they were both vulnerable to each other's weapons but a Katana let you become more lightweight, faster, and versatile in the techniques of your attacks. Not to mention it has slightly longer range | ||
Last Romantic
United States20665 Posts
| ||
|
Slaughter
United States20255 Posts
 wish I had caught this show. | ||
|
Freyr
United States500 Posts
On May 05 2009 09:28 AzureEye wrote: I guess time period is really irrelevant because we're comparing the prime time of each category but if you want a specific date, anytime before the Meiji Restoration before the dominance of gunpowder should be good. Just because you're a Samurai doesn't mean you're deadly but some of them are trained in old traditional sword schools that have been perfecting swordmanship for generations. But realistically speaking, even if I believe that Japanese samurai swordmanship was one of the best, there is no way I can prove it. I do know that Vikings were not completely iron armored, full plate mail like Knights, more like chainmails, and they won't give you enough protection from the Katana. Meaning, they were both vulnerable to each other's weapons but a Katana let you become more lightweight, faster, and versatile in the techniques of your attacks. Not to mention it has slightly longer range Wait so your suggesting that chainmail is ineffective against a katana? Where are you getting this information? Are you a high rank in Iaido? Have you ever practiced Iaido or any bona fide koryu? Most relevantly, have you ever tried tameshigiri on chain mail? I hope you have a lot of spare swords if you intend to do so. As I said, I'm sure there were plenty of fantastic Japanese swordsmen, however, what makes you think other nationalities were not similarly skilled? Again, that is all based off of pop culture nonsense. On May 05 2009 06:21 Chanted wrote: They had different way of fighting, allthough they have some similarities. Both the Samurai and the Vikings thought that dying is combat was great. For Vikings, dying in combat, meant that you got to enter "valhalla" basically the Vikings "Heaven" One of the great Norwegian kings, actually ordered his own men, to stab him to death, when he was about to dye from age, ensuring that he wouldnt end up in "hel", the norse equievelent of Hell. The vikings way of fighting, aimed greatly on causing fear, and I doubt that would work too well on a skilled Samurai. Samurais were as mentioned, faster and more drilled in swordfighting then the vikings. Ofcource the conclusions arent "valid", but its a thought experiment, you gotta take it for what it is. Its like getting pissed off after watching the Matrix, claiming that what happened there was simply impossible. Important factor is also that the percentages arent that bigfavored towards one side in any of the current matchups, so for instance in the Viking vs Samurai question in this program, out of a 1000 fights, samurais would win 522, basically being around 52.2% Ofcource this could go either way. Again, this "skilled samurai" BS. There was no standardized badass samurai training camp. There would have existed tremendously skilled samurai, and pretty crappy ones as well (just like everything else in life). You cannot make any generalized statements about the samurai because they were never a uniform fighting force and shared no common training regimen. There is absolutely nothing wrong with thought experiments, but they are worthless unless there is some quality thought involved. Also, my guess is that the show is not exactly marketed as a 'thought experiment' which no one should consider remotely factual. This kind of show could be fun and valuable if some real effort were put in. Here's an example of a scenario that's similar in spirit but provides more parameters: student of Araki ryu Kogusoku vs Roman Legionary under Trajan. Araki ryu is a koryu bujutsu (classical japanese martial school) founded around 1573, which is still practiced (albeit in diluted and modified form) today. Araki ryu would have been one of the zillions of different schools to have trained samurai. Why is this a better scenario? Because, obviously, it's specific enough such that we actually have real information as to how these two individuals would have trained. Both would have had distinct and identifiable modes of combat, and consequently it might be somewhat reasonable to speculate on how a duel might play out. However, it would still be totally ridiculous to try to draw actual conclusions as to the outcome. | ||
|
Duke
United States1106 Posts
| ||
|
Freyr
United States500 Posts
| ||
|
Duke
United States1106 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
I mean what do you reasonably expect them to do | ||
| ||
