Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'History' started by PhillyQuakesFan, Apr 13, 2009.
This is the greatest f**king show ever.
I missed it, who won the Viking or the Samuri?
That episode is tonight.
I DVR'd last week's episode and only got around to watching it last night, an Apache warrior defeated a gladiator.
HTF does an Apache defeat a gladiator. That doesn't sound right.
If you like this then you might like one of the few good programs on The History Channel. It's called 'Warriors'. It tries to hands on get down to the nuts and bolts of different battles and different warrior types. It explores the weapons and tactics and what the mindset might have been by each type of soldier. The host is a bit excitable, but he seems to mean well.
I've heard that's a good show too, been meaning to check it out.
As for Apache vs. Gladiator (and I'm sure MM10S will weigh in here sooner or later)--my feeling was that they got the right outcome but the actual simulation they showed was pretty flawed. I would probably give the gladiator the advantage at close (due to his armor, superior weaponry, and better reach at that range) but the Apache would have a HUGE advantage at long range. The Apache's bow speaks for itself but the gladiator's sling is almost entirely worthless. At medium range I'd probably also give the advantage to the Apache, who can sit just out of reach of the gladiator's trident and get him with a thrown knife or tomahawk. Basically I think that if the gladiator is able to close the fight down and get within a few feet of the Apache he'd take it more often than not, but he'd have a very difficult time getting to that range in the first place. The show had the Apache winning almost exactly 2/3 of the simulations they ran, which I feel might even be a bit generous for the gladiator, despite his advantage at close range.
As for the simulation they actually showed, it was obvious they were going out of their way to let both guys showcase each weapon in their arsenal--which is the way they have to do it, I guess, but it definitely sacrificed realism. I loved the part where the gladiator slugged the Apache with the spike-glove thing, the Apache is on the ground dazed with the gladiator crouching over him, and instead of finishing him off the gladiator jumps up and waits for the Apache to recover.
Still a f**king awesome show. Got the DVR set for tonight (Samurai vs. Viking--my money is on the Samurai due to better armor and, again, better capability at long range).
I agree that the Samurai is the superior fighter. There skill with sword and bow puts them ahead of the Viking. Though brute force and close in fighting skill, and the ability to take alot should help the viking in hand to hand or close melee combat.
I will be setting the DVR for this one.
On second look I've actually got it set up to record Fringe and Rescue Me tonight, so I'll have to wait and catch the rebroadcast of DW tomorrow night.
Spartan and Ninja seems a rather odd pairing, as the Spartans relied pretty heavily on discipline and formation in war while the ninja was usually a solo act. And that's to say nothing of the fact that they weren't exactly contemporaries - ninja appeared in Japan during the Ashikaga Shogunate, nearly 1600 years after Sparta had ceased to be the dominant military power in Greece.
Plus, you're talking about someone using Bronze Age weaponry and tactics against someone armed with steel. I don't see a way the ninja doesn't take it.
A solitary hoplite is useless without a phalanx. A spear 5 feet long is not terribly useful in hand to hand combat without a supporting wall. And despite the phalanx's supposed discipline and strategy, it ultimately proved too static and immobile to deal with Roman legions.
Anyone see the Pirate vs. Knight last night?? Great episode...the ending to the fight was UNREAL.
I thought they gave the pirate too much credit for swordplay. I mean in a one v one with sabers the Knight clearly has the advantage due to his armor. Still they made a good show and the weaponry was great.
I am not too enthused about Yakuza v Mafia. I don't consider either to be warriors.
Yeah, I kinda thought so too--hell, even if they're equal in skill, the knight's sword is a lot heavier. The fight they actually show isn't necessarily representative of what they think would happen, though (other than who actually wins), they work it a bit so that both fighters get to showcase all of their weapons.
Agreed, not so much because they aren't warriors, but because they just seem too similar to me. The whole point of the show is to match up two enemies from different parts of the globe and/or different points in history, who could have never actually met in real life. I'm not too excited about the Green Beret vs. Spetsnaz episode for the same reason.
I didn't watch it, but wouldn't the pirate have an enormous advantage outside of melee combat given that he'd have pistols?
I will certainly get the names wrong here so please bear with me, but the flintlock failed to penetrate the knights armor from 12 feet. The grenado (a clay encased combo of gunpowder, nails, bb sized pellets, etc) also failed to penetrate the armor at very close range, less then 5 feet.
The other firearm which I don't recall the name for, was basically a precursor to a shotgun with a 1 inch diameter barrel easily penetrated the knights armor, that is when it didn't misfire.
The shrapnel in the grenado failed to penetrate the knight's armor, but it still would have done a lot of damage as a concussion weapon. (For that matter--and I'm surprised no one mentioned this--while the flintlock failed to penetrate the knight's armor, a head shot probably would have seriously rung his bell.)
Here's the end of the episode (the fight starts at 2:25):
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEdujhb0PvA"]YouTube - Deadliest Warrior - Season 1 Episode 4. *Pirates vs. Knights*[/ame]
It seems like the deadliest warrior of all might be the knight's horse. That thing took a grenado to the belly and didn't skip a beat.
I watched a couple of the episodes, and there were a few things that surprised me. How effective the ring mail was against the katana especially--I thought at least some damage would have passed through. They do seem to have some trouble calculating non-lethal hits. There have been a few times I thought they got it wrong, and I don't value their sim program for much.
I agree the sim program isn't that much to write home about.
I think that while they do a very good job of getting all the facts they can, there are too many intangibles that you can't account for in these fights.
I liked how at the end of the Ninja v Spartan the guy from the Ninja team said something along these lines that if a Ninja saw a spartan coming for a fight, he would run away and kill him later while he slept. Which is what they were. Assassins. I would have liked to have seen the Knight face a Samurai.
Some other matchups:
Spartan v Gladiator
Roman v Mongol
Ninja v Pirate
Huh. I'm surprised at the choice of weapons, actually. One of the biggest reasons knights were so effective in medieval warfare was the lance - men on foot were effectively defenseless against it until the reintroduction of pike warfare in Europe in the early 14th century - and yet they didn't let the knight have one.
Pre-Marian Reforms Roman gets his ass kicked. Hell, post-Marian Reforms Roman gets his ass kicked if he's outside the legion.
I say the Mongol takes it and then celebrates in true Mongol fashion:
"There is nothing greater than embracing the wives and daughters of one's enemies after a victorious battle." - Genghis Khan Temujin
The fantasy element and the simulation are to me a negative in this show. The one positive I get out of it is the weapon testing and some of the background. I would actually prefer they compare troop types that had historically fought against each other. Mongols and Mamluks or Teutonic Knights and Lithuanians for example.
As far as Mongols vs Romans, a Mongol soldier would probably make short work of a Roman soldier just as their army would. The mobility plus bow range or lance would make it impossible for a Roman foot soldier or cavalry. Advantages of Roman training and discipline would probably be matched or surpassed by the Mongol also.
Cool episode last night. One of the better ones of the season. FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOMMMMMMMMMMMMM!!!!!!
Shaolin Monk vs. Maori last week was also pretty good.
Only one more episode left this season and it's on this Sunday night, not Tuesday. IRA vs. Taliban--I'd think the IRA would have little trouble, as their main weaponry (the AK-47) is the same, but they are better-equipped in terms of things like explosives, better trained, etc. Also, it appears from the preview that they will have actual (presumably former) IRA and Taliban members talking up their respective sides, which I'm surprised doesn't create some sort of legal issues. I'd thought they might get around that obstacle by having Westerners talking on behalf of the enemies they fought against--British combat vets representing the IRA and Americans representing the Taliban.
Mongol bow range? The Romans had mechanized artillery.
I can't believe I just discovered this thread. This show is so frakking awesome. It's one of my new favorite things. And yes, I totally wish they would do pirate vs. ninja.
I agree that their sim program leaves quite a bit to be desired -- although they're not entirely clear about what factors it takes into consideration and how it weighs each factor. The impression they create is that it's all about kill shots, with some references to "training". It doesn't seem like they're really factoring in tactics and non-lethal blows.
But the simulated fights at the end of each episode are pretty ********ing awesome! I loved pirate vs. knight. I mean, they're silly because you wouldn't have a ninja sneak up on a Spartan and try to jump-stab him -- especially not if he has poison darts that he can shoot without the Spartan ever knowing he was there. Plus at one point in that battle, the ninja ran ahead and the Spartan lost sight of him in the woods. You would think the ninja would find a decent place to conceal himself and get the drop on the Spartan, but instead he pops out of the underbrush and lobs a couple of shuriken at the guy. That didn't seem quite right.
But the mafia/yakuza battle was waaaay cooler than I expected it to be. Especially the baseball bat part.
At the Battle of Carrhae the Romans, under Crassus, faced light mounted archer cavalry. They went down to a man. The Mongols wouldnt present targets for the Legionaries.
The IRA/Taliban show was stupid. A flamethrower??? please. I think any of the unit 'battles' are completely reliant on circumstance and setting.
Of course they are. What battles aren't?
It is just fun to show the weapons that particular groups used and to see how the stack up against similar weapons in terms of death potential.
There is no way the simulations can take into account "stealth attacks" and/or terrain they are fighting on and/or weather conditions and/or how well trained an individual is, there is no way they could account for that. They are just comparing the weapons each of these warriors used and how they fared against other warriors and/or their armors.
It's still pretty damn entertaining though to see how badass some of these weapons are and how effective they are in combat.