Deadliest Warrior

Yeeeeeeeeah...about the end "kitsch" battles. I know they're supposed to be dramatizations and all, but they can REALLY be ridiculous sometimes.

I actually enjoy this show, to be honest, because I am impressed by how much analyzing goes into this...and the fact the main guys do NOT believe any of the hype/spin the supporters for each side try to muster. But I do think that the end results can be questionable sometimes. For example, a D&D player friend of mine kind of agrees with the end result of Spartan vs. Ninja (Spartan won), but thinks the end result of Spartan vs. Samurai (Spartan won AGAIN) was BS. I have to agree.

BTW...I just saw the end result of the CIA vs. KGB episode. What...the HECK...was with all the gadgetry?!? Exploding cigars? Shoe blades? What is this...Deadliest Warrior via Q branch? I was expecting MI6 and Bond!

GamemasterAnthony wrote:

Yeeeeeeeeah...about the end "kitsch" battles. I know they're supposed to be dramatizations and all, but they can REALLY be ridiculous sometimes.

Absolutely; don't even get me started on the end battle simulation of the Pirate vs Knight episode.

Psy-4 wrote:

Aggie wrote:

it's silly fun, nothing more. Now if you want to see people taking it too seriously, check out

Aggie wrote:

Absolutely; don't even get me started on the end battle simulation of the Pirate vs Knight episode.

One can enjoy silly fun and still be annoyed/amused by an aspect of it, silly Psy-4. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

GamemasterAnthony wrote:

Yeeeeeeeeah...about the end "kitsch" battles. I know they're supposed to be dramatizations and all, but they can REALLY be ridiculous sometimes.

You know, I really don't see why everyone bitches about the battle dramatizations. They're ridiculous for a reason: They reflect the weapon stats the guys have cooked up over the show. This is why in the Green Berets vs. Spetsnaz show, the Green Beret dumps 15 rounds of 9mm at the Spetsnaz guy without a hit, forcing him to switch to his melee weapon (the entrenching tool), allowing the Spetsnaz guy the opportunity to shoot him with his knife.

It may be absurd but that's how they dramatize each weapon-on-weapon scenario. It's not about realism (it would've made a lot more sense for the Green Beret to just, you know, reload) but about demonstrating the conclusions they'd reached.

Quote :

I actually enjoy this show, to be honest, because I am impressed by how much analyzing goes into this...and the fact the main guys do NOT believe any of the hype/spin the supporters for each side try to muster.

Are you kidding? That's basically how e-tool vs. ballistic knife was decided.

Quote :

But I do think that the end results can be questionable sometimes. For example, a D&D player friend of mine kind of agrees with the end result of Spartan vs. Ninja (Spartan won), but thinks the end result of Spartan vs. Samurai (Spartan won AGAIN) was BS. I have to agree.

...because playing D&D makes you an expert in the field of medeival combat, right? Up next for commentary on Green Beret vs. Spetsnaz, some kid who plays Modern Warfare 2 nonstop.

Quote :

BTW...I just saw the end result of the CIA vs. KGB episode. What...the HECK...was with all the gadgetry?!? Exploding cigars? Shoe blades? What is this...Deadliest Warrior via Q branch? I was expecting MI6 and Bond!

Why the fuck would you expect a British intelligence agency and a fictional spy in an episode about real US and Soviet intel- what is this I don't even

Penguin wrote:

...because playing D&D makes you an expert in the field of medeival combat, right? Up next for commentary on Green Beret vs. Spetsnaz, some kid who plays Modern Warfare 2 nonstop.

It happens a lot these days, sad to say.

One epic troll I saw once claimed that he was a very good sniper thanks to Call of Duty 2, but if things got dicey he'd just flip into god mode.

....

I'm just gonna let that sit for a moment...

Aggie wrote:

One can enjoy silly fun and still be annoyed/amused by an aspect of it, silly Psy-4. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

If you are negatively affected by silly fun in any way, it is no longer silly fun.

Majin Gojira wrote:

One epic troll I saw once claimed that he was a very good sniper thanks to Call of Duty 2, but if things got dicey he'd just flip into god mode.

Does not compute. Reason - contradicting statements.



On another note, a study found out that playing fps'es makes you a better surgeon, when working with cameras and remotely controlled tools.

Yep. And IIRC similar results have been found with FPS games and the coordination necessary for shooting.

The latter one, I take with a grain of salt. When I go for a few months without shooting and just play FPSes, I find that it's something of a hindrance as I have to reacquaint myself with the way iron sights work in reality as opposed to games. CoD's breath-holding mechanic is also detrimental to good shooting. You don't want to hold your breath when aiming a rifle, you want to shoot at one of the natural stopping points when you breathe- either just when you're done exhaling, or done inhaling. Holding your breath is a really bad habit, especially for repeated shots. Your body needs that oxygen to aim steadily, especially in a high stress environment.

Also, reloading quickly takes practice, and there really isn't any way to repeat the sort of motion necessary in a game. It's just a trick that takes practice.

The biggest problem with the "conclusions", IMHO, is that it's less about the warriors and more about their toys. They don't even try to factor in physical differences between historical warriors or tactics or fighting styles. It's all about which weapon does the most damage. Shaka Zulu vs. William Wallace (Winner: Wallace) was the most egregious example of this to me.

Hell, I tend to ignore the "conclusions" and groove on the weapon porn.

Freezer wrote:

The biggest problem with the "conclusions", IMHO, is that it's less about the warriors and more about their toys. They don't even try to factor in physical differences between historical warriors or tactics or fighting styles. It's all about which weapon does the most damage. Shaka Zulu vs. William Wallace (Winner: Wallace) was the most egregious example of this to me.

Hell, I tend to ignore the "conclusions" and groove on the weapon porn.

I blame that on the computer program; I sincerely doubt it has the ability to take tactics into consideration.

Well, that would make the show pretty boring. They all have to have the fighters square off against each other to make it interesting.

Ninja vs. anyone? Sneak up on them and kill them from behind.
Mafia vs. Yakuza or IRA vs. Taliban? Car bomb.
Green Berets vs. Spetsnaz? Call in an airstrike.
Pirate vs. Knight? Shove the knight in the water.

Etc.

Given they list the average physical statistics for the warriors, I think they do take physical things into account.

But not tactics, nor disorientation effects, terrain or prolonged effects.

They just want the quickest, cleanest and/or flashiest kill.

Majin Gojira wrote:

They just want the quickest, cleanest and/or flashiest kill.

Nope, otherwise they would've gone with the above. It's all about dramatizing the weapon stats.

Anyone sort of wish we could get a battle royale of all the previous combatants? [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

It'd just be the Green Berets and Spetsnaz shooting everybody.

Penguin wrote:

Well, that would make the show pretty boring. They all have to have the fighters square off against each other to make it interesting.

Ninja vs. anyone? Sneak up on them and kill them from behind.
Mafia vs. Yakuza or IRA vs. Taliban? Car bomb.
Green Berets vs. Spetsnaz? Call in an airstrike.
Pirate vs. Knight? Shove the knight in the water.

Etc.

Who is car bombing whom? Same with the airstrike. And what if the pirate were to (for whatever reason) be fighting on land?

Also, what's stopping certain warriors from nuking Japan until every last ninja is dead?

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Who is car bombing whom?

Probably depends on the location, really.

Quote :

Same with the airstrike.

Probably the Green Berets because the idea of the Russians having air superiority in virtually any contest between the two is patently absurd.

Quote :

And what if the pirate were to (for whatever reason) be fighting on land?

Push 'em in the river then.

Quote :

Also, what's stopping certain warriors from nuking Japan until every last ninja is dead?

You can never be sure you've got them all.

Penguin wrote:

Quote :

Also, what's stopping certain warriors from nuking Japan until every last ninja is dead?

You can never be sure you've got them all.

Yeah, and you'd have to go door to door and check every fridge in Japan. That gets tedious after a while.

And even then, half the time when there's someone in the fridge, it's just an aging archaeologist.

Penguin wrote:

It'd just be the Green Berets and Spetsnaz shooting everybody.

Going by how their dramatization goes, they'd just miss, and then it's a huge brawl with melee/short-range weapons.

Sun Tzu somehow wins by raking the ninja with his back scratcher.

They often have to unfairly disavantage one of the sides in their comparisons or there won't be much of a battle. For example the Native Americans are never given firearms for the obvious reason that they'd simply gun down their opponents in short order. Some of the weapons choices seem arbitrary as well, used more to make sure there's a difference between the two sides than anything else. For example the IRA made use of the RPG7 as well as the Taliban. Giving the Yakuza Stens seems kind of odd given that any automatic weapons they had would likely have been stolen from US armouries in Japan during the immediate post war period, which is when the scenario seems to be set, so they'd likely be armed with M3 submachineguns, M2 carbines, or what have you.

tim gueguen wrote:

They often have to unfairly disavantage one of the sides in their comparisons or there won't be much of a battle. For example the Native Americans are never given firearms for the obvious reason that they'd simply gun down their opponents in short order. Some of the weapons choices seem arbitrary as well, used more to make sure there's a difference between the two sides than anything else. For example the IRA made use of the RPG7 as well as the Taliban. Giving the Yakuza Stens seems kind of odd given that any automatic weapons they had would likely have been stolen from US armouries in Japan during the immediate post war period, which is when the scenario seems to be set, so they'd likely be armed with M3 submachineguns, M2 carbines, or what have you.

I think that the Sten, though firing a .45 round rather than a 9mm round, is more likely to be a example of "let's 'kitbash' a SMG in a small backyard workshop/blacksmith" type weapon than the M3, given the Sten's underpinnings, than the actual weapon used by the Yakusa...

I enjoy the show and watch it all the time...but i have to agree it is usually BS when it comes to facts and stuff. A few things I have to comment on:

Joan of Arc vs William the Conqueror
really?.....are you trying to make me believe that a 4'11" 130lb 17yr old peasant girl with NO combat experience, who never actually killed anyone, is going to defeat a man who is a foot taller and 100lbs heavier..AND has a wealth of experience killing people...in a sword fight?

North Koreans SpOPS vs US Rangers
I like how they say on the show that the North Koreans had the advantage of knowing there country in combat as compared to the Rangers. So what do they have them do in the sim?.......gaurding a warehouse!

Crazy Horse vs Poncho Villa
I got a real charge when they tested the 'close range' weapons...Crazy Horse (a stupid little club)....and Poncho Villa (a really BIG knife).

The Star Trek security guys
you know....the 10 guys who always get killed when the 2 celeb warriors face off.....makes you wonder why they even bother with group fights.

X factor numbers on season 3
a nice idea....they just never tell you where they get those numbers from....or did they just roll some dice.

Silly x-factors
like when they talk about 'logistics'.....as though that is gonna be a big advantage to you when you are in a knife fight on the battlefield.

Overkill
when they test weapons....i get a real charge when they get all orgasmic at the 'damage' caused by a blade as they hack the gell torso to pieces....when the first hack that decapitates it was enough.

Didn't they have an episode wherein the Continental army fought the Grande Armée?

Washington had 12,000 men or so at best and Napolean called upon about half a million troops for the invasion of Russia. And the French hadn't been de-spined by then so it's not like Washington could have just pre-imitated the Wermacht.