Deadliest Warrior - interesting show.

[Woosta]

So there's a show sorta simulating fights between ancient warriors, and the results from the first 2 episodes:

Fight #1. Gladiator vs Apache:

Apache won 666 out of 1000 fights mostly because of bow and arrow. Gladiator won 333 fights mostly because of trident + net combo.

Fight #2. Samurai vs Viking:

Samurai won 522 out of 1000, most useful weapon was the Naginata. Viking won 478 with the use of a long sword

(next week ) Ep 3. Spartan vs Ninja

( On the show the results are obviously computer generated; so they're prone to inaccuracy and may not fully depict a real scenario. )

So anyway, I was curious as to who you think would win with these variables:

Gladiator vs Apache scenario: between Gladiator and Apache there are two fights, on 2 types of terrain ( one being forest area, the other being a collisseum fight ). The Apache has knives on him, a bow and arrow. The Gladiator has a trident and a net, along with a pair of gloves with spikes on the end.

Viking vs Samurai scenario: , the first fight takes place in the upper north in the woods, snowy/wintery. Second fight takes place in a grassy plain near a body of water in Kyoto. Samurai has obviously his 2 swords + armor + helmet while the Viking has an axe + shield + armor + helmet.

- In all these fights, we assume the fighter is of the very top caliber of their respective type ( highest skilled samurai, etc ).
- Fighters are 40 feet apart from each other and both are aware of one another before the battle commences ( no sneak attacks )

Who do you think would win?

I'd agree completely with the Apache defeating the Gladiator - his marksmanship skills would come in handy and most likely pierce/kill the Gladiator before the Gladiator even gets to him. He can outrun the Gladiator ( the Apache has no armor ) and keep on shooting, and when the Gladiator tires out he'll finish him with the knife.

I think the Viking would beat the Samurai. Yes, samurais practice sword thrusting eternally, but that doesn't mean it will pierce the viking's armor. The Japanese are relatively small compared to most Europeans, so they definitely do not have a size advantage ( and yes, size can matter in most circumstances ). The vikings will have strength/brute force advantage, they endure harsher conditions, they have the advantage of a round shield to block katana blows, plus the armor. Though of course one may always get lucky and pierce a critical area that's not protected. I would still have to say the sheer size and brute force of the viking would overcome the smaller samurai.

What do you think?

I'm too lazy to type the next challenge/fight between Spartan and Ninja but I say the Spartan decimates him.

 

[SSSnail]

So, when are they gonna have Ninjas vs. Pirates?

 

[jlee]

My sister was telling me about this the other day..

 

[Baked]

What channel and show time is the show on? I saw commercial, but don't remember which channel.

 

[Newbian]

Giggity.

 

[mrkun]

Does anyone else think this is mildly stupid? Apache/Gladiator and Spartan/Ninja are apples to oranges comparisons.

Apache vs. Gladiator: hunter/guerilla fighter (presumably 16th-18th century) against a 2nd-4th century slave warrior that fights in one-on-one combat

Spartan vs. Ninja: 5th-3rd century BC heavily armored soldier that fights in a large phalanx vs. a 15th-19th century assassin? It's difficult to imagine a more retarded comparison. Beekeeper vs. amputee porn star... who wins??

Viking vs. Samurai: This is the only non-BS comparison of the three they've had so far. My only criticism is that they're comparing samurai of the 17th-19th century with a viking from the 9th-11th centuries. There's a huge technology gap here.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: Woosta
I think the Viking would beat the Samurai. Yes, samurais practice sword thrusting eternally, but that doesn't mean it will pierce the viking's armor.

The katana is not the samurai's main weapon. It's a backup weapon only.

 

[Killmenow]

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: Woosta
I think the Viking would beat the Samurai. Yes, samurais practice sword thrusting eternally, but that doesn't mean it will pierce the viking's armor.

The katana is not the samurai's main weapon. It's a backup weapon only.

The whole chainmail thing was blown a little out of perspective. It's like saying a gun is useless against someone wearing a Kevlar vest, just because the vest stops bullets. I would think that the intellect and mind games of the Japanese would also play a large part in the effectiveness of the Samurai in combat. When a Japanese fellow realizes that the white devil's armor renders the slicing ineffective, he should be cunning enough to target other parts of the body by exploiting a weakness of some sort. Sure the samurais aren't ninjas, but you ever play an asian in Street Fighter?? so cheap! The computer program they used at the end of the show doesn't seem to take skill, intellect, or group tactics into consideration at all. And what about the horsies?! Maybe I am giving the samurais too much credit, but the show just seems to take a very limited scope of things into consideration; doesn't seem to be doing anyone justice.

 

[Elbryn]

http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm
this show is all about entertainment and not realism. check out the link, its a comparison between knights and samurai and who would win in a fight. cliff notes: the author goes on to say it could be either way, most depends on the fighter and whichever won can be considered luckier... not necessarily better. The article brings out quite a bit of standard misconceptions on both parties.

 

[Electric Amish]

Yeah, it's kinda cool.

The smack talk between the two "sides" is kind of annoying.

"My ancestors would beat-up your ancestors"

I think Ninja beats a Spartan....like the Samurai beats the Viking. Speed.

 

[thescreensavers]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Yeah, it's kinda cool.

The smack talk between the two "sides" is kind of annoying.

"My ancestors would beat-up your ancestors"

I think Ninja beats a Spartan....like the Samurai beats the Viking. Speed.

indeed, but I don't like the first test they did the black egg vs the long pole with the metal tip at the end, you can dodge the weapon but a trained ninja will at least get one eye and I don't care how Spartans can handle pain, eye pain is excruciating. It will severely immobilize the spartan.

Also any one notice how the doctor disappears sometimes? lol

 

[Bulk Beef]

10000 samurai vs. 2 Vikings on a tank?

 

[Newbian]

Originally posted by: Bulk Beef
10000 samurai vs. 2 Vikings on a tank?

Vikings would win if they have unlimited ammo.....

 

[zinfamous]

I've been watching that Warriors show on History channel recently.

based on the Viking show, I'd have to go with Viking as well. those fuckers were bad-ass. Terrorized the entire continent for 4 centuries to the point where the mere threat of an invasion simply resulted in concessions and payment without a fight. After seeing one of their big-ass 2-handed axes in action, the ones that only the elite Vikings were capable of using, I'd say he could totally take out a samurai.

They also invented and perfected the throwing axe. ...so I kinda think you have to arm your viking with a throwing axe in the battle vs. samurai.

They extracted all of their iron from peat moss, which they then used in the steel to craft their weapons and armor. Freaking wild.

 

[0roo0roo]

well the problem is their measurement of lethality is too simplistic. if that was all that mattered the heavier the hammer or axe the better, get a big ol axe and you could probably cleave someone in half in battle if you got a hit. but theres probably good reason more warrior groups didn't rely on axes, the weight is a massive disadvantage in actual battle. if you are running after civilians its one thing, but in a fight, you swing, you miss, you get sliced to pieces while you recover from your swing

 

[dennilfloss]

The Danish battleaxe served the English quite well against the Normands at Hastings.

 

[Fayd]

Originally posted by: Woosta
So there's a show sorta simulating fights between ancient warriors, and the results from the first 2 episodes:

Fight #1. Gladiator vs Apache:

Apache won 666 out of 1000 fights mostly because of bow and arrow. Gladiator won 333 fights mostly because of trident + net combo.

Fight #2. Samurai vs Viking:

Samurai won 522 out of 1000, most useful weapon was the Naginata. Viking won 478 with the use of a long sword

(next week ) Ep 3. Spartan vs Ninja

( On the show the results are obviously computer generated; so they're prone to inaccuracy and may not fully depict a real scenario. )

So anyway, I was curious as to who you think would win with these variables:

Gladiator vs Apache scenario: between Gladiator and Apache there are two fights, on 2 types of terrain ( one being forest area, the other being a collisseum fight ). The Apache has knives on him, a bow and arrow. The Gladiator has a trident and a net, along with a pair of gloves with spikes on the end.

Viking vs Samurai scenario: , the first fight takes place in the upper north in the woods, snowy/wintery. Second fight takes place in a grassy plain near a body of water in Kyoto. Samurai has obviously his 2 swords + armor + helmet while the Viking has an axe + shield + armor + helmet.

- In all these fights, we assume the fighter is of the very top caliber of their respective type ( highest skilled samurai, etc ).
- Fighters are 40 feet apart from each other and both are aware of one another before the battle commences ( no sneak attacks )

Who do you think would win?

I'd agree completely with the Apache defeating the Gladiator - his marksmanship skills would come in handy and most likely pierce/kill the Gladiator before the Gladiator even gets to him. He can outrun the Gladiator ( the Apache has no armor ) and keep on shooting, and when the Gladiator tires out he'll finish him with the knife.

I think the Viking would beat the Samurai. Yes, samurais practice sword thrusting eternally, but that doesn't mean it will pierce the viking's armor. The Japanese are relatively small compared to most Europeans, so they definitely do not have a size advantage ( and yes, size can matter in most circumstances ). The vikings will have strength/brute force advantage, they endure harsher conditions, they have the advantage of a round shield to block katana blows, plus the armor. Though of course one may always get lucky and pierce a critical area that's not protected. I would still have to say the sheer size and brute force of the viking would overcome the smaller samurai.

What do you think?

I'm too lazy to type the next challenge/fight between Spartan and Ninja but I say the Spartan decimates him.

with regard to samurai vs anything...

japanese chain mail is woefully inadequate for thrusting/cleaving fighting. it's only useful as protection against slicing.

as such, on a simple weapon advantage i'd have to say the europeans are better.

let's see a samurai vs a teutonic knight. samurai wasted, 1000/1000.

 

[Fayd]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
well the problem is their measurement of lethality is too simplistic. if that was all that mattered the heavier the hammer or axe the better, get a big ol axe and you could probably cleave someone in half in battle if you got a hit. but theres probably good reason more warrior groups didn't rely on axes, the weight is a massive disadvantage in actual battle. if you are running after civilians its one thing, but in a fight, you swing, you miss, you get sliced to pieces while you recover from your swing

one handed axes arent drastically heavier than swords.

and that same argument could be used against all 2 handed weapons.

there is a time and place for them. good luck bringing down a mounted rider without the reach of a 2 hander... for example.

 

[Fayd]

fwiw, i dont think a naginata would be particularly useful in 1v1 combat either. that's more where the standard length katana really does better.

that show is fucked up if they think an axe + shield wielding viking is gonna lose to a naginata wielding samurai.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss
The Danish battleaxe served the English quite well against the Normands at Hastings.

It did much better against Harald Hardrada at Stamford Bridge. History would have been slightly different had it not.

 

[dennilfloss]

The Battle of Hastings was not lost because of the Danish Battleaxe. It was lost because Guillaume used combined warfare and thus kept the weary English on the defensive until a mistake was made.

I am pretty sure the first Normand infantry units that were mauled pretty badly when they went up the hill against Harold's shield wall did not regard the Danish battleaxe as an inferior infantry weapon.

 

[alkemyst]

lot's of misinfo, esp those second guessing the show.

Spartans were never really considered heavily armored. They used helmets, breastplates, greaves and shield at best...since the Hoplite brought his own armor it usually wasn't even metal based.

TV reenactments are a lot different than the real history much of the time.

 

[mrkun]

Originally posted by: alkemyst
lot's of misinfo, esp those second guessing the show.

Spartans were never really considered heavily armored. They used helmets, breastplates, greaves and shield at best...since the Hoplite brought his own armor it usually wasn't even metal based.

TV reenactments are a lot different than the real history much of the time.

Spartan's armor wasn't provided by the state?

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: mrkun

Originally posted by: alkemyst
lot's of misinfo, esp those second guessing the show.

Spartans were never really considered heavily armored. They used helmets, breastplates, greaves and shield at best...since the Hoplite brought his own armor it usually wasn't even metal based.

TV reenactments are a lot different than the real history much of the time.

Spartan's armor wasn't provided by the state?

special units perhaps, but as far as I know (and this is the case for quite a few armies) they came in whatever they brought.

On tv it looks better to have everyone look nice and shiny though

 

[ViviTheMage]

show is pretty cool...SO actually showed me it!