www.ditl.org

Mark wrote:Anybody else watch "The Deadliest Warrior"? I caught another rerun last night, where they matched up the Apache warrior vs a Gladiator. Some of those damned Gladiator weapons were badass. The Scissor for one. The Trident and net combo worked better that I would have expected as well.

Its not a bad show. I wasn't to happy with the outcome of the Gladiator v Apache. The scores for the Gladiator weren't just low but pathetic. Can't help but honestly believe they messed up the numbers some how. Didn't help that the Gladiator guys didn't bring in good armor and they took a sling vs a bow.

Mark wrote:What I found interesting is that the Samuri won his challange, yet the Knights lost theirs.

The Samurai had one problem and that was getting past the Viking's shield. Even after that, the scores were very close. It was a surprisingly even fight. With only a slight bit of luck, it could have gone the other way.

The Knight was a whole new problem. They had to get close, up close the Pirate didn't have a chance. The close combat scores for the Pirate was a joke. The Knight also would have had better luck if they had remembered to add their shield to the mix as their counter to the blunderbuss. Only 1/3 of the shot of the weapon made it through the armor. A shield would have removed this problem and given the Knight a much better chance.

I think I've seen that show over here once or twice. I was far from impressed with it.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Mark wrote:What I found interesting is that the Samuri won his challange, yet the Knights lost theirs.

Who were they matched against?

A pirate, with guns and (IIRC) a grenade.

So, yeah, pretty much the obvious outcome.

Though the Viking should have easily taken the Samurai. This is what happens when you fail spectacularly at research.

kostmayer wrote:Think I saw a clip of that show on a panel show over here - The IRA versus the Taliban.

That one was just hilarious. My favourite part was at the very end, where the last surviving IRA guy ran onto a bus with the last surviving Taliban guy chasing him with an AK. The IRA guy dropped a car bomb into one of the seats, ran out the front set of doors and slammed them shut behind him. The Taliban guy runs to the doors, finds them locked, sees the detonator in the IRA guy's hand and pulls this utterly hilarious "Oh no!" expression before the IRA guy blew the bus up.

One of the IRA guys also had a flamethrower, for reasons which were completely beyond me.

Deepcrush wrote:Its not a bad show. I wasn't to happy with the outcome of the Gladiator v Apache. The scores for the Gladiator weren't just low but pathetic. Can't help but honestly believe they messed up the numbers some how. Didn't help that the Gladiator guys didn't bring in good armor and they took a sling vs a bow.

I've no problem at all believing that Apache Warrior V Gladiator was a horribly one-sided victory. Gladiators weren't trained as soldiers, they weren't armed and armoured like soldiers, and they were trained to be impressive fighters - not necessarily great warriors.

Put the Apache warrior up against a legionnaire, however, and you'll see that one-sided victory suddenly swing in the opposite direction.

The show isn't bad, though most of their "tests" prove something between jack and shit. The problem is that often they leave things out, like the knight's shield, or over value or under value things. There are obvious limits to what you can do in this kind of scenario as there are a ton of assumptions that have to be made to even get to the place where you can make a comparison and I think that a lot of the time their assumptions suck.

Some of their numbers are way off, I freely admit. It was either during the IRA vs Taliban or the Green Berets vs Spetznaz, when they were matching assault rifles that one guy (that looks like Ryan Renolds or Dane Cook) gave the edge to one weapon because "he like the feel of it better"

BTW, I think a better matchup series would have been the Ninja vs the Apache and the Gladiator vs the Spartan.

The Green Beret vs. Spetznaz one was one of the most ridiculous ones they did.

The Draganov is a better sniper rifle, the Spetznaz knife gun being more than a sorry joke, combat gymanstics being useful, etc.

Tyyr wrote:The Green Beret vs. Spetznaz one was one of the most ridiculous ones they did.

The Draganov is a better sniper rifle, the Spetznaz knife gun being more than a sorry joke, combat gymanstics being useful, etc.

Well, of all the weapons the matched the knife gun against, the fricking E-Tool? I couldn't figure that out. Not the bayonet or the K-Bar. The damned entrenching tool. A colapsable shovel. Yes, it can SERVE as a weapon....but sure as hell isn't a weapon by primary purpose.

Sionnach Glic wrote:Though the Viking should have easily taken the Samurai. This is what happens when you fail spectacularly at research.

How so?

Sionnach Glic wrote:I've no problem at all believing that Apache Warrior V Gladiator was a horribly one-sided victory. Gladiators weren't trained as soldiers, they weren't armed and armoured like soldiers, and they were trained to be impressive fighters - not necessarily great warriors.

While not as well equipped as a legionnaire, the Gladiator experts could have brought in leather armor and tower shield. Which would have removed all of the Apache range advantage. Plus the sling, a fraking sling... really!

Put the Apache warrior up against a legionnaire, however, and you'll see that one-sided victory suddenly swing in the opposite direction.

Oh, no doubt about it. The Apache would be lucky to get a kill at all.

I think the ninja vs the spartan was the most absurd, because they insisted on treating the ninja like a front line warrior, and pretty much ignored the whole "stealth assassin" aspect. Of course the ninja is going to lose to a spartan in a straight up fight, that's pretty much what a spartan spent his whole life training for, and what he was equipped for. Despite what the movies like to suggest, ninja were not a combination of master martial artists and supernatural weapon expert. They were the guys sneaking around in the shadows and stabbing the front line warriors in the back.

The problems for the Ninja is three fold. One being that while they were able to wound the Spartans, the Spartans killed the Ninja with every blow. Two, its Deadliest Warrior and not Deadliest Assassin. Three, Spartans are not just front line fighters but also traded assassins. It was a part of their training growing up.

The Ninja team was just to far outclassed by the Spartan team. Truth is, it wasn't even a fair fight.

Season two will be starting soon. I'm kind of impatient to see the next seasons matchups 8)

Agreed. While there tend to be just a few things off (shush), the show is still entertaining.

Sionnach Glic wrote:One of the IRA guys also had a flamethrower, for reasons which were completely beyond me.

It was the guy with the catapult that had me confused.

Can't argue that the show isn't entertaining.

It does have 100% of a man's daily required dose of testosterone and smack talk.

I hate the smack talk though. It's like the internet only now I have to look at and hear the idiot fanboys prattle on about how awesome their faction is. Shut the fuck up you wanna be poser.