Deadliest Warrior on Spike (spoilers)

[NewJeffCT]

Kind of an interesting show in that it pits famous historical warriors from different eras against other famous warriors. Apologize if this has been discussed before, but I went back a few pages on here. (I'm also old, so could have missed it due to my aging brain, too)

Viking vs Samurai
Ninja vs Spartan
Knight vs Pirate


I did not see the Yakuza vs Mafia, though. And, I know there was one with the Apache vs ____ as well that I missed.

However, in the pirate vs knight one, I had some problems: They rated the cutlass vs broadsword as even, and they did both have good cutting power, slicing clear through a pig carcass. However, they neglected to mention that the knight is going to be covered in plate mail armor, and their viking vs samurai episode showed that a katana would not go through chainmail, let alone plate...

Then, they had some pirate gunpowder devices like the grenado (old fashioned grenade) and the flintlock pistol, and neither penetrated the knight's armor, yet they rated the grenado as better than the knight's morningstar which cleaved through a skull?

 

[Brown Jenkin]

I saw the Viking vs. Samurai. It was fun to watch them test the various weapons but the comparisons were bad and didn't really match up. Then with the battle reenactment they showed them hitting each other but only lightly hurting each other, when they had just shown the weapons doing horrific damage in the test. I was also disappointed when they said one side was clearly superior to the other when the computer put the advantage at 52%-48%.

Overall it was a good show because of the weapon testing, I just don't buy their conclusions.

 

[Mouseferatu]

One has to keep in mind that the "reenactment" at the end isn't meant to be a reenactment at all. It's a dramatization of the results of the "thousand-times test," nothing more. The weapons aren't as deadly because that would end the fight in a matter of seconds, and that's not very cinematic.

(Or, in other words, the fight at the end is the D&D version of the fight, complete with hit points. It's not meant to be realistic; just cool to watch, and to eventually have the same conclusion as the computer program.)

All that said, while it's a fun show to watch, their conclusions are utterly meaningless. All they're comparing, when you get down to it, is equipment. The program doesn't take stealth into account. It doesn't take unusual techniques into account. And it assumes combatants of equal skill.

 

[NewJeffCT]

True, I know a lot of things aren't taken into account - the Spartan vs the Ninja for example. Unless they're in a gladitorial arena, the ninja is just going to run away to fight another day, rather than continuing to attack.

But, the Knight vs Pirate one bothered me more than the others because of the rating the cutlass equal to the broadsword, which was fine if everything was equal, but the cutlass would be attacking plate mail armor... which was not penetrated by the grenado shrapnel or the flintlock.

 

[Brown Jenkin]

One has to keep in mind that the "reenactment" at the end isn't meant to be a reenactment at all. It's a dramatization of the results of the "thousand-times test," nothing more. The weapons aren't as deadly because that would end the fight in a matter of seconds, and that's not very cinematic.

(Or, in other words, the fight at the end is the D&D version of the fight, complete with hit points. It's not meant to be realistic; just cool to watch, and to eventually have the same conclusion as the computer program.)

I understand what they are trying to do, I just don't think it works out that well when they just told us it takes only one hit to kill with most of the weapons.

All that said, while it's a fun show to watch, their conclusions are utterly meaningless. All they're comparing, when you get down to it, is equipment. The program doesn't take stealth into account. It doesn't take unusual techniques into account. And it assumes combatants of equal skill.

The show is also about one on one combat between the best trained warriors on both sides. Tactics and manpower are not accounted for either.

I would watch again just to see more weapon tests.

 

[Crothian]

Entertaining, not scientific. I like the ancient weapon testing over the guns though. It might be better if they tried to match up civilizations of equal technology.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Entertaining, not scientific. I like the ancient weapon testing over the guns though. It might be better if they tried to match up civilizations of equal technology.

True, I think it would be better to get them closer in eras. A Spartan from the Bronze Age vs a Ninja from the steel age is a huge difference in technology. Why not the Ninja vs the Pirate, as both are sneaky unarmored types, while the Spartan vs the Knight, as both are heavily armored types better at melee combat? (Granted, that is still Bronze Age vs Steel, but at least its two melee types)

 

[Darth Shoju]

Though I also find some of their matchups and weapon comparisons odd, I still really enjoy this show. I'm interested to see what they have coming up. As for the matchups, I think it would have been cool to see:

Viking vs Spartan
Ninja vs Pirate
Samurai vs Knight

Apache vs Gladiator was just so bizarre it can't be improved upon.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

The show has been entertaining, but they're so utterly wrong, and seem to measure results solely by killing power, and nothing else. For ranged weapons, range might come into play. After Pirate vs. Knight, I just can't watch anymore. Ninja vs. Spartan pissed me off (if the egg can't kill, and the only thing you measure is kills...give the ninja a different freaking weapon for that category!) and the first episode really was an odd matchup. But the pirate one really took things to a new level.

Rant:
First off, no lance? The knight's most iconic weapon? It was odd to give them crossbows, given it was the knights most aghast about them at first, how a regular guy could pick one up and kill knights with ease. But eh, by format, they needed soem kind of ranged weapon.
Second, that show should be called "any idiot with guns vs. knight," cause that's basically ALL it came down to.
Third, more so than any of the other matchups, terrain mattered a lot here. If it were on a ship (somehow), the pirate would have a much greater advantage.

As for the weapon matchups themselves...
Grenado beat morningstar, even though the latter delivered a gory kill shot every try and the former failed to damage anything protected by plate. "Concussive force," without putting that to some kind of test, you say? Sounds like that matchup's winner was predetermined to me...
Flintlock was just plain fail. No real issues there.
Cutlass and boarding axe were both unable to penetrate the armor, so they shouldn't have gotten nearly any kills, save for the few coup de graces after a gunshot.

Blunderbuss...it got over 1/3 of the overall kills all on its own. And yet...1) it's a single shot, 2) inaccurate, 3) misfired or just plain wouldn't fire a whole bunch of times in the test and 4) they never stuck the shield in front of the armor to see if it acted as enough of a "speed bump" to weaken the penetrating force of the shot.

So, of all the pirate weapons, only 1/5 can even actually kill a knight, and it faces all the above listed problems. On the other hand, every single knight weapon, every single one delivered reliable kill shots in the tests. Knight lost...how?

/rant

I knew it wasn't going to be terribly scientific, and for a while the show entertained me. But after all that bs, it's not even entertaining anymore.

 

[Hand of Evil]

I wish they would go into the science and mechanics behind the system and get away from the trash talk.

• What is the base line warrior?
• How do they come up with who vs who, I mean if they were doing it right it would have been Ninja vs Pirate, not Ninja vs Spartan.

Viking vs Samurai was the most equal, the outcome 522 wins for the Samurai.

Mongal takes them all.