Deadliest Warrior Thread


#1

I didnt see a thread on the show so here it is. My favorite Episode is the Samurai vs. Viking one.


#2

bump


#3

Ive watched this show from Season 1. As a history major (and i know this show isnt like 100% accurate or anything) it appeals to me =)

Samurai vs Viking was good, Genghis Khan vs Hannibal was interesting as well.


#4

I know right its still fun to watch


#5

i watched every episode out at the time it was on all day. It’s a pretty stupid show, but it’s pretty funny to watch. ira vs taliban was classic


#6

They may have lost me with the Joan of Arc episode though. There is just no way in hell she wins over William the Conqueror except in an unusual scenario where she kills him in his sleep, or seduces him for later betrayal or something like that. *(or he doesn’t take her seriously like “eh, go home little girl”, and turns his back for some asinine reason) In any kind of straight up battle…come on…we’re talking about a man in good shape who had decades of battle experience. It’s like saying an average, normal 11th grade girl could take Wolverine in a fight…get outta here with that. Even if you go with the “squad vs. squad” idea with them…once it comes down to 1 on 1 she’s SO dead in so many ways.

ooh…and there’s a spinoff idea… Deadliest Warrior: Comic Book Edition. (*of course, most people on internet forums today like to pretend they’re above such discussions though…that shit went “out of style” for messageboards back in the early 2000s.)


#7

There was an original thread about the first season of the show, but I can’t find it anymore. I saw some of the second season, but I haven’t seen the Joan of arc episode.

There are a million things wrong with the episodes I’ve seen. The very old historical stuff is wildly off, and the “experts” they have don’t really seem to make any reasonable points or demonstrate a level of ability that I would think would be required to be on a tv show. I wrote a bunch of stuff tearing apart the early episodes, but it was lost I assume. I have nothing bad to say about the modern episodes. I disagree with some show choices, but those guys are (presuming their credentials are real) real soldiers and I can’t argue with years of real war experience using these weapons. The criminal versus episodes are cute, but I’m not sure of the point.

With all that hate, it is a fun show. I enjoy seeing them playing with the weapons, and blowing up stuff is fun to watch. I also realize that if they did a realistic show, then it wouldn’t be nearly as fun for most people. Since a 5 minute episode ending in “this is a shield wall, you don’t have one, go die now.” isn’t very entertaining. I do wonder if the people on the show are asked to act all arrogant and asinine. I can’t imagine all the people are actually like that, and I never encountered anyone acting like that who was doing historical weapon work.


#8

I’ve found that Season 3 seems to feel much more credible. They seem to have better experts coming in and real historians as well as a better setup to the show. Check it out, u might be pleasantly surprised.


#9

yes I agree


#10

Episode 10 of Season 3 is apparently vampires vs zombies.


#11

I hope your just jocking. That would ruin the show


#12

last night was cool! spaniards vs russians Cortez vs Ivon the terrible
I like the new info and tech that they have, its pretty cool and they’re gonna need to remake some of the olders eps IMO
X-FACTORS!!! haha, awesome.
… [details=Spoiler] Cortez vs Ivon, For mexicans, its gonna make up for the bs Aztech vs Africans results BS I SAY! [/details]


#13

I was a fan of the show since it correlated with a college course I had at the time, but it is just way too hard to get a good analytical match-up due to so many factors.


#14

I’ve talked with a lot of police officers in the past and they all seem to unanimously agree that when it comes to operating something for combat women are better due to their thinking process. From my classes about war and their inventions, combatants did not engage another combatant in long drawn out duels. In the battlefield the victor was decided fairly quickly so it was more about who could land the strike effectively rather than out muscle.


#15

was gonna give it a new chacne but vampires vs zombies? fuck this shit.


#16

Assuming both groups start with equal numbers, the vamps should slaughter the zombies with little to no problem, if we imagine this logically. They are gods compared to those brainless chumps. Zombies usually just have the advantage of the “strength in numbers” concept, and it’s really just the modern fast ones that are any threat.


#17

Vampires would dominate zombies.
No matter what version of zombies you do, Vampires win. This is some one sided shit.


#18

one thing I wonder though. can the vampires turn into zombies?


#19

No that isn’t right. Operating a device calmly during combat is different from actually fighting. Strength is also important, or at least a certain amount of required strength. If you are too weak to drive a spear through a breastplate and layer of chain, then you aren’t going to be getting as much done in a shield wall. I haven’t seen the episode yet, but I don’t see someone inexperienced beating someone who is without a great disparity of technology. If it was squad then I guess the victory could be on the backs of her soldiers and not her.

You are right that drawn out single combat didn’t occur, but that wasn’t something to discount strength. That is because a sword (or spear or ax) fight is still over very quickly, and once a formation broke the duels were meaningless. You can fight well and kill another man, but once your wall is broken, you are running or being cut down. It isn’t a fight after that, it’s a slaughter. Order and formation in a fight was very important, and if deadliest warrior used people who weren’t just random stuntmen, then they might know this.

What about twilight vampires vs thriller zombies? Bet on zombies! :rock:


#20

That’s probably why you’re in disbelief. The evolution of combat went projectiles -> armor -> melee.

In terms of technology her ranged weapons, a steel crossbow (more accurate) and her cannon (a freakin’ cannon) beat the crap out of william’s crossbow and catapult. Joan had a steel fullplate while william just had chainmail. It’s pretty much the same reason why the apache, pirate, and hell a good amount of these simulations figure out the victor. If ranged ain’t a big difference then it comes down to how good the armor is and after that is when we can argue about which dude physically got robbed.