[Ulrik]

Are you guys (ladies) watching it? Its in basic boy game "who would win?" where producers choose two warriors from different eras or places and test their weapons.
I always liked tests of weapons, because, especially ballistic gel torso tests are useful. Yeah, final movies are cheesy and usually stupid (Apache vs gladiator, Pirate vs. knight) and some decisions strange, but usually tests are fine.

Im just disappointed that with 3rd season is higely biased because of strictly american audience and its beggining to influence even tests. C´mon, George Washinton beating Napoleon? Thats national myth But worse is for example bad analyze of their short range weapons. And same way was strange Joanne of Arc vs William Conqueror.

But still, some episodes are great (Wallace vs Shaka, Specnaz vs Green beret, strangely even Jesse James vs Al Capone gang). And of course, if you are interested in martial arts, history and all those shiny toys... it has its value, despite of clear entertainment (and not educational) discourse.

So, anyone watching it too?

[Aptorian]

What channel is this show on?

I'd never heard of it before I saw this Quick Look on the video game version, it's hilarious when they turn on zombie mode:

http://www.giantbomb...egends/17-4508/

[Ulrik]

Spike TV, but, well... there are other sources...kchm kchm... (especially when online content is regionally locked)

http://www.spike.com...dliest-warrior/

This post has been edited by Ulrik: 01 August 2011 - 10:03 AM

[Aptorian]

Ah, Spike is not available in Denmark. It'll probably show up eventually.

[Ulrik]

At our TV bought it Spektrum, but...they took first season. I simply went for TV Rips and each time bought whole season on DVD... just for ease of souls...and yeah, despite my criticism of first two seasons matches (some), it is really interesting. Seeing what can some weapon really do to human body... We wanted to buy some of those ballistic gel torsos for our own testing of hand and knife attacks in club, but... Its too expensive.

[Ulrik]

I wasnt able to find many youtube tests, especially those good ones. But just a little. And yeah, I sound rather like" recruiting", but its from my need to discuss some things and Malazites are a) intelligent, not like mob on internet from nature MBoF has some understanding of weapons in literature c) it has some great warriors and weapons like Rajput, Zande fighter, Aztec Jaguar or ming warriors or maori (despite putting him against shaolin monk was not fair).

Rajput and his suprisingly effective Katar (sometimes they use pig carcasses because its tissue and flesh sctructure is close to human)



Test of modern SEALS vs Israeli commando... usually modern weapons arens such fun...

[Ulrik]

NAVY SEAL use of cold steel knife..pretty dumb guy...its just for showing torso used... but instead of needlework is great to looke impacts of morningstar, pistol whip (because of detectors watching pressure), rapier... sometimes they put adequate armor...and thats best, becuase sometimes its surprising how armor protects...and sometimes dont...



THIS was interesting match - Atilla vs Alexander, this scythian axe test is good example of effect on unprotected opponent...and power of helm - even in pressure tests. Armouresrs knew their job:)

http://www.movieweb....xe-weapons-test

[Whiskey Bass]

i watched the first couple of series and was looking forward to series 3, but the slight change in format has put me off(Washington vs Napoleon). I was very intrested in the tests as i have a bit of an obsession with martial arts and ancient warfare. Some of my favourite episodes were:-

Shaolin Monk vs. Māori Warrior
Roman Centurion vs. Rajput Warrior
Persian Immortal vs. Celt

Some of the match-ups, tests and even presenters were daft, biassed and inacurate but on the whole i sat back and enjoyed.

loved the Māori Mere, the Samurai Naginata and all the Rajput weapons.

Really hated the IRA vs Taliban i thought it was in extreemly poor taste.

This post has been edited by j2tks: 01 August 2011 - 03:19 PM

[Ulrik]

IRA vs Taliban was pretty weak... Well, I liked demonstration of RPG, but those irish guys didnt took my sympathy and some decisions were strange. Thats IMO problem of many modern matchups. Same weapons, no distinction... Specnaz vs GB was good one (and some americans went into rage that GB lost).

Best matchups I liked are Specnaz vs GB, Wallace vs Shaka, Persian Immortal vs. Celt and suprisingly Jesse James vs. Al Capone (gunslighter speed was totally absurd, especially when he was in 1/4 of second able to draw, shoot and hit target precisly...and I was surprised by Tommy Gun inaccuracy) and Musketeer vs. Ming Warrior

Worst matchups IMO - Washington vs Napoleon, Joan vs William Conqueror, Apache vs Gladiator...oh and Knight vs Pirate.

But some tests are great...naginata and its slice of skull was great, spartan shield is monster...well, many tests were interesting:)

But this week is live show - US Ranger (iirc) vs North Korean spec ops... WTF?? I know how it ends, thats OK, but who will analyze North Korean spec ops???

[Dutch]

Quote

'Ulrik' timestamp='1312196986' post='884392']
I wasnt able to find many youtube tests, especially those good ones. But just a little. And yeah, I sound rather like" recruiting", but its from my need to discuss some things and Malazites are a) intelligent, not like mob on internet from nature MBoF has some understanding of weapons in literature c) it has some great warriors and weapons like Rajput, Zande fighter, Aztec Jaguar or ming warriors or maori (despite putting him against shaolin monk was not fair).

Rajput and his suprisingly effective Katar (sometimes they use pig carcasses because its tissue and flesh sctructure is close to human)

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=VGciJpNlgWY

The Katar, Assassin weapon from Diablo II: Lord of Destruction.

[Whiskey Bass]

Ulrik, on 01 August 2011 - 03:58 PM, said:

Worst matchups IMO - Washington vs Napoleon, Joan vs William Conqueror, Apache vs Gladiator...oh and Knight vs Pirate.

this was the shows biggest fail imo, why they thought the heavy infantry types like the gladiator, spartan or knight should face off against hit and run type skirmishers and not each other, was beyond me.

i thought the spetsnaz v green berets was excellent, particularly the russian geezer telling them to punch him harder, and the outrage of the american representatives at the result was priceless.

imo that episode should have been spetsnaz vs sas, dont think the sas would allow anyone on the show though

i think the spartans would be a good bet for the best 'pre modern heavy infantry' type

any thoughts your own winners ?

This post has been edited by j2tks: 01 August 2011 - 08:50 PM

[shikkaka]

Their "experiments" are not very scientific. I enjoy the show, but its worse than sports science as far as methodology goes. Also, the live fights at the end are priceless.

[Coco with marshmallows]

I quite enjoyed the Green Beret guy who insisted on saying "it's tested in combat" repeatedly.

Because yeah, Spetsnaz have NEVER been in combat....

[Ulrik]

Fights in the end are beautiful in its stupidity....) No.1 is IRA locking Taliban in bus... with bomb:) It was almost like some old comedy:)

Cocoreturns - they werent in Iraq, so they never were in combat! ) btw - I like the fact, that specnaz guy was doing balet as little boy...

[Migol]

The show could be great if they weren't trying so hard to appeal to the grunting sports drunks so much...every weapons test they have carefully set up screams and reaction shots (YEAHHHHH! OH SICK!!! etc etc). They also make some REALLY boneheaded decisions, like trying to use Ballista on a 5v5 matchup because "it's so cool".

[Ulrik]

Migol, on 02 August 2011 - 08:13 AM, said:

The show could be great if they weren't trying so hard to appeal to the grunting sports drunks so much...

Amen!!! Thats major drawback... But, well, nobody probably is interested in final result...decisions are stupid from producers to choose some weapons...ballista...castraphetes...ice pick...

[Primateus]

Some of the episodes were, if you ask me, kinda boring and stupid. Others were surprising though. One thing I liked was the viking vs. the samurai. I was surprised to see that the vaunted and legendary samurai sword, the katana, was pretty much useless against metal armour. It has always been people telling me that the katana could cut through anything anytime, but it barely scratched the vikings ringmail.

Another was the Spartan vs. the Ninja. The spartan shield bash certainly seemed extremely powerful, what with it basically being capable of punching straight through your head.

[Bauchelain the Evil]

Primateus, on 02 August 2011 - 10:37 AM, said:

Another was the Spartan vs. the Ninja. The spartan shield bash certainly seemed extremely powerful, what with it basically being capable of punching straight through your head.

Wait,what? They matched a soldier whose greatest advantage is team play and whose modus operandi is basically stand your ground and push against a guy whose job is to sneak behind people ? Really clever.

j2tks, on 01 August 2011 - 08:49 PM, said:

i think the spartans would be a good bet for the best 'pre modern heavy infantry' type

*cough* Roman Legionnaire *cough*

This post has been edited by Bauchelain the Evil: 02 August 2011 - 10:44 AM

[Primateus]

Bauchelain the Evil, on 02 August 2011 - 10:44 AM, said:

Primateus, on 02 August 2011 - 10:37 AM, said:

Another was the Spartan vs. the Ninja. The spartan shield bash certainly seemed extremely powerful, what with it basically being capable of punching straight through your head.

Wait,what? They matched a soldier whose greatest advantage is team play and whose modus operandi is basically stand your ground and push against a guy whose job is to sneak behind people ? Really clever.

j2tks, on 01 August 2011 - 08:49 PM, said:

i think the spartans would be a good bet for the best 'pre modern heavy infantry' type

*cough* Roman Legionnaire *cough*

Well, that's a good point, perhaps a better matchup had been the ninja vs. the apache. But the Spartan did win against the ninja, basically because his shield was impenetrable.
I've just seen the Spartan vs. the Samurai which, imo, is a better matchup.


I'll agree though, that the better matchup would be the Spartan vs. the Roman Legionnaire.

[Ulrik]

Bauchelain the Evil, on 02 August 2011 - 10:44 AM, said:

Primateus, on 02 August 2011 - 10:37 AM, said:

Another was the Spartan vs. the Ninja. The spartan shield bash certainly seemed extremely powerful, what with it basically being capable of punching straight through your head.

Wait,what? They matched a soldier whose greatest advantage is team play and whose modus operandi is basically stand your ground and push against a guy whose job is to sneak behind people ? Really clever.

j2tks, on 01 August 2011 - 08:49 PM, said:

i think the spartans would be a good bet for the best 'pre modern heavy infantry' type

*cough* Roman Legionnaire *cough*

Mwaha, making same mistake as producers. Cant compare legionnare against spartan hoplite and say "he´s better". It was matter of tactic and terrain. Legions are (much) upgraded phalanx - peltast system. Still, in some cases I would bet on old schol, pre-macedonian phalanx...or northern shield wall/ schiltron.. But main reason why were romans superior (putting aside iron - bronze) were numbers. Where Rome can lose small batlle, polis wouldnt...too few men, no regular army And of course, gladius is better version of xipphos system...and great argument:)


But for the show - it isnt important who stands against who - and winning. Its testing of weapons on human-like material and busting of myths (like uberkatana...or as I sometimes heard "helm would stop it, but it ill break your neck"). But of course, even that has drawbacks - usually underestimated chainmail (you see, our thurst penetrated it, its useless).