The knight was deserving of the win. The pistol was worthless, the grenado did nothing, they didn't test the cutlass against the armor but it would have been worthless as well. The only weapon that was able to get through the breastplate was a few pellets from the blunderbuss. I bet if the included the aketon in that test, it would have been a different story.
Despite being worthless, all pirate weapons got at least 100 kills each. Call bullshit, I must.
Agreed. Latest incarnations of plate armor would often be 'proofed', a flintlock would be fired point blank into the plate to prove it would protect the wearer. Considering this type of plate was also surface hardened and fluted, this would only make it even more resistant to fire. Modern shotgun pellets today can hardly penetrate the walls of your home, pellets from a blunderbuss wouldn't stand a chance against plate. Even slug penetration is poor, due to bullet size and velocity
I'm also interested where DW got the notion that grenados used shrapnel. No reputable source I have found has confirmed this. They all state shrapnel wasn't employed in grenades until the late 19th century, and that early grenades were largely deemed ineffective and seldom used by the military forces until that time. Now, I could be wrong, but I have yet to find anything saying otherwise.
No, while they were doing the testing they stated that the grenado was filled with nails ect. as well, of which there are no historic references to pre-WW1 era
@demomanchaos The pistol was probably a finisher, for lack of better term. The only weapon the Pirate could use properly would be the blunderbuss. They also didn't use the halberd in the final battle. Did Max forget to include that in the computer? Rigged, just like the Al Capone episode.
This is Eldgrimr. Thrand and I have acquired a new camera. New video series coming out soon. Thrand will be on the Deadliest Podcast with Jay and Kirby. Just google Deadliest Podcast and you'll find a link to jay and kirby productions. The message board has a thread titled Jay and Kirby are going to talk to Thrand.
Hey every won who ever Doubted me or likes my videos googe the Deadliest Warrior pod cast and listen to the latest Casey Hendershot Pod Cast .That is the Deadliest Warrior Pod Cast google it :P
This is why Thrand is so awesome, because he uses live targets to test their real weapons :D! Nobody else is crazy enough to even try :P. That way, you don't need a physician to say what kind of tissue damage will result, all you need to do is listen for Eldgrimr to scream and yelp xD. Please take no offense to this, but as they say in Zombieland, "God bless rednecks!" :). You guys are just too cool.
I've just rewatched your video, and that must have been a POORLY made Flail if you lost a ball after only three strikes. I'm guessing you purchased it for under 20$, and have been hanging it on your wall? A real flail made of solid metal with spikes causes tremendous damage. Yours must be recreation flail or decoration flail.
@makuta3423sghost Although I don't have a video I have a handmade flail and it completely decimated an old broiler lid, it was really thick steel to. The spikes went in a good 2 inches. Im sure ti would go though a wisby.
Spike TV has banned my account there again, the account was Konugrafgotu sorry about me unable to reply to you guys. Be sure send the the message what we think of them doing this to try to over look the mistakes I try to point out and set straight. I hate seeing history getting raped on this program.
They Do not test armor right, They Always use Butted Ringmail, without any padding, I think why is because nothing would go threw it and it would be a one sided show sometimes, so they Gimp the armor in Favor of the other opponent.
@Gratch2222 Incorrect. They used Riveted Mail in the Viking vs Samurai episode, which is the one Thrand appears to be so...for lack of a better word... butthurt over.
@napalmcannon Because the Knight was dead long before he got into Flailing range, usually? With the Blunderbuss and Granado, he would have died before getting to use it at all.
@napalmcannon Because a Halberd is more reliable and quick to use than a flail, and would help if the Knight manages to survive into melee range? It all got fairly explained on the episode. The Flail had more chance of just wounding the pirate than outright killing him, giving more chance of the pirate pulling out another dirty trick. You get stuck with a halberd, you're dead.
There's also the 'he had two weapons to pick from, and favored the longsword' argument.
@KnightValhalla: No, this is the major misconception in that episode; plate and chainmail armour were being used well into the 1600s, contemporary with the earliest pirates using pistol and cutlass. By that time, armour had developed to the point where it was bulletproof, at least against the firearms of the day.
The grenade and blunderbuss might have wounded or stunned an armoured knight, not killed him; a morning-star around the skull would likely be fatal, at the very least incapacitating.
@JCLeSinge you are half correct. The armor worked against firearms OF THEIR TIME, which explains why the Flintlock pistol bounced right off. But weapons such as the Blunderbuss and Grenado were long after the Knight's time, and were good at piercing plate armor. A Grenado needs not even damage the armor to kill with the concussive shockwave, and the Blunderbuss fires with more force than modern shotguns. The Knight would win in close combat, but would usually die before getting there.
@KnightValhalla: The Blunderbuss was late 16th century, the grenado late 15th; both within the timeframe in which armoured knights could have conceivably faced early "classic" pirates.
Either weapon could have easily knocked a knight on his ass, while the shrapnel effect of both weapons would have a high chance of finding chinks in armour, but I'm not convinced that either of them would directly penetrate armour of the day. Wounded or stunned? Possibly. Incapacitated or killed? Unlikely.
@JCLeSinge Ah, but you ignore the sheer magnitude of each blast. Neither NEEDS to pierce armor to kill, it only needs transmit a large enough amount of force to the body to damage internal organs, break bones, and cause hemorrhaging. It's the same reason people use Blunt Weapons against knights in armor; with a transfer of force you don't NEED to pierce.
A blunderbuss fires with more force than a point-blank shot of a modern shotgun. Anyone hit by it is dead, save for wearing layers of Kevlar.
@KnightValhalla: Direct hit, very close range, yes; sheer kinetic force would likely be lethal even to a man in full armour. But at even moderate range, that force dissipates quickly; either a grenado or a blunderbus would have to score a direct hit at close quarters (i.e go off literally at the knight's feet or hit him smack in the chest, respectively) to be reliably fatal.
The chances of the pirate taking the knight out before he closed to melee range still look pretty slim.
You should look at the Musketeer vs Ming Warrior ep. Even when tossed into a cart (muffling the blast) one target was killed from the force of the blast, and the Musketeer Grenado was almost half the size of the one used by the Pirate. With the Knights inability to see something small at his feet and his relative speed in full plate armor, it would be a very good Knightslayer. The blunderbuss would also be good for a few yards easily, meaning the knights crossbow is about all that out-ranged it.
@KnightValhalla: I don't think we can take the depiction of an explosion from Deadliest Warrior as convincing evidence. Plus, the gredano used by a Musketeer would be a more refined weapon than that used by a pirate; there's the relative dates to consider, plus the quality of equipment available. In a one-on-one encounter, the pirate's only real chance would be if he had a cannon; it was artillery that made armour obsolete, not small-arms.
@JCLeSinge Why not, exactly? One can argue historical accuracy, but when they break out the controlled explosives and easy to fact-check explosive patches, you really can't argue from 'but it's not valid'. The Grenado used by the musketeer was more 'advanced' in that it was more portable and made of a better shell, but it's the same concept. But the Pirates used a larger one.
It's the same logic behind a War Hammer: blunt trauma with no need to pierce armor. Pirate still wins.
@KnightValhalla The Only Thing I disagree with is the Pirates Ability to light a Grenade in melee combat, He couldn't do it with an armored fighter in his face. you have time to either Shoot the Blunderbuss or Light and Throw a Grenade yet the simulation did both.
Why Cant the Knight Block and swing a sword at the same time? There is some things left out of that program and although they update the tests the program seems to work on flawed logic and unrealistic detection.
@Gratch2222 They don't immediately start in melee combat. If they did, the fight would be unfairly skewed to people who specialize in close-range combat. This would give the Pirate plenty of time to light and throw a Grenado. If it worked, the Knight would most certainly either be killed or stunned from the concussive force, giving the Pirate plenty of time to fire.
BTW: Who said a Knight CAN'T block and swing his sword at the same time? You and I don't know what the sim can or can't do.
@KnightValhalla At the Range they tested you would get hit in the face with a pole-arm, and there very inaccurate and have about a 25% mis fire rate.
By Default out of three shots 1 misfire along with the only ranged weapons that lowers His odds. A Knight doesn't misfire. From the outcome they clearly didn't factor that in at all.
They also didn't add the shield as a defensive tool because they never tested it or put in into the sim how can it even be calculated?
25% is a number you just made up and we both know it. As for the range, what, a Halberd is three yards long? They tested the thing past 10 feet and it still did serious damage. By the way? 1 out of 30 is 30%, not 25%. 25% is 1 out 4, meaning every four times that Pirate gets a shot off, one time it doesn't work. Those are still REALLY good numbers in the Pirates Favor given how the Blunderbuss fires with more force than a modern shotgun, and would surely either kill or daze the knight each time.
By the way, how do you know they never added the shield? They do three days of testing for the show before making the episode, they don't show EVERY test that is done. The shield would surely be great, but using it would mean he can't use that halberd or crossbow of his, so we come once again to the problem of 'putting on your shield in combat' that made the Vikings lose.
You say a halberd would hit? Maybe. But if he had it out, he couldn't use his shield. Game, set, match, Pirate.
@KnightValhalla A halberd doesn't weigh 100 pounds. You can easily wield it with one hand until in range then drop your shield. Besides only the blunderbuss pierced the armor, that's one tool even without a shield. That blunderbuss is going to shoot wide and misfire more times than it hits.
You don't know much about armor, do you? Piercing it is NOT the only way to kill a man through it. In fact, it's the least reliable way to do so. Why do you think Hammers were used as weapons against knights? The blunt force trauma caused by the massive explosion the Blunderbuss makes (Black powder cannons fire with more force than modern shotguns, with the same range) would easily either kill or severely wound whatever it hits. The grenado would do the same from the concussive blast.
@KnightValhalla I have worn armor a number of years. all I am saying is a Grenado isn't a grenade, It cannot be timed perfectly in a 1 on 1 fight to go off the exact time you need it too like was shown in DW.
And a Blunderbuss is situational as well just like any other weapon. You get one chance to get it perfect while the Knight has many. I still think the odds are in favor of the Knight.
Of course it cannot be timed perfectly, but with the size of the explosion and the relative slowness of a Knight in Plate Armor (yes, yes, I know you are not reduced to plodding along, but you MUST admit that wearing over 20 pounds of metal slows you down and reduces you field of vision) the Grenado could still harm him. Would it explode in midair? Of course not. But it would still explode near him, and either kill him from the concussive force or knock him on his ass and make him much weaker.
@KnightValhalla Do you have any experience in said weapons to make this claim? I have personally seen a Blunderbuss fired, and they miss a lot, they also don't have enough black powder to cause any concussion wounds like a modern shotgun, the pellets would go in and depending on the injury the knight would either fight till death or just be incapacitated. Even a flintlock could score a lucky hit and go though or a deep wound impact from the ball,
That's WHY the blunderbuss is better than the Flintlock. The Flintlock would bounce off harmlessly due to the round nature of the ball, but the small "pellets" a Blunderbuss uses being fired at higher force mean it will pierce the armor, but more importantly, not be deflected off. As for strength, do you know how firearms work? Modern firearms use very small amounts of gunpowder already worked into the individual shell casing to fire the bullet, while a Blunderbuss or Flintlock (continued)
pours in a great amount of gunpowder to get the same effect. Modern shotguns use much less black powder than the ancient blunderbuss, meaning it would not fire with the same explosive force since there is much less of an explosion to propel the pellets forward. That's basic firearms knowledge. The Blunderbuss would either outright kill, mortally wound, and permanently injure the Knight every single time it hits, giving the Pirate a serious advantage (or the win right there and then.)
@KnightValhalla Wait so you think a modern shotgun is less powerful than a medieval Blunderbuss? wow. Oh I forget to mention the Blunderbuss that on DW used wasn't invented until almost 1800.
The term Pirate is very broad, there where Carribean pirates up until 1956, Why not just give him a machine gun?
@Gratch2222 I don't just think a modern shotgun is less powerful, I know it is. A modern shotgun uses a very small amount of explosive material to fire it's charge, whereas a Blunderbuss uses far greater amounts of a more explosive compound. The big advancements in Firearms have been Accuracy, ease of use, reproducibility, uniform ammunition types, and the ability to hold multiple shells at a single time. A blunderbuss only fires once, but it's essentially a shrapnel CANNON.
and yes, the term "Pirate" is Vague, but so is the term "Knight." People are still Knighted today, and Pirates still exist, but they took two examples of period Pirates and Knights to pit against each other. At this point you're just splitting hairs.
@KnightValhalla Well its my opinion that the Pirate would only get 1 chance because that grenado is just worthless in a 1 on 1 fight. and the blunderbuss gets 1 chance to get it right. The Knight has far to many advantages when that Scatter gun is taken away. All the pirate could do is run and make the Knight chase him.
Why Didn't they use an English Knight, they used a French Knight lol obviously biased episode. They where the worst knights in History.
obviously biased episode? The Knight was basically the ONLY fighter that would have a chance of going against a Pirate due to the Blunderbuss, and it was an interesting episode even if the Knight didn't quite stack up. A Grenado would be quite worthwhile in single combat -providing- that you manage to light and throw it when the opponent is trying to get in range. After that, the only time he could ever use it is if he already knocked the Knight on his ass with the Blunderbuss.
But I do agree that it was essentially the Blunderbuss (and the Grenado. The thing has a bigger blast radius than you'd expect) that won the day for the pirate. Just like how it was essentially the Twin Hooks that won the day for the Shaolin. Sometimes only a single, or two, weapons make the difference. But using an English Knight would pretty much change nothing about the episode...
@KnightValhalla Sure It would. The English Knight would have had a Lance, a Horse in heavy armor, and a set of gothic plate, It was made of better quality than the french and had many more hard angles of deflection and alot easier to move in, it was almost a second skin and the weight was way less with the same amount of protection.
The Knight would charge the Pirate on horseback, Even if the pirate scored a hit He would be run over a lot of the time by the Horse or pieced with the lance.
Lance: Worthless unless he is on Horseback, and also worthless against a target who is NOT on horseback and can thus move laterally to avoid your horses charge.
Horse: You would consider this a fair match-up? Really? Giving one person access to a horse and the other person NOT access to a horse is entirely unfair. The horse in the ending "Simulation" was just for dramatic effect, it was not taken into account in the simulator.
Gothic Plate: wouldn't change the concussive force at all.
@KnightValhalla Whatever you say, knights have been killing Foot soldiers from horseback even as light armored as a bowman, even when the bowman switched to firearms .
Its not Unfair A Knight by definition is a Heavy Calvary soldier. most if not all Knights killed from horseback. Taking a Knights horse away is the same as taking the Pirates blunderbuss away.
Hardly, and you know it. A knight is still an incredibly dangerous combatant without his Horse, especially with the already "tilt things to help him" addition of the crossbow. If the terrain is 50/50 for the combatants, it would not be a plain and empty field, meaning a cavalry charge from a Horse would not be very effective. Especially one with a lance. Lances were used to unhorse enemies and pierce armor, not attack infantry units.
A blunderbuss had to be loaded right then or before a boarding If you tilted it forward all the shot would spill out, It cannot benefit from shot wad that keeps it from falling out because the barrel was so big Keeping Flash powder in the cup for to long clumped it up and made a mess in the pinhole of the Barrel.
No one in there right mind would carry around a loaded Blunderbuss anyway. You might have time to load it or not, and it might misfire or not, and you might miss or not.
In the time it takes the Knight plod on over towards the pirate, or to load his crossbow and aim at the pirate, the Pirate has time to load his Blunderbuss or move in, light a grenado, and throw it. The only point you have there is "it might misfire", as it's basically impossible to miss with a Scattergun in one-on-one combat when your opponent is wearing such heavy and cumbersome armor. He WOULD be able to load it, WOULD hit, but the only concern is whether it misfired or not.
The pirate has alot of weight in guns and supplies and heavy clothing, but the knights armor is evenly distributed over his body.
I am trying to see your point but when you use terms like 'plod' is just shows your bias. A Knight would not stand there while someone loads a weapon. They fought against guns and won many times, Guns was not the downfall of plate, the downfall was that it was cheaper to hand someone a gun than it was to make custom fitted armor.
You honestly thing 40+ pounds of Full Plate Armor is less obstructive than carrying a few weapons and wearing a coat? Seriously? lol. Look at my name, Gratch, I -know- about knights. A Knight's Armor may allow them full range of movement, but only an armchair historian would claim that it does not hamper their mobility. In the time the Knight is loading his Crossbow, the Pirate can load his Blunderbuss. In the time the Knight is running at the pirate, the pirate cna light and throw a grenado.
Guns were not the downfall of plate, on this I agree. You saw how basically worthless the flintlock was if the Knight was still standing and shot in the armor. But that armor DOES hinder your mobility, and the Pirate WOULD have an advantage in terms of speed and maneuverability. To claim otherwise is to never have worn armor.
@KnightValhalla Your name is a contradiction. Dont forget the Grenado did no damage at all, but got kills in the simulation. how does that math add up? That is point blank and they did not test the shock wave so it cannot be a factor at all. They assumed it would get a kill even though it proved otherwise.
It was a biased episode, nothing you say can convince me otherwise, There math is flawed and made up, that is not a simulation its a loaded dice roll to see who wins.
You obviously know nothing about explosives if you believe the only way to harm someone is to pierce through armor with shrapnel. I highly suggest you dig up a book and do some research on the number one reason people in armor were killed. Note: it was not because of people actually PIERCING the armor. Have you ever heard of blunt weapons? Ever? It's the same damn principle; cause damage THROUGH the armor without having to PIERCE the armor.
Btw: they do more testing then what's shown on air.
@KnightValhalla If They do more testing and do not show it, that is there fault not mine, As a show called deadliest warrior it is there job to convince me that one warrior could best another. I am not into guessing games when I am watching a show.
If You cannot agree they make up math and give bias often then I dunno what to tell you. If its not there then I cannot judge for myself its worthless to me.
"Their" fault, Gratch. There is a place. But that aside, it is NOT their job to convince you one warrior could best another, it is their job to be entertaining and claim that one warrior would best another. They are an entertainment show, not a history program. As for the testing, what, do you HONESTLY expect they'll be able to fit 3+ days of testing footage onto an hour-long time slot? It's simply impossible.
If you don't want to believe it? Fine. But don't bullshit and call it made up.
If you think they totally made it up, why don't YOU get weapons, armor, ballistics gel, chronometers, shock patches, spectrometers, and make your own? Oh that's right. You can't. You also don't know what exactly is taken into account and what isn't. So don't say that the whole show is made up unless you actually have some knowledge on how the stuff works, Kay?
There's nothing worse than someone burying their head in the sand just because they don't like what someone comes up with.
@KnightValhalla Well I guess if you need to prove yourself somehow on a comment box by trying to discredit someones opinion, you went from a conversation to insults, You obviously have nothing to contribute but your own self inflated ego and stand behind a show you have no idea one way or the other?
Why do you care? I mean honestly, does it break your pride for someone to disagree, grow up.
Why do I care? Because Thrand lies worse than Deadliest Warrior. At least with the show they tend to be inaccurate with both sides, instead of heaping praise upon one side and heaping scorn upon the other, all the while using plastic bottles and tree branches to try and disprove accelerometers and pressure mats.
Is the show perfect? Hell no. It's on Spike. But Thrand is even more inaccurate then they are, and his literal worship of the Vikings is amusing and fun to prove wrong.
@KnightValhalla This video isn't even about Vikings. you claim he is biased but you spill your comments from one video over to another to take a jab at someone you have not proven wrong at any point in time.
BTW they didn't use a pressure mat on this episode, they just assumed, and assumption makes an ass out of you and me.
Rose-colored glasses much? Let's take this charade point by point.
1: Thrand has also gotten butthurt over episodes that DO include pressure mats, like Rajput vs Centurion, so my point about pressure mats stands.
2: The "worship of the Vikings" was part of the answer to "why do you care?", which YOU asked. It stands.
3: Not proven wrong? I've cited 10 things saying "Arrows can pierce mail", and Thrand repeatedly says "nuh-uh." Also, I've called him on poor quality materials repeatedly.
@KnightValhalla I never said it did. I just do not care about your opinion on this subject. I never asked why you didn't like Thrand. It;s as you said... irrelevant.
I don't see a video of you doing anything to disprove it, Just a bunch of words. Its easy to sit from an unseen throne and cast disapproval.
Oh yes, because swinging around a fake flail in your backyard is proof worthy of throwing out recorded history over. Sorry. I have a job and a family and can't afford to waste a few hundred dollars just to prove some poor fool on the internet that banging replica swords on pot lids isn't realistic in the least.
I mean, really. He made a whole video about how realistic it is to use Plastic Water Bottles to test things. He's a viking fanboy who hasn't proven anything besides his own bias.
@KnightValhalla Apparently your not keeping up with the proper conversation or read anything I've typed. The burden of proof is on you, not him. So unless you can contribute something as evidence. A book another video, anything? Instead of -People told me-. Being You do not have enough time at 21 with a Family and a job and the like.
21? I'm not 21, youngster. You'd know this if you'd been keeping up with what I've said to you before. Considering I -asked- you if that "people told me" was incorrect about the SCA, and you refused to answer, I must take what I saw on SCA Kingdoms websites and from people who have taken part in the SCA as fact.
As for citations, you take a video of two untrained guys in their backyard with as "evidence" instead of historical accounts and first-hand experience?
@KnightValhalla I have seen no historic accounts presented by you. and I am not inclined to answer any questions about the SCA because I do not not have the knowledge you seek to gain from such a question.
I have done my own research and While I do agree you would not go flying, a good morning star would pierce plate. I do however agree that the Viking would best a Samurai the majority of the time.
Given that the Viking and Samurai where from contrasting era's.
...what? That doesn't even make a lick of sense. Are you really trying to pull the "I'm going to intentionally say something wrong to prove you can't trust everything you read" charade on me? Son, get your head screwed on straight. If you're going to throw out the listed rules of your own system's kingdoms, and experience from their members, on the basis of "you can't believe everything you read", why are you here?
You can't believe everything you SEE, either. Like the work of a certain Thrand.
@KnightValhalla When did I cite any rules for the SCA? You have an imagination don't you? What I said was I do not recall those particular rules. You love to quote people totally wrong don't you? almost every time, Then make up things to stick on top of it.
Your just arguing for the sake of it. If your time is so precious Why argue a moot point for hours on end? That is what doesn't make sense sir.
You said I was 21. Then when I called you on it you said you KNEW I wasn't 21. So either you're a backpedaling liar, or you intentionally said my age wrong. Which is it, boy?
@KnightValhalla How am I backpedaling? It says your 21 on your profile, then in a comment you said you where not. Ever heard of sarcasm?
. I think your overall your full of shit about everything and are reading things of Wikipedia to back up your outrageous claims and inconsistent wavering comments.
It does? Hmm. That's a problem I'll have to see fixed. But you can't hide behind the "sarcasm" card on the internet, it's near impossible to properly convey it and you should know this.
@KnightValhalla I am almost twice your age in this incarnation. But all I want to know is why you think Deadliest Warrior is accurate or even real and why does it mean so much to you for it to be so? Are you Max Geiger? I always thought the manperson might be. You say stuff that is foolish enough and do not understand real combat so I would say you probably are, It would take some one that dumb to put out such a unhistorical entertainment program and try to back it up against us Lmfao :P
There you go again accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being Max Geiger... Are you drunk, Thrand? Or are you just so full of yourself that you think anyone who doesn't worship your mighty viking gods must be offended by your message? Who else are you going to accuse of being Max Geiger just because they think you're more inaccurate than that show, huh?
Also, "this incarnation", hnmh? Let me guess, you've deluded yourself into thinking you're actually a grand viking hero reborn?
@KnightValhalla Dude you're such a troll. Why come onto this guys video page and flame him like an asshole? He's has more to show than you do. He's got a video and some armor. All you have is an episode of Deadliest Warrior. lol.
"a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response"
@KnightValhalla I'd say real human targets (shield vs kanabo, katana vs leg/arm splints, flail vs coat of plates) are much better than gel torsos. The bottle cutting is because it's the closest thing Thrand could get to cutting human flesh without killing anyone in real life (though he will use deer meat/bone). Overall, the tests are good considering he's on a budget and doesn't have Viacom financing him. With that in mind, I think you could cut Thrand some slack.
I agree that such targets are better than Gel Torsos, Gel Torsos are the best you can get without actually killing or seriously injuring someone. There is no way that two friends would go full force on each other in an attempt to see how lethal weaponry is, which is why I doubt any test that consists of someone swinging a weapon at their buddy. It's just not valid. You can't test whether a weapon would injure someone without doing everything you can to actually TRY to injure them.
@KnightValhalla After Thrand swung a katana at Eldgrimir's leg splints, he looked like he had a tattoo on his leg in later shots. Must've been hit pretty hard if you ask me. Again, Thrand is kind of on a budget and doesn't have a corporation funding his videos.
I can understand the budget issues, but it's more the fact that he claims in comments that his methods are SUPERIOR to others that causes problems. There's also the fact that the only way to really test how damaging something is is to try and damage someone with it, and that simply wasn't happening during the "Shield Test" they did.
Which is rather hard to do when you're not trying to break your friend's arm, isn't it? Ignoring that the weapon was incorrect, the reason Gel Torsos are used on the show is because you can't test lethality without trying to kill someone. For a sensor to get the proper reading of what a weapon does when it's being swung with deadly force, it needs to be swung with deadly force. You can't do that against a human. People will pull their punches to avoid hurting or maiming the target.
@KnightValhalla I did not pull my punch wile attacking the shield because I did not need too. His arm was safe :P
Watch Viking vs. Samurai : Thrand's Fighting and Bonus Video here on youtube The best test for the Kanabo that was around weight show described which is not historical they weighed around 7lbs was accidentally put on there and tell me I was pulling blows. The reason I didn't break is arm is because I could not that way , why Deadliest Warrior is scripted fake program that's why.
@ThegnThrand If you are talking about this video The point was he didn't get knocked to the ground like in the story with a padding duct tape flail because they are so powerful. I did not pull the blows at all they armor he was wearing will stop one of those more powerful hand cannons you are talking about that's better than .44 magnum, Not :P But yes it will stop any pirate weapon they tested on DW so why would I pull a simple flail shot you are joking right?it stopped a navy .36 cal cap n ball
@ThegnThrand to be honest I was using a Japanese kusarifundo technique of following through with the whole arm swing to make sure the balls didn't bounce back and break mi hand something I was more worried about in this test due to how the line up with grip. Hurting him was least of my worries :P
@KnightValhalla Yes it was superior DW used a metal brace that was ridged the center boss shield is not held ridged is it it absorbs force so your arm does not break. The spartan shield is held ridged though and would transfer all force to shoulder and arm so he would of had to worry more about getting hurt than the viking or any other ninth century shield user with a center boss raw ox hide and linden wood shield
The test in Viking vs. Samurai : Thrand's Fighting and Bonus Video is better.
@ThegnThrand You cant explain these things to people that have no fighting experience. The moves and techniques after awhile become instinct and the fighter gains prowess to put those attacks in places an inexperienced fighter can not.
People seem to thing ancient warriors had some magic formula for fighting and they didn't. People are a lot stronger than healthier than they used to be, An SCA fighter today would decimate an ancient warrior.
I highly doubt people who play swordsman for a few days then go home to cushy apartments and tv dinners could beat a spartan, viking, samurai, hell, any of those warriors who were taught since they were children how to fight and to kill, who lived in a time of constant struggle and toil simply to survive. We of this age are all soft, a byproduct of the easy life we live. The conditioning and strength of these warriors would be hard pressed to match in our modern world.
@WitheringintheDark It would depend on the people you speak of I know people who love fighting and training and since this is done out of love for it they would surpass a man that is forced to do it due to circumstance in my belief although some loved this back in the day as well :P
Doing something because you love it still doesn't; quite match up to doing something because your very life depends on it. I'd put my money on a trained (Insert warrior here) over even the best member of the SCA any day, just because of the fact that the historical figure fights for their survival and the SCA member fights for enjoyment.
Alright, i'll give you that, I just find it presumptuous and arrogant that he would think that any modern hobby swordsman could simply 'decimate' one of the ancient warriors whose styles they train in. It's like saying any boxer today could annihilate bruce lee. That your average sword fighter could handily trounce Musashi. Back in the day they would be better trained and conditioned then we are. Thinking we could easily defeat them insults their memory and skill.
@WitheringintheDark People have a healthier diet and are far less prone to sickness and disease of ancient times. We are also much stronger since we understand how to build and maintain muscle growth. Look at Muscle men from 1940's then look at them today, and that is over less than a century span. Dark age warriors did not fight and train all the time. and a good majority is speculation that they all trained from birth.
LMFAO healthier diet my ass. We are surrounded by radiation and toxic substances, our food is genetically modified garbage grown in toxic soil. We are far less prone to sickness and disease thanks to modern medicine keeping us alive, not because we are 'healthier'. I'm staring at evidence spartans trained from the age of 5. You have proof otherwise?
The Spartan Army by Nick Sekunda. Some other sources disagree, saying they began later at 7. Either way, they started military training at a very young age.
@WitheringintheDark Hrmm well I don't know enough about Greece to even guess. I assume most warrior cultures started some sort of formal or informal training at a young age.
@Gratch2222 My son Alar is 2 years old I am training him as we speak he is quite good with weapons at his age. Freaks my friends out when the see us sword fighting :P
Also the reason bodybuilders are so much larger these days is because their all quaffing down unnatural substances that artificially stimulate muscle growth. If you look, there is a Huge difference between natural bodybuilders and those substance swallowers. The greeks knew plenty about how to build and maintain muscle, and were quite fit, they just didn't have artifcial substances with potentially dangerous unknown side effects on the human body to consume to bulk up even more.
@WitheringintheDark Exactly my point, You think they don't use it in the military? They would have used it back then if they had it. But the fact is it did not exist, instead they drank out of lead cups, ya that's healthy.
@WitheringintheDark You don't know much about ceramics, Lead was a main ingredient in its glaze up until the recently. It's was called Lead-glazed eathernware,
That I did not know. Looking into it a bit more, it seems the most popular material it was made out of was terracotta, a clay based unglazed ceramic that evidently contains high amounts of lead. Kinda scary.
Creatine is not given by the military(not the us one at least) but neither do they ban or encourage it's use. Some instructors discourage it even, as it can cause soldiers to lock up on long training periods. Bodybuilders do not good soldiers make. Endurance and agility are what is sought, not sheer power, and creatine can inhibit that.
4: There are over three days of testing put into an hour long episode. Unless you want them to rend the fabric of space and time, it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to show every single test that they do. To Assume (remember your little jingle, gratchy!) that they don't use pressure mats, but somehow have access to a full-on load-bearing pressure sensor and accelerometers is stupid.
There we go. Wrapped up in a nice little package. Going to kneel at the throne of the holy Thrand some more, Gratch?
@KnightValhalla They did not have access to this on earlier episodes. and it was never shown, They assumed a lot of the first season. your saying since its three days of testing that We can all assume to that they used and tested armor and weapons thoroughly. but that is another assumption that can be debated. You don't know this so you cant make the claim that they did any more than I can say they didn't.
It's not another Assumption, they've outright said it repeatedly on the show, the aftermath, and in various "off the record" interviews. They do three days (or more, if they need to travel on-location) of testing for each episode, and only put in the basics of each weapon into the episode. By the way? They used a pressure mat on Apache vs Gladiator, the very first episode that aired.
@KnightValhalla That is your opinion, You cannot tell me how to have mine. Fact is there is no way to prove it. If You don't want to believe it, fine. but don't bullshit and call it facts.
@KnightValhalla Blunt trama wasn't from firearms or explosives it was from Pole axes Maces and Lances. The test with firearms and explosives was botched and the misfire clearly was not calculated. It is what it is.
The Pirate expert thinks being close can do more damage than being at a distance with a sword even though the arming sword could be used two handed..... its an insult to common sense. Then they called them even,
"Blunt trauma wasn't from firearms or explosives."
lol. You know nothing about firearms if you think they don't produce greater force than a Mace. Do some reading and then we'll talk, okay? There's no way in hell a mace produces more force than an explosion.
@KnightValhalla Umm Knight Calvary specialized in charging into shield walls and killing as many as possible before retreating, That is why kite shields were on there back for disengaging. What do you mean Knights didn't fight infantry? Thats the silliest thing I've heard yet.
A shield -wall-, you said. Meaning a stationary group of men who are clumped together. Charging against a single opponent is very hard, as the opponent can move Laterally far more easily than you can. Especially if, as the terrain was said to be in order to be 50/50, it is not a flat and featureless plain.
A lance is next to worthless in single combat, as it only works when you are mounted and charging, and against a single opponent they can move laterally and avoid your charge.
A Shield wall is much harder to charge against than one person. If you think its that easy to out maneuver a horse I would love to see you do it. Horse aside though it takes much less time to load a crossbow than it does to load a flintlock.
I did a bit of research it took a knight 1 minute to fire 2 shots, the average flintlock loading time is 3 in a minute. Each kill on impact. also another factor, what is loaded into the blunderbuss I doubt every Pirate has lead shot at his disposal.
Of course they would have lead shot. You don't know much about Pirates, do you? That's like arguing "Well the knight likely wouldn't have any bolts in the crossbow." There's no use in giving them a weapon if they don't have the ammo. Besides, Knights didn't even USE crossbows, so that was purely an unrealistic thing to give the Knight more of an advantage. It helped in 10% of the fights, but wasn't enough to bring the win.
Inaccurate? To a point. But you don't need to be accurate when firing a scattergun if your opponent is within 1-10 feet of you. It would not be accurate out past that range, but within 3 or so yards it WOULD hit the Knight. There's no way to avoid it. It would be more effective the closer he is, but that would risk the Pirate being injured as well, unless the Knight has already had his bell rung by the Grenado and the Blunderbuss is used to finish the poor bloke off.
@KnightValhalla 1 -10 feet are you serious? do you read what you type? The blunderbuss misfired twice, thats HUGE...
I do agree the weapons given this Knight in this particular episode would have lost but I'm not speaking of facts from this episode. They don't even know the difference between morning star and a flail.
The Blunderbuss misfired twice -in the footage we were shown.- The weapon, if properly maintained, actually had a very low rate of misfires. Let's just be generous and say it misfires one out of every 5 times it is used, okay? That means 4 times the Knight is either killed, severely wounded, ore bare minimum knocked to the ground and disoriented from the shockwave. This gives the pirate time to light a grenado and toss it onto his chest, killing him instantly. Or stabbing through a joint. Okay?
You don't know much about firearms, do you? Modern shotguns knock people flat onto their back, and they only use a fraction of the amount of Black Powder a Blunderbuss uses. Those things fire with a massive explosion for a weapon that size, and it's like carrying around a cannon. I'd be shocked if someone could get hit by it and NOT be disoriented, no matter what they were wearing. Especially heavy plate armor that doesn't do much to disperse force.
@KnightValhalla I have several Blunderbuss and flintlock rifles I know there limitations. A Blunderbuss in a moving one on one pitched battle is very hard to use. You have to load the priming cup every time before firing. I doubt seriously if you would have time for that every encounter.
There was a reason The lined up to fire in the Revolutionary war and formed ranks to reload, its not a gorilla warfare weapon and there making it into one.
You think they would be so unfair as to give the pirate an UNLOADED weapon? That's cheating him, and you know it. In one on one combat, you will get exactly a single shot before the weapon is worthless when it takes that long to reload...but the pirate only NEEDS that one shot. They don't start off an arms-length away from eachother, and unfairly give the pirate an unloaded weapon.
There's nothing pitched about waiting for the guy to get close enough to pull the trigger.
@KnightValhalla Its not unloaded, you cannot prime the cup until your ready to fire it, A flintlock is a two stage Weapon meaning it has to be primed twice in two separate spots. Any tilting of the gun can effect its firing, It needs to be aimed careful after priming or the flash powder will run out.
You cant prime a cup and then stick it into your belt either then pull it out randomly and fire, that's only movie magic.
But you CAN prime the cup, wait for him to get close, and pull the trigger. I never said anything about him priming it and putting it away. But if he hits with either the Grenado or the Blunderbuss, which can each be prepared easily in the time it takes Ploddy McIronpants to jog over to him, he'll either kill the Knight outright or have enough time to finish him off while he's disoriented. Even if he can't finish him off, the Knight will now be seriously wounded/stunned, meaning easier to fight.
@KnightValhalla The Knight would also Have time to load the Crossbow and shoot it at range, whats your point? You give the Pirate a completely different set of rules to follow than the Knight.
He would have time to load the crossbow. Hence getting 100 kills in the simulator. Are you even paying attention to what you say? But the Knight's Helmet, combined with the Pirate's Mobility, would make the crossbow not very accurate. While the Knight is trying to reload his second shot, which is a process that takes several seconds and both hands, the Pirate can move into range and shoot him with the Blunderbuss or throw his Grenado.
@KnightValhalla A disorienting sound would hurt the Pirate more than the Knight since the Knights helmet is padded with chain and cloth. As far as being knocked down by the blunderbuss impact, Not gonna happen, no way no how.
No. No it doesn't. In fact, physics is the very reason WHY someone gets thrown from their feet. Transfer of force, anyone? Just because you don't understand the laws, doesn't mean they don't work they way they work. A body at motion will stay at motion, remember that little gem? A soft target like a person isn't enough to stop the kind of transfer of force a Blunderbuss would make, and thus the body would end up moving with the blast and being thrown off their feet.
@KnightValhalla For that to be possible it would have to expel the same force back onto the wielder, and a force large enough to throw 250 pounds would break someones shoulder. Didn't you watch Mythbusters? An elephant gun can barely manage to knock a hat off someones head.
You don't understand physics, do you? A gun does not propel the exact same force backwards as it does forwards, and the scattering nature of the pellets from the explosion causes a wider surface area when the weapon connects, thus causing more of the Knight's body to be hit simultaneously.
Come back when you have a grasp on basic physics, or shotguns. They wouldn't be thrown violently through the air five feet, but it WOULD knock someone in such heavy armor over.
Quote from Wikipedia article entitled "Stopping Power"
"Humans encountering a physical hit, be it a punch or a bullet, are conditioned to absorb the blow by moving in the same direction as the force."
It's simple physics and psychology. A handgun bullet or a flintlock bullet can't do it, but the massive power a black powder cannon? Hell yeah. That will knock someone on their ass.
@KnightValhalla That doesn't say anywhere that it creates more force than it produces like you claimed. Now you throw in some other explanation. your one of those, I'm always right guys aren't you?
13 out of 1000? There are weak spots in the knights armor. Joints, face, etc. I can realistically see the Pirate knocking the Knight onto his ass with the blunderbuss, and then while he's unconscious or unable to move to protect himself, removing his helmet and stabbing him in the neck with the boarding axe. 13 out of 1000 is only over a .1% amount of kills.
The weapon that finishes them off gets the kill. I can see it killing him 13 times. Plate armor doesn't cover EVERYTHING.
@KnightValhalla By That Logic it should have gotten a lot more than 13 kills since the blunderbuss can blow the knight back 1000 feet and incapacitate him an hour, amirite? Yet the Crossbow got over 100 kills, almost the same as the Halberd, c'mon you don't see the flawed math there?
...um...what? You're just making numbers up at this point. I never said knock him back 1000 feet and incapacitate him for an hour, but YOU try getting shot with a cannon and not get severely injured, killed, or thrown for a loop. A few seconds is all you need to finish someone off, and need I remind you 13 kills is only .13%? More likely he finished him off with the grenado, cutlass, or a flintlock to the face like shown in the end of the simulated fight.
As for the halberd getting the same kills the Crossbow did? It makes sense. The crossbow can kill the pirate from a distance, though the Knight's helmet makes aiming hard. The halberd would basically kill the pirate any time at all he got into melee with it in hand, but most times he wouldn't survive long enough to be in any condition to use it. It makes sense. The pirate's best weapons would kill, wound, or at least incapacitate the knight long enough to be finished off.
@KnightValhalla The crossbow doesn't kill out rite , so does the Knight beat the pirate over the head with the crossbow and get the kill with it? This is going by your logic.
You don't think a crossbow can kill someone in no armor? Do some research, man. That thing was a veritable can opener, and you can get more than enough penetration on an unprotected body to pierce vital organs.
@KnightValhalla It wouldn't get over 100 kills right off, it would maim and the knight would close in and finish off with a different weapon. first you say a blunderbuss kills right off even the grenado then they run in and kill, but the knight follows different rules? Which is it?
100 kills in a 1000 kill simulator is 10% of the time. So in 1 out of every 10 fights, the Knight manages to kill the pirate before the pirate can get into Blunderbussing range.
Besides, if you'd paid attention, I've said the blunderbuss will either kill outright or seriously wound. A crossbow bolt, if it doesn't instantly kill you, will cause serious pain but will not transfer enough force to ground you. The Pirate could keep fighting if he got shot, the Knight couldn't.
To think a blunderbuss is more powerful then a shotgun is simply ludicrous. The energy output of modern smokeless powder is much greater then primitive black powder, it takes 5-6 times as much black powder to equal the explosive force of modern highly efficient smokeless powders. This is why 'grenados' of the 1600's saw little use; a direct at your feet hit would be necessary to have Any effect.
The knight was deserving of the win. The pistol was worthless, the grenado did nothing, they didn't test the cutlass against the armor but it would have been worthless as well. The only weapon that was able to get through the breastplate was a few pellets from the blunderbuss. I bet if the included the aketon in that test, it would have been a different story.
Despite being worthless, all pirate weapons got at least 100 kills each. Call bullshit, I must.
demomanchaos 10 months ago
@demomanchaos
Agreed. Latest incarnations of plate armor would often be 'proofed', a flintlock would be fired point blank into the plate to prove it would protect the wearer. Considering this type of plate was also surface hardened and fluted, this would only make it even more resistant to fire. Modern shotgun pellets today can hardly penetrate the walls of your home, pellets from a blunderbuss wouldn't stand a chance against plate. Even slug penetration is poor, due to bullet size and velocity
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@demomanchaos
I'm also interested where DW got the notion that grenados used shrapnel. No reputable source I have found has confirmed this. They all state shrapnel wasn't employed in grenades until the late 19th century, and that early grenades were largely deemed ineffective and seldom used by the military forces until that time. Now, I could be wrong, but I have yet to find anything saying otherwise.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@WitheringintheDark I thought the Grenade was just a diversion, and Blunderbuss caused the real shrapnel damage
Gratch2222 10 months ago
@Gratch2222
No, while they were doing the testing they stated that the grenado was filled with nails ect. as well, of which there are no historic references to pre-WW1 era
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@WitheringintheDark Ya I meant historically, not on DW because most of there -references- I'm sitting there with a confused look.
Gratch2222 10 months ago
@demomanchaos The pistol was probably a finisher, for lack of better term. The only weapon the Pirate could use properly would be the blunderbuss. They also didn't use the halberd in the final battle. Did Max forget to include that in the computer? Rigged, just like the Al Capone episode.
EhSteve8690 10 months ago
This is Thrand!!!!
The Pod Cast is out!!!!!!
Google Jay and kirby's Deadliest Pod Cast look for the Thrand final pod cast on top :P
ThegnThrand 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is Eldgrimr. Thrand and I have acquired a new camera. New video series coming out soon. Thrand will be on the Deadliest Podcast with Jay and Kirby. Just google Deadliest Podcast and you'll find a link to jay and kirby productions. The message board has a thread titled Jay and Kirby are going to talk to Thrand.
LordEldgrimr 11 months ago
This is Thrand!!!!
Hey every won who ever Doubted me or likes my videos googe the Deadliest Warrior pod cast and listen to the latest Casey Hendershot Pod Cast .That is the Deadliest Warrior Pod Cast google it :P
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
This is why Thrand is so awesome, because he uses live targets to test their real weapons :D! Nobody else is crazy enough to even try :P. That way, you don't need a physician to say what kind of tissue damage will result, all you need to do is listen for Eldgrimr to scream and yelp xD. Please take no offense to this, but as they say in Zombieland, "God bless rednecks!" :). You guys are just too cool.
ENJager 1 year ago 12
I made a better flail than that when I was 10
UlfrIronwood 1 year ago
I've just rewatched your video, and that must have been a POORLY made Flail if you lost a ball after only three strikes. I'm guessing you purchased it for under 20$, and have been hanging it on your wall? A real flail made of solid metal with spikes causes tremendous damage. Yours must be recreation flail or decoration flail.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
thrand i have the same morningstar =D i got it from a market for 15$ and did u fix the morningstar yet?
makuta3423sghost 1 year ago
@makuta3423sghost For $15? Good lord, that means it's a piece of crap... How does Thrand think it's accurate?
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla no the guy had it forever and i tested it on alot of stuff its not crap
makuta3423sghost 1 year ago
@makuta3423sghost Although I don't have a video I have a handmade flail and it completely decimated an old broiler lid, it was really thick steel to. The spikes went in a good 2 inches. Im sure ti would go though a wisby.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Spike TV has banned my account there again, the account was Konugrafgotu sorry about me unable to reply to you guys. Be sure send the the message what we think of them doing this to try to over look the mistakes I try to point out and set straight. I hate seeing history getting raped on this program.
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
dom ass
macattack923 1 year ago
They Do not test armor right, They Always use Butted Ringmail, without any padding, I think why is because nothing would go threw it and it would be a one sided show sometimes, so they Gimp the armor in Favor of the other opponent.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@Gratch2222 Incorrect. They used Riveted Mail in the Viking vs Samurai episode, which is the one Thrand appears to be so...for lack of a better word... butthurt over.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla And nothing went though it. Thats the last time you saw correct period, Maille.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
How did the flail get so few kills in the sim, it got even less kills than the war club got on the gladiator.
napalmcannon 1 year ago
@napalmcannon Because the Knight was dead long before he got into Flailing range, usually? With the Blunderbuss and Granado, he would have died before getting to use it at all.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla then how did the broadsword and halberd get all those kills?
napalmcannon 1 year ago
@napalmcannon Because a Halberd is more reliable and quick to use than a flail, and would help if the Knight manages to survive into melee range? It all got fairly explained on the episode. The Flail had more chance of just wounding the pirate than outright killing him, giving more chance of the pirate pulling out another dirty trick. You get stuck with a halberd, you're dead.
There's also the 'he had two weapons to pick from, and favored the longsword' argument.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla: No, this is the major misconception in that episode; plate and chainmail armour were being used well into the 1600s, contemporary with the earliest pirates using pistol and cutlass. By that time, armour had developed to the point where it was bulletproof, at least against the firearms of the day.
The grenade and blunderbuss might have wounded or stunned an armoured knight, not killed him; a morning-star around the skull would likely be fatal, at the very least incapacitating.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge you are half correct. The armor worked against firearms OF THEIR TIME, which explains why the Flintlock pistol bounced right off. But weapons such as the Blunderbuss and Grenado were long after the Knight's time, and were good at piercing plate armor. A Grenado needs not even damage the armor to kill with the concussive shockwave, and the Blunderbuss fires with more force than modern shotguns. The Knight would win in close combat, but would usually die before getting there.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla: The Blunderbuss was late 16th century, the grenado late 15th; both within the timeframe in which armoured knights could have conceivably faced early "classic" pirates.
Either weapon could have easily knocked a knight on his ass, while the shrapnel effect of both weapons would have a high chance of finding chinks in armour, but I'm not convinced that either of them would directly penetrate armour of the day. Wounded or stunned? Possibly. Incapacitated or killed? Unlikely.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge Ah, but you ignore the sheer magnitude of each blast. Neither NEEDS to pierce armor to kill, it only needs transmit a large enough amount of force to the body to damage internal organs, break bones, and cause hemorrhaging. It's the same reason people use Blunt Weapons against knights in armor; with a transfer of force you don't NEED to pierce.
A blunderbuss fires with more force than a point-blank shot of a modern shotgun. Anyone hit by it is dead, save for wearing layers of Kevlar.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla: Direct hit, very close range, yes; sheer kinetic force would likely be lethal even to a man in full armour. But at even moderate range, that force dissipates quickly; either a grenado or a blunderbus would have to score a direct hit at close quarters (i.e go off literally at the knight's feet or hit him smack in the chest, respectively) to be reliably fatal.
The chances of the pirate taking the knight out before he closed to melee range still look pretty slim.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
You should look at the Musketeer vs Ming Warrior ep. Even when tossed into a cart (muffling the blast) one target was killed from the force of the blast, and the Musketeer Grenado was almost half the size of the one used by the Pirate. With the Knights inability to see something small at his feet and his relative speed in full plate armor, it would be a very good Knightslayer. The blunderbuss would also be good for a few yards easily, meaning the knights crossbow is about all that out-ranged it.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla: I don't think we can take the depiction of an explosion from Deadliest Warrior as convincing evidence. Plus, the gredano used by a Musketeer would be a more refined weapon than that used by a pirate; there's the relative dates to consider, plus the quality of equipment available. In a one-on-one encounter, the pirate's only real chance would be if he had a cannon; it was artillery that made armour obsolete, not small-arms.
JCLeSinge 1 year ago
@JCLeSinge Why not, exactly? One can argue historical accuracy, but when they break out the controlled explosives and easy to fact-check explosive patches, you really can't argue from 'but it's not valid'. The Grenado used by the musketeer was more 'advanced' in that it was more portable and made of a better shell, but it's the same concept. But the Pirates used a larger one.
It's the same logic behind a War Hammer: blunt trauma with no need to pierce armor. Pirate still wins.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla The Only Thing I disagree with is the Pirates Ability to light a Grenade in melee combat, He couldn't do it with an armored fighter in his face. you have time to either Shoot the Blunderbuss or Light and Throw a Grenade yet the simulation did both.
Why Cant the Knight Block and swing a sword at the same time? There is some things left out of that program and although they update the tests the program seems to work on flawed logic and unrealistic detection.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@Gratch2222 They don't immediately start in melee combat. If they did, the fight would be unfairly skewed to people who specialize in close-range combat. This would give the Pirate plenty of time to light and throw a Grenado. If it worked, the Knight would most certainly either be killed or stunned from the concussive force, giving the Pirate plenty of time to fire.
BTW: Who said a Knight CAN'T block and swing his sword at the same time? You and I don't know what the sim can or can't do.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla At the Range they tested you would get hit in the face with a pole-arm, and there very inaccurate and have about a 25% mis fire rate.
By Default out of three shots 1 misfire along with the only ranged weapons that lowers His odds. A Knight doesn't misfire. From the outcome they clearly didn't factor that in at all.
They also didn't add the shield as a defensive tool because they never tested it or put in into the sim how can it even be calculated?
Gratch2222 1 year ago
25% is a number you just made up and we both know it. As for the range, what, a Halberd is three yards long? They tested the thing past 10 feet and it still did serious damage. By the way? 1 out of 30 is 30%, not 25%. 25% is 1 out 4, meaning every four times that Pirate gets a shot off, one time it doesn't work. Those are still REALLY good numbers in the Pirates Favor given how the Blunderbuss fires with more force than a modern shotgun, and would surely either kill or daze the knight each time.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
By the way, how do you know they never added the shield? They do three days of testing for the show before making the episode, they don't show EVERY test that is done. The shield would surely be great, but using it would mean he can't use that halberd or crossbow of his, so we come once again to the problem of 'putting on your shield in combat' that made the Vikings lose.
You say a halberd would hit? Maybe. But if he had it out, he couldn't use his shield. Game, set, match, Pirate.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla A halberd doesn't weigh 100 pounds. You can easily wield it with one hand until in range then drop your shield. Besides only the blunderbuss pierced the armor, that's one tool even without a shield. That blunderbuss is going to shoot wide and misfire more times than it hits.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
You don't know much about armor, do you? Piercing it is NOT the only way to kill a man through it. In fact, it's the least reliable way to do so. Why do you think Hammers were used as weapons against knights? The blunt force trauma caused by the massive explosion the Blunderbuss makes (Black powder cannons fire with more force than modern shotguns, with the same range) would easily either kill or severely wound whatever it hits. The grenado would do the same from the concussive blast.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla I have worn armor a number of years. all I am saying is a Grenado isn't a grenade, It cannot be timed perfectly in a 1 on 1 fight to go off the exact time you need it too like was shown in DW.
And a Blunderbuss is situational as well just like any other weapon. You get one chance to get it perfect while the Knight has many. I still think the odds are in favor of the Knight.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Of course it cannot be timed perfectly, but with the size of the explosion and the relative slowness of a Knight in Plate Armor (yes, yes, I know you are not reduced to plodding along, but you MUST admit that wearing over 20 pounds of metal slows you down and reduces you field of vision) the Grenado could still harm him. Would it explode in midair? Of course not. But it would still explode near him, and either kill him from the concussive force or knock him on his ass and make him much weaker.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Do you have any experience in said weapons to make this claim? I have personally seen a Blunderbuss fired, and they miss a lot, they also don't have enough black powder to cause any concussion wounds like a modern shotgun, the pellets would go in and depending on the injury the knight would either fight till death or just be incapacitated. Even a flintlock could score a lucky hit and go though or a deep wound impact from the ball,
But A blunderbuss used pellets.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
That's WHY the blunderbuss is better than the Flintlock. The Flintlock would bounce off harmlessly due to the round nature of the ball, but the small "pellets" a Blunderbuss uses being fired at higher force mean it will pierce the armor, but more importantly, not be deflected off. As for strength, do you know how firearms work? Modern firearms use very small amounts of gunpowder already worked into the individual shell casing to fire the bullet, while a Blunderbuss or Flintlock (continued)
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
pours in a great amount of gunpowder to get the same effect. Modern shotguns use much less black powder than the ancient blunderbuss, meaning it would not fire with the same explosive force since there is much less of an explosion to propel the pellets forward. That's basic firearms knowledge. The Blunderbuss would either outright kill, mortally wound, and permanently injure the Knight every single time it hits, giving the Pirate a serious advantage (or the win right there and then.)
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Wait so you think a modern shotgun is less powerful than a medieval Blunderbuss? wow. Oh I forget to mention the Blunderbuss that on DW used wasn't invented until almost 1800.
The term Pirate is very broad, there where Carribean pirates up until 1956, Why not just give him a machine gun?
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@Gratch2222 I don't just think a modern shotgun is less powerful, I know it is. A modern shotgun uses a very small amount of explosive material to fire it's charge, whereas a Blunderbuss uses far greater amounts of a more explosive compound. The big advancements in Firearms have been Accuracy, ease of use, reproducibility, uniform ammunition types, and the ability to hold multiple shells at a single time. A blunderbuss only fires once, but it's essentially a shrapnel CANNON.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
and yes, the term "Pirate" is Vague, but so is the term "Knight." People are still Knighted today, and Pirates still exist, but they took two examples of period Pirates and Knights to pit against each other. At this point you're just splitting hairs.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Well its my opinion that the Pirate would only get 1 chance because that grenado is just worthless in a 1 on 1 fight. and the blunderbuss gets 1 chance to get it right. The Knight has far to many advantages when that Scatter gun is taken away. All the pirate could do is run and make the Knight chase him.
Why Didn't they use an English Knight, they used a French Knight lol obviously biased episode. They where the worst knights in History.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
obviously biased episode? The Knight was basically the ONLY fighter that would have a chance of going against a Pirate due to the Blunderbuss, and it was an interesting episode even if the Knight didn't quite stack up. A Grenado would be quite worthwhile in single combat -providing- that you manage to light and throw it when the opponent is trying to get in range. After that, the only time he could ever use it is if he already knocked the Knight on his ass with the Blunderbuss.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
But I do agree that it was essentially the Blunderbuss (and the Grenado. The thing has a bigger blast radius than you'd expect) that won the day for the pirate. Just like how it was essentially the Twin Hooks that won the day for the Shaolin. Sometimes only a single, or two, weapons make the difference. But using an English Knight would pretty much change nothing about the episode...
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Sure It would. The English Knight would have had a Lance, a Horse in heavy armor, and a set of gothic plate, It was made of better quality than the french and had many more hard angles of deflection and alot easier to move in, it was almost a second skin and the weight was way less with the same amount of protection.
The Knight would charge the Pirate on horseback, Even if the pirate scored a hit He would be run over a lot of the time by the Horse or pieced with the lance.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Lance: Worthless unless he is on Horseback, and also worthless against a target who is NOT on horseback and can thus move laterally to avoid your horses charge.
Horse: You would consider this a fair match-up? Really? Giving one person access to a horse and the other person NOT access to a horse is entirely unfair. The horse in the ending "Simulation" was just for dramatic effect, it was not taken into account in the simulator.
Gothic Plate: wouldn't change the concussive force at all.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Whatever you say, knights have been killing Foot soldiers from horseback even as light armored as a bowman, even when the bowman switched to firearms .
Its not Unfair A Knight by definition is a Heavy Calvary soldier. most if not all Knights killed from horseback. Taking a Knights horse away is the same as taking the Pirates blunderbuss away.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Hardly, and you know it. A knight is still an incredibly dangerous combatant without his Horse, especially with the already "tilt things to help him" addition of the crossbow. If the terrain is 50/50 for the combatants, it would not be a plain and empty field, meaning a cavalry charge from a Horse would not be very effective. Especially one with a lance. Lances were used to unhorse enemies and pierce armor, not attack infantry units.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
A blunderbuss had to be loaded right then or before a boarding If you tilted it forward all the shot would spill out, It cannot benefit from shot wad that keeps it from falling out because the barrel was so big Keeping Flash powder in the cup for to long clumped it up and made a mess in the pinhole of the Barrel.
No one in there right mind would carry around a loaded Blunderbuss anyway. You might have time to load it or not, and it might misfire or not, and you might miss or not.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
In the time it takes the Knight plod on over towards the pirate, or to load his crossbow and aim at the pirate, the Pirate has time to load his Blunderbuss or move in, light a grenado, and throw it. The only point you have there is "it might misfire", as it's basically impossible to miss with a Scattergun in one-on-one combat when your opponent is wearing such heavy and cumbersome armor. He WOULD be able to load it, WOULD hit, but the only concern is whether it misfired or not.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
The pirate has alot of weight in guns and supplies and heavy clothing, but the knights armor is evenly distributed over his body.
I am trying to see your point but when you use terms like 'plod' is just shows your bias. A Knight would not stand there while someone loads a weapon. They fought against guns and won many times, Guns was not the downfall of plate, the downfall was that it was cheaper to hand someone a gun than it was to make custom fitted armor.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
You honestly thing 40+ pounds of Full Plate Armor is less obstructive than carrying a few weapons and wearing a coat? Seriously? lol. Look at my name, Gratch, I -know- about knights. A Knight's Armor may allow them full range of movement, but only an armchair historian would claim that it does not hamper their mobility. In the time the Knight is loading his Crossbow, the Pirate can load his Blunderbuss. In the time the Knight is running at the pirate, the pirate cna light and throw a grenado.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
Guns were not the downfall of plate, on this I agree. You saw how basically worthless the flintlock was if the Knight was still standing and shot in the armor. But that armor DOES hinder your mobility, and the Pirate WOULD have an advantage in terms of speed and maneuverability. To claim otherwise is to never have worn armor.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Your name is a contradiction. Dont forget the Grenado did no damage at all, but got kills in the simulation. how does that math add up? That is point blank and they did not test the shock wave so it cannot be a factor at all. They assumed it would get a kill even though it proved otherwise.
It was a biased episode, nothing you say can convince me otherwise, There math is flawed and made up, that is not a simulation its a loaded dice roll to see who wins.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
You obviously know nothing about explosives if you believe the only way to harm someone is to pierce through armor with shrapnel. I highly suggest you dig up a book and do some research on the number one reason people in armor were killed. Note: it was not because of people actually PIERCING the armor. Have you ever heard of blunt weapons? Ever? It's the same damn principle; cause damage THROUGH the armor without having to PIERCE the armor.
Btw: they do more testing then what's shown on air.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla If They do more testing and do not show it, that is there fault not mine, As a show called deadliest warrior it is there job to convince me that one warrior could best another. I am not into guessing games when I am watching a show.
If You cannot agree they make up math and give bias often then I dunno what to tell you. If its not there then I cannot judge for myself its worthless to me.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
"Their" fault, Gratch. There is a place. But that aside, it is NOT their job to convince you one warrior could best another, it is their job to be entertaining and claim that one warrior would best another. They are an entertainment show, not a history program. As for the testing, what, do you HONESTLY expect they'll be able to fit 3+ days of testing footage onto an hour-long time slot? It's simply impossible.
If you don't want to believe it? Fine. But don't bullshit and call it made up.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
If you think they totally made it up, why don't YOU get weapons, armor, ballistics gel, chronometers, shock patches, spectrometers, and make your own? Oh that's right. You can't. You also don't know what exactly is taken into account and what isn't. So don't say that the whole show is made up unless you actually have some knowledge on how the stuff works, Kay?
There's nothing worse than someone burying their head in the sand just because they don't like what someone comes up with.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Well I guess if you need to prove yourself somehow on a comment box by trying to discredit someones opinion, you went from a conversation to insults, You obviously have nothing to contribute but your own self inflated ego and stand behind a show you have no idea one way or the other?
Why do you care? I mean honestly, does it break your pride for someone to disagree, grow up.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Why do I care? Because Thrand lies worse than Deadliest Warrior. At least with the show they tend to be inaccurate with both sides, instead of heaping praise upon one side and heaping scorn upon the other, all the while using plastic bottles and tree branches to try and disprove accelerometers and pressure mats.
Is the show perfect? Hell no. It's on Spike. But Thrand is even more inaccurate then they are, and his literal worship of the Vikings is amusing and fun to prove wrong.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla This video isn't even about Vikings. you claim he is biased but you spill your comments from one video over to another to take a jab at someone you have not proven wrong at any point in time.
BTW they didn't use a pressure mat on this episode, they just assumed, and assumption makes an ass out of you and me.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Rose-colored glasses much? Let's take this charade point by point.
1: Thrand has also gotten butthurt over episodes that DO include pressure mats, like Rajput vs Centurion, so my point about pressure mats stands.
2: The "worship of the Vikings" was part of the answer to "why do you care?", which YOU asked. It stands.
3: Not proven wrong? I've cited 10 things saying "Arrows can pierce mail", and Thrand repeatedly says "nuh-uh." Also, I've called him on poor quality materials repeatedly.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla
1. This isn't about Rajput vs centurion so I could care less.
2. You can say it stands all you want I say it doesn't. then again I am from Norway.
3. Arrows can pierce mail with the proper arrowhead I agree, but the arrowhead used can be debated.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
1: You asked why I don't like Thrand. Whether you care or not is irrelevant.
2: Good for you, want a cookie? Being from Norway doesn't change anything or automatically make you knowledgeable.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla I never said it did. I just do not care about your opinion on this subject. I never asked why you didn't like Thrand. It;s as you said... irrelevant.
I don't see a video of you doing anything to disprove it, Just a bunch of words. Its easy to sit from an unseen throne and cast disapproval.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Oh yes, because swinging around a fake flail in your backyard is proof worthy of throwing out recorded history over. Sorry. I have a job and a family and can't afford to waste a few hundred dollars just to prove some poor fool on the internet that banging replica swords on pot lids isn't realistic in the least.
I mean, really. He made a whole video about how realistic it is to use Plastic Water Bottles to test things. He's a viking fanboy who hasn't proven anything besides his own bias.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Apparently your not keeping up with the proper conversation or read anything I've typed. The burden of proof is on you, not him. So unless you can contribute something as evidence. A book another video, anything? Instead of -People told me-. Being You do not have enough time at 21 with a Family and a job and the like.
I'd say your out of gas.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
21? I'm not 21, youngster. You'd know this if you'd been keeping up with what I've said to you before. Considering I -asked- you if that "people told me" was incorrect about the SCA, and you refused to answer, I must take what I saw on SCA Kingdoms websites and from people who have taken part in the SCA as fact.
As for citations, you take a video of two untrained guys in their backyard with as "evidence" instead of historical accounts and first-hand experience?
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla I have seen no historic accounts presented by you. and I am not inclined to answer any questions about the SCA because I do not not have the knowledge you seek to gain from such a question.
I have done my own research and While I do agree you would not go flying, a good morning star would pierce plate. I do however agree that the Viking would best a Samurai the majority of the time.
Given that the Viking and Samurai where from contrasting era's.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Age isn't important, its the fact I knew you where not 21 and called you on it to make a point. don't believe everything you read.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
...what? That doesn't even make a lick of sense. Are you really trying to pull the "I'm going to intentionally say something wrong to prove you can't trust everything you read" charade on me? Son, get your head screwed on straight. If you're going to throw out the listed rules of your own system's kingdoms, and experience from their members, on the basis of "you can't believe everything you read", why are you here?
You can't believe everything you SEE, either. Like the work of a certain Thrand.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla When did I cite any rules for the SCA? You have an imagination don't you? What I said was I do not recall those particular rules. You love to quote people totally wrong don't you? almost every time, Then make up things to stick on top of it.
Your just arguing for the sake of it. If your time is so precious Why argue a moot point for hours on end? That is what doesn't make sense sir.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla and I didn't intentionally say anything wrong, You have the false info, not me.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
You said I was 21. Then when I called you on it you said you KNEW I wasn't 21. So either you're a backpedaling liar, or you intentionally said my age wrong. Which is it, boy?
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla How am I backpedaling? It says your 21 on your profile, then in a comment you said you where not. Ever heard of sarcasm?
. I think your overall your full of shit about everything and are reading things of Wikipedia to back up your outrageous claims and inconsistent wavering comments.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
It does? Hmm. That's a problem I'll have to see fixed. But you can't hide behind the "sarcasm" card on the internet, it's near impossible to properly convey it and you should know this.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla I am almost twice your age in this incarnation. But all I want to know is why you think Deadliest Warrior is accurate or even real and why does it mean so much to you for it to be so? Are you Max Geiger? I always thought the manperson might be. You say stuff that is foolish enough and do not understand real combat so I would say you probably are, It would take some one that dumb to put out such a unhistorical entertainment program and try to back it up against us Lmfao :P
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
There you go again accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being Max Geiger... Are you drunk, Thrand? Or are you just so full of yourself that you think anyone who doesn't worship your mighty viking gods must be offended by your message? Who else are you going to accuse of being Max Geiger just because they think you're more inaccurate than that show, huh?
Also, "this incarnation", hnmh? Let me guess, you've deluded yourself into thinking you're actually a grand viking hero reborn?
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Dude you're such a troll. Why come onto this guys video page and flame him like an asshole? He's has more to show than you do. He's got a video and some armor. All you have is an episode of Deadliest Warrior. lol.
HayabusaGrrrl 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response"
Pot, Kettle, Black.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla I'd say real human targets (shield vs kanabo, katana vs leg/arm splints, flail vs coat of plates) are much better than gel torsos. The bottle cutting is because it's the closest thing Thrand could get to cutting human flesh without killing anyone in real life (though he will use deer meat/bone). Overall, the tests are good considering he's on a budget and doesn't have Viacom financing him. With that in mind, I think you could cut Thrand some slack.
EhSteve8690 1 year ago
I agree that such targets are better than Gel Torsos, Gel Torsos are the best you can get without actually killing or seriously injuring someone. There is no way that two friends would go full force on each other in an attempt to see how lethal weaponry is, which is why I doubt any test that consists of someone swinging a weapon at their buddy. It's just not valid. You can't test whether a weapon would injure someone without doing everything you can to actually TRY to injure them.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla After Thrand swung a katana at Eldgrimir's leg splints, he looked like he had a tattoo on his leg in later shots. Must've been hit pretty hard if you ask me. Again, Thrand is kind of on a budget and doesn't have a corporation funding his videos.
EhSteve8690 1 year ago
I can understand the budget issues, but it's more the fact that he claims in comments that his methods are SUPERIOR to others that causes problems. There's also the fact that the only way to really test how damaging something is is to try and damage someone with it, and that simply wasn't happening during the "Shield Test" they did.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla On the shield test, I think he wanted to prove that your arm won't be broken when a 25 lb club hits it, that's all.
EhSteve8690 1 year ago
Which is rather hard to do when you're not trying to break your friend's arm, isn't it? Ignoring that the weapon was incorrect, the reason Gel Torsos are used on the show is because you can't test lethality without trying to kill someone. For a sensor to get the proper reading of what a weapon does when it's being swung with deadly force, it needs to be swung with deadly force. You can't do that against a human. People will pull their punches to avoid hurting or maiming the target.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla I did not pull my punch wile attacking the shield because I did not need too. His arm was safe :P
Watch Viking vs. Samurai : Thrand's Fighting and Bonus Video here on youtube The best test for the Kanabo that was around weight show described which is not historical they weighed around 7lbs was accidentally put on there and tell me I was pulling blows. The reason I didn't break is arm is because I could not that way , why Deadliest Warrior is scripted fake program that's why.
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
@ThegnThrand If you are talking about this video The point was he didn't get knocked to the ground like in the story with a padding duct tape flail because they are so powerful. I did not pull the blows at all they armor he was wearing will stop one of those more powerful hand cannons you are talking about that's better than .44 magnum, Not :P But yes it will stop any pirate weapon they tested on DW so why would I pull a simple flail shot you are joking right?it stopped a navy .36 cal cap n ball
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
@ThegnThrand to be honest I was using a Japanese kusarifundo technique of following through with the whole arm swing to make sure the balls didn't bounce back and break mi hand something I was more worried about in this test due to how the line up with grip. Hurting him was least of my worries :P
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
@EhSteve8690 yes that is correct And we will being doing a test in our spartan vs Ninja/ Samurai Video with a kanabo in my next series.
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Yes it was superior DW used a metal brace that was ridged the center boss shield is not held ridged is it it absorbs force so your arm does not break. The spartan shield is held ridged though and would transfer all force to shoulder and arm so he would of had to worry more about getting hurt than the viking or any other ninth century shield user with a center boss raw ox hide and linden wood shield
The test in Viking vs. Samurai : Thrand's Fighting and Bonus Video is better.
ThegnThrand 1 year ago
@ThegnThrand You cant explain these things to people that have no fighting experience. The moves and techniques after awhile become instinct and the fighter gains prowess to put those attacks in places an inexperienced fighter can not.
People seem to thing ancient warriors had some magic formula for fighting and they didn't. People are a lot stronger than healthier than they used to be, An SCA fighter today would decimate an ancient warrior.
He doesn't get it.
Gratch2222 1 year ago 6
@Gratch2222
I highly doubt people who play swordsman for a few days then go home to cushy apartments and tv dinners could beat a spartan, viking, samurai, hell, any of those warriors who were taught since they were children how to fight and to kill, who lived in a time of constant struggle and toil simply to survive. We of this age are all soft, a byproduct of the easy life we live. The conditioning and strength of these warriors would be hard pressed to match in our modern world.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@WitheringintheDark It would depend on the people you speak of I know people who love fighting and training and since this is done out of love for it they would surpass a man that is forced to do it due to circumstance in my belief although some loved this back in the day as well :P
ThegnThrand 10 months ago
@ThegnThrand
Doing something because you love it still doesn't; quite match up to doing something because your very life depends on it. I'd put my money on a trained (Insert warrior here) over even the best member of the SCA any day, just because of the fact that the historical figure fights for their survival and the SCA member fights for enjoyment.
TheManperson 10 months ago
@ThegnThrand
Alright, i'll give you that, I just find it presumptuous and arrogant that he would think that any modern hobby swordsman could simply 'decimate' one of the ancient warriors whose styles they train in. It's like saying any boxer today could annihilate bruce lee. That your average sword fighter could handily trounce Musashi. Back in the day they would be better trained and conditioned then we are. Thinking we could easily defeat them insults their memory and skill.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@WitheringintheDark People have a healthier diet and are far less prone to sickness and disease of ancient times. We are also much stronger since we understand how to build and maintain muscle growth. Look at Muscle men from 1940's then look at them today, and that is over less than a century span. Dark age warriors did not fight and train all the time. and a good majority is speculation that they all trained from birth.
Gratch2222 10 months ago
@Gratch2222
LMFAO healthier diet my ass. We are surrounded by radiation and toxic substances, our food is genetically modified garbage grown in toxic soil. We are far less prone to sickness and disease thanks to modern medicine keeping us alive, not because we are 'healthier'. I'm staring at evidence spartans trained from the age of 5. You have proof otherwise?
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@WitheringintheDark You're looking at proof? what proof would that be?
Gratch2222 10 months ago
@Gratch2222
The Spartan Army by Nick Sekunda. Some other sources disagree, saying they began later at 7. Either way, they started military training at a very young age.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@WitheringintheDark Hrmm well I don't know enough about Greece to even guess. I assume most warrior cultures started some sort of formal or informal training at a young age.
Gratch2222 10 months ago
@Gratch2222 My son Alar is 2 years old I am training him as we speak he is quite good with weapons at his age. Freaks my friends out when the see us sword fighting :P
ThegnThrand 9 months ago
@Gratch2222
Also the reason bodybuilders are so much larger these days is because their all quaffing down unnatural substances that artificially stimulate muscle growth. If you look, there is a Huge difference between natural bodybuilders and those substance swallowers. The greeks knew plenty about how to build and maintain muscle, and were quite fit, they just didn't have artifcial substances with potentially dangerous unknown side effects on the human body to consume to bulk up even more.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@WitheringintheDark Exactly my point, You think they don't use it in the military? They would have used it back then if they had it. But the fact is it did not exist, instead they drank out of lead cups, ya that's healthy.
Gratch2222 10 months ago
@Gratch2222
Where do you see them drinking from lead cups? Greek cutlery was made of ceramic earthenware.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@WitheringintheDark You don't know much about ceramics, Lead was a main ingredient in its glaze up until the recently. It's was called Lead-glazed eathernware,
Gratch2222 10 months ago
@Gratch2222
That I did not know. Looking into it a bit more, it seems the most popular material it was made out of was terracotta, a clay based unglazed ceramic that evidently contains high amounts of lead. Kinda scary.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
@Gratch2222
Creatine is not given by the military(not the us one at least) but neither do they ban or encourage it's use. Some instructors discourage it even, as it can cause soldiers to lock up on long training periods. Bodybuilders do not good soldiers make. Endurance and agility are what is sought, not sheer power, and creatine can inhibit that.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
4: There are over three days of testing put into an hour long episode. Unless you want them to rend the fabric of space and time, it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to show every single test that they do. To Assume (remember your little jingle, gratchy!) that they don't use pressure mats, but somehow have access to a full-on load-bearing pressure sensor and accelerometers is stupid.
There we go. Wrapped up in a nice little package. Going to kneel at the throne of the holy Thrand some more, Gratch?
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla They did not have access to this on earlier episodes. and it was never shown, They assumed a lot of the first season. your saying since its three days of testing that We can all assume to that they used and tested armor and weapons thoroughly. but that is another assumption that can be debated. You don't know this so you cant make the claim that they did any more than I can say they didn't.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
It's not another Assumption, they've outright said it repeatedly on the show, the aftermath, and in various "off the record" interviews. They do three days (or more, if they need to travel on-location) of testing for each episode, and only put in the basics of each weapon into the episode. By the way? They used a pressure mat on Apache vs Gladiator, the very first episode that aired.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla That is your opinion, You cannot tell me how to have mine. Fact is there is no way to prove it. If You don't want to believe it, fine. but don't bullshit and call it facts.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Blunt trama wasn't from firearms or explosives it was from Pole axes Maces and Lances. The test with firearms and explosives was botched and the misfire clearly was not calculated. It is what it is.
The Pirate expert thinks being close can do more damage than being at a distance with a sword even though the arming sword could be used two handed..... its an insult to common sense. Then they called them even,
Gratch2222 1 year ago
"Blunt trauma wasn't from firearms or explosives."
lol. You know nothing about firearms if you think they don't produce greater force than a Mace. Do some reading and then we'll talk, okay? There's no way in hell a mace produces more force than an explosion.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Umm Knight Calvary specialized in charging into shield walls and killing as many as possible before retreating, That is why kite shields were on there back for disengaging. What do you mean Knights didn't fight infantry? Thats the silliest thing I've heard yet.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
A shield -wall-, you said. Meaning a stationary group of men who are clumped together. Charging against a single opponent is very hard, as the opponent can move Laterally far more easily than you can. Especially if, as the terrain was said to be in order to be 50/50, it is not a flat and featureless plain.
A lance is next to worthless in single combat, as it only works when you are mounted and charging, and against a single opponent they can move laterally and avoid your charge.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
A Shield wall is much harder to charge against than one person. If you think its that easy to out maneuver a horse I would love to see you do it. Horse aside though it takes much less time to load a crossbow than it does to load a flintlock.
I did a bit of research it took a knight 1 minute to fire 2 shots, the average flintlock loading time is 3 in a minute. Each kill on impact. also another factor, what is loaded into the blunderbuss I doubt every Pirate has lead shot at his disposal.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Of course they would have lead shot. You don't know much about Pirates, do you? That's like arguing "Well the knight likely wouldn't have any bolts in the crossbow." There's no use in giving them a weapon if they don't have the ammo. Besides, Knights didn't even USE crossbows, so that was purely an unrealistic thing to give the Knight more of an advantage. It helped in 10% of the fights, but wasn't enough to bring the win.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla The blunderbuss also has a greater surface area and is not accurate. Its a scatter gun and you never know if its going to hit or not.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Inaccurate? To a point. But you don't need to be accurate when firing a scattergun if your opponent is within 1-10 feet of you. It would not be accurate out past that range, but within 3 or so yards it WOULD hit the Knight. There's no way to avoid it. It would be more effective the closer he is, but that would risk the Pirate being injured as well, unless the Knight has already had his bell rung by the Grenado and the Blunderbuss is used to finish the poor bloke off.
Spread fire = more impact.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla 1 -10 feet are you serious? do you read what you type? The blunderbuss misfired twice, thats HUGE...
I do agree the weapons given this Knight in this particular episode would have lost but I'm not speaking of facts from this episode. They don't even know the difference between morning star and a flail.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
The Blunderbuss misfired twice -in the footage we were shown.- The weapon, if properly maintained, actually had a very low rate of misfires. Let's just be generous and say it misfires one out of every 5 times it is used, okay? That means 4 times the Knight is either killed, severely wounded, ore bare minimum knocked to the ground and disoriented from the shockwave. This gives the pirate time to light a grenado and toss it onto his chest, killing him instantly. Or stabbing through a joint. Okay?
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Shockwave? ITs a medieval shotgun not an RPG
Gratch2222 1 year ago
You don't know much about firearms, do you? Modern shotguns knock people flat onto their back, and they only use a fraction of the amount of Black Powder a Blunderbuss uses. Those things fire with a massive explosion for a weapon that size, and it's like carrying around a cannon. I'd be shocked if someone could get hit by it and NOT be disoriented, no matter what they were wearing. Especially heavy plate armor that doesn't do much to disperse force.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla I have several Blunderbuss and flintlock rifles I know there limitations. A Blunderbuss in a moving one on one pitched battle is very hard to use. You have to load the priming cup every time before firing. I doubt seriously if you would have time for that every encounter.
There was a reason The lined up to fire in the Revolutionary war and formed ranks to reload, its not a gorilla warfare weapon and there making it into one.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
You think they would be so unfair as to give the pirate an UNLOADED weapon? That's cheating him, and you know it. In one on one combat, you will get exactly a single shot before the weapon is worthless when it takes that long to reload...but the pirate only NEEDS that one shot. They don't start off an arms-length away from eachother, and unfairly give the pirate an unloaded weapon.
There's nothing pitched about waiting for the guy to get close enough to pull the trigger.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Its not unloaded, you cannot prime the cup until your ready to fire it, A flintlock is a two stage Weapon meaning it has to be primed twice in two separate spots. Any tilting of the gun can effect its firing, It needs to be aimed careful after priming or the flash powder will run out.
You cant prime a cup and then stick it into your belt either then pull it out randomly and fire, that's only movie magic.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
But you CAN prime the cup, wait for him to get close, and pull the trigger. I never said anything about him priming it and putting it away. But if he hits with either the Grenado or the Blunderbuss, which can each be prepared easily in the time it takes Ploddy McIronpants to jog over to him, he'll either kill the Knight outright or have enough time to finish him off while he's disoriented. Even if he can't finish him off, the Knight will now be seriously wounded/stunned, meaning easier to fight.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla The Knight would also Have time to load the Crossbow and shoot it at range, whats your point? You give the Pirate a completely different set of rules to follow than the Knight.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
He would have time to load the crossbow. Hence getting 100 kills in the simulator. Are you even paying attention to what you say? But the Knight's Helmet, combined with the Pirate's Mobility, would make the crossbow not very accurate. While the Knight is trying to reload his second shot, which is a process that takes several seconds and both hands, the Pirate can move into range and shoot him with the Blunderbuss or throw his Grenado.
Advantage: Pirate
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla A disorienting sound would hurt the Pirate more than the Knight since the Knights helmet is padded with chain and cloth. As far as being knocked down by the blunderbuss impact, Not gonna happen, no way no how.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
A sound? Seriously? You think the SOUND is what causes it? Yeah, get back to me when you manage to fire one of those "Many Blunderbusses you own."
It sure as hell aint gonna be the sound that knocks someone over, it will be the massive explosion.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla what you claim breaks the laws of physics.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
No. No it doesn't. In fact, physics is the very reason WHY someone gets thrown from their feet. Transfer of force, anyone? Just because you don't understand the laws, doesn't mean they don't work they way they work. A body at motion will stay at motion, remember that little gem? A soft target like a person isn't enough to stop the kind of transfer of force a Blunderbuss would make, and thus the body would end up moving with the blast and being thrown off their feet.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla For that to be possible it would have to expel the same force back onto the wielder, and a force large enough to throw 250 pounds would break someones shoulder. Didn't you watch Mythbusters? An elephant gun can barely manage to knock a hat off someones head.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
You don't understand physics, do you? A gun does not propel the exact same force backwards as it does forwards, and the scattering nature of the pellets from the explosion causes a wider surface area when the weapon connects, thus causing more of the Knight's body to be hit simultaneously.
Come back when you have a grasp on basic physics, or shotguns. They wouldn't be thrown violently through the air five feet, but it WOULD knock someone in such heavy armor over.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla lol I want you to show me one example of this that isn't from Hollywood.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
Quote from Wikipedia article entitled "Stopping Power"
"Humans encountering a physical hit, be it a punch or a bullet, are conditioned to absorb the blow by moving in the same direction as the force."
It's simple physics and psychology. A handgun bullet or a flintlock bullet can't do it, but the massive power a black powder cannon? Hell yeah. That will knock someone on their ass.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla That doesn't say anywhere that it creates more force than it produces like you claimed. Now you throw in some other explanation. your one of those, I'm always right guys aren't you?
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla How can it expel more force than it creates? wtf kind of logic is that?
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla Boarding axe 13 kills lol Ya this show is so accurate.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
13 out of 1000? There are weak spots in the knights armor. Joints, face, etc. I can realistically see the Pirate knocking the Knight onto his ass with the blunderbuss, and then while he's unconscious or unable to move to protect himself, removing his helmet and stabbing him in the neck with the boarding axe. 13 out of 1000 is only over a .1% amount of kills.
The weapon that finishes them off gets the kill. I can see it killing him 13 times. Plate armor doesn't cover EVERYTHING.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla By That Logic it should have gotten a lot more than 13 kills since the blunderbuss can blow the knight back 1000 feet and incapacitate him an hour, amirite? Yet the Crossbow got over 100 kills, almost the same as the Halberd, c'mon you don't see the flawed math there?
Gratch2222 1 year ago
...um...what? You're just making numbers up at this point. I never said knock him back 1000 feet and incapacitate him for an hour, but YOU try getting shot with a cannon and not get severely injured, killed, or thrown for a loop. A few seconds is all you need to finish someone off, and need I remind you 13 kills is only .13%? More likely he finished him off with the grenado, cutlass, or a flintlock to the face like shown in the end of the simulated fight.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
As for the halberd getting the same kills the Crossbow did? It makes sense. The crossbow can kill the pirate from a distance, though the Knight's helmet makes aiming hard. The halberd would basically kill the pirate any time at all he got into melee with it in hand, but most times he wouldn't survive long enough to be in any condition to use it. It makes sense. The pirate's best weapons would kill, wound, or at least incapacitate the knight long enough to be finished off.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla The crossbow doesn't kill out rite , so does the Knight beat the pirate over the head with the crossbow and get the kill with it? This is going by your logic.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
You don't think a crossbow can kill someone in no armor? Do some research, man. That thing was a veritable can opener, and you can get more than enough penetration on an unprotected body to pierce vital organs.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla It wouldn't get over 100 kills right off, it would maim and the knight would close in and finish off with a different weapon. first you say a blunderbuss kills right off even the grenado then they run in and kill, but the knight follows different rules? Which is it?
Gratch2222 1 year ago
100 kills in a 1000 kill simulator is 10% of the time. So in 1 out of every 10 fights, the Knight manages to kill the pirate before the pirate can get into Blunderbussing range.
Besides, if you'd paid attention, I've said the blunderbuss will either kill outright or seriously wound. A crossbow bolt, if it doesn't instantly kill you, will cause serious pain but will not transfer enough force to ground you. The Pirate could keep fighting if he got shot, the Knight couldn't.
KnightValhalla 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KnightValhalla Thanks for proving my point.
Gratch2222 1 year ago
@KnightValhalla
To think a blunderbuss is more powerful then a shotgun is simply ludicrous. The energy output of modern smokeless powder is much greater then primitive black powder, it takes 5-6 times as much black powder to equal the explosive force of modern highly efficient smokeless powders. This is why 'grenados' of the 1600's saw little use; a direct at your feet hit would be necessary to have Any effect.
WitheringintheDark 10 months ago
The blunderbuss is only as situational as "occasionally it misfires." If