Poll: Deadliest Warrior..?

[NOT WILL]

I love that show. I can never seem to find out when it is on anymore. The fights are pretty cool and the weapons are awesome.

10:00 est spike. they had a marathon on a few days ago. this is one of my fav shows. on new ones for a few weeks though.

Unfortunately in my opinion the show is just the stereotypical american take on medieval/dark age history, some idea but mostly opinions instead of fact. I would find a program on vikings interesting, a program on samurai interesting. But a program where they pretend a viking fights a samurai and the 'experts' basically go "zomg the XX was like soooo cool and kills like 100,000,000 enemies" for an hour seems a little too much like tripe!

the lead person on the show is CANADIAN not AMERICAN. There shows are not all medieval/dark age. they have had IRA. (i just watched it)

The indians won because they kill not amuse.

the show is fun and stupid and i wouldn't have it any other way

 

[That One Six]

For one, the show isn't new, and for another, they only factor in killing power of weapons, and not all of the skills and mannerisms of their users.

Well, They get cold, hard facts, and put them into a computer to see who would win in a fight. It's accurate enough.

That's exactly the problem. It's too accurate. That isn't a simulation of humans fighting, but perfect, unfailing robots.

But because they get the facts from humans, it simulates humans. Right?

It's supposed to, but if the tests are skewed, or the results are one in a million, then that is what will be placed in the simulation to be repeated 1,000 times.

 

[Rednog]

For one, the show isn't new, and for another, they only factor in killing power of weapons, and not all of the skills and mannerisms of their users.

Well, They get cold, hard facts, and put them into a computer to see who would win in a fight. It's accurate enough.

As a science major myself and a person who studied ballistics and criminology for 2 and a half years, their data is sketchy at best. Like mentioned by others their tests for similar weapons differs greatly, ie one weapon being used on a stationary ballistics dummy, but the other on a moving hunk of meat. There isn't going to be some magic math equation that says X damage on dummy = Y damage on meat. In the end I bet all they measure is killing power, range, and accuracy. Which completely throws out things like fighting styles. For example in the Ninja vs Gladiator, the egg weapons were pretty much useless because they had no killing power at all, even though getting something like that in your eyes would mean instant death because you wouldn't be able to defend effectively. And this method also takes out the way a warrior approached a battle, like at the end of the episode the Ninja guy says "Well no Ninja is going to rush a fully armored guy head on, he is going to sneak in and kill you in the night."
The same problems exist with a variety of the weapons and imo they should be fair and tell the people presenting the weapons "Hey we know this is a great weapon and is extremely effective in real life, but in our simulation it will mean jack shit because we don't have a factor for this, so can you choose another weapon?"