The DiscussionEdit

Alright given the constant editing on this page I thinks it's best that both sides give their reasons for why they think what should and shouldn't be on the page and reach some kind of agreement.User:Swg66-Cambria ne'er can yield! 20:15, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Everything written was correct, Rmzilla just doesn't know any better. 20:39, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

By putting that kind of info on the page your making yourselves look like sore losers I mean seriously you don't see anyone else putting unnecessary information on the other warrior pages so just accept the fact that you guys lost. I know what your going through I was extremely pissed off when the Knight lost to the Pirate but I got over it and you don't see me putting unnecessary information on the Knight page. Rmzilla 21:03, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

The Celts chariots were nowhere near as advanced as Persian chariots and if you don't believe me look up Persian chariots and Celtic Chariots at Google images and compare the 2 chariots. Rmzilla 21:19, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Again you're wrong. Persian chariots were lighter and proably looked nicer, but the Celts was more advanced. The Celts developed a suspended platform to stand on that made them more stable, allowing for mor controled movment. Perisan chariots would would have the driver and warrior shacking and rocking with every bump. 21:33, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Did the Celts chariot have any handles for the Celt to hang on to or straps on their feet to keep them from flying off as soon as it moves or spikes that could slice into the other guys chariot wheels and cause crash or a large plate looking thing on the front of the chariot to give the Celts cover while being shot by archers. No they don't but the Persians chariot does have cover and they have spikes and the platform is way more stable you obviously didn't look at the pictures on Google Images so allow me to show you a comparison of chariots!!!

Celtic Chariot:


Persian Chariot (note this was the only good picture I can find so if you insult me I will keep deleting the Celt page until I grow old and die:

Persian Chariot
Rmzilla 22:09, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Wow you just keep proving my point.1. The Celtic chariots were sturdier, with iron rimmed wheel, the the chariot scythe hit it , it would proably be more likly to break the Persian chariot.2. you are clearly impressed by pretty pictures. I did look at the pictures but they don't prove your point, the Celts didn't need handle to grab becasue the design of the Chariot made them much more stable, the only adavantage they had was they offered some protection against archers, but the Celts could hold their shield at the same time so it renders the point moot, The lack of the plates on the side of front allowed celts to fight more effectivly against ground troops. Persian chariot use a less sophsticated design than the Celts. 22:51, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Rmzilla, i'm not the same Anon you've been arguing with. 22:59, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

@anon67.247.147.56: wow you just filled with so much bullshit I'm surprised you can even read let alone type. The Celts Chariots had wooden spokes on the wheels not iron spokes you mother-fucking butt-scratching nose-picking poop-flinging dog-humping mentally-retarded caveman.Rmzilla 22:59, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

I said iron rimmed, not iron spokes, Iron rimmed means that the out side of the wheel had an iron band around its outside, I haven't said anything that isn't true. 23:07, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

@Rmzilla: you called me an uber Nazi for no reason. 23:14, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Let's calm down here, ladies, this is a NICE Wiki about a NASTY show ;)

The Deadliest Warrior 15:13, August 3, 2010 (UTC) The Deadliest Warrior

I'd say deserves a back for blood Edit

Given that the program they use has evolved over the seasons, and they've brought on more people with a wider array of knowledge and skills, I dont think they accounted for nearly as many if any of the x-factors that wouldve been involved in this kind of fight. I've done research out of curiosity due to my heritage and Caesar himself has an entry in his war journals during the Gallic wars stating that while he and his soldiers were setting up camp they were overrun by a celtic ambush and by his own words stating that it was only with great fortune that they wernt utterly annihalated. The celts were fierce and savage yes, But they were also cunning, and there is evidence suggesting they frequently used guerilla tactics particularly in areas of europe that were contested by rome. Also ive noticed multiple fallacies in wiki articles online, Wiki's arnt always the best resources for finding factual information, especially on ancient peoples and civilizations so much of the arguments arising on this particular subject are being backed by false information. The celts weren't just iron age barbarians, they were deeply cultured warriors and historically for their time the finest metalworkers in europe. Yes, wiki articles will suggest that "Their swords would bend during battle" But as ive said, this is historically innaccurate, and many roman historians, not just celtic historians, say that this instead refers to the ritualistic metal bending of the celts. Yes, They would bend blades during battle and for rituals, especially the blades of their enemies. Not just to render them useless, but for spiritual reason and to inspire fear, so they also used psycological warfare. If you saw a 6' man with rippling muscles covered in tattoos and scars barreling down at you with death in his eyes, a smile on his face, howling with the rage of a cornered animal while bending your dead comrades sword almost clean in half what would be going through your head?

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.