File:Placeholder

220px

A Review A Week[edit | edit source]

I will be righting my views on warriors and why they won.

Apache Vs Gladiator[edit | edit source]

Apache[edit | edit source]

Apaches have one of the lowest budget and lightest weapons of any warrior, yet makes perfect use of whatever is avaliable. Projectiles, projectiles, projectiles- short range, short range, short range. Great skill, tactics, speed and a trick fightingstyle that keeps you guessing. Throw? Stab? Slash? Run? Ambush? Other unarmored enemies would be overwelmed by the Apache's many projectiles and at close range Apache's skill with their weapons makes them hard for slower enemies to beat it.

  • Bow- nothing special, though Apaches would be skilled with it. A good 'average' bow and is what I compare other bows to see if they are good or not.
  • Knives- 20 throwing knives? OMG. You better be armored to stop this one man volley. The knife fighting is very impressive, it would be devistating against slower enemies with heavy weapons.
  • Tomahawk- One of my favorite axes because you can throw it. Even if you don't, it's good at hooking other longer weapons and can still 'hurt' when it hits.
  • War Club- Sucky- being pretty lethal but breakable. Another weapon or armor can break that club, and the club use showed no real skill other than a quick pounce or jumping strikes.
  • Leather Shield- Yeah, not much of a defense against anything.

Gladiator[edit | edit source]

Gladiators are very intimidating close combat fighters. That being said, they're not designed against long ranged enemies, as they only fight other Gladiators. They charge into battle thinking they can take any hits when in reality they are just as mortal as their enemy. This mentality can only work if a warrior can defend themselves, but Gladiators are only partially armored. Gladiators are not born warriors and only some lived as warriors, Gladiator training lasted only a few days or weeks and they only fought other Gladiators, meaning there's not much examples of Gladiators being sucessful in war. They are not different from a large civilian geared in some armor and weilding scary or symbolic weapons.

  • Sica- The sword's design to go around shields is an effective idea, which brings the question 'why did no army adopt it?'
  • Trident- This is a lethal spear, but again- why haven't armies adopted it? I can only guess that it gets stuck in the enemy, but this is a good think in a 1 on 1 fight as it tears with its 3 barbs.
  • Sling- All slings SUCK. Yes they are cheap to build and easy to reload, but they are only leathal with a strong, direct hit to the head. Oh good luck hitting an Apache from a distance when he's shooting arrows at you and your sling has trouble hitting at 20 ft distances. That's hitting the TARGET, imagine hitting the head of the target.
  • Cestus- This idea of a spiked boxing glove is cool, but isn't instanlty lethal. It is possible to survive a strike from this weapon, you need to pummel your enemy to death to kill him. If you don't knock him down, you can't knock him out. Besides, it is very short ranged and you risk making your arm vulnerable.
  • Scissor- Although instantly lethal, this weapon is short on range. It wasn't as effective as the Rajput Katar because it is clumbsy as a weapon and doesn't have as much skill or adaptation.
  • Armor- The helment, shield and arm-guard can block attacks, but Gladiators have no chest protection. Infact, some Gladiators wore no armor. Yes a shield can block some attacks but not every attack.
  • Enviornment- Arena- With no hills and no cover, there is little advantage or disadvantage to the Arena except you can't run far. This helps the Gladiator who is a close combat specialist.

The Match[edit | edit source]

The Gladiator was overwelmed by the Apache's projectiles against the Gladiator's lack of armor. His helment and shield prevented the significant loss from being a landslide loss. With no USEFUL projectiles of his own and the Apache being fast enough to just retreat and fire would overwelm the Gladiator. Even if his legs weren't arrowed to the knee, the Apache's skill at close combat matched the Gladiators evenly, maybe even slightly better due to the Apache being a warrior his entire life, battle harden, surviving in the wild. Gladiator just gets a short training lession and spends his nights with slaves giving him baths. I can see a contrasting image of a Gladiator on his couch being feed grapes Roman style while the Apache crawls in the rainy night as he hunts a wolf. Apache is a true warrior, Gladiator is not so much. PS- I voted for Apache, not to sound bias. Either way, I don't want either of these guys after me.

Viking vs Samurai[edit | edit source]

Viking[edit | edit source]

'The Viking Age', when Vikings were the dominant warrior in Europe. DOMINANT. If a warrior can raid all of Europe and conquer England (William, I'll get to you later) then that shows effectiveness. I look at the weapons of the Viking and see one thing, effective overkill. Even full Knight armor, you could get hurt or killed, yeah killed, by two throwing spears. An axe to the head? Ow. There is little defense against the Viking, while the Viking has some defenses of his own.

  • Great Axe- Finally an axe that looks like an axe. It chops someone in half, slamming with enough force to knock down any armored foe. It also is larger than other axes, giving it range. SOME defenses.
  • Longsword- Although nothing special, this sword is great at cutting and stabs and is effective with a shield.
  • Shield (as a weapon)- Didn't think a fat spike would make it lethal. Shieldbashing is good for stunning yet I never saw the same offensive lethality from other shields like the Apsis or Targe.
  • Dual Throwing Spears- Throwing spears have significantly shorter range than a bow and other weapons and can be dodged due to how slow they are fired. That being said, if you get hit in the chest or head you are dead, and with two firing at you, how do you dodge- left or right? Which is the distraction? How- [Ikw] I'm dead.
  • Helment, Chainmail and Shield- The Shield is a good defense against light weapons though could break from heavier ones (it is made of wood afterall). Behind the shield, the Viking only has a torso focused chainmail and his limbs are exposed.
  • What I think of Chainmail so I never have to mention it again- Chainmail is perfect against slashes, and NOTHING else. Stabs, arrows and bullets can easily go throw it- only getting slight deceleration or resistance (this did help Vlad's test against Sun Tzu's bows, AND NOTHING ELSE). Some blunt forces can also go through the chainmail.
  • Terrain- Tundra and Coastlines- Vikings mastered naval navigation, even founding North America. Their raids were perfect suprise attacks, making it hard to prepare for them.

Samurai[edit | edit source]

Samurai- masters of 2 handed weapons and a warcry similar to someone’s reaction to getting hit in the nuts. The mentality of the Samurai is the purest warrior code of perfect (I’m trying to sound poetic). You live for fighting, knowledge and to fight to the death. Out of all the warriors of the world, Samurai should be and are immortalized by legend. Now if only they realize that a shield could help you sometimes in a fight. Samurai think shields are a coward’s weapon- well tell that to the Spartan, I dare you… and that’s how Season 1 B4B began.

  • Katanas- the famous slashing weapon. At blinding speed they can be drawn from their sheaths and slice 3 people in a split second. Cut through anything, but chainmail. So what do you do? STAB HIM. Curved swords still have a point on them, so if your enemy has chainmail, STAB HIM. Either way, I would rather have a sword and shield instead of just a sword. Call me a pussy, but if I can parry AND block then I have an advantage against someone who can just parry and shields can be a good secondary weapon. Block the katana, stab him in the face, Spartan Wins (spoiler).
  • Kanabo- This is one of my favorite clubs. It’s shape and length makes you wield it like a sword yet it is strong enough to break swords and shields. Good range for a club but it is REALLY heavy and hefty.
  • Yumi- The sniping rifle of feudal japan. I never thought a bow can EYE-shot (headshot yes, eyeshot no). Those without shields or faceguards are royally screwed. Also this is a really large bow, I like it!
  • Naginata- A spear with style. Its ability to slash and/or stab while being lighter than a Halberd allows versatility and parrying, creating an agile Naginatajutsu (yes that’s what the fighting style is called). Realistically though, I would want a spear and shield combo, just so I can block easily instead of tiring myself with parries, but Samurai don’t like shields those stuck-up idiots.

Armor- The Samurai iron armor is segmented yet just as hard as Knight armor. It allows protection while giving some speed compared to other heavy armor. The angles of the helmet and armor showed their ability to repel blows, weakening blunt force. Love the Samurai mask. Serves no real purpose and isn’t a strong defense, but it looks cool.

Match[edit | edit source]

The Samurai had superior steel armor while the Viking had a shield. Because of the lack of a shield, the Samurai had to rely on his armor to take attacks. The Viking’s heavy weapons could do damage than the Samurai weapons, and can injure even if it hit the armor, but not kill him. The Viking’s shield was breakable when hit by the Kanabo and his chainmail armor can’t stop piercing weapons. Because both warriors had questionable defenses, the fight was also determined by the weapons themselves. Because all of the Samurai’s weapons were lethal, quick and battle efficient in 1 on 1 fights is the reason why he won, but only slightly.

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