This week had been Yakuza vs Mafia.
Which I thought was a much better match up than the last ones.
And certainly more entertaining than some of them too. (cause it was on a squad level!)
Anytime you get Tommyguns on a show, it's always a good thing.
Next week is Spetznatz, vs Green Beret. (I'm guessing they are going period correct for both here? (Cold War) I don't recall seeing modern body armor on either in the preview clip)
Place your bets.
If it's a squad level, I'm leaning towards the Green Beret. If it's individual, Spetznatz all the way.
Really though, I feel there is only one clear winner of this... and that's Delta Force. :D
I think that speaks for itself :P Like who else can take on a summersaulting hatchet throw! What you have guns... Umm...
They should do Knight vs Samurai just to shut up the nerd rage.
Knight wins, samurai can't do jack against that armor. Where as the Knight... will easily shred that samurai's craptastic armor.
Heavy Infantry > Light and Medium.
See Spartans vs Persian Immortals, and there you go. (except the Samurai didn't even have shields going for them)
Knight wins, samurai can't do jack against that armor. Where as the Knight... will easily shred that samurai's craptastic armor.
Heavy Infantry > Light and Medium.
See Spartans vs Persian Immortals, and there you go. (except the Samurai didn't even have shields going for them)
Samoori are the 1337 haxxorz!11!!1!one!shifteleventeen!1! Tey haz catanaz!1! :P
Plate even more so. (Because it also protects the user from bludgeoning weapons as well as arrows)
The reason they won't do this match up is because basically what would change is you give a Viking a horse, lance, and better shield and Plate Armor. (one that's actually made to fight with.. not just be there for defense like the Viking's woodshield is)
Anyway, what's your bet piggy? Spetznatz or Green Beret?
Green Beret, 'cause I'm American and bias. :P
Or both? :D
I liked Human Weapon a lot, myself. Or the other show where the MMA guys didn't just learn local forms of combat, but challenged warriors based on the stuff they knew... but I can't recall the name now, I only watched a few.
While trying to search for the name of the last show I mentioned, I did discover that they have an online show at spike.com called "Deadliest Warrior - the Aftermath" that addresses a lot of the issues and questions that viewers send in like archetype development and tactics. Actually worth the watch!
Well Spetsnaz are good at rolling up a high body count... of hostages. Yeah Green Beret. Spetsnaz are crazy with some of the stuff they do, but Berets probably have better discipline and such.
Despite extensive campaigns in Grozni and satellite regions, and therefor more than just training (real world XP), they're badass. Still, most of their crack Spetsnaz are well beyond their old Afghani theatre; pushing retirement and then some. No major conflicts after. Perhaps some got mustered for the Georgian conflict, Summer '08. But it's not like the KGB or GRU is saying, you know? I'm sure they have their fingers in a few pies, but nothing of incredible importance.
I still think the smart money is on our Special Forces. We just have more veteran units in circulation now given the obvious (current theatres), thusly, combat experience you can take to the bank. This is why the Israelis are so dangerous. They're always fighting. Relative peace breeds sloth and laziness that no amount of training can completely erradicate.
We've been at it longer, funded better, bigger pool to draw from than the Russians I guess is the short of it. Overall, current combat ops typically means better current combat strength/prowess.
Isn't the host a GB vet? I'm sure he'll have plenty to say...
What made them lose? Pathetic in comparison technology (T-80s are no match for an M1A1 at all), worse communication and poor Logistic skills.
It really depends on the training, and what era I think that we are talking about. Grant it every American vs Soviet type of conflict the Soviet style forces pretty much lost. (Vietnam they didn't win.. the Us just wasn't allowed to win) Due to poorer training, technology, communication, logistics etc.
It'll be interesting to watch this though I think. The Spetznatz aren't exactly slouches. (unlike pretty much the entirety of the Russian Military Doctrine otherwise)
I just would never put my money on a Special Forces group who decided there best way to free hostages was to pump deadly gas into the building killing the hostages and the terrorist. 129 civies dead, and 700 wounded is hardly what I would call a successful mission. *Sarcasm* Way to go Spetsnaz! *Sarcasm*
It's Russia. They don't place the same value on human life that the West does. Remember this is the same country that would give one guy the rifle, the next man behind him the bullets and the third man was the one who was expected to actually fire the weapon.
Combat Experience isn't everything
I never said it was everything, do not imply that I did, thank you.
Simply put, 2 combatants of roughly equal standing and gear (Spetsnaz/GBs...not Iraqi units), well, odds are on the more XP'ed one almost always.
...remember when the U.S went to town on Iraq, Iraq had just fought two wars and had alot of combat experience. They also had sheer numbers.
No, they fought 1 war of attrition (w/ WMDs) from '80-'88 vs. Iran we helped fianance (both ways) and a quick and tidy invasion of Kuwait we stomped flat but stopped short in the end foolishly. Beyond that chronology, meaningful Iraqi units would be officers or retired, not on the front line.
What made them lose? Pathetic in comparison technology (T-80s are no match for an M1A1 at all), worse communication and poor Logistic skills.
We had better tech, this is true, but overall, everyone knew the outcome. Regardless. Our DOD budget lays it out simply enough IMO. Who knows...
Armor wasn't an issue, never was despite our superior tanks btw. Once we had the skies, that was it. Every sortie out of Turkey or the Gulf insured it. Main combat ops were over in 2 weeks. That's f'ing amazing...
It really depends on the training, and what era I think that we are talking about.
Yes, training is big and all that; trained well, helps you survive 'x', garner XP which is passed on in further training 'y', circle of life. There's a reason they mostly use Special Forces as "military advisors" (which has immense connotations) rather than regular combatants. Too valuable to waste. Most of them are learning Pashtu and Farsi right now and working w/ the locals (Afghans) rather than mounting large raids. Getting intel mostly, not kills.
Grant it every American vs Soviet type of conflict the Soviet style forces pretty much lost. (Vietnam they didn't win.. the Us just wasn't allowed to win) Due to poorer training, technology, communication, logistics etc.
Uh, right...
Show
See conventional land war in Western Europe, specifically Soviet Armor in the 80's. We were petrified of the prospect. Even Clancy summed it up accurately in Red Storm Rising, as did the Pentagon, NATO, and 2nd Armor. Our Navy and our Airforce was bar none, but we were not unbreakable by any means, simply more advantaged in some spheres of influence. This was not one.
Next, the Soviets were never in Vietnam, only supplying intel and Warsaw Pact tech first of all. Training was avg to good depending, tech sucked at 1st (M16 A1's) but got much better fast (A2's, Cobras, B-52's, quick medevacs, etc), communications were excellent, but logistics were conflicting, not bad. Westmoreland's strategy was attrition-based and did not work despite immense enemy kills & our officers infield begging for a different platform to engage meaningfully. They couldn't work due to political machinations in DC hamstringing the military ones over there. Sh-t rolls downhill...
Next, the Soviets were never in Vietnam, only supplying intel and Warsaw Pact tech first of all. Training was avg to good depending, tech sucked at 1st (M16 A1's) but got much better fast (A2's, Cobras, B-52's, quick medevacs, etc), communications were excellent, but logistics were conflicting, not bad. Westmoreland's strategy was attrition-based and did not work despite immense enemy kills & our officers infield begging for a different platform to engage meaningfully. They couldn't work due to political machinations in DC hamstringing the military ones over there. Sh-t rolls downhill...
Oh, yeah, I remember that a few years back. Big school raid in Chechnya, right? Not exactly a surgeon's touch for such a delicate issue...
Nope that was the Beslan school hostage situation, which we aren't quite sure of all the facts even now. We think the **** hit the fan inside the school before troops went in, explosions had begun to detonate, etc.
I am talking about the Moscow theatre hostage situation back in 2002. Chechens both times though. The 90's and early 00's had a fair chunk of terrorist acts being performed in Russia and Chechnya.
Anyway, those yakuza guys were pretty idiotic to think nunchaku could do more damage than a bat, especially since section weapons are really difficult to control and have crappy attack power. They're great for disarming and trapping, but they're useless in the way they showed it. Those ceramic grenades were pretty impressive, though.
As for the next episode, I have no clue since, unfortunately, I don't know much about the Green Berets or the Russian Spetznaz. I know of them, yes, though not much else, so I'll just side with my country and go with the Special Forces.
Combat Experience isn't everything, remember when the U.S went to town on Iraq, Iraq had just fought two wars and had alot of combat experience. They also had sheer numbers.
What made them lose? Pathetic in comparison technology (T-80s are no match for an M1A1 at all), worse communication and poor Logistic skills.
It really depends on the training, and what era I think that we are talking about. Grant it every American vs Soviet type of conflict the Soviet style forces pretty much lost. (Vietnam they didn't win.. the Us just wasn't allowed to win) Due to poorer training, technology, communication, logistics etc.
It'll be interesting to watch this though I think. The Spetznatz aren't exactly slouches. (unlike pretty much the entirety of the Russian Military Doctrine otherwise)
I agree with a lot of what you said, but don't discount experience. During my time in the sandbox I'd say that it was pretty obvious to me that the enemy had more experience fighting in that type of environment. Granted, we couldn't do a lot of things due to having our hands tied by politics and lawyers who were out to fry soldiers, but IMO we were much slower to adapt to the tactics of the enemy compared to the speed at which they adapted to our tactics; in part, I feel that our technology was as much of a weakness as it was a strength because our soldiers rely on it too much and lost the ability to adapt and think outside the box. A lot of the casualties that I saw were -IMO- caused by poor tactics that were implimented by the upper echelon command.
During one of my deployments, my platoon leader could barely read a map because he was so reliant on GPS and the various gadgets that he carried around; luckily I was the RTO at the time, so I knew enough about what was going on with the missions at the time via monitoring communications to be able to set him straight when need be.
Getting back on topic...
A samurai could potentially defeat a knight because the heavy armor of the knight carries with it some disadvantages. IMO fatigue would set in for the knight before it would for the samurai as a result of having heavier equipment which takes more effort to use. I can relate this to some of my own experience because it was a lot more tiring for me to do some of the missions I did if I was wearing full body armor and carrying something like a 240b versus just wearing a LBV and carrying an M-16.
Also, much like modern day body armor, even the best plate armor had weak points. The joints of plate armor often weren't as strong as the rest of the suit. Even if they were, there are still open areas where two portions of the armor come together. I do agree that the weapons of the samurai may have a very hard time penetrating knight armor; however, I think that if a samurai were to employ a tactic designed to drag the fight out until the knight were fatigued that the samurai could use precision strikes and speed to overcome the defenses of the knight. It should also be noted the samurai didn't only use swords; for a portion of time, the primary weapon of the samurai was the bow and not the sword.
I think perhaps the knight would win, but I don't feel it would be as lopsided as others think it would be. The battle between the Spartans and the Immortals is a very good example to show what would happen, but the Immortals had their main advantage -mobility- negated by the terrain of the battlefield. I'm not taking anything away from the Spartans; at that period of time they were arguably the most skilled warriors in the world, but I feel that a lot of details are left out when the outcome of the battle is discussed.
As for the show... I'd like to see a Native American Tribe battle a Zulu Tribe.
They should do Knight vs Samurai just to shut up the nerd rage.
Seconded. Along with Viking vs Gladiator.
They should do Knight vs Samurai just to shut up the nerd rage.
Article on that topic that was in an issue of Dragon a while ago.
SAS could beat either of them though
Army are just there for boots on the ground, Attack copters, and Armor. We also have a habit of using Reserve troops before non Reserve troops... (which really they aren't as well trained by far as Regulars)
And our Special forces are just pure awesome.
Don't know much about green berets in particular, but I know American soldiers tend to be less well trained than they're counterparts in some parts of the world, so I fell inclined to go with the Russians, who I've heard are in much better state than many other parts of Russia's military.
SAS could beat either of them though
What? Who're trained better?
When we need extremely well trained soldiers we turn to the Marines is why. :P
We would were Marines actually "soldiers". Similar capacity, totally wrong namesake.
Why:
Show
They are Dept. of the Navy and a corp of that section. A good many resent that comparison, others could care less. And being tough as nails and very innovative may/may not qualify as "extremely well trained". Their basic and overall standards are simply more arduous is my understanding. This doesn't necessarilly equate to better training so much as perhaps having more mettle & adaptability given extent of their responsibilities.
Furthermore, I would venture, if we need extremely well trained combatants, we have the lion's share composed of Spec.Forces, Rangers, SEALs, Delta Force, you name it. Our Defense budget, genepool, and resources afford us these luxuries in offense & defense few can afford/muster.
Furthermore, I would venture, if we need extremely well trained combatants, we have the lion's share composed of Spec.Forces, Rangers, SEALs, Delta Force, you name it. Our Defense budget, genepool, and resources afford us these luxuries in offense & defense few can afford/muster.
Probably us given immense budget affording them a wider host of varying situations to drill in, learn from. Guessing more resources allows more diversity of strategy and preparedness, just a hunch though.
That's the way I see it. There are a couple of militaries out there that I may have bought as better trained (Korean Rock Marines, IDF), but I'm still not sure about that.
What? Who're trained better?
I know most parts of the British military train for longer than their American equivilents. I believe the same is also true of Canada, Austalia, South Korea and several parts of Europe, but I'm not 100% sure of that.
with the Aussies, man...I know those guys, and they are just sick. 'Course, personal opinion isn't the same as fact, but on average I'd say that a JTF-2 soldier takes some of the hardest and most brutal training I've currently seen and heard of, not counting Russian and some of the Eastern counties.
Canada is often considered a joke these days when it comes to the military (and to an extent, it is), but the training of our Special Forces equivalent, JTF-2, is extremely punishing and restrictive, and not only that, but all those who do get accepted, and out of ten, only one will, you must complete the training program once every six months. Failure to do so and they kick you out. The phrase "only the best of the best of the best" applies directly to these guys. I met one once on a trip to Ottawa, and he was one scary SOB. Nothing overt mind you, he was cheery enough, but I always had the sense that this guy could kill me if I even blinked the wrong way. I've met a few American SpecFor guys through my cousin who's in the army, and they came pretty close to the same scare factor.
'Course, personal opinion isn't the same as fact, but on average I'd say that a JTF-2 soldier takes some of the hardest and most brutal training I've currently seen and heard of, not counting Russian and some of the Eastern counties.
Yikes. Two things, I'd say.
1. The equivalent of basic training every six months? That sounds like enough stress to get an already trained warrior to become a psycho who might kill you if you blink wrong... oh wait! *facepalm*
2. basic training every six months? I hope they get paid a lot.
All jokes aside, sounds like an intense program that brings out some serious soldiers.
Also, I can't remember the exact distance, but so far a Canadian JTF-2 bloke carries the honour of farthest kill with a snipe in the world. These guys are the very definition of "badass". Too bad most people think Canada is a joke.
The same goes with our regular troops actually. There has been some various military competitions and war games, and regular Canadian troops scored about even with French Foreign Legion, and American Marines.
Cracked.com: Simo Hayha
Simo Hayha had a fairly boring life in Finland. He served his one mandatory year in the military, and then became a farmer. But when the Soviet Union invaded his homeland in 1939, he decided he wanted to help his country.
Since the majority of fighting took place in the forest, he figured the best way to stop the invasion was to grab his trusty rifle, a couple of cans of food and hide in a tree all day shooting Russians. In six feet of snow. And 20-40 degrees below zero.
Of course when the Russians heard that dozens of their men were going down and that it was all one dude with a rifle, they got ... scared. He became known as "The White Death" because of his white camouflage outfit, and they actually mounted whole missions just to kill that one guy.
They started by sending out a task force to find Hayha and take him out. He killed them all.
Then they tried getting together a team of counter-snipers (which are basically snipers that kill snipers) and sent them in to eliminate Hayha. He killed all of them, too.
Over the course of 100 days, Hayha killed 542 people with his rifle. He took out another 150 or so with his SMG, sending his credited kill-count up to 705.
Since everyone they had was either too dead or too scared to go anywhere near him, the Russians just carpet-bombed everywhere they thought he might be. Supposedly, they had the location right, and he actually got hit by a cloud of shrapnel that tore his coat up, but didn't actually hurt him, because he's the ... White Death, damn it.
Finally on March 6th, 1940, some lucky guy shot Hayha in the head with an exploding bullet. When some other soldiers found him and brought him back to base, he "had half his head missing." The White Death had finally been stopped...
...for about a week. In spite of having come down with a nasty case of shot-in-the-face syndrome, he was still very much alive, and regained consciousness on March 13, the very day the war ended.
Since the majority of fighting took place in the forest, he figured the best way to stop the invasion was to grab his trusty rifle, a couple of cans of food and hide in a tree all day shooting Russians. In six feet of snow. And 20-40 degrees below zero.
Of course when the Russians heard that dozens of their men were going down and that it was all one dude with a rifle, they got ... scared. He became known as "The White Death" because of his white camouflage outfit, and they actually mounted whole missions just to kill that one guy.
They started by sending out a task force to find Hayha and take him out. He killed them all.
Then they tried getting together a team of counter-snipers (which are basically snipers that kill snipers) and sent them in to eliminate Hayha. He killed all of them, too.
Over the course of 100 days, Hayha killed 542 people with his rifle. He took out another 150 or so with his SMG, sending his credited kill-count up to 705.
Since everyone they had was either too dead or too scared to go anywhere near him, the Russians just carpet-bombed everywhere they thought he might be. Supposedly, they had the location right, and he actually got hit by a cloud of shrapnel that tore his coat up, but didn't actually hurt him, because he's the ... White Death, damn it.
Finally on March 6th, 1940, some lucky guy shot Hayha in the head with an exploding bullet. When some other soldiers found him and brought him back to base, he "had half his head missing." The White Death had finally been stopped...
...for about a week. In spite of having come down with a nasty case of shot-in-the-face syndrome, he was still very much alive, and regained consciousness on March 13, the very day the war ended.
maybe the show should pit specific historical figures against each other!
I like that idea quite a bit. The only change I would prefer is to see it done with generals in the large scale. I'd love to see Hannibal against Sun Tzu, or Custer against Napoleon, or Spartacus against Gideon (the biblical general).
I pulled up the info from here, but don't snicker! Unlike a lot of other foreign countries, Canada is very open about the nature of JTF-2, just not all the ways and means, if you know what I'm saying. This information is actually very accurate. JTF-2 is pretty intense, comparable to Delta Force/Rangers/SEALS, SAS and the ol' Spetznaz.
Also, I can't remember the exact distance, but so far a Canadian JTF-2 bloke carries the honour of farthest kill with a snipe in the world. These guys are the very definition of "badass". Too bad most people think Canada is a joke.
IIRC, the official record for longest sniper shot is somewhere around 2500 meters. I remember learning about it when I went to sniper school. There are a few 'rumors' of longer shots, but they can't be officially reported due to being classified.
I like that idea quite a bit. The only change I would prefer is to see it done with generals in the large scale. I'd love to see Hannibal against Sun Tzu, or Custer against Napoleon, or Spartacus against Gideon (the biblical general).
That would be a pretty cool idea. I'd like to see a show which featured famous generals squaring off, but I'm not sure how they'd determine the winner. I remember that I used to subscribe to a magazine (can't remember the name) which did something similar. They presented you with a historical scenario in which the general at the time lost or failed, and they asked you to write in and describe what you would have done in the same situation had you been in charge. They would then respond and tell you what they thought your choices would lead to based on whatever criteria they used to judge.
Borg vs Ori vs Yuuzhan Vong
Let the fanboyism begin!:D