I guess: Because they are phony.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
One of them is the nephew of the guy that practically founded the IRA, but they're "phony".
Uh huh.
I'm Charlie Owens, good night and good luck. PSNID: CEOIII 1117
Regarding the statement under Armor Is Useless that they never tested Alexander the Great's armor other than the helmet-
You have to remember that each episode is several days of testing edited down to 42 minutes (probably more like 25-30 minutes when you take out the intros, stock footage, discussions, posing with weapons, etc.). The editors are naturally going to pick the most definitive/coolest moments, and like in all shows a lot of stuff gets left out. During the making of the SWAT vs. GSG 9 episode, their kevlar armor was definitely tested (there's a video on Spike.com of one of the SWAT guys shooting a kevlar vest with a shotgun), but in the actual episode they never even mentioned armor.
In this particular episode, there's a quick shot of a ballistics gel torso wearing Alex's breastplate being shot with an arrow (you can see it at around 0:27 in the Aftermath video), so they clearly at least tested the ability of Attila to shoot around his armor. Also, IIRC at one point during the reenactment, an arrow hits Alex in the chest but it just breaks against his breastplate without any effect. That leads me to believe that they did take armor into account for all weapons in the simulation, even if they didn't show all the tests.
Besides, there are lots of times where they don't show a weapon being tested against armor. In Viking vs. Samurai, they never show the naginata, longsword, or spear being tested against the opponent's armor. Should we interpret that to mean that they didn't take armor into account at all for those weapons, even when they clearly did for others? How about in Ninja vs. Spartan, where they never show the ninjato being tested against the spartan's armor/shield?
EDIT: In the Aftermath for Green Beret vs. Spetsnaz, Max says, "armor instantly doubles the number of tests that we have to do" (emphasis added). To me, this implies that their general policy is to do armor tests for all the weapons, if its applicable for that matchup.
While we're on this subject, is there any real evidence that Wallace's armor was the primary reason he won? His chainmail wasn't very useful at all against the Zulu spear. Based on what we saw on the show, I'd argue that the claymore was a much greater factor.
Edited by INH Hide / Show Replies
Wallace won because he got one good weapon against one useless weapon for Shaka. The kill difference before the Special Weapons category is calculated is 6. Thank the show (and the producer who also happened to be the Scottish expert) for giving Wallace a better weapon than the spit of poison when they were deciding weapon match ups.
PaperMaster
- Badass Spaniard: Hernán Cortés, one of the Conquistadors' most remembered commanders, is one of the warriors appearing in season 3, being pitted against Ivan the Terrible.
Badass Spaniard has been renamed to Dashing Hispanic. The trope requires some necessary characteristics, like being a rogue Anti-Hero of wit and charm, kind of like Zorro. There is not enough context to tell if it fits here.
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
- Is it just me? But I think I heard some of Metal Gear Solid 3 theme in Zombie vs. Vampire episode. It's on the scene that narrator explain about Vampire and Zombie.
I don't mean to provoke anyone, honestly, but after watching Charlie Brooker recently, I was wondering if there isn't an aspect on Unfortunate Implications in the fact that due to the format of the show, where two sides are presented fighting each other, there's a natural human tendency towards picking sides... which might lead you to cheer on Nazis, to put it quite bluntly. Yay or nay?
Hide / Show Replies
I don't really think that hoping one terrorist faction win against another terrorist faction in an entirely-fictional showdown is really unfortunate an implication at all.
Just because it's fictional doesn't take it away from Unfortunate Implications in anyway. As per the Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment, I'll await further reasons for why this isn't applicable before making any changes.
And in an unrelated note, I fail to see how Nazis or Vietcongs could possibly be classified as terrorists.
Edited by Vert
Sure it does. Just because you're hoping that they don't die as much in a fictional fight doesn't mean that you're suddenly supportive of everything that they do or did in real life. Just like cheering for the Taliban doesn't suddenly make you a treason to America or cheering for the I.R.A. doesn't suddenly make you hate the UK.
In "White and White Morality" it's mentioned people complained that it wasn't "good guy vs. good guy" like someone stated in the Aftermath. Why wouldn't it be?
Hide / Show Replies
There's currently a lot of drama going on about Israel currently sending the Commandos against people who aren't religious, rather than people who actually attack.
I don't know much about the situation nor can claim to know much, so I'm afraid that's all I can offer.
Some troll that insists on saying there are leaders in the Nazi Waffen-SS vs. Viet Cong simulation. Apparently interrogating someone and being interrogated makes you a leader. Can we ban him yet? Or...something?
He was doing the same thing with Yakuza vs Mafia and KGB vs CIA. I've tried talking to him several times, but he just remains silent.
Grrrrr.
Edited by TerminusEst13
The only team that was shown to have some sort of leader (I think) was SWAT and the GSG 9 in their episode. Oh and Al Capone vs. Jesse James, obviously. And probably in the other special forces episodes. This whole thing is stupid anyway and the only reason I keep editing it back to the way it was is because he's so insistent on it being his version.
IMDB and wikipedia, plus a credits screen capture, have the name Drew Skye as the narrator. (although it sure does sound like Wehnam, or however its spelled.) I'm guessing we'll want "Hey! It's that voice" changed, though am making sure in here first.
Hide / Show Replies
I went ahead and edited this trope, some no one has commented on it.
Edited by Pickly
http://twitter.com/geoffdesmoulin/statuses/13284431900
- Seems like Drew Sky is a psuedonym.
What do other people think about a seperate Dan Browned (or Did not do the research) article for this show? There are definitely a lot of issues with it, but I could also see people including some opinions that are stretches (So it would have to be edited carefully to make sure everything was more certain)
Hide / Show Replies
I think it'd be useful in providing a neutral point of view, balancing the hefty praise (I like the show! :D) with equally-hefty criticism. Right now, however, the current size of the list is pretty small, and I think some of the more minor niggles can be put in It Just Bugs Me.
If we get a pretty huge list of more egregious stuff, then I think this would definitely be a good idea—but right now, I'm not sure it's needed with the list's current size.
Tell Me A Lie...
Season #2 officiallly
SWAT vs. GSG-9
Attila the Hun vs. Alexander the Great
Aztec Jaguar vs. Zande Warrior
Jesse James Gang vs. Al Capone Gang
Persian Immortal vs. Celt
Roman Centurion vs. India's Rajput Warrior
Somali Pirate vs. Medellin Cartel
Nazi SS vs. Viet Cong
KGB vs. CIA
Vlad the Impaler vs. Sun Tzu
Ming Warrior vs. Musketeer
Comanche vs. Mongol
Navy Seal vs. Israeli Commando
Tell Me A Lie... And Say That You Won't Go...
re Your Terrorists Are Our Freedom Fighters: Why, exactly, are the quotes around "experts" necessary?
I'm Charlie Owens, good night and good luck. PSNID: CEOIII 1117 Hide / Show Replies