The gauntlet's been thrown, choose your weapon!
- Thread starter Nocta-Aeterna
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Actually, ignore my last post, I have a better one: The other blokes weapon, then he doesn't have one and I do!
The Eldar's Harlequin's Kiss from 40K, one touch with that and my foe lies dead with nothing more than a pin-prick visible though his internals would be ripped to shreads
I know about punching mechanics, I watched a video of chuck teaching kids how to punch properly.Aerodyamic said:
I know that weapon would throw you off balance but it could be shortened to reduce weight and to make it more effective and if you have ever watch machida fight he is hard as hell to hit so if you do both of those things you could be devastating.
Holy shit! I never knew our country had such badass legends!Coldfreeze said:
Still, I'm going for the simple Bo Staff. It looks like a simple walking stick, but with the right training you can wreck some havoc with it. Sure I love swords, but there is something inherently satisfying about beating an opponent with such a simple weapon as the Bo Staff.
Okinawan kusarigama or The Blade of the Archfiend from Ninja Gaiden 2. That game, and the weapons in that game, kicked some serious arse...
Don't wear that! You'll kill your self. According to the dredges at the Halopedia and some of the Halo books, If you ain't a spartan, you'd be dead.mysoxsmell said:
"...t is amorphous, yet amplifies force, doubling lifting capability and increasing reaction time by a factor of five. Unfortunately the system is so reactive that normal human beings cannot use the suit without injuring themselves.(Halo: The Fall of Reach Chap.13, p.115) Only humans who have carbide ceramic ossification, a skeletal augmentation, such as a SPARTAN-II, can safely wear the suit."
Also, those damn Grav Hammers are huge! That's a lot of heavy lifting. You'd get aneurysms, stroke, and cause a dissection. And for what? so you can move around a pole that liquefies tissue on contact but only works for like 5 swings, in a suit that could break every bone in your body, just to kill someone? I say stick with a gun if you want to beat these guys, they all chose swords and junk. Do them in like Dr. Jones; one shot, no loss.
Realistically?
I'll take a shield and a spiked mace.
The reason being that I know very little about swordsmanship, and "graceful" is not a word that would be used to describe me. However in goofing off I believe a shield gives a massive advantage and I'm pretty good at thumping people.
I'd still probably lose if my opponent knew anything about fighting with ancient weapons since I know very little, but the above would probably give me the best chance.
I think some people's choices are totally overlooking their real world capabilities. With no offense to anyone, but a game nerd is NOT going to lift a Katana (like Sepiroth's) that is as big as he is. Part of what makes that fantasy is that nobody could wield a weapon like that the way he does, especially if they were built like him (or inferior). I doubt most of the champions of "World's Strongest Man" competitions could use that weapon anything like in the games.
-
Also for the record if I knew anything about swordsmanship I would pick a US calvary sabre circa the late 1800s. A guy who does handle weapons like that apparently (Robert Adams, who wrote things like "Horseclans") at one point went into the pros and cons of differant swords and mentioned that one as being the best sword overall.
The bottom line is that technology increases given time, and swordsmithing and weapon designs continue to progress based on what was learned in previous generations of weapons. Longswords, Rapiers, Katanas, Kopeshes, etc... all were very good in their time periods and dominated their neck of the woods, but the last generation of real swordsmanship (when it was truely dying) learned from all of those developments. That paticular style of sword pretty much has all the advantages of previous generations of weapons including a curved edge, sharp point, and perhaps the best compromise in terms of a weight to strength ratio. They are also designed to be used both on foot, and on the ground, and are long enough where they can be used to charge on horseback (albeit they aren't lances).
I'd imagine that if someone how I was training with swords that's the same one I'd pick given the arguements I've heard in it's favor.
Incidently advances in armament are also one of the big reasons why a lot of recreationist groups can be so anal when it comes to keeping things "period". If you have a bunch of dudes fighting with weapons a time period is usually specified, if some guy with equal skill shows up with a weapon that benefitted from another hundred years of weapon development he's going to have an unfair advantage.
I'll take a shield and a spiked mace.
The reason being that I know very little about swordsmanship, and "graceful" is not a word that would be used to describe me. However in goofing off I believe a shield gives a massive advantage and I'm pretty good at thumping people.
I'd still probably lose if my opponent knew anything about fighting with ancient weapons since I know very little, but the above would probably give me the best chance.
I think some people's choices are totally overlooking their real world capabilities. With no offense to anyone, but a game nerd is NOT going to lift a Katana (like Sepiroth's) that is as big as he is. Part of what makes that fantasy is that nobody could wield a weapon like that the way he does, especially if they were built like him (or inferior). I doubt most of the champions of "World's Strongest Man" competitions could use that weapon anything like in the games.
-
Also for the record if I knew anything about swordsmanship I would pick a US calvary sabre circa the late 1800s. A guy who does handle weapons like that apparently (Robert Adams, who wrote things like "Horseclans") at one point went into the pros and cons of differant swords and mentioned that one as being the best sword overall.
The bottom line is that technology increases given time, and swordsmithing and weapon designs continue to progress based on what was learned in previous generations of weapons. Longswords, Rapiers, Katanas, Kopeshes, etc... all were very good in their time periods and dominated their neck of the woods, but the last generation of real swordsmanship (when it was truely dying) learned from all of those developments. That paticular style of sword pretty much has all the advantages of previous generations of weapons including a curved edge, sharp point, and perhaps the best compromise in terms of a weight to strength ratio. They are also designed to be used both on foot, and on the ground, and are long enough where they can be used to charge on horseback (albeit they aren't lances).
I'd imagine that if someone how I was training with swords that's the same one I'd pick given the arguements I've heard in it's favor.
Incidently advances in armament are also one of the big reasons why a lot of recreationist groups can be so anal when it comes to keeping things "period". If you have a bunch of dudes fighting with weapons a time period is usually specified, if some guy with equal skill shows up with a weapon that benefitted from another hundred years of weapon development he's going to have an unfair advantage.
Ideally, I would use a meteor hammer (a metal ball the size of a fist on a long rope or chain). Not only is it intimidating and confusing to the opponent, it is really hard to block once it gets moving. If it was on a chain, it could even be used for blocking.
However, anytime I get something spinning I end up wrapping myself up or hitting myself, so I would probably end up with just a chain or a staff.
However, anytime I get something spinning I end up wrapping myself up or hitting myself, so I would probably end up with just a chain or a staff.
well who says im not a genetically enginered super soldier?
and its a duel, only melee weapons, no guns, 1 opponent so my gravity hammer is ultimate
and its a duel, only melee weapons, no guns, 1 opponent so my gravity hammer is ultimate
Shortening the weapon could be helpful, but it's also robbing the weapon of a key, inherent feature: mass. That weapon wasn't designed like a katar, where the 12-16" of metal going into the target did the damage, it was designed to be heavy with a large sharp bit at the front of it.omega 616 said:
I'm still not seeing the connection between Mashida and how you'd fight with a roman scissors-cestus, unless you're referring to using off-angle punching techniques and a highly mobile fighting style. If that's the case, those opponents win a greater percentage of fight against large, slower, less agile opponents anyways.
Drive a boat on dry land and fall off a cliff, what else would I do?Altheus_Necron said:You would attempt to dual wield a chainscythe?BloodyThoughts said:I would choose a flailing weapon. Like this, only duel wield.
And after you had bashed your own head in, what would be your next move?
You saw what chuck did to that cow with the cestus, it would be about the same with a shortened scissor, your punches would be faster, more powerful (due to less surface area on the blade) and more deadly 'cos it can slide through flash like a hot knife through butter.Aerodyamic said:
Machida's fighting style means he takes next to no damage yet his strikes have knocked out opponents such as Rashad Evans who knocked out chuck.
Wasn't a weapon like that used in kill bill? Just a mace instead of a blade.BloodyThoughts said:Drive a boat on dry land and fall off a cliff, what else would I do?Altheus_Necron said:You would attempt to dual wield a chainscythe?BloodyThoughts said:I would choose a flailing weapon. Like this, only duel wield.
And after you had bashed your own head in, what would be your next move?