Comments for 7milesdown http://www.7milesdown.com Making Magic Happen on a Little Island Paradise Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:02:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Deadliest Warrior – Pirate vs. Knight Controversy by Mysterious Stranger http://www.7milesdown.com/2009/05/04/deadliest-warrior-pirate-vs-knight-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-97016 Mysterious Stranger Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:02:14 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=3554#comment-97016 Knight should have won. The Knight had plate armor, chain mail, and a shield which should've gave him added protection from the blunderbuss. Furthermore, the blunderbuss was shown to be unreliable during its testing, yet the show conspicuously neglected that during the fight. Lastly, in the "Spartan vs Ninja" episode aftermath, the hosts said the Spartans were trained to resist minor pain, the Knight was trained that way too, yet they don't mention it at all. I think the show was biased for the Pirate due to all the hype and popularity of the "Pirates of the Caribbean" films. I am betting that the hype and popularity of the "300" film was why the Spartan won in the "Spartan vs Ninja" episode. I would not be surprised if the hosts would later state that, despite having bronze armor, the Spartan could beat the Knight and/or the Pirate. "Thy beheading of pirates shalt continue, until thy rematch doth air" -Knight. Deadliest Warrior has been cancelled though, thank the maker. . Knight should have won. The Knight had plate armor, chain mail, and a shield which should’ve gave him added protection from the blunderbuss. Furthermore, the blunderbuss was shown to be unreliable during its testing, yet the show conspicuously neglected that during the fight. Lastly, in the “Spartan vs Ninja” episode aftermath, the hosts said the Spartans were trained to resist minor pain, the Knight was trained that way too, yet they don’t mention it at all.

I think the show was biased for the Pirate due to all the hype and popularity of the “Pirates of the Caribbean” films.

I am betting that the hype and popularity of the “300″ film was why the Spartan won in the “Spartan vs Ninja” episode.

I would not be surprised if the hosts would later state that, despite having bronze armor, the Spartan could beat the Knight and/or the Pirate.

“Thy beheading of pirates shalt continue, until thy rematch doth air”
-Knight.

Deadliest Warrior has been cancelled though, thank the maker.

.

]]> Comment on Deadliest Warrior – Pirate vs. Knight Controversy by Runic http://www.7milesdown.com/2009/05/04/deadliest-warrior-pirate-vs-knight-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-96979 Runic Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:54:27 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=3554#comment-96979 I think the Knight definately should have won. They gave the edge to the blunderbuss over the halberd which was a huge mistake. Sure the blunderbuss can penetrate the armor at close enough range, but 1) It can misfire 2) You get only one shot. I'M PRETTY SURE THE HALBERD DOESN'T RUN OUT OF AMMO. That means you can kill lots of the little unarmored fleshies with it, not just 1. Oh, and if you get close enough to penetrate their armor with the blunderbuss even if it doesn't misfire, you're gonna have a 6 foot long axe (don't forget arm length and a good 1 or 2 steps adding to it's range giving it a good 9-10 feet lethal range.) swinging at your unarmored self. The test results only came out the way they did because the edge was wrongly given to the blunderbuss. I mean most of the pirates kills came from the blunderbuss. I have a hard time believing pirates carried more then one preloaded blunderbuss on their persons at all times. The fact the the powder runs out if held improperly, leading to a misfire, means you can't even carry more than one preloaded at a time. Even taking the time to throw a grenado, which accounted for almost half the rest of the kills, (and was only lethal at extreme close proximity from the concussion not the shrapnel of the blast) you may spill some of that powder. At the least this would lead to less propulsion making it probably ineffective against the armor. The knights also had shield tactics for defending against ranged weapons. I agree the shield would have added enough of an extra layer to nullify the blunderbuss even under the best of conditions. Oh and lets not forget the chain mail and 8-16oz leather armor underneath that plate. Chainmaille weave is unique in that when something hits it hard enough the surrounding rings are pulled towards the object trapping it. I've seen tests of firearms vs. chainmail without plate and vs. something like musket shot it was extremely effective every time. The chains closed in around the projectile and trapped the shot. Only modern bullets not shots were effective. It took extremely sharp weapons at high speeds to penetrate chainmaille. I'm not talking about butted chains either. A knights chainmaille was riveted shut on every single ring meaning the metal itself had to be CUT not forced open in order to penetrate the armor. Rings make a nice little thing called an arch, which some may know as the strongest structure known to man because of the way it distributes force. It's why bridges are made the way they are. Another intresting fact about historically accurate plate is that it WASN'T flat in the front. It actually came slanted from the sides towards the middle in the front. Hmmm, why would they want slanted metal armor? Answer: it deflects most attacks rather than absorbing the impact. This helped keep the knight on his feet. I mean a glancing blow has almost no force compared to a broadside blow. If the blunderbuss barely penetrated their flat armor in thest at close range I can only speculate how ineffective it would be against actual plate hauberks which would have deflected the shots. I think the Knight definately should have won. They gave the edge to the blunderbuss over the halberd which was a huge mistake. Sure the blunderbuss can penetrate the armor at close enough range, but 1) It can misfire 2) You get only one shot. I’M PRETTY SURE THE HALBERD DOESN’T RUN OUT OF AMMO. That means you can kill lots of the little unarmored fleshies with it, not just 1. Oh, and if you get close enough to penetrate their armor with the blunderbuss even if it doesn’t misfire, you’re gonna have a 6 foot long axe (don’t forget arm length and a good 1 or 2 steps adding to it’s range giving it a good 9-10 feet lethal range.) swinging at your unarmored self. The test results only came out the way they did because the edge was wrongly given to the blunderbuss. I mean most of the pirates kills came from the blunderbuss. I have a hard time believing pirates carried more then one preloaded blunderbuss on their persons at all times. The fact the the powder runs out if held improperly, leading to a misfire, means you can’t even carry more than one preloaded at a time. Even taking the time to throw a grenado, which accounted for almost half the rest of the kills, (and was only lethal at extreme close proximity from the concussion not the shrapnel of the blast) you may spill some of that powder. At the least this would lead to less propulsion making it probably ineffective against the armor. The knights also had shield tactics for defending against ranged weapons. I agree the shield would have added enough of an extra layer to nullify the blunderbuss even under the best of conditions. Oh and lets not forget the chain mail and 8-16oz leather armor underneath that plate. Chainmaille weave is unique in that when something hits it hard enough the surrounding rings are pulled towards the object trapping it. I’ve seen tests of firearms vs. chainmail without plate and vs. something like musket shot it was extremely effective every time. The chains closed in around the projectile and trapped the shot. Only modern bullets not shots were effective. It took extremely sharp weapons at high speeds to penetrate chainmaille. I’m not talking about butted chains either. A knights chainmaille was riveted shut on every single ring meaning the metal itself had to be CUT not forced open in order to penetrate the armor. Rings make a nice little thing called an arch, which some may know as the strongest structure known to man because of the way it distributes force. It’s why bridges are made the way they are. Another intresting fact about historically accurate plate is that it WASN’T flat in the front. It actually came slanted from the sides towards the middle in the front. Hmmm, why would they want slanted metal armor? Answer: it deflects most attacks rather than absorbing the impact. This helped keep the knight on his feet. I mean a glancing blow has almost no force compared to a broadside blow. If the blunderbuss barely penetrated their flat armor in thest at close range I can only speculate how ineffective it would be against actual plate hauberks which would have deflected the shots.

]]> Comment on Deadliest Warrior – Pirate vs. Knight Controversy by TrueCelt http://www.7milesdown.com/2009/05/04/deadliest-warrior-pirate-vs-knight-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-96977 TrueCelt Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:11:12 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=3554#comment-96977 Sorry but you're wrong. The armour of medieval knights was exactly as portrayed in the show (you should get a clue from the fact the guy was wearing a replica, why would they make it lighter if it's supposed to be an accurate representation?). It's a myth that knight's armour was heavy, in actual fact today's soldiers carry more than a knight's armour weighed, and the armour is distributed across the body, making it easier to carry. You are right that they are a cavalry force. But let me ask you, doesn't that raise a point? Horses charge far too fast to get an accurate shot away with such an unreliable and inaccurate weapon as a blunderbuss. And the horse would take the hit, not the knight. The fight should have been a lot closer, they either fudged it or they manipulated it so the pirate could win Sorry but you’re wrong. The armour of medieval knights was exactly as portrayed in the show (you should get a clue from the fact the guy was wearing a replica, why would they make it lighter if it’s supposed to be an accurate representation?). It’s a myth that knight’s armour was heavy, in actual fact today’s soldiers carry more than a knight’s armour weighed, and the armour is distributed across the body, making it easier to carry.

You are right that they are a cavalry force. But let me ask you, doesn’t that raise a point? Horses charge far too fast to get an accurate shot away with such an unreliable and inaccurate weapon as a blunderbuss. And the horse would take the hit, not the knight. The fight should have been a lot closer, they either fudged it or they manipulated it so the pirate could win

]]> Comment on Deadliest Warrior – Pirate vs. Knight Controversy by TrueCelt http://www.7milesdown.com/2009/05/04/deadliest-warrior-pirate-vs-knight-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-96976 TrueCelt Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:03:04 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=3554#comment-96976 The episode was pretty annoying and certainly in the final fight the knight did hit the pirate a couple times with the morningstar. Even a glancing hit with that monstrosity would be enough to take a chunk of flesh right off the bone, resulting in massive blood loss and immediate shock, I dont see why they would include such a massive mistake in their video. Twice. : / Beyond that inconsistency, look at the numbers they put up at the end. This is where the show loses its own credibility, and why they only show the numbers briefly, then do the convincing with the "experts" comments at the end. It's all a smokescreen. During the testing, the flintlock did NOTHING to the knight. Yet it got a massive 41 kills in the sim!? The cutlass and boarding axe? Again they did nothing, cutlass vs shield and broadsword is completely outmatched, and the boarding axe couldn't even get through to the flesh, and those weapons got a combined 38 kills. The flintlock, cutlass and boarding axe picked up more kills than the morningstar, EVEN THOUGH the morningstar barely has to make contact to open the pirate's skull!!! It makes zero sense that 3 useless weapons (by their own definition in the show) can get more kills than a skull crushing weapon. Then look at the blunderbuss. Yes, a very good weapon, can pierce the armour and cause a wound. But, it misfires, and you only get 1 shot to kill. Now let's look at this situation more closely. In 1000 fights, the blunderbuss got 350 confirmed kills. Take into account the misfire rate (very high), coupled with human accuracy when dealing with a very close range weapon against a charging foe. Consider the speed of the horse or the charge of the man, and finally remember the knight has a shield. The pirate would do very well to fire off a shot without it misfiring, or running out of time to fire, or firing and missing his target. No such thing as a one-hit kill either, people have survived shotgun slugs, 7.62 rounds, 5.56 with tumble, some targets just dont go down. Out of one thousand zealous, elite and battle-hardened veteran knights, even without armour or a shield, I guarantee 350 wouldn't be killed with a single shot from a blunderbuss, it's just not a realistic number. I think it was deliberate that they left the chainmail off the body of the manequin, and equally I think leaving the shield out of testing was all intended to favour the pirate over the knight. Fact remains every one of the knight's weapons kill the pirate. Every single one. Pirate has no armour, and only a single weapon that's effective, and even then it misfires and is woefully inaccurate, blunderbuss may as well be considered a close combat weapon, it's range is terrible because its fire spreads too much. And I'll make one last point. Knights aren't renegades. They travel as part of armies. A more realistic test would have taken maybe a dozen pirates and a dozen knights. My prediction is this: On horseback the knights charge with lances, the horses charge too fast to allow a pirate to get an accurate shot off, and the pirates lose, badly, maybe a single knight loses his mount but the pirates get smashed into the dirt. Take the horses away, the knights are on foot. Remember their armour weighs less than modern soldiers carry today, and the weight is distributed across their entire body. They can run. They charge, as a group, lose a couple to blunderbuss fire, then bring any of their weapons to bear (pick any one, doesn't matter) and that evening their squires will be cleaning pirate guts off their armour. It's a no contest. Only chance the pirates would have is to attack a crusade vessel, take on unarmoured knights who are unprepared, and they would most likely come out on top. But that would be the worst possible idea, because then all of Christian Europe would be order by the pope to seek out and destroy the heretics that attacked a crusade ship. There really is no way pirates can beat knights The episode was pretty annoying and certainly in the final fight the knight did hit the pirate a couple times with the morningstar. Even a glancing hit with that monstrosity would be enough to take a chunk of flesh right off the bone, resulting in massive blood loss and immediate shock, I dont see why they would include such a massive mistake in their video. Twice. : /

Beyond that inconsistency, look at the numbers they put up at the end. This is where the show loses its own credibility, and why they only show the numbers briefly, then do the convincing with the “experts” comments at the end. It’s all a smokescreen. During the testing, the flintlock did NOTHING to the knight. Yet it got a massive 41 kills in the sim!? The cutlass and boarding axe? Again they did nothing, cutlass vs shield and broadsword is completely outmatched, and the boarding axe couldn’t even get through to the flesh, and those weapons got a combined 38 kills. The flintlock, cutlass and boarding axe picked up more kills than the morningstar, EVEN THOUGH the morningstar barely has to make contact to open the pirate’s skull!!! It makes zero sense that 3 useless weapons (by their own definition in the show) can get more kills than a skull crushing weapon.

Then look at the blunderbuss. Yes, a very good weapon, can pierce the armour and cause a wound. But, it misfires, and you only get 1 shot to kill. Now let’s look at this situation more closely. In 1000 fights, the blunderbuss got 350 confirmed kills. Take into account the misfire rate (very high), coupled with human accuracy when dealing with a very close range weapon against a charging foe. Consider the speed of the horse or the charge of the man, and finally remember the knight has a shield. The pirate would do very well to fire off a shot without it misfiring, or running out of time to fire, or firing and missing his target. No such thing as a one-hit kill either, people have survived shotgun slugs, 7.62 rounds, 5.56 with tumble, some targets just dont go down. Out of one thousand zealous, elite and battle-hardened veteran knights, even without armour or a shield, I guarantee 350 wouldn’t be killed with a single shot from a blunderbuss, it’s just not a realistic number.

I think it was deliberate that they left the chainmail off the body of the manequin, and equally I think leaving the shield out of testing was all intended to favour the pirate over the knight. Fact remains every one of the knight’s weapons kill the pirate. Every single one. Pirate has no armour, and only a single weapon that’s effective, and even then it misfires and is woefully inaccurate, blunderbuss may as well be considered a close combat weapon, it’s range is terrible because its fire spreads too much.

And I’ll make one last point. Knights aren’t renegades. They travel as part of armies. A more realistic test would have taken maybe a dozen pirates and a dozen knights. My prediction is this: On horseback the knights charge with lances, the horses charge too fast to allow a pirate to get an accurate shot off, and the pirates lose, badly, maybe a single knight loses his mount but the pirates get smashed into the dirt.

Take the horses away, the knights are on foot. Remember their armour weighs less than modern soldiers carry today, and the weight is distributed across their entire body. They can run. They charge, as a group, lose a couple to blunderbuss fire, then bring any of their weapons to bear (pick any one, doesn’t matter) and that evening their squires will be cleaning pirate guts off their armour. It’s a no contest.

Only chance the pirates would have is to attack a crusade vessel, take on unarmoured knights who are unprepared, and they would most likely come out on top. But that would be the worst possible idea, because then all of Christian Europe would be order by the pope to seek out and destroy the heretics that attacked a crusade ship. There really is no way pirates can beat knights

]]> Comment on Facebook Mafia Wars Clans and War Tactics by Brenda Fluitt http://www.7milesdown.com/2010/03/28/facebook-mafia-wars-clans-and-war-tactics/comment-page-1/#comment-96970 Brenda Fluitt Sat, 14 Jan 2012 14:07:40 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=5093#comment-96970 Is there a place to find a list of Clans with their SS Is there a place to find a list of Clans with their SS

]]> Comment on The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (Trailer) by trench http://www.7milesdown.com/2011/12/21/the-hobbit-an-unexpected-journey-announcement-trailer/comment-page-1/#comment-96929 trench Fri, 30 Dec 2011 04:06:01 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=5386#comment-96929 yeah, too bad its not going to be released until Dec. 2012 yeah, too bad its not going to be released until Dec. 2012

]]> Comment on Deadliest Warrior – Pirate vs. Knight Controversy by ??? http://www.7milesdown.com/2009/05/04/deadliest-warrior-pirate-vs-knight-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-96928 ??? Fri, 30 Dec 2011 02:59:37 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=3554#comment-96928 I declare that the knight fight a warrior without a gun and see where it goes from there. I declare that the knight fight a warrior without a gun and see where it goes from there.

]]> Comment on Deadliest Warrior – Pirate vs. Knight Controversy by ??? http://www.7milesdown.com/2009/05/04/deadliest-warrior-pirate-vs-knight-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-96927 ??? Fri, 30 Dec 2011 02:58:45 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=3554#comment-96927 Thats Bull @#!* Thats Bull @#!*

]]> Comment on Deadliest Warrior – Pirate vs. Knight Controversy by ??? http://www.7milesdown.com/2009/05/04/deadliest-warrior-pirate-vs-knight-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-96926 ??? Fri, 30 Dec 2011 02:57:58 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=3554#comment-96926 Agree. They probably wanted the Spartan to win. The knight is the more advanced Spartan in terms of weapons, armor, technology, etc. Agree. They probably wanted the Spartan to win. The knight is the more advanced Spartan in terms of weapons, armor, technology, etc.

]]> Comment on Deadliest Warrior – Pirate vs. Knight Controversy by ??? http://www.7milesdown.com/2009/05/04/deadliest-warrior-pirate-vs-knight-controversy/comment-page-1/#comment-96925 ??? Fri, 30 Dec 2011 02:56:44 +0000 http://www.7milesdown.com/?p=3554#comment-96925 Alright let's review, Pirates weapons Flintlock:No effect Granado: No effect Cutlass:A cheap sword that would do nothing on plate/chainmail Blunderbuss: somewhat effective Knights weapons: Crossbow=pirate shish kabob Halbeird= Pirate porkchops Morning Star: Pound those pirates to bone meal Broadsword: Its craftmanship, beauty, destructive power rivals the katana Final conclusion= Knight wins Alright let’s review,

Pirates weapons

Flintlock:No effect
Granado: No effect
Cutlass:A cheap sword that would do nothing on plate/chainmail
Blunderbuss: somewhat effective

Knights weapons:
Crossbow=pirate shish kabob
Halbeird= Pirate porkchops
Morning Star: Pound those pirates to bone meal
Broadsword: Its craftmanship, beauty, destructive power rivals the katana

Final conclusion= Knight wins

]]>