View Full Version: terrsitosts vs nijas.

Haven Of Wiidom > Members' Zones > terrsitosts vs nijas.


Title: terrsitosts vs nijas.
Description: a what if


ND4 - June 28, 2008 08:11 PM (GMT)
the us amry had enigh of the war and decdid to call in the nijas to take out the terrsiot.okay it is 12 nijas vs 100 terrrsiots .both sides have all thiere gears.


hamboy - June 28, 2008 08:28 PM (GMT)
Guns>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ninjas

Phalanx - June 29, 2008 02:45 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (hamboy @ Jun 28 2008, 08:28 PM)
Guns>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ninjas

that's the thing with modern combatants these days, it's all guns, guns, guns and they're only stronger than the ninja's when they have guns in their hands. Take those away, then the ninjas would most likely win in a stomp.

I know guns are a much faster and relatively convenient weapon, but sometimes it's just another cheap way to kill your opponents without using pure skill and art (with the exception of aiming of course or the stuff Dante does with them)

Oh and then there's the Inverse Ninja Strength Law, the less ninjas there are, the stronger they are (though in other cases, I'd believe it's BS).

hamboy - June 29, 2008 09:43 AM (GMT)
Who cares if you don't need skill? They have guns, and they win, end of story.

Wingman - June 29, 2008 06:42 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (hamboy @ Jun 29 2008, 05:43 AM)
Who cares if you don't need skill? They have guns, and they win, end of story.

High-five.

Phalanx, listen. No one uses swords anymore. Everyone has guns. You can't take their guns away, because you can't get close enough to do it. You'll get blasted apart. The Brits did it in Africa, we did it against freakin' Banzai charges on Saipan, and the Brits also did it against the French at Poiters and Agincourt. Missile weapons>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>swords, even in skilled hands.

Except in dumb anime.

hamboy - June 29, 2008 06:56 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Jun 29 2008, 06:42 PM)

Except in dumb anime.

To be fair, the characters who use swords in anime tend to be superhuman, so it's not so bad.

Wingman - June 29, 2008 10:49 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (hamboy @ Jun 29 2008, 02:56 PM)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Jun 29 2008, 06:42 PM)

Except in dumb anime.

To be fair, the characters who use swords in anime tend to be superhuman, so it's not so bad.

Yeah, that was my point. Kenshin and all them (can't think of any others; I've only watched Himura Kenshin, and he can dodge bullets... sorta) are greater than regular humans by a large margin.

Phalanx - June 30, 2008 12:50 AM (GMT)
I admit guns are more faster and more convenient, but swords have more style and they kick more ass.

I mean come on, in that Link vs. New York City, even though I would reluctantly admit that Link would fall to gunfire (unless he had supernatural reflexes/agility/durability), Link has fought monsters that could have easily decimated buildings or towns and that are resistant/invulnerable to conventional forms of weapons (unless they were laced with magic), so in conclusion if guns were strictly prohibited in NYC, who knows how the tables might be turned.

But then again, it's a real fight, so I guess style doesn't really play a significant role at all.

But in video games/anime, the swordfighters tend to overpower the gun users a lot of the times, if they have sufficient speed and the like.

Wingman - June 30, 2008 01:24 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Jun 29 2008, 08:50 PM)
I admit guns are more faster and more convenient, but swords have more style and they kick more ass.

I mean come on, in that Link vs. New York City, even though I would reluctantly admit that Link would fall to gunfire (unless he had supernatural reflexes/agility/durability), Link has fought monsters that could have easily decimated buildings or towns and that are resistant/invulnerable to conventional forms of weapons (unless they were laced with magic), so in conclusion if guns were strictly prohibited in NYC, who knows how the tables might be turned.

But then again, it's a real fight, so I guess style doesn't really play a significant role at all.

But in video games/anime, the swordfighters tend to overpower the gun users a lot of the times, if they have sufficient speed and the like.

But regular ninjas aren't like the ones in the movies. I totally understand: most martial artists are cool BECAUSE we feel than can beat someone with an "inefficient" firearm. That's why the Jedi are so cool, even though they're special. They can block the fire. No katana blade can block a bullet, unless it's special metal (like adamantium), or it's magical. In real life, neither exists. I understand they advantages for swords, about the style and they skill required, but that's just it. You have to train a man for months, even years, to gain sufficient skill with a blade. But any person, from peasant to nobleman, can be trained to use and fire a gun in a matter of days, even hours. That's what was great about the English. Every Englishman was required to train with his longbow every Sunday afternoon. It was also much easier to use than the crossbow or swords. The French used the latter two, and got their, pardon the language, asses handed to them at the aforementioned battles. A common man, with little training, can kill a nobleman who trained his entire life to fight with a certain weapon.

Phalanx - June 30, 2008 02:10 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Wingman @ Jun 30 2008, 01:24 AM)
QUOTE (Phalanx @ Jun 29 2008, 08:50 PM)
I admit guns are more faster and more convenient, but swords have more style and they kick more ass.

I mean come on, in that Link vs. New York City, even though I would reluctantly admit that Link would fall to gunfire (unless he had supernatural reflexes/agility/durability), Link has fought monsters that could have easily decimated buildings or towns and that are resistant/invulnerable to conventional forms of weapons (unless they were laced with magic), so in conclusion if guns were strictly prohibited in NYC, who knows how the tables might be turned. 

But then again, it's a real fight, so I guess style doesn't really play a significant role at all.

But in video games/anime, the swordfighters tend to overpower the gun users a lot of the times, if they have sufficient speed and the like.

But regular ninjas aren't like the ones in the movies. I totally understand: most martial artists are cool BECAUSE we feel than can beat someone with an "inefficient" firearm. That's why the Jedi are so cool, even though they're special. They can block the fire. No katana blade can block a bullet, unless it's special metal (like adamantium), or it's magical. In real life, neither exists. I understand they advantages for swords, about the style and they skill required, but that's just it. You have to train a man for months, even years, to gain sufficient skill with a blade. But any person, from peasant to nobleman, can be trained to use and fire a gun in a matter of days, even hours. That's what was great about the English. Every Englishman was required to train with his longbow every Sunday afternoon. It was also much easier to use than the crossbow or swords. The French used the latter two, and got their, pardon the language, asses handed to them at the aforementioned battles. A common man, with little training, can kill a nobleman who trained his entire life to fight with a certain weapon.

You do have a point on ninja's only being proficiently overpowered in fiction.

Although if there were gun blades invented in real life that would nice, unless you want to count those rifles attached w/ bayonets underneath them.

Off-Topic, right now on CBUB, I'm moderately worried about two matches, but I'm confused about whether to detach my feelings or continue them until the match is over.




Hosted for free by zIFBoards