SilentMobius Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 I disagree. How does 'asymmetrical and surgical' better describe Ninja than knights. And how does Surgical even remotely describe Tenno when most of our missions are huge massacres rather than carefully planned out plans. The closest to surgical that we come is Rescue, and even that isn't precise. As someone else posted. Warframe mission types: <=4 vs Many (AKA asymmetric) Rescue behind enemy lines (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Capture Enemy and extract behind enemy lines (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Defend Item while waiting for backup (Knight: Likely, Ninja: unlikely) Create distraction for other team (Knight: Possible, Ninja: Possible) Eliminate all troops (Knight: Possible, Ninja: Possible) Sabotage equipment (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Steal Equipment (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Assassination (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Information Interception(Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Simply put, knights function at their best in large-scale melee with plenty of troops to back them up, that is their essence, just like a modern mainline battle tank, you do not deploy those on their own. Ninja fight in small groups against many, like a modern spec-ops team. Only one of these is the essence of Warframe and it's most definitely the ninja side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ensignvidiot Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 While i do love my Knights, and Templar, and Samurai... I'd much rather have more mechanics placed into the game that make me feel more ninja-like Like Space-Parkour for ArchWing! varied stealth-kill positions for crouching, ledges, and drop kills! More Stealth! More Speed! Faster Dodging mechanics! Faster weapon-switching! The ability to hide in the shadows with a neon-pink frame! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquirmyBurrito Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 As someone else posted. Warframe mission types: <=4 vs Many (AKA asymmetric) Rescue behind enemy lines (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Capture Enemy and extract behind enemy lines (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Defend Item while waiting for backup (Knight: Likely, Ninja: unlikely) Create distraction for other team (Knight: Possible, Ninja: Possible) Eliminate all troops (Knight: Possible, Ninja: Possible) Sabotage equipment (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Steal Equipment (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Assassination (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Information Interception(Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) Simply put, knights function at their best in large-scale melee with plenty of troops to back them up, that is their essence, just like a modern mainline battle tank, you do not deploy those on their own. Ninja fight in small groups against many, like a modern spec-ops team. Only one of these is the essence of Warframe and it's most definitely the ninja side. provide proof for your claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ensignvidiot Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 (edited) provide proof for your claims. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Knight http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Ninja+Wiki here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninja http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight Give those a read. And if you think those arent reputable, feel free to click through the bibliography. EDIT: To save you some time, at the TOP OF THE NINJA PAGE it lists the names of several mission types that currently exist in Warframe. It was never mentioned whether Knights where called to task for Assassinations, acts of Sabotage, and Deception. Knights reference adhering to a code of conduct (Chivalry), which COULD POSSIBLY be the "tenno Code". But with more loopholes to allow for the stabbing of our enemies from the shadows. I feel SilentMobius' Logic is sound and valid. Edited December 10, 2014 by ensignvidiot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentMobius Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 provide proof for your claims. None is needed, It's common sense. Small squads of knight breaking beind enemy lines to assassinate/capture/etc are just counter to the theme. Ninja are mobile, Knights are not and require a horse for mobility. It's so plainly obvious. If you don't have any sense for the theme of Knight vs Ninja then that explains your contribution to the thread. My understanding of the themes of a ninja vs the themes involved with a knight are no more or less needing of "proof" that the silly assertions that started this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquirmyBurrito Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 (edited) http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Knight http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Ninja+Wiki here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninja http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight Give those a read. And if you think those arent reputable, feel free to click through the bibliography. Telling me to google them, and to read the wikipedia articles on them (which provides no information on the claims that SilentMobius made) is hardly providing proof for their claims. Try again. None is needed, It's common sense. Small squads of knight breaking beind enemy lines to assassinate/capture/etc are just counter to the theme. Ninja are mobile, Knights are not and require a horse for mobility. It's so plainly obvious. If you don't have any sense for the theme of Knight vs Ninja then that explains your contribution to the thread. My understanding of the themes of a ninja vs the themes involved with a knight are no more or less needing of "proof" that the silly assertions that started this thread. So what you're saying is... "I don't have to prove my claims because everything I said was my perception of what knights are based on nothing more than hollywood's portrayal of them." Concession Accepted. Edited December 10, 2014 by SquirmyBurrito Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ensignvidiot Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 Telling me to google them, and to read the wikipedia articles on them (which provides no information on the claims that SilentMobius made) is hardly providing proof for their claims. Try again. I ask you again to give it a Read. Ive even edited in 1 point of discussion from each page. If you are not able to read an additional source that supports his/her logical train of thought... then what right have you to challenge them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innocent_Flower Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 More accurate to say Farming cowboy wizard warriors. We can shorten that to FarCowWizard Warriors Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquirmyBurrito Posted December 10, 2014 Share Posted December 10, 2014 (edited) I ask you again to give it a Read. Ive even edited in 1 point of discussion from each page. If you are not able to read an additional source that supports his/her logical train of thought... then what right have you to challenge them? You claim their train of thought is logical, I called that into question, and in the end it was established that their argument is based on nothing more than their interpretation of what ninja and knights were (based on unknown sources possibly typical hollywood fiction). Unless that person happens to be an expert on either, I think it is fair for me to ask for them to provide evidence for their claims. EDIT: To save you some time, at the TOP OF THE NINJA PAGE it lists the names of several mission types that currently exist in Warframe. It was never mentioned whether Knights where called to task for Assassinations, acts of Sabotage, and Deception. Knights reference adhering to a code of conduct (Chivalry), which COULD POSSIBLY be the "tenno Code". But with more loopholes to allow for the stabbing of our enemies from the shadows. I feel SilentMobius' Logic is sound and valid. I wasn't arguing against claims of what ninja did, I was arguing against claims of what knights didn't do. If it was never mentioned, I see no reason to act as if it was unlikely to have occurred. Chivalry has nothing to do with being able to stab your enemy in the back. I feel SilentMobius' argument is baseless. I'll clarify a bit more: Rescue behind enemy lines (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) -Why was this deemed unlikely? Capture Enemy and extract behind enemy lines (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) -Why was this deemed unlikely? Defend Item while waiting for backup (Knight: Likely, Ninja: unlikely) Create distraction for other team (Knight: Possible, Ninja: Possible) Eliminate all troops (Knight: Possible, Ninja: Possible) Sabotage equipment (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) -Why was this deemed unlikely? Steal Equipment (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) -Why was this deemed unlikely? Assassination (Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) -Why was this deemed unlikely? Information Interception(Knight: unlikely, Ninja: Likely) -Why was this deemed unlikely? If a person's response is "because those don't fit the theme", is it unfair/unreasonable for me to call that into question? Edited December 10, 2014 by SquirmyBurrito Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connorpistol Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 +-+-+-+--1 sir, If you play the game the way it was originally intended, you'd be a ninja. Fun fact though:using a ranged weapon other than a sling (even then only when the situation REQUIRES it) was considered dishonorable according to chivalry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ensignvidiot Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 You claim their train of thought is logical, I called that into question, and in the end it was established that their argument is based on nothing more than their interpretation of what ninja and knights were (based on unknown sources possibly typical hollywood fiction). Unless that person happens to be an expert on either, I think it is fair for me to ask for them to provide evidence for their claims. I wasn't arguing against claims of what ninja did, I was arguing against claims of what knights didn't do. If it was never mentioned, I see no reason to act as if it was unlikely to have occurred. Chivalry has nothing to do with being able to stab your enemy in the back. I feel SilentMobius' argument is baseless. Okay, This makes a lot more sense. To be perfectly frank, i thought your post was made under the basis of "You are wrong, because you didnt show me reasons". On support of Silent, from what ive read on Knightly orders its generally frowned upon to attack your enemy in an underhanded manner such as poisoning other knights, spreading lies, and other acts of clandestine behaviour. They are perfectly fine with doing attacks when their enemy's pants are down. And using tactics and weaknesses to their advantage. But, generally, Numbers are in play. Unless a duel is being fought to contest one man's honor over another, Knights fight in heavily armored formations that are equipped and formed to deal with small to large armies of enemies. Ninjas, conversely, are apt to use any method necessary to do their assigned task. At this point, it isnt a matter of honor, its a matter of a few individuals attempting to do the largest amount of damage in the most efficient way possible for either the person hiring the clan, or the clan's own interest. Knights fight battles and duels to overpower their enemies Ninjas assassinate leaders, intercept orders, kidnap key figures to use as blackmail While... we as Tenno, are currently not very ninja-like at all. I still feel we are more like ninjas than Knights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
connorpistol Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Plus ninjas, from what little we think, (we don't even know if they actually existed) ninjas were just DIShonorable mercenaires that assassinated and stole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquirmyBurrito Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 +-+-+-+--1 sir, If you play the game the way it was originally intended, you'd be a ninja. Fun fact though:using a ranged weapon other than a sling (even then only when the situation REQUIRES it) was considered dishonorable according to chivalry. Cite a source. Cite a source. Knights were known to use bows and/or crossbows in addition to their non-ranged weaponry. Nothing I have ever read on chivalry went so far as to establish that certain forms of combat were frowned upon. Okay, This makes a lot more sense. To be perfectly frank, i thought your post was made under the basis of "You are wrong, because you didnt show me reasons". On support of Silent, from what ive read on Knightly orders its generally frowned upon to attack your enemy in an underhanded manner such as poisoning other knights, spreading lies, and other acts of clandestine behaviour. They are perfectly fine with doing attacks when their enemy's pants are down. And using tactics and weaknesses to their advantage. But, generally, Numbers are in play. Unless a duel is being fought to contest one man's honor over another, Knights fight in heavily armored formations that are equipped and formed to deal with small to large armies of enemies. Ninjas, conversely, are apt to use any method necessary to do their assigned task. At this point, it isnt a matter of honor, its a matter of a few individuals attempting to do the largest amount of damage in the most efficient way possible for either the person hiring the clan, or the clan's own interest. Knights fight battles and duels to overpower their enemies Ninjas assassinate leaders, intercept orders, kidnap key figures to use as blackmail While... we as Tenno, are currently not very ninja-like at all. I still feel we are more like ninjas than Knights. Lying is typically seen as being against the code of chivalry, I have not seen anything saying you couldn't do the rest of that. In the end, Knights were just high-ranking warriors, and a warrior rarely passes up a chance for an easy victory. If your opponents trips, you kill them before they can recover. If you run into an opponent while they're heeding nature's call, you kill them. Honor has little to no place in battle, and I have seen nothing to suggest the opposite in regards to knights. Plus ninjas, from what little we think, (we don't even know if they actually existed) ninjas were just DIShonorable mercenaires that assassinated and stole. To claim to be a dishonorable mercenary is to needlessly establish was it typically assumed to be the norm. You'd have a harder time finding a mercenary who was honorable, than one who was dishonorable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)Lowk721 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) Best of both worlds, NinjaKnights play free. BOOM, A title as equally fictitious as the Tenno themselves with no actual set dictionary term. But carries the same connotation due to the mash up of words. Are they knights that take on ninja-esque missions? Are they Ninja that wear armor like knights? Edited December 11, 2014 by (PS4)Lowk721 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentMobius Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) So what you're saying is... "I don't have to prove my claims because everything I said was my perception of what knights are based on nothing more than hollywood's portrayal of them." Concession Accepted. What I'm saying is that this thread is asking for a change. It is using "data" no more sourced than mine. Hence the default state is no change. Your default state here is _lose_ And you might want to read those wikipedia links. Knights were most commonly form of heavily armored mounted cavalry. Hell the french for "Knight" is "Chevalier" which is literally "horse-rider" Tenno are closer to classic Dumas Musketeers than "Knights" "Knight" does not fit the design of this game. Which is fine because this change isn't going to happen. Edited December 11, 2014 by SilentMobius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni_Omega Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 If by 'Knights' you mean 'Super Parkour Magic Space Rambos' then yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentMobius Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 (edited) Cite a source. Cite a source. Knights were known to use bows and/or crossbows in addition to their non-ranged weaponry. Nothing I have ever read on chivalry went so far as to establish that certain forms of combat were frowned upon. Can. 29 of the Second Lateran Council under Pope Innocent II in 1139 banned the use of crossbows, as well as slings and bows, against Christians. Although the authenticity, interpretation and translation of this source is contested. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_crossbows ) Also it's damn hard using a crossbow on horseback, where knights usually were. Edited December 11, 2014 by SilentMobius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwapplephobia Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 I'm pretty sure this was a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade343 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Can. 29 of the Second Lateran Council under Pope Innocent II in 1139 banned the use of crossbows, as well as slings and bows, against Christians. Although the authenticity, interpretation and translation of this source is contested. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_crossbows ) Just Christians, not all the other people that the knights fight (i.e.: Muslims, the Turkish, etc.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentMobius Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Just Christians, not all the other people that the knights fight (i.e.: Muslims, the Turkish, etc.). But the reason was that the crossbow was seen as "sinful" and in violation of gods order. Which Knights represented via their King/Queen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade343 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 But the reason was that the crossbow was seen as "sinful" and in violation of gods order. Which Knights represented via their King/Queen But there is evidence that knights still used crossbows, despite the law. Besides, Pope Innocent II banned the use of crossbows by Christians against Christians, which seems to imply that Christians using crossbows against anything else is fair game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vykorias Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 This thread killed some of my brain cells. Can someone end this madness already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ensignvidiot Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 This thread killed some of my brain cells. Can someone end this madness already. Well wait till we get started! Welcome to the Warforums, my friend! Here is the TRUE endgame! But there is evidence that knights still used crossbows, despite the law. Besides, Pope Innocent II banned the use of crossbows by Christians against Christians, which seems to imply that Christians using crossbows against anything else is fair game. Ill take this as a point to shift Tenno to more like ninja's instead of knights. Ninjas used whatever worked, instead of adhering to a Church's demand for a combat doctrine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade343 Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Ill take this as a point to shift Tenno to more like ninja's instead of knights. Ninjas used whatever worked, instead of adhering to a Church's demand for a combat doctrine. Then again, it was ignored for quite a bit, since knights use crossbows against those dreaded pikemen (because flying bolts beat long pokey sticks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SquirmyBurrito Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 What I'm saying is that this thread is asking for a change. It is using "data" no more sourced than mine. Hence the default state is no change. Your default state here is _lose_ And you might want to read those wikipedia links. Knights were most commonly form of heavily armored mounted cavalry. Hell the french for "Knight" is "Chevalier" which is literally "horse-rider" Tenno are closer to classic Dumas Musketeers than "Knights" "Knight" does not fit the design of this game. Which is fine because this change isn't going to happen. There is no losing as this isn't a competition. You might was to extend your investigation beyond the confines of wikipedia. Knights did more than fight on horse back. Okay. I disagree. You never know. Can. 29 of the Second Lateran Council under Pope Innocent II in 1139 banned the use of crossbows, as well as slings and bows, against Christians. Although the authenticity, interpretation and translation of this source is contested. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_crossbows ) Also it's damn hard using a crossbow on horseback, where knights usually were. Already been addressed by another user. Ill take this as a point to shift Tenno to more like ninja's instead of knights. Ninjas used whatever worked, instead of adhering to a Church's demand for a combat doctrine. Come get me when we (tenno) start using nullifier shields or the shields that shield lancers tote. Until then, we only use what we're given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now