Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I always pictured the powered upper armour being described in that bit from 1990 as enhancing the strength behind punches and grappling/crushing moves - not simply letting the wearer carry or lift greater weights (which would also require the legs to be powered) .

The Lexicanum quote misses out the word "grappling" after "close quarters", which to me implies that the wearer of a suit of Thunder armour could tear his opponents limb from limb and crush their heads and torsos in a power-assisted bear-hug. It also, to me, implies a level of ritualised combat, rather than "proper" warfare. That's probably down to a lack of technology and manpower, after a few millennia of global warlordism.

Realistic? Who cares. The image works, of these unstoppable armoured legions literally crushing their foes in battle.

 PhillyT wrote:
Its part of the reason kung fu has been exposed so severely in mixed martial arts competitions. It is overly flashy, inefficient, and largely ineffective. It has led to a more streamlined version that has evolved due to international competition. Akido has had a similar evolution when it was exposed as being mostly show with only a little go.

To be fair, Kung-Fu was originally designed by people who spent literally their entire lives studying just the one Art. The crap they taught to the tourists was mostly just the cool stuff, without the substance that makes it actually applicable in a fight.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AndrewGPaul wrote:
I always pictured the powered upper armour being described in that bit from 1990 as enhancing the strength behind punches and grappling/crushing moves - not simply letting the wearer carry or lift greater weights (which would also require the legs to be powered) .

The Lexicanum quote misses out the word "grappling" after "close quarters", which to me implies that the wearer of a suit of Thunder armour could tear his opponents limb from limb and crush their heads and torsos in a power-assisted bear-hug. It also, to me, implies a level of ritualised combat, rather than "proper" warfare. That's probably down to a lack of technology and manpower, after a few millennia of global warlordism.

Realistic? Who cares. The image works, of these unstoppable armoured legions literally crushing their foes in battle.

The bear hug of death! That might be the funniest army I have ever visualized in my life. Screw realism, want an army who hugs people to death!

 PhillyT wrote:
Love to hear from another judoka!

I worked with O-sensei Porter on several occasions and he drilled that into our heads. Knowing a thousand movies isn't worth a damn thing if you aren't automatic. He said it was important to find what works, but that when he was coaching the Olympic team,he would have his athletes do the same throw hundreds of times over a six hour session. One partner after another, twenty guys in a line cycling over and over. He mentioned automaticity was the focus.

Its part of the reason kung fu has been exposed so severely in mixed martial arts competitions. It is overly flashy, inefficient, and largely ineffective. It has led to a more streamlined version that has evolved due to international competition. Akido has had a similar evolution when it was exposed as being mostly show with only a little go.

Same here bro, always excellent to hear from others!

Your sensei knows what he's talking about, that's for sure. Personally, although I'm biased as feth, judo works exceedingly well in street-fight scenarios because of the repetition. I find where the likes of karate there is room for each strike to be slightly out of place by a centimetre or two, judo's muscle memory requirements lead to perfect placement of a well rehearsed throw every time and it leads to the automaticity that your sensei talks about. I have actually used harai-goshi a few times in a fight over the years, and every time its been an instinctive reaction, I don't even have to think about it.

I think the key difference is that, civilian martial form practitioners attack an 'opponent', military practitioners attack a 'target'.

I've got respect for both sides of the argument, but military unarmed combat training is for killing or crowd control with no room for flamboyance.

Agreed. I think in the case of the Thunder Warriors, they didn't need powered legs because they were already monstrously strong. Adding powered arms makes them even more vicious.

 PhillyT wrote:
Agreed. I think in the case of the Thunder Warriors, they didn't need powered legs because they were already monstrously strong. Adding powered arms makes them even more vicious.

I've already been swayed by the bear-hug of death argument


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SirDonlad wrote:
I think the key difference is that, civilian martial form practitioners attack an 'opponent', military practitioners attack a 'target'.

I've got respect for both sides of the argument, but military unarmed combat training is for killing or crowd control with no room for flamboyance.

Civilian Martial Arts aren't (usually) intended for actual combat. At best, it's for self-defence, and the civilian Martial Arts teacher who goes beyond that is rather rare. That being said, civilian Martial Artists who do get taught actual combat techniques (not the flashy stuff, the fun stuff) generally get taught to a degree of precision that (most) Military Martial Artists don't get due to time constraints, as most military Martial Arts are stuck to the "hard" Martial Arts (all lines, very few circles; aka Karate), as those are usually the easiest to learn. When you start bringing in things like Small Circle Jiu-Jitsu or Shaolin Kung-Fu, it can take years to master the fun stuff (actual combat techniques that combine the line and the circle), but it is more effective due to the increase of complexity (which is why it takes years rather than months to get it down, as, otherwise, the complexity would make it impossible for use in combat). The complexity of techniques isn't actually from complicated move combinations, though; it's more like you've learned a thousand different basic moves and it takes years to learn to chain them together in a life-or-death situation (I've been an MMA practitioner for 9 years, and I've just barely gotten to his point; before I've always relied upon sticking to the basics in an actual fight). Of course, when you get into Navy Seals and the like, they get the best training imaginable, so they would, of course, get the full spectrum.

I doubt you would see that level of HtH technique in military units. HtH just isn't that necessary or emphasized. For the most part, they are taught the basics of self defense, then, with time allowing, they get increased training which allows for some advancement, but against a person who trains exclusively for HtH combat, they are going to be outmatched.

Really though, the number of times a soldier will fight in HtH versus at range isn't even comparable. But you are correct, they are going to work to their capacity and ability.