Deadliest Warrior (2009) s03e01 Episode Script

Fire! Okay, guys, we are talking about George Washington and his continental army versus Napoleon Bonaparte and his Grande armee.
Both of them were fighting in the age of revolutions, only 20 years apart, but never met on the battlefield until today.
These guys are larger-than-life figures-- the generals of generals.
Napoleon was driven.
He was obsessed with war.
He wanted to take all of Europe and make it his.
When you think of George Washington, that ability to be patient, to motivate his troops against the British, essentially led America to become its own independent nation.
One becomes known as the father of his country.
The other becomes known as the God of war.
I think this is gonna be the best matchup on Deadliest Warrior.
Napoleon Bonaparte The bloodthirsty French emperor whose maniacal dream was to conquer the world, or George Washington, the American hero, who against all odds defeated the mighty British army.
Now, 200 years of speculation will be buried when these two titans of war finally face off.
To find out, the history of war and modern science collide As former Navy seal Richard "mack" machowicz dives deep into the tactics of the warriors behind the weapons.
Biomedical engineer Geoff desmoulin applies 21st-century technology to unlock new data on arsenals of the past.
And E.
R.
physician Armand Dorian dissects the trauma and reveals the physical and psychological traits that shaped these legends of war.
This groundbreaking data will be paired with historical research and entered into an all-new digital combat engine.
Two legendary combatants will be resurrected.
History will be rewritten.
But only one will be crowned Deadliest warrior.
Welcome to the fight club.
Here, our experts will unlock historical secrets and battlefield strategies to decide which revolutionary-age general is deadliest - Aah! - Napoleon Bonaparte, the brutal French warlord and emperor who terrorized Europe and left millions dead in his bloody wake, or George Washington, America's first general-turned-president, who waged an unconventional guerilla war that defeated the British empire and created the world's most powerful nation.
This is a special episode to me, because you're talking about two of maybe the greatest generals in history.
When you think of Napoleon, you understand his brilliance on the battlefield, and it's still studied today.
Washington takes necessity and turns it into a virtue against the most powerful army at that time.
Mack, these guys are larger-than-life figures, and so I like breaking it down and actually looking at the tale of the tape.
George Washington was 6'3", 200 pounds.
That's a big guy for his time.
And then you compare Napoleon.
You know, he has that reputation of being this short guy.
Actually, he was 5'6".
He wasn't that short-- about 140 pounds.
But then when we look at their own personal health--disaster.
George Washington deals with malaria.
He had smallpox as a child.
Napoleon had severe insomnia-- not the best state to be in if you're gonna be a general.
For me, it's about the weapons, and these guys operated in the age of revolutions.
That means we are talking about cannons.
There's no question, guys, that is is gonna be one of our best matchups yet, but we've got to make sure that it's set up properly for the SIM.
The new digital combat engine was created by former green beret and military-based game designer Robert daly.
His latest high-tech creation will incorporate complex weapons data, damage probabilities, and more than 100 different "x" factors-- critical intangibles that are given numeric values based on analysis of the warriors' lives, tactics, and psychological profiles.
When you look at both Washington and Napoleon, the biggest "x" factor you're gonna look at is generalship.
One dealt with limited resources and had to fight a guerilla war with the British.
On the other hand, you have Napoleon, who's moving large bodies of troops over massive areas.
Doing battle for Napoleon Revolutionary war era musket and sword specialist mathew cape.
Napoleon was the God of war.
His equipment was the best.
His tactics were unbeatable.
And his men were the best trained that there was at the time.
Unlocking the secrets of Napoleon's battlefield strategies, historian phillipe Simon.
Napoleon's ingenious battlefield tactics are legendary.
He changed the concept of the army.
He was convinced that artillery and cavalry could easily take over any infantry regiment anywhere in Europe.
In the early 1800s, Napoleon marched across Europe, crushing every army in his path.
He really wanted to destroy you.
He didn't want you to run away.
He didn't want to have a second battle.
In 1804, Napoleon proclaimed himself emperor for life and launched a vicious reign of terror that killed more than two million people.
Now we'll witness one of history's most dreamed-about battles, as the bloodthirsty emperor confronts his most formidable foe-- the gentleman warrior, general George Washington.
Wielding Washington's weapons, competitive swordsman and 18th-century firearms expert Paul suda.
Washington had a very clear goal in mind.
He set himself to accomplish that goal with the resources he had on hand.
And he came in with less than he wanted and ended up winning the war.
Analyzing Washington's life and war tactics Retired army officer and university of north Carolina history Professor Dr.
Wayne Lee.
Washington's a big guy.
His presence on the battlefield, the way he carried himself-- in the 18th century, that really meant a lot to people.
As a young man, Washington fought for the British army during the French and Indian war.
He discovered firsthand the deadly advantage of his native enemy's hit-and-run strategies.
Years later, in 1775, as commander of the continental army in America's war of independence, Washington used these same lethal guerilla tactics to gain an edge against the British.
Outmanned and outgunned, he backed up his larger conventional army with small unit state militias.
He's gonna use that militia in ways that are a little bit more unconventional-- raids on a detachment here, raid on a detachment there.
They cover the ground and make it difficult for the British to operate.
And then you create a moment when you can use your conventional army to try to fight that big battle to win in the end.
Fire! Washington's hybrid combination worked, and in 1783, the British surrendered.
A new nation was born, and its greatest general became its first president.
We're using this historical data in the simulator this year, but to make it complete, we've got to get you some weapons data.
Warfare in the revolutionary age was dominated by long-range Cannon fire.
Now these battlefield titans' heavy artillery will go head-to-head.
General Napoleon will blast off this battle with the 8-pound Cannon-- machine-bored for maximum lethal precision.
It's called an 8-pounder, because it shoots 8-pound cannonballs.
It is about 6 foot long, which make it very accurate.
The bore is about 106 millimeter, and the ball itself is only 103.
So the precision of the shots were extreme due to the expertise of those builders.
Napoleon was a master of artillery.
As a junior officer, Napoleon spent hours and hours, days after day, studying Cannon ballistic.
Napoleon's 8-pound Cannon will be tested in an explosive shootout against Washington's 6-pound Cannon.
For the first time on Deadliest Warrior, we are gonna be firing cannons.
I'm gonna be assessing the damage they can do and how accurate they are.
We know both of these weapons would have been crew served, so we're gonna have two of our armorers to help you out.
Forrest Taylor, one of the world's premier weapons artificers, has painstakingly recreated Napoleon's 200-year-old Cannon.
Each weapon will be fired from a deadly effective distance of 200 yards.
Take a look down range.
To test the accuracy and destructive capabilities of the 8-pounder, the Napoleon team will fire four cannonballs at a set of blue targets.
The primary target is a two-man artillery unit.
Beyond that, an officers' quarters, containing four more targets, will gauge the cannonball's shrapnel damage.
Fire at will! Whoo! I'm actually surprised it went that high, man.
The first shot tears through the officers' quarters and digs up the hillside, but it misses every target.
Thumb the piece! Reloading is a dangerous process that can't be rushed.
First, a leather thumb jacket seals the back of the gun as the barrel is cleared of any debris.
Clear.
A damp sponge creates a vacuum to kill any live embers.
Advance the round.
The black-powder charge and cannonball are inserted and carefully rammed.
A vent pick pierces the charge, and the hole is packed with more black powder to trigger the round.
Are you kidding? Second shot-- direct hit.
Wicked! The Napoleon team re-aims the Cannon to try to take out the primary target.
- I think we're right on.
- We're right on it.
- Mm-hmm.
- All right.
Oh, yeah, baby! Oh-ho! That was awesome! Two hits-- one artillery crew, one officer inside.
That's what I'm talking about Right here.
Oh-ho! Yeah! Yeah, that's what I'm talking about! The point of the exercise was to take out the target.
You've clearly done that.
Look at this guy.
And don't forget the psychological impact of seeing the first guy take that round, right? Then that guy gets replaced with another guy.
The second ball comes through and rips that guy in half.
And then the third ball comes through and rips your Cannon down.
And when you're talking about the "x" factors of psychological warfare and domination, you've got both of them that we'll plug into the SIM.
And then think about accuracy, mack.
Look at the grouping we have here.
In this tight space, some rifles aren't this good, and this 8-pound ball was able to hit three targets in a small group like this 200 yards out.
- Take a look here - That's what I'm talking about.
Decapitated by a cannonball.
Then he's got shrapnel right into his chest.
The main difference between Napoleon and Washington is Napoleon had trained soldiers.
- What do you think, Wayne? - We're gonna be able to basically do the same kind of damage with a lighter Cannon that's going to be a lot more maneuverable.
Will you be using apples or oranges? Coming up, the carnage continues as the battle heats up.
This guy's just completely obliterated.
And later, the body count rises in a bloody firing-line showdown.
The commander's down.
Avance! Napoleon, Washington Who is deadliest? Oh! I meant to tell you right now, no one understood artillery better in Napoleon's days than Napoleon.
He was the master of artillery.
And artillery is the key to battle.
Napoleon Bonaparte The merciless emperor of France-- his brutal strategy of annihilation demolished his enemies.
Versus general George Washington, the legendary leader of the continental army.
Faced with sick and deserting troops in the brutal winter of 1777 at valley forge, Washington's determined leadership rallied crucial resources and pulled them through to ultimate victory.
He's been through the real depths of despair in the early parts of the war, with defeat after defeat.
But nevertheless, he's got this commitment.
He's going to stay the course.
And Washington's personal qualities were really fundamental to his success.
Unh! In a test of damage and accuracy, Napoleon's 8-pound Cannon leaves little doubt why he was known as the God of war.
You guys see that? But Washington had a much lighter and more mobile big gun in his arsenal The 6-pound Cannon, the fast-moving gun that forced britain to wave the white flag.
Washington's 6-pound Cannon fires a 6-pound cannonball.
The gun itself is cast from bronze.
It's much lighter than its iron counterpart.
It's about 1,200 pounds for the entire piece.
Washington knows he needs cannons, but they're not available.
So they take the materials literally from church bells, from bronze fittings on ships, and most famously, the statue of king George in New York City.
They melt it.
They're pouring it into a mold around a piece of wood.
And that's gonna have an effect on its accuracy.
But it's a thing that Washington has to do.
They've got no other choice.
You use what you've got.
The Washington team will fire four cannonballs at a set of red targets 200 yards downrange.
Their primary target is the Cannon.
Two artillery soldiers and four officers inside the quarters are secondary objectives.
The Washington team needs to top Napoleon's score of three soldiers and the Cannon.
Fire at will! - Holy - Nice! The first shot blasts through both walls and tears up the hillside.
But it is high and misses the targets.
Looks like a miniature Cannon compared to ours.
It's not how big it is, buddy.
It's how you use it.
Knocked part of the porch roof down.
Shot two--also high.
It hits the house but misses the primary target.
We were at 1 1/2 degrees.
I think I want to get to 2 degrees.
The team uses an elevation gauge to lower the angle of trajectory.
That looks good.
All right, hold it right there.
Put her down.
It skipped.
The third shot scores two instant kills inside.
I'd say that's on target.
Lower the elevation and bring it a little to the right.
The team only has one chance left to destroy the enemy Cannon.
You're gonna hit it on this one.
I feel it.
Ready! I hope you do, doc.
- Oh! - Oh! Nice! Yes! Right down the barrel! If you can disable the artillery, it doesn't matter what these two guys are doing.
They can no longer function on the battlefield with their Cannon.
Instant kill right here.
And take a look at the wall.
It's completely shattered there, which means tons of shrapnel.
All those are gonna increase the chance of death.
The accuracy that we're getting is very comparable to Napoleon, and given Washington's logistical situation, he's getting the same amount of damage.
Your Cannon is 400 pounds lighter than Napoleon's Cannon, and that has to factor in when it comes to fatigue, and fatigue is an "x" factor in our SIM.
Our bore was actually drilled by experts, making it very smooth and precise.
Their Cannon is not as accurate as ours, you know, just from the building of it.
The teams are locked in a virtual dead heat.
The clash of the cannons will be decided by one final test-- antipersonnel ammunition.
These shorter-range shrapnel rounds widen the field of fire, increasing the carnage as enemy infantry closed in.
Well, you know, Washington would love to have grapeshot, but the logistics was a major problem for him, and he uses scattershot.
So he's gonna take anything he can get--nails, chain.
You shove that down the barrel, and at close range, when it comes out of that thing, it's gonna do a lot of damage.
Well, that's great, 'cause we're going to test both the damage and dispersion pattern of Washington's scattershot and Napoleon's grapeshot.
And you'll each get one shot to take out the targets.
The targets-- 15 charging enemy soldiers.
Napoleon crew, you'll be up first with the grapeshot.
- Ho-ho! - Oh! Nice job, Napoleon crew.
We're gonna go immediately to the Washington crew.
Are you ready? Ready! - Fire at will! - Here we go.
- Oh! - Oh-ho! Love it! U.
S.
A.
! U.
S.
A.
! Dr.
Dorian checks the damage from Napoleon's grapeshot.
One instant kill.
Two instant kills--in his face.
Another instant kill.
Another one, face, chest.
That's five, six So a total, guys, 8 out of 15 instant kills.
But how deadly was Washington's scattershot round? Take a look at this! This guy has a huge piece torn right out.
This is a guaranteed instant kill.
It looks like most of that muscle comes straight through the middle, 'cause this guy's just completely obliterated.
Little scratch on his ear, nothing here and nothing here.
This guy is down.
This is the fourth instant kill.
So we got 4 out of 15 here.
So 4 out of 15.
But I think the biggest factor here for me is the very narrow dispersion pattern.
I think you want this to scatter as much as possible, and when you look at the grapeshot, I think it speaks for itself right there.
Absolutely.
Napoleon's 8-pound Cannon or Washington's 6-pound Cannon Which one do our experts believe give its warrior the edge? When you're looking at, basically, an improvised Cannon, you got to give credit to Washington for being able to adapt, improvise, and overcome.
But Napoleon is the master of artillery.
It's obvious in our test.
Eight guys versus four guys down when you compare the grapeshot versus the scattershot.
I have to give my edge to Napoleon's Cannon.
For long-range weapons, edge--Napoleon Bonaparte.
Fire! Coming up Can Washington even the score with a savage counterattack? Evil trick.
And later, mack exposes the surprising secrets behind two of history's greatest generals.
General George Washington-- outmanned and outgunned, he led a tired and tattered army to victory over the most powerful military force of the time Versus Napoleon Bonaparte-- the power-hungry warlord bent on world domination.
He was willing to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of his own men in pursuit of victory.
In the winter of 1812, he invaded Russia with half a million troops.
Less than 25,000 survived.
It's cold there--we're talking about six feet of snow.
The whole army was having to deal with malnutrition, and they lost a lot of people.
We've seen how Napoleon Bonaparte and George Washington utilized cannons to initiate a battle.
But after that, they would've closed that distance and utilized their mid-range weapons.
Phillipe, how would Napoleon conduct mid-range warfare? Well, Napoleon loved volley fire-- a technique developed to make up for the lack of accuracy of the muskets.
You would have a row of soldiers shooting to overwhelm the enemy with the sheer volume of rounds.
Napoleon armed his troops with the 1777 charleville musket-- a design so deadly, it was copied across the world.
It's a .
66-caliber round.
It's actually not a tight fit, which meant that it wasn't as accurate.
But it was way faster to reload than any rifle.
To accurately reproduce Napoleon's volley-fire tactic, mathew and three experienced black-powder Marksmen will form a volley line.
To test the charleville musket's damage, accuracy, and reload time, each Marksman will fire five rounds at four static targets placed 60 yards away-- the effective range of the weapon.
Five yards behind them, an officer on horseback.
Just missed him.
To reload, a black-powder charge is poured into the muzzle, followed by a patched lead ball, rammed on top.
More black powder is poured into the firing pan, and the hammer containing a flint is cocked.
When the trigger is pulled, the flint sparks the powder in the pan, igniting the main charge.
Feu! I don't think they're hitting anything.
En joue! Feu! - There's a hit.
- Got a hit on the face there.
Feu! AhHa ha ha ha! Yeah! - Get that general.
- Feu! - Oh! - Nice shot.
Nice! Beautifully placed, right through the zygoma, the cheek bone.
This by itself is an instant kill.
Napoleon's 1777 charleville musket delivered death to all four infantry targets.
And the commander is clean.
So what that means-- out of these five targets, four of them are killed in 1 minute, 43 seconds.
It seems like you've done plenty of damage, but you missed the important guy in the back.
If only you had some kind of weapon that you could properly aim and fire on such an important target.
Washington's continentals took aim at the British with the one-two punch of muskets and long rifles.
Washington is forced, by the lack of resources, to combine conventional with unconventional into something I might call "hybrid warfare.
" He's got militia that are coming in from all around.
They're bringing muskets, but some of them are bringing rifles.
He's gonna fold those units into a line of battle, but the rifle gives him a lot more flexibility.
Washington's musket, the brown Bess The longest-used firearm in British military history.
A very comparable musket to the French equivalent.
And the loose fit of the ball meant that it bounced around a bit in the barrel.
That's why muskets aren't nearly as accurate as rifles are.
Washington's troops also packed the Pennsylvania long rifle A weapon that dealt death from over 200 yards.
Rifling is a series of grooves that spiral to the end of the barrel.
The grooves spin the ball out of the barrel.
Because it's spinning, it's more accurate for a farther distance.
Unfortunately, that snug fit in the barrel tended to foul the barrel when there was carbon buildup, so it takes longer to reload.
Can Washington's musket-rifle combo outgun Napoleon's team in less than 1 minute and 43 seconds? Wayne and Paul and two black-powder Marksmen will fire two muskets and two rifles, each with five rounds.
One! Fire! Nice.
The carbon buildup in the rifle's barrel must be thoroughly cleaned, making it twice as long to reload.
- Oh! - That was a hit.
Man, that takes a long time.
Oh, that's a hit! - Ha ha ha ha ha! - Evil.
Evil trick.
Oh, that's a mess! Ah, he missed it.
- Nice shot.
- That's a good hit.
Missed it.
Oh-ho! Belly shot on the horse.
Poor bugger.
Perfect.
All four static targets are hit now.
The muskets blow through their five shots, but the slower-reloading rifles continue to fire.
Oh! - Commander's down.
- Oh! There goes the commander.
3 minutes, 31 seconds! Washington's musket-rifle combination matches Napoleon's four static-target kills.
This guy is half the man he used to be.
Human tissue would not fall apart like this, but it does speak volumes with regards to the temporary cavity that's being displayed here.
That's an instant kill.
The accuracy of the rifle is undeniable.
But in war, speed is everything.
Our charleville is way faster reloading.
We get so many more shots.
Napoleon's musket volley fire or Washington's musket-and-rifle hybrid warfare-- which do our experts believe has the edge? The brown Bess used in combination with the Pennsylvania rifle-- you're looking at a weapon system that allows you to reach out a little further, a little bit more accuracy that I-- as a sniper, I like.
We're seeing a combo technique where you're actually getting accuracy and a lot of trauma.
So, for me, there's no question the edge here goes to George Washington.
I don't like the fact it did take them double the time, but doesn't really matter what kind of time these were done in.
If you don't kill everyone, you don't get the job done.
For medium-range weapons, edge--George Washington.
Coming up George's Washington crushing victory at yorktown Go there, and he used deception Faces off against Napoleon Bonaparte's brutal triumph at austerlitz.
Plus, centuries-old swords rise to kill again.
Two legendary generals brought empires to their knees.
But who is deadliest? George Washington, the general who refused calls to be crowned king, insisting instead that the head of state should be an elected president Versus Napoleon Bonaparte, the ruthless French emperor whose cold-blooded campaign through Europe once saw 70,000 casualties in a single day.
Each warrior's battlefield tactics will provide crucial data for the digital combat engine.
Mack breaks down each general's most legendary victory to predict how he'll perform in the heat of battle.
What was Washington's approach to conducting warfare? Well, he's smart enough to know that he can't risk his army in a revolutionary situation.
So you bring in militia, and you fight a kind of unconventional war on the side, while maintaining a conventional army at the core of your resistance.
Today we might call it hybrid warfare.
The best example is the campaign that leads up to yorktown.
Let's go to yorktown right now using the touch table.
So after 1778, the French join in with the Americans to fight the British, and so the British send a major army under general lord cornwallis down into the Southern states.
And they're gonna try to recapture those states and fold them back into the empire.
And down in those places, Washington's generals are fighting the unconventional part of the war-- skirmishing, tearing up the supply lines, and they're making life hell for cornwallis.
When a British general gets into trouble, he tends to head for the sea so he can link up with the Navy, get support.
So the French fleet sails into the chesapeake and bottles up the entrance to the bay, and cornwallis is trapped.
The French have actually blocked the chesapeake bay.
There is no way the British can come in there.
After the small-unit militias forced cornwallis' troops to yorktown, Washington unleashed the second half of his hybrid attack.
The French and the American armies march in, and they start the conventional European-style siege, pounding yorktown day after day.
And by just continuously bashing and bashing and bashing them, they have to surrender.
They do.
It has a huge impact on public opinion back in britain, and for all political purposes, the war is over.
And he's proven that his hybrid warfare is successful on the battlefield.
Most revolutionary age battles were decided in close combat with cold, hard steel-- swords.
Napoleon wielded the French cavalry saber.
A descendant of an Egyptian tribal sword, it was originally used to behead enemy prisoners.
After exhaustive research, bladesmith Dave Baker has meticulously recreated each warrior's sword, beginning with Napoleon's saber.
It's got a heavy curve to it, a deep Fuller, and a clip-point blade to help with thrusting.
Now, while doing research, we discovered that he carried a sword just like this at the battle of marengo.
Now, that sword still exists and was sold recently at auction for $6 million.
Washington attacked with a cold steel killer, the colichemarde, a deadly combination of speed and accuracy.
George Washington's sword, it's a combination weapon-- a wide, heavy section at the bottom and then a thin, fast blade at the front.
What this does is it gives you the speed of a small sword, as well as enough meat in that blade to deflect or parry a heavy blow from a saber.
These two swords will go head-to-head in a two-part contest.
These are generals, and they ride on horseback.
And in the worst-case scenario, they actually have their horses shot from underneath them, they've got to still use those blades to save their butts.
So we've got set up three stationary targets, mimicking real human flesh, real human bone.
The experts will test each sword for its accuracy, penetration, and strike versatility.
First, they will attack each target from horseback, then dismount for a final attack on foot.
The Napoleon team is up first.
Allons-y! Yah! Oh-ho! Ugh! Nice! - Oof! - Ugh! Three targets, three instant kills.
Dr.
Dorian examines the final death blow.
Small diameter, but it goes all the way through.
This, placed perfectly, is an instant kill.
The fact that you can slash like this and still thrust makes it a perfect weapon.
The colichemarde's designed to counter a saber.
It's designed to thrust and to penetrate.
It's gonna be fatal every time it goes in.
Charge! Will the colichemarde cut out a final victory for the American general? Ah, he's got to be careful with that blade coming out, though.
Through-and-through, baby.
Nice.
Oh That's a through-and-through.
Nice.
Three.
Instant kill city here.
Another important fact about thrusting injuries-- once you're in, the tip doesn't stay straight.
It actually bends up and down, so it's not just the width of the wound on the outside.
There's a lot more tearing up going on in the inside.
And I love the placement, center of mass of that target, showing me the accuracy that you have with that weapon.
It was terrifying how easy it was to push this through the target, especially with the power of the horse under me and behind me.
With a saber, you're very mobile.
You can go left, right, everywhere.
With your sword, you miss your shot, you're off your horse.
This would be way more efficient.
Napoleon's cavalry saber proves more versatile, able to thrust and slash with deadly results.
But Washington's colichemarde does more damage with each strike.
So which sword do our experts argue gets the edge? With the colichemarde, there was no slashes whatsoever that we saw, and I think anytime a weapon gives you options, that's gonna give you that slight advantage on the battlefield.
This is where I'll disagree with you.
I'm going to go with the colichemarde.
Obviously, cavalry sabers do better on horseback because of that room for error.
Okay, now, let's get off the horse.
I think it makes a very big difference at this point, because there is a whole parry tactic that is designed in the colichemarde, specifically for sabers.
Washington had experience of having horses shot out from underneath him.
So he wanted to be able to go to an infantry weapon that he knew would deliver for him.
We did see three great punctures all the way through.
So I'm going to go with the colichemarde.
For close-range weapons, edge--George Washington.
To predict what tactics will be used for battle in the digital combat engine, mack examines Napoleon Bonaparte's 1805 victory at the battle of austerlitz.
How would you describe Napoleon's approach to strategy and tactics? If I had to put it in plain English, I will say bait and bash.
Let's go to Europe using the touch table right now.
In the present day Czech Republic, Napoleon positioned his forces on a hilltop called pratzen heights.
Below them, more than 70,000 Russian and Austrian troops.
He met with Russian and Austrian representative and let them believe that he wanted to surrender.
So he actually withdraws his troops from a great position to let them think, "I'm about to accept surrender.
" So he has set the table perfectly, right? Absolutely.
The Russians move their troop to pratzen heights and watch Napoleon run away.
They have 72,000 Russians on top of the hills, only 62,000 Napoleon troops.
They think they have the upper hand.
They're laughing.
What happens next? Using the cover of fog, Napoleon brings up a massive cavalry unit to reinforce his right flank and surprise the enemy.
It's all about baiting, baiting, baiting.
And when he finally has them set up, he goes in for the bash.
All of a sudden, he starts destroying them with everything he has.
This cavalry all engaged.
He basically sends everyone up there and destroys the Russians.
Yes, he destroyed the whole Austrian army, a third of the Russian army.
And this is why the czar of Russia said, "we are babies in the hand of a giant.
" And Napoleon set his legacy up for the rest of history.
Washington's use of hybrid warfare allowed him to prolong the war with Great Britain.
But not only was Napoleon incredibly successful in baiting onto the battlefield, he was able to set up perfectly the moment he bashed into submission.
For the "x" factor of battlefield tactics, edge--Napoleon.
Coming up General Napoleon Bonaparte, France's infamous God of war, versus general George Washington, America's hero of the revolution.
Two legendary generals, one final battle.
Who is deadliest? Deadliest Warrior's a huge undertaking, and it's really cool.
And at the end of the day it comes down to 3 guys having some fun.
guys shoot cannons and blowing stuff up.
Being a part of Deadliest Warrior is the .
It's the historic clash of revolutionary age giants.
General George Washington Calm, calculated, and humble in victory Versus general Napoleon Bonaparte, maniacal, merciless, and obsessed with world domination.
Fire at will! In our long-range artillery tests, Washington's 6-pound Cannon was blown away by Napoleon's 8-pound Cannon.
In medium-range weapons, Napoleon's 1777 charleville muskets were no match for the one-two punch of Washington's brown Bess muskets and Pennsylvania long rifles.
In close-range weapons, Napoleon's cavalry saber was cut down by Washington's colichemarde.
In battlefield tactics, Washington's hybrid warfare was outmaneuvered by Napoleon's bait-and-bash tactic.
While the experts have formed their opinions, all of the concrete data is turned over to Robert daly and entered into the digital combat engine, which ultimately determines the winner.
His team of engineers and historians has also completed its research on more than 100 "x" factors.
These "x" factors include things like intimidation, dominance, audacity, logistics.
All of these play a part in who these men were and how they led their troops to victory.
And then we assign a numerical value between 1 and 100, with 100 being the ultimate warrior.
When you talk about generalship, Napoleon is brilliant, but he has moments when he's very impatient.
And that impatience is what overextends him into the Russian winter campaign and leads to basically his biggest defeat-- versus George Washington, who's very, very patient when he comes to the battlefield.
How do you rate that? Washington knew what it took to get the job done, and Napoleon's impatience started to really impact him.
We ended up giving generalship to Washington, slightly, at an 88 versus Napoleon's at 82.
Let's also consider fatigue here.
George Washington's strategy was prolonging the battle.
Napoleon took the long trek into Russia with half a million troops and retreated with only 25,000.
No, absolutely.
And when you look at Napoleon having stretched his line so far, more so than Washington, who is moving quickly in a very localized area generally.
So Washington ends up having the advantage here-- 74 to Napoleon's 67.
For me on this one, it's all about logistics.
I mean, Napoleon had the resources.
He had the trained men.
Washington, I'm seeing a guy who can improvise, and that's awesome, but if you're making cannons out of candlesticks, I see a problem.
No, absolutely.
While Napoleon had a great logistical base, we had to rate him a 79 due to the fact that he extended himself too far and got out of his logistical supply line.
On the other hand, you have Washington, and he was able to scrap and scrounge and accomplish his mission.
It's still lower than what Napoleon had, but only slightly, at a 73.
So we've got the weapons data in the SIM.
We've considered all the "x" factors.
Let's run the SIM.
The combat engine will run 5,000 simulated battles-- pitting general George Washington and four continental soldiers against general Napoleon Bonaparte and four soldiers from la Grande armee.
Avance! To arms! Allez, allez! Take out the lieutenant! Go to the Cannon! Load, load! Take the boxes off! Ram! Ram! Prime the piece! Clear! Reload! Scatter! Bayonets! Prepare to charge! In one of the closest contests in Deadliest Warrior history, George Washington narrowly seizes victory.
Washington wins 2,530 battles to Napoleon's 2,470-- a difference of just over 1%.
When you look at this matchup, it is so close.
George Washington is able to adapt to his battlefield and to move troops strategically wherever it is necessary to create the most amount of chaos in the battle space.
The "x" factors were virtually dead even.
Napoleon scored high in logistics and tactics for his skills at executing battle plans.
But it was Washington's generalship, his ability to use limited resources and motivate his heavily outnumbered army and the overwhelming advantage of his musket-rifle combination that clinched his narrow victory.
Napoleon is brilliant, but Washington is persistent, dedicated, and will not stop until he accomplishes the goal at hand.
And he is a brilliant leader, not only of men in battle, but a country as well.