EPTKnight vs. Samurai - Page 13
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
RowdierBob
Australia12844 Posts
| ||
|
FragKrag
United States11545 Posts
On July 27 2008 13:59 Kaesi wrote: I thought that article was very interesting and in-depth, but I think the OP of this thread lacks that same specificity. In a straight up, on foot, sword vs sword fight, the knight has a significant edge I'd say. But the Samurai are not swordsmen... They're elite horse archers... Why are we even doing this comparison when it's been proven again and again horse archers >>>> Knights? Yes, Samurai are not swordsmen. They are actually Mongolian/Hunnic cavalry archers. | ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
Knight = his own man Knight wins socially ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/1-1.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/ChampionLancer.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/DakmorLancer.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/EasternPaladin.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/FumikotheLowblood.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/IsaoEnlightenedBushi.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/HandofHonor.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/KondaLordofEiganjo.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/NorthernPaladin.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/SouthernPaladin.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/TakenoSamuraiGeneral.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v290/CustomLover/ToshiroUmezawa.jpg) So Samurai's are stronger but fuck knights are untouchable and can auto destroy shit. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11545 Posts
| ||
|
Kaesi
United States82 Posts
On July 27 2008 14:39 FragKrag wrote: Yes, Samurai are not swordsmen. They are actually Mongolian/Hunnic cavalry archers. From wiki: The samurai stressed skill with the yumi (longbow), reflected in the art of kyujutsu (lit. the skill of the bow). The bow would remain a critical component of the Japanese military even with the introduction of firearms during the Sengoku Jidai period. The yumi, an asymmetric composite bow made from bamboo, wood, rattan and leather, was not as powerful as the Eurasian reflex composite bow, having an effective range of 50 meters (about 164 feet) or 100 meters ([328 feet]) if accuracy was not an issue. It was usually used on foot behind a tedate (手盾), a large and mobile bamboo wall, but shorter versions (hankyu) could also be used from horseback. The practice of shooting from horseback became a Shinto ceremony of Yabusame. The samurai used various weapons, but the katana is the weapon that is synonymous with samurai. Bushido teaches that the katana is the samurai's soul and sometimes a samurai is pictured as entirely dependent on the katana for fighting. They believe that the katana was so precious that they often gave them names and considered them as part of the living. However the use of swords did not become common in battle until the Kamakura period (1185–1333), where the tachi and uchigatana (the predecessor to the katana) became prevalent. The katana itself did not become the primary weapon until the Edo period. It's mostly marketing and PR that makes people think samurai = katana. Yeah, it's romanticized a lot, but that doesn't change history. It wasn't the primary weapon until the Edo period, and the Edo period runs from 1600-1830... so that means katanas weren't the primary weapon until the medieval ages were already over. In fact the Edo period is considered beginning of the modern period for Japan! | ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
On July 27 2008 16:12 Kaesi wrote: From wiki: The samurai stressed skill with the yumi (longbow), reflected in the art of kyujutsu (lit. the skill of the bow). The bow would remain a critical component of the Japanese military even with the introduction of firearms during the Sengoku Jidai period. The yumi, an asymmetric composite bow made from bamboo, wood, rattan and leather, was not as powerful as the Eurasian reflex composite bow, having an effective range of 50 meters (about 164 feet) or 100 meters ([328 feet]) if accuracy was not an issue. It was usually used on foot behind a tedate (手盾), a large and mobile bamboo wall, but shorter versions (hankyu) could also be used from horseback. The practice of shooting from horseback became a Shinto ceremony of Yabusame. The samurai used various weapons, but the katana is the weapon that is synonymous with samurai. Bushido teaches that the katana is the samurai's soul and sometimes a samurai is pictured as entirely dependent on the katana for fighting. They believe that the katana was so precious that they often gave them names and considered them as part of the living. However the use of swords did not become common in battle until the Kamakura period (1185–1333), where the tachi and uchigatana (the predecessor to the katana) became prevalent. The katana itself did not become the primary weapon until the Edo period. It's mostly marketing and PR that makes people think samurai = katana. Yeah, it's romanticized a lot, but that doesn't change history. It wasn't the primary weapon until the Edo period, and the Edo period runs from 1600-1830... so that means katanas weren't the primary weapon until the medieval ages were already over. In fact the Edo period is considered beginning of the modern period for Japan! Still 1 on 1 i'd only fight using a bow if i was on a horse also from most drawing of the era bowmen samurai didn't wear any armor. Hell only crossbow man use armor else it gets in your way most archers in Europe would crappy a large shield you shove into the ground creating a shield wall and the archers would fire from behind that. | ||
|
aseq
Netherlands3972 Posts
| ||
|
shinigami
Canada423 Posts
Knights are the definitely stronger in melee combat, while samurai fought with bows and even guns (see: arquebus). Ranged weapons will forever be the bane of knights, so if we're talking about a samurai with only a sword, the knight will utterly annihilate him whereas if the samurai was also armed with his traditional bow (or gun), then the samurai will emerge as the victor. But if we were to give limited ammunition to the samurai, the knight "may" yet come out as the victor providing he successfully dodges/blocks the arrows/bullets. Besides, the knights get all the wenches. | ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
On July 27 2008 17:26 shinigami wrote: Again, knights can actually move fast even wearing plate because knights are generally made up of the strongest men. A samurai has no chance in melee range, especially if the knight is using a shield to further protect his neck and joints. Knights are the definitely stronger in melee combat, while samurai fought with bows and even guns (see: arquebus). Ranged weapons will forever be the bane of knights, so if we're talking about a samurai with only a sword, the knight will utterly annihilate him whereas if the samurai was also armed with his traditional bow (or gun), then the samurai will emerge as the victor. But if we were to give limited ammunition to the samurai, the knight "may" yet come out as the victor providing he successfully dodges/blocks the arrows/bullets. Besides, the knights get all the wenches. TT Although the catholic church was banned crossbows they where still used due to easier to aim and load and its alot more powerful then a bow. Also you should know knight armor where made esp if they are calvary to be arrow resistant most good plate mail will dent but not pierce the armor. A samurai that uses a bow would not wear armor if he expects to hit them its too restricting. Also if your going with a gun by then knight died out and so did samurai guns > all armor making anyone not using a gun useless. your not a samurai using a gun your just another marksman. By the time guns where in full swing knights and samurai where out of style. | ||
|
Play
Australia608 Posts
| ||
|
H
New Zealand6138 Posts
| ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
On July 27 2008 17:54 p23s3 wrote: Samurai are like Jedi man... Knights are Archangels Jedi vs Holy MOTHERFUCKING POWER | ||
|
aeronexus
United States392 Posts
On July 27 2008 18:10 IzzyCraft wrote: Knights are Archangels Jedi vs Holy MOTHERFUCKING POWER so samurai:knight::jedi:god. this could lead to some very deep philosophizing. for example, did god even exist a long time ago in a galaxy far far away? (I am inclined towards the atheist version of that analogy tho  ) | ||
|
Play
Australia608 Posts
On July 27 2008 18:10 IzzyCraft wrote: Knights are Archangels Jedi vs Holy MOTHERFUCKING POWER Jedi control the universe, or so the prophecy says... | ||
|
Funchucks
Canada2113 Posts
Against one enemy, it's not hard to see arrows coming and duck behind your shield. It's much harder against massed archers, and archers really become useful when they flank the enemy and attack from multiple directions at once, or against people (or horses) not covered by shields. Archers really shine against a massed cavalry charge. Shooting charging horses at the front of a crowd of charging horses creates utter chaos, and it's pretty rare for horses to be properly armored. | ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
On July 27 2008 18:19 aeronexus wrote: so samurai:knight::jedi:god. this could lead to some very deep philosophizing. for example, did god even exist a long time ago in a galaxy far far away? (I am inclined towards the atheist version of that analogy tho )Well midichlorians are little particles that jedi manipulate whos to say god isn't some guy that does quantum physics and manipulates all particles in the universe | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28576 Posts
| ||
|
opsayo
591 Posts
Sorry, but it appears you've already voted in poll #4158: "Who would win? ". Well I'm out of ideas. | ||
Live2Win
United States6657 Posts
| ||
|
MyTHicaL
France1070 Posts
| ||
| ||
