|
On July 28 2008 06:13 RtS)Night[Mare wrote:
You know people, armor doesnt mean autoinmunity against strikes. It's actually better to dodge an attack rather thank take a hit. The lack of armor offers great mobility, so i dont see how would lack of armor be a disadvantage in a battle.
Portuguese rapiers probably needed to be pretty swift to thrust fast enough, if they carried any armor, they would probably be slowed down and shitted on because the rapier is just not strong enough to fight a katana. It's a trade-off; big armor makes you harder to take down, but more likely to take hits. It worked for phalanxes and cavalry because cavalry would have mobility and phalanxes were walking tanks. However, archers WOULD NOT use heavy armor because they would need to relocate pretty fast. Stop saying armor > no armor, because it's pretty much situational.
Okay lol ill get in plate mail is designed to take slashes more or less cured to roll with the slashes etc and you can have the katana lets see who wins hell i wont even have a weapon just my gauntlets to punch you in the face. Armor is a god send other wise you can just get nicked and be slowed down bleeding slows you down alot more then armor ever would. Rapiers where a choice of sword to go with the musket because it was a light sword meant to pierce. When heavy armor become obsolete to guns leather armors of types where common to wear to prevents small cuts in a sword fight if your ever to miss with your gun and the guy has a sword so a piercing sword was chosen over a slashing sword for this reason its easier to pierce leather armor then it is to cut it.
Armor > then no armor IT IS SITUATIONAL AND IT FITS THIS SITUATION
SAMURAI WORE ARMOR THERE ARE NO PAINTINGS OF THE ERA WHERE A SAMURAI IS FIGHTING WITHOUT ARMOR UNLESS HES INSANE AND WANTS TO DIE FROM SMALL WOUNDS fucking die from tetanus from a small cut. Just cuz the guy is caring a sword doesn't make him samurai. Samurai have traditions and one of witch is preparing the body for battle WHICH INCLUDING WEARING ARMOR
|
I thought the Japanese Katanas (the good ones) took months and maybe years to make...(pounding and crafting to create the sharpest blade possible) and I heard that some of the good ones can cut through almost anything...probably even plate mail
Forgive me if I'm wrong but the good Katanas could cut up almost anything the knight has and the Samurai's swordmanship level was very advanced...thats why 'kendo ' is still very popular even today, while I don't see any sword arts that are popular from Europe except 'fencing' and you kind of can't really do fencing with a 2 handed claymore
That being said, the Knight probably had an advantage with a horse but thats probably it
|
United States42184 Posts
On July 28 2008 07:49 Februarys wrote:
I thought the Japanese Katanas (the good ones) took months and maybe years to make...(pounding and crafting to create the sharpest blade possible) and I heard that some of the good ones can cut through almost anything...probably even plate mail
Forgive me if I'm wrong but the good Katanas could cut up almost anything the knight has and the Samurai's swordmanship level was very advanced...thats why 'kendo ' is still very popular even today, while I don't see any sword arts that are popular from Europe except 'fencing' and you kind of can't really do fencing with a 2 handed claymore
That being said, the Knight probably had an advantage with a horse but thats probably it
Katanas are a slashing blade. You can't slash through plate mail. That's that.
|
On July 28 2008 07:49 Februarys wrote:
I thought the Japanese Katanas (the good ones) took months and maybe years to make...(pounding and crafting to create the sharpest blade possible) and I heard that some of the good ones can cut through almost anything...probably even plate mail
Forgive me if I'm wrong but the good Katanas could cut up almost anything the knight has and the Samurai's swordmanship level was very advanced...thats why 'kendo ' is still very popular even today, while I don't see any sword arts that are popular from Europe except 'fencing' and you kind of can't really do fencing with a 2 handed claymore
That being said, the Knight probably had an advantage with a horse but thats probably it
Not plate mail. Yeah they can cut through a lot, perhaps even spear, but not plate mail armor.
I voted for samauri cause im japanese but the knight would win
|
On July 28 2008 07:49 Februarys wrote:
I thought the Japanese Katanas (the good ones) took months and maybe years to make...(pounding and crafting to create the sharpest blade possible) and I heard that some of the good ones can cut through almost anything...probably even plate mail
Forgive me if I'm wrong but the good Katanas could cut up almost anything the knight has and the Samurai's swordmanship level was very advanced...thats why 'kendo ' is still very popular even today, while I don't see any sword arts that are popular from Europe except 'fencing' and you kind of can't really do fencing with a 2 handed claymore
That being said, the Knight probably had an advantage with a horse but thats probably it
Samurai's has horses too 
|
On July 26 2008 15:33 IzzyCraft wrote:
We can just base it on size 6 Foot german vs 5 foot japanese
More like 5'11 German and 5'7 Japanese
Nice exaggeration
|
On July 28 2008 07:52 Kwark wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2008 07:49 Februarys wrote:
I thought the Japanese Katanas (the good ones) took months and maybe years to make...(pounding and crafting to create the sharpest blade possible) and I heard that some of the good ones can cut through almost anything...probably even plate mail
Forgive me if I'm wrong but the good Katanas could cut up almost anything the knight has and the Samurai's swordmanship level was very advanced...thats why 'kendo ' is still very popular even today, while I don't see any sword arts that are popular from Europe except 'fencing' and you kind of can't really do fencing with a 2 handed claymore
That being said, the Knight probably had an advantage with a horse but thats probably it Katanas are a slashing blade. You can't slash through plate mail. That's that.
No.
Back then the Chinese has the 大刀(Big Blade?) for slashing and 長劍 (Long Sword) for thrusting. The Japanese wanted a weapon to be able to do both, hence they designed the Katana. Capable of doing both with its speed and power. You can look it up.
|
we need some kind of sticky.
katana =/ lightsaber
get it out of your heads; a katana will not slice through plate armor or shields.
swordsmanship was advanced on both sides.
too many people keep falling into the assumption that knights solely relied on brute strength and that all samurai's are the pinnacle of swordfighting.
samurai's weren't used to fighting a shielded opponent.
|
A falchion barely goes through plate.
Good luck with a katana.
|
On July 28 2008 07:57 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2008 07:52 Kwark wrote:On July 28 2008 07:49 Februarys wrote:
I thought the Japanese Katanas (the good ones) took months and maybe years to make...(pounding and crafting to create the sharpest blade possible) and I heard that some of the good ones can cut through almost anything...probably even plate mail
Forgive me if I'm wrong but the good Katanas could cut up almost anything the knight has and the Samurai's swordmanship level was very advanced...thats why 'kendo ' is still very popular even today, while I don't see any sword arts that are popular from Europe except 'fencing' and you kind of can't really do fencing with a 2 handed claymore
That being said, the Knight probably had an advantage with a horse but thats probably it Katanas are a slashing blade. You can't slash through plate mail. That's that. No. Back then the Chinese has the 大刀(Big Blade?) for slashing and 長劍 (Long Sword) for thrusting. The Japanese wanted a weapon to be able to do both, hence they designed the Katana. Capable of doing both with its speed and power. You can look it up.
If you have curved blade, it would never be as adept at thrusting as it is for slashing. Asian troops were not used to fighting heavily armored foes, so slashing worked out well.
|
On July 28 2008 08:04 FragKrag wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2008 07:57 Fishball wrote:On July 28 2008 07:52 Kwark wrote:On July 28 2008 07:49 Februarys wrote:
I thought the Japanese Katanas (the good ones) took months and maybe years to make...(pounding and crafting to create the sharpest blade possible) and I heard that some of the good ones can cut through almost anything...probably even plate mail
Forgive me if I'm wrong but the good Katanas could cut up almost anything the knight has and the Samurai's swordmanship level was very advanced...thats why 'kendo ' is still very popular even today, while I don't see any sword arts that are popular from Europe except 'fencing' and you kind of can't really do fencing with a 2 handed claymore
That being said, the Knight probably had an advantage with a horse but thats probably it Katanas are a slashing blade. You can't slash through plate mail. That's that. No. Back then the Chinese has the 大刀(Big Blade?) for slashing and 長劍 (Long Sword) for thrusting. The Japanese wanted a weapon to be able to do both, hence they designed the Katana. Capable of doing both with its speed and power. You can look it up. If you have curved blade, it would never be as adept at thrusting as it is for slashing. Asian troops were not used to fighting heavily armored foes, so slashing worked out well.
I'm not actually arguing against the whole Samurai vs Knight thing, but I just wanted to point out that the Katana can in fact, and more or less meant to thrust in some way.
There are actually Kendo styles that uses the Katana to thrust.
|
Traditionally I would say the Samurai would definitely win, just because Samurai have much more tact than your average knight.
Plus Samurais could be backed by ninjas at anytime thus making them more deadly than anything besides ninjas.
voted Samurai this is like the closest poll ever
|
On July 28 2008 08:13 Fishball wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2008 08:04 FragKrag wrote:On July 28 2008 07:57 Fishball wrote:On July 28 2008 07:52 Kwark wrote:On July 28 2008 07:49 Februarys wrote:
I thought the Japanese Katanas (the good ones) took months and maybe years to make...(pounding and crafting to create the sharpest blade possible) and I heard that some of the good ones can cut through almost anything...probably even plate mail
Forgive me if I'm wrong but the good Katanas could cut up almost anything the knight has and the Samurai's swordmanship level was very advanced...thats why 'kendo ' is still very popular even today, while I don't see any sword arts that are popular from Europe except 'fencing' and you kind of can't really do fencing with a 2 handed claymore
That being said, the Knight probably had an advantage with a horse but thats probably it Katanas are a slashing blade. You can't slash through plate mail. That's that. No. Back then the Chinese has the 大刀(Big Blade?) for slashing and 長劍 (Long Sword) for thrusting. The Japanese wanted a weapon to be able to do both, hence they designed the Katana. Capable of doing both with its speed and power. You can look it up. If you have curved blade, it would never be as adept at thrusting as it is for slashing. Asian troops were not used to fighting heavily armored foes, so slashing worked out well. I'm not actually arguing against the whole Samurai vs Knight thing, but I just wanted to point out that the Katana can in fact, and more or less meant to thrust in some way. There are actually Kendo styles that uses the Katana to thrust.
Its meant for thrusting like a long sword is you can do it but its not wise. Katana are top heavy the weight is in the blade, common for slashing swords to have this trait makes the slash more powerful and easier to go with. Thrusting blades are usually double edge and are grip heavy meaning your aim and control with the thrust is greatly enhanced. The katana has a pointed tip but its more or less for pushing chain mail or flesh it has a wide stock on the backing even if he stabbing thought the plate mail i doubt he get far in unless he has amazing strength to push far enough past the sharp part of the blade and to the backing. But by then the knight porably would have chopped him up good lol.
Kanata can thrust but unless its hitting chain mail or less its very doubt full it will do much esp against plate mail that curves only an idiot bs would make it form fitting curving it lwins and glides off hits just point it out
|
On July 28 2008 08:17 Sp1ralArch1tect wrote:
Traditionally I would say the Samurai would definitely win, just because Samurai have much more tact than your average knight.
Plus Samurais could be backed by ninjas at anytime thus making them more deadly than anything besides ninjas.
voted Samurai this is like the closest poll ever
lol then the knights get to have legions of archers fire the first volleys i think the archers win as long as there is distance no need for knights.
|
On July 28 2008 02:22 RtS)Night[Mare wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2008 11:50 shinigami wrote:
In any martial art, it's proven that no amount of technique beats pure raw manly strength.
i was seriously reading your post until i run in that statement. You've obviously no idea of what you're talking about. Any guy with decent martial arts training will own the shit out of a "pure raw manly strenght".
What I said is completely true. Any guy with decent martial arts training also does STRENGTH training. The best analogy would be a trained american boxer versus a wushu practitioner. The boxer does heavy duty strength and cardiovascular training, while the wushi practitioner would practice katas and breathing techniques. The boxer's fists would easily break the guy's jaw and win quite easily thanks to his strength augmented with boxing techniques.
You can't win with just techniques alone. Strength is what protects or destroys people.
|
I'm coming in late but when was it agreed that it was katana vs broadsword? If i'm not mistaken there are plenty of old japanese weapons aside from the katana, particularly blunt ones which could dent and own plate armor i'm guessing, and i'm also guessing that the samurais would've been trained to employ these weapons on occasion?
|
On July 28 2008 08:36 zobz wrote:
I'm coming in late but when was it agreed that it was katana vs broadsword? If i'm not mistaken there are plenty of old japanese weapons aside from the katana, particularly blunt ones which could dent and own plate armor i'm guessing, and i'm also guessing that the samurais would've been trained to employ these weapons on occasion?
Hell most people aren't even thinking its a katana but like some sorta super sword that cuts though metal, cars, plate armor, cows, houses with ease. Anyways blunt weapons where meant to dent armor at lest in Europe but to throw the opposite to the ground or give them a concussion knock the air out of them etc. Doesn't matter if your armor is great if you get hit by a sledge(war) hammer your gonna feel something.
|
This topic is overflowing with nonsense and absurdity. It's annoying. Please stop it. You know who you are.
|
1v1 = Samurai WIns all the time
2k+++vs 2k++++ = Knights win all the time
Period.
|
On July 28 2008 08:33 shinigami wrote:
What I said is completely true. Any guy with decent martial arts training also does STRENGTH training. The best analogy would be a trained american boxer versus a wushu practitioner. The boxer does heavy duty strength and cardiovascular training, while the wushi practitioner would practice katas and breathing techniques.
That's a terribly faulty analogy. wushu is not combat designed. I want to see your boxer fight an aikido sensei, or 3rd++ dan taekwondoin. He'll probably not end up shitted up because he HAS BEEN TRAINED TO FIGHT, but eastern martial arts > western fighing any day. The boxer is not completly raw strenght, the analogy would fit best if a bodybuilder fought an advanced kung fu fighter. You know, the bodybuilder stands no chance.
On July 28 2008 07:37 IzzyCraft wrote:
Okay lol ill get in plate mail is designed to take slashes more or less cured to roll with the slashes etc and you can have the katana lets see who wins hell i wont even have a weapon just my gauntlets to punch you in the face. Armor is a god send other wise you can just get nicked and be slowed down bleeding slows you down alot more then armor ever would. Rapiers where a choice of sword to go with the musket because it was a light sword meant to pierce. When heavy armor become obsolete to guns leather armors of types where common to wear to prevents small cuts in a sword fight if your ever to miss with your gun and the guy has a sword so a piercing sword was chosen over a slashing sword for this reason its easier to pierce leather armor then it is to cut it.
Armor > then no armor IT IS SITUATIONAL AND IT FITS THIS SITUATION
SAMURAI WORE ARMOR THERE ARE NO PAINTINGS OF THE ERA WHERE A SAMURAI IS FIGHTING WITHOUT ARMOR UNLESS HES INSANE AND WANTS TO DIE FROM SMALL WOUNDS fucking die from tetanus from a small cut. Just cuz the guy is caring a sword doesn't make him samurai. Samurai have traditions and one of witch is preparing the body for battle WHICH INCLUDING WEARING ARMOR
you missed completly my point. I stated that wearing heavy armor is not autowin because of the reasons i posted. If you were too blind to notice it's not my fault. Of course samurai wore armor, armor protects from slashes and light blunts, but at the cost of mobility. I dont think you have noticed but troops that wore next to no armor were troops who were meant as either: hit and run/cannon fodder. The mainstay of the army wore armor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/548/parade4fl.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.katanaproject.info/images/dress/samurai_on_horse.jpg)
