EPTKnight vs. Samurai - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
We Are Here
Australia1810 Posts
| ||
|
We Are Here
Australia1810 Posts
| ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
| ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
On July 26 2008 16:27 ICanFlyLow wrote: A Samurai's armor is not made for Heavy-style european swords. 2-handed swords rlllyyyy popular at that time. So i have to go with the knight. Still Ninja > Samurai, Knights Really wtf do people think ninja's are they are fucking body guards if you look them up properly usually hired to do yard work etc but be able to defend the feudal lord with what they have. So they don't look like gaurds | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On July 26 2008 15:33 IzzyCraft wrote: We can just base it on size 6 Foot german vs 5 foot japanese Germans weren't 6ft then. Both groups were like 4-5'6" tall. Seriously though, the quality of European metal was better so that helps, but knights in plate mail can realistically only fight for a few minutes before running out of energy. Look at what happened at Agincourt. Make a knight fall in the mud and he dies on his own. Also, there are weak points in plate armor and I suspect samurai would be able to hit those targets, because they do actually train whereas being a knight is about whoever can afford the gear. The real question is who would win- a samurai or a lowly peasant? AHAHHAHHAHAHHAHA EARLY EDO PERIOD TOKUGAWA JOKES ARE SO GOOD + Show Spoiler + ... | ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
On July 26 2008 16:59 Jibba wrote: Germans weren't 6ft then. Both groups were like 4-5'6" tall. Seriously though, the quality of European metal was better so that helps, but knights in plate mail can realistically only fight for a few minutes before running out of energy. Look at what happened at Agincourt. Make a knight fall in the mud and he dies on his own. Also, there are weak points in plate armor and I suspect samurai would be able to hit those targets, because they do actually train whereas being a knight is about whoever can afford the gear. The real question is who would win- a samurai or a lowly peasant? AHAHHAHHAHAHHAHA EARLY EDO PERIOD TOKUGAWA JOKES ARE SO GOOD + Show Spoiler + ... Lol few minutes so battles where fraught in what 5 mins then they took breaks? doubt that. even 100 pound armor if your smart and conservative in your moments you can keep it up for a good time. Hey if your going hypothetical it's very plausible to get 6ft knight = wealthy = good eating more or less meaning they don't fit into the avg height. | ||
|
zgl
United States1055 Posts
On July 26 2008 15:01 Instigata wrote: Mongols owned them both. Tsunami saved Japs, Kahn's death and tradition saved Europe. Longrange bow owns. Mage > Mongols > Knights, Samurai | ||
|
KwarK
United States42116 Posts
On July 26 2008 16:59 Jibba wrote: Germans weren't 6ft then. Both groups were like 4-5'6" tall. Seriously though, the quality of European metal was better so that helps, but knights in plate mail can realistically only fight for a few minutes before running out of energy. Look at what happened at Agincourt. Make a knight fall in the mud and he dies on his own. Also, there are weak points in plate armor and I suspect samurai would be able to hit those targets, because they do actually train whereas being a knight is about whoever can afford the gear. The real question is who would win- a samurai or a lowly peasant? AHAHHAHHAHAHHAHA EARLY EDO PERIOD TOKUGAWA JOKES ARE SO GOOD + Show Spoiler + ... The elite haven't gotten much taller because their diet has always been good. Henry VIII was 6 foot, Peter the Great was like 6'8. When you're growing up on a diet of meat you grow up big. It's just the malnourished poor who were short. As for tiring, the horse does a lot of the running around. | ||
|
aseq
Netherlands3972 Posts
The knight, easily. He's a foot taller and his blows are way harder. Put Bruce Lee vs Semmy Schilt in a boxing ring and see whether size matters. Also, people are forgetting samurai do wear (mail) armor, which, together with all their ornaments and useless things sticking out, weighs almost as much as the plate mail. Unless the plate mail suit has weak points, so the samurai can inflict massive damage in 1 blow, the knight is going to take this. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On July 26 2008 17:09 aseq wrote: "(some high-ranking 16th century samurai lords actually owned pieces of contemporary European armor, gifts and purchases which they even wore into battle -they did not prize them merely as exotica)" The knight, easily. He's a foot taller and his blows are way harder. Put Bruce Lee vs Semmy Schilt in a boxing ring and see whether size matters. Bruce Lee beat Kareem Abdul Jabbar. Point proven. Kwark, I knew Henry was pretty big but I thought he was a rare exception. No idea Peter the Great was that huge. Being on horse back kills agility even further and then all you have to do is go after the horse's legs. Cavalry works great in mass melee, but 1 on 1 I don't think it'd be much of an advantage. | ||
|
SaveYourSavior
United States1071 Posts
Most samurais have two swords: a long and short sword. Most wear mail armor. Samurai are not as protected and their swords are pretty ineffective unless they can stick their sword through the knight helmet's visor Monty Python style. Its pretty much a draw in a 1v1 battle except the knight has the slight edge i believe. Samurai have less weight to run around but samurai are not pussies. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42116 Posts
I'm reasonably sure that being on horseback would still be very valuable in a duel simply because you'd be four feet higher up than them. The ability to do sweeping overhand blows at their head has to come in handy. | ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
| ||
|
haduken
Australia8267 Posts
don't believe... look up invasion of Korea. | ||
|
haduken
Australia8267 Posts
| ||
AltaiR_
Korea (South)922 Posts
| ||
|
besiger
Croatia2452 Posts
| ||
|
IzzyCraft
United States4487 Posts
On July 26 2008 18:20 AltaiR_ wrote: VADER = samurai helm/armor/katana stance, CAN I SAY MORE. but in honesty samurais have rode horses and shot bows too, not all of em are katana footmen, knights have spears, samurais have naginatas and zanbatos which are meant to slay people OFF horses, but frankly i would say samurais have far better experience with 2 handed sword play Cuz Japanese are smart samurai aren't specialized in swordplay but more likely yari and bow SPEAR AND LANCE MAKE THE ARMY NOT SWORDS. Also Japanese horse warfare wasn't as large scale as knight charges also zanbato for serious you go there TT why not say knight have thors hammer and could lift it. Horse spears are 8+ feet takes a special man (stupid or suscidal) to stand up to a changing horse with a small spear. Also as far as riding horses while shooting a bow that Mongolian japan used long bow for a long long time like Europe cuz its easer to maintain. Rain = fucked up recurved bow if you didn't know. | ||
|
ambit!ous1
United States3662 Posts
| ||
| ||
