Originally posted by M21Sniper
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Samurai against knight
Collapse
X
-
-
Samurai...Knight, I don't want to piss either off."Our citizenship in the United States is our national character. Our citizenship in any particular state is only our local distinction. By the latter we are known at home, by the former to the world. Our great title is AMERICANS…" -- Thomas Paine
Comment
-
"Thunar: Yep like I said its a parade arming sword dude not an actual fighting sword they made it that way for looks never for fighting. For one the blade is to wide. I'm sure its a good buy for a wallhanger but never for fighting. I busy for the moment but I will respond to the other posts probably later tonight or tomorrow but I hate to say it dude that is not a real bastard sword in sense of what a knight would actually carry into battle."
Nope, it is a full tanged fully functional battle worthy sword.
It is NOT a wallhanger by any means.
It was made that way(engraved and gold inlaid) because the dude that had it made has ridiculous amounts of cash, and he was very good friends with the blacksmith that made it. For a stranger to have got that sword made it would've cost at least $4000 US dollars.Last edited by Bill; 12 Apr 05,, 00:49.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperThe Scots under Wallace trashed a huge British heavy armored cavalry charge at the battle of Falkirk, and the Moors cleaned the crusaders clocks on many occasions, knights are hardly invincible.
Comment
-
Originally posted by LunatockLots more to consider than just the Katana and the European Bastard Sword. Knight Swords and Knight Armor for example. They depended on brute strength since the swords and armor were so heavy. And when knights fought the objective was to knock your opponent flat on his back.
And the different types of weapons & tactics. Let's say castle or house warfare. Unlike Knights, samurai would use bows & arrows at medium to close range.
And you ever been inside any Japanese buildings? Not quite as spacious as buildings in other countries. Which would suck for fully suited knights and most of thier weapons. Samurai could just unsheath some Wakazashi's, which were made for indoor fighting. And odds are the knights would have to use daggers, as most of thier other weapons would be too big & clumsy, considering the limited space they'd have in a Japanese fortress.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Lunatock4. All of which except a few short swords and daggers they could muster from their ranks would be equally useless inside the hyopthetical Japanese fortress or castle. Especially the lances & pikes. Moving them into position would be like moving furniture up or down at least one flight of stairs.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bigross86What about the 14-15th centuries when the Ottoman's attacked and conquered most of Europe, including Constantinople? They used newly invented/improved cannons, and I'd say their mettalurgy and weaponry was far better than the Europeans at the time. One of the main reason they survived as en Empire over such a large land mass for 500 years
Comment
-
F.Caddy: "But that was in the 13th or 14th century, the question was 1 15th century knight v 1 15th century samurai"
I am in no way convinced that a 15th century plate would stop a bursting doublehanded Choku-To Katana thrust by a well trained Samurai warrior.
It might...it also might not.
That is of course if a Samurai was using a Choku-To or Ninja-To sword. A curved Wakazashi Katana is still a very powerful thrusting blade, but not nearly as optimized for piercing attacks as the straight bladed Choku-To and Ninja-To Katanas are.
Someone send this into mythbusters! lol. ;)Last edited by Bill; 12 Apr 05,, 00:48.
Comment
-
an introduction.. i just signed up because i came across this thread just now and i love it.
a while ago, someone mentioned how it is possible to use bows and arrows at close range. as an avid archer, it's quite simple.
samurai bows were made to be drawn on horseback. a yumi, as it is called, is asymmetrical in design and it allows the samurai to draw very quickly over armor and allows him to easily weild it in battle.
a note here.. the length of the bow does not matter in the strength of it directly. the longer a bow is, the longer the draw length is, which allows for more force on the bow (assuming the bow can handle it.) the key points are the curves. the apex of the curves act as key stones in an arch, holding the force until the arrow is "loosed" or let fly.
yumi's have a fundamental design that combines the hunnish double-recurve bow to that of the long bow. yumi's are (and were) at least 82" long, with the same 3 key curves that the hunnish bow had (though less exaggerated). this allowed them a potential of raw power equivalent to that of the steppe warriors.
why did i go on about that? to state that the power of a yumi exceeded that of the longbow, and we all know that longbows pierced plate armor, and even chain mail. actually, i'm looking for a citation that states that a 100-pound mongolian bow can pierce triple layered chain mail from about 300 yards.
but yeah, in the Last Samurai (freaking awesome movie), the archery (at the very least) is portrayed almost completely accurately. the sheer speed that a good archer has is insane. at the least, the samurai could get the knight off of his horse with his bow.
oh, and crossbows of the era were not only grossly large themselves (the stocks were huge), they were slow to reload. a decent archer of the era in even europe could nock, aim, loose, and renock 7 arrows per minute, assuming a 100 yard target. it takes considerable less time to aim, and a single shot to the face, back of the head, or to other key areas could finish a knight.
just my thoughts..
Comment
-
oh, i also forgot to mention that ya, or a yumi's arrows, were longer, and so more mass went into each shot. also, the draw was more complete, adding more force to the shot.
yeah, once on the ground, the samurai would finish off a desperately wounded knight easily.
also, knights didn't use crossbows, as bows and crossbows were yeomen weapons.
on a side note, for quite a while, crossbows were said to be anti-christian as well, though i don't know if that was during the 15th century. i'll have to look that up...
Comment
-
First off...I can't believe I sat here and read 7 pages of this...lol
but what the hell...I'll put my 2 cents in..
It'd be a close battle..both bloodied and tired, but after seeing full plated guys walking around the local renaissance fair...I'd have to go with the samurai on sheer agility.
Everyone has given excellent points and counter points...so I say agree to disagree until proven otherwise..
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperIt was made that way(engraved and gold inlaid) because the dude that had it made has ridiculous amounts of cash, and he was very good friends with the blacksmith that made it. For a stranger to have got that sword made it would've cost at least $4000 US dollars.
Comment
-
Originally posted by M21SniperI have a bastard sword.
It weighs about 30lbs.
Using that effectively one handed would be neigh on impossible.
But I remember reading that Great Sword weighted 20 lbs.... (isnt lbs about 0,46 kg or something like that?)
Comment
Comment