View Poll Results: Samurai vs Medieval Knight

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Samurai

    20 62.50%
  • Medieval Knight

    12 37.50%
Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 726

Thread: Samurai against knight

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Regular
    Join Date
    01 Jun 04
    Posts
    74

    Samurai against knight

    Who would win fight ,samurai or 15-century knight like this one?My bet is on knight.

  2. #2
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    26 Aug 03
    Posts
    3,169
    Samuria would nail him in the crotch with his Samuria sword

  3. #3
    Regular
    Join Date
    01 Jun 04
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Praxus
    Samuria would nail him in the crotch with his Samuria sword
    I guess in this Armour replica they forgot to put some kind of protection ,hey man but this armour looks just fantastic anyway.I have couple more pics. chek them out.

  4. #4
    Staff Emeritus Lunatock's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Location
    Southeast Pennsylvania
    Posts
    3,337
    Basing this on a samurai being better trained with a sword, and faster than a knight who has the armor slowing him down and a more cumbersome weapon than a Katana.

  5. #5
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    1 against 1, the samuari. Openned battle, the knights.

  6. #6
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    A Katana will punch right through ancient plate armor.

    It has a piercing tip unparralled for penetrating armor.

  7. #7
    Regular
    Join Date
    19 Sep 04
    Location
    Germany (currently Australia)
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
    1 against 1, the samuari. Openned battle, the knights.
    if you think about battle you could consider another point. Japanese armies were usually a lot larger than european ones. Just due to the fact that e.g. in the 17th century (that's the only fact I have, but I think it reflects the whole thing) the japanese population was bigger than the population of whole Europe!
    No matter how the next war ends, the following one will be fought with sticks and stones.
    (Albert Einstein)

  8. #8
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    5,509
    This thread is waay to long to get through so will add some thoughts after a few searches.

    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    1 against 1, the samuari. Openned battle, the knights.
    You made that comment back in 2004 !

    Have you changed your your mind since wrt to 1 vs 1 ?

    On the program 'Deadliest Warrior', they had a simulation of Samurai vs Spartan

    The Spartan came out tops due to the big shield. This is for 1 against 1 but results are quite close.

    Is it fair to say if the Spartan could do it so could the Knight ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Skill and artisan versus technology and tactics. In the long run, I bet on the 2nd. A bad samuari will come out 2nd best against a good knight. Not every samuari is that good just as not every knight is that bad. That being said, the knights go for the lowest common denominator, ie the mass charge where they act as one. The samuari never encountered a wall of steel ... nor clouds of arrows until the Mongols.
    This goes for open battle, which is completely different. So many situations possible if armies faced each other on the battlefield, the knights seemingly would have the advantage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster View Post
    Actually the Samurai won. It was against the Vikings. A Samurai is not a Ninja which is of a different breed. The Spartan won against the Ninja.
    In the episode where a Spartan takes on the Samurai, its the Spartan that wins and the biggest advantage is due to the shield. But its a close fight. Out of a 1000, 527 vs 473.

    In the show with the Viking vs the Samurai, the Samurai wins but it was again very close. Out of a 1000 simulations, 522 vs 478.

    I think these results are not enough to have any conclusion, on any given day it could go either way.

  9. #9
    Patron roshan's Avatar
    Join Date
    30 Oct 03
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Lunatock
    Basing this on a samurai being better trained with a sword, and faster than a knight who has the armor slowing him down and a more cumbersome weapon than a Katana.
    Lunatock, what would the Knight be using? The Katana was quite a heavy sword. In fact the katana was in fact slightly heavier then your typical european swords, assuming the blade lenght was the same.

    Quote Originally Posted by M21Sniper
    Personally, i say the Samurai would whoop the knights asses.

    Here's why- the Crusades.

    The heavy mounted Knights of Europe ran into tremendous difficulties against the unarmored Moors and their lightning fast sabres.

    Against trained Samurai, who were faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar more skilled warriors than the Moors were.....ouch.

    M21 I really doubt that most of the moors were unarmored. Chain mail was quite common in arabia/india/persia, and sometimes plate was also used.

    Quote Originally Posted by M21Sniper
    A Katana will punch right through ancient plate armor.

    It has a piercing tip unparralled for penetrating armor.
    Slashing and piercing weapons were quite ineffective against plate armor. If you are going up against plate armor it would make much more sense to have a mace or even an axe rather then a katana. In this situation a Knight would have a MUCH larger advantage over the samurai because medieval europe had a much larger variety of maces. clubs and axes and the samurais had little training in the use of such weapons.

    During the time that plate armor was common in Europe, most swords had very thin tips for piercing through armor, and the most common swords were 2 handed and bastard swords which were the most suited to fighting other plate wearing opponents.

    The Katana was basically a slashing weapon, its tip could be used for thrusting by modifying your thrusts to account for the curve, but it was by no means a great thruster. The best thrusting tips would be those of rapiers. European cut and thrust swords could also thrust better then the katana.
    Last edited by roshan; 16 Jun 04, at 22:06.

  10. #10
    Regular
    Join Date
    01 Jun 04
    Posts
    74
    Actually this type of armour is the 15-century made in Germany for combat ,and those were relativelly light and not cumbersome,only tournament armours were very heavy.Weight of this one I guess is no more than 15-20kg.But the most important thing ,are the ridges and fluting which makes the steel quite strong and does not have to be very thick like in Crusaders plate armour.
    Notice one more thing ;all surfaces are rounded so even samuraii sword would have hard time to penetrate.

  11. #11
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Sir, who ever stopped the Mongols the first time round?

    The Mongols would've kicked the snot out of Euro knights too.

  12. #12
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    "But the crusadors were victorious!"

    Ummm, no they weren't.

  13. #13
    Regular
    Join Date
    01 Jun 04
    Posts
    74
    Mongols invaded in about 1250 Russia , E.Europe but then Khan died and retreated back to the far east.
    I agree Mongols defeated Polish, Silesian,Moravian armees but mainly in my view by the sheer numbers of their soldiers and in fact they had good tactic "Mongol Blitz" I would call.
    But that happened in early 12-century,later on European metallurgy surpassed and weaponry was simply the best in the world.Knights were just unbeaten in the field,they conquered whole of Iberian peninsula from lightly armoured and fast Arabs.
    Look at the Teutonic order in early 15-century with their couple of thousand heavy cavalry.They blackmailed and defeated many times powerfull Kings of Poland and Lithauenia.
    Teutonic order was mainly German and as I mentioned before German armour was the best and also discipline and tactics.Knights rule!

  14. #14
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    The 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.

  15. #15
    Regular
    Join Date
    01 Jun 04
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by M21Sniper
    The 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.
    That must have been suprisse to the English .Scotts did not have any cavallry but only peasants with swords.Wow.!
    It happened many times when for example Swiss Pikemen won on many ocassions against Much bigger Austrians or Burgundians armies.But those victories were exceptions to the rule.
    I have read that Crusaders had only few hundred Knights and the rest consistet of lightly armed peasants when they took Jerusalem-impresive when you consider how far they were from the home base and supplies were very sporadic.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Ninjas & Knights
    By Ironside in forum Ancient, Medieval & Early Modern Ages
    Replies: 106
    Last Post: 08 Jan 09,, 13:40
  2. Last Samurai gun question
    By Beaugeste93 in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 11 Jul 05,, 00:16

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •