A samurai would have not chance at killing a Knight in real life, primarily because a Samurai would have absolutely no experience with something like a Knight. The Samurai would take one look and say "What the Fuck is that?" because the Samurai would have never seen so much Armour in his life.
The Knight on the other hand has seen Armour of the same general make as the Samurais and thus can handle it relatively well.
@1169Timothy Unless the Samurai can spot his weakness, like being heavy and can't see very well. I think that a smart Samurai would probebly take a look and leave, then come back later with a plan and back up. But maybe you are right, he might just be like "誰がこのメタル馬鹿であり、そしてなぜ彼は日本にあります?"
@JordansGuitarCovers In retrospect I don't think the Knight would allow him to leave and come up with a plan. Also if by heavy you mean slow, then no that is not an option, most people believe that Knight's armour was heavy and made them slow in battle, but that is an urban myth and holds no water historically, also Samurai armour weighed about the same as Knightly armour so if the Knight is slow then so is the Samurai.
@JordansGuitarCovers Oh one more thing I wanted to tell you, I believe that the Knight could see just fine, and this is how I will prove it, take 2 fingers, space them out by 1cm and then put them up to your eye and thy to look between them, I can see through mine just fine and on most helmets the visor was often wider then that. but the Knight surly can't hear shit.
After reading your comment I fooled around with some tape and ski goggles (I don't have any medieval helmet). I first taped the goggles so that i had two 2 x 20 mm holes to see trought. I would not like to fight in that, but to walk to the fight in an arrow storm and then lift my visor just before the fight, sure. Then I tried with one 2 x 150 mm slit, this I could fight with I think but would have problem with my vison. And with 10 x 150 mm I felt like "no problem".
Of course, ski goggles aren't a medieval visor. And I didn't do any fighting while wearing it, just wear it to get the different feelings of the different slits.
I do agree with you that the vision of the helmets are probably not the difficult part to get used to. The hearing and breathing in a closed helmet would probably be much more difficult.
@gurkfisk89 That is why most knights got helmets which did not restrict their breathing that much like a Pig face helmet, look up that one, it is not my favorite helm but it is the most practical for ergonomics, it also has the ability to deflect blows due to the conical shaped mouth piece of the visor. I would prefer your blows to be deflected off the helm then to have my face take the full force of the blow. Please look up the helm.
I'm going to hope and assume this was a play fight meant for entertainment.
That Samurai baseball swing from 0:15 - 0:17 is something a someone trained in the art of the Japanese would (or at least should) never do.
Problem. You never cut passed or over the lead leg. The reason for this is because like many martial arts your footwork or stance is your foundation and cutting in this way both unroots your stance and puts you in a very vulnerable position.
@DoomShizzle Now I took a couple screenshots from the frames at the end of the attack to show you explain my point. screenshooter.n3tt/0803952/wyrkjxq & screenshooter.n3tt/0803952/lqsivwn Now the knight may not be able to see this with the shield blocking his vision but I'm sure with these screens all of you can. Because of that inappropriate cut, he just made his whole right side an open defenseless target.
change the 3 in n3tt to e and remove the extra t of course :)
Ok lets get a bit of armor from a knight put it on a dead pig or summon and chop it with a full on katana. Oh wait knights are invincible when they into battle with other knights swords just bounced off there armour
They where not invincible to swords, but nearly invincible to sword cuts. The main sword techniques to counter armor are grabbing the sword with one hand on the blade and then thrust at weak points (areas that are not protected by plate).
Sorry, I didn't get that comment. Do you mean that I think that armors are low-tech or that swords are low-tech? I don't see any of them as low-tech. Plate armor protects you from sword cuts really well. So the armor is sure not low-tech. And even if swords usually isn't designed to counter armor, halfword techniques let you have a good chance anyway. So swords are not low-tech either.
Both are however low-tech compare to modern military equipment but that's an other story.
@gurkfisk89 The armor has 2000 years of developement. You can block with ellbows, hands, neck, back. A Katana would brake if it hits a european hardened fightarmor, because all that Katanas do is cutting.
This is Bujinkan/Ninjutsu is a matierial arts with 1000 years of tradition from Japan with 9 different schools that the Samurai & Ninja have training 6 of them have the Samurai training and 3 of them have the Ninja training. The Samurai and Ninja warriors was (Zen)buddhism like me. I beleave on this becouse i want prove my master. "Hatsumi Maasaki" soke of Bujinkan.
The fight would pobably be very tight between a samurai and a knight. The fightingstyles of the knights were also very sofisticated! Differens being that the european fightingstyles where forgotten for a long time.
An unarmoured samurai against a real european knight in armour would probably be dead as a door nail.
What the heck? What samurai is so ignorant that he would throw his saya and katana away when he is done with it? And why would the knight be in armour but the samurai now be in armour?
the knight's sword are too short, and armor is too thick to acutally be quick enough to have long combat effectiveness. Knights were usually on horses to charge through enemy. On foot, knights are useless, they cna't run, they can't chase, how do you win?
Except that knights frequently fought on foot; the English and Germans were known for this in particular. There is literally no evidence that they wouldn't be combat effective on foot. The majority of the material in Medieval Fechtbuch deal with combat on foot; not mounted combat.
Knightly swords range from shorter than katana, to much longer than katana. Your claim here has no merit.
Knightly armor is not that thick; often only 1.5mm or 2mm, perhaps 3mm at the thickest part of the armor. Samurai armor is of a similar thickness. Knights could fight for long, extended periods of time.
Knights are as combat effective on the ground as samurai were, who /also/ originated from a history of mounted combat.
No, I menat, that they had to fought with one hand by blade and the other hand by control. And this knight fights in a armament of 15 th or 16 th century, by the time when lansquenets were better in fighting by foot. What I wanted to say was: For knights it was too difficult to fight with shield by foot, because their swords couldn´t interfuse the armaments (And a katana couldn´t it too), thats the reason why they use poll axes etc. it isnt a reenactment what these two guysdo in the video.
And do you know why the portugees won? Because the f*cking japaneese fight arts were and are SPORTS!!! in the middle ages, soldiers and knights had to kill with those weapons!
oh nononono... there are so many faults :((( knights only fought from horses, never by foot. And if they had to, they didn´t fought with shields, they fought with two hands on sword. I have a real sword at home, they aren´t heavy, maybe 800 g... And one example: In a memoire of a portugees captain from 1524, three fighters with rapiers won against seven samurai
Your comment contradict itself a bit. You say that knights only fought from horses. And that they used two handed swords. If you use a sword two handed from horseback you can't hold the reins.
Knights fought on foot too. Remember that they used weapons like pollaxes too which would be very awkward from horseback.
they realy need to look at this in deadlyest warrior. medival knight vs samurai. they did one for a viking and i think the viking won? i dont remember much.
@Amadeo790 Well when you find a royal trained day and knight in the use of Medieval Full Plate (Especially the Goth Armors) to the point he is not a blumbering tin can like this basement dweller and who can actually swing a sword, and uses a hard wood, and reinforced with steel instead of that pile of tin this guy is using, AND have a samurai in actual armor not just using a Katana which was more ceremonial, but spear and Bow, then I will consider this evidence.
@WhiteTiger225 dude i am no some deadlyest warrior employee, i dont have two teams working against eachother with supposed experts in the arts of both warriors with high tech simulator computor that has both warriors fight it over with the data accumulated from testing both warrior's armors and equipment. so dont come to me for evidance, go send them an email or something.
i am not the master of samurai arts and sword play. but if i remember, samurai always whent for the finishing blow right there with outmost pressision and mental power. i thing the samurai would have perried the sword and immidiately gone for the neck of the knight with a slash or a stab.
your supposed to charge forward because of your armor dude. the slit lets you see straight ahead. dont ever turn away to sheild your self just raise your arm. and step to your right and left but dont turn. you can been him alot easier that way.
Reality dictates that the knight would win. Plate armour renders slashing useless. And in reality knights didn't usually sword fight, they just hacked up lightly armoured units.
A trained , armored knight could bludgeon THIS unarmored samurai to death with his gauntlets. The one shown here is a kid who got too excited when he saw a coat of armor in his grandpa's house.
only thing samurai had over knights was a technique better suited for THEIR weapon. But katana is pretty much useless against plate armor. And shield. And chain mail. Unbelievably efficient sword for its created purpose. But the purpose wasn't to kill knights. The helmet would be the only advantage the samurai had since it creates a lot of blind spots...
Different helms approach this problem differently. Some, like the barbuta, do not create blind spots. Others, like armets, bascinets, and so on have visors which allow you to change how much visibility you have. It really depends upon the individual helmet.
Not to mention, even great helms without visors don't limit one's vision nearly enough to be that detrimental; Why would they even wear them in the first place if they just got you killed?
@HereTheArtBegins Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it isn't useful. Every piece of armor and weapon was created with a purpose in mind and each had their own strengths and weaknesses. And nearly all evolved in some way. Just emphasizing that when you compare two different warriors you're not comparing their weapons and armor so much as the styles. The only way to truly determine the value of a warriors tools is in the context they were designed for.
Instead of whacking the knight's shield, you might as well drag your katana's edge along the pavement for a few miles. Katana is not meant for blocking or penetrating tons of armor; it's made for cutting and stabbing weak points. You're doing it wrong.
HILLARIOUS.... I think the guy in plate exhausted himself to the point of vomiting. I love it. Ignoring how god-awful terrible people may say it disgraced the identities of knights and samuri, be comforted by the fact that a man with full plate lying around now has to clean the vomit from it.
@Selsiuss2 what a joke! how could Tin Can man do anything, stop living in an illusion. Look at Japanese characters, look at english characters, look at Japanese utensils, look at american utensils.
@SpicyHam knights are covered in full body plate armor and chainmail in the joint areas. A samurai sword cannot penetrate plate mail beyond just the tip. And what do characters and utensils have to do with this? and on that topic, chop sticks suck.
@PanNoOnnaNoKo If you are talking about the Mongol invasion, it wasn't the Japanese that defeated them, it was a storm. The mongols completely dominated the Japanese until the Japs got lucky when a storm wiped out the mongol fleet. Had it not been for that, the Mongols would have taken over the country.
@Selsiuss2 I wasn't, and what you are talking about its kamikaze, just one of many events that happened in those invasions, Japan actually defeated mongolians, the invations motivated to improve swords and spears and armors with silk parachute to reppel arrows were designed in those 7 years,
and what i mean is european martial arts were based on the use of strength and siege of enemy, japanese martial arts are still based on deep analysis of enemy, one move = one kill,
@PanNoOnnaNoKo a Knight was just as highly trained as a samurai in a variety of weapons and battle tactics. Take to equally skilled warriors and give one better armor and a equally dangerous weapon, then the one with better armor will win.
@PanNoOnnaNoKo I said nothing about anime. But my point is I'm tired of samurai fanboys saying that a samurai could beat anybody and everybody that ever came his way. A real samurai is almost nothing like what most samurai fanboys think. Samurai swords were not indestructible, they could not cut through armor, they could not fell a tree in a single stroke, samurai were not superhuman, et cetera. A samurai sword was actually kind of fragile. If you tried to block with it you'd chip the blade up.
@Selsiuss2 those are anime fan ilussions, R. Lee Ermey already prooved that katana is not just more dangerous that european swords but actiually more resistant, however i repeat japanese weapons are not design to intercept another sword, the way the samurai fought was too different, interecepting another sword is a holliwood fairy tale, thats why europeans used shields even if they already knew steel, long sowrds had an extra tickness to intercept yes, however this eventually made them weary
@PanNoOnnaNoKo btw that extra tickness made them very heavy, wich means you have to be very strong to weild them, and as i told you, european swords are designed to use stredgth and siege through constant striking, japanese martial arts are more sophisticated and as i told you, samurai fought with more than just swords, actually samurai favourite weapon was not sword research a little. you will be amazed
"btw that extra tickness made them very heavy, wich means you have to be very strong to weild them, and as i told you, european swords are designed to use stredgth and siege through constant striking..."
Eurpean swords had extra tickness? From where did you got this information because I think it's wrong. You need to be very strong to weild the very heavy blades? Take for example a longsword (ca 120 cm) thay tends to weight around 1,5 kg. I don't see this as very heavy.
@gurkfisk89 wikipedia says u're right i'll check that later, and yes...I'm afraid i saw that on documentary, however thanks for the data i'll check that
And I haven't seen any medieval fighting manual that says that it's wise to use strength and siege through constant striking. Rather the opposite, to strike fast and win a fight fast trugh skill and cunnings. Every medieval sword technique I've seen is about a fast and precise killing.
Also knight didn't use just the sword either they did prefer pole weapons when it came to war just as the samurai.
And R. Lee Ermey's test was a really poor preformance. If you go back 3 months in the comments I did post a wall of text about that show if you want to read why I think that the test is not a good source for any information.
@gurkfisk89 it is not a good performance , he is not trained, however my point is based in the use of skills so it was a bad argument after all dont mind it
@PanNoOnnaNoKo It really depends on the skill of the individual warrior that fights these battles. Every warrior is different. One samurai may be great, another weak. Same with any knight. No two battles will be the same. In one case a samurai may beat the knight, in another the knight may beat the samurai.
But in my personal humble opinion I give the edge to the knight because he had better armor that covered his whole body without restricting his movement too much, while the samurai had less.
what the blade was "designed" for in your imagination is irrelevant. I'm talking about the actual physics of the blade. How the actual metal is forged and its geometry. It is proven that the blade geometry of a katana is more effective than a long sword in penetrating armour. This is a fact with demonstrations if you search. It's a matter of technology. But we can talk about this all day on a crummy video. To be honest, I don't care - i just noticed your comment and had a different view.Good day
OK, it's just that no medieval manuscript tells you to try to thrust through plate armor. Anyway, if you don't want to you don't need to tell me who "prove" that the bladegeometry of the katana is better for penetrating armor. But I doubt that it's anyone that have knowledge of both types of swords.
To bad they didn't have anyone that knows how to use a sword in that video.
As I said before, that video isn't accurate at all. If you want I can write down what I think is wrong with that video. But that would take some time. But I will of course do it if you want me to.
I don't think that I have a vast knowledge of this. For one thing I'm really not that versed in Japanese sword fighting or forging. But I think that I have some knowledge. And I will be happy to share it with you. But as with everything else. Don't take my word for it. If you have time, do some research and check if what I say are the same as experts say. Now, why do I think R. Lee Ermey's show (watch?v=EDkoj932YFo) isn't a good source?
(This will take up some space and I'm sorry for that. I will also send you a message which I think is a bit easier to read.)
First, it seems that they didn't use any expert. They had Ermey who is a retired marine drill instructor and actor. Afaik he hasn't shown any knowledge of swords or medieval fighting or history in general. We also have Bob Goodwin as an “expert” who is a fight choreographer from Film Fighting LA Club. He knows how to make fights look interesting and cool.
Stage fighting is not the same as real fighting. My question is why didn't they ask a kenjutsu practitioner or anyone that are trained in European martial art or even better both, to show what these swords can do. Instead they chose that Ermey would do the tests. I think that you will agree that an unskilled person will not do proper techniques all the time. Please look at this video to hear what Dirk H. Breiding have to say about how historical accurate Ermeys shows are.
This is about armour and not swords but it's not in favor for the show.
watch?v=NqC_squo6X4&t=9m38s
About at the 10 min mark of the clip.
We also have the problems with the swords. At least I don't know who made them and how, if anyone knows this, please send me a message. Also characteristics do vary a lot from sword to sword, both in terms of katanas and longswords. I would at least want to know what kind of sword they test before I use their conclusion.
If they tested poor swords we can't say anything even if they did good tests. We also don't know anything about the armour they tested. Is the leather for example boiled? I don't think it is but I'm not sure and they didn't tell. Had the plate armor the right thickness? What kind of steel was it (all they say is that it's metal armour so they may even use aluminium.) and what kind of heat treatments did they use for the armour.
Let's take the ice cube test. Ice is a really bad medium for these kinds of tests. It's not homogeneous so if you manage to hit it on a weak spot it will crack more easy. It's also not possible to cut half an ice cube because it's either you will transfer enough energy to create a crack and when you have a crack the ice will break. If not you will only scratch the surface. Clay or ballistic gel or anything else that isn't brittle like ice would be a much better medium.
This because then you could see how deep the cut is and really make a cut and not crack.
Ermey also preformed this test rather badly. You will get more power out of a cut if you hit near the tip. With the katana he hit near the middle and with the longsword near the hilt. As Ermey isn't a swordsman by any stretch of the term we also don't know if he cut equally hard with the two swords. At 2:11 you will also see a funny thing, it's looks almost like the block was pre cut.
It may just be an optical illusion or something and I doubt this really had any more effect than that Ermey can't handle a sword, but anyway.
For the leather armor. As stated we don't know if it's leather armor or just plain leather. Any swordfighter you ask would tell you that a diagonal strike is more powerful than a horizontal strike. So I can't see why he did a dogori (spelling?) with the katana.
Why didn't he do a similar zornhau strike with the longsword instead for the less powerful horizontal strike. Here Ermeys unfamiliarity with swords also plays a big part. Did he cut with only his arms in these cuts or did he use the whole weight of his body behind?
The metal armor test. We don't know if the armor is accurate and I really doubt this. Further more if he had any experts in martial arts involving swords he would know that you don't want to attack armor directly.
You try to hit weak points where you don't wear armor or armor that is easier to penetrate. Beside from that if you have to penetrate armor, for example chainmail at the armpit. If you have a springy blade like some longswords you can't thrust like Ermey does, too much energy will be lost in bending the blade as we see here. The thing is that knights know they had springy blades, so they found a solution for this, halfswording.
You try to hit weak points where you don't wear armor or armor that is easier to penetrate. Beside from that if you have to penetrate armor, for example chainmail at the armpit. If you have a springy blade like some longswords you can't thrust like Ermey does, too much energy will be lost in bending the blade as we see here. The thing is that knights know they had springy blades, so they found a solution for this, halfswording.
By grabbing your blade around the middle with your left hand you will stiffen the blade and get more control of the tip so that you can hit those weak points. Of course, the springiness is no problem if you are facing unarmored opponents because human flesh is not that hard to penetrate with a sharp sword.
I don't say that the longsword would do better than the katana in all of these tests, absolutely not I would be surprised if a general longsword would break ice better or cut leather armor better than a general katana.
Also these tests don't take in consideration anything more than how well the swords cut and thrust.
A good sword need to be good at many other things and you always have to compromise as for example a hiltbalanced sword would be better for point control and fast cuts while a blade balanced sword would have a greater cut. They also don't show any advantage of a second edge or when a shorter sword are better and when a longer sword are better and so on.
I can't find a better video demonstration either about the katana vs longsword but there are some out there like this watch?v=5Hy_A9vjp_s
But rather that swords are sharpened iron bars that will behave in a similar way and that what he measured was the relative properties of different blade designs and that the test had nothing to do with real combat.
I'm sorry for the wall of text and that I'm not that good at writing, at least not in English. If anyone finds sources that contradict the text please share them with me so that I can learn and be more correct in the future.
I also know that I may be biased towards the longsword so please have in mind that even if it may looks like that, I don't think the longsword is any better than any other sword. Because there is no such thing as a best sword.
For one, Samurai also wore some heavy armor in battle.
Secondly, a Katana pierces plate and chain armor.
However, a knight's long sword does not.
Thirdly, while a Knight has the shield, he is forced to wield the sword one-handed.
A two handed sword has far greater control, speed and power. So the shield isn't a huge advantage in this battle unless they were going against arrows.
A katana *can* pierce plate and armor. But not easily. A samurai would have to repeatedly strike the same place over and over to have any effect.
More likely the samurai would have to fight dirty, or essentially use an iaido stance, only striking when he has the opportunity. I think that it would matter more on the samurais determination/skill than the sharpness of his blade. I honestly think it would be a pretty even match.
these two are nothing but Ashiguru/足軽 scum
BrandonBlaze904 3 weeks ago
faggot/coward vs faggot/coward, thumbs up if you agree.
BrandonBlaze904 3 weeks ago
kono kusotareeeeeeeeee
rhfkblo 1 month ago
@schnucklefutz **pig, not pug. stupid fingers.
schnucklefutz 2 months ago
@1169Timothy i like your comments on the helmets, i've never had a pug face before. I like either the sugarloaf, or crusader great helmet.
schnucklefutz 2 months ago
What kind of school is that? Poke-With-Sword no Jutsu?
Hypoo 3 months ago
lol at anime fans!!!
aethelwond99 3 months ago
In your dreams.
ThedemonRider666 4 months ago
shit give me that armor and bastard sword with an shield against an samurai......
DARKSERB96 4 months ago
GO FOR HIS LEGS!!!
raysetiger285 4 months ago
people are a bit too serious commenting on this one...
mightypensword 4 months ago
haha knight vs. that unarmored boy ? LOL
Theoden555X 4 months ago
ja pierdole jaki smut żałosne
DiabloRW27 5 months ago
A real Samurai does not step backwards
DelzenMartvan 5 months ago
@DelzenMartvan Wtf are you talkin about ...sounds cool tho
EpicEffinTom 5 months ago
It's funny watching the Japanese try to be European. You seem to be lacking the genetics to be using that stuff properly bud.
Halofreakanoid 5 months ago
A samurai would have not chance at killing a Knight in real life, primarily because a Samurai would have absolutely no experience with something like a Knight. The Samurai would take one look and say "What the Fuck is that?" because the Samurai would have never seen so much Armour in his life.
The Knight on the other hand has seen Armour of the same general make as the Samurais and thus can handle it relatively well.
1169Timothy 5 months ago
@1169Timothy Unless the Samurai can spot his weakness, like being heavy and can't see very well. I think that a smart Samurai would probebly take a look and leave, then come back later with a plan and back up. But maybe you are right, he might just be like "誰がこのメタル馬鹿であり、そしてなぜ彼は日本にあります?"
JordansGuitarCovers 5 months ago
@JordansGuitarCovers In retrospect I don't think the Knight would allow him to leave and come up with a plan. Also if by heavy you mean slow, then no that is not an option, most people believe that Knight's armour was heavy and made them slow in battle, but that is an urban myth and holds no water historically, also Samurai armour weighed about the same as Knightly armour so if the Knight is slow then so is the Samurai.
1169Timothy 5 months ago
@JordansGuitarCovers Oh one more thing I wanted to tell you, I believe that the Knight could see just fine, and this is how I will prove it, take 2 fingers, space them out by 1cm and then put them up to your eye and thy to look between them, I can see through mine just fine and on most helmets the visor was often wider then that. but the Knight surly can't hear shit.
1169Timothy 5 months ago
@1169Timothy lol yeah you're right, I have never worn a knight helmet before and it just seemed to me like it would be hard to see :P
JordansGuitarCovers 5 months ago
@1169Timothy
After reading your comment I fooled around with some tape and ski goggles (I don't have any medieval helmet). I first taped the goggles so that i had two 2 x 20 mm holes to see trought. I would not like to fight in that, but to walk to the fight in an arrow storm and then lift my visor just before the fight, sure. Then I tried with one 2 x 150 mm slit, this I could fight with I think but would have problem with my vison. And with 10 x 150 mm I felt like "no problem".
gurkfisk89 5 months ago
@1169Timothy
Of course, ski goggles aren't a medieval visor. And I didn't do any fighting while wearing it, just wear it to get the different feelings of the different slits.
I do agree with you that the vision of the helmets are probably not the difficult part to get used to. The hearing and breathing in a closed helmet would probably be much more difficult.
gurkfisk89 5 months ago
@gurkfisk89 That is why most knights got helmets which did not restrict their breathing that much like a Pig face helmet, look up that one, it is not my favorite helm but it is the most practical for ergonomics, it also has the ability to deflect blows due to the conical shaped mouth piece of the visor. I would prefer your blows to be deflected off the helm then to have my face take the full force of the blow. Please look up the helm.
1169Timothy 5 months ago
hahahahaaaa, very funny!
ekkenaab 6 months ago
I'm going to hope and assume this was a play fight meant for entertainment.
That Samurai baseball swing from 0:15 - 0:17 is something a someone trained in the art of the Japanese would (or at least should) never do.
Problem. You never cut passed or over the lead leg. The reason for this is because like many martial arts your footwork or stance is your foundation and cutting in this way both unroots your stance and puts you in a very vulnerable position.
DoomShizzle 6 months ago
@DoomShizzle Now I took a couple screenshots from the frames at the end of the attack to show you explain my point. screenshooter.n3tt/0803952/wyrkjxq & screenshooter.n3tt/0803952/lqsivwn Now the knight may not be able to see this with the shield blocking his vision but I'm sure with these screens all of you can. Because of that inappropriate cut, he just made his whole right side an open defenseless target.
change the 3 in n3tt to e and remove the extra t of course :)
DoomShizzle 6 months ago
Ok lets get a bit of armor from a knight put it on a dead pig or summon and chop it with a full on katana. Oh wait knights are invincible when they into battle with other knights swords just bounced off there armour
shogunsheba 6 months ago
@shogunsheba
They where not invincible to swords, but nearly invincible to sword cuts. The main sword techniques to counter armor are grabbing the sword with one hand on the blade and then thrust at weak points (areas that are not protected by plate).
gurkfisk89 6 months ago
No, they are not so lowtec as you think.
Pommes1983 5 months ago
@Pommes1983
Sorry, I didn't get that comment. Do you mean that I think that armors are low-tech or that swords are low-tech? I don't see any of them as low-tech. Plate armor protects you from sword cuts really well. So the armor is sure not low-tech. And even if swords usually isn't designed to counter armor, halfword techniques let you have a good chance anyway. So swords are not low-tech either.
Both are however low-tech compare to modern military equipment but that's an other story.
gurkfisk89 5 months ago
@gurkfisk89 The armor has 2000 years of developement. You can block with ellbows, hands, neck, back. A Katana would brake if it hits a european hardened fightarmor, because all that Katanas do is cutting.
Pommes1983 5 months ago
i love how everyone on youtube becomes an expert when leaving comments
srsly its friggin hilarious
khamfl 6 months ago
one word
BULLSHIT !
Reconcile100 6 months ago 19
This is Bujinkan/Ninjutsu is a matierial arts with 1000 years of tradition from Japan with 9 different schools that the Samurai & Ninja have training 6 of them have the Samurai training and 3 of them have the Ninja training. The Samurai and Ninja warriors was (Zen)buddhism like me. I beleave on this becouse i want prove my master. "Hatsumi Maasaki" soke of Bujinkan.
ZZaiBoT2011 6 months ago
sure...
HardcoreEwald 6 months ago
Who gave the D&D nerds swords....
KAXSH 6 months ago
Dude, the Jap guy is using the wrong weapon. A Toshiba electric tin can opener would be much more appropriate
WarrenEdwardBuffet 6 months ago
And the Mongol horseback rider shot them both with an arrow....
2017Downtown 6 months ago 20
@2017Downtown hehe
inzaren 6 months ago
@2017Downtown
Which is totally useless against the knights armour.
EvilxMerlin 4 months ago 2
this is stupid. Show me Japanese in full battle armor and then Maybe I'd not call you a bunch of worthless posers!
bigskip2121 6 months ago
this was pathetic, what a fake fight...
hahah
TheChefeChapado 6 months ago
que pendejooooo
stupid, -ass hole
putino
anime123ful 6 months ago
obviously knights are gonna win with all that armor on! itd be different if he took off all the armor
itakethepain 6 months ago
Samurai also used armour.
The fight would pobably be very tight between a samurai and a knight. The fightingstyles of the knights were also very sofisticated! Differens being that the european fightingstyles where forgotten for a long time.
An unarmoured samurai against a real european knight in armour would probably be dead as a door nail.
mondosrah 6 months ago
Oi, doing it wrong. Should've tsuki'd on the get go.
kurtczp 6 months ago
@kurtczp and dont EVER throw away the scabbard
kurtczp 6 months ago
Comment removed
sxyzm 6 months ago
This is dumb.
sxyzm 6 months ago
侍が甲冑着てないしへっぺり腰で打突も遅い。
そもそも基本は崩して脇差だ。
出直せ。
tsukasa4649ne 7 months ago
Dumptruck vs sportscar... we all know how it ends up if they collide.
SirWimpie 7 months ago
What the heck? What samurai is so ignorant that he would throw his saya and katana away when he is done with it? And why would the knight be in armour but the samurai now be in armour?
Kiwi2038 7 months ago
kendo vs historical fencing... search it.
TheBearlydeloved 7 months ago
恥さらし
shu5458 7 months ago
That's the funniest thing I seen today hahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahah
abejimeneza67c10 7 months ago
FUCKING HOMOS.
VoltismProductions 7 months ago
the knight's sword are too short, and armor is too thick to acutally be quick enough to have long combat effectiveness. Knights were usually on horses to charge through enemy. On foot, knights are useless, they cna't run, they can't chase, how do you win?
SpicyHam 7 months ago
@SpicyHam
On foot knights are usefull, they can run, they can chase. If they couldn't why would they wear armor?
watch?v=NqC_squo6X4#t=34m20s
gurkfisk89 7 months ago
@gurkfisk89 to gain full protection against spears and stuff when charged into infantry -.-
SpicyHam 7 months ago
@SpicyHam
Except that knights frequently fought on foot; the English and Germans were known for this in particular. There is literally no evidence that they wouldn't be combat effective on foot. The majority of the material in Medieval Fechtbuch deal with combat on foot; not mounted combat.
HereTheArtBegins 7 months ago
@SpicyHam
Knightly swords range from shorter than katana, to much longer than katana. Your claim here has no merit.
Knightly armor is not that thick; often only 1.5mm or 2mm, perhaps 3mm at the thickest part of the armor. Samurai armor is of a similar thickness. Knights could fight for long, extended periods of time.
Knights are as combat effective on the ground as samurai were, who /also/ originated from a history of mounted combat.
You need to research more.
HereTheArtBegins 7 months ago
to defeat a knight you are not suppose to hit his shield, but fart in his face.
SpicyHam 7 months ago
No, I menat, that they had to fought with one hand by blade and the other hand by control. And this knight fights in a armament of 15 th or 16 th century, by the time when lansquenets were better in fighting by foot. What I wanted to say was: For knights it was too difficult to fight with shield by foot, because their swords couldn´t interfuse the armaments (And a katana couldn´t it too), thats the reason why they use poll axes etc. it isnt a reenactment what these two guysdo in the video.
AuGeUNDoHr1 7 months ago
not fair. He has armor on and the samurai doesn't. to be fair samurai has to wear his armor first or else of course samurai gonna win.
nasurdan 7 months ago
And do you know why the portugees won? Because the f*cking japaneese fight arts were and are SPORTS!!! in the middle ages, soldiers and knights had to kill with those weapons!
AuGeUNDoHr1 7 months ago
oh nononono... there are so many faults :((( knights only fought from horses, never by foot. And if they had to, they didn´t fought with shields, they fought with two hands on sword. I have a real sword at home, they aren´t heavy, maybe 800 g... And one example: In a memoire of a portugees captain from 1524, three fighters with rapiers won against seven samurai
AuGeUNDoHr1 7 months ago
@AuGeUNDoHr1
Your comment contradict itself a bit. You say that knights only fought from horses. And that they used two handed swords. If you use a sword two handed from horseback you can't hold the reins.
Knights fought on foot too. Remember that they used weapons like pollaxes too which would be very awkward from horseback.
gurkfisk89 7 months ago
they realy need to look at this in deadlyest warrior. medival knight vs samurai. they did one for a viking and i think the viking won? i dont remember much.
Amadeo790 7 months ago
@Amadeo790 Well when you find a royal trained day and knight in the use of Medieval Full Plate (Especially the Goth Armors) to the point he is not a blumbering tin can like this basement dweller and who can actually swing a sword, and uses a hard wood, and reinforced with steel instead of that pile of tin this guy is using, AND have a samurai in actual armor not just using a Katana which was more ceremonial, but spear and Bow, then I will consider this evidence.
WhiteTiger225 7 months ago
@WhiteTiger225 dude i am no some deadlyest warrior employee, i dont have two teams working against eachother with supposed experts in the arts of both warriors with high tech simulator computor that has both warriors fight it over with the data accumulated from testing both warrior's armors and equipment. so dont come to me for evidance, go send them an email or something.
Amadeo790 7 months ago
@Amadeo790 The Viking lost. Completely and utterly.
gg08901 7 months ago
@gg08901 ah i see, ty for reminding me as i think i remember now.
Amadeo790 7 months ago
i am not the master of samurai arts and sword play. but if i remember, samurai always whent for the finishing blow right there with outmost pressision and mental power. i thing the samurai would have perried the sword and immidiately gone for the neck of the knight with a slash or a stab.
Amadeo790 7 months ago
The knight couldn't hit him back, he wasn't wearing any protection.
senopahx 7 months ago
Samurais dont have red hair..........your the devil
16mac1 7 months ago
...that.... made me cry.
KitsuneKun8 8 months ago
your leg pieces r coming off
freakgboy 8 months ago
your leg pieces r comin off
freakgboy 8 months ago
0:28 FINISH HIM
SalisburyBoy123 8 months ago
your supposed to charge forward because of your armor dude. the slit lets you see straight ahead. dont ever turn away to sheild your self just raise your arm. and step to your right and left but dont turn. you can been him alot easier that way.
MoGotMilk 8 months ago
Reality dictates that the knight would win. Plate armour renders slashing useless. And in reality knights didn't usually sword fight, they just hacked up lightly armoured units.
GreenFont 8 months ago
what is this monkey shit. Even the knight couldn't help it, he started laughimg his ass off. (in real life a knight would win)
TheVermontHunter 8 months ago
HAHAHAHA what is this bull$#@$
ramzevans 8 months ago
noob knight..,,, you should use shield boomerang
angelcloudesa 8 months ago
...Or "Hooligan vs Mohican" och "Hashischin vs Navy SEAL"...!
LOL! Ha-Haa!
;-)
ElCharlatano 8 months ago
This is almost as interresting as "Aztec vs Nazi" or "Neanderthal vs Janitschar"...
;-)
ElCharlatano 8 months ago
this knight is a little shy...
clonegreivou 8 months ago
humorous violence, too funny for real battle
leo20789 8 months ago
Uh... The knight's armor seems to be falling off at the shins...
SanderCohensPocket0 8 months ago
The samurai would be killed after on slash of the knights sword.
Dizzyfinger 8 months ago
I wondered in both vids of this why the knight dude just didnt tackle the robei o:
zesusdk 8 months ago
A trained , armored knight could bludgeon THIS unarmored samurai to death with his gauntlets. The one shown here is a kid who got too excited when he saw a coat of armor in his grandpa's house.
appa609 8 months ago
@appa609
Or a person that don't want to bludgeon his friend to death.
gurkfisk89 8 months ago
No sane samurai would go to fight a full-armoured knight without armour and effective weapons.
Katana can't break plate armours.
naq29 8 months ago
a knight would never give up... he is a disgrace
extondude 9 months ago
LOL
StudioOfDah 9 months ago
how dare you bring shame and disshonnor to bushido i hope you both rot in the pit's of hell
death2160 9 months ago
only thing samurai had over knights was a technique better suited for THEIR weapon. But katana is pretty much useless against plate armor. And shield. And chain mail. Unbelievably efficient sword for its created purpose. But the purpose wasn't to kill knights. The helmet would be the only advantage the samurai had since it creates a lot of blind spots...
CrimsonKumiho 9 months ago
@CrimsonKumiho
Different helms approach this problem differently. Some, like the barbuta, do not create blind spots. Others, like armets, bascinets, and so on have visors which allow you to change how much visibility you have. It really depends upon the individual helmet.
Not to mention, even great helms without visors don't limit one's vision nearly enough to be that detrimental; Why would they even wear them in the first place if they just got you killed?
HereTheArtBegins 9 months ago
Comment removed
CrimsonKumiho 9 months ago
@HereTheArtBegins Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it isn't useful. Every piece of armor and weapon was created with a purpose in mind and each had their own strengths and weaknesses. And nearly all evolved in some way. Just emphasizing that when you compare two different warriors you're not comparing their weapons and armor so much as the styles. The only way to truly determine the value of a warriors tools is in the context they were designed for.
CrimsonKumiho 9 months ago
Comment removed
CrimsonKumiho 9 months ago
0:26 FAIL
sirKristiano 9 months ago
Instead of whacking the knight's shield, you might as well drag your katana's edge along the pavement for a few miles. Katana is not meant for blocking or penetrating tons of armor; it's made for cutting and stabbing weak points. You're doing it wrong.
NamidaIroNoKaede 9 months ago
@karateboy101
that's Demon's Soul lesson #1:
"don't press the shield button for too long while being hit by a Makoto and you'll run out of stamina, losing your guard and your soul..."
paravidinopatrick 9 months ago
HILLARIOUS.... I think the guy in plate exhausted himself to the point of vomiting. I love it. Ignoring how god-awful terrible people may say it disgraced the identities of knights and samuri, be comforted by the fact that a man with full plate lying around now has to clean the vomit from it.
i8gong8i 9 months ago
i only have one word for this "NERDS!!!!!!!!"
weewoozesty 9 months ago
why did the samurai butt fucked him
Yodajens 9 months ago
Who the fuck has full plate mail just... laying around?
masterthehate2 9 months ago
bullshit..
TuonsLes 9 months ago
His shield was brutally killed.
ChessWyrm 9 months ago
Obviously made by Japanese samurai fanboys. Knights are not to be taken lightly. Knights will fuck your shit up.
Selsiuss2 9 months ago 13
@Selsiuss2 Word to dat shit
SeriouslyPissedOff 9 months ago
@Selsiuss2 what a joke! how could Tin Can man do anything, stop living in an illusion. Look at Japanese characters, look at english characters, look at Japanese utensils, look at american utensils.
SpicyHam 7 months ago
@SpicyHam knights are covered in full body plate armor and chainmail in the joint areas. A samurai sword cannot penetrate plate mail beyond just the tip. And what do characters and utensils have to do with this? and on that topic, chop sticks suck.
Selsiuss2 7 months ago
@Selsiuss2 then real samurais appear to send barbarians from where they came
PanNoOnnaNoKo 7 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo If you are talking about the Mongol invasion, it wasn't the Japanese that defeated them, it was a storm. The mongols completely dominated the Japanese until the Japs got lucky when a storm wiped out the mongol fleet. Had it not been for that, the Mongols would have taken over the country.
Selsiuss2 7 months ago
@Selsiuss2 I wasn't, and what you are talking about its kamikaze, just one of many events that happened in those invasions, Japan actually defeated mongolians, the invations motivated to improve swords and spears and armors with silk parachute to reppel arrows were designed in those 7 years,
and what i mean is european martial arts were based on the use of strength and siege of enemy, japanese martial arts are still based on deep analysis of enemy, one move = one kill,
PanNoOnnaNoKo 7 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo One move does not equal one kill when the Knight's wearing full body plate armor.
Selsiuss2 7 months ago
@Selsiuss2 well, samurai not only weild swords, research about that, you will surprise, promise ;D
PanNoOnnaNoKo 7 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo a Knight was just as highly trained as a samurai in a variety of weapons and battle tactics. Take to equally skilled warriors and give one better armor and a equally dangerous weapon, then the one with better armor will win.
Selsiuss2 7 months ago
@Selsiuss2 well if you think so...
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo You're still a samurai fanboy aren't you?
Selsiuss2 6 months ago
@Selsiuss2 i dont like anime if that is what you mean, anyways sorry for bothering, i didn't though it means that much to you to feel that u're right
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo I said nothing about anime. But my point is I'm tired of samurai fanboys saying that a samurai could beat anybody and everybody that ever came his way. A real samurai is almost nothing like what most samurai fanboys think. Samurai swords were not indestructible, they could not cut through armor, they could not fell a tree in a single stroke, samurai were not superhuman, et cetera. A samurai sword was actually kind of fragile. If you tried to block with it you'd chip the blade up.
Selsiuss2 6 months ago
@Selsiuss2 those are anime fan ilussions, R. Lee Ermey already prooved that katana is not just more dangerous that european swords but actiually more resistant, however i repeat japanese weapons are not design to intercept another sword, the way the samurai fought was too different, interecepting another sword is a holliwood fairy tale, thats why europeans used shields even if they already knew steel, long sowrds had an extra tickness to intercept yes, however this eventually made them weary
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo btw that extra tickness made them very heavy, wich means you have to be very strong to weild them, and as i told you, european swords are designed to use stredgth and siege through constant striking, japanese martial arts are more sophisticated and as i told you, samurai fought with more than just swords, actually samurai favourite weapon was not sword research a little. you will be amazed
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo
"btw that extra tickness made them very heavy, wich means you have to be very strong to weild them, and as i told you, european swords are designed to use stredgth and siege through constant striking..."
Eurpean swords had extra tickness? From where did you got this information because I think it's wrong. You need to be very strong to weild the very heavy blades? Take for example a longsword (ca 120 cm) thay tends to weight around 1,5 kg. I don't see this as very heavy.
gurkfisk89 6 months ago
@gurkfisk89 wikipedia says u're right i'll check that later, and yes...I'm afraid i saw that on documentary, however thanks for the data i'll check that
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo
And I haven't seen any medieval fighting manual that says that it's wise to use strength and siege through constant striking. Rather the opposite, to strike fast and win a fight fast trugh skill and cunnings. Every medieval sword technique I've seen is about a fast and precise killing.
Also knight didn't use just the sword either they did prefer pole weapons when it came to war just as the samurai.
gurkfisk89 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo
And R. Lee Ermey's test was a really poor preformance. If you go back 3 months in the comments I did post a wall of text about that show if you want to read why I think that the test is not a good source for any information.
gurkfisk89 6 months ago
@gurkfisk89 it is not a good performance , he is not trained, however my point is based in the use of skills so it was a bad argument after all dont mind it
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo It really depends on the skill of the individual warrior that fights these battles. Every warrior is different. One samurai may be great, another weak. Same with any knight. No two battles will be the same. In one case a samurai may beat the knight, in another the knight may beat the samurai.
But in my personal humble opinion I give the edge to the knight because he had better armor that covered his whole body without restricting his movement too much, while the samurai had less.
Selsiuss2 6 months ago
@Selsiuss2 ok
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I WIN BITCH FUCKER ASS CUNT LICKER COCK SUCKER!!!!!
Selsiuss2 6 months ago
@Selsiuss2 your momma must be proud ;D
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
@PanNoOnnaNoKo Funny thing. My mom saw my comment on facebook and FREAKED OUT.
Selsiuss2 6 months ago
@Selsiuss2 i bet...
PanNoOnnaNoKo 6 months ago
what the blade was "designed" for in your imagination is irrelevant. I'm talking about the actual physics of the blade. How the actual metal is forged and its geometry. It is proven that the blade geometry of a katana is more effective than a long sword in penetrating armour. This is a fact with demonstrations if you search. It's a matter of technology. But we can talk about this all day on a crummy video. To be honest, I don't care - i just noticed your comment and had a different view.Good day
kissing88 9 months ago
@kissing88
OK, it's just that no medieval manuscript tells you to try to thrust through plate armor. Anyway, if you don't want to you don't need to tell me who "prove" that the bladegeometry of the katana is better for penetrating armor. But I doubt that it's anyone that have knowledge of both types of swords.
And a very good day to you sir.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
@gurkfisk89 This is just one video;
/watch?v=EDkoj932YFo
kissing88 9 months ago
@kissing88
To bad they didn't have anyone that knows how to use a sword in that video.
As I said before, that video isn't accurate at all. If you want I can write down what I think is wrong with that video. But that would take some time. But I will of course do it if you want me to.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
@gurkfisk89 By all means fill me in with your vast knowledge. It's just that I don't see a better demonstration out there that supports your sayings.
kissing88 9 months ago
@kissing88
I don't think that I have a vast knowledge of this. For one thing I'm really not that versed in Japanese sword fighting or forging. But I think that I have some knowledge. And I will be happy to share it with you. But as with everything else. Don't take my word for it. If you have time, do some research and check if what I say are the same as experts say. Now, why do I think R. Lee Ermey's show (watch?v=EDkoj932YFo) isn't a good source?
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
(This will take up some space and I'm sorry for that. I will also send you a message which I think is a bit easier to read.)
First, it seems that they didn't use any expert. They had Ermey who is a retired marine drill instructor and actor. Afaik he hasn't shown any knowledge of swords or medieval fighting or history in general. We also have Bob Goodwin as an “expert” who is a fight choreographer from Film Fighting LA Club. He knows how to make fights look interesting and cool.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
Stage fighting is not the same as real fighting. My question is why didn't they ask a kenjutsu practitioner or anyone that are trained in European martial art or even better both, to show what these swords can do. Instead they chose that Ermey would do the tests. I think that you will agree that an unskilled person will not do proper techniques all the time. Please look at this video to hear what Dirk H. Breiding have to say about how historical accurate Ermeys shows are.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
This is about armour and not swords but it's not in favor for the show.
watch?v=NqC_squo6X4&t=9m38s
About at the 10 min mark of the clip.
We also have the problems with the swords. At least I don't know who made them and how, if anyone knows this, please send me a message. Also characteristics do vary a lot from sword to sword, both in terms of katanas and longswords. I would at least want to know what kind of sword they test before I use their conclusion.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
If they tested poor swords we can't say anything even if they did good tests. We also don't know anything about the armour they tested. Is the leather for example boiled? I don't think it is but I'm not sure and they didn't tell. Had the plate armor the right thickness? What kind of steel was it (all they say is that it's metal armour so they may even use aluminium.) and what kind of heat treatments did they use for the armour.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
Let's take the ice cube test. Ice is a really bad medium for these kinds of tests. It's not homogeneous so if you manage to hit it on a weak spot it will crack more easy. It's also not possible to cut half an ice cube because it's either you will transfer enough energy to create a crack and when you have a crack the ice will break. If not you will only scratch the surface. Clay or ballistic gel or anything else that isn't brittle like ice would be a much better medium.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
This because then you could see how deep the cut is and really make a cut and not crack.
Ermey also preformed this test rather badly. You will get more power out of a cut if you hit near the tip. With the katana he hit near the middle and with the longsword near the hilt. As Ermey isn't a swordsman by any stretch of the term we also don't know if he cut equally hard with the two swords. At 2:11 you will also see a funny thing, it's looks almost like the block was pre cut.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
It may just be an optical illusion or something and I doubt this really had any more effect than that Ermey can't handle a sword, but anyway.
For the leather armor. As stated we don't know if it's leather armor or just plain leather. Any swordfighter you ask would tell you that a diagonal strike is more powerful than a horizontal strike. So I can't see why he did a dogori (spelling?) with the katana.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
Why didn't he do a similar zornhau strike with the longsword instead for the less powerful horizontal strike. Here Ermeys unfamiliarity with swords also plays a big part. Did he cut with only his arms in these cuts or did he use the whole weight of his body behind?
The metal armor test. We don't know if the armor is accurate and I really doubt this. Further more if he had any experts in martial arts involving swords he would know that you don't want to attack armor directly.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
You try to hit weak points where you don't wear armor or armor that is easier to penetrate. Beside from that if you have to penetrate armor, for example chainmail at the armpit. If you have a springy blade like some longswords you can't thrust like Ermey does, too much energy will be lost in bending the blade as we see here. The thing is that knights know they had springy blades, so they found a solution for this, halfswording.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
You try to hit weak points where you don't wear armor or armor that is easier to penetrate. Beside from that if you have to penetrate armor, for example chainmail at the armpit. If you have a springy blade like some longswords you can't thrust like Ermey does, too much energy will be lost in bending the blade as we see here. The thing is that knights know they had springy blades, so they found a solution for this, halfswording.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
By grabbing your blade around the middle with your left hand you will stiffen the blade and get more control of the tip so that you can hit those weak points. Of course, the springiness is no problem if you are facing unarmored opponents because human flesh is not that hard to penetrate with a sharp sword.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
I don't say that the longsword would do better than the katana in all of these tests, absolutely not I would be surprised if a general longsword would break ice better or cut leather armor better than a general katana.
Also these tests don't take in consideration anything more than how well the swords cut and thrust.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
A good sword need to be good at many other things and you always have to compromise as for example a hiltbalanced sword would be better for point control and fast cuts while a blade balanced sword would have a greater cut. They also don't show any advantage of a second edge or when a shorter sword are better and when a longer sword are better and so on.
I can't find a better video demonstration either about the katana vs longsword but there are some out there like this watch?v=5Hy_A9vjp_s
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
I think that that video also have a lot of things they could make better.
There are however one clip I like more than other similar, and that is:
watch?v=eyAkA4Fc6CY
from the series Weapons that Made Britain.
Mike Loades does know how to use the swords. He really does know history. And his conclusions are well put, not that “one sword is the best”.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
But rather that swords are sharpened iron bars that will behave in a similar way and that what he measured was the relative properties of different blade designs and that the test had nothing to do with real combat.
I'm sorry for the wall of text and that I'm not that good at writing, at least not in English. If anyone finds sources that contradict the text please share them with me so that I can learn and be more correct in the future.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
I also know that I may be biased towards the longsword so please have in mind that even if it may looks like that, I don't think the longsword is any better than any other sword. Because there is no such thing as a best sword.
gurkfisk89 9 months ago
That's some funny shit.
GuitarLinkPlayer 10 months ago
last nine secs are really gay
kleemable 10 months ago
rogue vs warrior
Quy4life 10 months ago
not the armor or the kind of sward make a warrior strong... his life ... his trainning...his skills make him to a killing maschine!
MDGeist666 10 months ago
@MDGeist666
Yea, that's kind of the point behind a "Warrior aristocracy" in the first place.
Caliburnis 10 months ago
In real life, my money's on the knight. The samurai just doesn't have a good answer for that plate and chain armor, to say nothing of the shield.
AlabamaSoldier 10 months ago
@AlabamaSoldier I think you're not well informed.
For one, Samurai also wore some heavy armor in battle.
Secondly, a Katana pierces plate and chain armor.
However, a knight's long sword does not.
Thirdly, while a Knight has the shield, he is forced to wield the sword one-handed.
A two handed sword has far greater control, speed and power. So the shield isn't a huge advantage in this battle unless they were going against arrows.
kissing88 10 months ago
@kissing88
A katana *can* pierce plate and armor. But not easily. A samurai would have to repeatedly strike the same place over and over to have any effect.
More likely the samurai would have to fight dirty, or essentially use an iaido stance, only striking when he has the opportunity. I think that it would matter more on the samurais determination/skill than the sharpness of his blade. I honestly think it would be a pretty even match.
Ediblemon 10 months ago