Who would win the battle? - Page 4




View Poll Results :Who would win the pitched battle?
The Samurai 8 20.00%
The contemporary European soldier 17 42.50%
Depends on the terrain, weather and other circumstances 15 37.50%
Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll

 
--
 
June 5th, 2006  
SNowblind
 
I say the latter knights of the crusade or the knights templar could beat the samurai

1: superior armor
2: weapons you REALLY dont want to get hit by
3: physically stonger, and bigger
4: knights had horsies....wearing even more armor than the knights
June 24th, 2006  
LeEnfield
 
 
I think many people are influenced about this by the films that they see where the warriors complete acts of total fantasy while fighting.
June 25th, 2006  
MightyMacbeth
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNowblind
I say the latter knights of the crusade or the knights templar could beat the samurai

1: superior armor
2: weapons you REALLY dont want to get hit by
3: physically stonger, and bigger
4: knights had horsies....wearing even more armor than the knights
ahh good points, but then see.

The samurai had armour to provide balance of light weight and protection. The knight had heavy and bulky armour.
Weapons, both sides had a variety of a fascinating arsenal.
Each sizes has its goods and bads. The smaller samurai will eventually have superior manauverabilty and speed.
The horses that samurai used where not as armoured as the knights one ofcourse. One had protection, while the other had agility. Both are good if u ask me
--
June 28th, 2006  
OORAH
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNowblind
I say the latter knights of the crusade or the knights templar could beat the samurai

1: superior armor
2: weapons you REALLY dont want to get hit by
3: physically stonger, and bigger
4: knights had horsies....wearing even more armor than the knights

weapons you REALLY dont want to get hit by..........i would definately not want to get hit by a katana.


physically stronger and bigger, in the martial arts, size and strength, although sometimes important, does not make a difference in most one on one fights. Individual skill and training, which the Japanese would have an upper hand on, would prevail.



I think the fight we're fantasizing about would be a good one, and it would be one hell of a fight to watch( i know i wouldn't wanna fight in it ), but i think overall the samurai would win. Superior training, weapons that were made with perfection in mind, and the mindset of the samurai would help them to overcome the Europeans
August 9th, 2006  
Mohmar Deathstrike
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox
I think that would be european soldiers. European soldiers have catapult, knights with chain of metals and metals. also their horses wear chain of metals, etc.
Nope. Contemporary European sodiers have assault rifles, hand grenades, grenade launchers, AT rockets, sniper rifles, submachine guns, machine guns etc...

So it would be a slaughter, not a battle.
August 9th, 2006  
Team Infidel
 
 
It's all about the terrain.
August 14th, 2006  
AussieNick
 
Quote:
weapons you REALLY dont want to get hit by
I don't want to get hit by any weapon. That should be a given.
May 16th, 2007  
Insomniac
 
 
Don't forget the mace: a crushing weapon that would bat aside any sword placed before it. The mace wielder would have probably battered a samurai to the floor through sheer force of attack. And the mattock. If i remember rightly, a mattock was basically a huge hammer with either a wooden or iron head. Think of someone wielding one of those coming screaming at you: you're certainly going to panic.
May 21st, 2007  
mmarsh
 
 
I just cannot image how the Samurai would be able to stop a European heavy cavalry charge. The Samurai had imported Ponies from Korea, not European War Horses. And Unlike Hollywood, Most of the combat in Feudal Japan was fought on foot. A Frontal Charge by Veteran European Heavy cavalry formations would have been unfamiliar, terrifying, and unstoppable.

The Europeans only had 2 effective anti-heavy cavalry weapons: Pikes and Archery. Both of which relied on the other to be effective.

Pikes -The Samurai didn't have them. They did have spears, but not en-mass. Also I think the shaft on them would have been too short to prevent the cavalry from breaking through the lines.

Archery, The English/Welsh were the ones who pioneered arrowheads capable of penetrating plate (botkin arrowtip). I am not sure the Japanese arrowheads would penetrate the plate, let alone the chainmail shirt the Knights wore under their cuirass.

If it were Samurai vs Men at Arms I could see more of a match-up...
August 22nd, 2007  
Norwegian Viking
 
 
I think the samurais would have a big problem with Europe's technology