- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Who would win…A Knight vs A Samurai
Posted on 3/9/22 at 9:54 pm to Palmetto98
Posted on 3/9/22 at 9:54 pm to Palmetto98
Samurai easily. They were stealthy so he would slit the Knights throat while he slept.
1
Posted on 3/9/22 at 9:56 pm to Palmetto98
Samurai
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:03 pm to Fat and Happy
quote:
Samarai
Knights aren’t the bad arses movies make them out to be
The way some of y’all are talking about samurai, y’all must have believed the movies on them.
If we are talking mounted combat, one on one, armored knight on heavy horse wins, hands down.
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:06 pm to Fat and Happy
A katana is a slashing weapon and would be pretty useless against Mail and armor. A broadsword is a hacking weapon and would be very effective against Japanese armor.
Also, European armor was designed to account for the English longbow. That had over 100 lbs draw weight. The Japanese bow being for horses probably did not have that much draw weight.
A Knight would defeat a Samari pretty easily.
Also, European armor was designed to account for the English longbow. That had over 100 lbs draw weight. The Japanese bow being for horses probably did not have that much draw weight.
A Knight would defeat a Samari pretty easily.
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:14 pm to FreddieMac
Exactly. The sword evolves to beat the shield and vica versa.
Now, let’s just say you plopped Japan in the North Sea, and give them a couple hundred years of fighting to develop.
Now THAT would be interesting.
Now, let’s just say you plopped Japan in the North Sea, and give them a couple hundred years of fighting to develop.
Now THAT would be interesting.
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:18 pm to rsbd
quote:
Tom Cruise
Richard Gere Sans Lemminwinks.
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:25 pm to AUCE05
quote:
slit Knights throat while he slept
Would never happen because of the Samari code of honor. They were all macho and shite. Had strict codes of combat. You are thinking of ninjas of feudal Japan.
This post was edited on 3/9/22 at 10:27 pm
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:30 pm to Palmetto98
Can the knight be a dark one?
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:30 pm to Palmetto98
I’m going to take the knight. I think it would be a lot like the fight in GoT between Jorah Mormont and the Dothraki. The slashing style sword is at a major disadvantage against plate armor. And the idea of knights as lumbering plodders is not based in fact.
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:30 pm to Palmetto98
Samurai
His sword would slice through a knights sword..first off.
His sword would slice through a knights sword..first off.
This post was edited on 3/9/22 at 10:31 pm
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:33 pm to SEClint
quote:
His sword would slice through a knights sword..first off.
Man, y’all really did learn everything about knights and samurai from movies
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:42 pm to fr33manator
But could the knight beat this guy...
This post was edited on 3/10/22 at 1:19 pm
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:46 pm to Palmetto98
I'm taking the knight with this. Once you remove all the mystique and just examine the two sets of armor, weapons etc, give me the more heavily armored man in a one-on-one conflict.
Posted on 3/9/22 at 10:54 pm to fr33manator
quote:yes and video games.
Man, y’all really did learn everything about knights and samurai from movies
Katana and Wakizashi>>>A Claymore
Posted on 3/9/22 at 11:03 pm to SEClint
But it’s not about the sword here, it’s about the armor. The katana isn’t designed at all for the sort of armor a knight would wear. Meanwhile a claymore or a zweihander would cleave through Samurai armor.
Additionally, a katana wouldn’t be as effective in finding the vulnerable spots in the armor, due to it being a slashing weapon rather than a piercing, hacking weapon.
Basically what makes the katana great in Japan makes it a poor choice versus a knight, especially in mounted combat.
Additionally, a katana wouldn’t be as effective in finding the vulnerable spots in the armor, due to it being a slashing weapon rather than a piercing, hacking weapon.
Basically what makes the katana great in Japan makes it a poor choice versus a knight, especially in mounted combat.
Posted on 3/9/22 at 11:09 pm to fr33manator
Samurai did carry more than just swords, so if we are going all out..frick it, some would win some would lose
Posted on 3/9/22 at 11:26 pm to TutHillTiger
quote:Where does this viewpoint that knights were unwieldy and had zero stamina come from?
How long are they fighting? In short fight go with the knight, over 10 minutes I will take the Samurai.
Movies and TV?
The concept would make no sense in battle.
This post was edited on 3/9/22 at 11:26 pm
Posted on 3/9/22 at 11:27 pm to STLDawg
quote:Exactly.
And the idea of knights as lumbering plodders is not based in fact.
It makes zero sense.
Battles weren’t 10 minute affairs.
Posted on 3/9/22 at 11:37 pm to Scruffy
Posted on 3/10/22 at 8:08 am to SEClint
The Samurai’s only really effective weapon against a mounted knight would be their Polearm
The Yari
It’s designed for use against mounted enemies and can unseat them or may be enough to penetrate the armor on a charge (since it’s a piercing weapon vs. a slashing one.)
The Yari
It’s designed for use against mounted enemies and can unseat them or may be enough to penetrate the armor on a charge (since it’s a piercing weapon vs. a slashing one.)
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News