>>680861189
references pls

>>680861189
as a system; knight
1 on 1, on average, probably the samurai

EDGE KNIGHT

>>680861189
knights, by far, superior weapons and armour

No, absolutely not; assuming this isn't bait, we must consider a few things.

When you say "Knight", that's a little vague, as it can mean anything from 8th century Norman warriors to the soldiers of the late 17the century.

Let's choose a knight, then, from an era rather well-known: the 14th century. Let's make him a knight of the Tuetonic Order.

Immediately, this European knight is much taller than his Samurai opponent, not to mention the fact that he would most likely have a shield, which the Samurai rarely wielded.

Throw in the fact that his armor is of a much higher quality steel than the bronze and leather than that of the Samurai, and it's not looking good for the yellow.

Not to mention he small list of claims you've made are completely false and are actually the reason I'm fairly certain that this is bait. That, or you're just retarded.

EDGE KNIGHT

>>680862294
Knight had no standardized training and couldn't work well together as a result.

Only required to work 40 days a year

Would get fucked up by archers which samurai were also

Knights rarely fought professional soldiers and when they did they got humiliated every time

>>680861189
you're a fucking weaboo, that probably thinks a katana is a superior weapon in all scenarios as well. Knights had plate armor and much better weapons, while the samurai had mostly leather armor, and their katanas couldn't do shit to plate armor, unless it was very thin.

>>680863249
>Knight had no standardized training
wut?
>get fucked up by archers
wut?
>Knights rarely fought professional soldiers
wut?

>>680863204Beginning in the 14th century, the Swiss delivered crushing defeats to the knight-centric forces of Burgundy and Austria, most famously in the Battles of Morgarten (1315), Laupen (1339), Sempach (1386), and Nancy (1477). The Swiss were so successful that the rest of Europe began to copy their tactics, making knights all but obsolete.

Not even bait.

Knights were individual fighters who relied on horseback and charges. Big heavy things that in one on one on the ground were to slow and unorganized to do anything.

Samurai had far superior tactics than just wear armour and charge. Simply shoot their horse and they are gone.

>>680863249
Neither did the Samurai. Remember why they were needed in the first place? As warriors for the dozens of different warring states, each of which taught differently.

And the Japanese bows would simply not penetrate a Teutonic knight's steel plate armor.

You know who the Teutons did a pretty good job of beating? The Muslims. Remember the Crusades? Yes, in the long run, Europe could be said to have lost, but this was not immediate, and, simply put, they held their own for a long-ass time, several centuries.

And, yes, the Muslims they were fighting were professional.

>>680863204
This.

As much as I'm intrigued by Japanese culture and their soldiers, a European knight is simply too well geared and usually physically stronger than their japanese adversaries.

>>680863658
Knights weren't soldiers that all trained together as a unit. They were landowners from miles away from each other that learnt how to fight themselves.

It is well documented that archers destroyed knights. Not their armour but they would shoot out their horses causing the knights to topple. Knights as a result hated archers with a passion.

Knights were mainly used to settle disputes with peasants rather than fight warriors.

>>680863690
I suppose that's a decent point, but this does not mean that a knight is that powerless without a horse, does it?

So many fucking weebs here
Katana is trash
as are samurai

Where is the webm of the sword breaking the katana?

>>680864504
I severely doubt that that was a legitimate sword, then.

>>680861189
Plate steel armor > paper armor
Seriously some samurai wore paper armor.

>>680863249
samurai had really weak bows due to using them on horseback, it's dobtably that they would kill a knight.

>>680864656
Katanas may be sharp as fuck but they're pretty thin a strong swing with a massive claymore would break a katana

Samurai mostly used katana or thin bladed weaponry because it could easily cut through flesh bone and simple bamboo/clay armour, at that time in Japan iron armour wasn't perfected, not to mention katana weren't meant for parry play, if they came into contact with a dence uncutable force (another blade/iron armour) they would simply shatter. I assume you're referring to western Knights at the time of the Renaissance, they were trained at parrying and often used blades to their breaking point, their armour was chain mail and folded steel and was pretty advanced for the time.
Knight beats gay jap weaboo everytime.

>>680861189
What the fuck is this thread going on about?
This question is uselessly unspecific and the question itself is obviously impossible to anwser.
What knigt? The fuck are you talking about? 16th century teutonic knight or 18th century full-plate knight? And what kind of samurai? Early sengoku-jidai? What was the class of the samurai? Do you count yamato samurai's aswell? The fuck OP fix your dumbass question.

You're not just fighting a Knight though, are you? A Knight was a land owner with a huge support arsenel, militia, a leader of a squad, they had training, classical, mind, body, literature, unified codex. A samurai will have house slaves and maybe a couple squires, whilst a knight will have a dozen.

Plus a Knight can span a thousand years of evidenced working structure, crusades, order.

>>680861189
If you´re talking about killing peasants probably samurai. Thats about the only thing a katana is good for though.
Armoured knight vs samurai the knights would win if they´re both somewhat competent.

>>680863440
Not a weab. Yep knights swords far better. But their armour was weak against stabs and had lots of gaps. Also samurai had the yari and yatsubo which was made for armour.

>>680864116
Not powerless but a lot less effective without their horses.

>>680864992
At what time? What time are you talking about you lunatic?
>ITT people with no historical expertise moan about what soldier was better

>a pretty boy used most for appearance stature in good armor with a high quality weapon or a 'pretty boy' used most for appearance and stature in shit armor and poor quality weapon


Hmmmm

>>680864763
Mongol bows were designed to be used on horseback and were extremely short, but were possibly the most powerful bows of the time, possibly until modern times. Reinforced by bone, and they took months to make just one. If the samurai bows were weak it's because they didn't have the tech/knowledge to make them better like the Mongolians.

>>680864763
The bows are for the horses.
>>680864991
Samurai had weapons besides katana for anti armour
>>680865114
Exactly. Knights were a logistical nightmare.

>>680861189
Samurai
>Shit for armor
>No proper anti-armor weaponry.
>A fat feudal lord

Knight
>A walking tank
>More varied weaponry
>A fat feudal lord

>>680865309
But you aren't talking about the fucking mongolians, you're talking abou the Japanese Samurai you idiot. The Mongols are not relevant at all.

>>680864763
Oh my god what are you talking about?
Do you realize that the Japanese Yumi bows are about as powerfull as a medium sized longbow?
And yes what they used on horseback was a different kind of bow but just because they used it sometimes on horseback doesnt mean thats the one bow they use, that's retarded.

>>680863690
Amateurs study tactics. Professionals study logistics.

File: images (4).jpg (4 KB, 556x264) Image search: [Google]

4 KB, 556x264

This is a yari. It's made for armour.

>>680864991
a claymore/2h is also thin, claymores are generall a bit heavier and still have the advantage.

>>680865779
And this is a tatsubo. It Fucken ruins armour.

Samurai didn't just use katanas. They weren't one trick ponies like knights.

Slashing weapon vs piercing weapon

Armor negates slash attacks

Knight wins

>>680865779
It's not necessarily made for armor but it works, if you stab with it.

>>680865779
>implying the shit steel japs had would penetrate plate and chainmail

>>680865309
I didn't say shit about the Samurai or Knights, I think the whole argument is ridiculous but very funny to watch. I'm just telling you that when you said "samurai had really weak bows due to using them on horseback" that it's bullshit, and told you why. Calm your fucking tits.

>>680862006
I watch lots of anime.

>>680865229
>Also samurai had the yari and yatsubo which was made for armour.
define what a "lance" was.

>>680865689
Knights were a logistical nightmare as I stated befoe. They needed an entourage everywhere to be effective.

File: images (5).jpg (4 KB, 340x255) Image search: [Google]

4 KB, 340x255

>>680865942
Forgot pic

This thread is literally weebs vs game of thrones fans

>>680865533
>>680866056
I replied to my own comment retardedly instead of yours

>>680866018
Can you take a step back and re-access what you are talking about?
You are literally arguing about nothing, you dipshits all have 0 weapon knowledge asides from the 2 vidyas you've played set in feudal japan and europe.

>>680865779
how is that better than a western spear. In fact, it looks more fragile and like it would break easier.
Not even mentioning the whole other western weapon arsenal like bastard swords, claymores/2 handed swords in general and halberds which are all a lot more effective than the basic stick with iron tip you´re advertising as a miracle weapon.

>>680866090
Which was useless without a horse. Which samurai would remove with bows.

File: image.jpg (121 KB, 400x290) Image search: [Google]

121 KB, 400x290

>>680865266
If you didn't notice, there is more than one kind of knight and they used different armour and weaponry based on the events taking place at different era, Same goes for samurai dipshit.

>>680866361
And you base all your facts on samurai animes

File: purpleheartwoodtetsubo-1_L.jpg (69 KB, 1024x222) Image search: [Google]

69 KB, 1024x222

>>680866298
Thats from a video gaem.
This is a tetsubo, although a reproduction.
I'd still much rather use a polehammer, a crowsbeak or a warhammer for anti armor.

>>680866451
>It looks more fragile
Can you just let this useless thread die already you fucking idiot? You have no knowledge about anything, so why don't you shut up?

File: image.png (312 KB, 1280x957) Image search: [Google]

312 KB, 1280x957

Have you even seen naruto? Knights can't beat that, Japan is supreme

>>680866503
Are you fucking retarded? That's the point I made, you said
>At the time
Fucking specify the time dumbass

>>680864991
>learning your weapons from movies & vidya

for most katanas , the opposite was the case. due to the slag in japanese steel , the blade becomes brittle (they folded it to distribute the slag more evenly to avoid too brittle points) , so they had to forge it thicker for more stabiltity.

due to this , katanas were shorter at the same weight , which is a huge disadvantage regarding defense and safety distance while striking.
(it is more important to NOT get hit rather than to kill the opponent quicker , infections were a bitch back then)

making a katana with high-quality steel like most european blades allows you to basicly forge a thinner blade like a saber or kriegsmesser-like weapon , which both are shit against armor (steel cant cut steel , and you would need far mor mass to dent it properly)

>>680865779
More like made for paper nippon armor. A proper steel plate wouldn't be penetrated with a spear. They used polehammers n shit to penetrate that shit. A little poke would do jack shit, and hitting with that would be the same as hitting with a sword in the end of a stick.

>>680866718
>the weebs in the thread would have me believe that that sex toy inspiration would do anything to a knight except cause arousal if struck on the behind

Is this really up for discussion?
History clearly shows that the samurai is pretty much the ultimate warrior: Spiritual, disciplined, skilled beyond imagination.
European weaponry cannot compare on any level. Test cutting proves that a Japanese katana can cut clean through even the toughest knightly armor.
If Japan really wanted to, they could have conquered Europe in maybe a few decades.

>>680866086
solid

>>680867044
Well, it's a long blunt thing. Hitting a knight in the helmet would definitely make his ears ring.

>>680866593
I haven't really argued in this thread, I've only advocated for it to die you dumbass.

>>680865229
Also samurai had the yari and yatsubo which was made for armour.
Made for weak as piss rice armour

>>680866797
i don´t need much weapon knowledge to see that the tip of this thing would break off in 5 attacks if you´re really lucky.
Same goes for the "tetsubo", it pisses me off how the other guy thinks iron clubs were something unique to samurais or better than morning stars at crushing armor.

>>680865574
http://historum.com/war-military-history/26975-japanese-yumi-vs-english-longbow-2.html
>I have actually seen these as high as 70 lbs. This was a modern yumi mind you, so I don't know if that draw weight existed during the ages of warfare. Seeing as how they trained much more extensively than modern practitioners, I wouldn't be suprised if they had bows that powerful however.

I mean that it would be impractical to waste time and effort drawing the bow because the fact your hourse is moving would make it more difficult.

>>680867046
>I just watched a bleach episode

Any species nation race culture or whatever in the history of forever would've if they could've

The only time Japan ever did anything to anyone resulted in two atomic bombs being dropped on them

They are the cucks of Asia

>>680867318
there was also a gif where he did the same thing with 2 european swords for comparison

Knights hands down if I can fuck up old dad with a knight class

Your average samurai was just some self important faggot. There were certainly well trained individuals, but in general they're not at all like your romanticized vision.

The same goes for your average imbred faggot who got knighted because he was born to the right people or sucked enough dicks.

>>680861189
If you overlook disease, population, economy, long term effect and just go to the fights, then I would say that the knights would win. Knights and samurai were not that different, they were both sons of the higher class of society which is why they could afford their equipment, the knights were not as disciplined as the samurai but the armor of feudal knights is superior to the weapons of the samurai, remember the reason samurai armor is mostly wood is because japan severely lacked iron compared to Europe, its made for cutting not peircing, archers and pikemen would be only thing that probably would work. That's also the reason why Shinobi used farmer tools as weapons because the samurai monopolized all the metal in the land. the knights would win in the long-run, but one big fight might be in the favor of the samurai depending on terrain and climate.

>>680867416
Dude you clearly don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about.
Fucking trained samurais with actual yari's won't break the tip in 5 attacks, that's fucking retarded and you are getting it from looking at a picture and accessing it, no, it wont.
Just let this thread die in peace already. It's beating a dead horse at this point

File: image.jpg (41 KB, 350x326) Image search: [Google]

41 KB, 350x326

>>680866995
I did mention the renaissance era, seeing as not a lot of technological advances in weaponry happened thought 1300- it's not like I needed to exactly specify, I won't go into detail about Japanese armour because I know for a fact that it wasn't half as advanced as Weston European Knights. And Japanese steel was notorious for its flaking. Knights beat japs every time

>>680867618
Yeah
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVCaJdYZmCU

>>680867416
These dumbasses forget that
1. Late medieval, full plate and chain armour knights were used to fighting other ull plate and chain armour knights. The Jap samurai were used to fighting other Jap samurai who had lighter armor made from shittier materials
2.Jap steel was worse than Euro steel. Jap armour was a thousand times easier to destroy than Euro armor.

>>680867777
>willpower and training makes things i use to beat other things tougher than they should be.

>>680867777
Fucking Jap Samurais weren't stabbing proper steel plate armor tho.

>>680861189
That knight is from the year 800 or so, that samurai is from 1500 or so.

So obviously knights win first, then they go extinct and the samurais win.

in the 1600 the knights descendants beat the crap out of the samurais for the ultimate win.

>>680867760
Well, samurais had guns, spears and strong bows.
So honestly I don't know the fuck you are twlking about, neither do you.
To actually debate about this argument we'd have to select a time period for the samurais and knights to come from, did the samurais already have guns? What kind lf samurai is it? Yamato samurai or just your plain old run of the mill samurai?
This is a bait thread, please let it die in peace faggot

>>680868423
this is always a bait thread

>>680863249
Knights got fucked up by CROSSBOWS, most bows save a longbow with Bodkin couldn't pierce plate armor

>>680861189
Let's consider two things:
'Knight' is a blanket term used for a variety of different soldiers spanning over a thousand years and Samurai, as far as I know, evolved very little over their lifetime. At least compared to the knight.

Second point is that they are two very similar, yet very different kinds of soldier; used for different purposes.

Comparing them is retarded, so please stop.

>>680868252
Proper steel plate you say.
For starters this entire thread is fucking retarded anyways so it's pointless to argue about it.
Anyways with any long, hard elongated object you'll be able to pierce pretty much (Armor wise) anything if you stab correctly.

> samurai ride on a horse with a bow , shoot the knights horse reasonable point but what if the knight isnt on a horse.
English knights often fought on foot ,
with a crossbow he doesnt need to draw and aim , once locked he can follow the target and pretty much snipe the samurai on a horse or not.

File: 1458677779545.gif (688 KB, 664x714) Image search: [Google]

688 KB, 664x714

>>680865779
it was made for the "armours" they get used to fight to. like, thin metal and/or leather... I just monitor this thread with the certain fact that I get to know every weapon a samurai could have wield, and you can be sure, nothing, absolutly nothing that can be made in the feudal japan can defeat a full plate knight, with heavy shield and dynamic morningstar.
>none brought nodachi to TT

>>680868807
It's useless, just leave the thread, I've been saying that since the start

>>680868726
crossbows were really powerful, just slow.

>>680868423
Are you implying that knights did not have guns?
Are you aware that the first firearms in Japan were introduced by Portuguese sailors?
The matchlock arquebus only came to be a thing in Japanese warfare because Europeans introduced it to them.
This also meant that Japanese firearms were always one step behind European ones at basically every point in history.

>>680868726
How many times I gotta say it. The bows were used on the knights horses. It takes effectiveness of a knight away they're whole thing was armoured up horses chargers. On the ground a samurais yari or tetsubo would pierce and bludgeon away the armours usefulness and the knights would be too slow and disorientated to defend.

>>680868807
>>680869001
vietnam war any1? haha

>>680869109
you mean dutch sailors
And are you fucking retarded? That's obviously not what I was implying.

File: 1436939209450.png (134 KB, 900x891) Image search: [Google]

134 KB, 900x891

>>680869135
you are practically making a full scenario for the samurai to win... fuck you.

>>680869231
europ>murica

>>680868830
can a copper spear stab through 20mm steel plate if i do it correctly?

>>680861189
Probably samurai. They had maces. Armour is worthless against that

>>680869398
The Nanban trade (南蛮貿易 Nanban bōeki?, "Southern barbarian trade") or the Nanban trade period (南蛮貿易時代 Nanban bōeki jidai?, "Southern barbarian trade period") in the history of Japan extends from the arrival of the first Europeans – Portuguese explorers, missionaries and merchants
>Portuguese explorers, missionaries and merchants
Sorry you suck at history. The dutch came later and where (much later) the only ones allowed to stay in the age of Japanese isolation.
ANd the way your original comment was phrased seemed to imply that Samurai having guns was an advantage exclusive to them.

File: ncevxfc9wh1tg8jkro2_1280.jpg (176 KB, 658x900) Image search: [Google]

176 KB, 658x900

>>680868304
Eurofags had muskets but were still wearing metal armor and carrying swords in the 16th century. For a fantasy equivalent, you can think of the Three Musketeers who were from the 17th century.

>>680869548
A practical and realistic scenario. Neither side would fight without doing intelligence first.

knights were used to not only control localities but empires were both built & destroyed off their backs. samurai were a bunch of niggers used to keep the rabble to a dull roar

>>680869742
When I said armor wise I didn't mean armored vehicle wise, to get through 20mm of steel plate you's probably need atleast a 50cal anti material sniper, or perhaps a 15mm auto-cannon, and ofcourse rockets.

>>680869038
not that slow with a goatsleg loader even if it awas your point being ? a yumi bow would struggle with plate. if the samuria tries to ride up to fight the knight can just drop it and defend himself untill the samria passes then pick it up again. the only way a samurai can win is by hitting his weak points (only really reachable close up and the samuria has a lot more), bashing him in with a tetsubo . or killing his horse mid gallop and even then thats not for sure a kill