Who wins?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
You are currently reading a thread in /v/ - Video Games
Who wins?
What game is this from?
If we're speaking in strictly historical context probably the knight.
Knights
Katanas are shit and will break on contact
>>344383763
It's the cover of an old Ultima Online expansion.
>>344384009
Forgot pic
>>344383660
They become friends and go on adventures together.
Samurais were the black knights of japan, no lord, no honor but their own made up shit, bad DIY training and shitty gear.
If you think the average samurai would be more than an afterthought to the average knight you are stupid.
>>344383660
>>344384093
what if the samurai has a spear?
>>344384093
Katanas were fine and that situation probably wouldn't happen in a fight. How many times are you going to slash directly at a braced sword? Probably never, maybe once if you were incredibly stupid.
>>344384552
Who knows, it really depends on the skill of the two fighting.
>>344384305
>No lord
lol what
samurai were literally invented as a noble class to serve a feudal lord known as a daimyo
>no honor
Bushido was the Chivalry of the japanese - a honor code nobody really followed, but one that was there as some idealistic approach anyway.
>DIY training
What
>shitty gear
They weren't soldiers and their gear was effective for fighting in feudal japan. They would get rolled against a knight in full plate armor, however.
>>344384552
>shitty spear against full plate armor
It doesn't take a genius to know which one breaks
Knight would win because his armor is better and western medieval weapons are more effective at dealing with armor.
>>344383660
magic asian swords can't cut through tin can of catholic fanatism.
>>344383660
-no armor
samurai easy
-with armor
probably the knight but don't fool yourself into thinking the katana isn't sharp enough to cut through plate, as it certainly could, but it's not meant for it and would wear out very quickly.
>>344384913
It depends really, katana versus longsword is a closer fight than you'd think. Longsword is better in a purely striking match but with both in armour the match will come down to grappling which the katana is better at being a shorter blade.
>>344384552
Medieval Europe had better spears.
>>344384881
>it really depends on the skill of the two fighting.
well yeah,
this isn't a competition between a longsword and a katana's breaking points.
It's a showdown between two completely arbitrary warriors.
This thread is fucking dumb, and OP should kys himself
>>344385167
You have it absolutely backwards. Longsword beats katana in an unarmoured fight, in armour the katana wins.
>>344385325
>in armour the katana wins.
what
I want to know your reasoning
>>344385325
katana beats the longsword in an unarmoured fight, in armour the battle hammer wins.
katana was made for fast attacks
katana will break against a full plate armor,even chainmail is enough to stop it.
battle hammers were made for a reason,to break armor.
>>344384305
Ironically knights were actually fucking jackasses who barely practiced chivalry and were often little more than glorified thugs in reality.
That said, knights completely wreck samurai due to the later having no effective way of piercing the knight's armor. Archery MIGHT do something, but I doubt it. Sucks for the Samurai that they come from an island with almost no good metal, but what can you do?
>>344385325
>muh 10000 times folded katana and its superior stabbing power
>>344385325
what, half of what the samurai form is for unarmored duels. It's literally a dueling blade and what every samurai worth any kind of salt would have practiced for hundreds of hours besides which likely having won some duels personally.
>>344385428
In armour striking is useless. The only striking you'd do would be to maybe ring the other person up the side of the head to disorient. This isn't a guaranteed strategy but it might work.
When it comes down to grappling a sword that can be wielded easily in one hand wins it and katanas are better at that than longswords. Shorter swords win in close fights, who would have thought.
>>344385167
>>344385325
Both wrong.
Katana will lose both.
The only thing the katana has over the longsword is pure cutting power because of its weight and curvature.
Even so it can't cut armor and a longsword will do a fine job cutting against someone unarmored so it's irrelevant.
>>344383660
It depends entirely on the circumstance, but one-on-one, probably the guy in full fucking platemail. Samurai armour has lots of handy gaps in it.
>>344385537
hammers were made to break the people inside the armor, not the armor itself
>>344385167
>thinking the katana isn't sharp enough to cut through plate
>cut through plate
I can't tell what's bait and not anymore. Swords can't cut through any sort of metal, let alone steel plate.
>>344385207
You'd be surprised at how long a katana actually is, but then again, longswords were also called longswords for a reason.
>>344385136
Western medieval weapons were effective at dealing with chainmail mostly, but couldn't do shit against plate as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OrD8NRVKLiM
>>344385537
>katana will break
Not if it glances at least a bit, which it will. A hammer is also one of the most unwealdy weapons ever and were generally not used unless on horseback and for good reason. What do you think happens when you stand open winding up a swing?
I'm not defending the samurai, but some of you guys seem to think that katanas were literally made to break. Japan had shitty iron, but even bronze weapons don't just break on impact. Fuck, even wooden sticks don't break on impact sometimes.
Also while the katana is effective at stabbing, there were western weapons designed for stabbing through chainmail, so if you want an argument for why the knight might be more effective, there you go.
>>344385678
bro, the katana is unwieldy as shit, and it's heavier than the common longsword
In grappling mode, swords don't do shit, it's daggers that are the best, by stabbing the other in the openings
>>344385681
Nothing on the katana specifically but Samurai are literally trained for unarmored duels. Also assuming the fight starting from draw the katana has on of the fastest draws into lethal attack in the sword world if not the fastest. Plus parrying blade to blade is literally retarded and the only thing the longsword would really beat a katana at in a armorless duel.
>>344385663
I could say the same thing about longswords and longswords are better against katanas unarmoured due to range advantage. Armour nullifies that.
>>344385537
Unless you're using you're using a mordhau a longsword is not a battle hammer. Seeing as chainmail is enough to stop any sword saying chainmail can stop katanas is a little silly.
Any sword is shit against full plate. What you do with a sword against armour is strike at weak points, not at the person's breastplate.
>>344385207
Your forgetting two important things, anon.
>Longswords can be held by the blade, which can make them very effective against armor. Half Swording is also an option to get past armor.
>Samurai armor was inferior to the plate armor of Europe.
>>344385167
-against a defenceless peasant
samurai easily
-against an armed opponent
knight easily
This is bait i know, but katanas were just as sharp as any other sword. The only difference is they were made out of shit, low-carbon steel.
>>344383660
1 katana folded 20,000 times can solo a entire knight regiment
>>344384305
I think you said "samurai" where actually you meant "ronin".
At least I hope you did. The alternative leaves you with being a fucking retard.
>>344385865
>Western medieval weapons were effective at dealing with chainmail mostly, but couldn't do shit against plate as well.
Yeah no shit.
That's why all techniques for fighting against armor are about going for gaps in the armor.
Western weapons and techniques were better at this than Japan because Europeans actually had to fight against people wearing hardened steel plate armor.
>>344385879
I don't know if you know anything about swords but that's simply not true. Katanas weigh less than the average longsword and are shorter. Their point of balance is about the same distance away from the hilt as well.
Seeing as we're talking about armoured fighting it WILL come down to grappling.
Also, I thought we were talking about swords not knives. If they both have knives that changes things.
>>344385678
Katanas are not only heavier than longswords, but their centre of mass is like halfway up the blade. Katanas aren't magic blades that cut at the speed of light like in the films. They're actually just shit, flashy sabres that are good at murdering peasants.
>>344386070
but knights weren't duelists to the same extent that the crazy nips were. I'd say by experience alone the average samurai has seen more sword fights and has more disciplined technique. Assuming height isn't an issue (genetics be damned, let's assume the two men are equal height and thus have equally lengthed swords)
>>344386009
>Fight starting without weapons ready conveniently in range of the katana
>Samurai are the only warriors trained to fight unarmored duels
>Parrying is retarded
>>344386441
The reason the weight is so high is to make the overarching attack hit harder.
>>344386510
Knights loved dueling, anon.
That's basically all the feudal lord servant class did those days in both europe and japan.
>>344385681
Eh, the katana has better balance than a typical longsword, and I would give someone using a katana the advantage if they're both equally skilled.
But yeah katana are fucking useless against any real armor.
Of course, what most people forget is that katana were hardly even used in real warfare, simply being a last resort sort of weapon. Samurai were archers first, horsemen/spearmen second, swordsmen last.
>>344386104
Samurai armour was mildly inferior to the best plate armour but not by a large margin. They're closer than you'd think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2Wk4w9Z05w
The Aztec Warrior wins.
>Badass armor: Pick your choice, fur of the most dangerous animals or the bones of your enemies
>Intimidate your enemies with the death scream
>Chop them and their armor with your obsidian machete that you crafted yourself
Sorry, but all the other warriors are faggots. ULULULULULULULU
>>344386510
100% wrong. Knights and Samurai were both warrior classes whose entire lives revolved around battle.
>>344386441
Wrong, katanas weighed less than longswords and their point of balance was about 3-5 inches from the guard just the same as longswords.
>mount and blade is getting boring
>chivalry is awful
>war of the roses is dead
>kingdom come isn't shaping up that well
Are there any other good medieval combat games or am I gonna have to wait for Bannerlord?
>>344386760
then the spanish conquistador came.
we teached the japanese that guns beat sword on meiji and ww2,but the myth of magic katana still persist
>>344386712
The same is said about longswords. Swords are sidearms, not primary weapons.
The vast majority of swords ever produced were never used.
>>344386174
Eh, while it doesn't make a huge difference, katana were forged in such a way that they had a sharper edge than traditional swords.
I'm not saying they can cut through anything or whatever, but katana are pretty damn sharp for what they are.
>>344386760
Don't forget the part where you get sacrificed to your gods for being a good warrior.
>>344386712
The longsword is longer, basically the same weight and has a crossguard.
I think those are enough advantages for the longsword.
But yeah, samurai would probably destroy a knight in an archery competition.
>>344386931
Check out Mordhau. It's in development and looks to be like Chivalry if it wasn't fucking awful.
>>344387192
The katana has a crossguard as well. Though you can't really throw around the oponnent's sword as well with it, since it's much smaller.
>>344387001
Dont forget the part when you get sacrificed because you win a glorified soccer match
>>344387287
>The katana has a crossguard
It had a guard, not a crossguard. It's just a lil disk dealie.
>>344386986
So really people should be comparing things like the Lance to the Naginata.
>>344387318
Was there anything that you didn't get sacrificed for?
>>344384552
>what if the samurai has a spear?
Nothing.
>>344387449
Well when you start talking about pole weapons I think the Euros have an advantage. Poleaxes are fucking great for armoured fighting and the Japs just don't have an analogue for it.
However if you're talking pikes the Japanese were known to use up to 18 foot spears I believe so neither side can claim a better weapon there.
Lances are really just spears and I really like training with spear. There are some interesting things you could do but the yari and the lance are basically the same.
>>344387192
the average katana was likely only shorter because the men that used them were shorter. I'd have to look into percentages in height differences but it's quite possible. Though the tip of a katana was very brutal for slashing, the tip of the longsword couldn't really cause more than a shallow gash.
>>344387449
I dont know, but reading this makes me want to be a sacrifice
>>344386760
>mexican "intellectuals"
>>344387760
You don't use the tip to slash.
You use it to thrust.
>>344387760
You really don't know what you're talking about at all. I think you're thinking about rapiers when you say they can only cause shallow gashes.
The average katana was shorter because that was the choice they made. A compromise in length so it can be used one or two handed is useful in more situations but better in neither.
The English also preferred a shorter sword with a two handed grip. They both used similarly weighted and balanced swords.
>>344387981
Right but when talking about reach advantages slashing is the only thing that really has an advantage. A stab at maximum range wont cause much damage either but a maximum range slash from a katana can be crippling.
>>344388171
At a katanas max range. The longsword is already at least 10 inches inside you.
>>344387965
Say that to an Aztec Warrior, niño joto
>>344388305
stop talking you 5'3 subhuman
>>344388293
fair enough but again the size of the longsword might just be due to how much taller Europeans were.
ok this is fine and all, but how fucked would a samurai with a katana or a knight with a longsword be against a man wielding the Dragonslayer sword?Ignoring the fact that the Dragonslayer would literally be impossible to wield and would almost certainly snap at the hilt unless it was an incredibly solid hilt.
>>344388427
Are you scared now? Be careful papi, El Chapo is loose now and hes going to get Mr. Trump
>>344383660
Tom Cruise was a samurai, so that answers itself.
>>344388562
You answered your own question
>>344386931
Mordhau
For Honor
>>344386931
Exanima is fucking great
>>344388562
Ignoring the no fun allowed autists, magic weapons always win.
