Spyro the Dragon Forums / who would win: samurai or knight?

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Scaily) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 19:21:12 +0000

Blaze the Dragon wrote:

The katana is a thin blade, and yet it still manages to hold well. Unlike a thick blade of a longsword it can pierce the chainmail with a slash.

you have a decent point ^^

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (A Guy) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 18:59:10 +0000

Blaze the Dragon wrote:

And actually A Guy, samurai weren't just skilled swordsmen. They were also renowned for their skill in mounted archery, surpassed only by the Mongols. And, as we know, the archers eventually brought about the end of knights. Ergo, a samurai would still be an even match for a knight.

I've mentioned this loads of times, look back. Unless the knight is wielding an arbalest (which can kill most anyone with a single shot), the samurai is guaranteed a win at range.

Plate mail is resistant to slashing - chain mail, not so much.

Also, mounting a horse wouldn't be a wise move for either side, considering both have weapons made to take down horsemen.

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Blaze the Dragon) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:35:43 +0000

The katana is a thin blade, and yet it still manages to hold well. Unlike a thick blade of a longsword it can pierce the chainmail with a slash.

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Scaily) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 08:22:27 +0000

Blaze the Dragon wrote:

And actually a sword's blade can be honed to be thin at the tip and pierce chainmail.

so so true but thin theres the slight issue of the blades condition

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Blaze the Dragon) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 02:48:13 +0000

And actually a sword's blade can be honed to be thin at the tip and pierce chainmail.

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Scaily) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 02:44:17 +0000

sorry to kill your point but look back to the british vs the irish the tide was turned in the battaal of the bridge because the irish kill off the knights by dismounting thim and attacking thim with anything pointy makeing thim bleed to death samuria are known for there swords man ship yes but if one merly fought for the intense feeling thayy also took a smaller blade with thim incase of harukiri being needed

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Erza) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 02:24:11 +0000

thats why the knights wore a highly padded gown underneath the plate and chain armour. to stop blows that could break bones and whatnot

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Scaily) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 02:21:06 +0000

true but do you realy need to cut thim the hard blows alone can break ribs and thin possibly cause enternal punchers and bleeding

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Erza) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 02:12:32 +0000

Blaze the Dragon wrote:

Okay... a question The New Age of Cynder; if arrows have a single, narrow point, how can they pierce chainmail, when a sharp tip of a blade cannot? An arrowhead, it could be considered, is stabbing through the chainmail.

the chain mail underneath the plate armour is made of rings joined together, right? an arrow is thin enough to penetrate a single ring. but a sword cannot, because the blade to to thick. Ive been to a demonstration at an old medieval castle. thats why i know quite a bit about this. plus, i studied medieval knights at the start of this year.

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Scaily) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 01:52:48 +0000

untill both are dismounted thin the lighter fighter wins its ben prooven in history

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Blaze the Dragon) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 01:48:06 +0000

And actually A Guy, samurai weren't just skilled swordsmen. They were also renowned for their skill in mounted archery, surpassed only by the Mongols. And, as we know, the archers eventually brought about the end of knights. Ergo, a samurai would still be an even match for a knight.

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Scaily) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 01:15:22 +0000

*sigh*im 18 and it adds up i type how i wish thats all that needs to be said. if i were to type as every one els i wouldnt be true to my self plus some times i correct things latter when i have paceints[if thats how its spelled] another thing is im my self not you nor anyone els there for to be me i must act like me and no one els thus meaning i do as i am as i wish [ if that confused you the simple version is i simple dont care what othes think of my typeing]

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (cheesypower) — Sun, 13 Sep 2009 01:03:08 +0000

darkspyro <3 wrote:

actuly the armor thay were is exstreamly heavy so if the first swing is dodged there open for a fatal blow and lay off my spelling this is the enternet yull see it alot

um, dude, not to be condesending or anything, but...
you're eighteen and you spell like an eight-year-old.

something just doesn't add up there, even on the internet.
sorry, dude, someone had to say it.

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (Scaily) — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 22:15:35 +0000

actuly the armor thay were is exstreamly heavy so if the first swing is dodged there open for a fatal blow and lay off my spelling this is the enternet yull see it alot

Re: who would win: samurai or knight?

dummy@example.com (A Guy) — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 15:19:28 +0000

darkspyro <3 wrote:

you for get that ounce dismounted a knights armor dramaticly slows thim with a samurias is light and sturdy earther the arow would kill or cause him to fall off thin hes a slow moving jduck in a aligators pond

It doesn't take them 2 seconds to get a good swing with a longsword.

Also, may you please improve your spelling and grammar?