2007-07-22 16:27:25 · 19 answers · asked by hittenmitsurugi 4 in Sports ➔ Martial Arts
OK let me adjust the question. Which would you prefer an eastern knight w/c is the samurai or the european knight? Which of the 2 is way cooler?
2007-07-23 16:02:29 · update #1
The knight.
Samurai armor is not very strong and could not withstand a blow from a broadsword, especially if it's steel.
2007-07-22 16:36:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Samurai is way cooler!! And they would win...
I like what he said ^... Who would win in battle w/out armor. I still think a samurai would. But They are two very different styles of sword fighting. THe katana slices and cuts and is quick, while the broadsword is for stabbing and slamming into the other person but is slow.
((Ok...whoever said this "People, do some basic research on the topic before commenting."....
And seriously people lets not pretend to know everything about swords and history. I mean are we supposed to be impressed by your fake source of knowledge...wow!))
2007-07-30 13:56:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In answering this question I am assuming that each warrior is dressed in the attire appropriate for the combat setting.
If they were both mounted the knight would win hands down, that is how knights are the most effective. Samurai were also intended to be on a horse but a katana would have a tough time even getting through a knights armor. A mounted knight was a war machine that the samurai would be ill equip to battle.
On foot I think that the samurai would have the advantage. His speed and mobility would prove overwhelming
On the ground I think that mobility of the samurai.
-rj
2007-07-22 23:45:58 · answer #3 · answered by ronjambo 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You didn't specify the battlefield and terrain. If it's just a stand up fight with swords in a forest, then the samurai has the advantage of mobility and precision. The Knight would just flail away like crazy and be out of breathe after a while, and in the off chance he falls down, he'd have trouble getting up as the armor can be so heavy that some knights are mounted on their horses via a winch and pulley sytem. But on horseback in an open field, the knight would have the advantage, since the full plate armor was designed for repelling arrows and swords while charging down the enemies' ranks on horseback at full gallop. It's not called heavy cavalry armor for nothing.
2007-07-22 22:57:24 · answer #4 · answered by Shienaran 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Katana's for slicing, a broadsword is for hacking.
Samurai have relatively weak armor; medieval knights had armor lacking speed but that was unsurpassed in protection in their day.
Samurai< Knight.
2007-07-22 18:49:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
the samurai would win agaisnt the boradsword the katana was sharp enough to go threw plate mail like butter the broadsword would have a hard time with the katana sense the samurai used dodging techniques to avoid attacks and then strike for a one or two hit kill so to answer the question simply the katana does beat the broadsword for cutting power and trust me i own both weapons and tested the same theroy
2007-07-27 03:55:17 · answer #6 · answered by jack 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Go with the armored Knight---the sight alone would scare the crap out of a samurai--plus think of the size difference between a European Knight and a asian fighter!
2007-07-22 16:35:27 · answer #7 · answered by f4fanactic 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Samurai hands down. They have extensive training and can handle there swords with speed and percision. The knights broadsword is heavy and can easily tire the knight. And if i am correct broadswords were mostly cerimonial and rarely used on the battlefield because of there weight. The samuria can close make distance with ease. The knight could not keep up.
2007-07-22 20:29:52 · answer #8 · answered by D.B.K. S 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Samurai. That Armored suit does not allow for rapid movement. You can't roll in Armor, and it has it's weak points. The Samurai would be able to defeat a Knight.
2007-07-27 14:29:53 · answer #9 · answered by fightingdragons2001 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The samurai would win hands down. His armor is much less restrictive and a lot lighter, giving him a distinct advantage in mobility and speed. Their training is also excellent, and the katana is superior to a broadsword any day.
2007-07-22 16:37:03 · answer #10 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
i would agree with the 1st 2 answers but a knight would be too slow while a samurai would have a lightweight fast sword that is as strong or even stronger than a broadsword. all he would have to do is kick off the helmet and attack. the knight has his armor advantage.
2007-07-22 16:45:01 · answer #11 · answered by cs313 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋