/jp/ - Otaku Culture

hrmmm....

i donno lol

If the Europeans are so great then why'd they get their asses kicked whenever they faced Mongols?

Take about 5 dozen eggs, start puttin' em in a bowl, mix THE FUCK outta em' and whaddya get?

PEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENIS

>>101777
They sought revenge in the afterlife and succeeded.

>>101780
they didnt, the mongols were defeated

If Europeans are so great why do they smoke cock so often?

>>101782

i dont get the joke

>>101780
And the Mongols lost to the japanese.
It's Rock/Paper/Scissors, man.

>>101798
They were defeated more by a freak storm than by the Japanese. They lost 2/3 of their fleet in one storm while invading and the rest were so badly damaged they couldn't mount a strong attack.

Also, they weren't fighting Genghis or they'd have been fucked.

What this is a different samurai vs knight thread?

sage for the SECOND FUCKING TIME THIS PIC HAS BEEN POSTED IN AN HOUR.

If Europeans are so great why'd they get their asses kicked whenever they faced Turks?

>>101925

They didn't, only eastern europeans and greeks did.

And they aren't people.

>>101925
They didn't. There's a reason the Ottoman Empire no longer exists.

SAGE IN ALL CAPS.

>>101782
I lol'd

OH YEAH SHIT JUST GOT REAL!

>>101777
nobody knows. mystery of the earth. they most likely cheated.
fight with just swords, armor is ok.
eurofags would have gotten their shit fucked up.

>>101982
Europeans were always hundreds of years ahead of the Japanese when it came to warfare. A katana doesn't do shit towards plate armour.

>>101992
samurai wore armor too.
knight v. samurai. the choice is obvious.
no guns just swords. maybe a horse.

JESUS H. MCFUCKING IMAGINARY CHRIST, STOP RESPONDING TO THIS BULLSHIT

we've had this thread like 10 times
both on /k/ and /jp/ and /a/.

Knights would fuck the Samurai up, end of story.

>>101992
http://youtube.com/watch?v=YdFmVZ0aAWo
complete with kung-pow style dubs.

>>102020
prove it.
also age

>>102025
now if only they could be that precise to slice the bullet.

I doesn't matter because pirates would kick all their asses.

The samurai could cut the bullets with their Katanas

>>102003
Samurai didn't have plate armor. They had leather and wood armor, very primitive stuff. A knight with pretty much any European weapon at the time would fuck a samurai up.

>>102034
pirates would get fucked up in both cases.
gentlemenz in womens clothing acting tough while fighting off scurvy? lol no.

>>102038
Lead is weak, fyi.

a ninja appears

>>102047
japanese swords are weak, fyi

>>102025
Lead is weaker than what they used for plate armor. Even the sharpest Katana can't deliver enough force to cut through a suit of plate armor.

>>102089
what magic rune metal are knight swords made of?

This thread is going places...

>>102103
nintendium. that is how they cut through another knights armor.

>>101798
The weather did

>>102089
plate armor- made of steel
knight sword0- made of steel.
knights manage to fight each other and break through armor
katana made of steel.

i dont see what you are talking about.

>>102195
It's the quality of the steel.

>>102195
you know hw much time makers of katanas took to make their swords? it took that long because japanese steel sucked shit.

>>102195
Weight and density also mattered.

>>102195
are you serious?

why the fuck are you drooltards still debating this shit

Japanese ahd honor, and an honor code, europians were always the filthy backstabbers as they(we) are.
Samurai fight with swords, even if its not effective, lol.
Europeans had guns, better bows and plate armor.
So to simply put it they werent on the same level.

>>102195

Katanas were never made to cut through steel, they were made to cut through flesh and bones.
since this is the /japanfag/ we should know that katanas arent even supposed to collide with steel, at all.

>>102216
buuuuut....

wait....


Steel gets melted and the impurities are either burned out or fluxed out.

in fact, some impurities in steel make it STRONGER.

see: damascus steel and carbon nanotubes.

In fact, if I remember correctly, Japan learned to make steel from the Chinese, who learned from the Arabs.

Arab steel is the finest in the world, despite being the shittiest quality ore.

>>102270
Try harder.

Samurai wins because katanas are made of diamond, one of the hardest metals, if not the hardest metal known the man.

Katanas are made of adamantium.

>>102270

Might as well pull out the facepalm full stop.
Well Britian is the origin of Dragonforce.

>If the Samurai are so great then why'd they get their asses kicked whenever they faced Europeans?

I didn't know that the was a war between Samurai and Knights

>>102269
actually, Katana were made to cut through a variety of armors.

in fact, after a sword was completed, they would test it on a variety of things, from large piece of bamboo to dead bodies to helmets filled with iron sand.

>>102270
/b/ is <== that way.

I remembered one faggot using Rurouni Kenshin as his proof that Samurai > Knights in these threads.

>>102038
Yea, but they can't react to them fast enough while their flying.

>>102297
The samurai also saw all the weak points in any armor with just one clance! And they also knew all sorts of funky sword techniques

>>102320
>clance
ancient japanese secret

>>102316

And even if they did they woulld just welcome the bullet in two pieces into their bodies.

Samurai would win imo at least in a 1 on 1. Plate armor looks really fucking heavy and mobility can't be optimal in it. All the samurai needs to do is kite the knight, then around his line of sight and end him. Plus the plate armor advantage can't be that great since arabs pwned the shit out of knights and they didn't wear plate armor (ok, so they were outnumbered most of the time).

>>102038
if they could react fast enough to cut it then why not just get out of the way?

>>102305
there's no way to really decide a clear winner between the two.

There are too many factors, and both groups of warriors are very similar.

If an army of 100 samurai with yari, yumi, katana, and mixes of splint mail and japanese scale plate and horses faced down an army of 100 knights with Lances, longbows, broadswords, and mixes of chain and gothic plate, it would be a fairly even match.

The biggest deciding factor would be that samurai were generally accomplished bowmen and could fire while mounted at half gallop and still be pretty accurate.

In fact, most samurai were better with bows and spears than swords.

>>102343
>imo
Stopped reading there.

>>102343

You'd be surprised about mobility. They didn't fight in it for 500 years for nothing.

>>102343
it is surprisingly light weight according to wiki. a full set was only 40 pounds.

>>102343
full gothic plate doesn't slow you down that much.

It IS restrictive though. You'll have trouble moving sideways or blocking attacking/overhead.

Your vision is also pretty gimped by most helms.

Samurai armor is lighter and made to allow more free movement.

They also wore masks that allowed plenty of vision.

Samurai would likely win just by wearing out the knight and usign basic knowledge of armor to identify chinks in it, but he'd still take a long time to do it.

hahaha oh wow

Vikings would kill both.

>>102357
Your loss imo XD

>>101777
knight vs samurai is now a meme!

x is now a meme is an old meme.

Samurai would kick the knights into the river and then lol at them dying...

>>102389
this.
also gtfo Norsefag

>>102382
>usign basic knowledge of armor to identify chinks in it

Now you're just being racist.

>>102412
oh god i lol'd

This thread is an eyesore

>>102404
x is now a meme is an old meme is not a meme.

this eyesore is an thread

>>101777
nah, they ended up sticking their penor in each other's asses and raising a new generation of faggots LIKE YOU

>>102389
WAIT WHAT. VINLAND SAGA IS UP TO VOLUME 5 SCANLATED!?!??!

>>102343
Who outnumbered who?

Arabs was known to fight frickin' 200,000 Roman soldiers with only 3,000 people and still manage to comes out draw.

Heck, they win against 200,000 Sasanid Persians with only 40,000.

Besides, IIRC, 1st Crusade, the Crusaders = 100,000. 3rd = 200,000...? Well, initial forces of course. Now if we talk about how it was after Barbarossa drowned himself in a river.....

mandatory

>>102457
I was thinking mainly about the third Crusade.

Why does everybody talk about a sword when the knight has lots of possible choices, like a halberd?

I saw this video on Youtube once of a samurai cutting a building in half. He had spent 20 sharpening his katana's blade to cutting perfection to achieve that.

>>102457
>Now if we talk about how it was after Barbarossa drowned himself in a river.....
I cried myself to sleep that night after I finished playing the Barbarossa campaign on AoE2.

WHY DID HE HAVE TO DIE? HE WAS DOING SO WELL

>>102499
Because knights were long gone.

The Samurai would have been fighting huge formations of musketeers and demoralizing regimental cavalry charges.

>>102501
Link or GTFO

FUCKING ANACHRONISMS
THE FIRST CRUSADE WAS DURING THE HEIAN PERIOD
THE SENGOKU ERA WAS DURING THE AGE OF DISCOVERY
THIS SHIT WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED

europians are stronger and bigger build then those rat sized samurai also beter equiped.
samurai were pissing there all over them selfs when they had to europians face to face

>>102464
lol

>>102395
>imo XD

GTFO

Knights would win. Saying otherwise is like saying a longsword+2 is better than Fullplate+5.

I found a very interesting read just now.
Google "Samurai vs Knight" and this comes up:
http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm

That aside, my money is on the Knight.

>>102343
>Plate armor looks really fucking heavy and mobility can't be optimal in it.
the equipment of a modern soldier is heavier than well made plate armour.

>the plate armor advantage can't be that great since arabs pwned the shit out of knights
learn your history. plate armour wasn't worn during the crusades, and it wouldn't have worked in those countries anyway, since it would be too hot.

katana weren't worse nor better than european swords; they were no razorblades unfit for real battlefield conditions (unlike those 19th century wallhangers and testcutting blades of japanese romanticists missing the "old days"), and knightly longswords were no crowbars in sword form. it is impossible to cut through plate armour with any sword. both weapons were used similarly and knights as well as samurai knew how to use them. it's a silly thing to assume that professional soldiers, who would only survive if they were capable of defending themselves on the battlefield, didn't know proper techniques to do so. against an armoured opponent a knight would grab the sword by it's blade (which is possible with a good pair of gauntlets or a ricasso) and use the tip like a short spear to thrust for gaps in his opponent's armour. but even more than that, he'd try to grapple his opponent to the ground to finish him with a dagger. "bashing" would only be done with hilt and guard of the sword, but never with the blade, since it'd break.

>>102649
and while japanese armour was not as protective as plate armour (which is why rich samurai used to wear european armour on the battlefield - e.g. oda nobunaga), it'd still require a knight to adjust his tactics - even if he could thrust or cut through armour, it'd require a lot more strength and his weapon might break in the process; it'd simply be too risky. the main reason why plate armour was worn was to protect against projectiles. both warriors would try to thrust for gaps in the armour, both would try to grapple their opponent to the ground to finish them with a shortsword or dagger.

it'd only depend on the individual skill, since both would have learned useful techniques to do so.

here some related youtube videos about western martial arts:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6Pnw-9A8qQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIFIn6tAI3A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Y54lrNuWqw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXbZqKnwDbQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3DhjFUOG6Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj4Ng6DBfrg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HC5FIyfI8TA

Listen to this Anon.

>>101777

Knights never fought samurai. Europeans already had guns and weren't using armor when they conflicted the Japanese. Europeans also tried previously tried to combat the Japanese, but until the flintlock musket (Japan rains a lot, matchlocks go out) they had limited success.

>>102020
beg to differ for one broadswords thou they can do more damage cant NOT be swung in multiple directions and at fast speeds and arent meant to be handled by one hand while the katan or bushido where designed for speed and ease of use once masterd plus the speed which it can be swung adds to its cutting strength which would allow them to cut threw almost everything including plate armor ((up to a certain amount of the plate would be cut but enough for an opening)) (thrusting doesnt work well with armour)

>>103942
>cant NOT

durhurdur

>>103958
know what i didnt even realize i said that

Knight

>>104005
So
Cool

>>104005

>>104005
>>104012
now this is a battle i can get into

>>104005
>>104012
T
R
U
E

G
A
R

The best way to take out an armored soldier was a ranged weapon, crossbows and longbows really made the armored knight obsolete. However, a Mace was one of the best choices for use against armored men up close, you didn't need to pierce armor to mortally wound someone, and if you had a flanged mace it would penetrate the armor in addition to brute trauma of the blow.

>>103743
when did a european nation ever fight the japs? I don't recall reading about that. Even the Spaniards and Portuguese did not invade japland after they murdered all the Christians.

Anybody see that seen in Kagemusha where the Samurai just get owned by Oda Nobunaga's Musket fire?

And who gave mr. Nobunaga his Muskets...

>>104108
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY11v5w6DdQ&feature=related

>>104060
No pitched wars, but various European nations DID skirmish with the Japanese during 1860-80s. The only example that comes to mind is the British shelling a town in retaliation for the Japanese beheading a British man.

>>104117
What are you trying to say?

Bullet Beats Sword?

>>104142

>>104155
Well yeah, I don't know why I got linked to that after saying there were no pitched wars with the Japanese, that movie is a depiction of the Satsuma Rebellion. Not a war against Westerners.

>>104171
I think it was more to demonstrate the point of European Weaponry vs Japanese Weaponry

Battle of Nagashino is a pretty good example during the Sengoku period

>>104117

Disorganized pieces of conscript peasant jap shit. Yet they still won with superior western infantry tactics and weapons.

>>104190
It's a fucking movie, there's no accuracy. The samurai in the rebellion ALSO used western weapons and tactics.

>>104155
>Bullet Beats Sword

That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Clearly you aren't watching enough anime, or you'd know that's completely backwards.

>>104117
point is the fucking cheated. cannons against a horseman? yeah thats fair.

>>104235
>>104235
Historically the Japanese used Canons given to them by the Europeans *Along with Matchlock Muskets* during the Sengoku Period, as i said. All you really need to do is look at The Battle of Nagashino to get a clear picture of who would win. Kagemusha really does a good job portraying the firepower from an Aquribrusier (SP?)

samurai = homosexual master-student relationship trained small scale armies & combat.

knight = drunken heterosexual (except in germany where buttfucking among the elite was encouraged), trained in large scale armies & combat.

the japanese footsoldier had a long sharp stick because swords were only for samurai.

the euro footsoldiers had bows, swords, maces, halbards, pikes, crossbows and flails.

in summary, the japanese samurai lose because they're fags without any supporting footsoldiers.

I think the real debate would be SPQR vs Samurai

>>104190
鉄砲、騎馬隊、長篠の戦いが始まったのだ

>>104235
That's how it's done, EVERYWHERE. When cavalry charges, you shoot to thin them out.

>>104235

Who said war is fair?They decided to not go along with the times. The days of warfare being decided with swords was over 400 years ago. Whoever adapts with change in technology and tactics wins, end of story. Thats the same reason the Japanese annihilated the Russians, they had splitting edge battleships. That's also why they lost WWII. They invested too heavily in obsolete battleships.

>>104257
ITT: we frame issues to support our side.

ITT: We Pitch a Country using 6th Century Weaponry in 1560 against 16th Century Europe

It went really well for the Aztecs though i must admit

1 on 1. The knight would take too long to load the cannon (illegal in the first place, only weapons he can carry allowed) and get owned.

>>104383
AZTEC WARRIOR vs SAMURAI

Who wins?

>>104395
Knights didnt use Canon's until the late 15th Century, if it was the Ottomans they would have there kick ass janissaries there to support said Cannons

>>104406
Aztec Warrior has no horse and a club with some jagged rocks in it instead of a sword. Samurai wins.

Unless this is Aztec Warrior after contact with Spain, because then he has stolen horses, armor, and muskets. Samurai looses.

>>104406

This is a fucking stupid debate. The greater utility of a European Army would win. End of story. Unlike some of you fucking morons think, 90% of a European army were conscripted fucking peasants. Knights were used as heavy cavalry most of the time to flank and destroy units. But massed peasants with bows could destroy them. The thing is the peasants are replaceable and fucking cheap. Not gonna mention the impossibility of an invasion of Japan with Medieval European ships. The invasion would be doomed to a strategic failure and it would lost boatloads.

tl;dr This match up WOULD NEVER FUCKING HAPPEN. The knights weren't the ones to win the fight. It was their fucking massed armies spamming arrows while the other side died.

>>104422
But they had the atlatl. It could pierce through Spanish armor and still kill the man behind him as well.

>>104429

>>104429
For some reason, Civ III does not account for the Aztec Warrior's personal force field and staff that shoots laser beams.

>>104433
It was exactly the same for the samurai.

Well done one making a FUCKING OBVIUOUS point, Watson.

>>104433
It was exactly the same for the samurai.

Well done one making a FUCKING OBVIOUS point, Watson.

>>104433
knight v. samurai is now and forever was a meme. deal with it and cry more on improbability.

>>104433
This is a hypothetical situation anyways and we're talking about a 1 on 1 battle.

But yea samurai might win. Knights were typically noblemen.

>>104433
who the fuck is doing that? Since they both never met in battle, you compare by using common enemies.

1) Mongols destroyed European knights/armies. They easily conquered Eastern Europe/Russia/Persia/Eastern Germany with smaller forces.
2) Samurai repelled the Mongols from invading Japan.
3) Therefore Samurai > Knights.

>>104438
The atlatl wasn't too accurate and he'd only get one shot in before the samurai tramples him. It's the sort of thing that's effective in large numbers.

>>104443
Don't forget the invisibility fields!

>>104457
>paper beats rock and rock beats scissors so clearly paper beats scissors.
your logic is flawed.

>>104457
If by Samurai you mean "A Divine Wind" then yes, yes they did. Also Europe was incredibly fragmented, "Russia" did not exisit as we know it today, neither did Prussia. At the time of the Mongol Invasion Europe was broiled in the Third Crusade. The Mongols never made it past the Danube, and frankly everything east of the Danube was either a Shitty City State, or part of a former Byzantine Empire

>>104476
In the real world, nothing beats rock.

>>104457

The Mongols sucked at naval warfare, but they were the masters of mounted warfare. Therefore, your comparison is invalid.

Guh.

1000-1300 Japanese Samurai and Euro Knights are roughly on par. Both countries use feudal style military organization. Samurai are more mobile and versatile (fight with bow and spear) while the euro knights use heavier armor and greater survivabilty.
1300-1600 Japanese samurai obliterate euro knights for the simple reason of Japs having the MOST ADVANCE GUNS in the world. They took what the Portuguese gave them and improved on them faster than Euros could. Too bad they were idiots for banning them during the Edo-period
1600-1850 Euros waste samurai because samurai dont use guns anymore and euros finally surpass Japs in gun tech.


There. This bypasses the swords/armor debate completely by looking at both sides' willingness and ability to use guns.

The Mongols really were just a lighter form of Parthians, much like the Huns were before that.

>>104476
>>your logic is flawed.

no it works.
BTW - Han Empire > Roman Empire also. The Han were superior in every aspect of civilization than the Romans.

>>104489
oh rry.

>>104458
What, you on crack? Or are you assuming the dart would be thrown beyond that atlatl's range?

>>104489
Water does. And time.

In the end the Aztecs, led by Chuck Norris would enter the battle,run around and proceed to bludgeoning the fuck out of the Knights and Samurai.
THE END

>>104494
Which is why your speaking Chinese and not using a Latin Derived Language correct?

>>104492
So your saying somehow the Japanese using guns IMPORTED BY THE EUROPEANS would beat the Europeans with Said Guns? thats like saying LOL THE INDIANS SHOULD HAVE STOMPED THE US BECAUSE WE SOLD EM RIFLES!

>>104502
>>104498
Rock beats planet and vaporizes water. See >the moon.

>>104478
>>The Mongols never made it past the Danube

A combined force of 50,000 Poles and Germans under the command of Henry II the Pious, Duke of Silesia, supported by feudal nobility and knightly military orders sent by the Pope, attempted to halt the Mongol invasion of Europe.

The 10,000 Mongol force using superior tactics and Chinese technology wiped out this larger European army.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe

>>104509
in b4 germanic

When it comes to immediate effect, Romans swept Europe in culture while China swept all of east asia. Now, the legacy of the Romans(and Greeks) through Europe is Western Civilization, but China's influence over all of East Asia has gone uninterrupted for 3000 years. China's still alive while Rome has crumbled and gone 1500 years prior.

Its a toss up.
Back on topic, again, Gun Samurai pwn noob "guns are cowardly" euro knights until 1600 when Japos also pick up stupid idea.

>>104524
>>>>The Mongols never made it past the Danube

Europe was only saved by the untimely death of the Khan. When Subutai heard in 1242 that Grand Khan Ögedei had died the previous year, the Mongol army retreated eastward, because Subutai had three princes of the blood in his command and Genghis Khan had made clear that all descendants of the Khagan (Grand Khan) should return to the Mongol capital of Karakorum for the kuriltai which would elect the next Khagan.

The Golden Horde did not invade the heart of Europe - Vienna - as planned. Europe was saved an invasion. The Mongols never again seriously looked westward for conquest and only raiding for loot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe

>>104524
Some western historians attribute European survival to Mongol unwillingness to fight in the more densely populated German principalities, where the wetter weather affected their bows. The territory of Western Europe, with more forests and with many castles along with many opportunities for the heavy cavalry to counter-attack possibly made Western Europe a more formidable opponent. Also, despite the steppe tactics of the Avars and early Hungarians, both were defeated by Western States in the 9th and 10th centuries. A significant number of important castles and towns in Hungary had also resisted the formidable and infamous Mongol siege tactics.

But the probable answer for Batu's stopping after the Mohi River, and the destruction of the Hungarian army, was that he never intended to advance further[citation needed]. He had made the Russian conquest safe for the next ten generations, and when the Great Khan died and he rushed back to Mongolia to put in his claim for power, it ended his westward expansion. Subutai's recall at the same time left the Mongol armies without their spiritual head and primary strategist. Batu Khan was not able to resume his plans for conquest to the "Great Sea" (the Atlantic Ocean) until 1255, after the turmoil after Ögedei's death had finally subsided with the election of Möngke Khan as Great Khan.

>>104514
The japanese are notorious for developing shit better than the original. Just because someone invented something doesnt mean they will always be the best at making them.

Transistors, televisions, electronics in general, video games especially, the goddamn car. Gerald Ford's grip on the global auto industry ever since he invented the mass-producable car has been absolutely crushed by the Japanese since 1970.

Retard.

>>104518
That was a big ass rock, that's cheating.

>>104533
the Mongols destroyed European armies with ease. they could have invaded Vienna, Germany if they wanted to.

>>104528
In the mid-1280s Nogai Khan led an invasion of Hungary alongside with Talabuga. Nogai lead an army that ravaged Transylvania with success, where cities like Reghin, Braşov and Bistriţa were plundered and ravaged. However Talabuga, who led an army in Northern Hungary, was stopped by the heavy snow of the Carpathians and the invading force was defeated near Pest by the royal army of Ladislaus IV and ambushed by the Székely in the return. As with later invasions, it was repelled handily, the Mongols losing much of their invading force. The outcome could not have contrasted more sharply with the 1241 invasion, mostly due to the reforms of Béla IV, which included advances in military tactics and, most importantly, the widespread building of stone castles, both in response to the crushing defeat of the Hungarian Kingdom in 1241.

>>104535
Haha Gerald Ford. I meant Henry Ford.

>>104535
> Gerald Ford
>Retard

I've got bad news for you, buddy.

>>104533
see
>>104528

Only the untimely death of the Khan prevented Western Europe from being invaded by the Golden Horde.

>>104554
See:
>>104552

>>104549
No they Didnt, after 1241 it was all Down Hill for the Mongols and the rest of there Incursions were repelled with Relative Ease

Also you are comparing Eastern European Millitary Tactics vs Western European Millitary Tactics, The Holy Roman Empire was in Shambles, Lithuania was just forming (As was Poland) and Hungary was well...its Hungary. And Thrace? Great you beat the Fragments of the Byzantine Empire, want a cookie?

>>104568
Why do idiots always do that?

Can't you see I posted 1 second after yours, I OBVIOUSLY did not see your post.

>>104579
learn moar about Mongol history. after Ogedai Khan unexpectly died without a clear successor, infighting happened within the Mongol Empire. they broke up into separate camps, they didnt fortify their borders and then their decline happened.

And you dont understand, a smaller army - the Mongols - destroyed larger Russian/Persian/European armies with ease.

>>104616
The Mongols were amazing Tacticians easily rivaling the Greeks and the Romans. I personally dont think they would have won in Western Europe just due to the Attrition alone

Mongols were masters of open warfare. Cavalry (and by extension, armor) tactics such as the feint were pioneered by them. Unparalleled masters in psych warfare.

If they could pwn the ALL Chinese and the Muslims while the spread of Islam by war was still fresh, they could have swept Europe too.

Makes you wonder how they'd fare in Japan though, since it's so mountainous... Kinda like Persians in Greece, ya know?

IT WORKS EVERY TIME.

>>104680
And a good time was had by all.

>>104677
Except "Open" and "Western Europe" arent really Synonymous. (As the Allies quickly found out during the Battle of St. Lo), what Europe would really need to do is just go bunk with the Swiss for a time and ride the storm out. In-Fighting FTW

>>104680
>>104694
ITT:
Knights
Samurai
Comparing steel
Chinks?
Katanas can cut through tanks
Pirates
Mongols
Chinese
Aztec Jaguars?
Mongols vs. Chinese
Mongols vs. Europe
Henry Ford

BLADE BRAVER DEFEATS ALL, YOU STUPID ASSHOLES.

>>104716
Oh yeah and somehow Rock, Paper, Scissors got a bit of mention as well...

>>104677
They pwned everything through the fucking Himalayas. I think Japan's comparatively pussy mountains wouldn't have slowed them down much.

>>102103
a knight's sword wouldn't slash through any decent set of plate armor. this is why things like polearms, halberds and other similar weapons were created so you could basically just bash the armor with the sharp end and hope you get a hit. a katana simply isn't built for that.

>>102342
All the weapons you listed for the Europeans are far superior to the Japanese weapons, especially when fighting armored opponents. Japanese weapons were made to be quick and be able to kill lightly or unarmored people, Europeans were going up against other heavily armored bastards on armored war horses.

Also the yumi sucks ass compared to an english longbow.

THIS THREAD IS STILL ALIVE, EVERYONE WANTS TO ADD THEIR OPINION.

I've got a new idea, let's see how many days this thread can last.

let's start, SAMURAI vs WAR ELEPHANT

WHO WINS?

>>106447
Unless you have pikemen, the Swiss gaurd, or artillery, youre gonna suffer massive losses (according to METW2). Also, welcome to /v/.

>>106447
i think the samurai wins

>>106458
All you need is a good elf.

This is it. This is the worst thread.

WAR ELEPHANT > ALEXANDER
THUS WAR ELEPHANT > *

bump

bumpu

>>106742

This is /jp/ so the Samurai wins obviously.

The amount of weeaboo energy...yes..

The Turks invaded europe, they could do it because they knew the weakness of the knights. It was they heavy armor, and their weak fighting ability on their horse.
Also the Turks had always 4-5 times bigger army. Austria had only luck that the Hungarians slowed the army of turkey, and it was always because of winter that they went home. And Hungary was fallen because the country lost his king, and the they couln't decide who must be the next king. Thats all. FUCK YOU EUROPE!

Samurais were shot down. End of the story.

BUREIDO BUREIVER

>>108411
Better said, that western Europe was out of range.

BUREIDO BUREIVER

why aren't you trolling /k/ instead