Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Medival European Knight vs a Japanese Samurai

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by pirateship1982 View Post
    I agree mostly. However the knight may not be the best opening weapon if the enemy presents the schiltron defense. As was demonstrated at Bannockburn (and incorrectly portrayed as the tactic of Stirling bridge in the movie Braveheart), a concentrated pike formation - pikes being longer than lances - makes a cavalry charge ineffective.

    As for rallying your knights for a second charge this is a good policy in theory but would be difficult under battle unless you are dealing with professional disciplined soldier-knights such as the Templars and Hospitallers. Knights who didn't belong to a military order were individualistic and couldn't be ordered as easy as a regiment. If they were impetuous or, as is said in the south - "got their dander up" they might not listen to a call to retreat. Also given chaotic nature of medieval battle it has been notably difficult to command any medieval unit that has made contact with the enemy. So you have the double problem of first getting the order to your knights and then hoping they obey it.
    Yes I agree with all of that, I never meant to give away the message that cavalry charges work all the time or that they should be used all the time. They are best used as I said when you are very sure that it will work, they win big or lose big and they should never be used against strong pike formations rather they should be used against light infantry(archers and other missile troops), troops low on morale and any formation of troops that are low in numbers(after missile fire and infantry combat). I am also aware of the problem with getting them to retreat and rally which is why I stated that one should stick to using them only when you are sure they will be deceive.
    Last edited by Galfirdus; 25 Jan 07, 18:45.

    Comment


    • #77
      Sanurai

      First, Galfirdus, thanks for attributing "interesting" to my thoughts/writings on this topic - I think in all honesty I do not deserve such credit because as a history and literature geek I can be rather dull and anything but interesting!

      Revans, I think Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles part 3 featured samurai, also mortal combat 1 and i'm sure a few other movies as well besides last samurai. I don't mean to be a prude and say that a movie has to be historically correct "or else". i have fun watching many historically inaccurate movies simply because they can be a pleasure. But what I do mean to say is that the typical image of the samurai, in Hollywood and, you are right about certain native embellishments, in popular Japanese action samurai flicks, tends exagerrate certain qualities while neglecting to even mention others. The use of the ambush tactic, for example, was employed by the samurai as well as the Japanese sea pirates whom, ironically, the samurai supposedly hated so much.

      Even great ones like miyamoto musashi ambushed their enemies though this is not dwelled upon (because it is not very "macho" or honorable, I guess) much in toshiro mifune's samurai I, II, and III. And not only the "ambushing" but other qualities as well, such the ability to bear extreme physical deprivation and hardship, unfavorable conditions and circumstances, physical training and mental training, such as their 'liberal arts' intellectual education as well - calligraphy and haiku poetry, meditation, zen buddhist philosophy reading, and picture drawing and so on. Also, the martial proficiency as people here have mentioned with the yari spear, the bow and also the early forms of karate.

      Galfirdus - about the dismounted knight defeating a dismounted samurai in melee combat, I would respectfully disagree and argue that this is, at the very least, open to contention. Because I am not so sure that it would be so easy for the knight, simply because of the presumably superior armor. I am going to post more on this later, unfortunately I have to go at this point.

      Comment


      • #78
        It seems to me that armour is the only superior factor or indeed different factor on ether side in the melee. Everything else is to equal or random(down to the individual) to work with so if knights have the only advantage in the scenario then victory should be given to them.

        Comment


        • #79
          Zomgz. Look what I created. I have so much cacthing up to do.
          yeah!

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by maian View Post
            Zomgz. Look what I created. I have so much cacthing up to do.
            Hurry up, this has been very interesting.
            Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

            Comment


            • #81
              The thread is too long for me to browse right now, so sorry if this answer was already given by someone. I think the Samurai would disable the horse then have his way with the fallen, clumsy knight. Samurai win.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Imperial View Post
                The thread is too long for me to browse right now, so sorry if this answer was already given by someone. I think the Samurai would disable the horse then have his way with the fallen, clumsy knight. Samurai win.
                I see we have an amine fanboy in our mist

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Galfirdus View Post
                  I see we have an amine fanboy in our mist
                  What's your problem with what I've said? The horse is the most vulnerable part of the knight and the first target of the samurai.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    I'm just disappointed that a topic that has had long posts explaining many details has your little gem come along. The samurai has the option of attacking the horse, much like just about every infantry unit in history that has come against a charge cavalry, if they are both mounted then the knight can do like wise to his foe, if the samurai is dismounted then the knight can dismount.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Heck, the interesting question to me is not how well a European knight would do against a Japanese Samurai, but how well the English longbowmen would do against the Japanese Samurai. Firing from behind barricades at Samurais channelled into kill zones, they could inflict much damage!

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by Galfirdus View Post
                        I'm just disappointed that a topic that has had long posts explaining many details has your little gem come along. The samurai has the option of attacking the horse, much like just about every infantry unit in history that has come against a charge cavalry, if they are both mounted then the knight can do like wise to his foe, if the samurai is dismounted then the knight can dismount.
                        So you're disappointed that what was said in long posts was just as well said in one short sentence. Geez, sorry.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Come on, mates... the last thing we're gonna do in WTTA is engage in petty commentary about other members, or even about the length of their posts. Much less start wasting words over either in one post after another, as in other forums.

                          All are welcome here.

                          I appreciate all efforts to maintain the sentiment.

                          Thanx!

                          On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

                          ACG History Today

                          BoRG

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by Imperial View Post
                            So you're disappointed that what was said in long posts was just as well said in one short sentence. Geez, sorry.
                            Don't you even try to compare your silly post to those of others in this topic. Tell me what is so well said about your post? The knights have defeated many units which have had the capability to kill their horses but the knights still won such victories so your idea is completely mute. Until you can come up with an element that nether the knights or their defeated foes possessed your logic will not be respected.

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Galfirdus View Post
                              Don't you even try to compare your silly post to those of others in this topic. Tell me what is so well said about your post? The knights have defeated many units which have had the capability to kill their horses but the knights still won such victories so your idea is completely mute. Until you can come up with an element that nether the knights or their defeated foes possessed your logic will not be respected.
                              I expressed my opinion on who will win and based on what tactic. I did not compare my posts to any other, did not attack or belittle other opinions. You on the other hand came out of nowhere and called me an anime fanboy.

                              OK, now to address your arguments, as you will see on post #8 of the thread, the person that started it talks about knight vs. samurai ONE on ONE. Not about a mass of charging knights vs. a line of samurai.

                              As for the point of knights losing mobility and still winning I suggest you look at the battle of Agincourt.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by Imperial View Post
                                I expressed my opinion on who will win and based on what tactic. I did not compare my posts to any other, did not attack or belittle other opinions. You on the other hand came out of nowhere and called me an anime fanboy.

                                OK, now to address your arguments, as you will see on post #8 of the thread, the person that started it talks about knight vs. samurai ONE on ONE. Not about a mass of charging knights vs. a line of samurai.

                                As for the point of knights losing mobility and still winning I suggest you look at the battle of Agincourt.
                                The battle of Agincourt is a poor comparison as there is a very big difference between been stuck in the mud with your fellow soldiers all bundled together and simply just been dismounted. Honestly your comparing a few scars on the feet to having your legs cut off. And if you so meant in your post that the focus was of one on one combat then the knight would fight dismounted against his dismounted foe.

                                I apologize for my uncalled for comment, sorry.
                                Last edited by Galfirdus; 05 Feb 07, 09:50.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X