Who would win in a battle....

Samurai or Knight

Depending on terrain. On an open field, knight. At a dark forest with plenty of hiding spots, samurai.kris9031998

I think you have samuria mixed with ninja. Samuria charged straight into battle.

We've already gone over this. The knight is better armored, better armed, and better trained. It wouldn't even be close.

I guess it depends on which knight and which samurai. They should have dueled these two on Deadliest Warrior.

I guess it depends on which knight and which samurai. They should have dueled these two on Deadliest Warrior.

Palantas

I guess it depends on which knight and which samurai. They should have dueled these two on Deadliest Warrior.

Palantas

[QUOTE="Palantas"]

I guess it depends on which knight and which samurai. They should have dueled these two on Deadliest Warrior.

Pirate700

[QUOTE="I"]

I guess it depends on which knight and which samurai. They should have dueled these two on Deadliest Warrior.

Pirate700

I imagine he's talking about the plate armored knight. Not the older chain mail kind.

Or the Sir Ben Kingsley kind of knight. Anyway, in my comment, I meant the man inside the armor. There were a lot of knights and a lot of samurai. Some were better than others.

Clone thread?

knight of course

A Samurai could easily duel wield so that blows the 'Knights are better trained' argument out of the water.

A Samurai could easily duel wield so that blows the 'Knights are better trained' argument out of the water.

HGAT

[QUOTE="HGAT"]

A Samurai could easily duel wield so that blows the 'Knights are better trained' argument out of the water.

Pirate700

Dual weilding a sword and a shield is different from dual weilding two blades at someone in synchronisation.

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]

[QUOTE="HGAT"]

A Samurai could easily duel wield so that blows the 'Knights are better trained' argument out of the water.

HGAT

Dual weilding a sword and a shield is different from dual weilding two blades at someone in synchronisation.

A Samurai could easily duel wield so that blows the 'Knights are better trained' argument out of the water.

HGAT

Clearly that depends on the samurai's power level and what feats he gave up to get the Dual Wielding skill.

[QUOTE="HGAT"]

[QUOTE="Pirate700"]Knights could dual weild also. That has nothing to do with better training.

Pirate700

Dual weilding a sword and a shield is different from dual weilding two blades at someone in synchronisation.

if we put the shoguns number one vs the queens number one, the samurai would destroy the knight

SuperToshibaMan

I'm at a bit of a loss as to how people are saying things with such certainty.

[QUOTE="SuperToshibaMan"]

if we put the shoguns number one vs the queens number one, the samurai would destroy the knight

Palantas

I'm at a bit of a loss as to how people are saying things with such certainty.

Neither, an octopus would fall from the sky and kill them both.

if they start long range then the samurai with would have an advantage since they know how to use bows really well. i don't think knights have any range.Ontain

[QUOTE="Palantas"]

[QUOTE="SuperToshibaMan"]

if we put the shoguns number one vs the queens number one, the samurai would destroy the knight

SuperToshibaMan

I'm at a bit of a loss as to how people are saying things with such certainty.

Samurai armor was typically made as lighteight as possible in order to provide maximum maneuverability. It was roughly the equivalent of Roman military armor but even lighter as the bands typically didn't overlap much. A late medieval knight's armor was often extremely heavy and very protective. Early guns and matchlocks often had their bullets deflected from a knight's breastplate.

Japanese steel wasn't all that great. The process of folding the steel into forging a Katana was to remove impurities - impurities that ware much less present in European (mostly Spanish) steel.

A knight's training and dedication were about the same as that of a dedictaed samurai. Knights were usually trained from birth to be knights, just as a samurai was.

The total cost of a knight's equipment was far better than that of a samurai. With all else being equal, a knight would win.

more training, more dedication, more honor im pretty confused at how a knight can win... and people.... samurais have armor too and better weaponsSuperToshibaMan

How the f*** do you quantify who has more honor? And how do you know one or the other has more training? And how do you know any given individual has more dedication than any other individual without studying their lives in great detail? Some of the posts in this thread sound like they're comparing builds in an RPG. "Honor" is not a stat you can just go look up (and I'm not sure how it helps you win a duel in any case).

[QUOTE="metroidprime55"]

Neither, an octopus would fall from the sky and kill them both.

InEMplease

That's how my uncle died. :(

No way, really?!! :o

[QUOTE="InEMplease"]

[QUOTE="metroidprime55"]

Neither, an octopus would fall from the sky and kill them both.

Darthkaiser

That's how my uncle died. :(

No way, really?!! :o

His uncle was a knight.

knight just look at the armor damn

Samurai or Knight

MiloZEgamer34

A great sword would shatter a Katana, a Samurai wouldn't stand a chance.

[QUOTE="MiloZEgamer34"]

Samurai or Knight

Calvin079

Katanas probably wouldn't be able to cut through plate armour or shields, so the knight would have a pretty big advantage there.Planeforger

A great sword would shatter a Katana, a Samurai wouldn't stand a chance.[QUOTE="Calvin079"]

[QUOTE="MiloZEgamer34"]

Samurai or Knight

angrules23

a knight without his armor has a better chance at winning...

I remember this thread and I went to great lenghts to defend samurais, provided with videos, studies, sword comparisons....alone. But I'm not going through that again, I'll just agree with the majority and go with knightDarthkaiser

[QUOTE="Planeforger"]Katanas probably wouldn't be able to cut through plate armour or shields, so the knight would have a pretty big advantage there.DarnUniverse

I pick the Arabic Warrior.

Seeing as the samurai were skilled with bows, and knights were bulky and slow, my money is on the samurai.

Seeing as the samurai were skilled with bows, and knights were bulky and slow, my money is on the samurai.

htekemerald

[QUOTE="htekemerald"]

Seeing as the samurai were skilled with bows, and knights were bulky and slow, my money is on the samurai.

MiloZEgamer34

hey! ive been here lol

i dont get how a knight could win with all his armor on and his heavy slow moving weapons

[QUOTE="HGAT"]

A Samurai could easily duel wield so that blows the 'Knights are better trained' argument out of the water.

Palantas

Clearly that depends on the samurai's power level and what feats he gave up to get the Dual Wielding skill.