NationStates Jolt Archive

Got a favorite weapon? If so, which?

The Pointy Stick of DOOM!

Marlin 1895 Guide Gun (ported version) in 45-70.

Perfect for deer, the unauthorized visitor, and doesn't scare the uninformed in the same way an "evil assault weapon" would.

Topped with an EOTech sight.

Very short, very handy, very powerful. The deer never know what hit them.

Cz75 Po1.

I have this football sock, right, and inside it a cube of marble from the base of this trophy that my brother won. I keep it beside my bed. We get the occasional burgular on my estate.

Age and guile.

Sword. Gladius in its rude effectivenes, katana, the most elegant piece of metal work there has ever been, or even Scottish claymore. They just look incredibly beautiful.

Marlin 1895 Guide Gun (ported version) in 45-70.

Perfect for deer, the unauthorized visitor, and doesn't scare the uninformed in the same way an "evil assault weapon" would.

Topped with an EOTech sight.

Very short, very handy, very powerful. The deer never know what hit them.

I might add that it's made of solid metal and wood, and unlike the "evil assault weapon", it is eminently useable as a means of beating someone to pieces.

Marlin 1895 Guide Gun (ported version) in 45-70.

Perfect for deer, the unauthorized visitor, and doesn't scare the uninformed in the same way an "evil assault weapon" would.

Topped with an EOTech sight.

Very short, very handy, very powerful. The deer never know what hit them.

A) How much does it cost?

B) Where can I get one?

Got a favorite weapon? If so, which?
Staffs are good (so I voted for that), but no weapon surpassess the elegance of a bow and arrow (especially longbows). Crossbows are quite nice too, but have a little too much of the 'point-and-click' nature (like guns), and I prefer more skilled weaponry.

The Katana, I spent three years practising Kendo and Iaido. :) (evil smile) Anyone want to have a duel? I personally think the katana is one of the best sword designs ever made, and are the best swords ever made.

Bare fists...plus elbows, knees, teeth, feet, shoulders, head etc.

A good, solid heartwood quarterstaff shod at both ends with either steel or dye packs depending on the situation.

Guns are for pussies. The quarterstaff is a real man's weapon.

A) How much does it cost?

B) Where can I get one?

http://www.marlinfirearms.com/firearms/bigBore_levrAction/1895G.htm

550 dollars. The EOTech is something you'll have to buy and install separately.

Staffs are good (so I voted for that), but no weapon surpassess the elegance of a bow and arrow (especially longbows). Crossbows are quite nice too, but have a little too much of the 'point-and-click' nature (like guns), and I prefer more skilled weaponry.

That's a good point. Though I think the sheer manliness and gallantry is as important, and therefore prefer sword before any ranged weapon. But you are right, bow and arrow can look just stunning if well made and in hands of a man who knows what to do with them.

Gun: USP Match (.40SW), Sig Sauer P229 (.357SIG), Five-seveN (5.7 x 28mm), Colt 1911 (.45ACP), and Mark 23 (.45ACP).

http://www.marlinfirearms.com/firearms/bigBore_levrAction/1895G.htm

550 dollars. The EOTech is something you'll have to buy and install separately.

Thanks a lot! :D

Marlin 1895 Guide Gun (ported version) in 45-70.

Perfect for deer, the unauthorized visitor, and doesn't scare the uninformed in the same way an "evil assault weapon" would.

Topped with an EOTech sight.

Very short, very handy, very powerful. The deer never know what hit them.
Yes and Yes!
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y180/MrMisanthrope/bigcopilotred.jpg
We take a factory-made Marlin 1895 and completely dissemble it. Using precision machined parts, the rifle is converted to a takedown. We cut the barrel, port it to reduce recoil, and recrown it at 16-1/2, 18 or 20 inches in either .45 or .50 caliber. The front sight is remounted using a fiber optic front bead for high visibility and our original Ghost Ring Sight is installed. Before reassembling, a reliability tune is performed on the action for feeding, extracting and ejecting. Our patent pending Trigger Happy Kit is installed for a crisp clean 3 pound trigger pull. The action is modified to allow use of the new .457 Wild West Magnum while still allowing use of standard 45-70 loads, or is set up for the big .50 Alaskan. We install a Pachmayr Decelerator pad to help with recoil and Parkerize the rifle. A 21"x9"x2" soft carry-case is provided with each package.

NOTE: the .457 Wild West Magnum is firing a 350 grain premium Kodiak "Bear" Bullet at 2200 fps for maximum shocking power and 405 grainers at 2000! IT'S THE HOTTEST 45 CALIBER CARTRIDGE CHAMBERED IN A LEVER GUN!

And it performs! How about FORTY INCHES of penetration at 100 yards into a trophy brown bear expanding to .70? Or a shoulder to shoulder shot through a moose with the slug expanding to .90? These recovered slugs demonstrate once and for all that a premium quality jacketed bullet driven at maximum velocity is the ultimate dangerous game cartridge.

http://wildwestguns.com/

Though I would also add the 5" Ruger Old Army with suplemental .45Colt cylinder...

What, like to carry around or just weapons you like?

The Katana, I spent three years practising Kendo and Iaido. :) (evil smile) Anyone want to have a duel? I personally think the katana is one of the best sword designs ever made, and are the best swords ever made.

:eek:

*stares with massive amounts of respect in his eyes*

What, like to carry around or just weapons you like?

Either one.

The Katana, I spent three years practising Kendo and Iaido. :) (evil smile) Anyone want to have a duel? I personally think the katana is one of the best sword designs ever made, and are the best swords ever made.

Ok. I'll bite. I have a pistol in a holster, and you have the katana in its scabbard.

BTW, you who like powder weapons, doesn't the word Kalashnikov ring any bells? :D The ultimate bullet-delivering tool IMO.

The Katana, I spent three years practising Kendo and Iaido. :) (evil smile) Anyone want to have a duel? I personally think the katana is one of the best sword designs ever made, and are the best swords ever made.

Ooh, train me, train me! :D

Ok. I'll bite. I have a pistol in a holster, and you have the katana in its scabbard.

Now that wouldn't be very sporting, would it?

No it wouldn't, Trashia would remove the head of the gunman before he manages to say "I surrender!" :p

Now that wouldn't be very sporting, would it?
If the person really knows Iai-do, it should be fair if I'm within sword's reach.

The Pointy Stick of DOOM!

pfft,my stereotype stick pwns The Pointy Stick Of DOOM

Behold the glory of the stereotype stick (http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y239/NuGo1988/StereotypeStick.jpg)

Either one.
To carry I'll take my Smith and Wesson Airweight .38 spl and my Gerber Applegate Fairbairn combat folder.

Just for screwing around I'll use a Fillipino Barong in one hand and my Indonesian Kris dagger in the other.

Barong
http://www.kriscutlery.com/philippine/index_combat.html

Blade-on-a-stick weapons! Er... polearms, I suppose they'd be called.

Halberd, glaive, naginata, kwan dao... You name 'em, I love 'em. Because they look cool.

Hmm...I love the sword myself.

Can't say which in particular though.

What's cooler than katana like this (http://www.arscives.com/bladesign/Images/katana-blade3.jpg), really?

Any edged weapon really.about as good as a tin foil hat against a ranged weapon most of the time,but damned nice to look at,and you looked damned manly with one too.
since i have nothing better to do i've compiled a christmas lists of sorts,just in case any of you are feeling particularly generous.
Sting (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/uc1264.jpg)
Elven Warrior's Sword (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/uc1373.JPG)
Hadhafang (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/uc1298.jpg)
Russian Kindjal(Киндйал) (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/AH3204.JPG)
Gothic Bastard Sword (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/AH3370.jpg)
Celtic Bronze Sword (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/AH2103.jpg)
Conquer Sword (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/m245.JPG)
Sabre/Flintlock Pistol (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/G1052NQ.JPG)
Viking Sax (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/AH3379.jpg)
Scean Dhu (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/AH3255F.jpg)
Hells Viking Sword (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/HLSVIKINGSWORD.JPG)
Great Sword Of Ra (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/mc-d3022.jpg)
Cutlass (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/cutlassWG1.JPG)
Iai-to Katana (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/S108iato.JPG)
Tokugawa Katana (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/S062.jpg)
Imperial Samurai Sword (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/uc1352asnb.JPG)
Ninja Survival Sword (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/S102.jpg)
And others besides that,but im getting bored of all this copy-pasting

Hadhafang seems rather fancy than effective or handy, but it is a fantasy weapon afterall... Elven soldier's sword though, there we have a decent weapon. I actually think the design is pretty good and could actually work in hands of a trained fighter. Though that's not how Tolkien wrote the elven sword to be :p

Since I can have any weapon, as well as my rock-in-a-sock, I'd like one of those Gun blades from FF8.

Blade-on-a-stick weapons! Er... polearms, I suppose they'd be called.

Halberd, glaive, naginata, kwan dao... You name 'em, I love 'em. Because they look cool.

Yes. Yes, they do. Typcial short spears and certain styles of halberds are my favourites. Halberds for the coolness factor (it's hacky AND stabby!!) and short spears because they're essentially quarterstaves with a stabby end (and preferably with a bashy end on the butt of the spear).

Hadhafang seems rather fancy than effective or handy, but it is a fantasy weapon afterall... Elven soldier's sword though, there we have a decent weapon. I actually think the design is pretty good and could actually work in hands of a trained fighter. Though that's not how Tolkien wrote the elven sword to be :p

Oh ya,but they're more for decoration.for an actual fighting sword you might want to go with something a bit less flashy and a bit more practical.and when i say a bit i mean very.

Why don't you say it then?

The black spherical bomb with a whick on it that's about the size of a bowling ball and appears in cartoons as the stereotypical bomb. That or a portable DVD player with Elfen Lied at point-blank range.

Why don't you say it then?
Cos you touch yourself at night

You shouldn't have said that aloud! Beware, or I'll let them know that you stole mom's underpants!

You know, I'd take most anything off this (http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles.htm)page.

.50 Cal rifles are so cool. Having a sword does you no good if I'm a quarter mile away. :D

You know, I'd take most anything off this (http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles.htm)page.

.50 Cal rifles are so cool. Having a sword does you no good if I'm a quarter mile away. :D
Yah, but did you notice that the WWG Marlin 1895 can be had in .50 Alaskan as well as 457/.45-70?

That CoPilot is an awful lot easier to carry around....

You shouldn't have said that aloud! Beware, or I'll let them know that you stole mom's underpants!

Tell her i want mine back,then she can have hers back

You know, I'd take most anything off this (http://www.barrettrifles.com/rifles.htm)page.

.50 Cal rifles are so cool. Having a sword does you no good if I'm a quarter mile away. :D

A .50 caliber rifle is no good if im standing behind you with this (http://www.battleorders.co.uk/acatalog/ck265.JPG).
Then again few things are

What's cooler than katana like this (http://www.arscives.com/bladesign/Images/katana-blade3.jpg), really?
Something that isn't worthless against bone?

In terms of melee weaponry, I've always liked the falchion. Oversized butcher knives are fun.

The human mind
"Macgyver - his mind is his weapon!" :D

I don't suppose I could some kind of nuke?

Something that isn't worthless against bone?

In terms of melee weaponry, I've always liked the falchion. Oversized butcher knives are fun.

BS. If you know what to do with the sword, meaning you don't just come at the enemy slashing blindly, it'll be everything but worthless, even if your enemy happens to have bones.

Falchion is great for the slashing, yea. Like oversized knives too. The thing is much like in sex; do you prefer skill over the size...

hunnish composite bow, talk about gorgeous lol

Something that isn't worthless against bone?

In terms of melee weaponry, I've always liked the falchion. Oversized butcher knives are fun.
You'd love Philipino martial arts. Most of the swords are heavy hacking varieties with a few thinner thrusting swords thrown in for fun.

SS-18 SATANA http://www.tsniimash.ru/History/Utkin-eng.htm

I love the colt M1911 .45 and the AK-47 it's a close tie

I'll take dog-doo on a stick any day.

I chose the Sai it is a very elegant and feminine weapon. It is not to bulky and heavy more suited to men. And it is a melee weapon which I can respect anyone who can use one.

Though for a ranged weapon would be my compound bow. I also enjoy shooting my muzzle loader a 1863 remmington I believe. And my 1930 30-06. And my 1995 30-30.

There's this sharp, stainless steel knife that I have. It's so awesome.

As far as guns go, the Vektor CP-1 is my personal favorite.

There's this sharp, stainless steel knife that I have. It's so awesome.Except for the huge failing... good knives are not made of stainless steel.

I'll admit it may not do much to bone, but it's just so cool.

I'll admit it may not do much to bone, but it's just so cool.

I have a cool knife, too. Hell if it could actually be used as a knife in any sense, but it's damn pretty!

http://www.swordsdirect.com/gh2009.jpg

A little thing called my mind.

...But, if we're just going with actual contact weapons, I'll take Nunchaku. In the hands of an expert, those things are hell on earth.

Ninja Stars.

GIANT ninja stars.

Giant ROBOT ninja stars.

Sweet...

I'll admit it may not do much to bone, but it's just so cool.
Stainless steel usually doesn't hold an edge well, but on the plus side it's soft enough to sharpen quickly.

Ninja Stars.

GIANT ninja stars.

Giant ROBOT ninja stars.

Sweet...

Shuriken are much more efficient than throwing stars. Much.

Shuriken are much more efficient than throwing stars. Much.
Not as good as this

http://fusionanomaly.net/phantasmball.jpg

From the movie Phantasm

Got a favorite weapon? If so, which?
Swords are cool, but a gun would be the most practical.

I actually prefer Tonfa over anything... then the japanese long bow, then the European long bow

Not as good as this

http://fusionanomaly.net/phantasmball.jpg

From the movie Phantasm

The ball is back...

Swords are cool, but a gun would be the most practical.

A German "Zweihander" would scare anyone shitless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zweih%C3%A4nder

BS. If you know what to do with the sword, meaning you don't just come at the enemy slashing blindly, it'll be everything but worthless, even if your enemy happens to have bones.

Falchion is great for the slashing, yea. Like oversized knives too. The thing is much like in sex; do you prefer skill over the size...
Yay! Katana fanboyism! Katana are brittle. It's a side effect of making curved swords. Since they have to bend, they're made of two different hardnesses of metal. This means that hard objects, like armor or bone, will break them. They're a reason why samurai carried multiple katana into battle. There's also a reason why the katana was not the primary weapon.

Incidentally, a falchion takes just as much skill to use as a katana. It just happens to have a better design.

The Katana, I spent three years practising Kendo and Iaido. :) (evil smile) Anyone want to have a duel? I personally think the katana is one of the best sword designs ever made, and are the best swords ever made.
I'll duel. And after my Claymore has broken your toy sword maybe you can get a real one like the rest of us Scots.

That said, after having watched The Yakuza Papers and Clockwork OrangeI have been converted over to the beat-stick (Note: cane length, quarter staves are for pussies who are afraid to get their shoes bloody).
This simple wood pole, a few feet long, is perfect for any occasion:
Carry it over the shoulder, use it is a cane, smash your neighbors face in, break windows, stop closing doors, tap peoples shoulders, dislocate peoples shoulders, scratch your back, block the other guys weapon, and look stylish while doing so.
Thats Beat Sticks, favorite weapon of thifty street toughs everywhere!

Hmm, it's a toss up between the longbow and polearm. The long bow won the English so many battles when outnumbered - no one else in Europe dared let their peasants train in it's use because they feared revolution if they gave them such a powerful weapon.

I love polearms just because they look snazzy and were so devastating on the battlefield.

Oh, and Katanas may be the best sword against unarmoured foes, but Medieval European swords were designed to beat armour, and just as, if not more expertly crafted for doing what they were supposed to do.

Assuming we mean favourite for asthetic value (rather than what would be best in self defense) I have to go for sword. It's elegant - simple but effective.

I love the colt M1911 .45 and the AK-47 it's a close tie


my bulgie sa-93 or my mossy 12 gauge m500 with the 24 inch barrel and fiber optic sights.

i too love the .45 colt....getting a commander soon...woohoo:sniper:

The intellect.

The intellect.
*Hits Eolam's intellect with Beat Stick*
CRACK! SPLAT! (and other sounds implying skull breakage)
Ewww, now I have intellect and blood all over my pants.

*Hits Eolam's intellect with Beat Stick*
CRACK! SPLAT! (and other sounds implying skull breakage)
Ewww, now I have intellect and blood all over my pants.
At least you proved you had the better weapon.

Got a favorite weapon? If so, which?
My favorite weapon, as well as my most effective one, is my mind. :)

My favorite weapon, as well as my most effective one, is my mind. :)
I've already had to prove my weapon against one smart guy already, and now I have intellect on my pants. I don't mind having to dry clean some mind out of them as well, smart guy!

My word is my weapon.
It can achieve stuff without ever actually having to hurt anyone.

I'm a fan of the oldies.

http://www.iar-arms.com/images2/mauser45.jpg

http://www.metaweb.com/wiki/upload/6/6d/MW-M1911.jpg

Those are the Mauser Pistol, and the Colt M1911A1 .45 respectively. And here are two newer weapons I'm a fan of.

http://www.accuratereloading.com/p90.jpg

http://www.civilwar.de/angebote/aug_01.jpg

The FN P90 and the Steyr AUG.

My word is my weapon.
It can achieve stuff without ever actually having to hurt anyone.
But then whats the point?
*Hits Leonstein's words with Beat Stick*
Shit, broke another monitor.
You may have won this round, Justice League of Washington! But I'll get you yet!

But then whats the point?
*Hits Leonstein's words with Beat Stick*
Shit, broke another monitor.
MUHAHAHAHAHA!!! Sweet, sweet revenge...

Anyways, weapons are just tools to make other people do as you want. If you're good with words, you can do the same without doing damage.

Anyways, weapons are just tools to make other people do as you want. If you're good with words, you can do the same without doing damage.
Yeah, but if you lose your hand while wielding a weapon you can use your other hand. If someone tears your larynx out with a gaff, you can't use words anymore.

Lance... &...... short short spear..:p

Yeah, but if you lose your hand while wielding a weapon you can use your other hand. If someone tears your larynx out with a gaff, you can't use words anymore.
....
True. But if you're good enough with words, and well-informed, then you might prevent someone from getting to your larynx in the first place!

If you rely on a sword though, chances are that someone will kill you eventually - there's always someone better than you.

Well...
First and foremost, my brain. The most powerful weapon known to man.
If I actually have to fight, I'll take a knife. A knife when someone isn't expecting it is very useful. And concealable. A nice, sharp, shiny knife will stop most fights without having to use it.

Well...
First and foremost, my brain. The most powerful weapon known to man.
If I actually have to fight, I'll take a knife. A knife when someone isn't expecting it is very useful. And concealable. A nice, sharp, shiny knife will stop most fights without having to use it.
What's the saying ... "Never bring a knife to a gunfight"?

What's the saying ... "Never bring a knife to a gunfight"?

:p 0wn3d

What's the saying ... "Never bring a knife to a gunfight"?
If they've got a gun, I'm fucking out of there. Like the Flash. Only faster. And with brown underwear.

I've already had to prove my weapon against one smart guy already, and now I have intellect on my pants. I don't mind having to dry clean some mind out of them as well, smart guy!
I never claimed to be "smart," only that my mind was well-trained and effective. :D

If they've got a gun, I'm fucking out of there. Like the Flash. Only faster. And with brown underwear.

Sage voice : Believable, grasshopper.

Hmmmm


I like the AK-47 and the MP5

Marlin 1895 Guide Gun (ported version) in 45-70.

Perfect for deer, the unauthorized visitor, and doesn't scare the uninformed in the same way an "evil assault weapon" would.

Topped with an EOTech sight.

Very short, very handy, very powerful. The deer never know what hit them.

Favorite weapon depends on the purpose.

I hunt with an 1895SS .45-70, the longer barrel and not ported. I like a Leupold 2.5x compact, I can shoot with both eyes open. Weaver tip-off mounts and iron sights in reserve.

I handload LBT 412 grainers at 1900 feet per second, they don't lack for penetration and don't damage much meat. Have shot lengthwise through deer, I expect you could get through several if you could line them up.

My lean-in-corner home weapons are an SKS and an old side-by-side 12 gauge. one upstairs, one downstairs. Shells for various purposes are within easy reach.

nothing like a good battleaxe to solve all your problems :p

Katars man. It is basically a brass knuckle with a foot long blade on it (think wolverine from x-men, but with a much broader claw and its only one).

That being said, a close runner up would definitely be the Shaolin Spade. For those that don't know, it's a 6 foot long hardwood staff with a big bell-shaped blade on 1 side and big crescent-shaped blade on the other

a old dubble barrel shot gun- 12 gauge
that way it dont have to worry about my aim :D and i can still kill some one if i needed to
or a fillet knife;
for example
http://elitetacticalsources.com/prodimages/Cold%20Steel/90WFL.jpeg
it may be an odd choice but hey they look cool and can be as sharp as hell
(also they are close at hand it one has a kitchen :p )

Man gun was a close second but I've trained staff since grade school. Practically gun wins hands down but I LIKE staff fighting.

No it wouldn't, Trashia would remove the head of the gunman before he manages to say "I surrender!" :p

Only if I was close enough, and if I was given previous time to get into a certain stance.

Got a favorite weapon? If so, which?

Thermonuclear warhead.

Where's the ugly stick?:mad:

A good, solid heartwood quarterstaff shod at both ends with either steel or dye packs depending on the situation.

Guns are for pussies. The quarterstaff is a real man's weapon.

Hell yeah! :)

That said, there's something to be said for a nice, crude battle-hammer

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b174/Delator/WM-4167L1.jpg

And of course, what person wouldn't shit their pants if someone was coming towards them while wielding this five-foot long beast?

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b174/Delator/6970123e.jpg

:D

believe it or not, but in close combat a spear, shield, helmet and breastplate will get you through almost anything (excluding guns of course). beats katanas, smaller swords most arrows well just about anything.

guns, i gotta go with mp44, the world's first assault rifle

http://www.doheth.co.uk/episodeguide/5f01.jpg

Barring that, an MP5/10. Its the only real choice for a smg/carbine in 10mm, and I can't complain too much about german made guns.

believe it or not, but in close combat a spear, shield, helmet and breastplate will get you through almost anything

Actually, Battle-Hammers and Maces were developed specifically to punch through plate armor.

Granted, the spear has a reach advantage, but you can't always count on that.

well you have to agree that if the spearmen are in formation a bunch of guys with maces (unless on horseback) won't be very effective

i like axes, there must be some mongol blood in me
it would be nice if i could get a chainaxe, that would be fun to see the effect of :D

Actually, Battle-Hammers and Maces were developed specifically to punch through plate armor.

Granted, the spear has a reach advantage, but you can't always count on that.

European swords were also developed to do damage through armour, like I said. And longbows fitted with bodkin arrows could pierce plate armour. However, people didn't pay a fortune for platemail for the sake of it - it didn't make you as immobile as people like to portray in the movies, because knights would have being trained in wearing it for ages, and it made it so your opponent had to be a lot more accurate and strong to hurt you.

English sword and dagger combo.

i like axes, there must be some mongol blood in me
it would be nice if i could get a chainaxe, that would be fun to see the effect of :D
actually, thinking back to mordheim, a pair of dwarf axes - well balanced enough to parry with, though a chain version would be even more awesome

If I had to say an actual physical weapon I'd pick flashbangs or stun guns.

wait, of course, anything explosive or fire based, it's so much fun. :D

Katana, katana, katana! No matter how some of you people blame it or call it with names, it still pwns everything except fully armoured medieval knight or another katana. In hands of an expert that is.

Gunmen are a whole different story, but for that possibility the smart Bushi always carries an AKM in his back, just in case :rolleyes:

verbal abuse enhanced by a nasty cold

I like the A-10's gatling cannon.

But for personal use, you just can't beat a lever-action rifle. Mine's a Marlin 1894 in .44mag. Great all-around firearm.

Well...
First and foremost, my brain. The most powerful weapon known to man.
If I actually have to fight, I'll take a knife. A knife when someone isn't expecting it is very useful. And concealable. A nice, sharp, shiny knife will stop most fights without having to use it.
Yeah, I used to think that way until I had to use it.

Katana, katana, katana! No matter how some of you people blame it or call it with names, it still pwns everything except fully armoured medieval knight or another katana. In hands of an expert that is.

:
I don't know about that. Did the Samurai ever fight a truly dangerous enemy? Werent they spared by the "holy wind" when a credible force tried to invade them and they were all proud of how they killed the wounded and half-drowned soldiers who managed to wash up on the beach?

I never claimed to be "smart," only that my mind was well-trained and effective. :D

Agreed, you're a spry ol' geezer. ;)

That being said, a close runner up would definitely be the Shaolin Spade. For those that don't know, it's a 6 foot long hardwood staff with a big bell-shaped blade on 1 side and big crescent-shaped blade on the other

Mmm... Monk's spade...

http://www.karatedepot.com/catalog/images/items/wp-kf-18.jpg

Best sword ever (http://www.knightsedge.com/swords/german-landsknecht-flamberge-sword.htm)

Best sword ever (http://www.knightsedge.com/swords/german-landsknecht-flamberge-sword.htm)
You swing once, then I come in and gut you with a Katzenbalger - or Gladius.

I once fought an SCA "Knight" who thought he was all that with a great sword. He was in armor and I was in buckskins with a quarterstaff. He swung once, I rolled under & behind him and cratered him with a strike to the small of the back followed by a hand-over helm blow. Then while he was lying there pulled out a quillion and explained how interesting it would be to open him up like an oyster.

Big Swords + Armor vs. small quick guys = Dead Knights.

I don't know about that. Did the Samurai ever fight a truly dangerous enemy? Werent they spared by the "holy wind" when a credible force tried to invade them and they were all proud of how they killed the wounded and half-drowned soldiers who managed to wash up on the beach?

At the risk of infuriating the anime fan boys, i'd say in most cases an average European late medieval knight would wipe the floor with an average Samurai, assuming they were both allowed to use their whole range of arms and armour.

SWORD! you have no idea hos satisfying it is to slice someone up... :D

Fave weapon? Telekinetic powers, of course.

*Evil smile*

You swing once, then I come in and gut you with a Katzenbalger - or Gladius.

I once fought an SCA "Knight" who thought he was all that with a great sword. He was in armor and I was in buckskins with a quarterstaff. He swung once, I rolled under & behind him and cratered him with a strike to the small of the back followed by a hand-over helm blow. Then while he was lying there pulled out a quillion and explained how interesting it would be to open him up like an oyster.

Big Swords + Armor vs. small quick guys = Dead Knights.That's roughly why I like the sword and dagger combo. If you can lock a guy that just has one and are quick enough, you can stab him in the neck with your dagger. The English preferred this at sea, specially since their swords were tough enough to stop a Spanish broadsword and light enough to compete with a French rapier.
Now the equation at the bottom is even more fun with a good crossbow:
Big Swords + Armor vs. crossbow = Dead Knights at a distance...:D

AK-47 kalasnikov(sp?)

or a chainsaw and boomstick combo(see evil dead for example)

Um… I'm not sure what mine is. I rather like glaives, which are a cross between a sword and an axe really.

For some reason AK-47's just fit me for some reason. They're like the .22 I had when I was a kid that I just got so used to I didn't really have to aim anymore, I could just point and shoot and hit. AK's are like that with me for some reason.

At the risk of infuriating the anime fan boys, i'd say in most cases an average European late medieval knight would wipe the floor with an average Samurai, assuming they were both allowed to use their whole range of arms and armour.

Now take that attitude and all the anime you can find and stuck it somewhere you find appropriate hole for it. Certainly not in this thread.

In my post I actually excluded the fully armoured medieval knight, didn't I?
"Whole range of arms and armour" is not what I was talking about when praising katana, but that wouldn't make the knight any stronger in the comparison as knight had sword and a lance while samurai could be armed with naginata, a damn good bow and even a musket! Samurai fighter is, under these terms, far more flexible and versatile than the knight could ever be.

Even if he would suffer a defeat in close combat-duel when they both walk towards eachother and start to beat eachother with their swords...


However, this is not what this thread was about, hmm? As far as I can remember, it was about the weapons, and of those, katana is (usually/in vast majority of cases) better in quality, maneuverability, agility and elegance than the straight, wide, heavy but hastily sharpened European sword.

Averagely, that is.

I don't know about that. Did the Samurai ever fight a truly dangerous enemy? Werent they spared by the "holy wind" when a credible force tried to invade them and they were all proud of how they killed the wounded and half-drowned soldiers who managed to wash up on the beach?

Actually, the Mongol army that landed was more than three times stronger than the Shoguns samurai army that was sent to fight them, but the Japanese kept their positions until the wind came and sank the Mongol navy. Samurais also won the Koreans and Chinese armies several times during their raids to the continent in 16th century. Both of those opponents were considered "credible".

Furthermore, the few samurais that fought as mercenaries in Thailand and mainland China during 17th and 18th century were extremely expencive and appreciated by both their enemies and those who hired them.

Lee Enfield or a Bren

Now take that attitude and all the anime you can find and stuck it somewhere you find appropriate hole for it. Certainly not in this thread.

In my post I actually excluded the fully armoured medieval knight, didn't I?
"Whole range of arms and armour" is not what I was talking about when praising katana, but that wouldn't make the knight any stronger in the comparison as knight had sword and a lance while samurai could be armed with naginata, a damn good bow and even a musket! Samurai fighter is, under these terms, far more flexible and versatile than the knight could ever be.

Even if he would suffer a defeat in close combat-duel when they both walk towards eachother and start to beat eachother with their swords...


However, this is not what this thread was about, hmm? As far as I can remember, it was about the weapons, and of those, katana is (usually/in vast majority of cases) better in quality, maneuverability, agility and elegance than the straight, wide, heavy but hastily sharpened European sword.

Averagely, that is.


Alright, calm down - it's not as if you are yourself a samurai and I just insulted your whole livelihood or something. I wasn't even referring to your post, I just made an assertion in response to someone else theorising on how Samurai weren't as tough as they are cracked up to be.

For a start, European swords were specialised - there was a sword for every situation, not just one type. Secondly, the shield was a *massive* advantage in a fight, and cannot be overlooked - and it is doubtful the Samurai would know how to get past it - there are no techniques for countering shields in Kenjutsu.

You are correct that the Samurai used bows, and later on muskets. In fact, Samurai actually more commonly used the bow than the sword. However, far from making them more versatile, is this just more proof that they wouldn't be as specialised and not devote as much time to sword training as knights? Since I am talking about a melee duel, the bow would be useless in this situation. Including muskets is just stupid - if you want to include muskets then I want to include a mount for the knight, which would pretty much ruin any chance the Samurai had. Not to mention the advantage the knight already had in terms of height and physical strength over the Samurai due to their more protien rich diet.

As for the whole "Katana is teh bestest!" myth, I will quote a passage from an essay written on the whole Knight vs Samurai scenario.

"Surprisingly, the longsword or greatsword is arguably a more complex weapon that the katana. Though there were single-edge versions, it generally has two edges that can be used, as well as a versatile crossguard and pommel permitting a variety of specialized techniques. Another element to consider is that European swords could be used in "half-sword" techniques where the second hand literally grips around the blade itself to wield the weapon in bashing, deflecting, binding, and trapping in all manner of ways that virtually make it a pole-axe or short spear. This was especially effective in fighting against plate armor. We must ponder would this be unusual for the samurai or just very similar to fighting with a short staff? Either way, with its especially sharp edge, a katana is not employed quite like this.

Knightly blades could be excellent swords, but are often denigrated merely as crude hunks of iron while samurai swords are venerated and exalted sometimes to the point of absurdity by collectors and enthusiasts (something the Japanese themselves do not discourage). Bad films and poorly trained martial artists reinforce this myth. The bottom line is that Medieval swords were indeed well-made, light, agile fighting weapons equally capable of delivering dismembering cuts or cleaving deep into body cavities. They were far from the clumsy, heavy things they’re often portrayed as in popular media and far, far more than a mere "club with edges." Interestingly, the weight of katanas compared to longswords is very close with each on average being less than 4 pounds."

Above all, the Katana, as I said, is designed for use against unarmoured, or lightly armoured foes. If a samurai slashed at an armoured knight, the blade, which was far more fragile and needed a lot more sharpening than a European blade, would dull very quickly - his only chance would be to try to thrust through it, which severly limits his options.

If you'd like to check out the essay I quoted from, it's at http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm

Really informative.

Even if he would suffer a defeat in close combat-duel when they both walk towards eachother and start to beat eachother with their swords...
At which point the katana will break against the steel, and the bamboo dress that the Samurai is wearing will get a few holes in it quick-like.

I heard that Miyamoto Musashi used to be so good that he'd duel using a wooden stick instead of a sword, and that the Katanas of his adversaries would get stuck in the wood and he'd break 'em. Is that true?

Now take that attitude and all the anime you can find and stuck it somewhere you find appropriate hole for it. Certainly not in this thread.

In my post I actually excluded the fully armoured medieval knight, didn't I?
"Whole range of arms and armour" is not what I was talking about when praising katana, but that wouldn't make the knight any stronger in the comparison as knight had sword and a lance while samurai could be armed with naginata, a damn good bow and even a musket! Samurai fighter is, under these terms, far more flexible and versatile than the knight could ever be.

Even if he would suffer a defeat in close combat-duel when they both walk towards eachother and start to beat eachother with their swords...


However, this is not what this thread was about, hmm? As far as I can remember, it was about the weapons, and of those, katana is (usually/in vast majority of cases) better in quality, maneuverability, agility and elegance than the straight, wide, heavy but hastily sharpened European sword.

Averagely, that is.

The Knight has access to maces, flails, warhammers, longswords, shields, broadswords... and depending on the armour style could be quite quick and agile...

But you know what? Just give me one good Welsh Longbow or an trained Arbalest...

Edit: Actually, someone just mentioned blade-breaking, which is something else that was a european invention. Also, it would be entirely possibly to make a shield with a soft-wood outer layer (softwood of some kind, balsam or various types of ash or yew) that would trap a well-sharpened blade, thus allowing it to be pulled out of the wielder's grip. And to be honest this reminds me a lot of the construction of Roman tower-shields.

Samurai armour, though, was actually not as flimsy as most people think but quite good, though the construction looks a little less reassuring because of the ornamentation. The way the iron in it was used, though, made it very tough, and it could even stop musket rounds (if built properly, and given a weak hit. A point-blank musket round has enough energy to go through most things and would probably floor the samurai long enough for him to get bayonetted.)

"knigtly" fighting style was made for close-ranks mele, which unfortunately proved to be useless in at least a few fights before gunpowder (re. Ashencor, or however it's spelled, I can never get that right, where English archers armed with heavy wooden mallets floored a force of a couple of thousand knights because they had better mobility and could topple the heavy armour pretty easily in the slipery, clinging mud.)

I recall watching something where a woman with a Chinese straight sword was duelling a man with a katana, and either she bested him, or they ended up in a stalemate.

I think she also beat some guy up with a fan. Ooh, now that's an interesting weapon, the fan...

I recall watching something where a woman with a Chinese straight sword was duelling a man with a katana, and either she bested him, or they ended up in a stalemate.

[/slight digression]
Personally I think straight swords are quicker and more deceptive than curved, slashing varieties. They're definately better for thrusting, and so you can set up combinations where thrusts turn into slashes then into thrusts on different angles.

Personally I think straight swords are quicker and more deceptive than curved, slashing varieties. They're definately better for thrusting, and so you can set up combinations where thrusts turn into slashes then into thrusts on different angles.

Yeah, the straight sword is pretty interesting. I think the tai chi form I do is done with a straight sword, or something very similar, and if I could speed it up I'd be doing some very interesting sword work.

In contrast the forms for the katana I've seen are very simple, just: out of sheath, cut, flick off the blood, back in sheath. One cut, one kill principle or so...

Yeah, the straight sword is pretty interesting. I think the tai chi form I do is done with a straight sword, or something very similar, and if I could speed it up I'd be doing some very interesting sword work.

In contrast the forms for the katana I've seen are very simple, just: out of sheath, cut, flick off the blood, back in sheath. One cut, one kill principle or so...
All my sword work comes from Filipino martial arts. One of the methods we drilled in frequently was called LAMECO. It stood for Largo, Medio, Corto. Three ranges at which a short stick or sword are used. Each class started with a numbering system for the angles of attack. Angles 6 to 7 and 8 to 9 were thrusts that changed into slashes. Desceptive and dangerous, but I can't imagine it's easy to do with a Katana held in two hands, but I suppose it's possible. Seems it would be slower.

EDIT: I may be confusing it with the Inosanto blend numbering system. I really need to review my notes.

All my sword work comes from Filipino martial arts. One of the methods we drilled in frequently was called LAMECO. It stood for Largo, Medio, Corto. Three ranges at which a short stick or sword are used. Each class started with a numbering system for the angles of attack. Angles 6 to 7 and 8 to 9 were thrusts that changed into slashes. Desceptive and dangerous, but I can't imagine it's easy to do with a Katana held in two hands, but I suppose it's possible. Seems it would be slower.

I think I remember hearing that the katana is based more on power than speed (at least compared to weapons like the straight sword). It's mostly a hacking weapon though, isn't it? So I would imagine that's it's not that deceptive.

One interesting move I can think of in my sword form is where you bring your rear foot forward to rest empty by your other foot, both arms in by your hips, which would usually mean you'd then step forward in a thrust. And though you do thrust the sword forward, it's while you actually take a step back again. Sort of like faking out an opponent, or something.

I think I remember hearing that the katana is based more on power than speed (at least compared to weapons like the straight sword). It's mostly a hacking weapon though, isn't it? So I would imagine that's it's not that deceptive.
No. If anything, katana and kenjutsu are based on speed and accuracy instead of power.




I will repeat my points one more time, just to clarify. It seems that I didn't make myself creal before. So.

What I have been saying all the time is that katana is not supposed to face man wearing full metal dress. Knight, that is. The point about shields was good though, I didn't remember those at all, but shield is not really a sword, and swords are what I think we were comparing discussing about.

The comparison between knight and samurai remains stupid. Like I have kept saying, as samurai wasn't really going to meet any fully armoured ironmen, the weapon was not designed to fight them. "Katana would pwn anything (bladed) except european sword in hands of a knight in full plate armour" was my claim.

I still claim that samurai, as a warrior,was superior to knight when it comes to agility, flexibility and versatility as he was trained to use wider variety of different equipment and even bare hands melee. Knight didn't have anything ranged, as far as I know. This is rather irrelevant though, as the question is still about the weapon, not the men (under the terms of the thread heading).

So no, against plate-armoured knight in duel, without possibility to use anything but katana, the samurai would lose. Lets put it even simpler then.

Two skilled, trained man carrying one sword. Without heavy armour (metal plates). I say that the other having well made katana will beat the other guy having any other sword there is.

No bladed weapon is better than katana, but this can be compensated by using shield or heavy armour. This is not what the thread is about though, I think.

No bladed weapon is better than katana, but this can be compensated by using shield or heavy armour. This is not what the thread is about though, I think.
Oh, I dunno. Zatoichi's ninja-to walking stick comes immediately to mind... ;)

Two skilled, trained man carrying one sword. Without heavy armour (metal plates). I say that the other having well made katana will beat the other guy having any other sword there is.

No bladed weapon is better than katana, but this can be compensated by using shield or heavy armour. This is not what the thread is about though, I think.

And I say that I watched a person with at Chinese straight sword trump/stalemate a person using a katana.

Though really, I think the general effectiveness in any weapon is more in the skill of the user, rather than the the weapon itself. I suppose if you take it down to people of equal skill level...

An interesting thing to think about would be to take two people with little experience with a weapon, give one of them a katana and another some other sort of sword and to see who can win. Because in one way you could consider a weapon's effectiveness by how well it works with the least amount of training.

Or something. Man I babble a lot...

You swing once, then I come in and gut you with a Katzenbalger - or Gladius.

I once fought an SCA "Knight" who thought he was all that with a great sword. He was in armor and I was in buckskins with a quarterstaff. He swung once, I rolled under & behind him and cratered him with a strike to the small of the back followed by a hand-over helm blow. Then while he was lying there pulled out a quillion and explained how interesting it would be to open him up like an oyster.

Big Swords + Armor vs. small quick guys = Dead Knights.

I like it for it's size but I would never use one to go into battle with. Gah if only battles were fought like that these days.

If you'd like to check out the essay I quoted from, it's at http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm

Really informative.
Thanks for the link, I've seen that article quoted before, but no one ever provides a link its nice to see were it came from.

MP5K personal defense weapon! It's an awsome mod of the worlds favorite submachine gun, and its short enough to hide inside your jacket untill you decide to unleash a bit of hell on the target(s)!

http://www.motionpicturearmourer.com/MP5K.jpg

<sniptastico>
What I have been saying all the time is that katana is not supposed to face man wearing full metal dress. Knight, that is. The point about shields was good though, I didn't remember those at all, but shield is not really a sword, and swords are what I think we were comparing discussing about.

The comparison between knight and samurai remains stupid. Like I have kept saying, as samurai wasn't really going to meet any fully armoured ironmen, the weapon was not designed to fight them. "Katana would pwn anything (bladed) except european sword in hands of a knight in full plate armour" was my claim.

I still claim that samurai, as a warrior,was superior to knight when it comes to agility, flexibility and versatility as he was trained to use wider variety of different equipment and even bare hands melee. Knight didn't have anything ranged, as far as I know. This is rather irrelevant though, as the question is still about the weapon, not the men (under the terms of the thread heading).
So the Samurai was superior to the Knight in everyway, except for Battle? You have made an interesting point, I think that all wars should be decided this way. The winner isn't the person who can actually defeat the other one in a fight, but is instead decided based on other factors.
Imagine if all battles had been fought in this style, the Nazis could have bested Stalin because kartoffelsalat is most certainly better tasting then Russian potato-food-products. The British would have defeated the Americans in the Revolutionary war due to their superior taste in clothing. The fate of nations could be decided, not on who wins or loses, but on who can set a better table, or make better tea, or shine their shoes faster!
Brilliant!
Two skilled, trained man carrying one sword.
I think you mean "trained men each carrying one sword" because otherwise they would have to share the sword (how would they pull that off, taking turns? Now Bobby, you get to swing at Billy twice, and then Billy gets to swing at you twice).
GRAMMAR NAZI AWAY! SEIG HEIL!
Without heavy armour (metal plates). I say that the other having well made katana will beat the other guy having any other sword there is.

No bladed weapon is better than katana, but this can be compensated by using shield or heavy armour. This is not what the thread is about though, I think.
Actually, yes, the thread is about whose weapon is better, and no, all that Captain No Katana has to do is get a good hit on the other guys blade, and then we really do have a fight with two men and one sword.

No bladed weapon is better than katana, but this can be compensated by using shield or heavy armour. This is not what the thread is about though, I think.

What you mean when you say the bolded point is that no bladed weapon is better than a katana against an unarmoured foe. The European designed swords were, as the article says, just as well made but just had different purposes in mind. They could still easily kill a man unarmoured, but also gave you a good chance to do damage to someone in armour, as opposed to the katana which was slightly better against the unarmoured and completely ineffective against armour.

Agreed, you're a spry ol' geezer. ;)
[ bitch-slaps Lewrockwellia until his grandchildren's-to-be ears ache! ] :D

What you mean when you say the bolded point is that no bladed weapon is better than a katana against an unarmoured foe. The European designed swords were, as the article says, just as well made but just had different purposes in mind. They could still easily kill a man unarmoured, but also gave you a good chance to do damage to someone in armour, as opposed to the katana which was slightly better against the unarmoured and completely ineffective against armour.

That's a good point, too. As they were made different purpose and usage in mind, their superiority over eachother is difficult to define. But, really, if you take an average European sword from the middle ages (what, 600-1500?) and an average Japanese sword from that same period and the compare the quality of the work, you can hardly say that the European one (and this is, as I said in the previous post also, an average example-of course there are masterpieces of European sword production) is as well made.

The thing that makes it so is of course the fact that in European middle age those swords weren't meant to last centuries, from generation to generation as an "magical" artefact of the family. If they were, like those of some royal families (the sword of the French king Filip, for example) they were jsut as good. But typical "knight sword" and a typical "samurai sword" are what I meant.

So the Samurai was superior to the Knight in everyway, except for Battle? You have made an interesting point, I think that all wars should be decided this way. The winner isn't the person who can actually defeat the other one in a fight, but is instead decided based on other factors.

No. I meant that the samurai can shoot the knight's horse with his bow, as he is propably trained in kyujutsu, and then finish the man wearing so heavy armour that he can barely walk. Or if he can, shoot more. Or, if the samurai preferrs powder, he can shoot the knight with a musket (assuming this duel is fought lin 16th century). He is also able to jump, run, hide, even swim and across obstacles that would stop the knight, giving, together with the mentioned abilities, advantage over his foe who can move forwards and swing his big, straight sword.

Those are also things that define a good fighter. That is what I meant.

About your hilarious examples I can only say that if the Englishmen would have been able to march 2 times faster than the Americans, they would have held a great advantage and propably won, even if they weren't as good in open battle. Which they were, but that's another thing.

The Germans were actually as individual fighters above their Soviet or Western opponents, just as well as in company, battalion, regiment or division level.
Still they lost. Is taht becuse their enemies were so good in making tea and drinking vodka?

I think you mean "trained men each carrying one sword" because otherwise they would have to share the sword (how would they pull that off, taking turns? Now Bobby, you get to swing at Billy twice, and then Billy gets to swing at you twice).
GRAMMAR NAZI AWAY! SEIG HEIL!

Yes, true, my English is far from perfect, and more so if I don't have time to carefully check what I have just written. My humble excuse is that English is my third language, but you're right, I should be more careful. Trained men each carrying one weapon, a sword, that is what I meant.

Actually, yes, the thread is about whose weapon is better, and no, all that Captain No Katana has to do is get a good hit on the other guys blade, and then we really do have a fight with two men and one sword.

It seems that I have serious problems in making my point clear and you to understand what I have trying to say. I meant that the thread excludes shields and types of armour, or so I thought.

Would katana be broken if hit by heavier straight sword? If well made, and the man using it doesn know what he's doing, and how to repel the strike of a heavier weapon, My answer is no. That depends, of course.

If his sword is broken though, he can take some distance between him and the knight, and then pepper him with arrows. This option is not awailable for the knight, now is it? ;) Even as the samurai is propably too proud to do so, and would preferably die than move to shooting position... But still.

This is not about the swords anymore though.

[ bitch-slaps Lewrockwellia until his grandchildren's-to-be ears ache! ] :D

OUCH! :mad:

Hey, don't get sore, Pops, I meant that as a compliment! :p

A G3A4K or the legendary HK/MC 51, or the tromix jackhammer in .458socom...


Or my mind and my amassing pyromatic powers!!!

my hands.
And any weapon of opporotunity they happen to reach.

bump

That's a good point, too. As they were made different purpose and usage in mind, their superiority over eachother is difficult to define. But, really, if you take an average European sword from the middle ages (what, 600-1500?) and an average Japanese sword from that same period and the compare the quality of the work, you can hardly say that the European one (and this is, as I said in the previous post also, an average example-of course there are masterpieces of European sword production) is as well made.

The thing that makes it so is of course the fact that in European middle age those swords weren't meant to last centuries, from generation to generation as an "magical" artefact of the family. If they were, like those of some royal families (the sword of the French king Filip, for example) they were jsut as good. But typical "knight sword" and a typical "samurai sword" are what I meant.

Read the article - the myth about a knights sword being just a big hunk of metal is just that - a myth. European blades were superbly made - some would say better made than Katanas, with their intention in mind. Katana's dulled extremely quickly, couldn't take as much punishment and weren't as versatile.

Another myth that you mentioned is that of the knight in armour being all immobile and clumsy. They were trained for years to wear this sort of armour, and it was designed to be as comfortable and allow as much movement as possible. Sure, it seems heavy and cumbersome nowadays if you try to wear one, but these knights were incredibly strong, trained from infancy. They would be slower than an unarmoured person of course, but the protection would more than make up for it. After all, the richer samurai warlords used to pay fortunes for Western European plate armour - so obviously they saw that it would give them a big advantage.

Sure, the knight wasn't trained in ranged weapons, like you say, but that's because he was specialised in sword and lance use. They had archers, crossbow men and musket wielders (later on) to do the ranged stuff. When you specialise in something, generally you'll perform better at that task than someone who tries to be a jack of all trades. Besides, a man can master the use of a crossbow in a matter of days - could just whip one of them out if the Samurai used a bow, and since he had a shield and the Samurai didn't use bodkin (armour piercing) arrow heads as far as I know, yet again the Samurai would be disadvantaged.

Plus the fact knights would be taller and stronger due to their diet. Eh, it's impossible to say of course and obviously the circumstances and personal skill decide everything, but even unarmoured i'd say bet on the knight as long as he had a shield - if he managed to block the katana a few times, which is likely since Samurai didn't know how to get past shields, the katana's sharpness advantage would be lost, and it might even shatter the blade.

I'd go for a foil or sabre on sheer elegance, however, I'm quite handy with a bow. For close melee combat I don'tthink anything beats a shiv or a 3 finger push knife, but for practicality I'd say a sock with a 1/2 brick in it or a 2 by 4 with a 6 inch nail through it. if my house gets invaded by zombies however, my first choice would be a cricket bat

The Katana...one of the most elegant and effective weapons to have ever spilled human blood. I love it.

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

If the person really knows Iai-do, it should be fair if I'm within sword's reach.
it is possible to shoot a pistol in one 11th of a second, provided you have the correct type of holster that it can be drawn that quickly. although, i would think it would also be rather easy to draw and swing the katana, too.

I don't know about that. Did the Samurai ever fight a truly dangerous enemy? Werent they spared by the "holy wind" when a credible force tried to invade them and they were all proud of how they killed the wounded and half-drowned soldiers who managed to wash up on the beach?
the mongols could have easily won that except for the wind hapening twice like that. if only they took korean turtle ships instead...

i can't really think of which weapon i'd say is best...i'm looking to get one that i can practice with, hopefully something that's both ranged and meelee, like a throwing hatchet, or possibly a throwing two handed axes(they had some odd name(i'll look it up and see if i can find it), i'm pretty shure either the persians or indians used them in war)
or throwing needles, but supposedly they're very hard to master.
hmm, or ancient chinese rockets :D

EDIT: i think it may have been called a tabar?

Read the article - the myth about a knights sword being just a big hunk of metal is just that - a myth. European blades were superbly made -1 some would say better made than Katanas, with their intention in mind. Katana's dulled extremely quickly, couldn't take as much punishment and weren't as versatile.

2Another myth that you mentioned is that of the knight in armour being all immobile and clumsy. They were trained for years to wear this sort of armour, and it was designed to be as comfortable and allow as much movement as possible. Sure, it seems heavy and cumbersome nowadays if you try to wear one, but these knights were incredibly strong, trained from infancy. They would be slower than an unarmoured person of course, but the protection would more than make up for it. After all, the richer samurai warlords used to pay fortunes for Western European plate armour - so obviously they saw that it would give them a big advantage.

3Sure, the knight wasn't trained in ranged weapons, like you say, but that's because he was specialised in sword and lance use. They had archers, crossbow men and musket wielders (later on) to do the ranged stuff. When you specialise in something, generally you'll perform better at that task than someone who tries to be a jack of all trades. Besides, a man can master the use of a crossbow in a matter of days - could just whip one of them out if the Samurai used a bow, and since he had a shield and the Samurai didn't use bodkin (armour piercing) arrow heads as far as I know, yet again the Samurai would be disadvantaged.

4Plus the fact knights would be taller and stronger due to their diet. Eh, it's impossible to say of course and obviously the circumstances and personal skill decide everything, but even unarmoured i'd say bet on the knight as long as he had a shield - if he managed to block the katana a few times, which is likely since Samurai didn't know how to get past shields, the katana's sharpness advantage would be lost, and it might even shatter the blade.


Ok, I've pust little number in your post above on how I will address them 1 by 1. So, here I go:


1) Its true that European made blades, such as Spanish steel or blades out of Damascus were highly well made and strong. However, you can't make this comparison. Its impossible due to this fact: The way a weapon is made, is determined upon what need there is for it. We made the gun because we wanted to harm our enemies from a distance since, the old hack & stabing with a sword was bloody work and after the 1600s considered barbaric. However, you have to understand that the Japanese blade and the style they used to fight was based upon slashing, as the Russian's made the first calvary saber, it made it easier to cut; and when you consider that most Japanese battles was samurai challenging one another then dueling (not really a battle more than a congestion of duels), whereas the European style of fighting was more based upon massed groups of men charging each other and its either swing and kill or don't and die. The 'mind-set' of each individual, the knight and samurai, are both heavily different.

2) Not all knights were super human and could wear armor like a second skin. Armor was indeed made to be a protection, and it worked, and yes they did train (the higher classes) from birth to be able to move around like it was nothing; but they were still slow moving targets. (I'd rather have 1 english longbowman than 10 heavily armored knights.) Also, only one Japanese warlord ever spent money on a European suit of armor, that was Oda Nobunaga, the 1st of the Great Unifiers. He had the most interest in European things, they amused him. However, he only bought a spanish chest plate (spending less than 100 gold koban) and he rarely wore it. And overall the japanese thought European styles of fighting cowardly and useless, though they utilized the arquebus musket which offered more power to the common soldier against heavy calvary (same as why the Europeans adopted the gun), and they even made better improvements on the gun than European smiths at the time.

3) Again, you have to consider the paradigm, or 'mind-set' of the knight and samurai. It was traditional for a knight to be at the least 'good' with a sword and lance; if not he was considered a disgrace as a knight. Also, if you perhaps have never heard, there are those who are called 'Weapon Masters' who have accomplished what few have, and that is by mastering all forms of known combat in their living places. Also, samurai did not use shields, it never even came up in thought to use one. They did use large 'walls' of bamboo to shield from arrows during a siege, but that was it. And the bow had been used since ancient times as a very respectable and honored way of doioing combat for the Japanese, whereas most European knights thought it 'unsporting' and was considered a woman's weapon or for just hunting. (At least until the English decided to use the longbow) And they did have armor piercing arrow heads, they had several different types; just as the Europeans did.

4) Lets see...a diet of large amounts of meat, bread, cheese, and beer v.s. a diet of simple meals of healthy rice, fish, and vegetables, and water with the occasional sake (wine). Then lets look at their hygiene habits: samurai would bathe often two times a day, and had excellent doctors in case of wounds or sickness; knights hardly bathed unless thrown into a river during combat, and had thier butchers as doctors (practically).

A katana is made for cutting. Meaning that from the center to the top point is where it is strongest. And due to the fact that samurai did not wear heavy armor, prefering lacquered wooden armor, would make them quicker and less easily tired; thus meaning all a samurai would have to do is not even attack, and let the knight swing his sword until he was tired, then the samurai could stick the sword into a weak point such as the neck or armpits.

And keep this last thing in mind. For over 600 years the Japanese had endless, nonstop, civil war. Generations were born and thrived on war, they thought and breathed nothing else but how to handle a sword and bow, and how to end the other mans life. They were taught total obediance to their leige lord, and if that lord told them to fight, they would fight, if he told them to die, they would slit their stomachs open on the spot. No other People on earth have ever had such a strong connection to war or to such a lack of fear of death. To a samurai, life was nothing, death was nothing. To a christian knight, life was very precious. And in a fight, wether you have skill or no, it depends on who has the least willingness to live, that most times wins. (though it could be that the one with the most desire to live would, but then that rhetorical)

Does a Lightsaber count?

If not, its a tie between the Japanese Katana, or Muramasa blades, or the English longsword.

I recall someone mentioning how easily katanas dulled.
Thats simply not true.
Not the ones made by masters anyway.
Some of these blades were folded, and refolded, thousands of times, and kept thier edges, far greater than most blades of the time.

As for style though, the katanas use was very choppy...not elegant at all.
It was made for very quick slashing strikes.
Effective perhaps, but not very pretty.

Also, even given the craftmanship of the katana, its pretty much outdone, with the later designs of the basket-hilted rapier.
The rapier had more reach, and more protection for the hand.
It also has the benefit of being easily used with one hand, leaving the option of a parrying dagger, or main-guache.

A katana is made for cutting. Meaning that from the center to the top point is where it is strongest. And due to the fact that samurai did not wear heavy armor, prefering lacquered wooden armor, would make them quicker and less easily tired; thus meaning all a samurai would have to do is not even attack, and let the knight swing his sword until he was tired, then the samurai could stick the sword into a weak point such as the neck or armpits.

All swords are made for cutting.
Katanas, are made for slashing.

The heavy armour of the average Knight, was usually layered.
Heavy cloth padding, under chainmail, then covered in plate.
Really, there were few "weak points" to be found.

Slashing weapons, do little against such armour.
This is why many also carried maces.
Armour can be crushed, and dented severly enough to crush the ribcage of the wearer.

The english longsword, however, can be used for slashing, or peircing.
Laquered wooden armour, doesnt stand a chance.

In a proposed battle, between a samurai and knight of equal fighting skill, the guy with the metal armour is probably going to win out.

I fence with my college - my preferred weapon would undoubledly be a sabre... although i'd have to put it to a grinding wheel and put an edge on it!! fun fun fun...:D :D

a pet chav?

A large celestial object.

A 9mm or a 10mm pistol is good for me...

One of these - a blinding laser.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123012699

A huge plank of wood.
















With a nail in it! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA PWNED!

A large celestial object.


But they're so hard to get in modern weapon shops these days.damned celestial object waiting lists.

A large celestial object.
*snerk*

Or a cloud of lesser celestial objects.
:D

In reality now, though... A shotgun. 12 or 20 bore. Slide action, such as the Remington 870 or Mossberg 500. Reliable, versitile, effective, inexpensive, and likely to be one of the last weapons the gun grabbers try to ban.

Oh, and when you run dry of ammo, they do one hell of a job at butt-stroking people, too.

My favorite weapon of the moment is my Lee-Enfield no.4 mk.1. Second place would be the Ruger Mini-14. I just bought a 30 rd. clip for it. They're both great guns. 3rd place goes to my assorted melee weapons.

But they're so hard to get in modern weapon shops these days.damned celestial object waiting lists.

Even so, it's undeniably more powerful than almost anything else. :D

My Springfield 1911a1. :D

Even so, it's undeniably more powerful than almost anything else. :D

How do you aim said celestial objects?

How do you aim said celestial objects?
You pray to God, of course.

Something that isn't worthless against bone?

In terms of melee weaponry, I've always liked the falchion. Oversized butcher knives are fun.
Um, if the katana is made right and well maintained, it will slice through bone rather well.

Um, if the katana is made right and well maintained, it will slice through bone rather well.
Correct.

Whilst I'm not going to get into the "my sword is better than your sword" argument, there is a martial practice done with the katana (could be done with any sword, I suppose, of the proper design and quality) involving cutting through what are, for lack of the proper word, "neck simulators." And I do mean through. As in "cut cleanly into two or more pieces."

The "necks" are made of a thick roll of wet rice straw matting tightly wrapped around a bamboo core. The matting does a very nice job of simulating neck muscle, and the bamboo is very close approximation of human bone (vertabra, in this case). A good blade (of any sort!), in the hands of someone well-trained, can go through the roll cleanly in a single pass.

All swords are made for cutting.
Katanas, are made for slashing.

The heavy armour of the average Knight, was usually layered.
Heavy cloth padding, under chainmail, then covered in plate.
Really, there were few "weak points" to be found.

Slashing weapons, do little against such armour.
This is why many also carried maces.
Armour can be crushed, and dented severly enough to crush the ribcage of the wearer.

The english longsword, however, can be used for slashing, or peircing.
Laquered wooden armour, doesnt stand a chance.

In a proposed battle, between a samurai and knight of equal fighting skill, the guy with the metal armour is probably going to win out.

You'll notice that I named only two weak points. When facing a fully armored knight, the only way of defeating him, with a katana, is by tiring him out and stabing or slashing these three places: 1- armpits, nothing like cutting the tendons. 2- neck, the neck often times when the knight raises his head like when he is falling backwards or looking up reveals his neck, a prime target. 3- Behind the knees, cutting the leg tendons and causing your opponant to fall to the ground helpless.

Also, I didn't say anything about laquered armor being better than metal armor, I simply said how a samurai would have less weight and thus more speed and less chance of tiring out quicker.

And no, in a proposed battle, bettween a samurai and knight, the guy with the better armor will now win. Believe me, I studied kenjutsu for over 4 years now, and I tested the knight vs samurai theory with my friend who does rienactment stuff. He was all plated up and with his long sword. I had my tight laquered armor and katana, both blades were dull of course for safety. The fight lasted half an hour. I dodged my friends slashes easily and would smash my sword into his shoulders. Finally when he tired, I knocked him down and put the sword to his throat. End result: I win.

Theres another key point about full plate armor you have to realize; with armor your ability to make down slashes from head height is very difficult and would leave you open to be smashed in the stomach, thus meaning the attack pattern of a knight becomes predictable, his movements left to heavy handed side-ways cuts and strait forward jabs.

I like me axe!!! It's so shiney... Yes, yes, you know daddy loves you :D

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Kettenhemd.jpg

very nice axe. *thumbs up*

MR Desert Eagle

M16A1 with M203, Beretta 92 aka M9, FN F2000, Desert Eagle, M249 SAW, M60.
Need I say More?

You forgot HK G36, MP7, and USP, among others.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2676268927161385975&q=minigun

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2676268927161385975&q=minigun

I had the opportunity of working one of those on the USAF UH60s (Pave Hawks), but seeing as there isn't much of a demand for arieal gunners in the civilian world, I went with computers :)


Any type of SAW is also on my list.

M16A1 with M203, Beretta 92 aka M9, FN F2000, Desert Eagle, M249 SAW, M60.
Need I say More?

Hows about why you chose to gravedig a thread from 10 months ago? I haven't seen this much gravedigging since my thread on Klonor-san.



Klonor was cool.

My brain!
(Seriously, given my strength and skill with weapons - or lack thereof - my brain is about the only way I'll win an armed fight)

Hows about why you chose to gravedig a thread from 10 months ago? I haven't seen this much gravedigging since my thread on Klonor-san.



Klonor was cool.

Oh! I just saw it a few days ago on my nation in the thread section and you know. didn't pay attention to the date.

I'll take one of the old CZ75s, and a pair of brass knuckles for good measure.

I choose gun out of all these. Why? Becuase you run up to me with a sword and I'll tear you apart. Simple.

BTW My favorite gun is the Kalashnikov AK-47. Its a Classic.

Maybe I should have said the right smiley for every occasion. Very disarming! http://www.section.at/img/smiley/kap.gif

Maybe I should have said the right smiley for every occasion. Very disarming! http://www.section.at/img/smiley/kap.gif
surrender denied.
http://http://casusbelli.iespana.es/tierra/m203.jpg

Anyone who says desert eagle should be shot. With their own 2 dollar bullets, to be exact.

I'd take a 10mm any day over a .50. Desert eagle will be reloading twice as often, feeling the recoil more, and take longer to aim with its heft. The 10mm will go through pretty much any practical thing a .50 will(body armour, most cover, etc). If the 10mm can't do it, the .50 probably can't either.

Ohh, and I'll walk away with much more money for ammo and thermobaric weapons :P

surrender denied.
Dude, that's not me surrendering... That one is everyone surrendering to my über-supply of smileys! *nods*

TNT nunchaku cannon sword! (a cannon that shoots nunchakus of TNT. It is attached to one's left arm, and a ong chain conects it to a sword held by the right hand)

Nothing screams dominance like a blunderbuss!