Samurai vs Roman Soldier Options

[flipcombatmedic]

I know it somewhat off topic, but how do you think the korean "samurais" will do? against the japanese and romans?

Korean Samurais?

[gesturer]

Do people realize that very few samurai were expert swordsmen? That's why it's such a legendary thing when one is good with the sword, because he's able to out-duel many other samurai. If you're going to use the argument of 1vs1, that the samurai would win because he's a master swordsmen, and the Roman is merely a soldier, it would only be fair to also give the Roman soldier an equal amount of skill with his weapon. I'm sure there were Roman soldiers renown for their skills as sword duelist.

A comparison of the Samurai's swordsmanship and a Legionnaire's swordsmanship would be impossible. I'm inclined to say the Samurai was more skilled with the sword in general. First of all, there is the renowned Asian concentration. Look at the batting averages of the Japanese in the MLB. Now replace that bat with a sword...

[Brian T]

Do people realize that very few samurai were expert swordsmen? That's why it's such a legendary thing when one is good with the sword, because he's able to out-duel many other samurai. If you're going to use the argument of 1vs1, that the samurai would win because he's a master swordsmen, and the Roman is merely a soldier, it would only be fair to also give the Roman soldier an equal amount of skill with his weapon. I'm sure there were Roman soldiers renown for their skills as sword duelist.

A comparison of the Samurai's swordsmanship and a Legionnaire's swordsmanship would be impossible. I'm inclined to say the Samurai was more skilled with the sword in general. First of all, there is the renowned Asian concentration. Look at the batting averages of the Japanese in the MLB. Now replace that bat with a sword...

And at the same time, look at the batting averages of some of the greatest American ball players...what's your point? Anybody can become greatly skilled at anything. I don't think you need some 'Asian concentration' to do it. 'White, black, hispanic, whatever concentration' seems to do just as good. I'd be inclinded to say you've been watching too many samurai movies.

[gesturer]

Do people realize that very few samurai were expert swordsmen? That's why it's such a legendary thing when one is good with the sword, because he's able to out-duel many other samurai. If you're going to use the argument of 1vs1, that the samurai would win because he's a master swordsmen, and the Roman is merely a soldier, it would only be fair to also give the Roman soldier an equal amount of skill with his weapon. I'm sure there were Roman soldiers renown for their skills as sword duelist.

A comparison of the Samurai's swordsmanship and a Legionnaire's swordsmanship would be impossible. I'm inclined to say the Samurai was more skilled with the sword in general. First of all, there is the renowned Asian concentration. Look at the batting averages of the Japanese in the MLB. Now replace that bat with a sword...

And at the same time, look at the batting averages of some of the greatest American ball players...what's your point? Anybody can become greatly skilled at anything. I don't think you need some 'Asian concentration' to do it. 'White, black, hispanic, whatever concentration' seems to do just as good. I'd be inclinded to say you've been watching too many samurai movies.

Haha maybe you're right. Only time will tell. But I do believe Asians, on average, have better reaction time, as reaction time is a function of visuo-spatial IQ and East Asians have the highest avg visuo-spatial IQ in the world.

[EvilAsianDude]

koreans held for 39 years not 20 years. Furthermore they wernt defeated since the Mongols still didnt conquer Korea and slaughtered its people to install fear(like they would to those they conquered). A truce was instead signed by both sides agreeing to peace as long as koreans payed the mongols tribute and also help them reach japan. Although im not sure if the Koreans would have won if they continued the war since the Mongols would have eventually used armies from just about every country they conquered+their own mongols against them(I believe they were already using Chinese troops against Koreans).

I know it somewhat off topic, but how do you think the korean "samurais" will do? against the japanese and romans?

The Korean counterpart of the samurai were the Hwarang. They were mostly expert archers wearing armor while riding on horses. They also carried sabers and shields(big difference since the samurais didnt carry shields). Basically they were like the Mongols except they had a honor code and used slightly different weapons and vastly different armor and clothing. They trained mostly in archery although they had skill in sword, spear in various weaponry.The bow they used was the a water buffallo horn composite bow which had a drawing strength of 166 lbs(which is the same bow the Mongols used). Japanese yumis/bows I believe max out at 80 lbs, Roman archers were mostly foreign employed and they wernt that great, British Long Bows had a draw strength of 110. The standard roman legionairre wasnt armed with a bow however so they face one great disadvantage. In fact the only ranged weapon they carried was the one shot pilum(range was very short). The Pilum(kinda like a heavy throwing spear) was also mostly a weapon not to kill but to make shields useless. It would stick on shields and make them heavier which meant the opponent would have to drop his shield or carry a cumbersome load. However the pilum is slow, its range is minimum and its only 1 shot vs a several shot, long distance, much more accurate , faster and harder to spot composite bow. There honor code of the hwarang was

Their code was
1.Loyalty to the Emperor/King
2.Filial piety to parents/family Respect among friends
3.No retreat in war
4.No unjust killing

They were very effective, created during the Shilla dynasty to fight against Koguryo Koreans and Paekchae Koreans(Koguryo and Paekchae also had similar hwarang warriors although they had different names for their warrior caste). Their effectivness was proven during battles against Koguryo and Paekchae eventually the civil war ended and Shilla was the victor. Their effectivness was also demonstrated in its war against Tang China who attempted to conquer Shilla twice. Shilla successfully defeated and drove the Chinese out with one major factor being the helpful hwarangs despite being outnumbers I believe its somewhere around 1:5 to 1:15.

In most medieval battle between japanese and korean forces the koreans were usually victorious in just about every battle. Examples would include pirate wars, Japanese and Paekchae alliance, Tsushima war etc etc. However that started changing in 1592 when Japan chose to invade korea with portuguese match lock rifles. Although Koreans won the war they still suffered a lot due to the weaponry advantage the japanese. The Chinese had aid Korea as well. So if it was a Hwarang vs Samurai battle than the Hwarang will probally win unless the Samurai has a gun. And we all know that horse archery was vastly superior to foot soilders like Roman legionairres. A Samurai on horseback with arrows can easilly defeat a legionairre. Only difference between Samurai and Hwarang was 1. Hwarangs had better bows, 2. Hwarangs were much better archers(the Japanese spent their time training in sword, spear, archery, meditating and doing sumo while Hwarangs spent most of all their military time doing nothing but archery and some spear and swords). So yeah the Hwarang will defeat the legionairre much more easilly than a samurai.

So basically it goes like this

Fully equipped Roman Legionairre < Fully equipped Samurai < Fully equipped Hwarang < Peasant with a gun.

Also the difference between Roman and Japanese swordsman ship is hard(since there were several styles of Japanese swordsmanship). However most agree that Kenjutsu(Japanese sword martial arts in general) involved lots of slashing and some stabbing. The Romans incorporated the gladius and used it mostly for stabbing. Who do I think will win in a sword vs sword match? The Legionairre will mostly likely win. The reasonn being that the Roman has a shield and a sword while the Samurai only has his swords. The Japanese never really developed shields since they only fought amongst themselves. And contrary to popular anime belief you CANT cut a shield with a slash of a sword. And even if you do, theres a good chance your sword will get stuck on his shield which spells doom for you. If it was Legionairre without shield vs samurai than the samurai will probally win. The gladius is very short and mostly a stabbing sword while the japanese used "sharper" and longer+better blades. The gladius can make a decent slashing weapon but its nothing compared to its japanese counter part. If it was legionairre vs samurai with a shield than the legionairre will win. The reason why the Legionairre carried such short stabbing swords was because of the shield they carried(those large tower shields/pavise(I believe thats what theyre called). You cant swing a large sword with carrying such a big shield because it requires too much strength, its too slow and your shield will make movement and attacking range less effective. If you give both sides small circular shields though then the samurai will probally win. Of course in a no holds bar anything goes battle between legionairre and samurai the samurai will obviously win. In the Hwarangs case, the hwarangs prefered the bow so they probally wouldnt fight hand to hand unless they absolutely had to. And usually if that occured then the foot infantry armed with spears would come to the hwarangs aid while the hwarangs would move back and start firing arrows at the back side. They only charged with swords and spears when they felt the killing moment was right.

[gesturer]

Fully equipped Roman Legionairre < Fully equipped Samurai < Fully equipped Hwarang < Peasant with a gun.

(IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif) 2 Peasant with a gun.

[meiki]

I think the Euro soldier would win.
cause even if they are so mighty powerful.... they fought with grace and things lik ethat.. straight up a crazy mofo will just take it and stab you in da eye and nuts.

There's no such thing as an Euro soldier. The romans soldiers kicked the folks in the area now known as Holland, Germany butt. They conquered the area.
The romans and greeks were far more civilised.

[Minako_megami]

The romans first off wheren't equiped for 1vs.1 combat. the Romans where armed with iron sheilds 4ft long and 2 ft wide made from blocking heavy iron broad swords used by the europeans at the time. the roman swords where not made to slash, the Maximus only being 2ft long is a stabbing wepon. The romans would block the oponets strike and than stab under the sheild... they whernt trained in the same way the samurai was... the medi evil knight as a simular scenario although it is more fair to compare samurai to knigts since the Samurais where at their peek about 1500ad-1600ad.

the medi evil knights swords (broad bladed) swords whernt meant for shlashing either... they where sharp dont get me wrong but not very sharp... the borad swords where made to be a crushing wepon.. and there armour was made to defend against that..... a katana would peirce knight armour... may damage the blade,but it would make it through the armour.... The samurai deifnatly have the trained advantage again.

This post has been edited by Minako_megami: Jun 17 2005, 09:27 PM

[SniperWZ]

Samurai is overrated, to borrow minakosama's own phrase, only dumbasses who believe in the media thinks samurai has somehow superior fighting abilities...

[Minako_megami]

Samurai is overrated, to borrow minakosama's own phrase, only dumbasses who believe in the media thinks samurai has somehow superior fighting abilities...

you are just getting stupid..... I trained in it for some time and phycaly i had a hard time keeping up.... and if you want to say the japanese whenr advanced and and civil, you're @$$ needs to sit and read Bushido... and all 2,000+ codes and regulations the Samruai lived by... and look into the making of the Katana... a well made katana being a little over 3ft. in length and a 8 ound peice of steel sharp enough to cut through a lose hanging thread.. and still srong enough to endure combat unlike the crapy eurpoean blades..... You sniper have won todays Suck at life award.

[Mr. Tree]

Samurai is overrated, to borrow minakosama's own phrase, only dumbasses who believe in the media thinks samurai has somehow superior fighting abilities...

you are just getting stupid..... I trained in it for some time and phycaly i had a hard time keeping up.... and if you want to say the japanese whenr advanced and and civil, you're @$$ needs to sit and read Bushido... and all 2,000+ codes and regulations the Samruai lived by... and look into the making of the Katana... a well made katana being a little over 3ft. in length and a 8 ound peice of steel sharp enough to cut through a lose hanging thread.. and still srong enough to endure combat unlike the crapy eurpoean blades..... You sniper have won todays Suck at life award.

um sorry....but the sharpness of a blade does not determine victory....hell some of the greatest warriors, the Jin dynasty used Sword Maces (blunt sword weapons) and ripped all nomads/sedentary people in their path.

its the STRENGH of the weapon that makes it viable. please understand this.

SECONDLY - the sharpest thing in the world is a peice of glass/crystal/diamond is glass strong enough to use as a sword? no diamond? yes but where can you find a diamond 4 ft long?

(IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/sure.gif)

im not attacking you for being ignorant...not your fault but please read a book (no Japanese books please).

[Minako_megami]

Samurai is overrated, to borrow minakosama's own phrase, only dumbasses who believe in the media thinks samurai has somehow superior fighting abilities...

you are just getting stupid..... I trained in it for some time and phycaly i had a hard time keeping up.... and if you want to say the japanese whenr advanced and and civil, you're @$$ needs to sit and read Bushido... and all 2,000+ codes and regulations the Samruai lived by... and look into the making of the Katana... a well made katana being a little over 3ft. in length and a 8 ound peice of steel sharp enough to cut through a lose hanging thread.. and still srong enough to endure combat unlike the crapy eurpoean blades..... You sniper have won todays Suck at life award.

um sorry....but the sharpness of a blade does not determine victory....hell some of the greatest warriors, the Jin dynasty used Sword Maces (blunt sword weapons) and ripped all nomads/sedentary people in their path.

its the STRENGH of the weapon that makes it viable. please understand this.

SECONDLY - the sharpest thing in the world is a peice of glass/crystal/diamond is glass strong enough to use as a sword? no diamond? yes but where can you find a diamond 4 ft long?

(IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/sure.gif)

im not attacking you for being ignorant...not your fault but please read a book (no Japanese books please).

wow are you stupid... you missed an entire sentence of that post..... I have a katana that has stodd a strike from a Mual .... a 100+ pound war hammer in a full over head swing.... note it cost me 300 dollars in repairs but the european blades break when struck with a mace..... Brute strength does not win battles... grace speed and skill will over come any fool of a knight whearing a steel can thinking it will protect him

[wRiter Reverie]

you know... I've seen this debate before on another messageboard....

... did you ever visit the forum at www.ff7citadel.com?

[EvilAsianDude]

Minako_megami you are a moron, a liar, a fraud, and a samurai wanna be as well.

After analyzing that pile of $hit you posted let me correct/educate you on certain issues.

The typical roman legionnaire wasn’t equipped for 1:1 combat which Is true. Neither was the samurai.
Not only that but the roman legionnaire used a shield called the scutum. It was made of wood, the advantage of wood over iron was 1. Lighter, 2. Weapons can actually stick on to wooden shields unlike iron. A Katana CANNOT cut a wooden shield. Katanas are sharp, very effective at slicing human flesh, they are however not used for cutting trees. Axes are used for cutting trees and they do this so well due to the weight they have and the blunt force delivered into the blade of an axe. The scutum can block strikes from axes. Also the Maximus ISNT a sword, I don’t know where the hell you got the name Maximus. The name of the Roman stabbing sword is the Gladius Hispaniensis.

The Samurai will win overall due to horse archery but since you are intent only to compare melee to melee or sword to sword combat let me tell you that the samurai will lose to a legionnaire in all likelihood.

A katana CANNOT pierce Knights plate armor. It just cant. Its been tested and its been shown that it cant end of discussion. Heavy blunt like swords are actually better against plate armor than Katanas. Also Europeon swords are sharp, not as sharp as Japanese swords but they can still cut an apple or human head. I don’t know where the hell you got the idea that European swords are as dull as rusted 50 year old kitchen knives. Secondly katanas and Broad swords are used in a different manner. European swords are in fact used in a smashing slashing action. Japanese swords were used in a strike then pull downward motion to maximize the cutting effect of the blade. Obviously a razor blade is not effective at cutting when you just use it to push on things to cut, but when you slide it downwards or upwards it cuts very well.

And where the hell did you get the idea that Japanese swords last longer than European swords? The life of a sword is dependent on who created them and who wields them. A Japanese sword wielded by someone like you obviously wont last long due to the stupidity you possess. Whereas a European sword held by a master could last a very long time.

And heres where I prove that you’re a liar. THERE IS NO SUCH fu-kING THING AS A 100 POUND WAR HAMMER. If you can swing a +100 pound war hammer then you must be the strongest man in the world. Do you think I believe that you can swing a wooden shaft with over 100 pounds on it at the other end? The heavy axes used to cut trees weigh less than 10 pounds.

This is a heavy 10 pound sledge hammer.

http://www.ospikagear.com/browseproducts/1...dge-Hammer.HTML

How the hell do you expect anyone to believe that you can swing 100 lbs of metal with wood attached to it?

I hope you go get yourself killed when you practice your sword. Heck I hope you try to lift a 100 pound war hammer in real life and get yourself killed. Do us a favor and the human gene pool a favor by getting yourself killed.

[Suijen]

Minako_megami you are a moron, a liar, a fraud, and a samurai wanna be as well.

After analyzing that pile of $hit you posted let me correct/educate you on certain issues.

The typical roman legionnaire wasn’t equipped for 1:1 combat which Is true. Neither was the samurai.
Not only that but the roman legionnaire used a shield called the scutum. It was made of wood, the advantage of wood over iron was 1. Lighter, 2. Weapons can actually stick on to wooden shields unlike iron. A Katana CANNOT cut a wooden shield. Katanas are sharp, very effective at slicing human flesh, they are however not used for cutting trees. Axes are used for cutting trees and they do this so well due to the weight they have and the blunt force delivered into the blade of an axe. The scutum can block strikes from axes. Also the Maximus ISNT a sword, I don’t know where the hell you got the name Maximus. The name of the Roman stabbing sword is the Gladius Hispaniensis.

The Samurai will win overall due to horse archery but since you are intent only to compare melee to melee or sword to sword combat let me tell you that the samurai will lose to a legionnaire in all likelihood.

A katana CANNOT pierce Knights plate armor. It just cant. Its been tested and its been shown that it cant end of discussion. Heavy blunt like swords are actually better against plate armor than Katanas. Also Europeon swords are sharp, not as sharp as Japanese swords but they can still cut an apple or human head. I don’t know where the hell you got the idea that European swords are as dull as rusted 50 year old kitchen knives. Secondly katanas and Broad swords are used in a different manner. European swords are in fact used in a smashing slashing action. Japanese swords were used in a strike then pull downward motion to maximize the cutting effect of the blade. Obviously a razor blade is not effective at cutting when you just use it to push on things to cut, but when you slide it downwards or upwards it cuts very well.

And where the hell did you get the idea that Japanese swords last longer than European swords? The life of a sword is dependent on who created them and who wields them. A Japanese sword wielded by someone like you obviously wont last long due to the stupidity you possess. Whereas a European sword held by a master could last a very long time.

And heres where I prove that you’re a liar. THERE IS NO SUCH fu-kING THING AS A 100 POUND WAR HAMMER. If you can swing a +100 pound war hammer then you must be the strongest man in the world. Do you think I believe that you can swing a wooden shaft with over 100 pounds on it at the other end? The heavy axes used to cut trees weigh less than 10 pounds.

This is a heavy 10 pound sledge hammer.

http://www.ospikagear.com/browseproducts/1...dge-Hammer.HTML

How the hell do you expect anyone to believe that you can swing 100 lbs of metal with wood attached to it?

I hope you go get yourself killed when you practice your sword. Heck I hope you try to lift a 100 pound war hammer in real life and get yourself killed. Do us a favor and the human gene pool a favor by getting yourself killed.

I remember reading that a crossbow can pierce through the armor and kill the man inside. I'm sure if you've got a bow or perhaps a good crossbow, you can probably win 1:1. You can also use poison dart automatic crossbows also, and you may be able to kill a knight wearing full plate. But, as mentioned earlier, a buffoon with a rifle will spell doom to cavalry. Oh yeah, and didn't legend say that Guan Yu wielded a pretty heavy blade?

This post has been edited by Suijen: Jul 1 2005, 12:07 AM

[Col]

Ancient Asian warfare relies more on archery more than swordsmanship. The Chinese and Korean soldiers made extensive uses of bows, hell, the Chinese had powerful crossbows wayyyyyyyy back in the days. Samurais, as far as i know, fight as horse archers. The Romans did lose the Battle of Carr Plain or something like that agaisnt the Parthian horse archers after all.

A katana might be sharp, but it's not a miracle blade. As for:

wow are you stupid... you missed an entire sentence of that post..... I have a katana that has stodd a strike from a Mual .... a 100+ pound war hammer in a full over head swing.... note it cost me 300 dollars in repairs but the european blades break when struck with a mace..... Brute strength does not win battles... grace speed and skill will over come any fool of a knight whearing a steel can thinking it will protect him

Wow, are you optimistic. A battle mace against a katana. Ok, the katana is okay, how about the person holding it? Is the blade still in his hands? Is he still standing up? I wanna see someone stand up agaisnt the sheer kinetic energy of a mace! Brute strength does not win battle, neither do grace speed and skill. You need intelligence, skills, firepower, speed, AND spatial awareness to defeat an opponent. Grace in battle is for show. When you're getting killed and must fight back, who the hell cares about grace? Are you putting on a circus show?

The Samurai IS overrated. If you wanna see better warriors, the ancient Chinese and Korean are more notorious yet obscure in that title

This post has been edited by Col: Jul 1 2005, 12:32 AM

[Suijen]

The Samurai IS overrated.  If you wanna see better warriors, the ancient Chinese and Korean are more notorious yet obscure in that title

We're just not as fancy as samurais. Oh yeah, and Zhuge Liang invented the auto-crossbow.

This post has been edited by Suijen: Jul 1 2005, 12:40 AM

[EvilAsianDude]

Correct, crossbows EASILY defeats even the strongest plate armor. The arbalest(very powerful crossbow in Europe) in fact was banned by the pope because a peasant with little training could defeat a fully armored knight whos trained his entire life with one shot. Powerful bows can also penetrate plate armor effectively as well. The reason why full plate armor was never developed in asia was due to the fact that the Chinese invented crossbows before 200 BC. There was no need for plate armor when asian bows could defeat plate armor. Europe saw full plate armor mainly due to its weaker bows(excluding the longbow which is still not as powerful but very close) and banning of crossbows. It was short lived however once guns and the renaissance came. The knight became a symbol rather than a warrior. Japanese Samurais for the most part relied on archery and in general used spears(yari) over the sword on horseback. Mainly because on horseback the spear is longer and it’s a lot cheaper as well. And according to LEGEND guan yus blade weighed 82 jin which equals 100 pounds. It was a kind of unique Halberd weapon which I forgot the name. However this is from the legend and not the actual Guan Yu. One fact is that the weapon Guan Yu used in Romance of the Three Kingdoms story didn’t even show up until AFTER Guan Yus time(800 years after Guan Yus time). Guan Yu in real life probably used a normal spear like weapon in combat with average weight. There have been very heavy weapons made during war, they were reserved for generals. They were not used for fighting, they were used for things like friendship or looking cool.

Yi Sun Shin for example carried a sword that was over 6 foot tall and weighed over 15 pounds. He didn’t use it to fight, he just used it to make himself look like a badass. The Chinese emperor(or was it his general) also once gave Yi Sun Shin a 30-50 pound ceremonial sword with lots of gold in it which I doubt anyone sane would carry to battle. Gold doesn’t make a good bladed weapon btw.

[Suijen]

Correct, crossbows EASILY defeats even the strongest plate armor. The arbalest(very powerful crossbow in Europe) in fact was banned by the pope because a peasant with little training could defeat a fully armored knight whos trained his entire life with one shot. Powerful bows can also penetrate plate armor effectively as well. The reason why full plate armor was never developed in asia was due to the fact that the Chinese invented crossbows before 200 BC. There was no need for plate armor when asian bows could defeat plate armor. Europe saw full plate armor mainly due to its weaker bows(excluding the longbow which is still not as powerful but very close) and banning of crossbows. It was short lived however once guns and the renaissance came. The knight became a symbol rather than a warrior. Japanese Samurais for the most part relied on archery and in general used spears(yari) over the sword on horseback. Mainly because on horseback the spear is longer and it’s a lot cheaper as well. And according to LEGEND guan yus blade weighed 82 jin which equals 100 pounds. It was a kind of unique Halberd weapon which I forgot the name. However this is from the legend and not the actual Guan Yu. One fact is that the weapon Guan Yu used in Romance of the Three Kingdoms story didn’t even show up until AFTER Guan Yus time(800 years after Guan Yus time). Guan Yu in real life probably used a normal spear like weapon in combat with average weight. There have been very heavy weapons made during war, they were reserved for generals. They were not used for fighting, they were used for things like friendship or looking cool.

Yi Sun Shin for example carried a sword that was over 6 foot tall and weighed over 15 pounds. He didn’t use it to fight, he just used it to make himself look like a badass. The Chinese emperor(or was it his general) also once gave Yi Sun Shin a 30-50 pound ceremonial sword with lots of gold in it which I doubt anyone sane would carry to battle. Gold doesn’t make a good bladed weapon btw.

Don't be so pessimistic, a little imagination never hurt anyone. Oh yeah, and Sung Wu'Kung carried a cudgel that was a pillar weighing several tons, which he compressed into a staff that looked only a few pounds. Can you imagine a monkey striking a several ton cudgel (small so there's great pressure) at quick speeds? How about if he grew about the size of a mountain with millions of arms, or perhaps made several hundred thousand copies of himself? He'd tear up anyone. He'd beat up anyone listed here, so make sure to mention that.

This post has been edited by Suijen: Jul 1 2005, 01:34 AM

[Mr. Tree]

Samurai is overrated, to borrow minakosama's own phrase, only dumbasses who believe in the media thinks samurai has somehow superior fighting abilities...

you are just getting stupid..... I trained in it for some time and phycaly i had a hard time keeping up.... and if you want to say the japanese whenr advanced and and civil, you're @$$ needs to sit and read Bushido... and all 2,000+ codes and regulations the Samruai lived by... and look into the making of the Katana... a well made katana being a little over 3ft. in length and a 8 ound peice of steel sharp enough to cut through a lose hanging thread.. and still srong enough to endure combat unlike the crapy eurpoean blades..... You sniper have won todays Suck at life award.

um sorry....but the sharpness of a blade does not determine victory....hell some of the greatest warriors, the Jin dynasty used Sword Maces (blunt sword weapons) and ripped all nomads/sedentary people in their path.

its the STRENGH of the weapon that makes it viable. please understand this.

SECONDLY - the sharpest thing in the world is a peice of glass/crystal/diamond is glass strong enough to use as a sword? no diamond? yes but where can you find a diamond 4 ft long?

(IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/sure.gif)

im not attacking you for being ignorant...not your fault but please read a book (no Japanese books please).

wow are you stupid... you missed an entire sentence of that post..... I have a katana that has stodd a strike from a Mual .... a 100+ pound war hammer in a full over head swing.... note it cost me 300 dollars in repairs but the european blades break when struck with a mace..... Brute strength does not win battles... grace speed and skill will over come any fool of a knight whearing a steel can thinking it will protect him

wow you made my day, thnx for posting a load of $hit. why do i even care, everyone knows a chinese peasant with a crossbow will own all your asses (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif) 2

then again a european peasant with a gun would own us all (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/icon_confused.gif)

you can use your sword, ill just run you over with my car (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif) 2 which weapon is superior now? (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif)

i have a Paul Chen Da Dao ( War Sword ) but even im not wise enough to use it against another steel object (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/sure.gif)

i love you (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/kiss.gif) (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/icon_twisted.gif) (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif) 2 you always make me laugh (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif)

(IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/biggthumpup.gif)