Samurai vs Roman Soldier Options

[Chinese DesertFo...]

You kidding?  Shaolin monks will whoop everyone's asses!

Lol, quite true.

[Mr. Tree]

hell yea ^ and the only ones who can beat Shaolin monks are Tai Chi practioners and old people, and who can beat old people? girls! and who beats girls?" <ME ahahaha :P i keed i keed

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

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

[Mangafan2]

Samurai would win a roman soldier
But a Roman Legionaire would own a Samurai

But there are different classes of Samurai's. So it all depends on the ranks. Same goes for roman soldiers.

[juwanFromTaiwan]

Samurai would win a roman soldier
But a Roman Legionaire would own a Samurai

But there are different classes of Samurai's. So it all depends on the ranks. Same goes for roman soldiers.

A Samurai would slice and dice any mofo to pieces..

[soro_i]

Samurai v Roman soldier?

That's like UFC fighter v Japan Imperial soldier

Samurai v Gladiator... that's a better match.

[YManchun]

I wonder if anyone ever thought about recruiting Shaolin Monks as Special Forces troops. Seeing the Shaolin's feats on tv (i.e. breaking bricks with one finger, balancing their entire body weight on one finger, withstand whippings and bladed weapons) I'm sure 100% of them can make through any Special Forces in the world.

[Mangafan2]

Samurai would win a roman soldier
But a Roman Legionaire would own a Samurai

But there are different classes of Samurai's. So it all depends on the ranks. Same goes for roman soldiers.

A Samurai would slice and dice any mofo to pieces..

Like they got defeated by ninja's? riiiight...

[Col]

I wonder if anyone ever thought about recruiting Shaolin Monks as Special Forces troops. Seeing the Shaolin's feats on tv (i.e. breaking bricks with one finger, balancing their entire body weight on one finger, withstand whippings and bladed weapons) I'm sure 100% of them can make through any Special Forces in the world.

Doing that would violate their beliefs won't it? They're taught not to harm another living being unless absolutely necessary.

[Chinese DesertFo...]

(IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v487/sharky221/shaolin.jpg)

[landsknechts]

LOL, those dudes are so funny, what are they doing with their fingers? (IMG:http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/style_emoticons/default/embarassedlaugh.gif)

[Col]

Looks like meditaton. Don't make fun landsknechts =P

[EvilAsianDude]

Aww man they closed down the romans vs han topic. A chinese mod probally closed it anyways because it hurt chinese pride.

Those chinese nationalist are ridiculous they claim han would win based on nothing. All they do is claim how the han can make more iron weapons and farm more than the romans. Such stupid logic on their parts. China has been conquered, beaten and humiliated in its history several times over by groups with much smaller populations and less iron or farming capabilities. Yet they claim that the han or chinese armor is invincible. They call me anti chinese because I support the roman cause? Such pitiful logic. They cant even hold a decent argument. They blab on and on about hans iron making skills as if chinese iron is diamonds vs roman iron which is glass.

btw back on topic shaolin monks are over-rated. They perform incredible feats like bending spears on their skin(which is actually possible for anyone). And you see them do a lot of crazy flips and stuff(which is stupid in actual combat). But ask yourself the truth, how effective are they in actual combat? And if your wondering, no Shaolin monks wont own anyone. Shaolin is a very ambiguous term. Its like claiming that a martial artists will own so and so. Martial arts = several different styles and different weapons involved.

And besides most shoalin monks were annihilated and the temple destroyed by the manchus. So much for the shoalin monks owning everyone.

[kunomchu]

Aww man they closed down the romans vs han topic. A chinese mod probally closed it anyways because it hurt chinese pride.

Those chinese nationalist are ridiculous they claim han would win based on nothing. All they do is claim how the han can make more iron weapons and farm more than the romans. Such stupid logic on their parts. China has been conquered, beaten and humiliated in its history several times over by groups with much smaller populations and less iron or farming capabilities. Yet they claim that the han or chinese armor is invincible. They call me anti chinese because I support the roman cause? Such pitiful logic. They cant even hold a decent argument. They blab on and on about hans iron making skills as if chinese iron is diamonds vs roman iron which is glass.

btw back on topic shaolin monks are over-rated. They perform incredible feats like bending spears on their skin(which is actually possible for anyone). And you see them do a lot of crazy flips and stuff(which is stupid in actual combat). But ask yourself the truth, how effective are they in actual combat? And if your wondering, no Shaolin monks wont own anyone. Shaolin is a very ambiguous term. Its like claiming that a martial artists will own so and so. Martial arts = several different styles and different weapons involved. 

And besides most shoalin monks were annihilated and the temple destroyed by the manchus. So much for the shoalin monks owning everyone.

you are not back on topic. stop trying to start another flame war with chinese.

as for the topic, i think samurais would have lost to romans cuz japanese rarely ever faced outside opponents cept the mongols. even then they were lucky cuz of natural conditions which severely weakened the mongol invaders.

[EvilAsianDude]

I may not be back in the samurai vs roman subject however this topic seems to be dealing with shaolin monks and their combat effectivness. So im still on topic.

[totalylegal]

Aww man they closed down the romans vs han topic. A chinese mod probally closed it anyways because it hurt chinese pride.

Those chinese nationalist are ridiculous they claim han would win based on nothing. All they do is claim how the han can make more iron weapons and farm more than the romans. Such stupid logic on their parts. China has been conquered, beaten and humiliated in its history several times over by groups with much smaller populations and less iron or farming capabilities. Yet they claim that the han or chinese armor is invincible. They call me anti chinese because I support the roman cause? Such pitiful logic. They cant even hold a decent argument. They blab on and on about hans iron making skills as if chinese iron is diamonds vs roman iron which is glass.

btw back on topic shaolin monks are over-rated. They perform incredible feats like bending spears on their skin(which is actually possible for anyone). And you see them do a lot of crazy flips and stuff(which is stupid in actual combat). But ask yourself the truth, how effective are they in actual combat? And if your wondering, no Shaolin monks wont own anyone. Shaolin is a very ambiguous term. Its like claiming that a martial artists will own so and so. Martial arts = several different styles and different weapons involved. 

And besides most shoalin monks were annihilated and the temple destroyed by the manchus. So much for the shoalin monks owning everyone.

iguess you are korean rite?

(IMG:http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/core9/phalsall/images/hanmap.jpg)

[Chinese DesertFo...]

Aww man they closed down the romans vs han topic. A chinese mod probally closed it anyways because it hurt chinese pride.

Those chinese nationalist are ridiculous they claim han would win based on nothing. All they do is claim how the han can make more iron weapons and farm more than the romans. Such stupid logic on their parts. China has been conquered, beaten and humiliated in its history several times over by groups with much smaller populations and less iron or farming capabilities. Yet they claim that the han or chinese armor is invincible. They call me anti chinese because I support the roman cause? Such pitiful logic. They cant even hold a decent argument. They blab on and on about hans iron making skills as if chinese iron is diamonds vs roman iron which is glass.

btw back on topic shaolin monks are over-rated. They perform incredible feats like bending spears on their skin(which is actually possible for anyone). And you see them do a lot of crazy flips and stuff(which is stupid in actual combat). But ask yourself the truth, how effective are they in actual combat? And if your wondering, no Shaolin monks wont own anyone. Shaolin is a very ambiguous term. Its like claiming that a martial artists will own so and so. Martial arts = several different styles and different weapons involved. 

And besides most shoalin monks were annihilated and the temple destroyed by the manchus. So much for the shoalin monks owning everyone.

Ugh, I am sick and tired of dealing with your bull$hit. You know nothing about Roman or Chinese history, and I have effectively destroyed all your $hitty rhetoric. You keep jumping around the timeline, and your contentions are completely false.

Go ahead and make another thread regarding the same topic, because I'll be there to liquidate whatever BS claim you can conjure up.

Shaolin monks haven't always been peaceful, they helped the Tang Emperor-tobe in his fight against Wang Sichong. Some monks were even given military status during the Ming dynasty.

They were, unfortunetly, destroyed by the Manchus when they came in but the Shaolin legacy is everlasting.

This post has been edited by Chinese DesertFox: Aug 29 2005, 09:02 PM

[EvilAsianDude]

Yes the han conquered korea when korea was a bunch of broken primitive tribes. Didn’t the Chinese only face like 2000 troops during this tiny skirmish? When the first true Korean kingdoms emerged(koguryo, Shilla and Paekchae)a few hundred years later. They defeated the Chinese. Heh I enjoy discussing the battle of salsu in which 305,000 Chinese troops were sent to fight a small band of less than 20,000 Koreans. Only 2700 Chinese returned alive while probably less than 2700 Koreans were killed. Wow that must have been fun for the Chinese. Conclusion: The Chinese cant do much in war unless they severely outnumber their opponents(even then they lose) or they are fighting amongst themselves.

Ugh, I am sick and tired of dealing with your bull$hit. You know nothing about Roman or Chinese history, and I have effectively destroyed all your $hitty rhetoric. You keep jumping around the timeline, and your contentions are completely false.

Wrong, you know nothing. You never proved anything. I discussed the battle tactics equipment and formations of the Roman empire vs. what the han used. You’ve failed to do so. All you state is that the Chinese could make better iron weapons and farm more. You wrote a freakin bible on the subject. The funny thing was that I never even disagreed with you on the subject of han iron works. Unfortunately your to stubborn and you cant seem to read. So you kept on assuming that I stated that the romans were better at manufacturing. I don’t know why your even arguing with me when you cant even read.

Importantly though who the hell cares if the Chinese can produce more iron weapons or farm more. The Mongols couldn’t farm or make as much iron weapons, is that why they conquered the Chinese?

Go ahead and make another thread regarding the same topic, because I'll be there to liquidate whatever BS claim you can conjure up.

Please do so. Let me educate you once again

Chinese armies have always been about quantity rather than quality. While the romans used highly trained warriors who were well equipped the han used average troops for the most part who were not so well equipped. Typical roman battle equip-

Scuta- Roman tower shield effective against arrows
Gladius- Stabbing short sword
Philum- Throwing spear with a heavy side used to slow down and make them targets armor or shield heavy(also helps to penetrate things)
Loricated plate armor or chain mail
Iron helm
Daggers
They also had a cavalry squad who also had shields and a. They also hired mecinaries so the roman army varied.

The roman foot soilder would get in formation via the testudo

http://www.larp.com/legioxx/testudo.jpg

This was basically a wall of shields and spikes. The han do not have any formation similar. The Han did have cavalry although they utilized large numbers and most of them were foot soilders. The testudo was very formidable it was protective against arrows and melee weapons. Chinese infantry would stand little chance mainly because hurting a shielded and armored man with a spike pointed at you is difficult. The romans were trained to the point where the testudo moved in unison. A general can tell them to turn, move back, march forward, take a step right whatever. The Testudo would do it without chaos. Han army wouldn’t do much against it.

Furthermore the way bows and crossbows were used in Chinese armies as in other armies as well was to fire them into the sky and let them rain down on the enemy. Then send their infantry troops to fight with the sword, axe, club whatever. No army is stupid enough to fire bows in a straight line(rather than above the sky)while infantry is running towards them. That’s why they have infantry troops. Heck the romans had saber and shield using horsemen too.

For example the English longbow men using some of the most powerful bows in the world would still fire arrows from above. Shields from all ranges of armies that the English faught even the primitive scotts still protected them. Did the English fire arrow after arrow at the enemy? Nope they would fire arrows then send in their knights and warriors for the real fight to begin.

The fact is that roman shields were far larger and more durable than tiny Scottish round shields. They also had the testudo formation therefore protection will be effective. The roman shield was also made of wood and was effective at letting enemy weapons stick on to them. If you chopped at the shield with an axe theres a great chance the axe might stick. And thus you would have no weapon while the roman would have his sword in your neck.

The only time bows were really really effective in straight shooting against infantry I guess was when French knights attempted to attack the English in a wet mud field. The French knights sank in the mud thanks to their heavy armor they wore while the lighter English troops clubbed or shot them to death. Or when the romans I guess had to fight in the sand with heavy armor. They too sunk in the sand and many died of heat and thirst.

In conclusion what exactly can the han do against the testudo formation? If cavalry meets cavalry then it would be a good fight. However a testudo will assist the roman cavalry with phylum and stabs from the sword. The Han infantry will get crushed and then the han cavalry will as well. The archers wont fire into a thick crowd of han and roman warriors unless they plan on hurting their own troops as well. If they do decide to do this then it will be mostly han troops who get shot(the roman testudo formation protects users even from the sky).

Thus theres little that the han cavalry and foot soilder can do. The Han army is very very similar to the Persian army. They used large numbers and utilized a overwhelming strategy to eat up the enemy. Large number of infantry, as well as archers and cavalry. The Persian army however was beaten by the greeks and conquered by the Macedonians. Both the greeks and Macedonians fight in a similar way. The greeks used the phalanx-

http://www.utexas.edu/courses/romanciv/rom...es4/phalanx.jpg

And defeated the Persians. Everyone remembers the battle at thermoply in which 300 Spartans held off and killed thousands of Persians before being overwhelmed. That’s how effective the phalanx is. The romans eventually learned and created a new version of the phalanx called the testudo. Instead of long spears they used short swords. Instead of small round shields they used large tower shields. The Phalanx had longer range however once you get passed the first couple set of spears the phalanx is screwed. The phalanx also cannot turn because that would mean the spear formation would have the change. The romans carried short stabbing swords which made it more maneuverable.

If you studied battle history there are many similarities between the han and the Persians. The han infantry and cavalry would lose indeed since they cant do much nor have the han dealt with an opponent like the romans. The romans however have dealt with and also have historical records of others fight quantity based armies.

Shaolin monks haven't always been peaceful, they helped the Tang Emperor-tobe in his fight against Wang Sichong. Some monks were even given military status during the Ming dynasty.

On the mere basis that the Chinese emperor ordered the shaolin monks to command large armies of even more Chinese troops to combat another Chinese guy is just hilarious. I see so according to you this is what makes Shaolin Monks own everyone? Because they got to command large number of real Chinese warriors? The only way shaolin monks can actually prove that they own everyone is when they do actual battle against foreign enemies.

They were, unfortunetly, destroyed by the Manchus when they came in but the Shaolin legacy is everlasting.

That’s the thing, most of the original shaolin monks were killed by the manchus. The original temple destroyed. The people who died were the masters for the most part. And with their death most of the original teachings of the shaolin was also gone. Todays shaolin are mostly acrobats planning to enter hong kong movies or incorporating new styles. By historical records however the Shaolin havent really accomplish much. Other than assist Chinese troops(who probably did most of the fighting anyways).

[totalylegal]

Yes the han conquered korea when korea was a bunch of broken primitive tribes. Didn’t the Chinese only face like 2000 troops during this tiny skirmish? When the first true Korean kingdoms emerged(koguryo, Shilla and Paekchae)a few hundred years later. They defeated the Chinese. Heh I enjoy discussing the battle of salsu in which 305,000 Chinese troops were sent to fight a small band of less than 20,000 Koreans. Only 2700 Chinese returned alive while probably less than 2700 Koreans were killed. Wow that must have been fun for the Chinese. Conclusion: The Chinese cant do much in war unless they severely outnumber their opponents(even then they lose) or they are fighting amongst themselves.

Ugh, I am sick and tired of dealing with your bull$hit. You know nothing about Roman or Chinese history, and I have effectively destroyed all your $hitty rhetoric. You keep jumping around the timeline, and your contentions are completely false.

Wrong, you know nothing. You never proved anything. I discussed the battle tactics equipment and formations of the Roman empire vs. what the han used. You’ve failed to do so. All you state is that the Chinese could make better iron weapons and farm more. You wrote a freakin bible on the subject. The funny thing was that I never even disagreed with you on the subject of han iron works. Unfortunately your to stubborn and you cant seem to read. So you kept on assuming that I stated that the romans were better at manufacturing. I don’t know why your even arguing with me when you cant even read.

Importantly though who the hell cares if the Chinese can produce more iron weapons or farm more. The Mongols couldn’t farm or make as much iron weapons, is that why they conquered the Chinese?

Go ahead and make another thread regarding the same topic, because I'll be there to liquidate whatever BS claim you can conjure up.

Please do so. Let me educate you once again

Chinese armies have always been about quantity rather than quality. While the romans used highly trained warriors who were well equipped the han used average troops for the most part who were not so well equipped. Typical roman battle equip-

Scuta- Roman tower shield effective against arrows
Gladius- Stabbing short sword
Philum- Throwing spear with a heavy side used to slow down and make them targets armor or shield heavy(also helps to penetrate things)
Loricated plate armor or chain mail
Iron helm
Daggers
They also had a cavalry squad who also had shields and a. They also hired mecinaries so the roman army varied.

The roman foot soilder would get in formation via the testudo

http://www.larp.com/legioxx/testudo.jpg

This was basically a wall of shields and spikes. The han do not have any formation similar. The Han did have cavalry although they utilized large numbers and most of them were foot soilders. The testudo was very formidable it was protective against arrows and melee weapons. Chinese infantry would stand little chance mainly because hurting a shielded and armored man with a spike pointed at you is difficult. The romans were trained to the point where the testudo moved in unison. A general can tell them to turn, move back, march forward, take a step right whatever. The Testudo would do it without chaos. Han army wouldn’t do much against it.

Furthermore the way bows and crossbows were used in Chinese armies as in other armies as well was to fire them into the sky and let them rain down on the enemy. Then send their infantry troops to fight with the sword, axe, club whatever. No army is stupid enough to fire bows in a straight line(rather than above the sky)while infantry is running towards them. That’s why they have infantry troops. Heck the romans had saber and shield using horsemen too.

For example the English longbow men using some of the most powerful bows in the world would still fire arrows from above. Shields from all ranges of armies that the English faught even the primitive scotts still protected them. Did the English fire arrow after arrow at the enemy? Nope they would fire arrows then send in their knights and warriors for the real fight to begin.

The fact is that roman shields were far larger and more durable than tiny Scottish round shields. They also had the testudo formation therefore protection will be effective. The roman shield was also made of wood and was effective at letting enemy weapons stick on to them. If you chopped at the shield with an axe theres a great chance the axe might stick. And thus you would have no weapon while the roman would have his sword in your neck.

The only time bows were really really effective in straight shooting against infantry I guess was when French knights attempted to attack the English in a wet mud field. The French knights sank in the mud thanks to their heavy armor they wore while the lighter English troops clubbed or shot them to death. Or when the romans I guess had to fight in the sand with heavy armor. They too sunk in the sand and many died of heat and thirst.

In conclusion what exactly can the han do against the testudo formation? If cavalry meets cavalry then it would be a good fight. However a testudo will assist the roman cavalry with phylum and stabs from the sword. The Han infantry will get crushed and then the han cavalry will as well. The archers wont fire into a thick crowd of han and roman warriors unless they plan on hurting their own troops as well. If they do decide to do this then it will be mostly han troops who get shot(the roman testudo formation protects users even from the sky).

Thus theres little that the han cavalry and foot soilder can do. The Han army is very very similar to the Persian army. They used large numbers and utilized a overwhelming strategy to eat up the enemy. Large number of infantry, as well as archers and cavalry. The Persian army however was beaten by the greeks and conquered by the Macedonians. Both the greeks and Macedonians fight in a similar way. The greeks used the phalanx-

http://www.utexas.edu/courses/romanciv/rom...es4/phalanx.jpg

And defeated the Persians. Everyone remembers the battle at thermoply in which 300 Spartans held off and killed thousands of Persians before being overwhelmed. That’s how effective the phalanx is. The romans eventually learned and created a new version of the phalanx called the testudo. Instead of long spears they used short swords. Instead of small round shields they used large tower shields. The Phalanx had longer range however once you get passed the first couple set of spears the phalanx is screwed. The phalanx also cannot turn because that would mean the spear formation would have the change. The romans carried short stabbing swords which made it more maneuverable.

If you studied battle history there are many similarities between the han and the Persians. The han infantry and cavalry would lose indeed since they cant do much nor have the han dealt with an opponent like the romans. The romans however have dealt with and also have historical records of others fight quantity based armies.

Shaolin monks haven't always been peaceful, they helped the Tang Emperor-tobe in his fight against Wang Sichong. Some monks were even given military status during the Ming dynasty.

On the mere basis that the Chinese emperor ordered the shaolin monks to command large armies of even more Chinese troops to combat another Chinese guy is just hilarious. I see so according to you this is what makes Shaolin Monks own everyone? Because they got to command large number of real Chinese warriors? The only way shaolin monks can actually prove that they own everyone is when they do actual battle against foreign enemies.

They were, unfortunetly, destroyed by the Manchus when they came in but the Shaolin legacy is everlasting.

That’s the thing, most of the original shaolin monks were killed by the manchus. The original temple destroyed. The people who died were the masters for the most part. And with their death most of the original teachings of the shaolin was also gone. Todays shaolin are mostly acrobats planning to enter hong kong movies or incorporating new styles. By historical records however the Shaolin havent really accomplish much. Other than assist Chinese troops(who probably did most of the fighting anyways).

the fact is that china was able to conquere korea,wheher they were really a bounch broken tribes or not.korea was always in the defences side.
the chinese has ben war with the horse riding nomads for thuasand years,from early huns to manchus. they've learned much tactics,calvary from the nomads than any other country.

[Col]

The "large number" argument is beaten to death i swear. Back in the days that's basically all that matters! They didn't have guided bombs or anything, or effective artillery for that matter. Population in Asia back in the days was already in the high millions, so of course this population number is going to be reflected on the numbers deployed on the battlefield.

Shaolin monks will own anyone on one-on-one basis, just like this thread's based on a one-on-one basis between a Samurai and a Roman soldier.

[EvilAsianDude]

the fact is that china was able to conquere korea,wheher they were really a bounch broken tribes or not.korea was always in the defences side.
the chinese has ben war with the horse riding nomads for thuasand years,from early huns to manchus. they've learned much tactics,calvary from the nomads than any other country.

No, that doesnt really matter. If I went back in time and beat up a 3 year old kid then went to the future and found out that 3 year old kid is now a 30 year old martial arts expert, navy seal and weapons expert then will I be able to beat him up? You see thats why those chinese nationalists have such poor logical skills. Defeating something when it was weak does not equate to defeating it when its stronger in the future. They apply this same logic to Han>Hun>Romans.
The han faced a different kind of hun then what the romans faced. The romans who faced the huns were also not the same romans 400 years ago during caesars time. The Han didnt face atillas modern army of united hun using advance weapons. They instead faced primitve broken tribes without a really good leader.
The Chinese have indeed been at war with almost all of its neighbors. Going into war frequently does not always equate to tactical expertise. Look at the french. They still suck at war.

The "large number" argument is beaten to death i swear. Back in the days that's basically all that matters! They didn't have guided bombs or anything, or effective artillery for that matter. Population in Asia back in the days was already in the high millions, so of course this population number is going to be reflected on the numbers deployed on the battlefield.

Shaolin monks will own anyone on one-on-one basis, just like this thread's based on a one-on-one basis between a Samurai and a Roman soldier

Wrong, large numbers did not always equate to victory. China has been beaten and beaten over and over again by much smaller countries. The only country in asia that had population in the high millions happened to be china. Every other country was actually pretty small in population. In the time of christ for example the chinese made 1/4th of the entire worlds population. Population did no always equate to victory. Chinas largest single invasion attempt I believe was when the sui sent in over 1.1 million warriors in one war.
In one battle the chinese sent 305,000 troops against a force numbering something around 20,000 koreans. Only 2700 chinese troops returned alive. Less than 2700 korean troops were killed I believe. Battle of Salsu is the name if your curious. This is just an example of how much the chinese rely on "tactics" and "smarts" rather than large numbers. If the chinese were master tacticians and experts they would have no trouble defeating a much smaller country when they outnumbered them several times over.

Shaolin monks will not own everyone on a one on one basis. Have you ever seen a real monk fight? Movies dont count. In all honesty the only actions ive seen shaolin monks do were stunts and flips just to show off. Acrobats and stuntmen can do the same thing. But can they fight?
And according to history they did command some troops of normal warriors. But that doesnt count as combat proficency. Some sagging old 70 year old general can be a genius, yet have difficulty throwing a mere punch. The shaolin is over-exaggerated. They didnt do much against the manchu and most of them were killed when the manchus slaughtered and burnt down their temple. The original teachings of the temple are gone actually since the most practioners were killed.