samurai vs spartan

Originally posted by King Kandy
lol, pattern welding can mean a lot of different actual techniques incorporated... based on that logic I could say any dinky damascus-like knife I get at a show is equal to a great katana... or even that they're both "swords" and therefore obviously are equally advanced.

Did I say the Celt sword was as advanced? No.... But some of the Anglo-Saxo/Norse swords... now those were insane. The foraging of Viking Swords involved twisting metals, welding a high-carbon edge, and other insane shit, beautiful craftsmen ship right there.

Originally posted by Robtard
No. It's not just the use of different metals, it's the types of metals, the proper mixtures of said metals, times it's folded, how it's cooled and reheated etc that make them superior.

Originally posted by Robtard Katana > your ass and a Celt sword [/B]

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I was thinking about sharpness. I've only ever heard that Japanese swords are the general superior blades in terms of cutting ability. Dexterity/stabbing/slashing omitted.

I want Blade's sword.

Originally posted by craftsman

Tactically, on one on one fight, where no follow up combat will take place (i.e. simple duel) the samurai will win.

Originally posted by ares834

But they aren’t really superior to all swords. Really each sword has different uses. For examples, Claymores were useful for bashing armor, while Rapier’s were perfect for dueling.

I know, was being a Katana fanboy. They're essentially gigantic surgical knives; in terms of edge/cutting quality, they likely are superior to all others. But as you said, your opponent's dress and style factor in.

As seen, Rob has no problem nearly splitting the fancy-lad in twain.

YouTube video
Just posted this cos.

Originally posted by ares834
Did I say the Celt sword was as advanced? No.... But some of the Anglo-Saxo/Norse swords... now those were insane. The foraging of Viking Swords involved twisting metals, welding a high-carbon edge, and other insane shit, beautiful craftsmen ship right there.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I was thinking about sharpness. I've only ever heard that Japanese swords are the general superior blades in terms of cutting ability. Dexterity/stabbing/slashing omitted.

And against metal armor the Macuahuatil were totally useless.

Originally posted by King Kandy
No, you didn't say that, but it was obviously your implication by saying there was nothing awesome about a Katana compared to a celt sword was meant to equate the two. All of those things you mentioned go into Katanas as well... and what exactly would make you think they are as advanced, when a Katana is that and more?

Originally posted by ares834
I never implied anything. I simply stated that pattern wielding isn't some amazing thing exclusive to Katanas... And I have never heard of twisting metals when foraging Katanas, only folding metals.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
In terms of sharpness I think Macuahuatil (Aztec sword clubs) might edge out the katana, though it would definitely vary since not all chunks of Obsidian have that "sharper than a surgeon's scalpel" quality.

And against metal armor the Macuahuatil were totally useless.

In fact they were pretty bad against armor in general. That's what happens when you make your blades out of the most fragile substance you can find.

Samurais lose this battle every time. They are ill equipped to fight against armies that brandish shields and spears.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Its not the fact that they are "pattern welded" that makes Katanas amazing... nobody ever said in this thread that it was pattern welding alone that caused all features of the blade, so if that was your only point it was nothing but a strawman.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
In fact they were pretty bad against armor in general. That's what happens when you make your blades out of the most fragile substance you can find.

Can't sacrifice corpses. 😛

Originally posted by King Kandy
Its not the fact that they are "pattern welded" that makes Katanas amazing... nobody ever said in this thread that it was pattern welding alone that caused all features of the blade, so if that was your only point it was nothing but a strawman.

Except I wasn't really responding to anyone in this thread. Afterall that comment was directed at no one in genreal, but rather to all...

Originally posted by Mindset
Why?

1. steel plate armor. The individual spartan will have a hard time penetrating that armor, unless he(spartan) is skilled enough to stab the samurai between the joints of the armor or topple the samurai out of balance.

2. experience. Mastery of the katana requires years to learn. An average spartan (in his prime physically and mentally) will be fighting a samurai who has mastered the use of his katana, typically an older man.

Those two things don't show how a Samurai wins.

I voted tie, because you never know who would win, unless you knew all of the specs bout the two warriors fighting

Both were world class warriors, but the Spartans were described as the world's best soldiers. Their training began at the age of six and ended at the age of eighteen. Casualties were acceptable during their training and aggression was highly emphasized. Sometimes young boys killed their opponent during training. At a certain age, the drill instructor would use a bull whip and flog them and their families would be there screaming "don't you pass out!' and a Spartan had to keep quiet during this horrific 'exercise.' It was considered quite an honor for a family for a child to become a Spartan soldier. The only Spartans that had tombstones were one that was KIA and woman who died in childbirth.

The 300 at Thermopalye (not using the movie) knew they were going to their deaths. The actual casualties the Persians suffered were around 250,000 and Xeres simply didn't want to fight the bulk of the Spartan army which numbered around 10,000. If those 300 killed that many of his soldiers which mostly were constripts (except the Immortals), he knew his army would be destroyed and Persia left wide open to rebellion and counterattack. The main event at the battle actually was Immortal vs Spartan and both sides suffered many KIA, but the Immortals were repulsed.

Now, we have many Katana fanboys. The Katana is a very good weapon I will admit, but against a shield it is not a match. Samurai didn't believe in shields which is a major flaw in combat. Spartans used the shield for defense and offense. Imagine getting smashed in the head with a heavy 40 pound bronze shield. That'll almost knock you out leaving you exposed to counterattack. Samurai, if they lost the battle would kill themselves. A Spartan doesn't surrender or retreat. He will fight to the death.

I took all of this information from the National Geographic documentaries 'Last Stand of the 300' and 'Samurai.' None of the evidence was taken from Hollywood movies. Hope this will information will help you come to a decision.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
the Spartans were described as the world's best soldiers.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
The actual casualties the Persians suffered were around 250,000

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
A Spartan doesn't surrender or retreat. He will fight to the death.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
I took all of this information from the National Geographic documentaries 'Last Stand of the 300' and 'Samurai.' None of the evidence was taken from Hollywood movies. Hope this will information will help you come to a decision.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
You seem to be big on individual psychology of combatants, so tell me how a warrior who's been trained from birth to rely on the men standing next to him will feel when he's one-on-one against a warrior who's been trained from birth to specialize in that type of combat.

Any questions?

I'm not into turkish baths, films about gladiators or this thread.