Japanese Traditional Sword Making - General

Yeah fair point i totally forgot you need a secondary arm anyway.

[QUOTE=doomkiwi;33335167]The Katana isn't a weapon that can be compared to other swords of the same time period from other countries because it quite simply did not fulfill the same role. I mean, you can, but that's like comparing a spoon to a knife and saying the knife is better because it's harder to cut things with a spoon (THAT'S NOT WHAT A SPOON IS USED FOR GENIUS). It wasn't a destructive instrument of war, it was a dueling or one on one combat weapon, made to take advantage of the ability to slice while being taken out of its scabbard in one swift motion. It's the quick draw revolver of the sword world. It's supposed to end a fight before anything prolonged happens.[/QUOTE] Oh man, that's honestly an excellent analogy. I'm envious that I didn't think of it first. :v:

[QUOTE=postmanX3;33356381]Oh man, that's honestly an excellent analogy. I'm envious that I didn't think of it first. :v:[/QUOTE] I agree, and in fact, there's a very big similarity between the revolver and the katana. If a samurai put his hand on the handle, that's the same as a gunman putting his hand on his gun, ready to draw. If the samurai just pushes the sword slightly out of his scabbard, that's like cocking the revolver. When he draws the swords, the gunman shoots. And then because of the katanas excellency the samurai wins because katanas can CUT BULLETS!!1! :v:

[QUOTE=Jake Nukem;33355622]Even some reports of people being able to swim in full plate, too.[/QUOTE] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm11yAXeegg[/media] [editline]20th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=sami-elite;33355638]Ah yeah sure, i was thinking mail and some sort of helmet and maybe gloves or mail mittens. Mainly because a neck guard (forgot the name of the thing) wasn't very commonly used from what i've read. But then again, it's probably pretty standard for men at arms with a low budget as they could just do with a cheaper alternative to plate/ mail. [B]I really don't know about their weapons, but surely they can't carry a small sword, shield and pole weapon..Would make more sense to have just the shield and sword or the pole weapon..[/B] Samurai used pole and katana, but i bet that's because Samurai were legally required to carry a katana.[/QUOTE] You tend to get rid of the pole-arm after a charge, usually by just discarding it on the battlefield (to be retrieved later.) It's entirely possible (and rational) for a Man-at-arms to wield both a pole-arm, shield and sword at the same time. [editline]20th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=G-Strogg;33349421] Full plate armor was never used by footsoldiers. They could never manage to walk more than a couple of kilometers without becoming exhausted. It was used for sitting on horses with a polearm. Knights in the field had chainmail and a clunky helmet. Still an advantage for a knight vs a samurai, but a samurai highly trained in taijutsu and bushido arts would probably win.[/QUOTE] You're thinking of Tournament armor, and even then the need to use levers and pulleys to get on your horse was not a matter of weight, it was a matter of flexibility. You're kind of ignoring how fit the average Knight was, and how Knights had effective martial arts and fighting stances of their own.

But surely a katana can go through leather Japanese armour right?

[QUOTE=Ignhelper;33357221]But surely a katana can go through leather Japanese armour right?[/QUOTE] Leather, yes, but if there are iron studs in the armour, and there often were, you'd not get through that bit of it. Also, about the katana as a quick draw weapon analogy, it was fast to pull out, but so is a European broadsword.

[QUOTE=Terminutter;33357439]Leather, yes, but if there are iron studs in the armour, and there often were, you'd not get through that bit of it. Also, about the katana as a quick draw weapon analogy, it was fast to pull out, but so is a European broadsword.[/QUOTE] Are there any tests or something like that? Also, I think this discussion fits better in the Mass Debate section.

[QUOTE=Swebonny;33358151]Are there any tests or something like that? Also, I think this discussion fits better in the Mass Debate section.[/QUOTE] I'll admit that I'm only using knowledge from Wikipedia and lindiebeiges youtube channel (he's a pretty interesting guy) and the like, so I can't provide tests. As for my iron studs comment, I can't provide tests, but I can assume that if any sword hits something made of the same type and quality of metal, there will be no penetration. I can say for sure that 16 gauge, 8mm diameter aluminium butted chainmail is fairly tough (I have a pathetic little segment that I'm making) and steel is 3x heavier, and much stronger. Also, I can vouch that the diet of the western knight or even a common soldier had a much, much higher protein count due to the amount of meat eaten, as the Japenese didn't really rear animals for meat as much, due to space constrictions which means that the European warriors would have a superior physique in terms of sheer muscle and energy. Oh yeah, I've used my cousin's katana a few times just testing the balance and the like and they're fairly unwieldy despite how they look. Samurai are really cool don't get me wrong, just massively overrated.

[url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/839748[/url] P. much all you need to know. And we might aswell take our discussion over there before Swebonny tries to come at us with a Skeggox.

[QUOTE=Terminutter;33358962]I'll admit that I'm only using knowledge from Wikipedia and lindiebeiges youtube channel (he's a pretty interesting guy) and the like, so I can't provide tests. As for my iron studs comment, I can't provide tests, but I can assume that if any sword hits something made of the same type and quality of metal, there will be no penetration. I can say for sure that 16 gauge, 8mm diameter aluminium butted chainmail is fairly tough (I have a pathetic little segment that I'm making) and steel is 3x heavier, and much stronger. Oh yeah, I've used my cousin's katana a few times just testing the balance and the like and they're fairly unwieldy despite how they look. Samurai are really cool don't get me wrong, just massively overrated.[/QUOTE] I regularly train with a Katana, and I don't see how they're "unwieldy" Not saying that they wield better than broadswords, but just by standing in a correct stance you get a good sense of balance and grip. Also if you're good at it, you CAN draw and slice in the same move, and it's hella effective against an unaware opponent (if that opponent isn't wearing full armor)

[QUOTE=G-Strogg;33359442]I regularly train with a Katana, and I don't see how they're "unwieldy" Not saying that they wield better than broadswords, but just by standing in a correct stance you get a good sense of balance and grip. Also if you're good at it, you CAN draw and slice in the same move, and it's hella effective against an unaware opponent (if that opponent isn't wearing full armor)[/QUOTE] They are definitely designed for slicing as you draw, that is true, but I don't like the single, thick edge (well, it's the entire blade that's thick) that the katana has, and I don't like the short blade relative to the long hilt. Also, the lack of a crossguard is a disadvantage in a fight against another sword. They are stellar weapons at mowing down unarmoured pesants in a single blow, but they are not anti-armour weapons. I'll put this here, too. [url]http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm[/url]

Wow, this thread has completely altered my perception about katanas, I thought they were the best, what would be considered a good European sword?

[QUOTE=smidge146;33363817]Wow, this thread has completely altered my perception about katanas, I thought they were the best, what would be considered a good European sword?[/QUOTE] Depends on the application. For light one-on-one infantry a rapier or some relative of it is best, don't forget your chainmail glove. For wartime conflicts between light infantry a pole weapon (spear, halberd, guisarme) would be better. If you are going against full plate get yourself a mace or a flail. As opposed to the katana's form, which just stuck after a certain period, the rest of the world was constantly changing and expermenting with new shapes of swords, new metals, weighting and forging techniques, you will find that most swords coming from a region that is not japan are superior to katanas due to the process of elimination, improvement and evolution that produced them. For example, swords in the middle east and neighbouring countries were made to be light slashing instruments due to the lack of any real full plate armors, they were made to be thin and sharp as all fuck to slice through the leather armor and not get stuck on any scales or studs.

[QUOTE=Wolverunder;33326472]Europeans swords had the leg up in material and strength, but regardless, put the Bushido behind the sword and it becomes a force to be reckoned with. OH GOD WHY SO MANY FUNNIES?[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/YNwba.png[/IMG] god i love this picture hey guys arguing over knights and samurai, we already had that thread. [url]http://www.facepunch.com/threads/839748[/url] so stop arguing and [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/glvID.png[/IMG]