File: Katana VS Longsword.swf-(9.84 MB, 320x240, Other)
[_] you know its true Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:12 No.

Marked for deletion (old).
>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:18 No.

  Katana is for light armor while Longswords is for Heavy armor.
  People wearing light armor are quicker, katana is light and swings fast.
  People wearing heavy armor are slower, long swords are heavy and swings slow.

>> [_] Anonyrnous 05/08/14(Thu)10:20 No.

  >>2377193
  Both are for light armour.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:26 No.

  >>2377196
  Did the try parrying the swords to each other?
  Which sword is dented the most?

  I'm still trying to find a good point in the longsword.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:34 No.

  >>2377199
  Wouldn't the longsword have crushing power?

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:37 No.

  >>2377199

  katana's blades edge is not meant for piercing. No doubt is the katana a better slashing weapon,
  but the european longsword can be used as a thursting and slashing weapon.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:38 No.

  longsword is heavy? They weigh from 2.3 to 2.6 kg
  so that's less than 6 lbs. They may look heavy, but a trained knight can wield it like its
  nothing.
  It has a wider handguard, so in a duel it will not be really easy to lose your fingers, like it
  is with a katana, where the handguard is just a skinny ring. Also when properly sharpened, a
  longsword can easily pierce full plate,and it has a lot longer reach than a katana.

  Basically in Europe, a samurai would be fucked...
  But a knight would be fucked in feudal japan.
  Katana is good against other katana wielders, same goes for longswords.One is for slicing quick
  and agile opponents and the other one for pounding (it has a pommel) piercing and disarming a
  heavily armored unit.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:39 No.

  >>2377204
  Oh, I watched somewhere about that. Actually longswords are farbetter than katana. Since katanas
  were very brittle. Smash the two swords together, the katana would be broken and dented.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:40 No.

  >>2377207
  Are we talking about that Skallagrim fellow?

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:45 No.

  >>2377207
  A katana isn't brittle, that folded steel made back then was superior to the european steel.

  that doesn't make it sharper though... a sword is a sharp as you make it to be.

  better steel only means it stays sharp for longer.
  Damascus steel was actually the best one ever made for weapons, and it originates in india; and
  was sometimes used by the brits for their weapons...
  So i guess that, for a period, europeans were superior in that also

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)10:50 No.

  >>2377210
  Materials used for katana were crap! That's why they had to fold the steel a lot of times. A
  great technique as it may be, it is still brittle and breaks easily.

>> [_] John Moses Browning 05/08/14(Thu)11:00 No.

  >not using great german weapons
  >Not using the Langes Messer/Bauernwehr
  Longsword a shit!
  http://youtu.be/jx1mrFnxXpY?t=1m55s

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:01 No.

  The Katana uses a thin blade and you're not meant to stab or cut deep with it, because the idea
  was to kill your opponent quickly and then move onto another, not spend time pulling the sword
  out, can we stop comparing the two please? I mean come on, Samurai and European armour varies and
  is much different

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:05 No.

  >"keh-tehn-eh"
  fuck this pisses me off more than it should

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:06 No.

  >>2377212
  >1 country a island
  >limited resources
  >using methods that they are hard to use even today
  >can beat weapons made by people that owns continents

  Also the katana is used for slice, not to slam it like a hammer like the did on the video

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:08 No.

  >>2377224
  The folding method used for katanas made the the outside very hard and the inside very resistant
  and very flexible

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:09 No.

  >>2377217
  Where did you learn that? from anime?
  Katana are just meant to kill and nothing else.
  Actually katana's in Feudal Japan were just used as side arms. Since... its brittle.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:10 No.

  >>2377223
  Seconded.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:11 No.

  Actually I took classes in a martial art focusing on sword and sojutsu, don't think everyone gets
  their facts from anime...

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:14 No.

  >>2377224
  >can beat weapons made by people that owns continents

  But it can't, that's the point.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:14 No.

  Too much penetration in this video.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:15 No.

  >>2377224
  Both are swords so both have the same uses.
  Slash, slice, stab. Nothing else.
  "Meant to slice" "meant to stab"
  Thats just excuses.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:20 No.

  >>2377231
  Sure, its faster than a longsword, but that's, as it was pointed out, because it was meant for
  faster opponents. If someone came with a katana, and attempted to "slice" a shield, or a fully
  plated knight... It would most probably not kill him, and even if it did, you wouldn't slice your
  way trough, it would still be "stuck in" halfway and you would need to pull it out.
  slicing an unprotected neck of a bamboo wearing soldier is a lot different from chainmail or
  plate, shileds.
  Longsword is superior...well most european swords are.
  But if I had to choose a weapon, i'd go a chinase crossbow (cho-ko-nu), because fuck close-range.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:24 No.

  >>2377239
  Excuses no, the shape is meant to it, its like if you try to compare the Falcata with the
  Scimmitar

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:27 No.

  >>2377249
  Both shapes are long. While katana has only one edge to make it sturdier, having two edges needs
  a stronger material. Longsword has two edges.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:29 No.

  >>2377210
  the technique for katana folding was the same shit used by ancient sandniggers hundreds of years
  prior. katanas were rarely used in battle anyway. the spear was important.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVCaJdYZmCU

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:29 No.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6LcGEzUmdM&index=22&list=PLE6058E5F6967E5B8

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)11:49 No.

  >>2377227

  They were also treated with clay to make them more flexible on the anterior side of the blade.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:04 No.

  >>2377253

  The spear was easier to make, too.

  Katanas were more ornamental. Tachi and Wakizashi saw more combat.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:19 No.

  you wouldn't really go to a fight and aim for the guys armour anyway, you aim for their necks

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:20 No.

  "that was a lot more penetration"

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:22 No.

  I typed a huge fuckin essay on how wrong you guys are to think katanas are better than
  longswords, but 4chan made me lose it because hurr comment field too long, so instead, have some
  really short points that brutalize and undetail my argument

  -The longsword can be practically used in nearly any close quarters situation, the katana can not
  -The materials used to create the longsword were vastly superior; even without Japan's bad iron,
  longswords were made of steel

  muh toledo

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:25 No.

  >>2377253
  The lance had a similar role in the Europe. There is a certain mystique with the sword but it is
  far overblown as the main weapon of any type of warfare. Spear and spear type weapons were the
  mainstay weapon of any army for most of human history with only a few deviations. Also, as a side
  note, for most of their history the Samurai mostly focused on the horse bow as their weapon of
  choice.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:25 No.

  >>2377287
  Huge essay and then that's all you summarize with? Pretty bad bro

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:28 No.

  >>2377291
  I know. I'm really upset I lost my post. I'll paste the latter half of it, where I talk about how
  longswords are good, but the half where I talk about why katanas are bad is FOREVER LOST.

  The longsword, on the other hand, was intentionally designed for utilitarian purposes,
  specializing in nothing, and being an all-rounder. The quality of raw materials in Europe were on
  average better, and Europeans have a history of increasingly better steel use for over 1000 years
  (assuming we're talking about ~1400AD here). In particular, swords coming from Toledo, Spain were
  legendary for their quality, to the point of even Japanese coming to get their swords made them.
  According to legend, the smiths of Toledo were highly religious and said a number of prayers that
  dictated the length of each part of the creation of the sword - which happened to be just right.
  If you don't believe in legend, they've been making steel since 500BC.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:32 No.

  this is one of the worst demonstrations ive ever seen, about the same as a weeb bashing cans in
  his back garden

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:34 No.

  >>2377294
  next time just go back (that arrow pointing to the left usually in top left corner) and your text
  will not be lost again

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:37 No.

  >>2377228
  this guy knows whats up. it was all about bow and arrows back then. no one used swords unless it
  was a last resort.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:43 No.

  shit arguments about swords
  im just 'look, its goddamn gunny!'

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:45 No.

  >>2377190
  guaranteedreplies.swf

  Although it is nice seeing this kind of discussion on /f/. Or any discussion at all.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:47 No.

  >>2377305

  Let's just segue into a discussion about dicks.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:51 No.

  >>2377207
  If you tried an actual parry, you were an idiot.

  Shields were for defense. The whole "Hit the sword" choreography you see in movies are not a real
  representation of how you would fight with a sword. You blocked with a shield, or you dodged. You
  never made a clean "parry" - At best, you "lead" the blow away from you.

  No bladed weapon, longsword or katana, were made to block another weapon. They were made to
  inflict damage. Nothing more.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:51 No.

  the real question is... who the fuck actually cares? oh thats right... weaboo faggots trying
  desperately to cling to a reason why they think japan is better than their own culture

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:53 No.

  >>2377300
  Spears were actually considered the weapon of choice in most armies.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:57 No.

  >>2377318
  i was referring about japan but you are right, it was all about the spear.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:58 No.

  >>2377318
  but why? I mean for me its just a long stick with a spike on its end with which I wouldn't
  maneuver as good as with smaller weapons.
  What is its advantage?

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)12:58 No.

  >>2377315
  Well you could use your weapon the break the enemies weapon.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:00 No.

  >>2377320
  Army is the key word.
  A battalion with spikes pointed at you, is deadly.
  Could probably stop charging cavalry before it could do much damage.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:03 No.

  >>2377323
  yeah but what in 1v1? is it still a way to go?

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:04 No.

  >>2377325
  thats what swords were carried for

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:04 No.

  >Hurr durr folded steel superior
  The steel-folding technique persisted for a long period of time and underwent very few
  improvements. There were no drastic changes in how they manufactured katanas, so they remained at
  a comparatively mediocre level. Meanwhile, Europe invented the process of braiding metals
  together to create weapons that are objectively better than if you used the same metals to make a
  folded-steel weapon. So not only did europe have higher quality ores to work with, but they
  actually had innovation on their side. Folded steel katanas just can't hold up to that.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:07 No.

  It's a pity that basically all of this is effectively irrelevant. People focus so much on swords
  and armor because they're flashy and romantic to the memory, but the real focus in war at those
  times were on archers.

  England in particular had a huge focus on longbows, which could penetrate plate armor. They even
  let commoners train with longbows to bolster their forces, and English longbowmen were prized
  mercenaries. You don't fuck with those bows.

  In feudal Japan, being good with a sword was downright embarrassing because your sword was what
  you used if you sucked too much with a bow to kill your opponents before they could reach you.
  Katanas only became "good" when samurai became outdated and they all moved into official
  positions and were only allowed to keep their swords as symbols of power, so they made shit up
  that made the sword seem important.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:09 No.

  fifty fucking replies
  holy shit

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:12 No.

  >>2377330
  Nothing provokes autism like katana arguments

>> [_] John Moses Browning 05/08/14(Thu)13:14 No.

  >>2377332
  That's true

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:22 No.

  >>2377321
  Or break your own if you fucked it up, dummy.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:23 No.

  >>2377320
  Believe it or not, but a spearman outclasses a swordsman every day of the week. Spears are fast,
  long and deadly, they naturally block sword swings and keep you out of range of most longswords.
  Spears can also slash and pierce easily, can be thrown (although thats fucking retarded) and are
  cheap and easy to manufacture. Spears are effective most combat and lend extremely well to
  formations and army maneuvers, they're also effective with a shield

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:26 No.

  >>2377320
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBbFe9drObk

  old mate spear

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:28 No.

  This is now a darksouls thread
  >ultra greatswords
  >ultra katanas
  >great crystal soulspear kills all builds in one hit

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:28 No.

  >>2377340
  Still a good choice is a dangerous 1vs1 combat.
  If you have a heavier sword, you could destroy your opponents sword while only chipping your own.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:31 No.

  >>2377349
  heavy swords are fantasy only really, even maces only weighed around one or two kilos. Heavy
  weapons meant sluggish movements and slow reactions, it also meant exhaustion for the wielder.

  Small hammers killed more knights than any other weapon according to some historians

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:34 No.

  First of all wasn't the longsword simply not sharp when they used it in this video?
  Like you could see a reflection on the edge or something.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:34 No.

  another good little demonstration of what combat might actually have been like
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3J-10KfRe8

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:36 No.

  >>2377352
  Well hammers can deform the knights armor and kill them like that. It can maybe also dent a sword
  but that would be hard to do.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:40 No.

  >>2377358
  Damaging equipment was never the aim of any weapon. Arrows were found to be poor for piercing
  armour, archers would instead shoot down the horses and crush the knights helmet in or stab in
  through the neck or eyes with a spear or dagger.

  I can't recall any point where a sword was designed to break the opponents weapon.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:41 No.

  these youtube videos are shit, the people are doing it so awkwardly. Let's get videos of real
  battles to the death up in here

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:43 No.

  >>2377349
  Lol

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:44 No.

  >>2377329
  The primary weapon of a samurai?

  The bow. The katana was primarily wielded OUTSIDE of combat. Being good with a sword wasn't
  embarrassing, though. It was a sort of self-defense/crime prevention tool, that served to make a
  statement about who you were - If you wielded a katana, people knew not to try robbing you.

  It would kinda be like having someone from the army walk around with a visible gun on them, while
  wearing uniform, and being allowed to use force if they wanted. Sure, you could try to pickpocket
  them, but then you'd get shot in the face by someone who is likely:
  1. In better shape than you
  2. Trained in actual, and deadly, combat
  3. Armed and ready to kill you if you try anything stupid.

  So yeah.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:44 No.

  >>2377364
  this is real life, choreographed shit in movies and TV series are the most unrealistic
  representations. It's not as entertaining, but its real.

  There is no real footage, we dont conduct warfare like this anymore, and there certainly isnt
  anything recorded from before besides artists renditions of particular battles

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:45 No.

  >>2377364
  Maybe if someone can create a realistic battle simulator. Then that would be great.
  Another way is to just give two people who hate each others guts a sword and film them.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:47 No.

  >>2377363
  Actually the aim for maces and such was to bash armor.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:47 No.

  >>2377348
  haha, bullshit.
  I max out my cast time and cast great resonant soul on those faggot wizards before they can land
  a hit. Or I just dodge it, run up to you and slice your face off with my dark katana

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:49 No.

  >>2377372
  I had an addict pull a knife on me once while I was walking home from work, its quite terrifying,
  you're every aware of the danger of getting sliced or stabbed. I imagine two men with swords
  would spend most of the time circling about each other and taking wild stabs at each other while
  staying well out of the way

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:50 No.

  >>2377363
  At best, some maces were intended to fuck up the enemy weapons. These were more like clubs than
  actual maces though. One of them, which is basically a long + shaped metal stick with a handle,
  was pretty effective at crushing enemy weapons, if you actually managed to hit them. They were
  far more solid than a sword, and even if they dented, it didn't matter, because they didn't have
  an edge to begin with.

  Of course, the primary focus was to pummel the shit out of the enemy, not their weapons. The fact
  that they were good at destroying enemy weapons was just an added benefit.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:51 No.

  Katana and fedora, folded a thousand times, forged into autism.

>> [_] AdamB15 05/08/14(Thu)13:53 No.

  >>2377352
  >Venetian heavy infantry in Medieval: Total War are elite units
  >Indians fought off vikings using wooden mallets

  Agreed!

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:56 No.

  >>2377380
  Which they did.

  Most 1 on 1 fights or duels had maybe 2 or 3 actual "clashes", IE. actual attempts at causing
  injury. The rest was circling around each other, taking a few careful thrusts towards you enemy,
  and trying to find a way to attack. If you blindly started flailing your sword at the enemy, you
  would get yourself killed, and fast.

  In fact, some of the better swordmasters used patience as their primary strength - They waited,
  let the enemy take a few stabs at the air, as they dodge back, making sure to apply just the bare
  minimum of pressure back against their enemy. The less dangerous they seemed, the more likely the
  enemy was to go all out, and try to get a kill - The perfect time for a quick counterattack.

  See, unlike bullets, were some people are capable of fighting on, despite having taken several
  gunshots, if you got hit by a sword in the main body mass, you were out of the fight pretty much
  instantly. Stopping power >>>>>>> penetrating power

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)13:56 No.

  >>2377377
  nigger you're shit at the game, you'd just get rekt by anyone with a good shield and rapier/spear
  (whatever floats their boat but i personally prefer the spears for turtle tactics)

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:02 No.

  >>2377390
  funny because just the other day I was raping retards that were trying to turtle. It's not hard
  to guard break

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:04 No.

  >>2377391
  just because you kill people shittier at the game than you doesn't mean that you're not also
  shitty at the game

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:04 No.

  >all these responses

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:15 No.

  >>2377329
  someone's been reading cracked
  that's true though

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:18 No.

  >>2377382
  >>2377363
  realistically, the less damage you can do to their weapons, the better; people picked that shit
  up and repurposed it after the battle

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:23 No.

  >>2377392
  Honestly, DS2 combat has gotten fairly intricate, to the point where you need to only really make
  a mistake or two for your enemy to completely rape your face.

  Or just use resonant spells all the time and lose more souls by casting than you win by killing
  opponents, like a moron.

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:24 No.

  >>2377393
  butthurt weaboos clash with butthurt castlefags and you get this

>> [_] sage 05/08/14(Thu)14:32 No.

  >>2377393
  >bolt action rifle beats both

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:41 No.

  >>2377407
  >sage in all fields

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)14:50 No.

  >80+ posts
  nice job OP

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)15:10 No.

  >>2377407
  And so begins the gun arguments

>> [_] Anonymous 05/08/14(Thu)15:25 No.

  >>2377407
  Donkey is still the ultimate weapon.