I wish they had least given a small explanation on how she escaped it. In the VN he only uses two slashes the first time and then his sword is bent the second time. Are they just going to chalk it up to A rank luck again?
Nip swords were always inferior and only useful for murdering defenseless peasants, however the samurai had fearsome techniques that could only be mastered by nerds who would swing their dumb ass swords all day instead of doing something productive.
>>117361925 From what I've seen on the "Fate" route, it seemed that he did used 3 slashes. It was just that the 3rd slash was slower on the uptake because of the unproper footing (according to Assassin), along with Saber rolling on the ground.
>>117366832 All of that had nothing to do with the fact that the victory had nothing to do with nip sword swinging or spanish fencing and more to do with the fact that you had a bunch of disorganized pirates (most of whom weren't even Japanese) fighting an organized military in an entrenched position. The only case where you can argue swords came into play might have been the boarding, and even then the article clearly says that the ship was taken with pikemen at the front.
Also >1000 Japanese Guns nice made up number. Hell, almost everything about the actual battle has no citations except for a report by the Korean court (during the Imjin war, which had nothing whatsoever to do with spain)
tl;dr nevermind your grammar, your argument sucks too.
>>117368582 Not to mention that these are pirates, so the only firearms they had were most likely looted off battlefields or overenthusiastic Chinese coastguard (the few times they bothered to do anything about Wokou).
>>117362911 Swords are sword. They're designed for different purposes based on the battlefields of various regions.
Bushido used to be referred to as the 'Way of the Horse and Bow". Anyone who could afford to used a horse, Any infantry that wasn't a retard would come to battle with a bow, a spear, a backup sword, and a backup knife.
The katana developed primarily as a cavalry saber, it was easy to draw from horseback, curved weapons are preferred for horseback due to the nature of how 'draw slices' work where you want to pull the blade along as you cut (which is easily accomplished while riding at speed and cutting at infantry). It was fashioned with a longer handle so as to be more easy to wield on foot (where its curvature also helped with the 'draw slice') though it was still perfectly capable of being used with one hand. It was capable of stabbing quite well and it was overall an excellent weapon for the Japanese battlefields that didn't have much metal armor (like English plate armor).
Katana are quite nice as far as swords go, if you understand how they evolved into what they are and what they were used for. European and Arabic swords are also quite beautiful things too. Fuck the romanticism that happened to all of them though.
The Yumi was designed to be used from horseback too (which is why it's held at the bottom third rather than in the middle). The yari was great either from horse or on foot.
>>117363773 Folding the metal helped even out the carbon distribution which made 'good' steel. The thing is though, once you've jumped through all the hoops to get to the finished product of 'steel' steel is steel this is a gross generalization but for the most part accurate regardless of the iron that it comes from as long as you did it right.
Europe had much higher quality iron and a lot more of it, which made it fairly easy to get to steel with relatively simple techniques. Japan had pretty poor quality iron which meant they had to use slightly more advanced techniques to get to steel.
>>117369764 40 career soldiers with artillery and muskets in an entrenched position fighting off a bunch of chinese-Japanese rabble with scurvy, a few muskets and a language barrier isn't particularly impressive, no.
>>117369542 The Japanese techniques weren't even more advanced, just more labor intensive. They got the whole folding shit from Tang Dynasty China and were still using it as a method 900 years after it was first transmitted, when the Chinese had long since moved towards an early version of blast furnaces for making steel.
>>117370158 At least they weren't pointlessly nationalistic to the point of letting every sovereign nation walk right over them, eschewing science and modernism until the 1900s resulting in woefully underequipped and underteched armies, industry, and agriculture - simply because, they were too prideful to learn from others.
Meanwhile, the Japanese ran around learning and stealing from the modern world, acknowledging their superiority, and successfully modernized themselves from an almost medieval-esque state (Sengoku era) through the Meiji Restoration in the 1800s.
>>117370472 >>117370472 The only reason Japan did any of this was because the Chinese got themselves completely fucked over in the Opium War. Previously Korea, China and Japan were all just about the same in their complete close-mindedness, Korea perhaps to a slightly lesser extent. You're also completely ignoring the existential crisis that the Japanese faced in the Boshin War and during the Satsuma rebellion, and the lucky presence of skilled reformers in the early years of the restoration.
China was cursed with a rotting, conservative government during this time, and even then they made an honest (if incredibly corrupted) attempt to modernize. If the other side of the Boshin and Satsuma rebellions won the same thing would have well happened to Japan.
>>117370472 You're making a simplistic hindsight comparison that ignores all of the complexities behind why things turned out the way they did.
If you compare China of the 1600s to any Western European nation of the 1600s, China was incomparably wealthier and more advanced than all of them. If you compare China of the 1700s to any Western European nation of the 1700s, the same is still mostly true. It's only when you get to the 1800s that the Western European nations (England specifically) really start to pull ahead due to the Industrial Revolution being in full swing + the innovations and scientific discoveries of the preceding 200 years finally being realized. Basically, it's not the Chinese being xenophobic luddites so much as it is that they did not pay enough attention to what was happening on the other side of the world and were caught completely off-guard when the previously poor and backward nations of Europe became ascendant.
As for why the Japanese had more success in modernizing, it's due to a number of factors. The first is that the Japanese had already watched the Chinese get taken out by England by the time Perry had shown up, on top of watching Perry demonstrate how his ships could easily destroy Edo Castle if things came to blows, both of which instilled in them a sense of urgency. The second is that Japan as a country was smaller (making sweeping societal changes easier) and that, unlike China, its leadership class was mostly united in their belief about the necessity of modernization. The third is simply a matter of timing--had the Japanese tried to "catch up" even 10 years earlier or 10 years later, its likely that they would have been much less successful than they were.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.