Okay /b/ since For Honor has come out it's sparked a lot

Obviously the Knight would be the best at pinochle.

The best fighter and/or the luckiest fighter.

>>723113155
Knight. Every time. Heavier armor, stronger arms and a fairly refined fighting style.

>>723113294
Assuming all fighters are equally proficient in their field and the terrain is completely flat

Vikings people.. its proven

>>723113155
We've been over this MANY times.

Knight, all day any day.

>>723113443
pic or it didn't happen

File: 1486784794947.jpg (150KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1280x960px

Sams are shit. Pussy ass niggers hittin shit with a fucking plant.

Vikings are literally the niggers of those times. Couldn't do shit by themselves so had to push Jews in the mud.

Knights 10/10

If all weapons/armor have equal power/defense I would bet on Viking. Otherwise Knight ftw.

Obviously the fucking samurai would win. They're faster, stronger, and just better over all

>>723113510
I read it in a pamplet awhile back sorry no pic, but it's true

>>723113294
/thread. But I foresee much circle jerking for each person's respective favorite

>>723113668
Alright easy weaboo, don't get yourself all worked up

Spartan would kick the suit out of all 3 of them at the same time

>>723113417
>Assuming all fighters are equally proficient in their field and the terrain is completely flat then the Knight would win.

ftfy

Knight, it has the best armor, they have access to weapons designed to fight armored opponents and they had the english longbow, with would shred weebs and snow barbarians.

>>723113905
If you're comparing armies maybe, not necessarily one on one

>>723113155
I remember seeing a YouTuber, Skalla Skallagrim talk about who would win. From what I got it would be hard to tell and based on not only equipment but also skill. Of course the game is inaccurate in some areas, i.e. a samurai sword would bounce of knight armor you would need something that would Pierce.

>>723114041
Who said English Knights? There's far too many unspecified variables

File: halos-master-chief.jpg (102KB, 810x600px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 810x600px

>>723113905
All the Spartans died

I don't think he could win a 3v1 even with tech advantage

>>723113155
It depends.

A samurai could beat a viking because at the time vikings were at the height of their travels they did not tend to have much in the way of armor and used shorter weapons. However, vikings also used shields and spears which would cover the reach advantage and protect them against the samurai. So it would depend on the weapons.

Samurai blade are meant to slice rather than pierce, knights were heavily armored to the point where the only way to breach them was to pierce through their armor. However, a samurai with a spear could possibly land a blow to get through the armor. Again, it would depend on the weapons.

Knights versus vikings would be similar, as well. Most of the knights crushing weapons (mace, flail, hammer, etc) wouldn't be as useful as they're slow but can deal with heavy armor, which would leave them open to a faster attack from a viking. However, if they used a smaller sword that didn't take away speed or telegraph as well (a skilled enough person can see where a flail/mace/hammer is going to hit) they would suddenly just be a heavily armored guy who could land a blow much more easily.

All that being said, I'd give knights an advantage. The pinnacle of pre-firearm warfare in Europe were the knights. They were part of the advancements that began with the viking raiders (and earlier, of course). As for them fighting samurai, samurai had a very different fighting style that resulted from less heavily armored soldiers so they may not really be ready to fight a knight.

>>723114041
The Vikings were well equipped contrary to the media perception. The best sword in the world comes from there

>>723113858
C'mon. It's just fucking science. Samurai arms and armor are superior in almost every way to knights and, god forbid, vikings.

>>723113155
Whoever had the better combination timing, speed, reaction speed, reflexes, and fighting knowledge.

>>723114321
Ok, lay the science of it on me then

Heh.... Dumb children.....

A trained samurai can slice a tank in half with one swipe...it wouldn't even make him break a sweat to kill a knight and a viking....

>>723113155
Knights. Heaviest armor, strongest swords, refined strategy and battle-proven fighting styles from centuries of feudal warfare

File: knight_firearm.jpg (154KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1024x768px

But what if knight had gun?

>>723114454
Samurai armor is about 10 lbs less than knight armor while being equally durable, sometimes even more so, and every weapon besides the meme katana could pierce knight armor.

>>723114321
gr8 b8 m8!

>>723114272
I remember hearing about the Vikings using the shield tactics the Romans used in France I think it was. Vikings certainly could beat knights and vice versa. They both because of region had similar equipment.

>>723114642
Obvious troll is obvious

>>723114636
>barrel 3x wider than the bullets it fires
???

File: LouiseCantDeal.gif (440KB, 400x224px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 400x224px

>>723114321
>Samurai arms and armor are superior in almost every way to knights

File: idiots.jpg (481KB, 1228x819px) Image search: [Google]

481KB, 1228x819px

>>723114739
They not the smartest

>>723114713
I'm not trolling. The fight, as everyone knows, is hypothetical and completely opinion based but it's my opinion that a samurai would win with my minimal, provided evidence.

File: WhatsThatHeathen.jpg (76KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 480x640px

>>723114636
DEUS VULT!!

Okay. My favourite is samurai and I think samurai were some of histories most disciplined warriors, but I don't think they'd win.
This is simply due to the resources available to each group and the development of each style.

Obviously, samurai would win

>>723113155
pretty poor ratings on steam, did ubisoft shit out another one? is single player worth a torrent?

Knights had crossbows, weapons designed to fight armored enemies and fucking armored horses, samuri had mostly wooden or fucking paper armor, and vikings for the most part wore cloth with an iron helmet. Also Samuri didn't use shields. And at one point knights had access to primitive guns, like Vlad the Impaler.

>>723113400
And samurai's don't have a 'refined' fighting style? are you stupid?

>>723113155
Whoever kicks me off the ledge first

>>723114848
Face it buddy, Nobushi and Orochi are the only classes worth a damn in the Samurai faction. Shugoki might as well be a walking target dummy, and Kensei are made of wet cardboard in durability.

>>723114656
Yep, at the time almost everyone fought in a shield wall. The vikings were no different but, iirc, they were able to use theirs more effectively. I think it was something like they had more people from the back ranks putting their shields up as well to help cover the front than other kingdoms.

File: ZoidbergTellsIt.jpg (1KB, 126x122px) Image search: [Google]

1KB, 126x122px

>>723114848
Your opinion is bad and you should feel bad.

>>723114821
That is actually a lethal move. Knights swords weren't razor sharp and the hand armour was so that you could grab a blade. If an opponent had a good enough helmet your blade wouldn't damage them.

If you grabbed your blade and did an axe swing though that made contact using your hilt/cross guard it would have a smaller impact size and cause more damage.

Tl:Dr knight using sword wrong is actually breaking his opponents skull.

>>723115113
nigga their shitty flimsy sword doesn't do shit against metal, and good luck having literal paper armor against a mace or real sword

>>723113668
Weaboo

If this is on foot only, samurai has the advantage completely. Contrary to popular belief, samurai were not all katanas. Especially during the 14th century, polarms were a huge deal, and were taken to battle as the primary weapon with a katana as sidearm. This was also around the time where they developed steel of their own (tamahagane), and it was used for swords and spears alike. Also, they further developed sōjutsu, the art of using a yari (spear, usually around 7–9 feet long with a sword like blade) or other polearm. This spear would out range most European weapons used by knights. So, on foot samurai were typically equipped with lighter armor that still protected all parts of the body and allowed for good mobility, a yari, a katana or other sword, and maybe a tanto. So, I believe samurai would win because of their perfected technique with the two handed spear, and if that was grabbed, they can simply resort to a sword. If the sword is lost as well, they’ve got the knife, and if the knife is lost, they have their unarmed combat, which they developed at this time. A knight would have trouble getting past all of these weapons and skills the samurai has to offer, so the samurai would best the knight on foot.

Racist faggots can't accept the truth.

>>723115260
It's nice attention to detail that one of the finishing moves in the game also does this

Knights. People say that they are slow and that the Samurai are faster but there are videos of people doing flips and rolls in full plate armor. Also they used tempered steel which is much better than folded steel.

Probably whichever one of them is more skilled with a bow

This debate is ridiculousness I'm sorry. Have any of you read the art of war? Samurai win.

Samurai would win cause their glorious nippon steel is folded ten billion times

File: darksouls.gif (1MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 480x270px

>>723115530
Knights from that era didn't get iframes

>>723114578
Chill out weeb, stop trying to make an interesting topic make you feel good.

>>723115605
Fuckin stealth archer fags

File: 592B9872-48A0-4ACF-ACE8-EAE1E7BF64F7.jpg (206KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 1024x768px

>>723113155
superior technology means winning

>>723113155

Nobody!!!1! Fighting is bad!!! REEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!111!!

#WorldPeace

>>723114321
>samurai use folded steel while knights used tempered steel

>>723115683
Obviously you haven't. It was written by a Chinese Philosopher called Szun Tzu and said more along the lines of "if you get to the battle first the advantage is yours" over "japanese katana so weeabu it melts steal beam"

>be viking
>have no cavalry
>be dead

File: desuvult.jpg (35KB, 480x479px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 480x479px

Samurai can't outsmart bullet

>>723115683
You obviously haven't, if you think it has any bearing on this discussion.

Doubt a samurai could get through a heavily armored knight one on one. They wouldn't know what to think If a full plate armored knight stepped onto the battlefield against them. God forbid he have a shield.

>>723115957
>oh shit they set up pikes
>cavalry made moot
>cavalry now on foot
>weapons for horse riding
>wrong equipment for ground combat
Pleb

File: e950b88b814e5084ee12e5452df29074.jpg (37KB, 736x521px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 736x521px

>>723115439
When someone starts claiming that a spear and shield was revolutionary for japan and that only they could have learned such mastery. A roman militia could manage a pike. Its the oldest method of getting a scrub useful in a fight short of throwing stones. They are there to make up the numbers on the cheap with less chance of death. With Japans tiny population compared to feudal Europe its ridiculous to suggest every Japanese farmer was a god with a spear over your average French peasant with a pointy stick

One on one, probably the knight. Anything else is assuming anyone in this thread knows about military science.

Unlikely, because you are all dumb niggers.

>>723115456
I've not played it yet because I'm poor, but it looks freaking fantastic. I also teach samurai sword classes and I think Knights would win simply because off the resources/equipment of the time. Not that the style is better.

Not that you asked just thought I'd share.

>>723116582
The vikings power was in mobility at sea. Smash up the opposing force before they are ready and demoralise the populace so the lord they raid isnt gonna raise an army any time soon

>>723116653
As a dumb nigger i suggest spear chucking. Tried and tested for generations

>>723116710
The game is fun. Mechanical decisions are what brings it down.

Microtransactions, season pass, no dedicated servers. And you know the whole Uplay thing if on computer.

Summary of this thread:
>A bunch of white people want to be told that knights, aka white euro fags, are superior to other races.

FU samurai win 10/10 times hands down no contest knight can't even beat unarmed viking no contest.

>>723116710
>I also teach samurai sword classes

>I also teach samurai sword classes

>I also teach samurai sword classes

Cringe thread?
Cringe thread.

>>723115782
Not even necessarily stealth. If you can strike the head with a strong enough arrow (bonus points for flaming) then you win

File: e9d.jpg (16KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 600x600px

>>723117159

>>723117228
no, that's a low quality picture, stupid.

>>723117126
Fucking uplay....

>>723113155
USMC!

>>723117160
It's one of the most cringe things about me.

>>723117277
Please apply Dr Luger's patented 9mm dosage intracranially for best results.
Repeat as needed.

>>723116046
praise the sun

>>723113858
>weaboo
>fucking kek

>>723113155
you are still shilling the game OP.

>>723113155
Vikings are clearly out matched, they never really mastered any tactics. They were basically a bunch of rapists, not a lot of real war experience.

Knights and Samurai would be a close tie. They both fight for feudal lords, but they do have the most battle experience. I believe feudalism in japan actually lasted longer though... also the title "For Honor" would imply a Japanese bias, honor being their greatest virtue.

It's all down to the armor
Viking has none, so not vikings clearly
Samurai had plated armor which was tied together, meaning it could be cut to fall off
Knights typically wore chain mail under the optional plate, making them the clear favorite

Knights had the heaviest armor for sure, but that just meant that to kill one, you would have to either use a crushing style weapon to dent the metal, or knock em down and use a dagger to stab them between the armor plates and bleed em out.

Out of the 3, the Vikings probably adhered least to any sort of Warriors code of honor, so I'd give it to them.

>>723117601
>honor being their greatest virtue.

But that's WRONG you fucking stupid weeb.

RECTITUDE is the strongest virtue of Bushido.

>>723115056
everyone ive seen that played the beta bought the game
who cares about ratings

>>723113155

Defo a medieval knight

>>723117860
At least the samurai have it as a virtue...
Chivalry was more about serving lord and country than honor.

>>723117762
Fold the steel all you want this is why England dominated the world. And still does to this day

>>723114739
It's called perspective. If that is to abstract an idea for you then try to not think about it too much.

>>723118366
they HAD to fold the steel because they had shitty iron to make it with.

>>723113155
This was literally a TV show for years op. Go watch it. Deadliest warrior in case you're a bitch

>>723115056
Seemed to be pretty well liked by my friends. Its pretty competitive online play of that's your bag.

File: Git Gud.jpg (58KB, 510x755px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 510x755px

Going to fall for this, and post some factual statements about the trio:
The European Knights had the best heavy armor and metals.

Japan had better techniques with duels

And the Norse were a bunch of overly macho men capable of surviving the harshest climates possible at the time.

Vikings wouldn't win, as they aren't all that great in a perfect scenario, they aren't meant to fight fair, it was pillage and raid and farm what they could in the snow.

The Japanese culture didn't have the supplies to get a strong, powerhouse military force as they are on a fucking island, forget anything about "Greatest metal on earth" bullshit. They had the metal they could for the weapons and armor they needed. Only thing they have on the armor of a European knight is stab it, as plate is weak against piercing.

The literal choice is a knight, as they can just take the slash and blunt attacks without worry, and simply use the utter force of a broadsword or long sword, or a shield for that matter, to annihilate their opponent. This is why they have jousting, so they know who can kill each other better.

I'm all for Vikings and all, but Europeans slaughtered each other for a century and more, so they got it to an art.

>>723113155
Y u do dis

>>723115439
This is based on the idea they wouldn't get killed before resorting to a shorter range fighting style. That's ignorant.

So much cringe here. Ok, thematically I like Knights better. There are some misconceptions in this thread I'd like to point out. First of all, tempered steel was available to both knights and samurai around 10th century. Katana, is a superior weapon(both for stabbing and cutting) compared to a longsword, not because of simply because of the design. Second, differences slight differences in weaponry make play a small role in determining a victor in one on one combat. Samurai in general, were better disciplined and trained, compared to a typical medieval noble. They were a social class of warriors, that being said, vikings or nordic people, whose entire civilization practically revolved around raiding, were much, much more competent fighters, and far more physically impressive (it's genetics) 5'2 samurai vs 5'8 knight vs a 6'3 viking - arm reach matters. In conclussion one on one, probably viking, followed by samurai and the out of shape 19 year old noble knight. In a situation where it's an army vs army? Knights, no question.

>>723118852
>as they can just take the slash and blunt attacks without worry

I'll pay you $50,000 if you stand in front of me with a suit of armor and let me attack you with one blow.

If you "take it without worry" you win.

When your head rolls on the floor, I win.

Deal?

File: 20170110_125716.jpg (113KB, 678x952px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 678x952px

OK, vikings are off the table. That's just retarded.

Knights and samurai: depends on the time period, but I'd say almost certainly knights. They were simply the heavier soldiers. Plus Europeans have a size and strength bonus over the Japs.

>>723116620
this x1000

>>723118185
*facepalm induces supercritical mass*
Ay yi yi-yi-yi...

Pick up one of those square thinks with paper inside with words written on them called a book.

I'm thinking start with the quintessential Geoffroi de Charny and move onto Maurice Keen you ignorant nigger.

Do any fucking millienials read?!

>>723118366
While your comment is bullshit you have got a point.

Broad swords have been proven to be the best sword ever made. Samurai swords while seem more refined there is actually weakness in the blade. This weakness is Hollywood perception of the warriors using it. They didn't train to the standards today it was basic moves. Which would have been no match for a knight. Knights had been fighting and refining the notion of battle for centuries with much blood spilt.

Vikings while fearsome they wasn't war material. They raided villages full of farmers then retreated from the real battles.

Knights are superior in every way. Kids want their anime to be real but the truth is its not. It's far from it.

>>723119278
>claims to be a learned scholar
>Uses the phrase ignorant nigger

>>723113271
agreed.

>>723119326
>proven
Don't fucking bullshit with words like proven if you're not going to give peer-reviewed studies on your claim you dumb fuck.

>>723119326
Agreed

>>723113155
>be viking
>kick samurai ass
>sail away from knight and colonize Americas

File: lastvirgin.jpg (2MB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2560x1440px

A Shinobi would fuck a knight up. Just stab between the bindings on their slow clunky armour.

>>723119788
Lol try better bait faggot

File: ShamefurDispray.jpg (124KB, 319x480px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 319x480px

>>723119195

>>723119788
you're pretty queer, weeb.

>>723113637
>be knight
>enforce feudalism
What's better being the shabbos goy of a king instead of a Jew?

>>723113155
>since For Honor has come out it's sparked a lot of controversy

congratulations on your 16th birthday, op. people have only been arguing about it since the internet was invented.

>>723119195
A katana is not going to pierce a knight's armor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDkoj932YFo

actual tests. Katana beat broadsword in every category.
>Sorry whities, weaboos are better.

>>723115113
Shitty armor shitty swords completely unprepared to vastly superior fighting technique of the Knight. Knight all the way

>>723120227
>>723120278
Katana can pierce an inch into armor. Nice try!

>>723119788
>slow clunky armor
>full plate barely slows you down, and slots you a lot less than chainmail or japanese plate

>>723120278
>>723120321
At some level of armor a katana and longsword are equally ineffective.
Knights had to use battleaxes and warhammers, et., to not penetrate but hurt the knight within with the blow.
The armor was too strong to penetrate with a blade but a crossbow might work.

>>723120227
if stabbed, yes, plate was designed to reflect blows from common areas, katana's design is exceptionally good at over coming that.

>>723120671
Plus katanas are designed to be swift and nimble, so they can be quickly turned to pierce at the joints of the armor where there are no plating. A broadsword is too heavy and bulky to swing around and attempt that on a samurai.

>>723117800
This. Knights probably couldn't do shit unless they were on horseback. Plate mail over chain mail? Plus a helmet with slits for eyes? Mobility is a big thing on the battlefield, and all that armor takes a bunch of it away

>>723118366
>Fold the steel all you want this is why England dominated the world. And still does to this day

England did not dominate the medieval world, and certainly not by the sword.

In fact, English steel was notably poor in quality in the medieval era - English iron ores contain too much phosphorus, which results in what is called "short" steel - it crumbles under heat.
it wasnt untill the development of the Bessmer converter, with the use of molten iron, where lime was used to flush out carbon, and which also served to neutralise the phosphorus, did English steel become usable for weapons.

in the medieval age, the primary areas for steel production were Germany - particularly the region of Solingen, on the Rhine, and Passau, on the Austrian border, on the Danube, or Brescia and Milan, in Italy. (Milan in particular being known for its use of steel in armour making, which it dominated for the 13-16th centuries.

Furthermore, even in the 18th century, steel forged for swords in europe was also folded, just like in japan, usually 4-5 times.

File: Zulu.jpg (116KB, 439x655px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 439x655px

>>723113155
Jealous white boi?

>>723119195
>whose entire civilization practically revolved around raiding, were much, much more competent fighters
It doesn't take skill to slaughter villagers.

The samurai studied and developed their combat arts. They practiced the fighting arts with each other, and they improved their combat abilities.

>>723118670
Yee

>>723114321
Shit nigga what are you doing, armor wise knight hands dow

>>723120321
Then there's the almost Full suit of Riveted Maille underneath that, Then the multiple layer of Linen. Katana can't do shit against that.

>>723120671
>>723120795
European armor became too difficult to pierce.
Instead of making lighter weapons (except those for executions) was not what the knights did to counter the better armor.
They just made bigger ones.

Vikings. They fight dirty. Knights have that whole chivalry code and Samurai's have that whole bushido thing. Vikings will murder you and rape your daughter while doing it.

>>723114080
Ey I saw some of his videos

>>723120795
yes, yes, but like I said, a slightly better weapon isn't gonna win a one on one, it's all based on skill, luck and other physical factors. Vikings win. All a vikin' has to do is just get close enough, and a shield swipe later that 100lb ninja warrior is fuckin' launched 8 feet into the air. spazzin' over but muh katana, while technically true, means shit.

>>723120278
Longsword not Broadsword. Thin gage Cuirass not bullet proofed Breast Plate. Also that show had some of the most nonsensical hype on it that ever graced the "Discovery Channel".

>>723121112
The broadsword couldn't even slice leather. So samurai were protected in less armor from a knight and knights used extra armor that only slowed them down so katana's could pierce the hinges. gg knight dies 10/10 times.

>>723121265
Then there is also Deadliest Warrior. Which was Horseshit for Accuracy around "Medieval" Arms and Armour. Like how they Say Butted Chainmail was what everyone wore. :L

>>723121317
If you're referring to the video the sword was dull as fuck

>>723121265
You can give the knight a grenade if you want. He probably wouldn't have enough movement in his arm to throw it farther than 5 feet.

>>723121499
You saying you could have done better than the Discovery Channel??????

>>723120992
Zulus were not shit warriors to be fair

File: .gif (668KB, 428x313px) Image search: [Google]

668KB, 428x313px

>>723121573

>>723121626
The Discovery Channel stopped presenting facts in the early 90s. That shitfest is laughable.

>>723121573
You've never seen a person actually wear a full suit of plate have you?

>>723121717
>heart rate, oxygen, and blood pressure, readings

>extreme fatigue with just 10min of movement

>>723121317
Riveted Maille. Closed Rings. Piercing was very Hard. And the European Broadsword/Longsword was the Kalashnikov of it's time. If you weren't trained how to use the Katana Properly you were fucked, The Blade would chip, snap at the hilt and just fall apart.
Whereas the Broad/Long Sword you could beat anything to death until it bent in half and failing that you still have the rest of the Weapon.
All of theese Arguments are Rock Paper Scissors. The Katana Was Effective in it's area, and It was very effective Yes.
The Knights Armour, and Weapons were Very Effective in their area, and the Same for the Vikings.

File: HolyGrail018.jpg (206KB, 800x441px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 800x441px

>>723121717

>>723121684
Until Guns got involved

>>723121968
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzTwBQniLSc

>>723121968
>>extreme fatigue with just 10min of movement

you might like to watch this video of professor Daniel Jaquet, of the University of Geneva, the man in that harness of plate doing the jumps, with a comparision of his heart rate, when competing in full armour against a modern soldier, and a firefighter.

You might be in for a shock:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAzI1UvlQqw

>>723122113
Tis but a scratch you filthy fucking weabo

>>723113668
>>723114321
t. weaboo

>>723121930
A Million Times yes. As someone who does Re enactment, Most people are so fuckin uninformed when it comes to half this shit.
I have a major Autistic Fit of rage when I see people pretending to know what they are talking about

File: 737294728.png (473KB, 570x470px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 570x470px

Reiter could be knighted

Armored horseback knight shooting a fucking weeb

>>723113155
People don't fight alone, so don't try the "Greatest Warrior" nonsense. Things change over time and region, so the Viking of The Danelaw is not The Viking of The Swedish Rus in Kiev, etc. Samurai changed often throughout their history. And knights changed often over time and regional space. I'd say it's actually almost impossible to say.

>>723115113
Clearly didn't say ONLY refined fighting style..

>>723113155
Viking all day you fucking nerds and weeaboos.

>>723113637
That picture. Intensely cute with the tough talk below. Perfection.

>>723122402
if you want to have an embolism, enjoy this one...

idiot dressed up in the shittiest reenactment wang to have ever been made, invited to give a talk at a school talking to a bunch of schoolkids... Explains that armour was made of lead, and that's why it was so heavy.

these fucking idiots are out there, in the wild.

>>723122402
And yet you claim that a knight wouldn't be able to chuck a grenade 5 feet. I've seen men in full suits hurl short axes 15 feet and hit dead center of a target without so much as chaffing.

It seems medieval weapons and armour adapted and changed over time frequently and improved by the decade.
While japan had a extremely restrictive orthodoxy that kept them using the same equipment for century's

An entire arsenals of tools are available to the western knight to defeat other knights and the most advanced armour in the post industrial world.

If two parties are equal then how can chose the one with just less tools to work with.

>>723123008
That wasn't me dood. I full well know That a fully armoured Knight could throw a Grenade further than 5 feet

>>723114321
Slashing sword for piercing armor? Nah. The way Samurai gets everybody is personal versatility. Archery, then guns, then spears, THEN katana? That might clinch it. But don't fall for the katana boys talk.

>>723123160
Well fucking disregard that you asshole. Its obvious I suck cocks.

>>723117717
Vikings did have armor
it was padded gambeson
and the rich ones were pretty much equiped like knights of the time

>>723123160
I mean I have literally done 3-4 hour Shows and then sat in full kit pissing about in camp essentially playing rugby for another half hour or so. It was an expensive game of Rugby, I broke alot of the fastenings along my arms and legs :L

>>723113155
Moar like this
http://traineddog.club

File: clay grenade, acre.jpg (67KB, 634x420px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 634x420px

>>723123160
even if it were a medieval grenade.

here's an incendiary example from the 13th century, found in a shipwreck near Acre in the holy land.

15th C ones were filled with gunpowder and caltrop-shaped shrapnel.

>>723117601
they did have tactics ie the shield wall so no

>>723123733
>then sat in full kit pissing about in camp essentially playing rugby for another half hour or so.
Jesus. Why would you do that?

>>723115731
I kekked

Historicly it comes down to the man with the spear. The man with the spear kills the man with the sword more often.

>>723115782
I heard that vikings' specialty is axes and steath archery. Knights on the other hand use armor and swords and have a natural affinity for stealth archery. Samurai actually fold their stealth archers thousands of times over in order to have a more refined warrior.

>>723123914
I was abit younger, it was mostly borrowed Kit and I was new to re enactment, I wasn't fully aware of how expensive it all was. Hence How I learned that day. Also a Fair amount of Alcohol had been Consumed

>>723123492
Aye Shh lad :P

>>723122266
I wasn't genuinely trying to have objective discussion, but you've piqued my interest. I'll check it out tomorrow.