Who would win?

Knight, however the samurai is more effective vs the lightly armored peasants they fought.

me desu

>>313692

What's the contest?

What are their arms and weapons?

Also tell me a little bit about the combatants. How many duels have they fought?

The guy with the shield

Whichever is white

>>313943

Your lardarse in full plate would beat a samurai

>>313943
>What's the contest?
fighting
>What are their arms and weapons?
swords
>Also tell me a little bit about the combatants. How many duels have they fought?
several

>>313692
Depends on the individual's experience, the time period, the equipment, the environment, etc. Even then there is almost no condition where one would win every time, aside from training that only occurred in one and not the other. Early samurai were most often mounted archers, for example.

File: 8566501_1.jpg (30KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 700x700px

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YyBtMxZgQs

>>314006
>british_colonization_of_the_middle_east.mp4

>>313692
Frankly put, European armor was better, and the samurai would have no experience dealing with it. So all other things being equal the knight would win.

Without the armor and with their weapon of choice it probably depends on the combatants

>>313692
I can tell from a historical point of view, absolutely pointless.

File: 1408736516257.jpg (106KB, 403x498px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 403x498px

What are the time periods? Is this a 13th century showdown or are you matching Jeanne D' Arc's 15th century French army and their limited and crude siege cannons against Nobunaga Oda's 16th century pike and shot force?

Time periods being equal, the knights win quite handily and in pretty much every phase of the battle. Though if you give the Samurai the incredible advantage of Matchlock firearms then the knights'll get their chivalrous asses handed to them.

It really is dependent on what time period we're talking about here but generally the Knight.

Too much armor plus a shield. It's possible the Knight could tire out if made to run around and exhaust himself as samurai armor is significantly lighter but generally the Knight is as tremendous advantage with full plate and a shield.

File: 1352929650093.jpg (131KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 1280x720px

In the end love would win

We're talking a late 15th-century Germanic knight versus a pre-gunpowder Edo period samurai? The answer is obvious.

Whoever fights the hardest and smartest given what tools they have. You literally cannot answer this question with any kind of certainty. This is fan-wank at best.

knight if no guns
if guns then samurai

File: NanbanDo.jpg (85KB, 278x541px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 278x541px

>>314634
>a samurai would have no experience with dealing with it
>what is nanban armour

>>313692
>heavy lancers vs light cavalry/footmen

You tell me

File: article-1166382-0437CC8B000005DC-285_306x604.jpg (44KB, 306x604px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 306x604px

>>316067
That's not even on the same playing field as full plate.