Celt (400 BC) vs. Samurai (Edo Era) (no tanegashimas)

>>33654863
How the fuck is this a fair fight?
Separated by 2000 years

File: Norms.jpg (11KB, 261x330px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 261x330px

>>33654863
I'd have to say the gook, If it were a Norman or something it'd be a much closer fight I think.

>>33654863
Well Europeans tend to be naturally larger and stronger than Asians, but it's likely that the Samurai would have had better nutrition since its so much further in the future.

As for weapons and armor, if it's just the people in your pic, then the Samurai would win handily since the Celt is in pajamas with a short sword. It's likely that in real life however, they would have had more comparable armor.

Likely a wash.

>>33654949
Separated by 500 years

Does the samurai have Nanban armor?

Depends on the fighters probably

Is the Celt a random armed man, or a full time warrior of a similar socioeconomic position to the average samurai?

>I'd say "Duel" but one is a fucking Celt

What? They were well known for single combats aka duels

>>33654910
it's still man vs. manlet

>>33654910
>2000 years
technology really didnt advance much till the last 100 and 300 years. The Uman Manda(the horde from who knows where) held off the romans and Persians for millenniums. Not to mention the celts whooped so roman ass and if the conversation was roman vs samurai i would put my money on roman.

i mean it genuinly depends on the quality of the soldier more than anything else. Just as an example 300 spartans killed 10,000 persians. Even Cesar with his vast army immediately feared the celts on sight....which led to them deciding to fuck with them....and so on.

What kind of Celt? The Gauls and Galatians were Rome tier while the Picts were basically cavemen.

File: Angus McBride - Roman Auxiliary Cavalrymen recruited from Celtic tribes burn a Germanic village in the to Century CE..jpg (129KB, 736x549px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 736x549px

>it's a "Celts didn't wear armor" episode

>>33658644
In 400 BC no they very definitely didn't.

>>33658616
I know you probably know this just wanted to clarify that 300 Spartans did not kill all 10,000 Persians during that battle

Samurai have an attack bonus against other civ's unique units so they're going to win

>>33658616
Thermopyae had nothing to do with the skill of the Spartans. They were defending a 100 meter pass with the sea and the cliff on the flanks. Not to mention they had thousands of auxillaries that everyone forgets because they weren't spartans.

>>33658791
those auxiliaries fell back pretty quick to join up with more greeks on another front.

but you are right the people to meet the persians first were not spartans.

but it definitely had alot to do with their skill, they did have an advantage the definitey even the odds but 300 men dont kill 10k(roughly) by being average. They were known as true warrior culture in greece, little is actually know about them because they didnt bother with philosphy or archetecture. if you were a spartan you were a warrior.

>>33658726
>just wanted to clarify that 300 Spartans did not kill all 10,000 Persians
there were in total roughly 250,000 Persians and the spartans killed most of the 10,000 but greeks from else where killed a few as well.

File: IMG_4466.jpg (91KB, 600x720px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 600x720px

>>33654863
>heavily armored man vs a guy without a shirt
Yeah obviously the Celt will win

>>33658759
Bp right here!

File: tfw your warrior tradition includes dresses and fancy hair dos.jpg (44KB, 576x600px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 576x600px

>>33654863
>muh honorable samurai
this meme needs to die. nips are soulless insects. their biggest claim to fame weapon-wise is a necessity-driven, over-glorified pig sticker designed to dispatch unarmed farmers.
>muh honor oath to daiymo
you mean the jewnip who owned all the land and women? yeah big surprise they want to be on his good side

the 4 foot slanty eye would get tramped by a barbarianigger

File: 133054057422.jpg (322KB, 1280x1077px) Image search: [Google]

322KB, 1280x1077px

>>33654863
The Samurai.
I don't know how the Celt would deal with having having someone shooting at him with a longbow far more advanced than he'd have ever seen.
It isn't fair to pit opponents from such wildly varying eras against each other.

>>33661133
How does anyone even manage to get so butthurt.

Samurai for sure, better ranged weapon and better formation fighting.

Better armor too.

>>33654863
The Celt obviously, because he knows his victory will trigger all the weeb autists.
Not only that, but the Samurai would be too frightened by a guy who's willing to show up to combat in pajamas to actually do anything.

File: who would win.png (947KB, 1415x400px) Image search: [Google]

947KB, 1415x400px

Hey /k/, would would win?

File: 1490516779663.jpg (67KB, 864x717px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 864x717px

>>33659413
this tbqhfamlmdingdong

File: 9121f17cc9e51550e85b7190f39b21bb.jpg (36KB, 409x550px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 409x550px

>>33661313
Europeans have always had access to yew trees, we have neolithic bog finds of bows that easily can compete with any Yumi.

A similar thread existed on /his/ a while back and the conclusion was that it's a toss-up between the two, depending on the sort of Celt we're talking about.

If you have a Celtic nobleman or elite soldier from around the 1st century BC, then there's even the possibility of the advantage lying with the Celt, purely equipment-wise. If the Samurai isn't wearing the heaviest of armours, then a Celt can easily get up close and dispatch him with this sword, the Samurai's close combat weapons would really struggle at dealing with the combination of body armour and large shield, while the Celt has clear weakpoints to aim for.
In terms of swords, a good La Tene sword probably earns an advantage against anything smaller than a Tachi out of pure reach.

At a distance, if we give both ranged weapons, the Samurai would have an advantage only at long distances. If the "ranged" segment is in javelin range, then the Celt has 3 or so throws to close the distance in which the Samurai is effectively "suppressed" and unable to shoot back.


The most potentially dangerous weapon against the Celt is the Yari. The range and agility of a spear held in two hands by a guy with a fairly high degree of armour is extremely threatening, the only option would be to try to push through and get up close with the sword.

File: 1298978568605.jpg (203KB, 764x1000px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 764x1000px

>>33661458
>Europeans have always had access to yew trees, we have neolithic bog finds of bows that easily can compete with any Yumi.
I'm doubtful of that.
If it's true I'd expect the Romans to have been turned into pincushions.

>If the Samurai isn't wearing the heaviest of armours,
The "standard" suits of armor by the end of the sengoku period would be generally better than anything even a Celtic king could get his hands on due to its mixture of solid plates, lamellar and maille being tougher and less awkward to move around in than wearing the equivalent amount of protection in only maille.

>the Samurai's close combat weapons would really struggle at dealing with the combination of body armour and large shield, while the Celt has clear weakpoints to aim for.
I'd expect a Yari to do just as well as a European spear when it comes to jabbing at any spot the Celt's shield didn't cover and busting through his armor if a solid blow lands, while the Samurai's armor will generally either have better coverage if the Celt is wearing a sleeveless and short set of maille or lighter weight if it has full sleeves and goes down to the knees.
As far as swords go, it depends on the era and purpose, a day to day katana will always be shorter than a battlefield tachi.

>At a distance, if we give both ranged weapons, the Samurai would have an advantage only at long distances.
You could just as easily put it the other way and say the Samurai would be able to suppress the Celt with his bow, since throwing a javelin with any efficacy requires just as much of a wind up as shooting a bow does.
It's with good reason javelins fell out of use so much in the middle ages.

Samurais were BTFO`d by portuguese in 14-15 century.

File: 1423285623856-2.jpg (751KB, 1388x1933px) Image search: [Google]

751KB, 1388x1933px

>>33661458
Part two.

>The most potentially dangerous weapon against the Celt is the Yari. The range and agility of a spear held in two hands by a guy with a fairly high degree of armour is extremely threatening, the only option would be to try to push through and get up close with the sword.
Outside of superior armor and bows, that would be my claim.
I'm not sure of how effective closing distance is for countering a spear's reach though, considering how quickly a spear can be retracted back into a shorter grip.

>>33661629
The Portuguese made it sound as the Japs were completely useless fighters while the British made them sound incredible.
Both are probably half right.

>>33661629
yeah that was a cool Samurai champloo episode

File: hqdefault.jpg (37KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 480x360px

>>33661621

>>33661645
British are awful fighters tho, probably thats why they were wrekt by nips

>>33661621
>I'm doubtful of that.
>If it's true I'd expect the Romans to have been turned into pincushions.

Yew bowstaves when fashioned correctly can reach poundages completely in excess of what any normal human could possibly handle. The longbow of the 15th century AD was the same as the longbow of the 15th century BC, the difference being in the head and the archers, the English laws that made extremely powerful archers out of such a large amount of men.

>The "standard" suits of armor by the end of the sengoku period would be generally better than anything even a Celtic king could get his hands on due to its mixture of solid plates, lamellar and maille being tougher and less awkward to move around in than wearing the equivalent amount of protection in only maille.

I'd say that a fully fitted suit of mail outclasses any other armour in terms of comfort because of its flexibility. That said, the Celt would only wear a lorica on his body, no fullbody protection. The rest is handled by the shield.
The Samurai has a lot of areas only poorly covered or even uncovered, depending on how heavily protected he is. The type of armour during the Sengoku period that has very high coverage outweighs a 15th century plate harness with significantly less protection.

>I'd expect a Yari to do just as well as a European spear when it comes to jabbing at any spot the Celt's shield didn't cover
The issue is actually managing to do that. The amount of solid, well aimed attacks you can pull off at a charging opponent are very low. If you hit the shield with too much force you'll only hand your weapon to the enemy on a silver platter
>and busting through his armor if a solid blow lands,
Completely unfeasible against both the helmet and the mail lorica.
>while the Samurai's armor will generally either have better coverage if the Celt is wearing a sleeveless and short set of maille or lighter weight if it has full sleeves and goes down to the knees.
Never forget the shield.

>>33661652
They were ill prepared for Burma, iirc it's the first time they ever fought in that sort of climate, Nips are subhumans who lived in shit and mud all day so they were immune to disease and the harsh jungle heat and humidity.

>>33661621
>You could just as easily put it the other way and say the Samurai would be able to suppress the Celt with his bow, since throwing a javelin with any efficacy requires just as much of a wind up as shooting a bow does.
The main difference is the Celt can do so from behind cover and on the move.
>It's with good reason javelins fell out of use so much in the middle ages.
They didn't though, they were especially popular in Iberia where they were used to great effect by Almogavars.

>>33661645
>Outside of superior armor and bows, that would be my claim.
The bow is nothing unusual by European standards. Yew self-bows eliminated any need for fancy composite ones until the wide adoption of crossbows that required a shorter bowstaff.
>I'm not sure of how effective closing distance is for countering a spear's reach though, considering how quickly a spear can be retracted back into a shorter grip.
People keep saying this over and over and it just shows how little people actually know about armed combat. The problem with doing that is that it takes time, and renders the weapon significantly more awkward to use. Yes, you can hold the spear further forward, but no, it will not be anywhere as close as good as a sword at close range. Parrying is out of the window and your fingers will get chopped off.

>>33661458
Romans had a massive weakness against horse archers.
The Persians made mince-meat out of their legions abusing them.

And here you're pitting a nobleman horse archer proficient with at least one more weapon against a Celt whose bow was of shorter range than a slingshot and as a noble most likely wasn't even proficient at any ranged weapon Celts preferred.

Add in the time difference and you're set. What arguments could /his/, like the retarded bunch they are, possibly throw against that?

>>33661645
>British made them sound incredible
The British have an awful military history, so their opinions shouldn't matter

>>33658544
uderrated post

>>33661350

Guy on left. Way more valuable and more protected.

pt1

>>33661652
And the Portuguese have any acclaim outside of beating stone-age south-Americans?

>>33661662
>The longbow of the 15th century AD was the same as the longbow of the 15th century BC, the difference being in the head and the archers
That's definitely strange that what would have, at the time, been such an incredibly powerful weapon didn't take off in popularity among both the Celts and then the Romans.
If their swords were good enough to copy, why not their bows too?

>I'd say that a fully fitted suit of mail outclasses any other Armour in terms of comfort because of its flexibility.
But it's so heavy, as in cripplingly heavy and with all of the weight on the wearers shoulders: there's no way to spread it out like you can with plate armor or lammelar.

>The type of armour during the Sengoku period that has very high coverage outweighs a 15th century plate harness with significantly less protection.
That depends on the year, as the thickness of breastplates ballooned and the general coverage shrunk once guns arrived on the scene
It isn't as though there is weight spent on nothing in particular.

>The issue is actually managing to do that. The amount of solid, well aimed attacks you can pull off at a charging opponent are very low. If you hit the shield with too much force you'll only hand your weapon to the enemy on a silver platter
On the other hand feints to force your opponent into moving his shield over where you want him can be quick and easy.
It depends on how both combatants approach each other.

>Completely unfeasible against both the helmet and the mail lorica.
Was the maille of the Iron age butted or riveted?
If it was butted then it would be viable to pierce it with a spear thrust, if not then you still end up having to deal with the blow's force.

>Never forget the shield.
And never forget it's cost when it comes to weight, restricting directions of attack and tying up a hand that could be used for two-handing a weapon.

>>33661662
pt2

>The main difference is the Celt can do so from behind cover and on the move.
Whether throwing on the move with an incredibly short range as opposed to having to stand still but shoot at long range is better is down to opinion and trying to throw a javelin while keeping behind cover that couldn't also be used to an archer would be awkward at best.

>They didn't though, they were especially popular in Iberia where they were used to great effect by Almogavars.
I don't mean "never used", just that in they became a niche weapon compared to bows and crossbows.

>People keep saying this over and over and it just shows how little people actually know about armed combat. The problem with doing that is that it takes time, and renders the weapon significantly more awkward to use. Yes, you can hold the spear further forward, but no, it will not be anywhere as close as good as a sword at close range. Parrying is out of the window and your fingers will get chopped off.
It's not like I've ever been on a medieval battlefield but when it comes to sparring, spears are incredibly flexible when it comes to range.
You can shift your grip foward or backwards in an instant with either feeling completely natural, smack your opponent with the rear end of the spear, block with the shaft and so on.


>>33661675
>lived in shit and mud all day so they were immune to disease
If that's the case, you'd expect the British to be doubly immune and then some.
No one can out-filth the British lower classes.

>>33661788
>You can shift your grip foward or backwards in an instant with either feeling completely natural, smack your opponent with the rear end of the spear, block with the shaft and so on.

Not that guy, but you have no idea what youre talking about. Spears arent imaginary toothpicks, they have mass and get heavy very quickly.

Not to mention that theyre mainly a stabbing weapon when fighting with a group of people.

1v1 is completely different.

>Who would win in a 1 on 1 fight?
I only have a rough overview of Japanese history, but I'm guessing the Samurai has a 50/50 chance of being some office administrator, and thus completely useless.

File: 1312184803457.jpg (86KB, 582x800px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 582x800px

>>33662414
>they have mass and get heavy very quickly.
A few kilograms of wood and steel isn't hard to move about and when using both hands you can initiate motion with one hand and then halt it with the other when it comes to adjusting its reach.
A really long spear would be awkward to use outside of a formation but generally polearms used by samurai weren't all that big.

>Not to mention that theyre mainly a stabbing weapon when fighting with a group of people.
Yari tend to have pretty long blades for spears, they were used for both.

>>33662601
OP stated that the samurai would be Edo period, so it would be more like be a 90% chance he'd never seen any kind of military action.

>>33661133
Did the shogun kill your parents or something?

>>33661652
The Brits are decent fighters... eventfully. The problem is they keep falling for the same racist bullshit over and over again. It's okay to believe you're God's gift to mankind, just don't forget that you bleed the same as anyone else.

>>33654863
why would you choose an edo era samurai? They were obsolete by that point. Why not muromachi period or kamakura period samurai.

>>33664616
*eventually

>>33661736
The Romans actually stomped the Persians a few times. When Commanders actually applied themselves with terrain and ranged units they were pretty scary. The problem was I think it was Emperor during the stomping did some decisions that made the General's achievments null.

File: Scotsman Insult.gif (2MB, 500x333px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x333px

>>33654863

I mean granted we're twice the size of the little nips; but with bronze against steel and lamellar armor against a nothing but a patch of manly chest hair.....it still wouldn't be a fair fight for the wee lil buggers.

>>33664730

>implying Celts weren't the first Europeans to use iron/steel arms and armor

File: 534534.jpg (623KB, 1360x1909px) Image search: [Google]

623KB, 1360x1909px

>>33654863
lets make this a more realistic setting, what would happen if that weeb met one of these guys

>>33658905
>but greeks from else where killed a few as well.
It's like you really don't want to let go of 300 as a historical reference

>>33661321
Better fighting formation in a 1v1 fight?

File: 1476570689263.jpg (386KB, 800x529px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 800x529px

>>33654863
The Celt clearly. All the Celt would need to do is throw a severed head at the Nip and the faggot would most likely shit himself and run. Besides if wouldn't break him the fact that most Celtic warriors of the period fought naked and only dressed in woad seeing his excessively large dong would most certainly send the autist packing.

>>33654910
This is the reasoning weaboo faggots like OP have to use to justify their little obsession.

If it was a higher class celt with good armour, easily the celt.

>>33654984
Celts actually had pretty decent diets, the Celts gonna be about 3 inches taller and 30lbs heavier

>>33654863
I don't know how well samurai did against opponents that had shields. I feel like that would define the fight
One on one, unarmoured, with swords only? Samurai probably had better training
Shit thread tho

>>33665842
Samurai collected heads

>>33658616
>technology really didnt advance much till the last 100 and 300 years

I hope you're joking

>>33665633

>400 BC

>>33667873

Iron Age started around 1000 BC.

>>33664616
>muh racism!
Learn the difference between Nationalism and racism.

The Anglos believed they were superior to Europeans and especially Germans, even though they came from the same stock.

>Edo Era
Samurais during the Edo Era (The era of peace) saw absolutely no combat except for maybe squashing a few peasant revolts from time to time. The majority of their time was spent fucking women, drinking, sucking their damiyo's cock, and then fucking women again.
This would be a completely different situation if it was a samurai from the Sengoku era.

>>33661458
among samurai weapons I wouldn't pick a yari as my choice in that fight, at least not a standard yari, the Japanese had a large variety of polearms that could be used fro stabbing or slashing.

>>33661662
Japanese actually did have chainmaile though admittedly it wasn't as good an european chain. but the armor was not really heavier or harder to move in than contemporary European plate.

>>33661629
Not really, unless your taking about navel battles which the Japanese at the time famously sucked at

>>33668039
there were any number of competent swordsman, spearman, and archers in the edo period, but they were specialists, people deeply involved in marital arts, where as during the sengoku everyone was expected to be able to fight

>>33661781
>hat's definitely strange that what would have, at the time, been such an incredibly powerful weapon didn't take off in popularity among both the Celts and then the Romans.
its exactly like how japs were still carrying sabers on the battlefield in WWII
or like how full power cartridges were still the primary round going into WWII
or like how american brass wanted the 7.62x51 nato after WWII

getting back to the spears, my best guess as to why they were the dominant ranged weapon for so long is because it was easier to give a grunt some spears and make him multi-role than it was to give some faggot a bow and have only a dedicated ranged soldier.

File: who-would-win-the-nazi-party-some-snow-18972865.png (74KB, 500x364px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 500x364px

These vs threads are gay.

>>33668485
theyre extremely autistc. hypothetical fights are the autismo's bread and butter.

>>33656480
>average samurai
>implying the average samurai was a warrior
>implying samurai wasn't a political title
Always remember that Samurai armor is shit, samurai steel is shit, the katana is shit and brittle.

Most things > Samurai.

>>33654984
>It's likely that in real life however, they would have had more comparable armor.
The celts didn't fight in armor, it was considered cowardly. The strongest and bravest would fight completely naked with only a weapon and shield.

>>33668460
Spear required little training to be used pretty effectively, was easy to use in large formations, and was cheap to make and replace, since the metal requirement was so low.

>>33668754
When I said spears I meant javelins, but your point remains the same

>>33668522
Not so much. Remember that the sengoku era samurai were running around with guns in addition to being fantastic horse archers.

>>33658544
>this

>>33661629
what are you even talking about?

>>33665842
>All the Celt would need to do is throw a severed head at the Nip and the faggot would most likely shit himself and run.

The samurai were the largest head cult in the history of the world. You're a fucking moron.

>>33654863
In unmounted melee combat, probably the Celt.

The Celt's sword may bend but it won't shatter like the grorious nippon steel folded 100,000 times.

>>33671177
Japanese swords usually bent rather than shattered but that was in extreme cases. usually they just got knicks that could be polished out.

The idea Japanese steel is greatly inferior to European tech is a new meme is direct response to the old meme that they could cut anything, but both are inaccurate

>>33670094

I wouldn't count them as "fantastic" horse archer. Mongols, Parthians, Huns, and Manchu are fantastic horse archers. Samurai don't come close to their level.

The thing about martial prowess is how much of it is relative. A "great warrior" in one civilization is merely good to mediocre in another civilization, and vice versa.

Japan probably suffers the most from this due to their isolationism removing points of reference. The "hardened" Samurai army after 100 years of war didn't do all that well against the Koreans and Ming China, and both of those had badly atrophied militarizes by that point.

>>33671407
Considering the logistics of such an operation they did very well initially. but native opposition and Ming support doomed it. Not to mention the Japanese were horribly behind in ship building

Of course they won battles due to their used of guns and pikes, not calvary

>>33671295

> The idea Japanese steel is greatly inferior to European tech is a new meme is direct response to the old meme that they could cut anything, but both are inaccurate

It depends on the time period, but European steel didn't get really good until the mid to late 1300's. Before then, both India and China had better metallurgy. India could make high quality Wootz/Damascus steel, and China could produce vast quantities of steel via blast furnaces. Then European metallurgy advanced further with the need to produce high strength alloys for cannons and muskets.

I'd still say Japanese steel is overall inferior, and greatly so past the 1500's, but they did what they were trying to do with the materials they had.

File: 1451437062805.jpg (89KB, 1110x440px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 1110x440px

>>33671534
Depends on what your looking for. I certainly think the spring tempered swords of the renascence were more durable, though in fairness they couldn't hold an edge as well.

As it was japanese swords were widely exported throughout south east asia, and even copied in china in the form of the weidao.

>>33671534
The Romans regarded some Celtic steel very highly. Noric Steel was probably as good as anything produced anywhere else in the world at the time.

>>33671599
>As it was japanese swords were widely exported throughout south east asia, and even copied in china in the form of the weidao.

Interesting, is there a source I could read? I'd think with Sakoku coming into effect so shortly after the end of the Sengoku period, "Japanese" and "widely exported" wouldn't fit.

>>33671656

Again, the thing about points of reference comes into play. What is great steel to the Romans might not be that "great" in other parts of the world. I am aware of the fantastic metalsmithing tradition among the Celts, but I would still be wary of stating that it was a good as Indian steel in the same time period.

Consider the fact the famous Ulfbert swords produced in the same regions centuries later were made from crucible steel, which had to be traded for from the middle east, and in turn, traded for from India. Crucible steel had been in production in the Indian subcontinent since around the first century or so. Using imported steel for the most prized swords would lead me to think that it's better than the "domestic" steel.

File: 1479528106276.jpg (138KB, 450x632px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 450x632px

>>33671707
here is one https://markussesko.com/2013/11/01/japanese-sword-trade-with-ming-china/

I also have some picks.This one I believe is from Java. trade with china was still carried out under sakoku, though alot of the trade happened before that

File: most manly asian manlets in existence.jpg (172KB, 960x460px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 960x460px

>>33658544
History would like to talk to you.

>>33671971
thanks anon, was a useful read.

>>33665793

Gets shot

>>33654984
The celt probably would have had chain mail + hardened leather + an iron helm. Most likely a spear and/or axe/club to go with his sword. They usually didn't waltz into battle with just trousers and a sword (usually).

>>33661313
> Longbow far more advanced than he'd ever seen

Stop right there. First of all, asians never had a "longbow", ever. That was pretty much exclusive to the British and French in the middle ages, most other bows fall under the recurve or just short bow category. Secondly, the average celt wasn't a barely clothed guy with a brittle iron shortsword, and the average samuria wasn't a fully armoured, decked out expert. Yes the samurai would have had a bow to pick him off if he could see the celt coming from a reasonable distance, but no, the bow wasn't "far more advanced than he'd ever seen". It was a fairly simple bow that the celt would have figured out in about 2 seconds that it was a bow. Stop being such a delusional weeaboo.

>>33661621
The romans mostly stayed in cowardly tight formations were every angle of their body was covered by a very thick shield or solid iron helmets - I don't think any sort of hand held ranged weapon would be able to seriously upset such a formation and deal many casualties. Also, the celtic tactics as a group were pretty shit. As individual fighters, Indigenous Northern and Western Europeans are in general very good and better than your average mediterranean foot soldier, but in groups and in military formations they got BTFO because they essentally used the lightly armoured human wave against medium armoured, tortoise shield walls and cost effectiveness.

>>33673477
> First of all, asians never had a "longbow", ever. That was pretty much exclusive to the British and French in the middle ages, most other bows fall under the recurve or just short bow category.
That's arguable.
The Yumi is often referred to as a Japanese longbow, whether you agree with that or not is up to you.

>the average celt wasn't a barely clothed guy with a brittle iron shortsword, and the average samuria wasn't a fully armoured, decked out expert.
Mostly true.
But generally, the Samurai would have arms and armor with metallurgy far more advanced than the Celt and with the armor itself being much heavier and elaborate than any Celt short of the wealthiest of leaders.

>the bow wasn't "far more advanced than he'd ever seen". It was a fairly simple bow that the celt would have figured out in about 2 seconds that it was a bow
I didn't mean that Celts didn't know what a bow was, but that they didn't have anything nearly advanced as an Edo period yumi would be.
Unless of course someone has dug up English bows from the iron age with four or five layers of bamboo and woof laminated together.


>>33673498
>I don't think any sort of hand held ranged weapon would be able to seriously upset such a formation and deal many casualties
Weren't most of the times Legions suffered a thrashing, it was when they were against bow wielding mounted skirmishers?

>>33673477
>Asians never had a longbow

Longbows were common primitive weapons found effectively everywhere on earth.

Laminated babmoo/wood longbows like the yumi were comparable to yew longbows used in the British isles.

>>33673605
Hell, the average Celt warrior in 400 BCE had a spear, shield and no armor. He'd be very lucky to have decent boots. Swords were rare and reserved for the rich.

The Edo period Jap gets body armor, a steel sword, a spear, a high quality horse, stirrups, and either a weird asymmetrical longbow or, Edo Period and all, a fucking gun.

>>33673605

> Weren't most of the times Legions suffered a thrashing, it was when they were against bow wielding mounted skirmishers?

Carrae recounts say that the Romans heavy infantry were able to "tank" the horse archer arrows in testudo. However, that formation left them vulnerable to the Parthian cataphracts, which would then charge and scatter the tightly packed Romans, doing most of the killing before the rout. The horse archers were able to pick off the Roman Auxilia, which made the legionaries even more open to getting charged.

Everything works best in combined arms. The mongols and huns also relied on lancers to either deliver the killing blow or break apart an enemy formation. For all their vaunted reputation, horse archers are pretty bad at killing armored infantry by themselves and are vulnerable to infantry archers/crossbowmen/arquebusiers.

>>33661621
>Nipga gets stabbed in groin
>Bleeds outta micro-junk
>Dead

Nice one.

File: Périclès.jpg (304KB, 1512x1057px) Image search: [Google]

304KB, 1512x1057px

>>33673498
>effective strategies are cowardly
WEW

>>33654863
celt probably? both have a history of dueling, that "30000 times folded" part steel sword isnt built around taking shields and ductile swords, shit has a chance of shattering

nips would only win in battles with the access to firearms and developed techniques against cavalry

celts didnt hang around in tight formations to get mowed down, so it would take a while

File: hqdefault (3).jpg (16KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 480x360px

>>33654863
ITT
Buthurt weebs think a guy in pajamas with nipon 100000000x folded steel can beat up a true barbarian

Pic related

>>33658676
>autism to this degree.

>>33661629
Their rapiers were like ten inches longer than katanas and lead with the point, of course they shit on people

>>33658676
Holy shit don't talk if you have no clue what you are talking about.

>>33661350
Hawking would just create a black hole

>>33678059
There are actually few if any recorded duels between someone with a rapier and someone with a katana.

>>33673689
Is there any Yumi with a recorded draw weight of >150lbs though?

>>33679306
Yumi were measured in terms of how many people it takes to string them. most took one or two people, with heavy bows taking three or four. there are mentions of higher numbers but those were probably literary inventions or so incredibly rare as not to count.

the estimate for a three man bow is 80 to 140lbs

>>33681017

This was actually informative and useful, thank you for saving a shit thread