Jessica Nubtus

Actually, it's that a normal (hunting) arrow could, in theory, penetrate plate at a 90 degree angle at mid range (power of an arrow increased through short range; it's not like a bullet where it is always most powerful at the point of firing) but bodkins were designed to get through plate; the curvature often didn't help and they could slice through chain and ring like nothing...
Once armour continued to be developed, of course, the effectiveness of bodkins continued to wane. This is assuming an early stage of plate armour...

__________________
http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=1410935

Aisha: "Where do you find these girls!?"

Wilfred Owen

Yes the majority of the French knights at agincourt died from being crushed and stood on. Some even drowned in the mud. The battle was faught in funnel shaped valley, with the English army at the small end and the French at the wide end. Once the Longbowman started to rain down their arrows, the French had no real option but to charge. But they got bogged down in the middle because of the mud and no room to manouver and the arrows kept on coming. The best thing about the story was that it was a tired, starved, diseased and defeated army which was trying to get back to England that beat the French creme de la creme. The French thought it was going to be an easy charge in and kill em all affair.

I dont think thats true. I think the arrow continued to haunt the Knights. How dare the peasants kill them!!! The next invention to completely negate the need for plate armour was the musket!

__________________

MySpace URL:
http://www.myspace.com/donedyjones

Jessica Nubtus

You are aware that plate armour continued until the end of the C17th? By then, it was good enough to repel most arrows!

And early muskets didn't stand much chance of getting through plate except at point blank range. They became popular because they were cool; once they became good was when plate started going out of use!

__________________
http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=1410935

Aisha: "Where do you find these girls!?"

Wilfred Owen

Due to the muskets shooting through them!

__________________

MySpace URL:
http://www.myspace.com/donedyjones

Jessica Nubtus

Would you like a cookie for a brilliant deduction that wasn't at all implied by my post? WELL YOU CAN'T HAVE ONE, I NEED MY SUGAR FOR MY ESSAY.

__________________
http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=1410935

Aisha: "Where do you find these girls!?"

angels_and_daemons

In fact armour was still being used in the first world war (well the beginning of it) the french cavalry wore big shiney easy to see brass breastplates (and bright red trousers so you really can't miss them). Odly this pleased the german armies who were amassed on the border with rifles.

And yes, the musket wasn't as effective as people would like to think because A it took longer to fire than a bow (right up till bolt action rifles which didn't really see action till the mid 18th century) and B until rifling was introduced as well as more tightly packed gunpowder in pre made rounds guns were inaccurate and often the powder charge was improperly mixed and so the range and power were greatly reduced... the main reason for muskets killing so many people as they did in wars was the lovely habbit armies had of lining up oposite each other... the second reason was the idea of using the three ranks of a standard infantry column to alternate between firing and loading to creat effectively a constant rate of fire.

Crossbows though are a bone of contention as far as I can tell - seems some think they were highly accurate and long range, others say the were incredibly powerful (the big heavy crossbows) but wildly innacurate so only effective at short range...

Stewan Seagull

100lbs sure is a heavy bow. I usually shoot 30lbs and assuming these boys had a lot more training and being used to 100 lbs, i think 6 seconds is to much. let?s agree on 4

Well that?s the nice thing about mass combat - there?s almost no aiming needed Just hit the enemy regiment and all is fine.
4 per minute is like 15 seconds per arrow. What do you want to do all the time? Even for a trained archer holding a stretched 100 lber is difficult - after a few seconds your aim will just get worse.

I?d give the Samurai the movement advantage, their armor was a lot lighter, but katanas were designed to cut, so maybe little good against plate.
In comparison european swords were like edged clubs

I think as long as our knight remains standing he?s all good and probably can beat the Samurai to pulp, but once he stumbles and falls he?s dead meat.

Klion D'Gar

Japanese culture was always vastly inferior to our own in terms of martial skill. They were very lucky to not become a colony of one of the European Empires to be honest.

Himasa

Vastly inferior is taking it too far, you're talking about a culture that was focussed around warfare for many centuries and had the potential of being just as adept at archery as Longbowmen. But I will agree that an armored knight versus a Samurai would win. There are many variables that come into play of course, so it's difficult being absolutely sure of it. Eventhough katana's rank amongst the best swords in the world, if not the best, they too weren't very capable of slashing through European armor.

An unarmored Knight versus an unarmored Samurai however, the Samurai would have the upper hand.

There's a guy who has written a nice essay about it.

http://www.thehaca.com/essays/knightvs.htm

Boogoose

I don't understand the whole idea that the Japanese are supernaturally good at combat. A long sword is an infinitely more practical weapon, since it can be as sharp as you could ever need it to be, deliver a heavy blow that can transfer through armour, be reversed and used as a hammer or a hook, and serve as a make-shift crucifix for prayin'. A katana is just an exercise in how many times you can fold a piece of steel.

If knights could fight in armour fast enough to defeat a more lightly armoured foe, just think how blindingly fast they would be without it, especially if their opponent was only used to laquered wood and chainmail.

I've read that essay. The guy is a knight re-enacter, I get the impression he spends most of the essay trying to be polite about the fact the knight would win hands down.

Himasa

That's the thing though. Europeans had better equipment in terms of armor and shields. But the actual combat skills of the Japanese were really not below par.

Boogoose

I'm not saying they were inferior, but also not automatically superior. What I'm saying is, a European knight would be trained to the same level of a samurai in the art of killing people, PLUS he would have the natural advantages of a bigger muscle mass and longer reach from genetics/diet, and higher stamina from having to adapt to wearing plate armour. Just because the Japanese add a bunch of stuff about "no mind" and moving like the wind doesn't make the fighting style any better, it's just their way of going about it.

Jessica Nubtus

This is true. They are in terms of style equal but different; there are elements of japanese swordsmanship, such as the speed and emphasis on vital targets, that allow a samurai to fight very well unencumbered against an unarmoured enemy. The reason for this is of course that iron in Japan is scarce and poor quality, hence the reason for (well-made) katanas being folded a lot and the lack of fear about armoured opponents. In an armoured fight (what a knight trains for) he'd win easily. In an unarmoured fight, the knight would be at a disadvantage, because that is not what his training, physical development and weaponry is really designed for.

__________________
http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=1410935

Aisha: "Where do you find these girls!?"

Jessica Nubtus

Personally, I believe spiderman would beat wolverine

__________________
http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=1410935

Aisha: "Where do you find these girls!?"

angels_and_daemons

Spiderman can't beat Wolverine - he's almost destructable, even surviving when the Incredible hulk tears him in half... but thats a whole other thread right there