[wulfgar]

Only problem with this is the Viking warrior was a 6th to 12th century figure and Samurai 13th century to the Renaissance. In general combat the Samurai sword was a side arm of last resort and only came into its own in personal duels in more civil circumstances. Actually late medieval European and Japanese warfare have strong parallels. The shield bearing general infantry of earlier European times have began to disappear in the 13th century, replaced by pole arms and bows.



Thrand was having fits about this "Deadliest Warrior" episode.

This post has been edited by wulfgar: 09 June 2011 - 12:22 AM

[tom]

wulfgar, on 09 June 2011 - 12:20 AM, said:

Only problem with this is the Viking warrior was a 6th to 12th century figure and Samurai 13th century to the Renaissance. In general combat the Samurai sword was a side arm of last resort and only came into its own in personal duels in more civil circumstances.

And to disembowell themselves should they face shame.

Now we are exploring the more important stuff in life!

I thought vikings used axes? If so they would not have stood a chance. I watched a doco on William v Harold 1066, and I was surprised to learn the elite infantry of King Harold mostly used axes which are supposedly not very effective in spite of the shield wall tactics Harold employed.

Of course Harold had just cruised up north to defeat a viking invasion from memory too before being defeated by william.

The most interesting parrallel from that doco was painting Harold like an operations manager, leading from within the crew and micro managing his surroundings while William cruised around on a horse able to manage the big picture ultimately able to defeat harold using feints and archery tactics after having one of his own flanks defeated he repeated the exercise when he noticed he was able to defeat the Saxon troops whenever they left the safety of their own shield wall to pursue his breaking flank. Harold was not in a position to prevent his own men apparently from braking ranks being within his own numbers as just one of the team.

Conclusion managers have to keep an eye on the big picture at all times not get buried in the detail.

[wulfgar]

Generally Vikings used single handed axes and heavy knives has the side arm, with spears as the main arm. Double edged long swords were rather pricey and an exceptional good quality one very, very expensive. Actually most of the long sword blades used in Europe were made in the Ruhr valley.

The double handed axe must have had something going for it since it was used throughout the middle ages. It's believed in Harold's time the great axeman cooperated another shielded man as his defense.

[tor]

The guy with the naginata is useless. The guy with the katana is holding it like someone that doesn't know what they are doing. the guy with the long sword has what looks like pretty experienced technique, the wrist rollover would be tricky to learn (not that I know SCA styles of fighting, it just has the combo of timing and dexterity which invariably go with hard techniques).

The combat strikes against the samurai were almost all strikes which would bruise but would not cut through japanese armour.

All of which boils down to in a fight the guy with the most training will usually beat superior technology (curved swords are better than straight at inflecting slashing damage, light strong curved are _way_ superior

EDIT: implying that to inflict X amount of damage with a straight sword requires more training than with a curved sword, the extra training will also result in better combat skills. I have won pub type fights because I have learned to shout very well, to learn to kiai (shout / scream) well takes most people at least ten years of training but when you do it well it brings across very clearly what is going to happen if the fight gets to a point where blows will be thrown. Most of a battle is psychology, training brings psychology).

The samurai were an elite caste that trained insanely. The vikings were not as they did not have the agriculture to support that kind of caste.

Anyways the problem with simulating a weapons based martial art is that you either end up waving around lightweight versions of the weapon which makes all techniques questionable or you end up with ludicrous rules which make all techniques questionable. The problem with comparing two wildly different weapons systems is that the rules / weapon versions make the whole thing a joke (unless you actually want to kill each other).

The samurai also had horses, that makes for a game over in my opinion. Lightweight foot are destroyed by horse.

Given that the English found the bill was the best way to for foot to counter shield (Flodden Field for example) and that the japanese did not use naginata that were straight and bendy (a drawback in the footage for the naginata bearer) I have a feeling a samurai with a naginata would take out the viking with ludicrous ease. A mounted samurai with a nagamaki (naginata for horse use). The Tsuba on a naginata functions similarly to the hook on the bill for shield attack.

We occasionally get SCA types come round and tell us how we are doing it wrong. We agree whole heartedly. We are doing it wrong if we want to use their rules. They never agree that they are doing it wrong if they have to play by our rules, they just say our rules are stupid.

My opinions anyway.

This post has been edited by tor: 09 June 2011 - 08:35 AM

[tor]

wulfgar, on 09 June 2011 - 04:06 AM, said:

The double handed axe must have had something going for it since it was used throughout the middle ages. It's believed in Harold's time the great axeman cooperated another shielded man as his defense.

Probably for the same reason the japanese abandoned the naginata for the yari (spear). When it comes to fielding fighters you can train a guy to use a pointy thing or a heavy thing to a point of basic danger to the enemy way faster than a complex weapon (naginata, curved sword). If you are taking on 3000 guys you don't want to field 30 expert complex weapons guys, the numerical superiority will toast you good.

That said for individual combat scenarios a complex weapon can really pull out the stops.

I think what really pissed me about the naginata guy is that he used one of the stances I use a lot, it is an inviting stance asking the opponent to attack, but it has certain techniques you can use from there and many many many you can't (that is why it is an inviting stance, the opponent sees your limitations and figures they can win). He used one of the techniques that just don't work from there.

What he should have done is used cross stepping footwork with a rising cut. If the opponent had blocked with the shield it would no longer be in his hands (and he would be feet away and off balance giving time for a short sword attack which is really popular in naginata; remove their weapon, get them off balance and run in with your short sword).

A one handed weapon cannot block that cut without amazingly superior strength.

If he didn't block with the shield he would have lost his legs.

I use that one against kendo guys all the time. Even with their two hands holding their shinai they can't block it due to the body mass behind the cut.

There is a reason the naginata became the weapon of choice for chicks and monks. It defeats superior strength and equivalent technology through use of distance. If you are stronger then you are totally going to win

[tom]

Look at this.

http://www.thortrain...al%20Combat.htm

Nothing there on axes, I suspect as they concentrate on things post 1250 but does draw some parralels between east and west.

[tor]

tom, on 13 June 2011 - 06:21 AM, said:

Look at this.

http://www.thortrain...al%20Combat.htm

Nothing there on axes, I suspect as they concentrate on things post 1250 but does draw some parralels between east and west.

I think one of the things that most of these web sites _really_ underestimate is the psychology of the fight. I would also add many of the people I have met that talk about realism.

From my perspective the idea of going into a life or death situation is bloody stupid. I doubt that the people of yore were particularly keen on it either. Even rabid psychopaths must give pause (psychopaths preferring a position of power). People in a situation where they are going to die tend to fight really hard or run away. That is why squares break; the awareness that if you stay together you will live is so intellectual compared to the insane fact that a dude with a ton of horse and half a ton of spiky stuff is coming to kill you. Oh and there are 40 or 50 of that dude. f*ck that I'm going home.

There is just no way that any fighting group in the history of the world is any better than any other fighting group outside of the basics:

Experience; if you survived it once you might be more relaxed the second time and relaxed is what wins
Training; if you train an insane amount of time, like 8 hrs a day you will have good skills
Confidence; If you have the training and have survived a battle or two you are going to relax and use the skills you learned

Technology is almost irrelevant until those 3 things are achieved. Religion is useful but all of the great fighting groups have had their religions and so that becomes almost a moot point (yes yes nazis, but that is close enough to a religion from my perspective).

I am pretty sure that most of the guys that turned up on the battle field didn't have to fight and were happy with that (US civil war might be an exception there with the technology / tactics mess up).

The ones that did fight and win were the relaxed ones with superior training or were lucky.

So comparisons are weird.

Can you beat a gun with a sword? Of course you can if you intend to kill the person and they don't. Hell a pocketknife would do.

What also really sh*ts me is the names and the attitude, we get them in martial arts all time, people that think they were or could have been a samurai. Then they adopt a name to reflect that. No you couldn't, odds are you would be a peasant with no training and no weapons and you would have been mown down. Thrand, thor etc. for f*cks sake if you are going to use the name of a god at least spell it right

As an aside my last name in katekana looks quite similar to my first name in english so I am working on a picture which has my first name in english with the katekana for my last name inside the letters. I am not sure if that makes me one of the "cool name" wankers.

[tom]

tor, on 13 June 2011 - 07:13 AM, said:

What also really sh*ts me is the names and the attitude, we get them in martial arts all time, people that think they were or could have been a samurai. Then they adopt a name to reflect that. No you couldn't, odds are you would be a peasant with no training and no weapons and you would have been mown down. Thrand, thor etc. for f*cks sake if you are going to use the name of a god at least spell it right

I imagine at a minimum they would need to be Japanese.

Your comment about turning tail and running is interesting because it is another one of those trajedy of the commons things, where if they all ran they would all die but if you sneak off on your own you are a chance of making it away just before a losing battle.

Armies which had won a series of battles usually had the upper hand in two ways, their own soldiers were confident of their command and secondly the enemy knows of the opposing sides successes and importantly in the case of those like Napoleon with the odds stacked against them even if they outnumbered him they were still fearfull as he would have something up his sleeve.

[steveno]

tom, on 13 June 2011 - 08:43 AM, said:

Your comment about turning tail and running is interesting because it is another one of those trajedy of the commons things, where if they all ran they would all die but if you sneak off on your own you are a chance of making it away just before a losing battle.

I think you mean a Hawk/Dove strategy, if most are adopting one strategy then adopting the other can be an advantage. Running away has been my defense of choice for some time.

[tor]

steveno, on 14 June 2011 - 12:48 AM, said:

I think you mean a Hawk/Dove strategy, if most are adopting one strategy then adopting the other can be an advantage. Running away has been my defense of choice for some time.

A couple of my favourites:

"He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day."

"...just as discretion was the better part of valor, so was cowardice the better part of discretion, he valiantly hid himself in a closet"

[Ruffian]

tor, on 14 June 2011 - 01:49 AM, said:

"He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day."

That was one of my dad's favourites. I can't say he walked the talk, though. He was never one to back down, still isn't really.

He used it as a commentary on other people's actions, and because he neither condemned nor praised when he said it, I was never really quite sure what message he meant to send.

Maybe he was just pointing out that it was an option. (I've been known to be a little forthcoming at times.)

[staringclown]

Ruffian, on 14 June 2011 - 07:04 AM, said:

That was one of my dad's favourites. I can't say he walked the talk, though. He was never one to back down, still isn't really.

He used it as a commentary on other people's actions, and because he neither condemned nor praised when he said it, I was never really quite sure what message he meant to send.

Maybe he was just pointing out that it was an option. (I've been known to be a little forthcoming at times.)

I'm the guy who steps in and attempts, in vain generally, some fast talking to diffuse the situation. If that doesn't work then I run away.*

*Except when confronted with a snotty nosed sales assistant from the Mac1 shop who will not take my computer for a service even though they did so a mere three months ago and it is both under warranty and is where I purchased the machine. Then I rise to my full height and cast caution to the wind. I become a warrior.

[AndersB]

Insane Samurai sword skills:

[tor]

AndersB, on 07 November 2011 - 06:41 AM, said:

Insane Samurai sword skills:

A slightly less awesome samurai:



Although I think my double foot avoiding trick at 1:23 was pretty fancy

[AndersB]

I don't get it.

It seems such a waste of talent for hand-eye coordination.

The Japanese bloke should have made $millions in baseball.

And that Naginata dude should be in silly Star Wars movies or something.

[tor]

AndersB, on 07 November 2011 - 07:25 AM, said:

I don't get it.

It seems such a waste of talent for hand-eye coordination.

The Japanese bloke should have made $millions in baseball.

And that Naginata dude should be in silly Star Wars movies or something.

[staringclown]

tor, on 07 November 2011 - 07:02 AM, said:

Although I think my double foot avoiding trick at 1:23 was pretty fancy

Was that the "run like a girl" bit

That was cool but I have no idea how the scoring works from watching.

[tor]

staringclown, on 07 November 2011 - 09:03 AM, said:

Was that the "run like a girl" bit

That was cool but I have no idea how the scoring works from watching.

Hey, my ability to lift feet away from incoming bamboo is famous. Admittedly the times when I forget to put the first foot down before the second goes up may have added to the fame.

We have pretty small target areas and every strike has to (to paraphrase) be good enough to kill the guy without being a kill where his friend would kill you.

So an awful lot of stuff that looks like it hit actually "missed" (like the shoulders were armoured so a strike there is meaningless despite us not having armour there, and in fact can get you disqualified for hitting unarmoured areas) and a strike which is kind of accidental shouldn't be scored, and a strike which doesn't have zanshin (loosely translated to "you are dead, where's that friend you spoke of? I need to kill him too" in balance and psychology and all) also shouldn't be scored.

All in all it makes it a somewhat crappy spectator sport.

[staringclown]

tor, on 07 November 2011 - 09:40 AM, said:

Hey, my ability to lift feet away from incoming bamboo is famous. Admittedly the times when I forget to put the first foot down before the second goes up may have added to the fame.

We have pretty small target areas and every strike has to (to paraphrase) be good enough to kill the guy without being a kill where his friend would kill you.

So an awful lot of stuff that looks like it hit actually "missed" (like the shoulders were armoured so a strike there is meaningless despite us not having armour there, and in fact can get you disqualified for hitting unarmoured areas) and a strike which is kind of accidental shouldn't be scored, and a strike which doesn't have zanshin (loosely translated to "you are dead, where's that friend you spoke of? I need to kill him too" in balance and psychology and all) also shouldn't be scored.

All in all it makes it a somewhat crappy spectator sport.

So it's Marquis of Queensbury rules only japanese style where the aim is to kill the opponent in a "fair" way such that you don't attract the attention of their friends. Sounds Klingon. Which is why I think Klingon is based on Japanese.