AOE3 Forums

first of all japanese men are small they need light armour and a light sword.

most of the european knights would have been huge and much more bigger then the samurai's so much more physical capabilities.

 so i dont think so a 100 lb sword + that heavy armour would be a big issue for a knight.

even though the samurai will be a bit faster but i will still put my money on the knight.

the only difference between me choosing the knight instead of the samurai is the shield.....knight is more like an op urumi on a horse.

hmm this is a good question but let's put some circumstances into effect..

-There is no range so no use of bows.

Now generally Samurai's where taught Judo, which enabled them to have good hand to hand combat skills. Knights on the other hand where more focused on sword fighting since hand to hand combat wasn't common in medieval warfare. Knight's armor was made so it could deflect attacks from an enemies sword and I doubt he would even wear that much armor because that much armor was made for defending against stones,arrows etc. Samurai Armor was made of bamboo and mostly used for defending against slashing. While samurai's armor was weaker it was a little more lighter but not significantly. Knights swords where created for stabbing and crushing bones inside their enemies armor. Samurai's swords where created to slash not stab. So basically this is almost impossible to decide. They both have disadvantages and advantages. Now really I would say it all comes down to their skill and how smart they are in battle.
 

samurai all the was...

i mean samurais have area damage dude! 

imo the knight looks cooler.

the samurai could be a little less berserk =P

Adamakonkon:

imo the knight looks cooler.

the samurai could be a little less berserk =P

samurai looks like a bad guy...he prolly got his ass whooped

Daemien:

Japanese and Chinese or asian warriors in general because they were more skilled in fighting with techniqe.

Q. Can bows peirce armour?

Well depends on the range and the speed of the arrow. 

Fellow:

hmm this is a good question but let's put some circumstances into effect..

-There is no range so no use of bows.

Now generally Samurai's where taught Judo, which enabled them to have good hand to hand combat skills. Knights on the other hand where more focused on sword fighting since hand to hand combat wasn't common in medieval warfare. Knight's armor was made so it could deflect attacks from an enemies sword and I doubt he would even wear that much armor because that much armor was made for defending against stones,arrows etc. Samurai Armor was made of bamboo and mostly used for defending against slashing. While samurai's armor was weaker it was a little more lighter but not significantly. Knights swords where created for stabbing and crushing bones inside their enemies armor. Samurai's swords where created to slash not stab. So basically this is almost impossible to decide. They both have disadvantages and advantages. Now really I would say it all comes down to their skill and how smart they are in battle.
 

This post presents your ignorance, Judo's founder wasn't born until 1860.

Yes they each have advantages and disadvantages, but the fact is, like you said, the samurai used slashing weapons, something not incredibly effective against plate armor.

Yes it does come down to skill and smarts, but one or the other still has an advantage over the other just based off their weapon and armor.

Judo is a sport form of Jujitsu (which was what the samurai learned) and is designed to cause as little injury to your opponent as possible. 

European Knights learned a variety of grappling and wrestling techniques for use in battle, this is well-documented.

And I'm pretty sure Samurai used metal plates for armor, not bamboo.