Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
I'm not saying it was bad at its niche, just that it was no better at that niche than any other weapon.
Someone killed with a katana is just as dead as if they'd been killed with a longsword, and the longsword is useful in other areas. Thus, the katana is the inferior weapon.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
its a niche weapon that never had to evolve.. and by evolve I posit the vast array of european and middle eastern bladed weapons..(also why I prefer collecting those..katana dont vary much in design from one to another..just minor artistic and length variances.each)
So..I lump the katana in the same category of any middle to high quality 2.5 to 3.5 ft length bladed weapon, sure they can be sharp..but so can a good falchion or longsword or hand and half sword..and speed is all in the user.
In short I don't find anything all that special about the 3 foot razor blade..other than the hype around it..and I can wear a nice hand and a half sword on my hip all day long..I think you are making quite a fuss over a pound or so difference.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 01:48:24
Grey Templar wrote: I'm not saying it was bad at its niche, just that it was no better at that niche than any other weapon.
Someone killed with a katana is just as dead as if they'd been killed with a longsword, and the longsword is useful in other areas. Thus, the katana is the inferior weapon.
That statement is not true.
The niche of Katana is control cutting over long sword. This niche Katana is superior.
However, yes a long sword has a better advantage over chain mail because the smaller point tip that can poke between the chain grove vs. Katana broad tip that might not get threw.
The claim that I made is that scalpel razor edge and control. This is the niche. You keep saying that Katana sucks.
I don't disrespect weapons that has been proven useful in history.
The point is you are a Katana hater and I just respect and understand what the history, science , and the niche of usefulness of are. And yes, Katana really shines at it niches.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Again with the silly control thing. The Katana isn't particular special in terms of that.
And actually no, the katana never proved its usefulness. It would have had to have clashed with other weaponry to do that. And when that happened it was made completely obsolete. Instead it shows what it was, the product of a stagnant technological backwater that was quickly eliminated once fresh technology and ideas came in.
If the katana had faced off against other weaponry from several centuries before it, the japanese would have adopted the better outside designs. Likely coming up with their own take on the sabre designs.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
um, most long swords don't have a small enough point to poke through chainmail rings. The point is no smaller than a Katanas, What it does have is the strength to break through the rings and hit the flesh underneath without snapping the blade.
"Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts."
I'm not sure you really understand how metallurgy works.
Or the physics of a cut.
The steel aside, the Katana's cutting power comes from the drawing cut as opposed to the straight chop.
Take a sharp knife.
Lay it on your forearm.
Push.
It'll not cut.
push and draw it across, and you'll fillet yourself to the bone.
The curve of the blade means it presents at an angle and draws across the target slicing rather than cutting.
Next up comes blade geometry, which will give the resistance to the cut in depth due to the shape.
Any curved blade will perform a drawing cut.
The blade geometry of the katana makes it quite thick, as Japanese smiths tended not to use a fuller (Often erroneously called a blood groove)
Fullering a sword adds strength while removing weight, which increases quickness in the hand, and also reducing the drag through flesh.
I can list plenty of curved swords with slicing power to match a katana.
A wootz steel scimitar has it beaten hands down.
An Indian Tulwar will do it too.
As for sharpness, any steel can be sharpened.
If the thought of something makes me giggle for longer than 15 seconds, I am to assume that I am not allowed to do it. item 87, skippys list
DC:70S+++G+++M+++B+++I++Pw40k86/f#-D+++++A++++/cWD86R+++++T(D)DM++
Grey Templar wrote: Again with the silly control thing. The Katana isn't particular special in terms of that.
And actually no, the katana never proved its usefulness. It would have had to have clashed with other weaponry to do that. And when that happened it was made completely obsolete. Instead it shows what it was, the product of a stagnant technological backwater that was quickly eliminated once fresh technology and ideas came in.
If the katana had faced off against other weaponry from several centuries before it, the japanese would have adopted the better outside designs. Likely coming up with their own take on the sabre designs.
Special control thing is handling of the sword and sharpness of the slicing of the blade. You can not get any 3 foot blade that can behead people with such a control that the skin is left hanging. The reason Katana can do this because it is a razor blade. You get a long sword and it would have to base on luck to slice something in one motion and stop it just enough. Long Sword and most European blade are not sharp like razor and use force to cut not sharpness to slice. This is the most powerful niche of the Katana. Sharpness and control.
Again, with your imagery evolution of the weapon. Why would Japanese change from Katana to long Sword for the same purpose niche usefulness in Japan island. They are both swords and can do just about the same function for the Japanese environment. Because of sharpness of Katana, I would think that the Katana would be better at cutting and killing armor less foes. Simple math would tell you that a sharper blade will kill more based on statistic.
You know, in highlander style... movie.. it will always come down to skill which sword is better. Again, you keep trying to tell me that Katana is an inferior weapon. I've handle moving around with katana drawn out or long sword drawn out.... running combat... I have to say that Katana feels better and fighting vs. armorless and none skill fighters like pleasants and rebels. Long Sword is slower to react and to move around because the blade is longer. You want a shorter blade like a Katana to slaughter.
You must judge a weapon for it's period and usage in the environment that it was use for. Hence the Niche of the weapon.
Like Marco Polo in Japan was a good example where two type of weapons can meet and how it faired out. Too bad, no battle was recorded if Cutlas, saber or Katana were better. End of the day... a sword is a sword, don't matter which swords.
marv335 wrote: I'm not sure you really understand how metallurgy works.
Or the physics of a cut.
The steel aside, the Katana's cutting power comes from the drawing cut as opposed to the straight chop.
Take a sharp knife.
Lay it on your forearm.
Push.
It'll not cut.
push and draw it across, and you'll fillet yourself to the bone.
The curve of the blade means it presents at an angle and draws across the target slicing rather than cutting.
Next up comes blade geometry, which will give the resistance to the cut in depth due to the shape.
Any curved blade will perform a drawing cut.
The blade geometry of the katana makes it quite thick, as Japanese smiths tended not to use a fuller (Often erroneously called a blood groove)
Fullering a sword adds strength while removing weight, which increases quickness in the hand, and also reducing the drag through flesh.
I can list plenty of curved swords with slicing power to match a katana.
A wootz steel scimitar has it beaten hands down.
An Indian Tulwar will do it too.
As for sharpness, any steel can be sharpened.
Isn't that what I've been saying? A scimitar, cutlas, saber are very similar to a Katana. The big different is ... the NICHE is
Katana is razor sharpness because of it's technique of forging. This part is important. Any steel can be sharpen as sharp as Katana... but for combat effective... those sharp sword will break or chip, Katana will not and will last longer.
Here is a dude that knows his stuff. Again, I agree with him that Katana sword is just a sword. However, I think the Niche of sharpness and control of a Katana makes it the best weapon for the niche of it's class.
Look at Katana study that this guy did. He proved my point of the sharpness and strength of the weapon with out being fan boy. In fact he debunk many myths of Katana. Again, I NEVER CLAIM any of the Katana myth. He in fact would prefer Rapier in a duel over a Katana.
As always, I never claim Katana is the best weapon in the world. Just the best at it's niche or tie as what a sword is suppose to do.
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
Samurai, well actually Ronin, wielding katanas did go up against European soldiers during the renaissance period. Sometime in the late 16th century Chinese pirates and Japanese samurai mercenaries attacked Spanish shipping in the Philippines. The Philippines being a Spanish colony at the time Spanish soldiers were sent to stop them. Initially the Spanish used muskets but when they ran out of ammo they fought the enemy hand to hand, used the combination of rapier and dagger. The Spanish kicked the crap out of the samurai and their Chinese allies and took their katanas back to Spain as prizes.
Its rather sad how bad that test was. They claim the katana wins because it got slightly more penetration. However the katana didn't hit the same spot as the longsword and got a slightly better spot. And neither weapon would have so much as scratched the guy inside. But the broadsword could cause internal damage due to its greater weight. Plus the katana is in danger of snapping every time it tries to actually stab someone in armor like that.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Now I wonder what happened to Mail Call guy. I tend to image that Ancient Aliens guy came into the office and Mail Call guy just couldn't stand being second fiddle to that radical hair. So Mail Call guy just said 'feth this gak I'm going home.'
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grey Templar wrote: Its rather sad how bad that test was. They claim the katana wins because it got slightly more penetration. However the katana didn't hit the same spot as the longsword and got a slightly better spot. And neither weapon would have so much as scratched the guy inside. But the broadsword could cause internal damage due to its greater weight. Plus the katana is in danger of snapping every time it tries to actually stab someone in armor like that.
Reminds me of the ISU-152 (I did like tanks more than swords ). That 152mm Howitzer didn't pierce the armor of a Tiger. It didn't have to. the sheer force of the shell's explosion would turn the crew into Swiss cheese (and could even blow the turret clean off the tank body).
The same fundamental applies. Blunt force trauma is often worse (especially prior to modern medicine) than cut wounds. Blunt force trauma breaks bones. Causes internal bleeding. In a battle there is little meaningful difference between the two. A guy with broken ribs is just as incapacitated as a guy with a gash from shoulder to thigh. Broken ribs are easier to achieve vs armor.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 03:12:08
EmilCrane wrote: Samurai, well actually Ronin, wielding katanas did go up against European soldiers during the renaissance period. Sometime in the late 16th century Chinese pirates and Japanese samurai mercenaries attacked Spanish shipping in the Philippines. The Philippines being a Spanish colony at the time Spanish soldiers were sent to stop them. Initially the Spanish used muskets but when they ran out of ammo they fought the enemy hand to hand, used the combination of rapier and dagger. The Spanish kicked the crap out of the samurai and their Chinese allies and took their katanas back to Spain as prizes.
LOL...I read the wiki and Spanish won because of better guns and training of the firearm vs. japanese pirates. The hand to hand combat victory was because of Spanish pikes vs. katanas. Never mention the rapier and dagger BS. This proof that organized soliders beat pirates and pikes are better than swords... We all know this.
Where did you get rapiers? It was pikes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 04:28:50
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Because the troops the spanish had were Rodeleros. A very specific type of soldier who used a rapier and a buckler. They were used in conjunction with pikemen as well, their purpose being protecting against troops who closed to within the pikes effective range.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 03:21:16
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Its rather sad how bad that test was. They claim the katana wins because it got slightly more penetration. However the katana didn't hit the same spot as the longsword and got a slightly better spot. And neither weapon would have so much as scratched the guy inside. But the broadsword could cause internal damage due to its greater weight. Plus the katana is in danger of snapping every time it tries to actually stab someone in armor like that.
What happen to your theory that katana won't scratch plate... The freaking katana crack and cause penetration better than the eu sword in every level. I told you back in first page that katana sharpness and hardness has better armor penetration and haters try to dismiss this. Katan can fight vs plate just as good as any eu sword can...if not better at penetration.
Grey Templar wrote: Because the troops the spanish had were Rodeleros. A very specific type of soldier who used a rapier and a buckler. They were used in conjunction with pikemen as well, their purpose being protecting against troops who closed to within the pikes effective range.
I'd be skeptical of that. Rodeleros were phased out of the Spanish military by the mid 16th century. The primary Spanish infantry formation in 1582 (and the one that the linked Wiki article seems to describe) is the Tercio. While there were swordsmen in the Tercio, there weren't many. The primary power of the formation came from a organized and disciplined pike wall protecting a block of musketeers.
Grey Templar wrote: Because the troops the spanish had were Rodeleros. A very specific type of soldier who used a rapier and a buckler. They were used in conjunction with pikemen as well, their purpose being protecting against troops who closed to within the pikes effective range.
Say what you want, but the article illustrated that the star weapon were the pikes and better guns. I wouldn't say the Cowboys beated the Indians because of pistol... It was the rifle.
Its rather sad how bad that test was. They claim the katana wins because it got slightly more penetration. However the katana didn't hit the same spot as the longsword and got a slightly better spot. And neither weapon would have so much as scratched the guy inside. But the broadsword could cause internal damage due to its greater weight. Plus the katana is in danger of snapping every time it tries to actually stab someone in armor like that.
What happen to your theory that katana won't scratch plate... The freaking katana crack and cause penetration better than the eu sword in every level. I told you back in first page that katana sharpness and hardness has better armor penetration and haters try to dismiss this. Katan can fight vs plate just as good as any eu sword can...if not better at penetration.
Katana 1 eu sword 0 lol, jk
Getting 1/2" through plate isn't penetration, denting it isn't penetration. You wouldn't have even broken skin with that due to the copious padding that is also worn. Swords in general aren't great at getting through plate. European swords are better. That video, and show, is so incredibly flawed that it isn't evidence either way.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 03:53:34
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Its rather sad how bad that test was. They claim the katana wins because it got slightly more penetration. However the katana didn't hit the same spot as the longsword and got a slightly better spot. And neither weapon would have so much as scratched the guy inside. But the broadsword could cause internal damage due to its greater weight. Plus the katana is in danger of snapping every time it tries to actually stab someone in armor like that.
What happen to your theory that katana won't scratch plate... The freaking katana crack and cause penetration better than the eu sword in every level. I told you back in first page that katana sharpness and hardness has better armor penetration and haters try to dismiss this. Katan can fight vs plate just as good as any eu sword can...if not better at penetration.
Katana 1 eu sword 0 lol, jk
Getting 1/2" through plate isn't penetration, denting it isn't penetration. You wouldn't have even broken skin with that due to the copious padding that is also worn. Swords in general aren't great at getting through plate. European swords are better. That video, and show, is so incredibly flawed that it isn't evidence either way.
Either way, I know about all sword attacks vs. Plate is not ideal.... but this myth that Katana is worst than long sword because it is so light or thin is so BS. It has the same damage effect as a long sword if not more so. The hardness and sharpness of the Katana is what cause more armor penetration vs. Sword. That was my point... it has better cutting edge and penetration. half inch with force is nothing to laugh at, what if that half in was at the helmet head or the heart. The point is Katana can pen as good if not better than european sword. This katana breakage or won't do any damage is debunk.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
1/2" cut or stab isn't fatal anywhere on the body.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
The armor penetration and denting shows the more power of the blade, not much more but as equal or better for the Katana. However, a better pointed long sword would have gone in about 1 inch I think. So the vs. heavy armor part is about the same.
As I mentioned many times, the niche of the Katana is the freaking cutting power of single edge curve bladed and razor sharpness that allows Katana to do this over most European blade.
So what, what did that Long Sword do to the plate? NO noticeable dent and about 1/4" penetration. And yet, you keep making claim that LS is better? The video stated my Katana niche nicely and I'll even give you LS and Ktana is a draw vs. Plate (even if Katana show much more penetration).
You do not see the bias you have? Even a superior test show favor in Katana, you denied it. lol.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 04:48:59
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
But what did I do? I was just defending facts vs. haters. I never claim that Katana is the best weapon. Just the best at it's niche. This claim is very different.
It is also fun to debunk Katana hater claims too.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 05:12:14
So what, what did that Long Sword do to the plate? NO noticeable dent and about 1/4" penetration. And yet, you keep making claim that LS is better? The video stated my Katana niche nicely and I'll even give you LS and Ktana is a draw vs. Plate (even if Katana show much more penetration).
You do not see the bias you have? Even a superior test show favor in Katana, you denied it. lol.
Yes, the LS is better against armor because it is heavier and imparts more kinetic energy. That video was not comparing apples to apples. It was comparing apples to split pea soup. It was a bad video by a horrible person who made a horrible test that proved absolutely nothing.
Sharpness isn't a great advantage like you seem to think. It does nothing to help against armor and it makes your weapon susceptible to getting chipped and broken.
I don't hate the katana. I just see it for what it actually was, a fancy overengineered weapon that wasn't super practical. It was cool and has the insane mythos surrounding it, but reality puts it squarely in the average category.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 05:18:25
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
david choe wrote: Just the best at it's niche. This claim is very different.
It's a really silly thing to be best at though. By their nature niche means being high specialized. Being highly specialized isn't a very good thing for a weapon in real combat. Despite how games and min-max tends to work out, real life tends to prefer versatility to specialization. The Katana works great for the Samurai in Tokugawa Era Japan. I don't think anyone has really disputed that in thread.
The problem is that that's not really much to be best at. The Long Sword was a much more versatile weapon (though, it probably wouldn't work great for a Samurai in Tokugawa Era Japan , It would simply be too long for their needs as well as illegal). If you were on a battlefield, a Long Sword would without much doubt function better. It was a field weapon, designed for battle. The Katana was not a field weapon, but a personal defense weapon with very specific characteristics derived for a unique situation. The more traditional field swords of the Samurai were much longer and straighter edged blades like the Nodachi (A weapon that was banned by the Tokugawa Shogunate after the Warring States Period).
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 05:39:36
Gentlemen, can we put this name calling and bickering aside for the glory of the Motherland? I present the Shasqua
A fine Russian saber first used by the Cossacks. Has a curved blade, razor sharp, and the handle low and short, meant to be wielded one handed, but you can grasp the back of the grip to stab in a spear-like motion. Weighs about 2 pounds w/modern blacksmithing (1055 Carbon)
This is my favorite blade, and other then that I'll take a hand and a half sword over a katana, though I do own one (also 1055 carbon) and use it for practice cutting
EDIT: Spelling and missing letters, I've been drinking, mybad
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 05:34:28
feeder wrote: Frazz's mind is like a wiener dog in a rabbit warren. Dark, twisting tunnels, and full of the certainty that just around the next bend will be the quarry he seeks.
david choe wrote: Just the best at it's niche. This claim is very different.
It's a really silly thing to be best at though. By their nature niche means being high specialized. Being highly specialized isn't a very good thing for a weapon in real combat. Despite how games and min-max tends to work out, real life tends to prefer versatility to specialization. The Katana works great for the Samurai in Tokugawa Era Japan. I don't think anyone has really disputed that in thread.
The problem is that that's not really much to be best at. The Long Sword was a much more versatile weapon (though, it probably wouldn't work great for a Samurai in Tokugawa Era Japan , It would simply be too long for their needs as well as illegal). If you were on a battlefield, a Long Sword would without much doubt function better. It was a field weapon, designed for battle. The Katana was not a field weapon, but a personal defense weapon with very specific characteristics derived for a unique situation. The more traditional field swords of the Samurai were much longer and straighter edged blades like the Nodachi (A weapon that was banned by the Tokugawa Shogunate after the Warring States Period).
Yes, that is what a niche is and I agree with you. Can you say that war hammer is better than a long sword or a katana? The war hammer has a niche for anti armor, but no cutting at all right? So why do I get so much haters when I say katana is one of the best cutting blade? That is the niche of katana right? So what the heck is the problem?
It is like I am being pick on by haters because they are sick of katana claim to fame and just have strong anti katana bias.
You are right almost 100 %, but I only make claim that the cutting power of katana is one of the best. This kind of stuff is easy to study... It is not like which sword is better in battle...katana or long sword. You guys are making the claim that long sword is better, I am not because I think it won't matter much. Like saying who will win with m16 vs ak 47.
In battle is a whole different can of worms. Formation and weapons is more important than the individule...so pikes and spears susually wins.
For like 4 pages...I keep seeing every other post of straw man argument...with armor in the picture even when that kind of armor was never used vs. katana in real life.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote: Gentlemen, can we put this name calling and bickering aside for the glory of the Motherland? I present the Shasqua
A fine Russian saber first used by the Cossacks. Has a curved blade, razor sharp, and the handle low and short, meant to be wielded one handed, but you can grasp the back of the grip to stab in a spear-like motion. Weighs about 2 pounds w/modern blacksmithing (1055 Carbon)
This is my favorite blade, and other then that I'll take a hand and a half sword over a katana, though I do own one (also 1055 carbon) and use it for practice cutting
EDIT: Spelling and missing letters, I've been drinking, mybad
Hey...I like this sweet looking weapon. It is almost the same as a katana. What is the cutting power of this blade? It is only 2 lb, so I'm guessing it is a slicing and poking and not cutting right? Can it cut arms and heads off with ease like a katana? I will go read about this.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 06:08:25
). That 152mm Howitzer didn't pierce the armor of a Tiger. It didn't have to. the sheer force of the shell's explosion would turn the crew into Swiss cheese (and could even blow the turret clean off the tank body).
3100+
