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 imagine it takes a lot of personal skill to do that. That much could be applied to any weapon, and frankly its a fairly useless skill at that as far a battlefield weapon. And that is what is important, not that it was a fancy execution tool.
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.
As I understand it, when carrying out the art of ritual suicide, the second would ideally judge his blow so that the head was only partially severed, leaving a connected strip of skin to prevent the head rolling away.
It's a unique cultural thing, so unlikely to be found outside of Japan. However any sword with a sharp edge could carry out the same feat, it's a product of the skill of the wielder rather than the blade itself.
Although as a boast, it's poorly thought out...
"Look, my sword almost cut all the way through!"
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: I imagine it takes a lot of personal skill to do that. That much could be applied to any weapon, and frankly its a fairly useless skill at that as far a battlefield weapon. And that is what is important, not that it was a fancy execution tool.
But that is the point of MY DEBATE. I choose to my the claim that it has the best cutting power and control. You disagree with me and I keep making my points on this key Cutting and Control.
Every time I finally proof a point, you brush my proof aside with ... well it is useless in battlefield weapon. The point which was never part of the discussion is battlefield weapon. Katana was not a battle field weapon, why use a Katana when Odachi is longer and also two handed?
I mentioned that it is like a scalpel and you dismiss it. At least I hope you can just accept it as the best scalpel sword with control ability.
Yes, all sword can do this with the right luck and skill.. but we are picking the best tool for the job right? I can use a baseball bat to play golf, but why?
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Except it has been shown that there are indeed swords that cut better than the katana, and this BS control argument you have is all about the person and not the 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.
Grey Templar wrote: Except it has been shown that there are indeed swords that cut better than the katana, and this BS control argument you have is all about the person and not the weapon.
No it is not. The sword that show contender are Kilijs as an example.
A Katana is a scalpel sword. As sharp and clean cut with great control if trained right.
A KILIJ is design to cut but lack this great control. I think the Kilijs is as good or better than Katana in cutting because of the extra weighted head. Not the razor sharp. Yes very sharp, but not the razor. Anyway.... it is a one handed weapon and you can never have a beheading execution weapon of one blow one handed. You need perfect aiming and you need two hand for that. All execution weapon must have the one hit and done job. This one hit must be on target and all execution weapons are two handed. Hence control. Next you need to make stoppage during your hit and let the blade do the slicing just right so the head don't roll. You need a razor edge for that. Kilijs just want be as good.
BTW - some weapons that are one handed can have more force than two handed. Two handed is best for control. A kilijs is a perfect example of one handed that is better than two handed Kilijs. You swing it and let the force goes with it and not hold back as two handed. Kind of hard to explain. Some weapon like a Tomahawk is better as one hand than two handed for maximum impact hit.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 18:44:34
You know... I thik your "control" is pretty much just about the point of balance of a blade. Closer to the hilt=> a more "nimble" blade, that is, its easier to move the tip. Its just a matter of inertia. However, a POB thats close to your hand makes it worse as a pure cuter, since theres less mass behind the cut. Thus, POB close to the hilt is great for thrusting, POB far from the hilt is great for chopping.
Ergo, your "control" is common for any sword with a similar point of balance.
I will grant you that a curved sword is slightly better for cutting, at least when it comes to large targets like a torso. A straight edge hitting a straight plane (more or less) will dissipate lots of energy across the length of the contact area. A curved sword has a smaller, single point of impact, which would allow you to cut slightly deeper. Barring draw cuts, of course.
That said, the amount of edges a sword has is irrelevant. Its just less common for a curved sword to have an edge on the back, though its not actually unheard of.
If you would have ask me to explain this... it would have been easy for you to understand.
The Katana control is this... Most weapon are design as maximum on impact. You want to be able to cut as far as it can cut right?
A katana is two handed so you can swing and stop at the right speed and slice enough with that it can cut only so much and not all the way. This weapon is optimal for you to be able to do this. A long Sword is almost impossible to do this control cutting.
Actuially no, you can do a very lethal head wound and not cut all the way with a cheap Chinese made imported machete. Ask the Hutus.
So the test of how you can make this control cut is to behead people and leave the front skin of the head left so the heads don't roll. A master Katana or Shogun executioner or other specialist executioner can do this and only with a Katana. You can I guess, in theory with long sword, but it will just be almost impossible and why do that, when you can just train with a Katana and get the more optimal cut.
Debatable. I suspect katanas were used as a the iconic samurai weapon, The kaishaku -nin you are describing wants to honour the principal of seppuku and gains honour himself with a correct cut.
As for why would you want to make this kind of execution? I think you heard of seppuku killing right? When a person gut his own guts as punishment. Well some high ranking samurai or lords who must commit seppuku in front of other high ranking lords or shogun would do this... and they usually have a executioner standing ready with a Katana ready to behead them after they have commit the act of seppuku. This is to show a bit of mercy because gutting is very painful. Now for a normal seppuku the beheading is cut and the head rolls is not a big deal. When a specialist like Shogun executioner is requested for the important death like a high ranking lords that must commit seppuku in front of many important guest like shogun, the rolling of the head is not very nice and polite at their present and also to let the dead have his head still part of his body. So this control is a must in the weapon... to cut the head and leave the skin on. Note, this is not a myth.
There were a lot of customs regarding correct seppuku, women would ask for their knees to be bound so that in death would not expose their modesty. The decision of when the kasishaku-nin was to strike and how deep was given by either the principle or sometimes their lord. Sometimes the assistant would make the mercy cut as the principal moved to grab the knife, or at the first second or third cuts. a Principal might ask for the assistant to strike at any cut and this could be overruled if the seppuku was drawn out so as to save honour of the principal.
If anyone was to be part decapitated then its just a skill move on the part of the kaishaku-nin and a point of honour.
All this is deeply ceremonial and has ceremonial meaning and not due to the katana alone being able to perform the job.
That said, the amount of edges a sword has is irrelevant. Its just less common for a curved sword to have an edge on the back, though its not actually unheard of.
For later sword designs having a double edge for the bottom quarter of the weapon was common. Its like a 'toolbox' edge, because you never know when you need it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 18:47:38
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Tyr13 wrote: You know... I thik your "control" is pretty much just about the point of balance of a blade. Closer to the hilt=> a more "nimble" blade, that is, its easier to move the tip. Its just a matter of inertia. However, a POB thats close to your hand makes it worse as a pure cuter, since theres less mass behind the cut. Thus, POB close to the hilt is great for thrusting, POB far from the hilt is great for chopping.
Ergo, your "control" is common for any sword with a similar point of balance.
I will grant you that a curved sword is slightly better for cutting, at least when it comes to large targets like a torso. A straight edge hitting a straight plane (more or less) will dissipate lots of energy across the length of the contact area. A curved sword has a smaller, single point of impact, which would allow you to cut slightly deeper. Barring draw cuts, of course.
That said, the amount of edges a sword has is irrelevant. Its just less common for a curved sword to have an edge on the back, though its not actually unheard of.
No not POB of the blade. Must be with in the context of cutting power. Katana is actually very not balance blade at all. It has no pommel to counter balance. The blade is heavy. All the force goes with the cut. The key to control of Katana is the razor sharp, two handed. If you need to do that great control choice cut you want, you don't have to go all out and swing just right and let the razor do the work. I keep pointing this out. If you have a razor edge, you can control your cut. If you need force to make the slice more effective like a Claymore or long Sword, it is harder to control the cut.
Now the POB for control for fancy fencing will be long sword. You can spin around a long sword and do all kinds of cool tricks with it. Do you every see a Katana do this? No. You can't. It is a One hit with control kind of thing. You can't be fancy with it. I hope you understand what control cut is now.
The debate of single vs. double is that as mentioned before....you can not have a functional razor double edge blade or it will be a weak blade and break. You can have a single razor edge and have it as a functional weapon with out breakage.
Think about this if all the advantage is in the double edge, why make single edge? What good is a single edge? You are telling me that the blacksmith can sharpen the other side of the Katana or a Scimitar? They don't want to break the blade and take the draw back as a single edge but with the extra sharpness.
The rule of thumb is single can have the sharper vs. the double.
The rule of thumb of curve has the cutting advantage v.s straight.
The rule of thumb of Straight is thrust and control of the thrust.
This crap is all give or take mini or maxi stuff.
You want full power of cuts.. SINGLE AND CURVE.
You want full power of thrust w/ control... you go STRAIT AND DOUBLE. Hence why rapier is built this way.
I understand this gak and ... this has nothing to do with Katana or long sword.. it is basic weapon design.
Two handed is best for control. A kilijs is a perfect example of one handed that is better than two handed Kilijs. You swing it and let the force goes with it and not hold back as two handed. Kind of hard to explain. Some weapon like a Tomahawk is better as one hand than two handed for maximum impact hit.
Actually I disagree, shorter is best for control. You can have shorter blades two handed swords.
In fact control with a slashing weapon is more about making sure the blade isnt stuck, executions are different as you have a prepared stance and a still target.
If you really want to see control in action then you are picking the wrong weapon.
The gladius was specifically designed for control of the wound in mind. A typical gladius wound was delivered to the abdomen, in a single thrust and only penetrated two or three inches. This would be immediately debilitating and excruciatingly painful, and the recipient of the wound would take a long time to die. The roman sculpture above highlights this, but does so politically giving the Gaul some dignity and is sanitised in a way. In actuality the line of soon to be corpses writhing and screaming in front of the line of roman soldiers were a physical barrier to the opponent and a psychological incentive not to close. Gut wounds are not the type you quietly die from, especially a minimum gut wound like this which ode just enough to kill eventually but no more than that.
When facing irregular forces this type of warfare had its advantages. If facing say other romans a quicker kill would be preferred, the gladius can kill very quickly and easily also.
If you want to talk about control in a meaningful way you need a thrusting sword. Even a spear didn't have that sort of control.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 19:08:19
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Grey Templar wrote: I imagine it takes a lot of personal skill to do that. That much could be applied to any weapon, and frankly its a fairly useless skill at that as far a battlefield weapon. And that is what is important, not that it was a fancy execution tool.
But that is the point of MY DEBATE. I choose to my the claim that it has the best cutting power and control. You disagree with me and I keep making my points on this key Cutting and Control.
Every time I finally proof a point, you brush my proof aside with ... well it is useless in battlefield weapon. The point which was never part of the discussion is battlefield weapon. Katana was not a battle field weapon, why use a Katana when Odachi is longer and also two handed?
I mentioned that it is like a scalpel and you dismiss it. At least I hope you can just accept it as the best scalpel sword with control ability.
Yes, all sword can do this with the right luck and skill.. but we are picking the best tool for the job right? I can use a baseball bat to play golf, but why?
Ultimately, YOU yourself said to the effect of "I dont want this to be a fanboy vs. haters argument" and yet YOU have personally turned it into exactly that. EVERY. SINGLE. POST. You have made comes across as a fanboy under siege.
You originally asked if there were any other edged weapons that had a "quick draw attack" like the Katana, we replied in kind that, yes, there are other swords that can do that.
Sure, the Katana was best in it's "niche".... in the vacuum that was feudal Japan. Yes, it's a cutting weapon. Yes, it's "razor sharp" which, as has been pointed out numerous times, is actually a BAD thing on a BATTLEFIELD. That little video with R. Lee Ermey a few pages back was laughably funny because, as I personally pointed out, there is archeological/historical record of soldiers being hit with an overhand blow to the head wherein a European Longsword punctured through the steel plate helm, through the padding, through the skull, and the cut was finally stopped by the victim's top row of teeth.
You want to talk about accuracy and control? Fine... during a typical fight in which knights were wearing a full suit of plate armor, if they were both wielding swords, they knew their best chance of winning was to exploit the small gaps in the armor. Strike in a gap, and you are cutting flesh. Cut the flesh and you are going to eliminate that limb (cutting tendons, etc) or you are going to significantly alter that opponents' fighting style (he's most likely going to go on the defensive, and protect what's already been hit)... And we have tons of records of THAT sort of thing happening.
Every weapon, whether it's a sword, mace, axe, polearm, etc. has a set of attributes, strengths and weaknesses in them. In Europe, near constant warfare meant constant innovation and improvement, which is why we see variations to basic designs based on successes and failures:
Spoiler:
Scottish claymore vs. Swiss/German Zweihander
Each had it's "prefered" uses, but you can see the similarities in the basic design.... Each ended up in vastly different places though
You should know, I am a historian..... Im not a katana "hater", I find their blades, when properly made to be among the most beautiful in the world.... But, I'm not a fanboy either, the katana does have some rather glaring weaknesses, and it seems that in post after post, you are more than willing to look past those weaknesses to say, "LOOK!!! I told you, you're ALL haterrrrzz!!!" Many of the points made here have been spot on... Viking swords made in Scandinavia were incredibly expensive to make, and weren't of as good a quality as an Ulfberht sword. In fact, the Elfberht sword/blade was so prized and so incredibly valuable, that it was the de facto most counterfeited item in all of scandinavia... The fact that we still have many of these "forgeries" should tell you the length that the forgers went to creating a quality blade to attempt to rival and Ulfberht.
As to your bit about "luck and skill"... well, that's a bunch of BS, because the best swordsmen, regardless of where they're from aren't going to have "luck" to rely on... William Marshall didn't survive and serve under 5 English kings because he was lucky. He did so because he was good and proved his value as a living weapon.
Tyr13 wrote: You know... I thik your "control" is pretty much just about the point of balance of a blade. Closer to the hilt=> a more "nimble" blade, that is, its easier to move the tip. Its just a matter of inertia. However, a POB thats close to your hand makes it worse as a pure cuter, since theres less mass behind the cut. Thus, POB close to the hilt is great for thrusting, POB far from the hilt is great for chopping.
Ergo, your "control" is common for any sword with a similar point of balance.
I will grant you that a curved sword is slightly better for cutting, at least when it comes to large targets like a torso. A straight edge hitting a straight plane (more or less) will dissipate lots of energy across the length of the contact area. A curved sword has a smaller, single point of impact, which would allow you to cut slightly deeper. Barring draw cuts, of course.
That said, the amount of edges a sword has is irrelevant. Its just less common for a curved sword to have an edge on the back, though its not actually unheard of.
No not POB of the blade. Must be with in the context of cutting power. Katana is actually very not balance blade at all. It has no pommel to counter balance. The blade is heavy. All the force goes with the cut. The key to control of Katana is the razor sharp, two handed. If you need to do that great control choice cut you want, you don't have to go all out and swing just right and let the razor do the work. I keep pointing this out. If you have a razor edge, you can control your cut. If you need force to make the slice more effective like a Claymore or long Sword, it is harder to control the cut.
Now the POB for control for fancy fencing will be long sword. You can spin around a long sword and do all kinds of cool tricks with it. Do you ever see a Katana do this? No. You can't. It is a One hit with control kind of thing. You can't be fancy with it. I hope you understand what control cut is now.
The debate of single vs. double is that as mentioned before....you can not have a functional razor double edge blade or it will be a weak blade and break. You can have a single razor edge and have it as a functional weapon with out breakage.
Think about this if all the advantage is in the double edge, why make single edge? What good is a single edge? You are telling me that the blacksmith can't sharpen the other side of the Katana or a Scimitar? They don't want to break the blade and take the draw back as a single edge but with the extra sharpness.
The rule of thumb is single can have the sharper vs. the double.
The rule of thumb of curve has the cutting advantage v.s straight.
The rule of thumb of Straight is thrust and control of the thrust.
This crap is all give or take mini or maxi stuff.
You want full power of cuts.. SINGLE AND CURVE.
You want full power of thrust w/ control... you go STRAIT AND DOUBLE. Hence why rapier is built this way.
I understand this gak and ... this has nothing to do with Katana or long sword.. it is basic weapon design.
Two handed is best for control. A kilijs is a perfect example of one handed that is better than two handed Kilijs. You swing it and let the force goes with it and not hold back as two handed. Kind of hard to explain. Some weapon like a Tomahawk is better as one hand than two handed for maximum impact hit.
Actually I disagree, shorter is best for control. You can have shorter blades two handed swords.
In fact control with a slashing weapon is more about making sure the blade isnt stuck, executions are different as you have a prepared stance and a still target.
If you really want to see control in action then you are picking the wrong weapon.
The gladius was specifically designed for control of the wound in mind. A typical gladius wound was delivered to the abdomen, in a single thrust and only penetrated two or three inches. This would be immediately debilitating and excruciatingly painful, and the recipient of the wound would take a long time to die. The roman sculpture above highlights this, but does so politically giving the Gaul some dignity and is sanitised in a way. In actuality the line of soon to be corpses writhing and screaming in front of the line of roman soldiers were a physical barrier to the opponent and a psychological incentive not to close. Gut wounds are not the type you quietly die from, especially a minimum gut wound like this which ode just enough to kill eventually but no more than that.
When facing irregular forces this type of warfare had its advantages. If facing say other romans a quicker kill would be preferred, the gladius can kill very quickly and easily also.
If you want to talk about control in a meaningful way you need a thrusting sword. Even a spear didn't have that sort of control.
You are making my point with out even knowing it. A Katana by european standard is a short sword using two hands.
The blade of a Katana is only about 2.5 feet long and using two had of this short sword is why I keep saying it has great cutting control. You want a short two-handed sword, it is a Katana. The Katana blade is heavy for such as short weapon. The blade is thick and cause more impact cut hit. The saber is a thinner blade and much lighter than a Katana.
You keep bring other weapons that outshine katana in one aspect but lack other aspect. This is why I keep stating that Katana has it's niche and is the king of blades at that niche.
Kilijis is a contender, but lack the two handed control.
Gladius is not even comparable weapon. Not saying it is bad. The cutting power of Gladius is a joke compare to Katana. Which agin, the KING of Best Cutting Blade with control I keep claiming.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 19:16:52
What? The American education system is even worse than I thought? So you are a native English speaker and for some reason your spelling and grammar (not to mention your style) are even worse than that of 15yo Russian kid who only learned it as a third language?
david choe wrote: and some how I am embarrassed that I have this long discussion with you....
Well, the reason you are having this long discussion with him is because your arguments are unconvincing because they show little logic and are not backed by any sort of credible evidence, yet you still refuse to accept the credible, evidence-backed positions proposed by others in this thread. We all love arguments here, but they need to be logical and backed by credible evidence. Reserve the appeals to emotion for political arguments.
Also, I feel this (very interesting btw) discussion is being drawn out because it has become clear what exactly is being argued over... Also, people mess up cutting with slashing (they are not the same) Swords are for slashing, axes and machetes for cutting.
Also, the best weapons for slashing are large two-handed weapons such as the Zweihander.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 19:25:15
A Katana by european standard is a short sword using two hands.
No. Just, no... not even fething close.
The blade of a Katana is only about 2.5 feet long and using two had of this short sword is why I keep saying it has great cutting control. You want a short two-handed sword, it is a Katana. The Katana blade is heavy for such as short weapon. The blade is thick and cause more impact cut hit. The saber is a thinner blade and much lighter than a Katana.
No, the Katana having a thicker profile on the back end means that if the wielder misjudges his strike/cut, the weapon can get lodged in the target, creating a situation where he leaves himself vulnerable while removing it, or he needs to get rid of the blade and go to another weapon. The saber, by virtue of being thinner, and again, a cavalry weapon, means that there's much less risk of that happening. But then, when you're discussing 18th and 19th century cavalry sabers, you are talking about men whose "armor" is a wool jacket. This means the force of the strike doesn't need to be as great, and so long as the blade makes contact and the "drawing" motion happens, there's going to be some significant damage happening.
You keep bring other weapons that outshine katana in one aspect but lack other aspect. This is why I keep stating that Katana has it's niche and is the king of blades at that niche.
No... people keep bringing up weapons that outshine the Katana in all the aspects that YOU say make it the "king".... the Katana's "niche" exists purely in a vacuum... Feudal Japan did not have much contact with outside peoples, and they were quite content to just kill each other for a long time.... This basically created a situation where warfare became "ritualized" and as such, you see little to no development in weapons and armor, until European people showed up.
Kilijis is a contender, but lack the two handed control.
Gladius is not even comparable weapon. Not saying it is bad. The cutting power of Gladius is a joke compare to Katana. Which agin, the KING of Best Cutting Blade with control I keep claiming.
Control. control... you keep using this word, but I don't think it means what you think it does. Again, keep up your fanboy-ism here.
Also, the best weapons for slashing are large two-handed weapons such as the Zweihander.
Yes and no.... The Zweihander in particular was designed to counter the pike formations popular in 16th-17th century warfare. The Swiss mercenaries would use the Zweihander not so much against the infantry block, but rather to behead the enemy pike, leaving him with basically a quarterstaff or big stick.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 19:29:23
Grey Templar wrote: I imagine it takes a lot of personal skill to do that. That much could be applied to any weapon, and frankly its a fairly useless skill at that as far a battlefield weapon. And that is what is important, not that it was a fancy execution tool.
But that is the point of MY DEBATE. I choose to my the claim that it has the best cutting power and control. You disagree with me and I keep making my points on this key Cutting and Control.
Every time I finally proof a point, you brush my proof aside with ... well it is useless in battlefield weapon. The point which was never part of the discussion is battlefield weapon. Katana was not a battle field weapon, why use a Katana when Odachi is longer and also two handed?
I mentioned that it is like a scalpel and you dismiss it. At least I hope you can just accept it as the best scalpel sword with control ability.
Yes, all sword can do this with the right luck and skill.. but we are picking the best tool for the job right? I can use a baseball bat to play golf, but why?
Ultimately, YOU yourself said to the effect of "I dont want this to be a fanboy vs. haters argument" and yet YOU have personally turned it into exactly that. EVERY. SINGLE. POST. You have made comes across as a fanboy under siege.
You originally asked if there were any other edged weapons that had a "quick draw attack" like the Katana, we replied in kind that, yes, there are other swords that can do that.
Sure, the Katana was best in it's "niche".... in the vacuum that was feudal Japan. Yes, it's a cutting weapon. Yes, it's "razor sharp" which, as has been pointed out numerous times, is actually a BAD thing on a BATTLEFIELD. That little video with R. Lee Ermey a few pages back was laughably funny because, as I personally pointed out, there is archeological/historical record of soldiers being hit with an overhand blow to the head wherein a European Longsword punctured through the steel plate helm, through the padding, through the skull, and the cut was finally stopped by the victim's top row of teeth.
You want to talk about accuracy and control? Fine... during a typical fight in which knights were wearing a full suit of plate armor, if they were both wielding swords, they knew their best chance of winning was to exploit the small gaps in the armor. Strike in a gap, and you are cutting flesh. Cut the flesh and you are going to eliminate that limb (cutting tendons, etc) or you are going to significantly alter that opponents' fighting style (he's most likely going to go on the defensive, and protect what's already been hit)... And we have tons of records of THAT sort of thing happening.
Every weapon, whether it's a sword, mace, axe, polearm, etc. has a set of attributes, strengths and weaknesses in them. In Europe, near constant warfare meant constant innovation and improvement, which is why we see variations to basic designs based on successes and failures:
Spoiler:
Scottish claymore vs. Swiss/German Zweihander
Each had it's "prefered" uses, but you can see the similarities in the basic design.... Each ended up in vastly different places though
You should know, I am a historian..... Im not a katana "hater", I find their blades, when properly made to be among the most beautiful in the world.... But, I'm not a fanboy either, the katana does have some rather glaring weaknesses, and it seems that in post after post, you are more than willing to look past those weaknesses to say, "LOOK!!! I told you, you're ALL haterrrrzz!!!" Many of the points made here have been spot on... Viking swords made in Scandinavia were incredibly expensive to make, and weren't of as good a quality as an Ulfberht sword. In fact, the Elfberht sword/blade was so prized and so incredibly valuable, that it was the de facto most counterfeited item in all of scandinavia... The fact that we still have many of these "forgeries" should tell you the length that the forgers went to creating a quality blade to attempt to rival and Ulfberht.
As to your bit about "luck and skill"... well, that's a bunch of BS, because the best swordsmen, regardless of where they're from aren't going to have "luck" to rely on... William Marshall didn't survive and serve under 5 English kings because he was lucky. He did so because he was good and proved his value as a living weapon.
I am going to politely say to you that you kind of join in late in this discussion. You are bringing straw man argument against me again.
I wish we all can just do a point by point update here ... but since it is just me against the 20 of you, I am too lazy.
I feel like many just can't except the facts that i've stated.
I never disagree on any facts. I agree with somebody who mentioned that some Indian and Kilijs were a contender of the cutting power. However, those weapons lack control cuts ability of a Katana.
The disagreement of my statements is that Katana can't be as control cut as I make the claim. Then I put a challenge that well design me a weapon that can have the best control cutting power. Almost all the weapons are not being narrow down to many single edge curve blade. The long sword finally disappear from this argument.
Many of you think that I'm some fanboi so you guys comes at me from that perspective and keep missing the topic of my claims. How many post have I have to deflect and defend about that Katana is not a battle field weapon. Yet, you are bringing this up again.
I'll say it again. My claim is ...
KATANA IS THE BEST CUTTING BLADE WITH CONTROL... now the control is more define as the control of the cut. Basically I am declaring that we are having a discussion on what would be the best sword (side arm category sword) that can have the strong cutting power and with control? If this measurement is by the numbers of Pigs then so be it. What this means is if we stack 5 pigs. Get your sword out and with one stroke cut, how many pigs can be cut.
The control cut test is if a Katana can cut 3 pigs, can a master Katana cut with the sword on the stack test.. but only cut 1.5 pig?
The great control of Katana is not just skill of the user. It is also the design of the weapon that allows the user to show this ability.
So far in this contest that i have been making ... have pretty much eliminated all strait double edge blade.
Go back to page 2 or 3 mate... I've been here since basically the beginning
I don't think you're some kind of fanboi... but you sure as heck are coming across as one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And again... control is down to the user, not the damn weapon... it's such a ridiculous argument for you to be taking.
And if you really, reeeaaaallly want to turn this into a contest here goes...
The Crusades, The Hundred Years' War, The Battle of Hastings, The Viking incursions/battles. The Roman Empire.... I can keep on going here. ALL of these wars, and battles prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that European weapons are superior at killing an armored foe. No, not everyone died by sword in those wars and battles, but the death tolls were much, much higher than much of what has existed in Japan.
We have also pointed out to you that the razor sharpness of a Katana, is actually a detriment because it will become dull in fewer cuts/slices than most other weapons.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 19:42:40
What? The American education system is even worse than I thought? So you are a native English speaker and for some reason your spelling and grammar (not to mention your style) are even worse than that of 15yo Russian kid who only learned it as a third language?
david choe wrote: and some how I am embarrassed that I have this long discussion with you....
Well, the reason you are having this long discussion with him is because your arguments are unconvincing because they show little logic and are not backed by any sort of credible evidence, yet you still refuse to accept the credible, evidence-backed positions proposed by others in this thread. We all love arguments here, but they need to be logical and backed by credible evidence. Reserve the appeals to emotion for political arguments.
Also, I feel this (very interesting btw) discussion is being drawn out because it has become clear what exactly is being argued over...
Also, people mess up cutting with slashing (they are not the same) Swords are for slashing, axes and machetes for cutting.
Also, the best weapons for slashing are large two-handed weapons such as the Zweihander.
ok commie.. you want to get racist here? I have to type fast and crazy... you know.. each post is like with in 5 mins. Give me a break dude.
It has been drawn out because people want to debate with me and they don't know what the premise is. The premise is clear and I've stated multiple times, I don't know if some are trolling or ignorance or just didn't read enough of the post and decide to chime in because they think that I am a Katana fanboi and keep bring this straw man argument of this X weapon is beat Katana or Katana can't cut armor.
Basically I am declaring that we are having a discussion on what would be the best sword
No... THIS is your OP:
david choe wrote: I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like the Katana.
I can't think of any.
And THAT is what we're discussing... If you wanted a discussion on best sword, which many, many of us have pointed out better swords, you should have put it in the OP.
And the hubris of declaring what we are discussing.
The Katana is a decent weapon, made of inferior materials. AGAIN, it is good within the vacuum that was feudal Japan.... If the Samurai had had to face the armies of the HRE, or Swiss Mercenaries, they would have been soundly defeated. Period. End of. The reason for that is the combined arms and armor of Europeans.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Go back to page 2 or 3 mate... I've been here since basically the beginning
I don't think you're some kind of fanboi... but you sure as heck are coming across as one.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And again... control is down to the user, not the damn weapon... it's such a ridiculous argument for you to be taking.
And if you really, reeeaaaallly want to turn this into a contest here goes...
The Crusades, The Hundred Years' War, The Battle of Hastings, The Viking incursions/battles. The Roman Empire.... I can keep on going here. ALL of these wars, and battles prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt that European weapons are superior at killing an armored foe. No, not everyone died by sword in those wars and battles, but the death tolls were much, much higher than much of what has existed in Japan.
We have also pointed out to you that the razor sharpness of a Katana, is actually a detriment because it will become dull in fewer cuts/slices than most other weapons.
so what do you think my claim is? Tell me, because your point is not within the discussion. I would rather debate with people who disagree on the statement that I am claiming and not put words in my mouth. If you can't tell what I am claiming, then how are you going to know that you are raising a straw man argument.
Factors that matter that are never made clear by Deadliest Warrior;
Weight of the carcass (they didn't even use a full carcass on their episode with the Katana, just a pig leg, many later episodes like the Kilij used a full carcass).
Type of pig (because for all I know it matters )
Level of prepardness for the blade prior to cutting, materials in its construction, the authenticity of manufacture
Factors that the show just entirely ignores
The person swinging the sword (size, muscle strength, skill)
It's not a reliable test. It's not even scientific. It's "how cool would it be if we got a bunch of old weapons and wacked stuff with them?"
Going back to this comment by Lord of Hats, I thimnk there is much to be added from observation.
Take a look at these two videos of 'pig tests':
Pig is tied taut at the hind legs
the second blow has less power than the first, it severs but not as cleanly.
The blow was also wide open using all the force of the body, an execution blow. Ih combat this person might not have lived to strike.
Pig is tied loosely at the hind legs
The stance is more reasonable and starts from a guarded position but is still open.
So not all pig tests are the same, and if they are not performed in similar conditions the same the evidence gained is unscientific.
I am trying to find a video earlier of a 'pig test' that included the katana and didn't cut through the animal, admittedly the european sword didnt either, but in the video the user slashed at the pig carcass which was on a table, and from a fighting stance rather than with a wide open executioners cut. I found that particular video far more useful as it would show morel likely battlefield wounds. The video makers were impressed the swords broke through to the bone in an army rather than bisected the animal.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 19:57:28
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Basically I am declaring that we are having a discussion on what would be the best sword
No... THIS is your OP:
david choe wrote: I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like the Katana.
I can't think of any.
And THAT is what we're discussing... If you wanted a discussion on best sword, which many, many of us have pointed out better swords, you should have put it in the OP.
And the hubris of declaring what we are discussing.
The Katana is a decent weapon, made of inferior materials. AGAIN, it is good within the vacuum that was feudal Japan.... If the Samurai had had to face the armies of the HRE, or Swiss Mercenaries, they would have been soundly defeated. Period. End of. The reason for that is the combined arms and armor of Europeans.
Well then.. you made a bit of mistake.
The OP was best sword for the quick draw. Then it came to past and the conclusion that I believe were none exist except for a Katana as a quick draw strike. Some suggested daggers and try to tell me that quick draw were useless because that hate Katanas. I mean... then that topic was done. Conclusion were no quick draw attack exist as a method of attacking using that weapon. Only Katana has this method of attack as a signature move.
Then to topic switch to the discussion of the Katana.
And I made a bold statement that Katana was the best cutting (with control) sword in the sword side arm category. This debate is still going on. Many attempt to give me a straw man argument such as Katana can't cut armor... can any side arm sword do that, i pointed right back. Then Katana will break vs. plate armor... again.. why would you choose a Katana to cut armor? Derail the discussion into what I never claim the Katana is.
Your claim is that Katanas are the uber-most-precisest weapon evar!!!
What I am saying, is that in all the things that I listed, armor is generally involved... As such, when using a sword Europeans absolutely MUST be more precise than you seem to think possible for them.
The Katana, as a weapon of Japanese warriors, who, were by and large extremely isolationist until Europeans arrived on their island, never had to progress or change. A sword is meant to kill. Plain and simple. And I think many of us have shown, and proven time and again, that there are other blades that are better at it.
Again, that the Japanese craftsmen could get the kind of quality they did out of the materials they had is amazing, and some of the antique pieces you can see in museums are quite beautiful to look at. But to claim that it's the BEST is simply wrong.
But then so are anime samurai with magic katanas emitting elemental forces.
Neither advance the case.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
But then so are anime samurai with magic katanas emitting elemental forces.
Neither advance the case.
Hear, hear.
Katanas, nowadays, are mostly used for flashy stuff. There are a lot of gimmicky uses for them, such as e.g. splitting a full water bottle in half, splitting cards in half in mid-air, Haidong Gumbo and similar stuff. Katanas are excellent tools for this as their top-notch sharpness and thin edge allows for sharp and precise cuts; with a skilled user, of course. I couldn't do stuff like this with a regular sword, let alone axe. Vs. a water bottle, for example, most of the time, if not all the time, you would end up just smacking the water bottle around, brutally destroying it in the process. That's what a katana is good for. As stated before, however, as a weapon, it sucks and stinks off vs. actual comparable weapons.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 20:16:17
I think a true test is to have Pig or dummy and have a none bias guy swing the weapon and see the impact hit right?
I understand we have to keep it as scientific as possible. But test can be done and I am sure has been done.
If you guys seen the youtube video or know about Katana is general and understand other weapons in the same category...
You know that Katana is one of the best in the Cutting category. Lets not make an argument in the details. You can keep trying to proof to this "fanboi" that I am wrong about Katana.. but the proof will be nit picking at most. Katana is one of the best if not the best for cutting. Enough of this Pig testing. The tatami bamboo chopping test has been done to death too.
Scalpel or control detail of this cut, again.. it is in the user. But Katana give the user a optimal tool for this task much better than most other sword.
I think I have made a very strong case about this two claims. Even if you disagree with me, can you give me your answer of what side arm sword can out class Katana in this two category? The Kilijs is close, but I think lost to the control issue.
If you do not like my claim and disagree that my claim is useless... then WTF? I didn't say Katana beat Rapier in duels, but I am saying that a Katana can cut better than rapier. That was just an example.
So lets end this debate, pick a weapon(side arm sword) that you think can out cut a Katana in the same test of cutting for both weapons.
Then see which weapons can make the control cut better? Example, if a X blade can cut 3 pigs... then can the cutter choose to just cut one or two and not go all out to cut 3?
Put up or shut up kind of thing you know? Stop with the my test is useless and this proof nothing as a battle sword.
This proof that I was correct that it is the best cutting blade with control. You want to disagree with my proof, then show me. Don't change the disagreement and turn this into a Katana vs. X sword of your choice.
I have also stated that I am a purest....I would love to see a better sword than Katana in this Test. I would love to tell other that Katana is not the best at cutting with control anymore ..... it is this X sword from Spain that I have never heard of. Man I hate being type cast as Katana fanboi.
Your claim is that Katanas are the uber-most-precisest weapon evar!!!
What I am saying, is that in all the things that I listed, armor is generally involved... As such, when using a sword Europeans absolutely MUST be more precise than you seem to think possible for them.
The Katana, as a weapon of Japanese warriors, who, were by and large extremely isolationist until Europeans arrived on their island, never had to progress or change. A sword is meant to kill. Plain and simple. And I think many of us have shown, and proven time and again, that there are other blades that are better at it.
Again, that the Japanese craftsmen could get the kind of quality they did out of the materials they had is amazing, and some of the antique pieces you can see in museums are quite beautiful to look at. But to claim that it's the BEST is simply wrong.
See, you do not know what my claim is...
I said that Katana is the best side arm sword in the control cutting category.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/08 20:22:50
Control is down to the user. Done. I have done exactly ZERO training with a Katana, but I have done some with European style swords (my only "battle ready" sword that I own is a true Hand and a Half Sword/ aka, Bastard Sword). As such, if it were me personally being the "guinea pig" in a pig cutting, card cutting, etc. type "test" the results would probably favor the European sword.
If we're demonstrating how different swords cut through, say, a flattened cardboard box, the one thing the Katana will do, is cut through cleaner than many other straight blades.
IIRC, many of the 18th and 19th century cavalry sabers were designed off of examples taken from Japan, the ME, India, etc. and refined in ways that "only" Europe can do. As such, I think that a saber from that period COULD give the Katana a run for the money.
But, all of these lab tests are only so useful. Swords, with few exceptions are designed for killing. And we've pointed out there are plenty that do it better than a Katana. Sure, you can butcher a million pigs, or bamboo rolls to prove how sharp a blade is, but that doesn't mean it's effective anywhere else.
And if we want to be technical, ALL of this is completely OT. As I reposted your own OP earlier in this page.. you asked a question "are there other swords that have the quick draw ability" To which, we answered you. THAT should have been the end of discussion. It was you who turned this into a "katana vs X" debate.
david choe wrote: I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like the Katana.
I can't think of any.
Well then.. you made a bit of mistake.
The OP was best sword for the quick draw.
I left your OP quoted there... No where in that does it say "best". you say, and I'll quote again: "I was wondering if there are any western swords that can do a quick draw attack like that Katana"
There's not even a hint of a "best at" discussion here. If that is really what you wanted, you should have put that in the OP.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/08 20:31:59
Frazzie gave the first reponse and quickly noted that it was about technique not sword that was important, then left the thread.
When Frazzie is the one being wise around here something is wrong.
I think I have had my say.
Yes Japanese had specific quick draw techniques which are a result of the societal conditions of the Tokugawa shogunate.
Other swords can be drawn very quickly but few had any specific quick draw technique developed as it was not necessary.
This is not due to the 'superiroity' of the katana, had the Japanese cultural weapon been different a quick draw style for that would have been required.
Again exceptions, like Roman short sword quick draw drills existed, and some weapons were designed as secondary weaponsd and ease of access was an important factor in their design without going as far as 'knives'. The scramseax and epee are two such examples from different periods of history.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
But then so are anime samurai with magic katanas emitting elemental forces.
Neither advance the case.
Hear, hear.
Katanas, nowadays, are mostly used for flashy stuff. There are a lot of gimmicky uses for them, such as e.g. splitting a full water bottle in half, splitting cards in half in mid-air, Haidong Gumbo and similar stuff. Katanas are excellent tools for this as their top-notch sharpness and thin edge allows for sharp and precise cuts; with a skilled user, of course. I couldn't do stuff like this with a regular sword, let alone axe. Vs. a water bottle, for example, most of the time, if not all the time, you would end up just smacking the water bottle around, brutally destroying it in the process. That's what a katana is good for. As stated before, however, as a weapon, it sucks and stinks off vs. actual comparable weapons.
see... this comment is a bit full of bias right?
Yeah you just mentioned that this Katana is great at cutting.
Then as a weapon it sucks ....vs. comparable weapon. That is a powerful statement. It sucks?
What are you going to compare a Katana against? Whatever comparable weapon you compare against, it won't suck. It will have advantages and disadvantages...
All side arm swords will be just about the same in a side arm combat... usually meaning fighting with no armor. You have your main weapon decide for the foes you are facing right? Side arm is that, your last choice because something you don't want to happen has happened like you lost your main weapon and such.
Give me a side arm sword that can fight vs. heavy armor. Long Sword is better at heavy armor than a Katana... but you know that long sword is gak compare to a Kanabo war club in cracking armor. The advantages for the Katana than long sword will be against armor less opponents like standard farmers. In a lets slaughters the farmers, the kill rate will be the Katana than long sword right... the idea of Katana going after none combatant will kill quicker than Long sword. Not much more ... but lets not nit pick. A sword is a freaking sword. All swords has advantages and disadvantages. You pick and choose why you want that advantages in that weapon and accept the disadvantages of that weapon. A rapier might be better than a Katana, but I would rather choose a sword that has the cutting power of a Katana... sometime you don't want a sword to kill people as your side arm... sometime you want a sword to have to cutting power. Example, how do you quickly execute a prisoner faster than a Katana with a rapier? Best kill with a rapier would be a stab at the heart right?
What I am saying is that all sword has functions and niche... but for you guys ... it is just unacceptable that a Katana can have it's niche and excel at it too.
However, I am here to claim that Katana out shine other swords in its cutting ability.
A pair of scissors is great for cutting paper. A knife can cut paper, but is far worse at doing so. But if I want to whittle something out of a piece of wood, Ill always choose the knife. I could use the scissors of course, but it being great at cutting doesnt make it useful for whittling. See what I mean?