# Japanese Samurai vs. Sassanid Immortals/Cataphracts



## Solrac (Mar 13, 2011)

*versus*



the Japanese samurai goes up against the last pre-islamic Persian empire's armored cavalry soldier with the best armor/weapons from the empire's peak. Also this is the latest pre-gunpowder era Samurai. 

How does it all go?


----------



## enzymeii (Mar 13, 2011)

Correct me if I'm wrong but the samurai will have the tech advantage here.  If we're talking pre-islamic then that's antiquity but the samurai are medieval.  Their weapons and armor will be stronger.  

And let's please not bring Deadliest Warrior's samurai vs spartan fiasco into this...


----------



## Solrac (Mar 13, 2011)

enzymeii said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but the samurai will have the tech advantage here.  If we're talking pre-islamic then that's antiquity but the samurai are medieval.  Their weapons and armor will be stronger.
> 
> And let's please not bring Deadliest Warrior's samurai vs spartan fiasco into this...



I have absolutely no intention of bringing in deadliest warrior, which would be contrary to the purpose of this thread.

And what about Medieval Persian infantry/cavalry against the Japanese samurai? would they fare better?


----------



## Nevermind (Mar 13, 2011)

I must say I'm getting sick of butthurt Samurai fans whining that the Samurai lost and calling it a "fiasco." It's a show on TV, it isn't a big deal. I think a fair conclusion was reached.

As for this, if it's a cavalry fight it comes down entirely to which bow has longer range armor piercing ability, something that I don't know the answer to. On foot swords would probably be useless except for a killing blow, but the Samurai does have the Yari Spear (their primary armament which the aformentioned DW episode left out, legitimately annoying me, but again it's just a TV show), which should work. The Samurai probably had more advanced training as well as better tech.

Going with the Samurai 60/40 on foot. On horse I need to know the specs of the bow.


----------



## Fang (Mar 13, 2011)

The Immortals have nothing to do with Cataphracts. And just because their from classical Persia doesn't mean their "out-teched". Japanese metallurgy even in the 1500-1700's is inferior to what was used in Europe and mainland Asia at the time.

Cataphracts are essentially the precursors to modern day Middle Eastern and European Knights, Proto-Knights if you will. They fight by horseback, and even their mounts are plated with light to medium iron and steel armor.



> "… all the companies were clad in iron, and all parts of their bodies were covered with thick plates, so fitted that the stiff-joints conformed with those of their limbs; and the forms of human faces were so skillfully fitted to their heads, that since their entire body was covered with metal, arrows that fell upon them could lodge only where they could see a little through tiny openings opposite the pupil of the eye, or where through the tip of their nose they were able to get a little breath. Of these some, who were armed with pikes, stood so motionless that you would think them held fast by clamps of bronze."



Their armed with heavy lances and spears as well as short swords and bows, guess what that means for a lightly armed atypical Samurai?


----------



## Solrac (Mar 13, 2011)

Fang said:


> The Immortals have nothing to do with Cataphracts. And just because their from classical Persia doesn't mean their "out-teched". Japanese metallurgy even in the 1500-1700's is inferior to what was used in Europe and mainland Asia at the time.
> 
> Cataphracts are essentially the precursors to modern day Middle Eastern and European Knights, Proto-Knights if you will. They fight by horseback, and even their mounts are plated with light to medium iron and steel armor.
> 
> ...



Finally the first post in this thread to know that a sassanian soldier is a real match for any pre-gunpowder era of the samurai. 

I still prefer the samurai over the immortal/cataphract more, but I wanted to make a even-as-possible fight and after seeing Persian Immortal vs. Celt (okay okay yes I know, I said I am not bringing up deadliest warrior and I won't again, but just sayin'), I thought it was nice that the persians got some spotlight for being deadly and I initially thought they were extremely formidable and nigh-unbeatable warriors or maybe all of that crazy military power was just in highly numbered armies rather than the individuals.


----------



## Endless Mike (Mar 13, 2011)

This thread reminds me of Age of Empires II.... great game that was


----------



## Solrac (Mar 13, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> This thread reminds me of Age of Empires II.... great game that was



just curious. are you interested in history, culture, and geography? Cause I am a pretty big fan of history/culture/geography.


----------



## Endless Mike (Mar 14, 2011)

Um, I suppose.... I'm not exactly an expert in every field though


----------



## passerby A (Mar 14, 2011)

Japan has very little iron mine, so every piece of precious steel was made into samurai sword. Their armors were mainly made of bamboo and leather, even their arrowheads were made of stone. So the technology advantage may not play a big roll here.
While the average size Persians and there horses were unknown, but it's for sure that they dwarfed the Japanese ones. Japanese were extremely short before 20th century, for example the famous Tokugawa Ieyasu was only 156cm(5'1''). Even Chinese and Koren, who are not tall either, used to call Japan "Wuo Guo(country of shorties)".
That is, the Japs is going to be stomped by those gigantic, full-metel covered Persians in close combat, especially on horesbacks. Samurai swords can't go through steel armors very well, and that's already the heaviest weapon of Japan.
Their only hope is their advanced bow technology giving them longer range, but the stone arrowheads despite having well-designed shape for armor penetration, may penetrate chain mails, but never plate armor.
As a result, I put my money on the Persians.


----------



## Gig (Mar 14, 2011)

Endless Mike said:


> This thread reminds me of Age of Empires II.... great game that was


Indeed it was an awesome game, Spain and the Turks where pretty awesome due to there unique units both being Gunpowder units, it was disapointing in the sequal that Briton didn't get the archery ring upgrade that gave archers 100% accuracy would have made the Longbowmen amazing 

My only Knowledge on Cataphats is that there the single best cavalry in Rome Total War, and if Rome Total Realism is correct Cataphats's used both heavy lances and maces meaning Japanese armour is useless since they can just crack there heads in with the mace in close quarters.


----------



## Solrac (Mar 14, 2011)

passerby A said:


> Japan has very little iron mine, so every piece of precious steel was made into samurai sword. Their armors were mainly made of bamboo and leather, even their arrowheads were made of stone. So the technology advantage may not play a big roll here.
> While the average size Persians and there horses were unknown, but it's for sure that they dwarfed the Japanese ones. Japanese were extremely short before 20th century, for example the famous Tokugawa Ieyasu was only 156cm(5'1''). Even Chinese and Koren, who are not tall either, used to call Japan "Wuo Guo(country of shorties)".
> That is, the Japs is going to be stomped by those gigantic, full-metel covered Persians in close combat, especially on horesbacks. Samurai swords can't go through steel armors very well, and that's already the heaviest weapon of Japan.
> Their only hope is their advanced bow technology giving them longer range, but the stone arrowheads despite having well-designed shape for armor penetration, may penetrate chain mails, but never plate armor.
> As a result, I put my money on the Persians.



so it seems the tables have turned.


----------

