# Muslim Mamluk vs. Japanese Samurai



## C. Hook (Nov 20, 2009)

vs. 



Bloodlust on.

1. On horses.
2. On foot.

Begin.


----------



## Omnirix (Nov 20, 2009)

Didn't both repel Mongol invasions which everyone else (except Vietnam and India) failed to do? I'd say they're pretty equal.


----------



## Quelsatron (Nov 20, 2009)

Hmm, the mameluke has faster movement speed plus a ranged attack while the samurai has bonus damage versus unique units and faster attackspeed. Tough choice.


----------



## C. Hook (Nov 20, 2009)

Omnirix said:


> Didn't both repel Mongol invasions which everyone else (except Vietnam and India) failed to do?



Japanese had a couple of typhoons destroy both Yuan fleets.

The Mamluks took on the Il-Khanate and won, saving North Africa. They're pretty freaking scary in that regard. The Mamluks also fought in the crusades, against the (Unimpressive) Christian knights.



Quelsatron said:


> Hmm, the mameluke has faster movement speed plus a ranged attack while the samurai has bonus damage versus unique units and faster attackspeed. Tough choice.



 Game mechanics are not allowed in this match.


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 20, 2009)

Omnirix said:


> Didn't both repel Mongol invasions which everyone else (except Vietnam and India) failed to do? I'd say they're pretty equal.



one did it by killing them in their sleep after being pwned in every battle

and had the help of a hurricane

the other did threw years of brutal..horrible warfare..

and then went onto deal with the crusades

so sure they both did the same thing

albiet in very different ways one being far less impressive then the other

edit-hook i wouldn't say the knights where unimpressive under the right leader they did..allot of damage

never mind the massacre that ad the first crusade


----------



## supreme91 (Nov 20, 2009)

one on one? that mamluk is a fatass lol


----------



## C. Hook (Nov 20, 2009)

The Immortal WatchDog said:


> one did it by killing them in their sleep after being pwned in every battle
> 
> *and had the help of a hurricane*



There were actually two Mongol invasions of Japan. Both were dealt by with hurricanes. Damn, Khublai had bad luck.


----------



## Glued (Nov 20, 2009)

The Mamluks beat the Mongols, the Japanese lost to the Mongols.

Mamluks were test against the forces of Europe.



supreme91 said:


> one on one? that mamluk is a fatass lol


----------



## skiboydoggy (Nov 20, 2009)

Beating back the Mongol horde is nice and all, but that has no bearing on their individual ability. Like, at all. Whatsoever. The Japanese (nearly) lost to the Mongols because of shitty tactics and internal conflicts, not because the samurai were weak shit or anything.


----------



## C. Hook (Nov 20, 2009)

I'm guessing the Mamluk has the definite advantage of horseback; they often used similar tactics to the Mongols, and one of those tactics was the prominent usage of horses.

The on-foot battle is more up to debate, really.



skiboydoggy said:


> Beating back the Mongol horde is nice and all, but that has no bearing on their individual ability. Like, at all. Whatsoever. The Japanese (nearly) lost to the Mongols because of shitty tactics and internal conflicts, not because the samurai were weak shit or anything.



This is true, but it's still entertaining.


----------



## skiboydoggy (Nov 20, 2009)

C. Hook said:


> I'm guessing the Mamluk has the definite advantage of horseback; they often used similar tactics to the Mongols, and one of those tactics was the prominent usage of horses.



Eh, samurai had to fight on horseback too, and they had to be expert archers as well as good spear users. They aren't weak on horseback or anything of the sort.



> This is true, but it's still entertaining.



I think it's silly. 
Besides, everyone knows that samurai are the best at having their ENEMY OFFICERS DEFEATED.


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 20, 2009)

Well the Japanese did pray for a storm to come to help fight off the mongols. So i guess if you looking at in from a religious point they are both even then. So horse back I dont know who to give it to. So ill put my money on the Samurai. Hmmm this should be simulated on that show deadliest warrior on spike tv.


----------



## hammer (Nov 20, 2009)

Jekidoruy said:


> Well the Japanese did pray for a storm to come to help fight off the mongols. So i guess if you looking at in from a religious point they are both even then. So horse back I dont know who to give it to. So ill put my money on the Samurai.* Hmmm this should be simulated on that show deadliest warrior on spike tv*.



no just no they had a gladiator get owned 7/10 by a native american with a stone axe


samurais have archery spears swordsmanship and anti horse but i do admit i lack knowledge on the other guy


----------



## Pimp of Pimps (Nov 20, 2009)

*Everyone, there was no hurricane. Japans strongest Samurais fought against the Mongols, and they swung their swords so fast both the water and the air moved. Giving the illusion of a hurricane.

kthxbai *


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 20, 2009)

Jekidoruy said:


> Well the Japanese did pray for a storm to come to help fight off the mongols. So i guess if you looking at in from a religious point they are both even then. So horse back I dont know who to give it to. So ill put my money on the Samurai. Hmmm this should be simulated on that show deadliest warrior on spike tv.



deadliest warriors is a hunk of crap

don't take it seriously don't even trust it..tis garbage


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 21, 2009)

The Immortal WatchDog said:


> deadliest warriors is a hunk of crap
> 
> don't take it seriously don't even trust it..tis garbage



true it might be a hunk of crap but it is a good base of where to go. Also what would help would to have a good understanding of how both groups would work. but still in the show they did have things that i would have called out for victors. Last their would be no real way of finding out who would win unless we had a time machine. so pc sim is as close as we are going to get imo


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 21, 2009)

Jekidoruy said:


> true it might be a hunk of crap but it is a good base of where to go.



sure if you want a nose bleed from all the BS



Jekidoruy said:


> Also what would help would to have a good understanding of how both groups would work.


depending on the era the Mamluk would have either years of experience in combat..or very little

The samurai would either have general training...and experience in battle (which is more important then anything you learn in a dojo)

or none at all.. and be stuck with just what he received growing up...



Jekidoruy said:


> but still in the show they did have things that i would have called out for victors.



the producers of this show..where the same hacks and fruads...that ordered navy seals to take a dive..against ninjas on the discovery channel 

because in pop culture east beats west

so no nothing..they've done as far as I'm concerned is legit..


Jekidoruy said:


> Last their would be no real way of finding out who would win unless we had a time machine.* so pc sim is as close as we are going to get imo*



best way to determine a winner is by reading history books

not a simulation by nerds out to make a buck..with more concern about offending their fan base and showy sfxs

then say...accuracy


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 21, 2009)

True best way would to do it in history. Also as you said depends on what era of guys you are using. Even then with history it still could be called in favor of one of the two groups depends on the book. So really your right it would be based on history and the use of our own thoughts to determine a winner in this battle


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 21, 2009)

turk/arab during the crusade or mongol era pretty handly

the samurai if that era where either..stagnating in a declining bafuku..or where falling  apart at the mongol hands 

Sengoku jidai era Samurai would probably have combat experience make it closer

but really samurais greatest weakness was an inability to adapt


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 21, 2009)

So do you think it would just be a one sided war fight. Then again and more important where would this fight even take place??  Well i hope that the samurai that comes from the sengoku jidai ear would be able to put up a good fight. That era produce all the wars in japan. Also another factor that would play apart in this would be the weapons that each are using


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 21, 2009)

Jekidoruy said:


> So do you think it would just be a one sided war fight. Then again and more important where would this fight even take place??  Well i hope that the samurai that comes from the sengoku jidai ear would be able to put up a good fight. That era produce all the wars in japan. Also another factor that would play apart in this would be the weapons that each are using



if kenshin..or hideyoshi or matsudaira (tokugowa) or anyy of the other big seven was it? or twelve? leading figures of the jidai era lead it

they smoke most of the muslim forces

unless the leader happened to be saladin...or mehmed the great it'd be much harder fight or an outright loss (saladin was one of the few dark age military leaders you ciould compare to Caeser or Pompeii or alexander the great or aurelious)

if its from a lesser experienced era for either sides then..no freaking clue

but one on one?

same..really depends on who what when..and such like


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 21, 2009)

Well i think that the samurai from the sengoku era would have enough combat fighting knowledge to be able to handle themselves in a battle. 2 things would play a factor. one location location location. the 2nd would be weapons and armor


----------



## C. Hook (Nov 21, 2009)

The Immortal WatchDog said:


> but really samurais greatest weakness was an inability to adapt



I wouldn't say that. They adapted to the Mongols by reinventing many of their military tech. 

They still would have been utterly raped if they hadn't gotten lucky, but the Japanese weapons tech adapted.

Also, Discovery Channel is bull. There was a special on the katana on it that claimed that the main purpose of Western swords was to "club through heavy armor" and that the katana could slice through plate mail (Which of course is bull; if plate mail didn't provide as excellent protection as it did, it would have been *useless* due to its high cost, cost of repair, and the way it limits mobility). The entire program was essentially an excuse for weaboos to talk about katanas cutting through tanks.


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 21, 2009)

Hey as i said before luck is part of any battle of war.


----------



## E (Nov 21, 2009)

muthafucken samurai


----------



## Belly Ranks (Nov 21, 2009)

C. Hook said:


> Japanese had a couple of typhoons destroy both Yuan fleets.
> 
> The Mamluks took on the Il-Khanate and won, saving North Africa. They're pretty freaking scary in that regard. The Mamluks also fought in the crusades, against the (Unimpressive) Christian knights.
> 
> ...



I'm no expert on history, but didn't the Knights give them a hard time in their war?

I should go check that out.


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 21, 2009)

Belly Ranks said:


> I'm no expert on history, but didn't the Knights give them a hard time in their war?
> 
> I should go check that out.



depends 

the templar where...Richard the lionhearted forces tended to be

The French forces where hardcore beyond belief...so where the Venetians..

but the other Western nations not so much....

the Holly Roman empire did have potency for awhile but not so much

then the crusader kingdoms...and the knights that fought with them where so so...

the ones who lasted the longest where the knights hospitalar (sp) they survived until Napoleon finished their order off like a almost a thousand or so years later

but they where more medics..bankers tax men and body guards then actual...combat knights



C. Hook said:


> I wouldn't say that. They adapted to the Mongols by reinventing many of their military tech.



well their tech not tactics...and they kinda had no other choice

some Historians have ahold of  accounts from both sides..noting..the early Katanas where so poorly made or..not folded properly at the time..that they where chipping against Mongol Leather armor 



C. Hook said:


> They still would have been utterly raped if they hadn't gotten lucky, but the Japanese weapons tech adapted.



the tech did indeed adapt...but their tactics kinda consisted of praying..and jumping them in their sleep 

which was my point..i wasn't disputing their folding tech armor and stuff got better

i meant their Strategies became stagnant long before the Mongols came around

Oda actually proved this 


C. Hook said:


> Also, Discovery Channel is bull. There was a special on the katana on it that claimed that the main purpose of Western swords was to "club through heavy armor" and that the katana could slice through plate mail (Which of course is bull; if plate mail didn't provide as excellent protection as it did, it would have been *useless* due to its high cost, cost of repair, and the way it limits mobility). The entire program was essentially an excuse for weaboos to talk about katanas cutting through tanks.




i always find that funny..i mean Japaneses steel is notoriously horrible hence why swords smiths had to be as good as they where

and yeah i saw that one too i turned PBS on since i remembered they used to be a bastion of objectivity..

and it was that old nova documentary on the Ebola Virus ya know the old school uncensored docs..they used to put out..where they showed people dying and fuenerals and shit....which was more intimidating..then the samurai wank...good lord 

interestingly enough after that came out a docu on Japan..specifically this era and it was pretty good


----------



## Whimsy (Nov 21, 2009)

I doubt many of the european knights got that much training, plus I imagine a lot of them were used as fodder. Tis usually the way with european wars, you have a few knights then TONS AND TONS OF PIKEMEN.


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 21, 2009)

Whimsy said:


> I doubt many of the european knights got that much training, plus I imagine a lot of them were used as fodder. Tis usually the way with european wars, you have a few knights then TONS AND TONS OF PIKEMEN.



during the early  crusades? and before and a little bit after?

the economy was so terrible that nobles and knights kinda had no choice but to make war...and loan out their services


----------



## Watchman (Nov 21, 2009)

C. Hook said:


> Japanese had a couple of typhoons destroy both Yuan fleets.
> 
> The Mamluks took on the Il-Khanate and won, saving North Africa. They're pretty freaking scary in that regard. The Mamluks also fought in the crusades, against the (Unimpressive) Christian knights.



Let's not forget that the "Mongol" force that the Mamluks took on was more of a Turkic force than Mongol, and about as comparable to Mongol armies in their prime as the Foederatii of the Western Roman Empire was to the Roman Legions in their prime.

That said, I don't know enough about Mamluks to make a proper guess as to who wins here.


----------



## Rampage (Nov 21, 2009)

Mamluk's take this


----------



## Kusogitsune (Nov 21, 2009)

Well shit, if it's a matter of armies, I think the samurai would lose; mainly because of infighting and poor organization.


----------



## noobthemusical (Nov 21, 2009)

C. Hook said:


> There were actually two Mongol invasions of Japan. Both were dealt by with hurricanes. Damn, Khublai had bad luck.



Nah I choose to believe in reality warping Samurai who did this.


----------



## death1217 (Nov 21, 2009)

..the samurai called storms to defeat their enemies mamluk's got nothing on that


----------



## Teach (Nov 21, 2009)

this isn't even a contest.

Samurai's would've gotten their ass handed to them so hard.


----------



## Shoddragon (Nov 21, 2009)

how is beating the christian knights impressive? they marched like thousands of miles in their knight battle armor in the incredible heat and many died before the battles even began.


----------



## heavy_rasengan (Nov 21, 2009)

The Immortal WatchDog said:


> if kenshin..or hideyoshi or matsudaira (tokugowa) or anyy of the other big seven was it? or twelve? leading figures of the jidai era lead it
> 
> they smoke most of the muslim forces
> 
> ...



Don't forget about Suleiman the Magnificent and his Janissaries! He was a great leader to and according to the history books that I read, his Janissaries were godly.(not literally)


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 21, 2009)

I think a few things need to be consider about this fight. The location of the fight and the conditions that the fight will take place in.For instance if it took place in a forest or snow type of area the samurai would win. if it took place in a flat desert the mamluk would win. So terrain and location would play apart in this battle


----------



## Fang (Nov 21, 2009)

Persian Catarphacti vs Japanese Samurai

how does this go


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 21, 2009)

mmmm TWF u should just start a new thread


----------



## Glued (Nov 21, 2009)

TWF said:


> Persian Catarphacti vs Japanese Samurai
> 
> how does this go



A samurai katana can't even cut through Viking chainmail.

Cataphracts had scale armor.


----------



## Fang (Nov 21, 2009)

I know it was rhetorical.


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 21, 2009)

Ben Grimm said:


> A samurai katana can't even cut through Viking chainmail.
> 
> Cataphracts had scale armor.



I think i saw one on lock  and load that a katana could go though chain mail. Mmm ill find out for sure but that what i thought i saw though


----------



## Pimp of Pimps (Nov 21, 2009)

*The Katana is an excellent sword, but it's a shame Japanese steel was so weak. *


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 21, 2009)

Shoddragon said:


> how is beating the christian knights impressive? they marched like thousands of miles in their knight battle armor in the incredible heat and many died before the battles even began.



it wasn't exactly always like that that might of been specific one or two major battles where the templars where under leadership of guy or renald

both where kinda dumb asses sos not very fair

plus knights used to come back looking like pin cushions and not be wounded over much 

guys are hardcore


----------



## Fang (Nov 21, 2009)

Who actually believes that in the Crusaders that Western armies were dumb enough to march the whole time in their armor?


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 21, 2009)

Jekidoruy said:


> I think i saw one on lock  and load that a katana could go though chain mail. Mmm ill find out for sure but that what i thought i saw though



a modern day Katana made with Modern day steel imported more then likely with modern steel making techs and the like?

sure...even old school sword smithing has improved allot

but an old school sword from three centurtes ago vs western or eastern chainmeal? I'ma say no


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 21, 2009)

TWF said:


> Who actually believes that in the Crusaders that Western armies were dumb enough to march the whole time in their armor?



weeaboos maybe?

it did supposedly happen once in a rather decsisive battle but that was because..the leaders where morons

and they where fighting Saladin...who was like a golden egg kill him and get eternal glory or what ever


----------



## Glued (Nov 21, 2009)

Even if knights did have armor, Mamelukes had high quality Damascus steel.


----------



## Jekidoruy (Nov 22, 2009)

well i think the samurai sword cut some light armor maybe chain mail. but what made japan steel so strong was how many times it was folded and pounded out i guess


----------



## Green Poncho (Nov 22, 2009)

Jekidoruy said:


> well i think the samurai sword cut some light armor maybe chain mail. *but what made japan steel so strong was how many times it was folded and pounded out i guess*



No, that just might have made it equal to others.


----------



## C. Hook (Nov 22, 2009)

Samurai swords did not cut through well-made chain mail; the entire point of chain mail is that it almost completely negates cutting damage. Nor would they cut through plate mail.



TWF said:


> Persian Catarphacti vs Japanese Samurai
> 
> how does this go



That would be a nice match to see.



Watchman said:


> Let's not forget that the "Mongol" force that the Mamluks took on was more of a Turkic force than Mongol, and about as comparable to Mongol armies in their prime as the Foederatii of the Western Roman Empire was to the Roman Legions in their prime.
> 
> That said, I don't know enough about Mamluks to make a proper guess as to who wins here.



Let's not forget the "Mongol" force that the Japanese took on was more of a Chinese force than Mongol.

The Mongols the Japanese and Mamluks fought still used most of the Mongol tactics and had much of the Mongol culture; in fact, in its prime, the Mongol empire still was composed mostly of non-Mongols.


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 22, 2009)

Jekidoruy said:


> well i think the samurai sword cut some light armor maybe chain mail. but what made japan steel so strong was how many times it was folded and pounded out i guess



it didn't make it strong it made it average

what came from japan that was epic was the swordsmithing 

and that had to be good as it was solely because of how awful the steel quality is


----------



## The Immortal WatchDog (Nov 22, 2009)

C. Hook said:


> Samurai swords did not cut through well-made chain mail; the entire point of chain mail is that it almost completely negates cutting damage. Nor would they cut through plate mail.



mongol era samurai swords chipped against mongol leather armor i might add according to some Historical texts 




C. Hook said:


> That would be a nice match to see.



these guys where the heavily armored infantry type crack troops

or more like the immortals?


C. Hook said:


> Let's not forget the "Mongol" force that the Japanese took on was more of a Chinese force than Mongol.
> 
> The Mongols the Japanese and Mamluks fought still used most of the Mongol tactics and had much of the Mongol culture; in fact, in its prime, the Mongol empire still was composed mostly of non-Mongols.



pretty much this..they where always a minority in their own realm


----------

