Knight vs Samurai

Clips are from For Honor

[kaisermaximiliandererste]

i hate how people think that knights were slow and unskilled

[strait_rage]

The European swords were scarily maneuverable alot more then a katana

[juninjahero]

I love how there are so many debates here, and all samurai sided debates usually revolve around 3 things.
1: Guns. Guns back then were powerful to be sure, but they also are a single shot cannon. Yes, they are still dangerous, but good luck hitting a knight who is moving, with one shot, with a gun that isn't very accurate, in a place that is fatal. Not saying they weren't effective, and they were incredibly deadly, but they aren't as big of a game changer that samurai enthusiasts think they are.
2: Samurai are faster than knights. Jack squat they are. Medieval armor and samurai battle armor weigh roughly the same (There is medieval jousting armor that is thicker and heavier, but that's for ceremonial jousting, not battles.) and if they do weigh the same, knights win in both speed and defense. Europeans made armor for joints that follow the body's natural bend, allowing for armor that protects the joints, and allows almost free movement. Samurai gear usually left joints free from armor for movement, lowering defense, or they made armor that made it uncomfortable to move in, covering joints, but losing agility. If I were to compare the armor, I would say that medieval armor is basically an exoskeleton following the human anatomy's movement, protecting and allowing movement in all parts of the armor, while the samurai armor is more like multiple shields strapped to parts of the body that don't need to hinge or move. (I know these are slight exaggerations, but you get the point.) All in all, Either knights and samurai tie in speed and knights win in defense, if the samurai expose joints. Or, if samurai wear their more protective gear, knights still win in defense, but not as strongly, and knights win in speed and agility. Medieval armor is not the tin bucket most people think they are.
3: Vision. People say you can't see squat when you wear a medieval armet, barbute, sallet etc etc. This is true for helmets like the frog mouth, that is designed to basically be bolted to the chest piece. The eye vision is low, because the eye slit is small and angled upward. The frog mouth specifically is designed to do these things purposefully, as it is not a battle helmet. It is a helmet that you wear during a jousting match, where you only need to see where the enemy jouster is, and aim your lance at their shield. You don't need to move your head, because the enemy is always in front of you. If you could move your neck, and if you fall of your horse, you could snap your neck at worst, and at best, get bad whiplash. Breathability is also so terrible in the frog mouth that you can only wear it for a few minutes because the only breathing hole is the visor. This helmet isn't meant for battle. The helmets I mentioned, armet, barbute, sallet, are meant for battle. You are protected at the neck by chain and with small steel plates that allow you to turn your head freely while still protecting, no matter where you are looking. That is the maneuverable part of your vision, but what about actual sight? You can barely see out of that tiny eye slit, right? Wrong. I wear homemade helmets all the time, and, admitted, sometimes I trip over a box because I cannot see my feet. However, vision is a lot higher than you think. Some people think that when you wear a sallet, which is the helmet used in this video, you could only see roughly 1/3 to a half of the samurai fighting right in front of you. This is a myth. Don't believe me? Put your hands in front of your face sideways, palms away from your face, with your middle fingers touching. Now bend your middle fingers. you will get a hole between your pointer and ring finger that is probably 16-20 mms wide(According to google). touch your nose with your pointer fingers, so that your fingers are a little bit away from your face. You've just made yourself your own makeshift visor. If that is how much you can see from your helmet, you do lose some vision down and up, but not a lot. You could probably see the samurai's entire body if you were standing two swords length from each other.
I am a big history nerd, and love both the knights and the samurai(Albeit I do like the knights better). For some reason people think that medieval armor is supposed to be tanky, slow, impossible to maneuver, but defensive. In reality, medieval armor was nothing short of artistry with how intricately it was made.

[dogomog]

Each person has a different IQ, being a knight or samurai does not make you have more or less

[mercbandit]

I just love armchair historians arguing who's better in the worst way possible.

[NoPeacetheEvil]

Lots of weebs crying😢 European steel ⬆️⬆️

[Anonone-mx]

This debate would be accurate if it was for honor knight vs for honor samurai, however in real life no samurai would use a katana against the knights, alot of people think that katanas was the main weapon of the samurai, and thats wrong. They either used spears (like nobushi does in for honor) or their cannon gun.

[elmundodedaniel]

The experience goes to the knight, because in Europe they had enemies not only in Europe, but also in the Middle East and Asia, while the samurai only fought against the Japanese since the country was closed to the rest of the world.

[Normandu]

When sre these kid's gonna realise that katana was samurais third weapon to use if bow and spear could not be used

[MrGecko-dmkh]

The samurai would quite literally be unable to penetrate a knight’s armour bro tf “more offense” 💀💀💀💀

[seminpark]

Everyone trying to compare when the video does not show what century XD

[Texan]

Samurai armor is a lot heavier than people think and knight armor was a lot more lighter and maneuverable than people think
But it varies between the type of samurai and knight armor (thanks to Michaelbrooks3220 for the armor types take)

[Icantreadatall]

Knights were made for war quite literally trained their whole lives being devoted to it

[rohailsyed]

The real answer: it depends heavily on which specific knight and samurai you’re talking about.

[weizhengleong]

The man played some video games at home.
Also him: this is historically accurate 😅

[KentaroYuuki]

Katana were meant to give cuts so enemy will bleed out
Where as western swords were literally there to cut down limbs

[-dusan]

The only ever example of a european swordsman fighting a japanese Samurai resulted in the European winning.

[coldbob]

reality:
*samurai hits knight in head with huge hammer*
*knight hits samurai in head with huge hammer*
stalemate

[thecreaturecalledpete]

Knights actually had a lot more education than the average Samurai, especially the later years of knights.

So IQ would probably go to the knight

[ermirohri]

A knight with full armor it’s hard to kill even if he’s sitting on the ground doing nothing especially with a sword.