Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Fantasy Duel#6--Ming Chinese swordsman vs. Samurai

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Poll Question: Imjin War chaos--who takes it?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
11 [50.00%]
11 [50.00%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
maersk View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 04-Sep-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 85
  Quote maersk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Fantasy Duel#6--Ming Chinese swordsman vs. Samurai
    Posted: 11-Sep-2005 at 18:25
ming military organization was inferior to the japanese. anyone who says different is spouting pro sino propaganda
"behold, vajik, khan of the magyars, scourge of the pannonian plain!"
Back to Top
Conan the destroyer View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai


Joined: 21-Jun-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 105
  Quote Conan the destroyer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Sep-2005 at 20:10

Uhh...no. While the late Ming military had declined. The army in Yongle the time was far superior to the Japanese armies. Anyone who says otherwise is spouting anti-sino propaganda.

And kiddo, you should give reasons why the Japanese military had superior orginasation, considering the Japanese military was based on old Chinese models

 



Edited by Conan the destroyer
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13-Sep-2005 at 22:42

Of course the Samurais will win. But Samurais Vs. Ming swords man is really an invalid comparison. It's like comparing knights to Roman infantries.

Both Knight and samurai are of noble class during their time period. They live by a code, and receive fief from their lord, supply their own weapons and armor. Of course they were better trained than the general infantryman. >>

Samurai has high military rankings, where as Ming swords men are just regular infantryman. You can't compare unit commanders unit it self, or comparing high military officers to privates. Samurais are noble man, while Ming swords men are peasant conscript. >>

I am not well versed in history, but I am sure that entire Japanese army wasn't made of samurais only. You're really making a false comparison here, can't compare apple to apple seeds. >>

You should compare Samurai with its equivalent Chinese noble class warriors, usually, well....  there isnt any. Chinese high offices are open to both noble and peasants. >>

But if you really want to compare, then you should compare Samurais with Chinese army generals. Like comparing Knights to Centurions.>>

 



Edited by Yue_Fei
Back to Top
poirot View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Editorial Staff

Joined: 21-May-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1838
  Quote poirot Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Sep-2005 at 14:23

I agree with Yue Fei. It is an asymetrical analysis.  More like compariing a Templar Knight to a Saracen infantryman.  I think 10 swordsmen vs. 1 samurai would be the usual ratio.  The Japanese military at the era was more feudal, while the Chinese military during the Ming more resembled a modern military in organization. 

I assume that we are comparing the Chinese and Japanese at the time of the Imjin War (1590s)  We compare Hideyoshi's army with the late Ming army, which is not elite.

In terms of:

Armor - Japanese

Size - Chinese

Firepower - Chinese

Swords - Japanese

Raw Martial Arts - Chinese, might be a little biased but what the heck

Morale - Japanese

Navy - Chinese (although Korean tops both in the Imjin war)

Cavalry - Chinese

Tactics - Tied

Leadership - Tied

 



Edited by poirot
AAAAAAAAAA
"The crisis of yesterday is the joke of tomorrow.�   ~ HG Wells
           
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Sep-2005 at 15:47

Yes The China's millitary was advanced only in terms of centrallized organization paid by the emperor, any able men can rise through the ranks to the General, and any noble man can't afford his own army.

In terms of armor, the Japanese used leather same as the Chinese.

swords - while samurai swords are well made, I don't think Japan are capable of providing a fine samurai swords for each of their soldier. So on average, every nations' swords are on the same level.

Raw martial art - I don't think it really matters, what counts is the physical fitness, Chinese average troops has no advantage on martial art over armies of any other culture, that's why the barbarians wins, they lose because they have no discipline.

Moral - China during that time was pretty corrupt so....

Navy - I don't think China has a navy during that war, as most of the naval victories were by the Koreans

In general, Ming army was of little impact on Imijin War. I recall some sources say the Ming army was more troublesome than the Japanese army, which I don't doubt.



Edited by Yue_Fei
Back to Top
Nick1986 View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar
Mighty Slayer of Trolls

Joined: 22-Mar-2011
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7940
  Quote Nick1986 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Sep-2012 at 20:16
The Samurai's lightweight armor gives him an advantage, but the katana was prone to shattering unless it was exceptionally high quality
Me Grimlock not nice Dino! Me bash brains!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.