It's time. We settle this once, and for all!

It's time.
We settle this once, and for all!

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >via 9gag.com

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      9gag and ifunnybrasil are a wellspring of good memes, the spirit of somethingawful lives on through them nowadays

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >9gag and ifunnybrasil are a wellspring of good memes, the spirit of eBaum's World lives on through them nowadays
        ftfy

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >eBaum's World
          >good
          >ever

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous
  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    which viking?
    which samurai?
    we need to establish a fair fight, here

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      If we're sticking to the same era, Heian period samurai would probably mop the floor with Vikings just like every other organized army did. They would especially struggle with horse archers, which is what samurai of the era were.
      When stone age Indians and the fricking Irish are able to beat you, you know you're doing something wrong.

      > average japanese samurai 4'6" to 4'9" and 80 lb to 90 lb
      > average nordic viking 5'6" to 6'0" and 150 lb to 200 lb

      This was already discussed ad naseum on the 4ch history board, the conclusion was the only fair comparison is 1 male samurai is slightly less than 1 female viking or ~10 male samurai = 1 male viking

      Here's the objective data point that crushed all weebs:

      Modern japanese male = 5'6" 145lb 35kg grip strength

      Modern swedish female = 5'7" 155lb 35kg grip strength

      Modern swedish male = 6'0" 190lb 85 kg grip strength

      Also, the credible data points of Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors in groups of 30 to 40 simply slaughter 1000+ samurai regularly indicates that male vikings would have it almost as easy

      tldr, 1.1 male samurai = 1 female viking or 10 male samurai = 2 male viking

      /thread

      Assmad manlet mongoloid detected

      https://i.imgur.com/f4MQTHR.jpg

      Vikangs always win, samurai got routinely whipped by a handful of Iberians with native flip levies let alone disciplined Euros nearly twice their size

      That picture, and every samurai everyone not being a pedantic butthole pictures, is from the Sengoku or Edo period.

      That is a soldier who shared the battlefield with, and was often armed with, guns.

      https://i.imgur.com/5YI9NQQ.jpg

      Scandinavian equivalent to the samurai would be the Housecarl. Professional soldiers/retainers to lords rather than murderhobo ex-farmer vikings. On the weaboo side would be Heian era samurai, who were still big on cavalry and horseback archery back then. My guess is samurai btfo by the housecarls in an infantry battle, since they're bigger and have more experience in formations. Samurai horse archers vs. a shieldwall ends in a stalemate with a few casualties on each side, slight edge to Samurai. 1v1 duel the housecarl wins mid diff. Bigger and better armour+a shield against a katana that doesn't have the weight to do much about it.

      >Scandinavian equivalent to the samurai would be the Housecarl.
      Unfortunately this is about a Viking, not an "equivalent".

      >On the weaboo side would be Heian era samurai
      Lets use Scandinavian riflemen from the 1900s because it makes me feel better.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Not anyones fault here that the japs peaked in the 1600’s in melee warfare when the rest of the world had long perfected pike and shot. No matter what period you can cope with, the Japs only win against chinks and korean levees (they lost to both anyhow) in pitch battles. Jap horses were horrible, even more horrid than the steppe ponies and invred Greek (look it up lmao) horses the Chinks and Mongols used

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          In the 1600's Japan was better at pike and shot than Europe you absolute mongoloid
          Toyotomi's army would wipe Spain

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            weak b8

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Its true, europeans would have been completely outranged and outgunned

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            The absolutely were not they would have gotten fricking assraped by better european tactics, cannons, guns, ships, and logistics. They'd still wipe the floor with vikings though

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Anon they also had cannons and had better muskets
              And their tactics were perfect in Japan and Korea

              The only reason the Manchus steamrolled Asia and not the Japanese is because the Japanese massacred millions of Chinese

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >And their tactics were perfect in Japan and Korea
                Japanese never could never reach parity with continental cavalry they were only capable of utilizing overwhelming numbers and even then they had no ability to pin down mobile forces.

                >The only reason the Manchus steamrolled Asia and not the Japanese is because the Japanese massacred millions of Chinese
                Ironically if it wasn’t for the Japanese decimation of Hamgyong elites, Nurhaci would never have had the opportunity to grow. The Japanese lost more men(50k~) in the first invasion than the Ming lost in the entirety of the war(20k~).

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        why use the sengoku period samurai at all, when its established they are hundreds of years apart from the vikings
        using the actual contemporary to vikings makes a lot more sense

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >why use the sengoku period samurai at all
          Engaging in pointless c**t word games is the height of homietry. Everyone knows what you mean when you say samurai. Everyone pictures a samurai from Sengoku or Edo. Every thread uses a Samurai in the common arms of that era, sans gun. Using a Samurai from hundreds of years before
          -Their height
          -Everyone's functional conception of them
          Is NO LESS obtuse than using "knighted" fighter pilots from WW1 as an example of a Knight in a question that specifies only "Knights VS X".
          It doesn't make you clever it makes you a gay.
          It's like if I made a thread saying "who would win, the US Army or Samurai", and included a picture of US army infantry from the modern day, and then b***hed that people weren't using a "fair" version of the US Army from the Revolutionary War.

          Not anyones fault here that the japs peaked in the 1600’s in melee warfare when the rest of the world had long perfected pike and shot. No matter what period you can cope with, the Japs only win against chinks and korean levees (they lost to both anyhow) in pitch battles. Jap horses were horrible, even more horrid than the steppe ponies and invred Greek (look it up lmao) horses the Chinks and Mongols used

          Not anyone's fault that Vikings are from the better half of a thousand years before what is in all functional conversation, a classical Samurai.

          Sorry, your degenerate pirate gays who lost 90% of the battles they ever fought against infantry they did not outnumber more than two to one, including against unarmored peasant militias, get shot by bugman manlets.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Knights are a perfect example of why you should list a specific era before making assumptions because they encompassed hundreds of years, the middle ages lasted a while
            So while you might lead with a picture of late medieval knight in full plate, or even early renaissance armor anachronistically depicted in the medieval ages, it makes sense to use a early middle ages knight in maille and a great helm with a kite shield for any matchup in that time period instead of the later ones

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >So while you might lead with a picture of late medieval knight in full plate, or even early renaissance armor anachronistically depicted in the medieval ages, it makes sense to use a early middle ages knight in maille and a great helm with a kite shield for any matchup in that time period instead of the later ones
              Someone could be forgiven for assuming you meant an early armored horseman with a sword.
              Someone would have to be a colossal, seething homosexual to assume you meant a WW1 fighter pilot.
              In either case, the picture would make it abundantly clear what you meant.

              When in doubt you would default to the most culturally relevant and prevalent image, because that's most likely to have been the intent of the person you're communicating with, not what's the most "fair", like some autist trying to balance a tabletop game.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >because that's most likely to have been the intent of the person you're communicating with
                The purpose of asking "which era of samurai" is literally comnunication, to make sure everyone is on the same page because most people will be thinking of anime samurai with sengoku period armor and heian period weapons, so its important to clarify upfront what the rules of the hypothetical duel will be

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The purpose of asking "which era of samurai" is literally comnunication
                >UHHMMMM ARE YOU SURE YOU DONT MEAN A WW1 FIGHTER PILOT??
                >I MEAN, I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT'S IN THE PICTURE, BUT WOULDNT IT JUST MAKE THE MOST SENSE??????
                And you wonder why everyone can tell you're autistic.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                pictured is a heian era samurai, which unequivocally looks like the samurai we are all familiar with and is still armed with a bow, a sword, and a spear

                for the same reason everyone leads with "which era of knight are you talking about" we should extend it to the samurai as well with "which era of samurai"

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >pictured is a heian era samurai, which unequivocally looks like the samurai we are all familiar with and is still armed with a bow, a sword, and a spear
                >Different armor
                >Different sword
                >obviously not from the era that literally everyone thinks of when they think of Samurai
                Your homosexual weaseling only further makes the point, moron.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Different armor
                >Different sword
                How exactly? They absolutely are the very same sort of lamellar armor and typical japanese sword. No one would mistake this guy with anything else be it a mongol or even a chinese. This is very clearly a japanese warrior.

                >literally everyone thinks of when they think of Samurai
                Who is this everyone then who can't even see that a guy in o-yoroi with a tachi, a horse and a bow is a samurai...?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >They absolutely are the very same sort of lamellar armor
                lol

                >Who is this everyone
                Everyone without brain damage.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >That face
                Look samurai-kun, I have depicted you as the baka-jak, this means you must sepuku to preserve your honor.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous
          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Everything you just seethed about the Vikangs, which is false for the Nords, is actually true for the Japs which actually were known for producing pirates and even more pathetic, they got their cheeks clapped by Chinks and Moorberians with ease lmao

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >nou
              cope and seethe, Vikings are not a catch all for "nords" and their record speaks for itself: they blew ass. They're shit tier dark ages infantry raiders and they're going up against armored well equipped soldiers from the pike and shot era.
              Continue to dilate.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >ass blasted asiatic noises
                >word vomit
                I sure have known better than to expect anything more when talking to weebs

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Spergs out and resorts to shitting everywhere just like the last two threads he got BTFO in

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Take your meds, it’s the first time i posted in these shit threads. Your weeb brain is so unoriginal that you think OP’s post is novel and not a weekly ovcurence for the past 10 years. lol Weebs are beyond cringe, unless you mindlessly jerk off the 5’1 nips you are some hater trying to keep the chinks down

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Heh the samurai are so puny they always loose
                >WAIT WAIT YOU HAVE TO MAKE IT FAIR MAKE IT FAIR YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO USE CLASSIC SAMURAI EVERYONE THINKS OF!!!

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Unfortunately this is about a Viking, not an "equivalent".
        Not that anon, but it was relatively normal for vikings to be well-equipped. While many of them were poor, their leaders and best warriors were nobles with the best armor and weaponry you could expect from that time. That anon is wrong to assert we even need to seek out an "equivalent." We just need to be more specific. A samurai would delete a peasant-tier viking, but any viking with enough money for a sword would be an interesting match-up because they actually had time to train.
        >inb4 the likes of Harold Hadrada and Egil Skallagrimson and the men that accompanied them were not "real" vikings
        Even common vikings were not always so poor as supposed ITT. A great deal of them chose to be vikings because that's simply what you did to win honor, glory, and wealth. Possibly also to advance politically.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          To continue my reasoning here before I get a bunch of (You)'s, I take the OP to mean a 1v1 fight because otherwise this question falls apart. There is such a thing as a viking army, but there's no such thing as a "samurai army." Regardless, and army captained by samurai would delete a viking army because they had mounted archers, superior numbers, and better organization depending on the period. An all samurai army would be like having an all knight army. Not really something that happened historically, but the power imbalance in this match-up would be insane in that case.
          In a 1v1, assuming no firearms, you have an interesting fight that probably sees your average viking usually beat your average samurai due to the use of better armor and shields and the huge size disparity (which strangely people ITT are discounting when it suits them). If firearms are on the table, then all bets are off. Samurai likely carry. A Sengoku Era musket would penetrate anything a viking had and likely blow a hole out the back. They would also be good enough to not often miss. I think the spirit of this question is about melee combat, but if we're considering the whole historical picture the samurai carry.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >due to the use of better armor
            Not only is chainmail not better than Samurai armor from their height (particularly considering it could include an entire set of chain armor), it is eminently penetrable by arrows shot from a 110+lb bow.
            We have many examples of Samurai helmets and chestplates that were struck with firearms and remained intact.

            >Unfortunately this is about a Viking, not an "equivalent".
            Not that anon, but it was relatively normal for vikings to be well-equipped. While many of them were poor, their leaders and best warriors were nobles with the best armor and weaponry you could expect from that time. That anon is wrong to assert we even need to seek out an "equivalent." We just need to be more specific. A samurai would delete a peasant-tier viking, but any viking with enough money for a sword would be an interesting match-up because they actually had time to train.
            >inb4 the likes of Harold Hadrada and Egil Skallagrimson and the men that accompanied them were not "real" vikings
            Even common vikings were not always so poor as supposed ITT. A great deal of them chose to be vikings because that's simply what you did to win honor, glory, and wealth. Possibly also to advance politically.

            >Not that anon, but it was relatively normal for vikings to be well-equipped. While many of them were poor, their leaders and best warriors were nobles
            >Normal
            >Their best
            These two statements contradict, but whatever, it hardly matters.

            >In a 1v1, assuming no firearms
            which is absolutely not something we should assume considering you seem to want us to take a "peak equipment" Viking.

            If you have to take away the Samurai's bow, his horse, his gun, downgrade his armor to that of his most primitive forebears, AND take the best of the vikings, you've answered the question already.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Look at this teeny tiny little man in his wooden amour and silk skirt, don't stand on him by accident, Olaf, bring him back to Ingrid to use as a shitting log servant, that is a rare collectible if ever I saw one!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The guy on the bridge at the Battle of the Milvian Bridge vs literally whoever samurai bois got.
      >inb4 they have a friend float under him with a spear
      Cheeky fricking Saxons

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Milvian Bridge
        Wrong bridge, idiot

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Wrong battle but I know who you're talking about and there's a very similar jap equivalent
        >In the end, Benkei and Yoshitsune were encircled in the castle of Koromogawa no tate. As Yoshitsune retired to the inner keep of the castle to commit ritual suicide (seppuku) on his own, Benkei stood guard on the bridge in front of the main gate to protect Yoshitsune. It is said that the soldiers were afraid to cross the bridge to confront him, and that all who did met a swift death at the hands of the gigantic man, who killed in excess of 300 trained soldiers.
        >Realizing that close combat would mean suicide, the warriors following Minamoto no Yoritomo decided to shoot and kill Benkei with arrows instead. Long after the battle should have been over, the soldiers noticed that the arrow-riddled, wound-covered Benkei was still standing. When the soldiers dared to cross the bridge and take a closer look, the heroic warrior fell to the ground, having died standing upright.[8] This is known as the "Standing Death of Benkei" (弁慶の立往生, Benkei no Tachi Ōjō). Benkei died at the age of 34.
        >At seventeen, he was over two metres (6.6 feet) tall
        Damn I really need to see this fight now, battle of the bridge giants

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >which viking?
      >which samurai?
      >we need to establish a fair fight, here
      A 4 foot 8 manlet in a silk dressing gown Vs a raging 6 foot+ psychopathic rapist murder hulk dressed in chainmail and steel that weighs double the manlet and has a shield? The viking could wear the samurai as an earing.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >A 4 foot 8 manlet in a silk dressing gown Vs a raging 6 foot+ psychopathic rapist murder hulk dressed in chainmail and steel that weighs double the manlet and has a shield? The viking could wear the samurai as an earing.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Look at this teeny tiny little man in his wooden amour and silk skirt, don't stand on him by accident, Olaf, bring him back to Ingrid to use as a shitting log servant, that is a rare collectible if ever I saw one!

          lmao, japs seething. There's a reason Mongols despite having access to millions of chinks to use as foot soldiers, relied heavily on paying out the ass for Turkic and Manchu warriors. The Jap thinks he's somehow on the same level because late romantic era artists loved the Samurai because they viewed it as a counter culture against the ultimate form of cucking for a people, to larp as something they werent when the Meiji restoration happened. When they went from unique Asiatics to souless modernist in their eyes which is a moronic take but hey it survived to the modern day because Japs got high off of their farts that the white people they saw as so superior envied something of theirs

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >japs see themselves as white

            wut? pretty sure japs see themselves as asian, just like how other asians (koreans, chinese, mongols, etc) see themselves as asian.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >japs see themselves as white

            wut? pretty sure japs see themselves as asian, just like how other asians (koreans, chinese, mongols, etc) see themselves as asian.

            There's no way they'd see themselves as white. Japs are divided as frick and they're full of different ethnic groups with all kinds of discrimination and oppression, but they all happen to look the same from a westerner's perspective. For example, the Japanese don't really see the people of Okinawa as true Japanese. They're dark skinned, hairy savages. Same goes for the hairy white savages from Hokkaido. And don't get the Japanese started on Korean immigrants. The Japanese will gladly show up to a Korean children's school in Japan and shout at the kids like American segregationists in the 60s.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Sadly this is true...how do the native Honshu japanese yayoi distinguish between themselves and zainichis since unlike ainus and ryukyuans the zainichi look precisely like yayoi? Its by size, typical zainichi are anywhere between 10cm and 20cm taller with a larger body frame, native honshu yayoi are likely around 5'3" to 5'5" on average, the zainichi are between 5'11" and 6'3" on average...

              But the truth is that its only the male fail japanese that seethe at the zainichi no different than say native indo male fails in southeast asia completely seethe at anglo sexpats, just like the southeast asian women uncontrollably lust after bwc the japanese female to the last pussy feel similarly to bcc except times a factor of 100x or more

              Data point: the largest single group of kpop, kdrama kwhatever are japanese women let that sink in

              Dead fricking serious

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >wood armor
          no contest

          Samurai had iron armor since the 7th century.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If we're sticking to the same era, Heian period samurai would probably mop the floor with Vikings just like every other organized army did. They would especially struggle with horse archers, which is what samurai of the era were.
    When stone age Indians and the fricking Irish are able to beat you, you know you're doing something wrong.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Heian period samurai would probably mop the floor with Vikings just like every other organized army did.
      people always leave out the times when organized armies didnt do shit to vikings, like during the sieges of paris.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I mean the Irish often hired vikings to beat other vikings to be honest.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the fricking Irish
      It's always them, bastards.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    > average japanese samurai 4'6" to 4'9" and 80 lb to 90 lb
    > average nordic viking 5'6" to 6'0" and 150 lb to 200 lb

    This was already discussed ad naseum on the 4ch history board, the conclusion was the only fair comparison is 1 male samurai is slightly less than 1 female viking or ~10 male samurai = 1 male viking

    Here's the objective data point that crushed all weebs:

    Modern japanese male = 5'6" 145lb 35kg grip strength

    Modern swedish female = 5'7" 155lb 35kg grip strength

    Modern swedish male = 6'0" 190lb 85 kg grip strength

    Also, the credible data points of Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors in groups of 30 to 40 simply slaughter 1000+ samurai regularly indicates that male vikings would have it almost as easy

    tldr, 1.1 male samurai = 1 female viking or 10 male samurai = 2 male viking

    /thread

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >naseum
      It's nauseam.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >30 to 40 simply slaughter 1000+ samurai regularly
      Cite 5 examples

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >the credible data points of Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors in groups of 30 to 40 simply slaughter 1000+ samurai regularly indicates that male vikings would have it almost as easy
      Conquistadors and Vikings are not comparable in any way. Vikings would get slaughtered by conquistadors.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Also, the credible data points of Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors in groups of 30 to 40 simply slaughter 1000+ samurai regularly
      You were caught lying about this last time and you had a spergout and ran away.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >muh grip strength and weight
      Or you could just look at history and realise the vikangs got mogged literally every single time they fought someone who had even the slightest idea of what they were doing.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Modern Japanese Male - Japanese, like his homeland
      Modern Swedish Male - "15 year old" (27) North African or Swede who has been cucked/raped by a North African.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Japan is set to allow a million nogs this year, all young men in a c**t that has almost the oldest population in the world. Weebs are delusional none the less, crying about muh racism a few posts above to now trying to say that their 100% non white c**t is better than some small Euro c**t because it became 90% white

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Sven, don't you have better things to do? I am pretty sure Amir down the street is about to have another sexual emergency and your neighbor's kids haven't recovered from the last time yet.

          Remember, you need to call the cops from outside the No Go Zone or they won't come. Then they might get him and give him 3 months of therapy, if he doesn't plead racism.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            No doubt that the korean royalty were about as incompetent and corrupt as they get, makes kju look straight like a progressive nation builder, but the korean populace were tough as nails, reminds if of the british concept of dignified poverty or maybe the tribes of the caucus mountains, effectively unconquerable by military force because they would simply rather keep fighting than concede anything

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      if all wars boiled down to raw size and muscle mass, then Black folk should be taken over the world by now.

      I expected better from someone who browses the WEAPONS board.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Lol the typical african is almost as small as the typical japanese, its the descendants of black slaves that were bred like livestock that have better physical size but still the average US black male is still both shorter and lighter than the average US white male...also there is a concept of predation iq and why a lion and a buffalo have similar iqs but the lion always eats the buffalo and not the other way around, a lot of this is related to raw physical size, this is why primitive hominids were both small physically with small brains it was not until they consumed cooked meat that their bodies grew larger and with that their brains

        Now back to the japs, the japanese were banned from eat ANY meat for over 1500 years, only the handful of royalty were allowed to eat meat, this 1500 year meat ban permanently changed the japanese genetic structure to that of likely the worst physical potential genetically similar to lower caste indians who also had a meat ban via forced relgious beliefs that only permitted the aryans to eat meat

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Bro, you can't fool us. We've seen pictures of Malmo. It's literally Cairo with clouds.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        No, it isn't. The invading scum are stuck in their ghetto, which shouldn't even exist.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          When are you going to admit you fricked up and deport them all?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >swedish
      Vast majority of vikings were danes and norwegians. Swedes are absolutely deluded to think they were the actual vikings.

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    we just had this thread
    https://desuarchive.org/k/thread/61331968/#q61331968

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Let me guess, your prefer a Ukraine thread newbie?

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Pirates.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Of the Somali, or butt type?

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >WHO. IS. DEADLIEST?
    Things got shaky in season 2, by 3 it'd gone off the rails entirely

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >green beret V spetznas
      It when off the rails season 1.
      I mean shit, the apache "experts" were literally insane, that's S1E1

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >no yakuza vs. alien
      basically unwatchable

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Some of these are hilarious.
      >Washington vs Bonaparte
      Washington was a full head taller with pretty much the same weaponry
      >Roosevelt vs Lawrence of Arabia
      Roosevelt was like 60lbs heavier and not a twink
      >James vs Capone
      A Tommy Gun vs an SSA Kek
      >Hussein vs Misc Pot
      One had armored units and an Air Force the other didn’t. Otherwise it’s just a bunch of commies using identical Russian scrap hand me downs
      >Legionary vs Gurkhas
      Only good matchup of season 3 imo

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      IRA vs. Taliban is an experience.

      That last kill was kino

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They would be really cool friends. The samurai would show him sushi (The old way, were fish was covered in fermented rise to preserve it) and the viking would show him some disgusting rotten fish thing.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    We already had this thread, you fricking morons.
    This'll just be a repeat where paganlarpers lose their minds over people not circlejerking over their vaunted thieving bandits.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Assmad manlet mongoloid detected

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vikangs always win, samurai got routinely whipped by a handful of Iberians with native flip levies let alone disciplined Euros nearly twice their size

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Scandinavian equivalent to the samurai would be the Housecarl. Professional soldiers/retainers to lords rather than murderhobo ex-farmer vikings. On the weaboo side would be Heian era samurai, who were still big on cavalry and horseback archery back then. My guess is samurai btfo by the housecarls in an infantry battle, since they're bigger and have more experience in formations. Samurai horse archers vs. a shieldwall ends in a stalemate with a few casualties on each side, slight edge to Samurai. 1v1 duel the housecarl wins mid diff. Bigger and better armour+a shield against a katana that doesn't have the weight to do much about it.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      To add a little counter point, norman knights and heavy infantry routinely wiped the floor with Turkic heavy cav and mounted archers who fought in a more refined way than the isolated Japs whose tactics remained static due to less pressure to innovate in the face of routine larger enemy forces like the Christians had to

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        No

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I’m a big fan of the crusaders but no it was the other way around, the turks completely mogged the euro knights even when outnumbered

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Can you provide any examples? Also you should know that the Egyptians and Iraqi’s were Turk mercenary controlled c**ts from around 1100 onwards till the Ottomans displaced the Mamluks around the mid 1800’s in both c**ts. It was Turk controlled all the way around and was part of the reason the Crusaders did so well, they were fighting a super minority that didnt utilize the Arabs well because that would mean rebellions, it’s why the Egyptians brought so many Kurd and Iranians to the frey, because they were effectively buying them from the other Turk ruled c**ts and they werent native to the region

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Wat
          European knights wiped the floor with Turk horse archers at Dorylaeum.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >viking/housecarl
      >kite shield
      no.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vikings rekt Europe in general and lost some big war battles because of cavalry so it really depends. I'd say 90% of the time Vikings would win because they're simply way bigger, stronger and their tactics worked most of the time.
    Even after the "viking age" ended they still kept doing for quite some time afterwards

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >80lbs peasant killers vs the most violent raiders and rapists

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >musketeers vs early dark age homosexuals who routinely got slaughtered by peasants

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        What?

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Samurai
    >Had Horses
    >Had Guns
    >Noble

    >Vicucks
    >Literally a sea smelly bandit
    >Too poor to afford swords
    >Entire reputation was built by killing unarmed monks and women

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Entire reputation was built by killing unarmed monks
      Oy vey that's very anti-semitic

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      And beating the frick out of mongols
      and found many historical cities across europe
      and fighting for A roman emperor
      and sacking paris

      lol you're an idiot
      go frick a dog

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        REMINDER
        Viking does not mean "norseman".

        This is like trying to use the successes of British first rate ships of the line to argue for the potency of Privateering morons on a run down sloop.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I have viking and Samurai fatigue. There's been too many Skyrim VIKANGS MUH THROAT SINGING RICHARD SPENCER HAIRCUT GAY BROS and Samurai Souls-like KATANA SWINGING SAKURA CHERRY BLOSSOM KIRR MY SHEF games and movies since the 2010s.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      If you want east, there's anywhere from Asian like Mongolians to Chinese or east Europe like Polish. The Ottomans were pretty capable fighters too.

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >uhh the average samurai would have been 2 feet tall and wore armour made out of cardboard, whereas the viking would have been 9ft tall and had an m1 abrams covering each limb, plus a shield which makes archery completely useless thats why nobody ever practiced horse archery in history. Oh and since we didn't clarify the samurai is a poorgay samurai from like year 900 even though all of the samurai stories and movies that theyre famous for are from the 1500s when they had guns and plate armour, but the viking gets to be a rich noble from the later end of his era whos tall, super buff, and has all of the best equipment a viking possibly could have had ever.
    >no im not just saying stupid shit because im a race obsessed sperg who's super emotionally invested in people who died generations ago, vikings would crush them, just look at this battle between spanish/portugese and the japanese! (ignore that its a naval engagement and half of the japanese are poorly equipped pirates)
    >what do spaniards/portugese and vikings have in common beyond being european? Well...uhhh...
    I hate these threads, its just dishonest shitflinging from paganlarpers doing the equivalent of my dad could beat up your dad but even more pathetic since vikings have been dead for hundreds of years. I'm not even a weeb, I admit the samurai had plenty of faults and were often outmatched by people sharing a time period with them, but the sheer amount of fricking lies being thrown around in these threads is shameful.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Present the question to any non jap and non weeb, and they’d choose the Viking 99% of the time. You’re the only race obsessed gay here, blacks are almost universally in favor of the white pirates over the chink ones. Also talking about historical and biological reality is not being obsessed in any way, the only people who speak like this are disingeneuous gays who are seething that reality disagrees with their larp

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    What year is each from? What is their loadout? Horses allowed? Ranged allowed?

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Oh hey, that's a cute shield wall

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Actual samurais were borderline pygmies...even at a hypothetical equal size to vikings the body frame and musculature difference is effectively no different than a goat vs a leopard...maybe if a 30 or so of these little fellows all zergrushed a single unsuspecting half-drunk viking it would be close but otherwise its not even a question...in all honesty, typical inner city black women would skullcrush these midgets 1v1 in a fair fight, keep in mind, the typical US black woman is 5'6" and 205lb...

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Why is this even a question?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Lol explains why their sole strategy was to mass as many of these twerps as they could find and zergrush comically outnumbered opponents

        Portrait of a viking based on skeletal analysis reconstruction, this is like comparing a rat versus a rottweiler

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Portrait of a viking based on skeletal analysis reconstruction
          Uhhh no thats very clearly a shitty ai image

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Midget with a gun beats a giant with a sword.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >muh primitive gun
        >gets btfo’d by Korean plebs with spears
        >end up implementing genocidal tactics due to how much seethe this caused Hideyoshi
        Japs only do good in surprise attacks, history has proven this time and time again and it’s why they stalled against literal 4th world tier Chinks when they invaded in ww2 with tech a generation ahead theirs, let alone when they were peers

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >gets btfo’d by Korean plebs with spears
          Yi Soonshin with cannon-armed turtle ship.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            These ships were like tanks versus horses literally impenetrable back then, koreans were literally 300+ years ahead of the world on this one, next time armored ships were used was the monitor versus merrimack over 300 years later

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Koreans managed to stall the Japs on land too, the Japs were so desperate that they couldnt defeat the Koreans as the Ming giant slowly limped to the peninsula that they began trying to invade the Jurchens as a way to kiss up to the Ming and try to pretend that their war was actually just a reprisal for minor trade piracy. That said the Koreans were very impressive at sea too, and that was with their own government doing its very best in crippling its force at sea for decades

            In all fairness the koreans were closer to continental european sizes even back which actually raises a relevant a = b = c = a scenario, the japanese had like three to five times the population of korea back then but this provides empirical evidence that physical size does make a difference in pre-modern combat

            Good point to consider too, Koreans and Manchu peoples had a long historical diet consisting of far more meat than their neighbors in the Han and Japs.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Much of Korea's success on land was due to Admiral Yi mauling their supply convoys.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Koreans managed to stall the Japs on land too
              Aside from horrendous leadership, Imjin era Koreans lost pitched battles left and right and the speed of the Japanese advance simply astounded the invaders and the Ming.

              >the Japs were so desperate that they couldnt defeat the Koreans
              This was never mentioned in historical sources, what they did have an issue with was Korean guerillas disrupting their supply lines, the climate and Ming intervention.

              > began trying to invade the Jurchens
              Nothing to do with the Ming, Kato Kiyomasa was instigated by Hamgyong rebels who hated both the Joseon court and the Jurchens.

              Much of Korea's success on land was due to Admiral Yi mauling their supply convoys.

              Yi Sunshin role in the war is the result of posthumous lionization he lacked the land forces to liberate Ungcheon and Busan.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The level of weeb delusions never fails to disappoint always about woulda coulda shoulda

                So how could japan with over 3x the people end up losing to a korea that was effectively disarmed due to the monke korean royalty efforts to control the kingdom, when all was said and done it was a decisive korean win and before you try to introduce the ming into the equation the ming tried to stay afterwards and even with probably fifty times the population ended up getting mogged and kicked out too

                Moral of the story is that mountaineous peninsulas are nearly impossible to conquer by military force

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Weeb delusion is even stronger than that of vatnigs. Hell the Jap invasion of the Joseon is actually pretty similar to that of Russia’s of Ukraine when you look at it with a broad enough lens. Both relied on surprise attacks to gain land as their target reeled in desperation, despite having multiple times their population and economic output still end up being unable to maintain a logistic train with a country that is their closest neighbor, and lastly they all cope up and down that their military blunders actually dont matter because they’re killing more civilians than their enemy

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                ok so viking is worse than samurai.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The level of weeb delusions never fails to disappoint always about woulda coulda shoulda
                Go read the primary sources, Koreans were incapable of evicting the Japanese on their own. If the Koreans were so competent King Seonjo wouldn't be begging in Uiju for Ming refuge.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          In all fairness the koreans were closer to continental european sizes even back which actually raises a relevant a = b = c = a scenario, the japanese had like three to five times the population of korea back then but this provides empirical evidence that physical size does make a difference in pre-modern combat

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >One terrorized the hell out of coastal Europe.
    >The other just fricked around a bit on some meaningless island.

    Fricking weeaboo's are worse then wehraboo's I swear.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Vikaboos getting all their info from vidya and amon amarth albums will never not be funny

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >vikings team up with the local lord to bully the shit out of some peasants that belong to the weaker neighboring lord for their lunch money
    Even if vikings landed on the coast of Japan, somehow, they would just loot some shit and frick off long before a real military could deal with them.
    Everyone in this thread who brought up
    >but muh black powder musket units
    can frick off because they would get their shit kicked in by the Euro version of those units. and even threw down with Russia if you want to see how that fight goes.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >they would get their shit kicked in by the Euro version of those units
      Why the frick do people keep bringing up other units like its relevant? The question is about samurai vs vikings. Samurai had guns for like half their existence(the half they're most famous for), the viking age ended in the early 1000s

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >can frick off because they would get their shit kicked in by the Euro version of those units
      What does that have to do with Vikings?

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    How many times do you intend to make this thread? Is this the new mecha spam?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      lmfao

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >How many times do you intend to make this thread? Is this the new ukie war spam?
      Ftfy

  24. 2 months ago
    Blind buyer

    The Vikings were just a bunch of peasants who could kill unarmed monks to steal their treasures. Mostly they had no swords, just the axes they took from their home courts. The samurai, on the other hand, were a warrior caste with centuries of honed martial skills and constant drill. Their sword alone had the value of a modern mid-range car.

    This would be a very short battle.

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Did samurai ever win a battle against anyone except other samurai? It seems like war was just a game to them. They only beat the Mongols because of the weather.

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    6’2” vs 5’2”

    Its like fighting children.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Average male height in Japan is 5'7.2, above the average male height for Libya or Morocco (Swedish male population).

      It's only one inch below the average American male height.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Go back in time. Japanese men in WWII were on average 5’2”

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Average male japanese is 172cm 69.5kg

        Average male us is 177cm 90.6kg, this is 2" taller and ~45lb heavier but this includes the hispanics and asians and even blacks who are both shorter and more obese, average white male in the us is similar to the average german male, 180cm which is almost 4" taller and 50lb heavier

        The japanese male is smaller than the average swedish female 167cm 70.5kg, dutch female 170cm 73.2kg, and german female 166cm 71.7kg

        For additional context the average japanese male is smaller than the average chilean male, the average costa rican male, the average taiwanese male and the average chinese male

        cliffs, japs are tiny

        https://www.worlddata.info/average-bodyheight.php

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        > only one inch below average US...lol

        The average japanese male is 171.4cm and getting shorter for reason

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Is this the weeb delusional version of 5'11" vs 6'0"? Not a single jap in that pic even reaches the white guys shoulder level

  27. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The one with the shield generally wins against the one with a two-handed dueling weapon. Even if the samurai had a long spear, the one with the shield tends to win.
    Norse marine raider and part-time merchant marine with shield and long seax > Samurai with katana or tachi

  28. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    katana enjoyed snapping for funsies.
    https://www.nihontocraft.com/Suishinshi_Masahide.html
    excerpt:
    In his book, Token Buyurai, the following statement is made.

    "Needless to mention rather we are discussing the o-midare hamon of Tsuda (Sukehiro), Sakakura (Terukane), choji or kikusui, if a blade has a wide hamon pattern it tends to break when in use".

    Masahide gained this knowledge empirically through repeated eye-witness accounts and reliable sources concerning swords in actual use. The following are 25 incidents that Masahide mentioned, in which blades with a "Hade" style hamon were broken. It is a direct translation.

    1. Suishinshi was at the house of an Akimoto retainer. There was a thief that night. The retainer used the mune of a blade to strike the thief. The blade broke in the middle and the kissaki was knocked off. As a result, it landed on the rooftop of a neighbor’s house. This was a katana by Mizuta Kunishige with an o-midare ba hamon.
    2. A younger friend of the Akimoto retainer used the mune of a wakizashi to hit a dog. The blade broke in the middle and the dog escaped. It was a mumei wakizashi by Etchigo no Kami Kanesada with an o-midare ba hamon.
    3. In the Shitatani area, a retainer was fighting a merchant. The retainer's blade broke and his arm was cut. The retainer used a Shinto katana by Omi no Kami Tsuguhira with a wide hamon. The merchant used a Bizen Sukesada katana. Masahide witnessed this himself.
    4. A Shitatani fencing teacher named Fujigawa was testing a blade by cutting a kabuto. The katana broke about 24 cm from the kissaki. It was a Satsuma blade. 5. In the Shiba area, a martial artist named Akamatsu tested a katana on a kabuto and the sword broke. This was a blade by Ishido Korekazu.
    6. In Inaba, a retainer was arguing with a Shinto priest, a katana was involved and broken. It was a Inaba Shinto sword.
    7. Satsuma area smiths tested their katana on thin metal plates and the blades were broken.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >The retainer used the mune of a blade to strike the thief.
      >the Akimoto retainer used the mune of a wakizashi to hit a dog.
      Idiots who uses the weakest part of their blade that is supposed to act as a spring and are surprised to see it snapping...
      That's also why there are techniques that directly attack the mune, because if you want to damage a sword, that's where you should hit.

      Regardless, blade breaking is part of the gig, it's bound to happen at some point, especially if as it's said, a fancy hamon is made that'll weaken the blade (but it's pretty).

  29. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vikings were stupid af. They would get raped by horse archers.

    Japanese were quite formidable all the way into the modern era. You can’t say the same about any of the descendants of vikings.

  30. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Samurai had guns, they win, everyone knows they’d win because every single time this moronic debate comes up people immediately try to handicap the samurai by taking the gun away, the Viking never gets handicapped because he’s the inferior warrior from a more primitive time, ScandiBlack folk are target practice end of story.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Even without guns, japanese were state of the art and mogged every bows
      >B-but muh english longbows
      Try using that on a horse NERD

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Jap bows were far weaker than steppe ones and the Jap horses were pony sized which was great because the men also were small.

        > average japanese samurai 4'6" to 4'9" and 80 lb to 90 lb
        > average nordic viking 5'6" to 6'0" and 150 lb to 200 lb

        This was already discussed ad naseum on the 4ch history board, the conclusion was the only fair comparison is 1 male samurai is slightly less than 1 female viking or ~10 male samurai = 1 male viking

        Here's the objective data point that crushed all weebs:

        Modern japanese male = 5'6" 145lb 35kg grip strength

        Modern swedish female = 5'7" 155lb 35kg grip strength

        Modern swedish male = 6'0" 190lb 85 kg grip strength

        Also, the credible data points of Spanish and Portuguese conquistadors in groups of 30 to 40 simply slaughter 1000+ samurai regularly indicates that male vikings would have it almost as easy

        tldr, 1.1 male samurai = 1 female viking or 10 male samurai = 2 male viking

        /thread

        /thread

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >the Jap horses were pony sized
          So were the mongolian ones and they reached Italy

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            No, Mongols ditched their pony sized ones when they conquered Central Asia and got access to old Scythian stock that were the envy of classical Europe. These horses eventually made it to the Manchu following the stagnation of the Mongols due to Han genetic corruption. The Manchu then were able to use these burly horses to conquer the decadent Mongols and Han easilly, then they began the cycle anew. Japs never once were able to secure these few strong horses that were beyond expensive in the east and required generations of careful rearing to maintain with one bad war being able to wipe out an entire breed of these prized beasts. Mongols also got clapped by the first western knights they met btw lmao

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Jap bows at their height had an average draw weight over 100 pounds, moron.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            nta but bong ones had upwards of 200lb, japs are pretty tiny in their defense

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              The average British longbow at their height had a draw weight of 140 pounds
              The average Jap bow at their height had a draw weight of over 100 pounds.
              200 pound bows are a historical rairity, probably used by exceptional men, and have been found in very small numbers all over the world.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Only read the first result
                Most Euro longbows were 200lb draw weights. You googled English longbow and posted the first result like the tarded asiatic you are. There's even examples requiring as much as 500lbs

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >There's even examples requiring as much as 500lbs
                Bullshit

  31. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vikings 1vs1, Samurai if an actual battled where they can bring their entire kit and can skirmish their enemies.

  32. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Vikings were cowardly raiders who attacked coastal settlements.
    Samurai were indentured warriors ala knights with arguably worse equipment but had horse archery.
    Vikings are getting mopped the frick up by samurai just on the horse archery factor alone and hand to hand, one is a guy who raids churches and gets his ass ruined by even basic standing armies while the other fought near constant wars throughout his history of other standing armies.
    Tho the viking is likely much bigger and stronger while the samurai is going to be swinging around a big fricking iron studded club that the viking has no answer for, even if he has a 25% strength/weight/height advantage.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      How is it possible to be this historically illiterate?

  33. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Given the image shows a Sengoku era samurai, the Vikings are utterly boned. Sengoku samurai would have been more skilled at firearms usage, and carrying better firearms than conquistadors. Unless we’re saying “samurai with sidearm (katana) versus Viking with ful battle kit lmao” the samurai had infinitely more impressive logistics, large unit tactics, weaponry, and cavalry. Some guy keeps bringing up heian samurai to be “fair” or something but that’s a sengoku samurai on the picture, and 500 or so years makes an unsurprisingly massive difference.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Japanese had better ships, weapons, armor, bows, and would happily eat that fermented fish bullshit the Vikings pass off as food because Japanese people love fermented crap.

      Here comes more samegay Jap cope

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Still thinks being big means you're anything but a bigger target.
        >Claims to like guns but hasn't realized that guns made size, gender, and race irrelevant.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Beyond pathetic. Guns, logistics, and unit tactics beat “le stronger manly men” any day. How’s the axe throwing bench pressing VDV doing?

  34. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Japanese had better ships, weapons, armor, bows, and would happily eat that fermented fish bullshit the Vikings pass off as food because Japanese people love fermented crap.

  35. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    since you decided to just copy-paste the thread you already made like a fricking Black person-meister supreme, i'll copy-paste my response:
    >Yakub's biomechanical design is clearly superior to that of Emperor Hwan I, as has been demonstrated time and time again since the first Finno-Korean Hyper-war. As such, it is probably safe to assume that a WM-16 (White male, model 16) would win in any engagement with a SPR-W (Slave-piggu race, Wa).

  36. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    > 40 washed up spanish pirates that could not cut it in europe slaughters 1000+ samurais

    Conquistadors had armor and one shot muskets but they were probably half the size of a typical viking and continental euros with similar armor had no answer to the vikings

    The samurai were arguably weaker than the aztecs and incas...

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What has that to do with anything?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >literally commissioned conquistadors versus japanese pirates
      >”SPANISH PIRATES VERSUS SAMURAI”
      >in a samurai vs Viking thread
      Can you not read or something?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        What has that to do with anything?

        He tries it in every thread hoping that THIS time, people wont point this out.

  37. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Samurais got mogged by the Chinese went they invaded Korea for the first time.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      This is what samurai getting “mogged” looks like by the way.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >"Only" 20k Chinese died
        >Japan lost 100k

        Seems pretty good to me.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          By your logic the Irish must have been the most skilled axis power for losing so little men.

  38. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    1-1, probably the samurai but I could see it going either way
    Actual conflict between armies, definitely the samurai, most of their history is just constant war while the vikings are predominantly known for raiding

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Lol this is the obvious nipshill weeb troony

      The only chance the samurai has against a viking is if there are maybe 30+ of the samurai vs 1 half-drunk unsuspecting viking and then maybe its close to parity

      In all seriousness 1 female viking could likely beat 1.5 samurai 1v1

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        The vikings are getting shot troony obsessed moron

  39. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >wood armor
    no contest

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >gun
      Sad!

  40. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    As a military formation samurai would win easily.

    Vikings are raiders they didn't fare well in large field battles.

    Even the Romans did usually wipe the floor with them and their peers unless taken by surprise or when the military was busy with other operations.

    One to one the samurai has the advantage in equipment and formal training but a viking has a massive size and likely strength advantage just simply because they used to be much bigger men on average.
    It could go either way.

    Samurai are better at ranged fighting as they are almost all trained as skilled horse archers.

    Also they are definitely better at manouvre warfare since they are very used to horses.

    Generally I would say that 8 out of 10 scenarios (from distance , on horse, etc...) the samurai wins the other two are melees were the samurai tried to parry an axe and just gets smashed to floor.

    However if a group of Vikings raided an unexpecting Japanese fishing town they would likely be successful just as they were against everyone else as it takes time for the samurai and their underlings to get ready most of their advantages are denied during a raid. The Vikings would likely fail to take the main castle as those are well defended stone structures but would successfully raid and pillage the town before a coordinate response.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The idea that a five foot nothing Japanese manlet that is 100 lbs wet can can fight a 180lb six foot plus psychopath is really funny. Its nearly as funny as thinking the norsemen did not field formidable armies, where did you think the franks came from? Space? The only people who ever beat them were the Irish because they were not part of Rome and had no dark age so were able to best them. A load of tony little Japanese guys with shit steel bendy swords dressed in twigs and dressing gowns are got going to last long when attacked by men who are big enough to use the tiny Japanese men as exercise weights. Let alone the fact that the Norsemen are covered in steel Armour including their heads and have crucible steel swords. What are the japanese going to do? Bite their kneecaps?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >What are the japanese going to do?
        Shoot them with their guns, I suppose.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >samurai
      humm but how would they counter the traditional fighting skills of the northern Europeans that are twice their size and have much better steel Armour?

  41. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I take a dim view of Samurais, but I don't understand why people jerk off vikings.

    Vikings are just like Mongols, good at raids, terrible at everything else. Introduce a sturdy stone fortress and the Vikings avoid it like the plague, hell even a wooden fortress would fend them off in a pinch.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Introduce a sturdy stone fortress
      They still raided those late viking age and afterwards though, successfully too.
      What I really don't understand is why people like you keep lying about Vikings for no reason.

  42. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the whole point of weapons, armor, and other equipments is that it CONSIDERABLY levels the playing field.

    I think some people here are forgetting that.

  43. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >actually the average samurai was 4 feet tall, and the average viking was 9 feet tall and clad in adamantium
    >I'm not just making shit up because I'm racist, just look at how these unrelated europeans from thousands of miles away defeated samurai hundreds of years later!
    The worst threads currently on /k/

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >I'm racist
      Don't tar us racists with the nordaboo brush. I'm defending the chink because he has a gun and vikings were gays who lost to peasant militias more often than they beat them.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You're right #notallracists
        Nordlarpers are a unique brand of annoying and pathetic losers who constantly claim that scandinavians are unstoppable supermen who can do no wrong and who despite being super warlike didn't just conquer the entire world with their aryan superpowers and ended up as a latinized/germanicized christian state because ??

  44. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    whites win every time. also I'm sure a thread was made about this before

  45. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >ctrl-f yari
    okay so this entire thread is moronic
    have a nice day morons

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >weapon used by literally every group of humans in history, including the oogiest boogiest tribesmen
      >making a decisive difference

  46. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If you're talking about Sengoku Era Samurai, then Vikings will be shred by gunfire

  47. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Just lol at the notion of nips vs vikings

    Even amongst weebs only a small hyper-deluded basement dwellers would even think this, the rest of the world representing 99.999% of the global population would 101% laugh at any notion of samurai vs a viking

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Samurai had guns, vikings lost to peasant militias.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Samurai lost to Korean and flip peasant militias, atleast the Vikings lost to European ones. Major difference between the two

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The vikings lost 9/10ths of the battles they fought against forces that actually met them afield that they didn't outnumber 2-1, including Irish peasant militias and other completely untrained, unarmored forces.

          They literally were only good for hacking up monks and sleeping men.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            So to own the Vikings who only won in 2 to 1 engagements, you post japs who despite outnumbering the Korean plebs 3 to 1, still lost? Lmao also that's an absolutely horrid k/d ratio for a surprise attack lmaooo

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >you post japs who despite outnumbering the Korean plebs 3 to 1, still lost?
              What in the frick are you talking about lol

  48. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That's a completely unfair matchup. The samurai is like 500 years more technologically advanced than the Viking. This would be like putting a renaissance era man-at-arms against a modern soldier.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Tbf that man at arms probably wins any fight against the typical conscript slop that all of Africa, China and India pushes

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Anyone arguing the samurai would use a gun is moronic. If you ask people on the streets no one will believe you they even had guns.
      Viking vs samurai would most likely be small skirmishes and 1v1. The vikings would never fight an army big enough where the samurai would bring gunners.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        LOOOOL suddenly "perception" matters huh?

  49. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    why are so many here buttblasted about vikings? All the post ive seen talking shit about vikings are just historylet PrepHole tier nonsense. I know most of these posters are southern euroes and beaners but still why the big seethe?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      The core viking area was in Denmark, southern Sweden, southern Norway

      Everybody that has blonde or light brown hair in europe is the product of viking chads

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *