10k Samurai VS 10k Romans

10k Samurai VS 10k Romans
Who wins in a battle on a flat land. Romans are on defense with a small hill fort.

Debate.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=EDkoj932YFo
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Depends on leaders, weather, morale and many other variables.

romans boy

i aint no japanofag

10k Knights

Romans win. Read some history books.

Leaders
R:Germanicus
S:Hattori Hanzō

W:Light rain (no fire type weapons)

Morale is average for both armies

thats a ninja not samurai

fine Minamoto no Yoshitsune then had to look that one up

Since samurai main weapon is bow and arrow and romans have shields they do have a huge advantage.
+ Samurai doesnt have shields so advantage os also in close combat
Case closed

Yes. A considerably large set of variables.

> Flat land
> Small hill fort

Mmmk

>Romans are extremely physically strong, well trained, disciplined soldiers with an adept, coordinated fighting style

>Samurai are random nobility

You didn't think this through at all, OP. The samurai would get absolutely butchered.

Lol rome would stomp them without question

ok den romans still win
west>east

This, especially when you consider that the romans are already in a fort on defense, thats a huge advantage.

samurai due to their superior weaponry.

Weapon, not weaponry.

but they have no defense against pilum

Romans because battle formations > army of duelists

This.

Even in the case of well trained samurai, they aren't an organized army.

Better question: 1 samurai vs 1 roman soldier.

Debate.

I'm a big fan of anime and Japanese culture (samurai my shiznit).
However even i know that attacking a full battalion of Romes finest is a death sentence.
The Romans were unmatched in waging large scale battles and being that they are in an open field... shit son. Romans got this no doubt

Could the servers even handle a battle of that size? If so, what monster if a PC would be needed to have a fight like that? OP didn't think this through...

they are still random nobility, and the pilum could easily weaken if not destroy their armor before the swordplay even starts

Samurai wins. Romans were Soldiers not warriors. they tried to fight as a unit while the Samurai were great at single combat.

OP here
I could handle 5k vs 5k on my PC but no game exists to do it i think you shit, why do you think I said debate.

...

Samurai weren't stupid... This would most likely end in a siege. And if the romans try to attack... I don't know ambush, I guess?

Do people still believe this meme?

Total weeb, but I love warfare.
Romans have it free. Samurai were not as they are depicted in Kurosawa films--they were often random farmers, hired hands, who had no problem running when the odds were against them. That is why the "story" of the Samurai is the opposite-to show what people SHOULD be, not shat they ARE.
Its an interesting topic to read up on.

...

Weren't samurai about muh honor and not into the whole ambush thing?

>t. weeabo

you still dont get it

Probs samurai. Nip steel beats roman bronze. Romans were better at war, but it doesn't matter much when your opponent is hundreds of years ahead technologically.

the samurai win

the two roman consuls can't agree on who should lead, because the junior consul is a patrician and absolutely will not follow the senior consul.

the junior consul leaves with half the army and the samurai pounce on this bellicose buffoonery and slaughter the army piecemeal

Romans. They are literally superior in every way. Especially if they are controlling a fucking fort and playing it defensively. Just a cursory knowledge of Roman military history will verify this.

Large numbers on both sides Romans win pretty much every time mainly due to their military being based around the Legion. Take the Pilum for example; its by no means an accurate weapon (its basically a stick with a cannonball taped around it,) but if you have a couple hundred of those suckers flying all at once its pretty much doom. Shield wall's a pretty damn hard nut to crack, even if you gave the samurai bows they still probably couldn't bust through. Smaller numbers and the samurai might have a chance.

Samurai win at individual combat
They weren't soldier who worked as units under command, only little more than fancy mercenaries
The only difference between a samurai and a ninja was how they carried out missions, as well as their rank in society for them to have become either
A Roman soldier worked as part of a legion
Individually, they were not amazingly skilled warriors
One Roman v One Samurai, Roman gets his shit canned
Legion of Romans versus Samurai team, samurais get their teeth kicked in by Roman boots

The first Samurai were in about the year 1100-1200 AD and the pinnacle of the Samurai, the ones all the weaboos worship, was in about 1500-1600.

The Roman Empire was at its peak in about 280 AD.

It's pretty pathetic on the Samurai's part that they are pretty much on par with technology about 1,000 years older.

Sure if you mean that samurai can use firearms it change situation

Underrated

personally id say the romans, but only if they were middle age of rome soldiers and not end tier thugs. samurai were indeed good at one on one combat but truth be told they were shit when it came to the offensive. Unless raiding a stronghold or using a dark/densely forested area to their advantage a band of samurai were only effective at offense in small groups. the romans have better armor, superior weaponry, better defensive tactics, and most importantly BALISTAS. The samurai forces woud be decimated to half before the first swords clashed.

Off hand I would have to give it to the Romans. Mostly due to bring on the defensive. But a rather important question no one seems to be asking is which Era of Roman military and what's the makeup of the army. 10k republic Era auxiliaries could just as easily lose as win given the fact that they are peasants with shit weapons and hardly any armor. The Roman armies weren't professional soldiers until the reform. Even then, an army of 10,000 would only have around 2,000 legionaires with the remainder being half trained auxiliaries, mercenaries and civilian conscripts all of whom have dog shit for morale.

Romans win, samurai will be busy jacking off to hentai

Greeks used bronze. Roman armor was pretty much all iron. Don't even matter that it's that much heavier than steel if you're on defense, its just as tough.
>Tfw pleb doesn't check his facts

Easily the samurai because you never specified which Romans so that means that half of them will be women aka easy victory

Republic citizen-soldiers or professional Imperial corps?

Allow me to clearly spell it out for you, since you clearly do not fucking understand the joke I have posted.
>I understand that we're talking about who would win realistically
>I made a joke saying "look, I know we're talking about a battle in real life, but il instead complain about the issues a computer would face making such a battle happen"
>OP is actually fucking retarded.

Japanese steel isn't that great. It's basically pig iron. The Weebs have made an entire fan fiction out of the Samurai and glamorized it far beyond anything it ever was.

>console peasant detected

Uh no, the Katana would be useless against the Roman's armor which is highly resistant to slashing attacks, plus they have a shield and Pilum.

here's a better one

50 greek slingers versus one carthaginian elephant

Never specified the samurai either so I guess they are katana wielding neckbeard weebs.

yea but samurai have the longbow which will chew through the mail easy

Uh Romans were some of the very first to develop steel, thats why they beat the soft iron swords of their Gaulic and Germanic enemies.

THIS FAGGOT GETS IT

they used lorica segmenta mainly, almost never mail

except when they used lorica hamata, aka chainmail, which most of the rank and file warriors would wear

The elephant

Romans from post reform had layered steel armor and a shield that blocked pretty much any and all projectiles. Bows would mean nothing.

And there's still the shields to get through before that, and if you bust through those there's a buddy standing right behind him ready to stick you.

i still say their consuls fuck it all up and get the whole army killed

No, in the height of Roman glory, their armies almost always had Lorica Segmenta. It is one of the most iconic parts of Roman armor. Light infantry like Auxillia had the Hamata.

Not when there's a wall of them in phalanx formation with tower shields. Samurai couldn't do shit against a phalanx.

Kek but I mean the Roman Populus most were not Roman soldiers

Samurai win. Anybody can 10k civilians. Idgaf where they are from. Now if OP wants to bother to say Centurions or Hoplites, maybe even Legionaires, then we have a battle.
Also

>flat land
>Romans have a small hilltop

Dafuq.

it was only used by auxilary plebs, making up most of the army was segmenta

really the only answer you need, skip to 6:55 and bear in mind this is to show you how ineffective a katana is against steel
youtube.com/watch?v=EDkoj932YFo

There isn't really flat ground for 20k people in Europe which means the battle is taking place well outside the empire. The senior consul would just imprison or execute the little shits that argue and go on about winning an easy victory

consuls bear imperium, you cannot arrest your fellow consul

Imperial Roman armies didn't use the phalanx, you're thinking of the testeudo.

It's pretty easy to have someone killed in an army camp thousands of miles from the bounds of imperial law

Lol, this guy.

Spartans. 300 of them.

...? Uhm... Roman leadership was incredibly good, capable of commanding soldiers to fight as one at all times and pull off very complicated formations, Samurai very often would flat out IGNORE orders if the one giving them didn't have express permission to do so. A good example is at the battle of Siekegahara(probably mispelled that) in 1600 where Shimazu Yoshihiro(the best Samurai in southern Japan) refused to reinforce Ishida Mitsunari's right flank because he wasn't technically the appointed leader, a pivotal point in the battle that might have been the reason they lost.

you're not going to get away with killing a patritian cornelian who bears imperium

except when the consuls in a consular army argue and get the army killed

which happened

Implying command on the Japanese side isn't hanging by a thread given that to put together that many samurai means making some very flimsy truces between the assorted feudal lords. Except for one or two shifts in power in history and its end, the chain of command in the Roman military was pretty damn solid. Hence the reason they owned all of Europe at one point, while the Japs couldn't even make it off their damn island, except to hold Korea for a couple of years.

Or maybe just a standard shield wall formation? Tuestudo was used rarely, only if under very heavy archer fire. If it was abused it would make the men very tired very quickly, because holding a massive hunk of wood above your head for extended periods of time while it is constantly hit with rocks and arrows is not easy.

Only the stupidest of armies did this, and usually it didn't happen, if it was a common thing, the Roman army wouldn't have been as successful as it was.

Like say 300 Spartans vs the Immortals? Lol I know its you fag from the other thread.

>all of europe

yea it was cool when julius caesar conquered germania and brittania

Yea, as badass as Samurai were, leadership was not their strong suit.

On one hand you fave annihilation from a fractured army. On the other you have the possibility of getting caught killing one man.

It's pretty easy to say someone died in battle. Even if you are caught, at least you lived a little longer. Plus the prestige of the victory helps insulate you from the repercussions, especially if you have a powerful benefactor

Alas but these are the legions we are talking about. The men most of the time were afraid more of their officers than the enemy. So fatigue is out of the picture. Also during combat romans would switch in and out of combat every 10 mins or so.

it was basically guaranteed to happen during the first engagement of any war the romans fought until the imperial era

remember that:

- romans had to pass under the yoke
- that gauls sacked roma
- that cannae fiasco
- the disastrous first encounter with germans
-battle of teutoberg

Yea, true. But constantly switching soldiers is dangerous, and breaks apart the battle line. I feel like if the Samurai were on the defensive, they might win, but on the offensive, without shields... kek it would end baaaaad

Yea, talking army to army though... Romans were superior.

The testeudo was hardly used at all aside from approaching walls, towers or other fortifications. My point was that no standard Roman unit used a phalanx, that was mostly a Greek thing.

Again this is the Roman legion we are taking about they knew what they were doing and would often wait for a break in the enemy formation.

Point nonwithstanding? Big ol chunk of Europe still more than the Feudal Japanese ever had, or had the potential to.

I like samurai. Very cool guys.
But.
Gonna hafta vote romans.
Better armor. Chariots, long range bows with arrows and catapults. Stronger swords even if they have shorter reach. Better spears. Etc.
Romans are more well equipped for the fight. The japs... Their armor is made of fucking bamboo and maybe some small coin sized bits of steel which are nearly paper thin.
Not very good armor.

if the samurai use advanced cavalry tactics like horse archers combined with mounted charge I bet the japs can crack a legion

Romans would win and anyone who says otherwise is a faggot weeb who knows nothing about either group

Romans for sure they conquer so much thanks to roman legions Samurai didnt do shit so yea easy win

This.

romans win but then have a devastating civil war and vandals sack rome

Yea, honestly I don't know why they didn't try it, modify the shields to have a little slot for the spears and march, combine that with the testudo and it would be impossible to defeat.

What about technology? Weren't samurai around as recently as a couple hundred years ago? There are literally photos of them.