If roman legionares ever meet samurais in battle...

Roman Legionares VS Samurais. Who will win?

  • Roman Legionares

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Samurais

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .

Users who are viewing this thread

meatbag999

Sergeant at Arms
*IF* roman legionares ever meet samurais... who will win??

Here's my point of view....

Legionares : They are tough, well trained, disiplined. And fight well in masses. Equip with 2 pilum, shortsword and a large shield.

Samurais : Sooooo Braveeeeeee....... Unmatched in 1-1 battle. Equip with swords and spears.

While samurais are the gods in 1-1. Romans choose to fight in masses. With shields to form a bunker and stabing shortswords. They do not give samurais the chances to close in and do 1-1. While samurais swords are sharp and powerful enough to cleave thru shields and armors. They do not have enough space to swing their swords. With the limited spaces. Romans cleary have great advantage. But with the samurais bravery. They WILL charge at the "bunker" hard. Till its broken. And when it's broken. Samurais can close in and do 1-1. But then again... if romans can reinforce the fallen quickly and keep their space advantage. Samurais will have a tough battle.

To make it breif. If romans can keep the fighting in masses, romans win.
If samurais can get close and start 1-1 battle. Samurais win.

BTW, I'm no historian. I donno much about the past. And that is what I understand. I could be wrong. Any ideas, opnions are welcome. Let us share our thought and knowledge.
 
While samurais swords are sharp and powerful enough to cleave thru shields and armors.

Actually you're mistaken here. The Romans would have an advantage due to their armor. Samurai swords were not designed to defeat armor. They were best used against unarmored opponents. Roman armor and shields would pose a serious problem to the samurai.

I give the win to the Romans.
 
Yeah the sharpness/effectiveness of samurai swords ei katanas and the like are greatly exaggerated these days. They were good, but not that good. Also samurais used more than just their swords, they had polearms and other such weaponry aswell.

I honestly don't know who would win such a battle as you propose. If the numbers were even, it would come down to the differences in fighting disciplines and weaponry/armour overall. Not 1v1 vs formations but as army vs army. If that makes sense. I'm really sorta tired.
 
The Samurai would be cunning and patient and not charge head-on into a heavily armored tank of a unit. Instead, they'd hide and wait....... then, come nightfall..............


SWOOOOOOSSHH
 
Gah! Courage and honor your way to certain death or sneak and slash your way to victory? The eastern philophies of the Tao teach the latter.
 
The Samurai started out as mounted archers, so I guess it depends which time period samurai you are talking about.

The Romans have shields, so the arrows may not do much. However, the Samurai can just stand and let the Roman get to him, then when the Roman draws back his sword headshot him. Assuming Borcha doesn't accidently shoot the Samurai while he's waiting....
 
"Gah! Courage and honor your way to certain death or sneak and slash your way to victory? The eastern philophies of the Tao teach the latter.".

Then I guess it's those dumb martial arts-movies have fooled people once again... Here I walk around thinking those guys were all brave and stuff and then it turns out they were just as cowardly and desbickable as us... Shame.
 
InferiorBeing said:
"Gah! Courage and honor your way to certain death or sneak and slash your way to victory? The eastern philophies of the Tao teach the latter.".

Then I guess it's those dumb martial arts-movies have fooled people once again... Here I walk around thinking those guys were all brave and stuff and then it turns out they were just as cowardly and desbickable as us... Shame.


I didn't imply that. All conclusions are sole property of InferiorBeing.
 
No, no, hold your horses here, mate! I did not imply that you implied anything, I only commented on the fact that you told me. Don't take everything as critique, now!
 
I do not condone implications, critiques, or direct references of any kind. I also frown upon holding, or otherwise restraining the movement of horses of any kind. I did not imply you implied I implied anything, further implying you implied nothing of the sort. Implications are only implied when the imply-ee is implicable to implacency.
 
Whoa....We are talking about romans VS samurais here, not user VS user

But yeah, all u guys said make sense.

Let's just say. We add a bit more detail.

Both sides have 5000 men each. No superhero generals. Men are at full strength and very good morale. No food and supplies shortage. They are both on the plain field. And both side can use everything at their disposal.

What do u think?
 
"I do not condone implications, critiques, or direct references of any kind. I also frown upon holding, or otherwise restraining the movement of horses of any kind. I did not imply you implied I implied anything, further implying you implied nothing of the sort. Implications are only implied when the imply-ee is implicable to implacency."


PWNED :oops:
 
meatbag999 said:
Whoa....We are talking about romans VS samurais here, not user VS user

But yeah, all u guys said make sense.

Let's just say. We add a bit more detail.

Both sides have 5000 men each. No superhero generals. Men are at full strength and very good morale. No food and supplies shortage. They are both on the plain field. And both side can use everything at their disposal.

What do u think?


In that case, most likely the Romans. However, that is never the case. So realistically, refer to above posts.


InferiorBeing said:

Happens to the breast of us :lol: .
 
meatbag999 said:
*IF* roman legionares ever meet samurais... who will win??

Here's my point of view....

Legionares : They are tough, well trained, disiplined. And fight well in masses. Equip with 2 pilum, shortsword and a large shield.

Samurais : Sooooo Braveeeeeee....... Unmatched in 1-1 battle. Equip with swords and spears.

While samurais are the gods in 1-1. Romans choose to fight in masses. With shields to form a bunker and stabing shortswords. They do not give samurais the chances to close in and do 1-1. While samurais swords are sharp and powerful enough to cleave thru shields and armors. They do not have enough space to swing their swords. With the limited spaces. Romans cleary have great advantage. But with the samurais bravery. They WILL charge at the "bunker" hard. Till its broken. And when it's broken. Samurais can close in and do 1-1. But then again... if romans can reinforce the fallen quickly and keep their space advantage. Samurais will have a tough battle.

To make it breif. If romans can keep the fighting in masses, romans win.
If samurais can get close and start 1-1 battle. Samurais win.

BTW, I'm no historian. I donno much about the past. And that is what I understand. I could be wrong. Any ideas, opnions are welcome. Let us share our thought and knowledge.

Sounded like you probably watched too much of hollywood movies that used katana. As I have learned about the truth strength and weakness of katana used by samurai, it can NOT, I repeat, CAN NOT cut through steel or heavy forged shield no matter how hard you strike at theirs shield.

However, if you really want to cut through shield, then you'd love using FALX, Dacian barbaric tribes were famous to be fearsome to roman when they often slice through steel shield of roman, which is reasons why they developed lorica segmental (sp?) that contains many layers steel in their armours.

However, with lorica segmental and huge shield, samurai have TINY chance of masscaring roman while they are heavy walking tanks. And second, samuari are born as pure warriors while legionaries are pure killing machine soldiers that were heavily trained with high morales for wars against any kind of enemy, especially powerful barbaric tribes.

Unless samurai have their own cunning plans to ambush romans, they might will have chance if roman ever march into their own homelands where they can work on their cunnning strategies against these fearsome of walking tanks romans.

Therefore, if japanese samurai EVER wanted to invade rome, you can all forget it, because it is total suicide for them to do so.

Now back to subject, as you have said if 50,000 of roman battle against 50,000 of japanese samaurai at plain field, I'd predict that roman are more likely to defeat samuari with my respect to both of these great soldiers/warriors of roman and japanese. And even in 1 vs 1, Roman's legionary will still defeat samurai as well.

But again, if roman doesn't use huge shield with lorica segmental in that kind of battles, it'd be whole different story while samurai would have big chance against them and would slice them into half.


Eagle out...
 
The sengoku period samurai lords were quite far from the honest and honoured samurais that many people think about. Actually, backstabbing an ally was quite usual method when trying to unite(read:conquer) the Japan under one clan and it's shogunate. And samurai did run away from battle. They were only humans, you know. One might think that they were brave if they were able to kill themself in such a painful way(for those who don't know, samurai didn't just pierce their stomach with the sword/knife, they cut it open), but I think that was just because in their culture it is/was worse to be caught and imprisoned than to die.

About the armies. One samurai clan often had armies that european kings would have been envious of. For example, the first civil war of the sengoku period was between two clans, who fought in Kyoto for about 10 years. They marched there with armies of 80,000 and 85,000. For comparison, around the same time there was some civil war in britain, and the armies of 10,000-15,000 men were considered huge.

I haven't made myself very familiar with the roman armies and their equipment, but I do know that when Rome was on the peak of it's strength, They were pure genious when it came to warfare. And due to the lack of shields, the Samurai armies would be pretty much helpless against ranged weapons.
 
Eagle, lorica Segmentata was not developed to counter Falx, and they never used steel shields.

Anyway, Let's assumed that, Roman army was Imperial roman army (around the time of Augustus - Claudius), legion, or 4800 + cavalry + personnels= app. 5000. Samurai being Sengoku pre-gunpowder era.

Roman: 4800 legionaries, 120 cavalry, 60 Ballistae, 10 Onagri (Each century contains one ballista and its crew (they could be rota from century). Also a single Cohort has one onager. pl. Onagri)
Samurai: 2000 Ashigaru archers, 2000 Ashigaru pikemen, 1000 Spear Samurai. Also it contains numerous stone throwers (if to conpensate Roman artillery).

Before starting, there's a difference between the military philosophy. Roman army was designed to engage and destroy enemy formation, with very aggressive tactical tendency. Japanese, on the other hand, developed more passive way to fight. Their method is mostly shooting as many arrows and stones at first to disrupt enemy formation. It could be more accurate to say, they expected to break enemy with missiles. It is very rare to see Samurai fighting head-on. And this head-on style of battle is what Roman was made for.
Also formation. Roman legionary is formed to maximise frontal fighting ability. First lines have four Cohorts, behind them formes three Cohorts for follow-up/reinforcing, and then another three Cohorts for final reserve. Each Cohort was four rank deep, staggered, 120 men wide (appr.108m to 120m). Each Cohort's gap was open quite wide - to maximise manoevring. Cohort structure means that they can take any formation at will.
Samurai, on the other hand, formed for more all-direction defenciveness. They are divided into Sonae, which is of various size. Sonae was commanded by a powerful vessel under the lord (lord himself has his own Sonae). Unfortunately, not many example of Sonae was survived, but the best known one was virtually box. The outer ring was formed by missile troops who were made up of groups of five. Next came pikemen. Inner part was not box. two lines of spear Samurai. Behind them was the commander in the centre of guards in half-moon formation. This formation severely reduced the combat efficiency but it is virtually unflanked. And moreover, each line was a single line. Let's say they are made of 5 Sonae, 400 archers, 400 pikemen, 200 samurai which gives frontal length of 100m. All samurai are dismounted, except commanders of each squardron.

Fighting method has to be taken in account:
Legionaries are designed to fight in relatively close range, they use Scutum, Pilum (Heavy and light), Gradius, Pugio (dagger). Armour was, well, lets say Lorica Segmentata though it seems likely that many, if not majority, soliers wore Lorica Hamata too.
Samurai are more likely to fight in longer distance. Pikemen uses specially constructed pike, of 5 -6.3m. They are made of composite wood and bamboo reinforced with string and lacquer. It is flexible (actually bend slightly) and strong. It is said it can push back a charging horse without breaking. But, it's main usage is not thrust, but smash from above. They simply batter enemy to death. It can also be used to make makeshift lafts, ladders and stretch. Spear is usually 3.6m long, with head of various shape. Some had hooks in shaft. Katana is, in all aspects, sidearms and not really considered to be used in this simuration.

So, what might happen is... Total defeat of Japanese (draw was the best they can get)

1. Setting troops.
Japanese would place Sonae with either Crane Wing formation (Somae placed to make as wide front as possible) or Scale formation (like Roman would, or piling up one another). It really doesn't matter which one to choose. Outcome would be the same. Each Sonae's gaps are wide - perhaps 100m or more. they could hope that any troops went into these gaps are shot by flank archers.
Roman would make either traditional 4-3-3 formation (if Japanese took Scale formation), or more wider one, maybe 5-5 formation (for Crane Wing, each sonae would face one Cohort with another for back-up).

2. Initial contact 1.
Roman artillery fires upon Japanese Sonae. Since Sonae was very loose (just a collection of single lines), artillery fire would be not as effective as against other usual mates like gauls. Though Ballistae is pretty accurate and it could break the moral of enemy. Legionary advances.

3. Initial Contact 2.
As Legionary approached, they enter the arrow range, possibly about 50m. Because of its box-shape, Sonae's fire power is reduced to 1/4. of 400 archers in one Sonae, only 100 can shoot! Legionary's Scutum made it almost impossible to make effective hit.
At the same time, Hord of stone throwers running up and throw stones at them. It is how Jpanese battle starts. Not really effective against Roman. Japanese can hope that hail of stones and arrows disrupt enemy formation, or defeat them. Very unlikely.

4. Crucial Point.
Japanese has a decision here. Retreat (and make it draw), or fight (and suffer total defeat). Historically most of Japanese commander choose to retreat. This time, they choose to fight to show how Samurai dies.

5. Initial Engage.
Roman finally made to Japanese Sonae. Archers withdraw inside of Sonae, or somewhere and Pikemen raise their pike and ready for oncoming Roman.
Roman, as usual, throw pili into pikemen. 500 pili went to 100 pikemen (rest 300 are other sides of box).
Pikemen Ashigaru flee. 'Samurai's job is to die, Ashigaru's job is not to die. (Ashigaru Monogatari)' It is very likely that other Ashigaru and Samurai will flee as well, to end the game.
If pikemen held, their battering is easily dealt with Sctum and Legionare will make short work of pikemen.

6. Legionare vs Samurai
If Legionary kept one pilum, it is likely to cause the volley to flee the first line of Samurai. If not, they would enter hand-to-hand. Legionary would find difficult to get into the range. And Japanese line is easily move backwards (it's just a single line, after all). However, since this very thin line means they tend to shrink rapidly when they starting to get casualty. Also thin line deteriorate morals in combat.
Roman attempt to make flank manoeuvre is counterd by flank archers and pikemen and as in previous sections, they will be destroyed and encircle enemy Samurai.
If they get close, winning fomura of Scutum+Gladius equals victory. Katana has great difficulty getting around of Scutum and shield bashing. Legianry has a lot of experience fighting these type of enemy.

7. End
It is very unlikely that Samurai would stay till this phase, more likely they will flee before contact. If they stood firmly, Samurai would be killed to the last man and add yet another glory to the Roman Empire.
 
there is a million outcomes to this battle, as you will never know what a general will for in battle. I on the other hand, believe that Samurai would win if it was a 1 on 1 battle (Legionares were trained to fight as 'clumps' of soldiers, forming a wall). The legionares would win if it was a group battle, as they were famous for solid walls that had a constant offense (the Samurai didn't use shields, making them targets. It would be a draw if it was the '5000 men on each side (clear plane's, what he said earlier) as both could use tactics on eachother for all eternity (or at least until wind began to blow for fire arrows)


I voted for Samurai, just because they looked cooler, and that i only learned about legionare history from gladiator
 
Ryuta said:
Eagle, lorica Segmentata was not developed to counter Falx, and they never used steel shields.

Anyway, Let's assumed that, Roman army was Imperial roman army (around the time of Augustus - Claudius), legion, or 4800 + cavalry + personnels= app. 5000. Samurai being Sengoku pre-gunpowder era.

Roman: 4800 legionaries, 120 cavalry, 60 Ballistae, 10 Onagri (Each century contains one ballista and its crew (they could be rota from century). Also a single Cohort has one onager. pl. Onagri)
Samurai: 2000 Ashigaru archers, 2000 Ashigaru pikemen, 1000 Spear Samurai. Also it contains numerous stone throwers (if to conpensate Roman artillery).

Before starting, there's a difference between the military philosophy. Roman army was designed to engage and destroy enemy formation, with very aggressive tactical tendency. Japanese, on the other hand, developed more passive way to fight. Their method is mostly shooting as many arrows and stones at first to disrupt enemy formation. It could be more accurate to say, they expected to break enemy with missiles. It is very rare to see Samurai fighting head-on. And this head-on style of battle is what Roman was made for.
Also formation. Roman legionary is formed to maximise frontal fighting ability. First lines have four Cohorts, behind them formes three Cohorts for follow-up/reinforcing, and then another three Cohorts for final reserve. Each Cohort was four rank deep, staggered, 120 men wide (appr.108m to 120m). Each Cohort's gap was open quite wide - to maximise manoevring. Cohort structure means that they can take any formation at will.
Samurai, on the other hand, formed for more all-direction defenciveness. They are divided into Sonae, which is of various size. Sonae was commanded by a powerful vessel under the lord (lord himself has his own Sonae). Unfortunately, not many example of Sonae was survived, but the best known one was virtually box. The outer ring was formed by missile troops who were made up of groups of five. Next came pikemen. Inner part was not box. two lines of spear Samurai. Behind them was the commander in the centre of guards in half-moon formation. This formation severely reduced the combat efficiency but it is virtually unflanked. And moreover, each line was a single line. Let's say they are made of 5 Sonae, 400 archers, 400 pikemen, 200 samurai which gives frontal length of 100m. All samurai are dismounted, except commanders of each squardron.

Fighting method has to be taken in account:
Legionaries are designed to fight in relatively close range, they use Scutum, Pilum (Heavy and light), Gradius, Pugio (dagger). Armour was, well, lets say Lorica Segmentata though it seems likely that many, if not majority, soliers wore Lorica Hamata too.
Samurai are more likely to fight in longer distance. Pikemen uses specially constructed pike, of 5 -6.3m. They are made of composite wood and bamboo reinforced with string and lacquer. It is flexible (actually bend slightly) and strong. It is said it can push back a charging horse without breaking. But, it's main usage is not thrust, but smash from above. They simply batter enemy to death. It can also be used to make makeshift lafts, ladders and stretch. Spear is usually 3.6m long, with head of various shape. Some had hooks in shaft. Katana is, in all aspects, sidearms and not really considered to be used in this simuration.

So, what might happen is... Total defeat of Japanese (draw was the best they can get)

1. Setting troops.
Japanese would place Sonae with either Crane Wing formation (Somae placed to make as wide front as possible) or Scale formation (like Roman would, or piling up one another). It really doesn't matter which one to choose. Outcome would be the same. Each Sonae's gaps are wide - perhaps 100m or more. they could hope that any troops went into these gaps are shot by flank archers.
Roman would make either traditional 4-3-3 formation (if Japanese took Scale formation), or more wider one, maybe 5-5 formation (for Crane Wing, each sonae would face one Cohort with another for back-up).

2. Initial contact 1.
Roman artillery fires upon Japanese Sonae. Since Sonae was very loose (just a collection of single lines), artillery fire would be not as effective as against other usual mates like gauls. Though Ballistae is pretty accurate and it could break the moral of enemy. Legionary advances.

3. Initial Contact 2.
As Legionary approached, they enter the arrow range, possibly about 50m. Because of its box-shape, Sonae's fire power is reduced to 1/4. of 400 archers in one Sonae, only 100 can shoot! Legionary's Scutum made it almost impossible to make effective hit.
At the same time, Hord of stone throwers running up and throw stones at them. It is how Jpanese battle starts. Not really effective against Roman. Japanese can hope that hail of stones and arrows disrupt enemy formation, or defeat them. Very unlikely.

4. Crucial Point.
Japanese has a decision here. Retreat (and make it draw), or fight (and suffer total defeat). Historically most of Japanese commander choose to retreat. This time, they choose to fight to show how Samurai dies.

5. Initial Engage.
Roman finally made to Japanese Sonae. Archers withdraw inside of Sonae, or somewhere and Pikemen raise their pike and ready for oncoming Roman.
Roman, as usual, throw pili into pikemen. 500 pili went to 100 pikemen (rest 300 are other sides of box).
Pikemen Ashigaru flee. 'Samurai's job is to die, Ashigaru's job is not to die. (Ashigaru Monogatari)' It is very likely that other Ashigaru and Samurai will flee as well, to end the game.
If pikemen held, their battering is easily dealt with Sctum and Legionare will make short work of pikemen.

6. Legionare vs Samurai
If Legionary kept one pilum, it is likely to cause the volley to flee the first line of Samurai. If not, they would enter hand-to-hand. Legionary would find difficult to get into the range. And Japanese line is easily move backwards (it's just a single line, after all). However, since this very thin line means they tend to shrink rapidly when they starting to get casualty. Also thin line deteriorate morals in combat.
Roman attempt to make flank manoeuvre is counterd by flank archers and pikemen and as in previous sections, they will be destroyed and encircle enemy Samurai.
If they get close, winning fomura of Scutum+Gladius equals victory. Katana has great difficulty getting around of Scutum and shield bashing. Legianry has a lot of experience fighting these type of enemy.

7. End
It is very unlikely that Samurai would stay till this phase, more likely they will flee before contact. If they stood firmly, Samurai would be killed to the last man and add yet another glory to the Roman Empire.

pal, ever heard of testudo formation?
 
Back
Top Bottom