Quote:
Originally posted by Lunchbox7
Are we giving the european armour a little too much credit.
|
Nope. Western armour was incredible stuff. Best personal armour in the world.
Quote:
|
Philopino stick fighting was designed specifically against plate armour and that was bloody effective. They were just sticks. Why couldnt an extremely hard, sharp blade be used the same way?
|
Er, check your facts, bro. Filipino "stick fighting", as you call it, existed long before the Spaniards invaded the Phillipines. Additionally, the Filipinos did not use sticks against the Spaniards, they used long knives, short swords, work knives, and only used sticks as a last resort. Another factor here is that the Spaniards were not in any way, shape, or form using heavy armour as we are discussing here. The armour they were using was generally a steel breastplate combined with an open face helmet with a broad brim. If you think about it, a stick is fairly effective against such a set-up provided you hit your target properly.
Filipino martial arts isn't about stick-fighting, excepting some more modernized arts. It is about training with sticks so that you can move to blades when you are ready. My Kali-Silat instructor always made damned certain that we understood that the sticks were for training, but that we should visualize them as blades. We also did a good bit of work with wooden training knives as well.
Quote:
|
Sheilds could be as much of a hindrence as a bonus. It protects you from harm but also blinds your vision. If an agile opponent moves the blind side your fucked.
|
No, you turn, or you just make sure the shield is moved between you and your foe. Ever used a shield? It's educating. In Western martial arts such as a knight would use, the use of the shield was as important and practiced a skill as using the sword, and about as difficult to master too. Shields do not blind you unless you are using some towering monstrosity like the Romans used in formation fighting.
Quote:
|
Anyone who has trained martial arts will tell you fighting isnt just about trading blows. It is about being in the best position to execute the correct attack and best defence. The faster fighter could move around the opponent and merely push them off balance. It is easy when you have the right angle. If you can get a fully armoured opponent on the ground its game over.
|
Not really. It isn't that hard to get up off the ground in well-made armour. That stupid myth about knights needing to be lifted into the saddle by a crane when armoured is garbage. It was referring to very late period tournament armour that would never have seen the battlefield. It is no exagerration to say that a fit knight in properly fitted plate could turn cartwheels ont he battlefield. It may look bulky and hard to move in to you, but when trained, it is very easy to move in.
You should also think about how much harder it is to "simply" push over a man in an extra 80lbs of armour. It's not a simple task, especially when he does not want to be pushed over. If it were that easy, armour would have never survived as long as it did.
As I've alluded to, I've trained in Kali-Silat (a Filipino
knife-fighting art) and SCA fighting (a Medieval Western style). I was easily able to apply my Filipino style footwork while wearing Western armour. It was harder work as I wasn't used to it, but I could do it.
Quote:
|
The samarai did wear armour but admittidly it was abizmal. I would go for the samarai not only for these reasons but they would rather die fighting than flee and live. Sun Tzu always said attack on 3 sides. If you dont give your opponent an avenue of escape they will fight heaps harder because they ahve nothing to lose and thus can conquer their fear. It is like a cornered animal will fight a hell of a lot harder if they know they are cornered. Samarai trained for that type of mentality through all their life. Knights didnt.
|
I'm sure the "true" samurai would do that. I am equally as sure that the majority would not. I am also completely certain that I could find historical examples of Samurai fleeing from a battle simply because winning a war is more important.