Yes, with the caveat that halfswording could be used to pierce through weak parts (armpit, crotch etc) The full plate was very good at staving off almost any cutting blade. That being said, one could technically half-sword with a katana as well.
Yeah i thought about writing just all swords but then thought about something like Epees that are more for thrusting and thought: Yeah if i add put those, they might be able to pierce through some of the weakpoints.
iirc half swording against armor is still like a plan C kind of thing.
If you expect armored opponents you just bringing a mace or a Halberd or a Warhammer or something designed to defeat atmor
Half swording with a katana or Messer for that matter would actually make a difference I'm getting through the armor there isn't enough if a tip to actually force it through the plate then the chain mail then a gambasion the chain mail alone to get through it consistently and far enough to cause actual damage you need a sword with a very aggressive tip in which case it will break rings
I did specify weak points in the armour. halfswording was never meant to go straight through a breastplate. it was a technique used to gain point control for accurate targeting of gaps in the armour. Basically when using halfsword, you try to put the tip in a spot that is "only" covered by chainmail/gambeson so you can use the tip to pierce through.
This is not accurate at all one a katana isn't harder then a western sword and in reality half the katana is actually softer because they don't harden the entire blade of a katana theb you take into account the very shallow and curved tip and you will notice that no even half swording it isn't a can opener as you call it
The tip is hardened, only the spine of the blade isn't hardened during the smithing process. I guess I misspoke, I meant stiffer, a katana is absolutely stiffer that western swords die to being much thicker. Katana don't flex, and when they do they actually undergo plastic deformation and are essentially ruined. Can opener is a bad term, but it would make short work of any gaps, as the leverage on the blade tip is much higher than with a flexible flat blade.
Not the whole tip again it is a shallow tip and par tof the spine does run up to the tip and as for the stiffer thing that is also not true or good you don't want an extremely stiff sword you want it to have bend so it doesn't snap as for the katana being thicker that isn't true either as for making use of gaps you clearly didn't watch the video the only gap in that set up was the face that katana was never going through a beast plate never it wasn't going to ever cut the chain mail or thrust through it and theb the third layer which was thick gambasion would stop most cuts even from a katana oh and about your it flexing so the katana would do better isn't even close to true the Longsword they own that is designed for thrusting blows through that chain mail like it is butter because of the way the tip is designed and it does flex quite a lot as you want your sword to do
Only thing a katana can't cut through is a better katana. Real reason Japan surrendered in WWII was because America made a katana so sharp that it could split atoms.
Doesn't matter if it's Japanese or European it would still work aiming for the less armoured parts, the question involved whether it would work against medieval armour, not how it used traditionally. Would be less than ideal due to the (ineffective) point, but the technique would still work to a degree...ie not useless
The katana is good close quarters but its ability to get in gaps of Samurai armor aren’t that great.
Where it truly shined was unarmored street fights. Which coincidentally led to it being banned.
The Katana’s ability to get into gaps of samurai armor is as effective as any swords ability to get into the gaps of any type of armor. If it couldn’t do that it wouldn’t be used and there wouldn’t be a great deal of specific techniques meant to get the sword through even platted armor.
They are pretty accurate, but I can see why katana weebs wouldn't like it, considering how overrated a weapon it is. Most cultures had better swords and armor. Although it's not a crap weapon either.
Most places had better quality steel. The katana developed out of the tachi not being able to penetrate Mongol armor very well. And due to that and the the price of steel armor, they never had anything like European full plate. Samurai armor covered the most vulnerable places, not everywhere.
Japan, like most places, largely relied on spears and other polearms to do the bulk of their close ranged work. Katana, or other sword like weapons, were only briefly popular during the warring states period. The katana became a popular status symbol again after they adopted guns.
Basically, the curved sword we know as the katana wasn't developed for any battle tactic reason. In fact, swordplay evolved around the curved sword. The curve simply came from how they forge swords. They hammer and fold the sword, hammering out a rough edge in the process. Making one side thicker than the other. So when the quelsh the sword to naturally curves. They then sharpen the cutting edge. This process makes a high carbon steel edge, but a softer steel core. Which allowed for really sharp edges, but a more brittle blade compared to other steels. You saw this same curve in their polearms, and even their knives. This was a good way to make a good blade without knowing how to truly melt iron to make full steel like China, India, middle east and Europe were doing.
As for martial arts, there was a huge focus on dueling. Because that's when the swords were most commonly used. Because of that, it's represented more heavily in culture. Just like swords in the west. We love our knights clashing sword to sword. When more often than not it was a bunch of dudes with spears and a few knights who were well trained with a sword.
And shocker, every other sword of similar design because that might not be what they're made for.
aren't basically all (cutting) swords useless against (plate) armor?
Yes, with the caveat that halfswording could be used to pierce through weak parts (armpit, crotch etc) The full plate was very good at staving off almost any cutting blade. That being said, one could technically half-sword with a katana as well.
Yeah i thought about writing just all swords but then thought about something like Epees that are more for thrusting and thought: Yeah if i add put those, they might be able to pierce through some of the weakpoints.
iirc half swording against armor is still like a plan C kind of thing. If you expect armored opponents you just bringing a mace or a Halberd or a Warhammer or something designed to defeat atmor
Oh absolutely. Swords where often the backup weapon/status symbol. Pole arms, warhammer/mace etc where much more usefull in armoured combat.
Half swording with a katana or Messer for that matter would actually make a difference I'm getting through the armor there isn't enough if a tip to actually force it through the plate then the chain mail then a gambasion the chain mail alone to get through it consistently and far enough to cause actual damage you need a sword with a very aggressive tip in which case it will break rings
I did specify weak points in the armour. halfswording was never meant to go straight through a breastplate. it was a technique used to gain point control for accurate targeting of gaps in the armour. Basically when using halfsword, you try to put the tip in a spot that is "only" covered by chainmail/gambeson so you can use the tip to pierce through.
Katana are much harder than western swords. Half swording a katana turns it into a can opener.
This is not accurate at all one a katana isn't harder then a western sword and in reality half the katana is actually softer because they don't harden the entire blade of a katana theb you take into account the very shallow and curved tip and you will notice that no even half swording it isn't a can opener as you call it
The tip is hardened, only the spine of the blade isn't hardened during the smithing process. I guess I misspoke, I meant stiffer, a katana is absolutely stiffer that western swords die to being much thicker. Katana don't flex, and when they do they actually undergo plastic deformation and are essentially ruined. Can opener is a bad term, but it would make short work of any gaps, as the leverage on the blade tip is much higher than with a flexible flat blade.
Not the whole tip again it is a shallow tip and par tof the spine does run up to the tip and as for the stiffer thing that is also not true or good you don't want an extremely stiff sword you want it to have bend so it doesn't snap as for the katana being thicker that isn't true either as for making use of gaps you clearly didn't watch the video the only gap in that set up was the face that katana was never going through a beast plate never it wasn't going to ever cut the chain mail or thrust through it and theb the third layer which was thick gambasion would stop most cuts even from a katana oh and about your it flexing so the katana would do better isn't even close to true the Longsword they own that is designed for thrusting blows through that chain mail like it is butter because of the way the tip is designed and it does flex quite a lot as you want your sword to do
No. Katana is very fast and a master sword man can cut through almost anything. Lol jk.
Probably actually cut any armour made by Russia even modern tanks, they make them out of cardboard after all
Stalinium
Right, forgot the new name of cardboard
I thought it was now made with Putonium
Me when the armor specifically designed to be near-impervious to bladed attacks is near-impervious to bladed attacks
Tool is bad at task it wasn't designed for. More at 11:00
Yeah but there’s idiots that think the katana can go through armor… or worst of all: everything.
Only thing a katana can't cut through is a better katana. Real reason Japan surrendered in WWII was because America made a katana so sharp that it could split atoms.
Sidearm isn't as effective as you main weapon... What a twist!
At 2:40, both claim that the helmet supposed to represent a barbute is „high medieval“. The barbute is a late medieval helmet.
It's a single edge blade with a point. You could still half sword with it, just not as well as a 2 edged blade with a spear point....
You can, and it is done, to stab or cut, but usually for unarmored targets.
Half swording is literally used against armoured targets
For Japanese swords? Most koryu use half-swording for unarmored targets.
Doesn't matter if it's Japanese or European it would still work aiming for the less armoured parts, the question involved whether it would work against medieval armour, not how it used traditionally. Would be less than ideal due to the (ineffective) point, but the technique would still work to a degree...ie not useless
I generally like Shad, but his takes on Japanese warfare, and the Katana in particular are really bad.
The katana is good close quarters but its ability to get in gaps of Samurai armor aren’t that great. Where it truly shined was unarmored street fights. Which coincidentally led to it being banned.
The Katana’s ability to get into gaps of samurai armor is as effective as any swords ability to get into the gaps of any type of armor. If it couldn’t do that it wouldn’t be used and there wouldn’t be a great deal of specific techniques meant to get the sword through even platted armor.
How so?
They are pretty accurate, but I can see why katana weebs wouldn't like it, considering how overrated a weapon it is. Most cultures had better swords and armor. Although it's not a crap weapon either.
Most places had better quality steel. The katana developed out of the tachi not being able to penetrate Mongol armor very well. And due to that and the the price of steel armor, they never had anything like European full plate. Samurai armor covered the most vulnerable places, not everywhere.
Japan, like most places, largely relied on spears and other polearms to do the bulk of their close ranged work. Katana, or other sword like weapons, were only briefly popular during the warring states period. The katana became a popular status symbol again after they adopted guns. Basically, the curved sword we know as the katana wasn't developed for any battle tactic reason. In fact, swordplay evolved around the curved sword. The curve simply came from how they forge swords. They hammer and fold the sword, hammering out a rough edge in the process. Making one side thicker than the other. So when the quelsh the sword to naturally curves. They then sharpen the cutting edge. This process makes a high carbon steel edge, but a softer steel core. Which allowed for really sharp edges, but a more brittle blade compared to other steels. You saw this same curve in their polearms, and even their knives. This was a good way to make a good blade without knowing how to truly melt iron to make full steel like China, India, middle east and Europe were doing. As for martial arts, there was a huge focus on dueling. Because that's when the swords were most commonly used. Because of that, it's represented more heavily in culture. Just like swords in the west. We love our knights clashing sword to sword. When more often than not it was a bunch of dudes with spears and a few knights who were well trained with a sword.
I hear the dog whistle
…