The Greek pike phalanx VS The Samurai warrior

[The Chambernator]

give any conditons you want but heres what i say macedon under command of alexander the great and the samurai under the command of who ever you want i simply could not pick someone from so many notable commanders so you pick. the samurai have no guns gunpowder wepons explosives all swords bows and their other weapons, the macedonian phalanx is alexander era they still have big sheilds and heavy armor. secondly its fine if you want to just compare the fighting its self between the troops but if you whant to compare a large battle to every things welcome. if you whant to do a full scale battle heres the rundown, large open area hills some patches of tall grass and trees here and there but for the most part open and flat. if you dont know much about one side then post what you know and not an ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥e statement i want a even debate.
troops:Greece Alexander 8,000 compainon cavalry,
infantry 18,000 pikemen, 3,000 hypaspists,
5,000 misc allied hoplites athens,corinth,spartans ect. 3,000 peltast archers slingers ect,
Japan Samurai 8,000 mounted samurai
13,000 samurai armed bows katanas 12,000 armed with naginatas
4,000 dedicated archers
so tell me what happens hope you have fun with this please dont start anything if you dont have anything good or contributeing to say dont then dont post. have fun with this. and sorry if i misspelled stuff :)

[Fane]

id still think Alexander would win. Due to the fact that he was one of the most famous commander of his time and that he knew the weakness of his troop. He made them fight together to make up for the weakness that occured as a individuals. The samurai alll they had to compet is their tech, Katana and niginater. But the niginata is better when closer and the pikes that the macedonian used was way longer and offered a incentive to attack from range yet attack close enough to coordinate it. btw the samurai were bounded by honor. The greek soldiers werent. I could still guess they would fight dirty(As evidenced by their martial arts)
Samurai couldnt fight dirty.

[The Chambernator]

Originally posted by iKhan(Sellling Page 6 item):

id still think Alexander would win. Due to the fact that he was one of the most famous commander of his time and that he knew the weakness of his troop. He made them fight together to make up for the weakness that occured as a individuals. The samurai alll they had to compet is their tech, Katana and niginater. But the niginata is better when closer and the pikes that the macedonian used was way longer and offered a incentive to attack from range yet attack close enough to coordinate it. btw the samurai were bounded by honor. The greek soldiers werent. I could still guess they would fight dirty(As evidenced by their martial arts)
Samurai couldnt fight dirty.

you know i agree with you for the most part the reason the phalanx was defeated was because the romans would pin the sarrisa spears on there sheilds and lop the ends of with there sword the samurai did not use sheilds they would charge into a forest of spikes with no protection. i think alaxander wins 25/75 but i would not underestemate the samurais cav but the companions where elite as well. that would be a heck of a face off and thanks for posting and shareing your thoughts

[Mc Nuggets]

i agree i would pay top dollar the see alex the great soldiers face off vs samurais

[Xautos]

Those long pikes are not only heavy, but unwieldly. That makes them difficult to move around and to handle much less use in close quarters, for the sake of mobility the Samurai would easily win that contest because the hoplite would be wearing armour, a heavy pike and shield. when it came to sword fighting, that heavy shield won't win the hoplite any favors in combat against the Samurai who only has the sharpest swords available to him.

If the Samurai charged into Alexander with his spear on a 1 on 1 encounter, the Samurai would knock the spear out the way but at that point Alexander would immediately need to drop the spear because it would do him no good at that point. At this point it is a sword encounter and with the Katana and Daishō combination for the Samurai, even if Alexander parried the first hit from the Katana the Samurai would have the reach to come back around with the Daishō and that big shield won't be winning Alexander no favors because it would be taking out his stamina and any sword play would be matched and surpassed with an expert swordsman.

Alexander would need to remove the shield to gain some measure of mobility and stamina but he is still outmatched the the two razor sharp swords that are longer compared to his one Xiphos which at the time would be half the size of a Katana and a little smaller than the Daishō.

in traning and experience the Samurai would be prepared for close encounters more than Alexander or any Hoplite since they were never that well trained for the encounter.

My money is on the Samurai when they get past the pikes.

[The Chambernator]

Now look im not going to stand up for how this was written this was over 6 years ago but I think what I was getting at was less 1v1 fights but more larger field engaments where formations and drilling play a larger role than individual combatants ability, in a 1v1 i'd be enclined to agree with you but that wasnt really what I was looking for. Im very aware how useless a pike is as a single weapon as I own one and have tried sparring against a sword but thats not at all how its used just google macedonian pike phalanx and youll know what im refering to if you havent already seen what that looks like.

[Xautos]

Originally posted by The Trumpinantor:

Now look im not going to stand up for how this was written this was over 6 years ago but I think what I was getting at was less 1v1 fights but more larger field engaments where formations and drilling play a larger role than individual combatants ability, in a 1v1 i'd be enclined to agree with you but that wasnt really what I was looking for. Im very aware how useless a pike is as a single weapon as I own one and have tried sparring against a sword but thats not at all how its used just google macedonian pike phalanx and youll know what im refering to if you havent already seen what that looks like.

A Sarissa is 6 meters long, 6 kg heavy, carried in the right hand. A dory is half that length and weight and can be used as a throwing weapon, but still 3 meters is a bit much for close quarter fighting for sure and that wood as hard as it is is no match for a sword with enough strength behind it.

That is mostly where i realised how impractical such a thing is in close quarters, the same with the shield, the Aspis is mostly wood with a little bronze on the front for protection but it is 7 kg heavy and the bronze armour is also very heavy to wear at over 30kg, and that is to protect the upper torso from harm but it won't keep the arms, legs and lower torso from harm either.

When it comes to swords, the Xiphos doesn't have any reach to really get at the Samurai. it's more like a slightly bigger dagger which by itself is like a knife in a gun fight.

But if the Hoplites are taught well, know how to protect themselves as a phalanx, they could take out sword wielding Samurai, but Spear using Samurai is another matter entirely and then there are Samurais using Bows and others using staff weapons..

[NekRon99]

I think the Companion cav would easily rout the Samurai cav and then mow down the archers. Even if the infantry engagement was favoring the samurai the cav would end it.

[Xautos]

Originally posted by NekRon99:

I think the Companion cav would easily rout the Samurai cav and then mow down the archers. Even if the infantry engagement was favoring the samurai the cav would end it.

The problem with Samurai is their code of honor, they won't surrender or retreat from battle in order to keep their promise to their master, their honor demands no less.

[Gilmaris]

Boy, this thread makes me think I travelled back in time back to the early 2000s, as I see the same arguments.

First off, the premise is a bit unclear. The title clearly says Greek pike phalanx vs. samurai warrior, but the OP text itself seems to be about the combined arms of Alexander's army vs samurai. And very specific samurai, too, but not much to do with historical samurai.

The OP disqualifies firearms for the samurai, hopefully because it would make the fight too uneven and not because of the misconception that samurai didn't use them (when in actual fact they loved them). Fine, so it's not 16th century samurai, then.

Pike phalanxes are also not mentioned for the samurai, which means it's not late 15th century samurai either.

Nor are horse archers mentioned, which rules out pretty much all of Heian. Then we are left with 14th-mid 15th century, or early Muromachi. In this period the samurai would indeed have a significant portion of archers, and naginata would be their melée weapon of choice - some would have the no-dachi, but none would go into battle with their katana alone. The katana was a sidearm, never a main battlefield weapon.

Of course, most warriors on the battlefield would have been ashigaru, armed mainly with bows or spears (and a sword as sidearm, like the samurai).

The Japanese battlefield had a particular focus on archery, and big pavises for cover.

A couple of things I noticed skimming the posts which are just wrong:

"Samurai couldn't fight dirty." Says who? They fought to win, and any means to do so was acceptable.

"They wouldn't surrender or retreat from battle." Says who? That happened all the time. "No surrender, no retreat" was an ideal, not just for the samurai but for warriors everywhere. Ideals are striven for, but not always attained. Samurai were just human, after all, with the same survival instincts as everyone else.

Japanese history is full of treachery, deceit, backstabbing, scheming, ignoble routs, cowardice and more... It's not just bravery and loyalty. There's one scene in James Clavell's Shogun which captures this neatly, and that's where Blackthorne (based on William Adams) has his first audience with Toranaga (based on Tokugawa Ieyasu). Toranaga is accusing the Dutch (whom Blackthorn serves) rebellion against their lawful rulers, the Spanish, and the dialogue goes something like this:

B: "But there were mitigating factors. Serious mitigating factors!"
T: "There can be no mitigating factors when it comes to rebellion against a sovereign lord!"
B: "Unless you win."
T: (laughs) "Yes, Mr. Foreigner-with-the-impossible-name, you have named the one mitigating factor."

That's the samurai mentality in a nutshell. Anything goes so long as you can get away with it.

[Xautos]

Originally posted by Gilmaris:

"They wouldn't surrender or retreat from battle." Says who? That happened all the time. "No surrender, no retreat" was an ideal,

Samurai are fanatically loyal to their masters, they served in a capacity their masters gave them, if they fail to carry out the order their masters set out for them, their honor means nothing and the only way ro reclaim that honor is a ritual suicide, Seppuku. This is in order to not only avoid capture by the enemy so they can't be used, but to make sure their family wasn't also shamed and dishonored by the actions of the family member who is a Samurai who ran from the field.

That is what their honor demands, they can't run from the fight no matter what.

[Gilmaris]

Originally posted by Xautos:

Originally posted by Gilmaris:

"They wouldn't surrender or retreat from battle." Says who? That happened all the time. "No surrender, no retreat" was an ideal,

Samurai are fanatically loyal to their masters, they served in a capacity their masters gave them, if they fail to carry out the order their masters set out for them, their honor means nothing and the only way ro reclaim that honor is a ritual suicide, Seppuku. This is in order to not only avoid capture by the enemy so they can't be used, but to make sure their family wasn't also shamed and dishonored by the actions of the family member who is a Samurai who ran from the field.

That is what their honor demands, they can't run from the fight no matter what.

Again, an ideal, not actual facts of life. But hey, don't take my word for it, here's something from the Hagakure by Yamamoto Tsunetomo:

"Among Takeda Shingen's retainers there were men of matchless courage, but when Katsuyori was killed in the fight at Tenmokuzan, they all fled. Tsuchiya Sozo, a warrior who had been in disfavour for many years, came out alone, however, and said: 'I wonder where all the men are who spoke so bravely every day? I shall return the master's favour to me.' And he fell alone in battle."

Now, the focus on that story is on the tremendous courage of Tsuchiya Sozo, who exemplified the samurai ideal. But what of the men of "matchless courage" who fled? Who all fled? There were far more of these than of men like Tsuchiya Sozo.

[Xautos]

Originally posted by Gilmaris:

Originally posted by Xautos:

Samurai are fanatically loyal to their masters, they served in a capacity their masters gave them, if they fail to carry out the order their masters set out for them, their honor means nothing and the only way ro reclaim that honor is a ritual suicide, Seppuku. This is in order to not only avoid capture by the enemy so they can't be used, but to make sure their family wasn't also shamed and dishonored by the actions of the family member who is a Samurai who ran from the field.

That is what their honor demands, they can't run from the fight no matter what.

Again, an ideal, not actual facts of life. But hey, don't take my word for it, here's something from the Hagakure by Yamamoto Tsunetomo:

"Among Takeda Shingen's retainers there were men of matchless courage, but when Katsuyori was killed in the fight at Tenmokuzan, they all fled. Tsuchiya Sozo, a warrior who had been in disfavour for many years, came out alone, however, and said: 'I wonder where all the men are who spoke so bravely every day? I shall return the master's favour to me.' And he fell alone in battle."

Now, the focus on that story is on the tremendous courage of Tsuchiya Sozo, who exemplified the samurai ideal. But what of the men of "matchless courage" who fled? Who all fled? There were far more of these than of men like Tsuchiya Sozo.

the fact you picked that particular story is interesting, because you pick and chose what you like to make a point with, alright then, what happened to all those men who ran away? if they were samurai, what did they do after they ran? What happened to their families as well.

[Gilmaris]

Originally posted by Xautos:

Originally posted by Gilmaris:

Again, an ideal, not actual facts of life. But hey, don't take my word for it, here's something from the Hagakure by Yamamoto Tsunetomo:

"Among Takeda Shingen's retainers there were men of matchless courage, but when Katsuyori was killed in the fight at Tenmokuzan, they all fled. Tsuchiya Sozo, a warrior who had been in disfavour for many years, came out alone, however, and said: 'I wonder where all the men are who spoke so bravely every day? I shall return the master's favour to me.' And he fell alone in battle."

Now, the focus on that story is on the tremendous courage of Tsuchiya Sozo, who exemplified the samurai ideal. But what of the men of "matchless courage" who fled? Who all fled? There were far more of these than of men like Tsuchiya Sozo.

the fact you picked that particular story is interesting, because you pick and chose what you like to make a point with, alright then, what happened to all those men who ran away? if they were samurai, what did they do after they ran? What happened to their families as well.

You tell me. Maybe nothing happened, and they remained in service. Maybe they became ronin, or maybe they found employ with some other lord.

[The Chambernator]

I was like 12 when I wrote this, take everything in the original post with a grain of salt. Thanks