16th century Japanese warfare is superior to medieval warfare

Ninjas "A ninja was a mercenary of feudal japan. .. In the unrest of the Sengoku period (15th–17th centuries), mercenaries and spies for hire arose out of the Iga and Kōga regions of Japan, and it is from these clans that much of later knowledge regarding the ninja is inferred" (1). "A mercenary. .. a person who fought for a foreign sovereign or power in return for monetary gain. " (2). Ninja's WORKED as mercenaries for the daimyo and emperor. As you yourself stated, "Ninja were mercenaries", meaning they were loyal to money. The Medieval powers have "deeper pockets" and could better afford ninjas. D2. Ikkï¿½|-ikki My opponent seems to think that this rebellion was settled quickly, that is not so. This rebellion occupied "nearly every road to the capital from this western part of the country was controlled by the ikki or their allies". So yes it was a threat and the Shogun eventually utilized the samurai to defeat this threat. This major uprising began in 1488 and was not defeated until 1564 when "the[ir] Ishiyama Hongan-ji and Nagashima fortresses were therefore besieged and destroyed by the forces of Oda Nobunaga. After several failed attempts at seizing each emplacement, he eventually succeeded. " (3) With European help, the rebellion would take much longer to defeat. This rebellion would divert Japanese attention towards their interior and away from the medieval forces. And as an added benefit the Medieval forces would have an awesome strategic advantage in their allies in this rebellion as they controlled the roads to the Capital. D3. Samurai vs Knight My point is not invalid. If the samurai cannot pierce a knights armor they will do NO damage to the knight. To put it in modern day terms, it's like a tank versus a motor cycle with a machine gun. The tank's main gun most likely will not damage the motorcycle (due to not being able to hit it) but, the motorcycle's MG will do no damage to the tank. The only way a samurai would be able to know about these chinks in a knights armor would be through careful study of the armor which could not be done on a battlefield. A samurai while intelligent, could not discern a tiny chink during battle. Furthermore, a knight is trained to defend these chinks with a shield. This is a draw no matter the samurai. Martial arts does not do much when your punching a metal sheet. Tie. D4. Bowman A samurai's bow has a useful max range of 50 meters if wanting to be accurate or 100 meters if accuracy was not an issue. It was "not as powerful as the Eurasian reflex composite bow [longbow]. " (4) The English long bow has an average maximum useful range of 400 yards (5). "The longbow had a long range and high accuracy, but not both at the same time. Most of the longer range shooting mentioned in stories was not marksmanship, but rather thousands of archers launching volleys of arrows at an entire army" (5). A longbow used with a bodkin arrow can pierce the heavy plate armor of a knight. Imagine what it would to to the lighter armor of a samurai. And since longbowman had better range and better fire rate they could easily demolish an entire Japanese Army BEFORE it even came within range. D5. Navy If the Greek Fire hit the open deck of a Japanese Warship there is no layer to shed. If it hits the side well then two canisters of Greek Fire are needed. Not one. My opponent drops the torpedo issue so that alone would destroy the Japanese Navy. As for the cannons, they both have these abilities, swiveling cannons and broadside. Now as for speed, a Medieval naval ship could travel around 8-10 knots. A Japanese ship could travel around 10-12 knots. This is not a significant difference, especially in a naval battle. Now for rebuttals R1. Heavy Armor A Knight was extremely strong and their armor weighed only around 15 kg (33 pounds) (6). This would not hinder their movement as much as you say, due to a knights tremendous strength. Instead, it provides excellent protection against blades, spears, and non-bodkin arrows. R2. Poor Cavalry Knight were expert cavalry men. And carried lances, swords, and maces. Their horses were also heavily armored. Knights on horseback were the modern day equivalent of a tank. Longbowmen were the bazooka. R3. Army Size So basically, all of Europe combined has a smaller army than the tiny island of Japan? Yea right. R4. Armour and weapon quality Yes the Japanese were expert sword-smiths. But, weapons do not just "break" as you put it. But, medieval blacksmiths did not create faulty weapons. They worked for knights. It is just a myth that a Japanese katana can cut through another blade. R5. Training. A knights training began at age 7, not 13 (7) and they are trained over a 14-20 year period. Knights do not just "hack and slash" they are expert swordsman and experts in a variety of weapons including maces, daggers, lances, flails, battle axes and swords. These weapons have a variety of ranges and a knight MUST be an expert in using ALL of them. They do not just "hack and slash. " R5. Navy Your basically saying a European trading ship is equal to a European warship. .. .not at all. R6. Allies In 1600, the French army numbered 200,000 alone (8). In 1600, the Japanese army numbered 160,000 (9). 200,000 is larger than 190,000. R7. Espionage The Medieval forces would have the ninjas on their side. They know the land. R8. Movement Each soldier carried their own weapons and had to keep up a march pace. And according to you, the Japanese had to carry more weapons than the Medieval forces. So they would move more slowly. Now for another contention. C1. Swiss Pikemen These soldiers traveled in dense formations with massive pikes. They were considered to be an essential part of a European Army. In fact, it was impossible to take a battlefield when pikemen were present as they could stab and kill you before you even came within distance to swing a sword. They were extremely well-trained and experienced in warfare. Them combined with longbowmen ALONE could defeat an entire samurai army as they would be stopped by the pikemen and picked off by the archers. Swiss pikemen were so admired by European powers that the Swiss formations were copied and utilized. (9) C2. Halberdiers Utilizing a pole weapon 1.8 meters long meant they could repel any attack. A halberd was a hook (used to pull horsemen to the ground), an axe (used as a blunt force weapon), and a pike all in one. It was extremely versatile in battle, extremely cheap to create, and extremely easy to use (it did not require much training). Since it was so cheap many soldiers had this weapon. It was a very good blocking weapon. Halberds had killed well trained knights, kings, and dukes. It can be used against both horsemen and infantry. (10) A samurai, even one armed with a spear, would be killed by the shear number of people using this weapon. 1. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 2. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 3. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 4. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 5. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 6. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 7. . http://www.medieval-life.net... 8. . http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com... 9. . http://en.wikipedia.org... 10. . http://en.wikipedia.org...