HEMA fags get over here

Not never, but yeah, the unarmoured person would need to be far more skilled than the armoured one in order to even have a chance at winning.
Of course, this is all assuming the unarmoured person has no other option but to fight; Plate armour might not be as heavy and encumbering as people think, but unless the unarmoured person is in shit physical condition, then they're gonna be able to outrun the armoured one.

Depends on, if he has a halberd or a poll axe he can.

If you're armed with a war pick you could trip the knight and stab him in the heart/face. That's the only way imho.

>That's the only way imho.
There's dozens of ways, close the distance, hip throw and then go for the armpit with whatever you got would be a classic technique suggested by the old masters. If you have divine footwork you'll be able to pull off a whole lot of stunts.

Warpick is very fucking short compared to a longsword, good luck getting in reach.

Same reach
Good luck getting in such a small range using a pick/mace while some angry armored dude is waving his long dick at you

In order for you not to get outreached while pomelling you need to grab the sword by the extreme which is not effective at all

Are be saying it's single combat on foot?

Because I mean, maybe this is a dumb question, but could some kind of hoplite not simply kite the knight until he was tired and there was a chance to knock him down?

armor gives you a huge advantage. It doesn't make you a god.

Hoplite would get wrecked unless he had friends. He isn't meant to fight alone. If he wants to out maneuver a knight he'd have to ditch that big ass dome shield he rests on his shoulder which is his main armor. At which time his armor at best covers his head, torso, upper thighs, and shins. While the knight will still be encased in steel tackling his ass. (If the Greek is one of those homo oil wrastlers he might have a slim advantage in the grapple if the fight went that far without him being maimed/killed.)

I would do a backflip kick in his face rendering him unconscious. Then spit on him.

If you slid tackled him and jumped on his back wouldn’t he be fucked? I’d imagine it be very hard to keep balance and be mobile in a suit of armour

Stab him in the slit on his face killing him instantly ez

>He isn't meant to fight alone
According to who? While we don't have any surviving accounts of fighting styles, we do have accounts of Renaissance treatises talking about personal combat using a similar shield, the Rotella. If you stand sideways the aspis does provide pretty good protection.

It's been speculated that the original purpose of those shields were to be used in personal combat.

What's going to keep him from simply stabbing you? You should keep in mind that real life isn't a video game where you can slide across huge distances.

You can't walk with that armour, it's only portable on horseback. Do you even know what a Knight was?
And what do you define as fighter, or warrior. A warrior is someone who is professional at war and dedicated to it, fighter is a rather vague term.
Even Huscarls would partially not be able to afford armour.
Shit thread, the Swiss would be disappointed disappointed.

>You can't walk with that armour

Possible but very difficult.
It's almost as if a full body armour of high quality plates gave the wearer a large advantage on combat.

>using a similar shield, the Rotella
>a similar shield
By similar do you mean they are both round?

The scutum and pavise are both rectangular, are they used the same way?

Yeah he's not walking you idiot

How much stamina and muscels will it take to be able to keep that speed for 5 minutes or more. Do you think this is favourable in hand-to-hand-combat? What about visibility and maneuverability of each body-part.

(You)

You may be familiar with Troy Hurtubise and his "bear suit" idea. While he may be somewhat of a meme in places like /k/, his work involving armor is probably the best out there. He stresses that it's always the blunt force trauma that is the biggest problem when it comes to making armor/the human body withstanding a blow.
Armor back then did not really absorb blunt force trauma, it was mostly to deflect blades and arrows. This is why weapons like the halberd start coming out, and previous weapons like battle axes start including a sharp pointed backside for punching through armor. Swords also start getting pointier and more flexible to bend and pierce through chain mail/stacked plates.
Longsword to longsword and the unarmored man is at a massive disadvantage. His only hope is to stab underneath a plate (armpit is usually a main target) or to knock him over and take advantage of his lessened mobility. Repeatedly smashing him in the helmet with his pommel or cross guard, or to get a stab through the visor would then be the only way he could end him, but he would have to ward off blows from gauntlets.

Take the same unarmored man and give him a war hammer, ball and chain or a heavy blunt force weapon and his chances have increased dramatically. One well placed shot to the head, or even the toe would spell doom for the knight. Usually though, a knight would be well prepared for this so it's still somewhat of a shot in the dark, but it's far better than any lighter bladed weapon.

Yes, particularly the back end of a halberd would do nicely.

>How much stamina and muscels will it take to be able to keep that speed for 5 minutes or more.

Not a lot. A suit of full plate being overly heavy and cumbersome is just a meme. If it's made correctly (any and all armor should be tailored to your dimensions) and the weight equally distributed, you should be able to do anything of consequence a man in no armor can.

The only real disadvantage in a suit of full plate is less visibility.

dude, 20kg+ of armour make a difference, no matter how well they are fitted.

It's not about the weight. The weight was roughly comparable to a modern soldier's armor and better distributed. But overheating with multiple layers of padding, mail and plate was a real issue.

well, if you are both equally trained, but he is better armed, only luck could compensate

Yeah
It is a pity our bodies aren't full of natural lever system like our knees or elbows that could easily distribute all the weigh down so it doesn't fill like carrying a giant stone in the back but more like having small rocks attached all over the body

Mate, Harnischfechten is more exhausting than Blossfechten, deal with it.

>Just use muh dedicated anti armor weapon
That armored guy is cutting you up with his sword or stabbing you with a light polearm, and there's not a thing you can do about it with your heavy poleaxe or warhammer.

why not just use an rifle?

>him a war hammer, ball and chain
First is the cavalry weapon, second one is meme. And if you take unarmoured man, all the knight has to do is to stab him, as parrying is basically out of question.
Does anyone has the video of that guy with zweihander fucking up plenty of guys?

...

The point is that the extra exhaustion makes more than up for the lack of defence. A man in armour needs to mind his defence a lot less than a man without armour and has a huge advantage.

What's keeping the knight from using a pollaxe? In fact, if a knight fights on foot a pollaxe is very likely his primary weapon, while his sword is the side-arm.

This might be true in a battle formation, in a 1 on 1 things are different.

If you don't have any armour on you while fighting an armoured man and you don't have a weapon that outreaches your opponent, then you need to step into the range where your opponent can hurt you. And if you do so, your opponent has a LOT more opportunities to hurt you than you have to hurt him, needing to consider a lot more openings. And even if you do have a weapon that outreaches him, he will have a much easier time closing in on you than an unarmoured man would have, since he does not need to fear your weapon as much (e.g. being able to set aside a thrust of a long weapon with the armoured hand).
Unless you significantly outperform your opponent in terms of strength and weapon skill, the armoured man has a huge advantage.

>How hard is it to disarm somebody in hema?
min 1:46, fulls speed in a sparring:

youtu.be/8_AIR_BMljU?t=1m46s

Now imagine that between 2 full equiped knights

Unlikely, unless they’re not closely matched in skill/weapons or one makes a mistake.
As an user said, it’s doable, but most disarms are voluntary

Check

>No matter how skilled a fighter is, he will never be able to defeat a well trained warrior with plate armor unless he's incredibly lucky

Lets contextualize this:

>Full armoured knight vs non armoured but very skilled figther, both on foot:
-Knight w/pole weapon or a weapon with longer reach vs figther w/sword or shorter weapon = fighter is fucked.
-Knight w/sword or shorter weapon vs fighter w/pole weapon or a weapon with longer reach = fighter is fucked.
-Knight w/sword or shorter weapon vs fighter w/longer reach blunt weapon= Knight loses 65% of the time.
-Both using swords = fighter loses 80% of the time.
-Both w/ no weapons = fighter loses 65% of the time.
In this scheme the knight is also very skilled

Now, in a battle situation, les say, 500vs500:
-Knights w/pole weapon or a weapon with longer reach vs figther w/sword or shorter weapon = fighters are fucked.
-Knights w/sword or shorter weapon vs fighters w/pole weapon or a weapon with longer reach = Knights are fucked.
-Knights w/sword or shorter weapon vs fighters w/longer reach blunt weapon= Knights loses 75% of the time.
-Both using swords = fighters loses 80% of the time.
I think that this is true even if the knights are mounted.

Bump

>First is the cavalry weapon, second one is meme.
Look I'm just naming heavy weapons, there's plenty to choose from. You're right though. Hypothetical situations aside, the unarmored man really has no chance other than pure luck. The safest way is with a crossbow, but even that is relying on a maybe.

Also I mentioned the ball and chain specifically because it was mostly a peasants weapon and would likely be the best choice available to said unarmored man. I'm not talking about the modern interpretation of a one handed little spiked ball on a shitty handle. The long handled flail in pic related is more likely to have been used if at all. They were rare though.

>that referee