[@Zugzwang]

I do believe we are broadly in agreement here. We both seem to agree that the katana as it stands has a reputation far in excess of it's actual effectiveness, and that it is fairly good at cutting down unarmoured opponents. Nowhere do you see me arguing that it would be effective vs a fully kitted out ~1500's era man-at-arms.

We only seem to disagree on the degree of effectiveness of a katana for it's time and circumstances, ie Japan prior to about 1850, after which the society went on to modernise, conquer, and then get a suntan.