Airsoft thread (opinions/suggestions/complaints)

[somerandomdude]

1H'd weapons would be paired with a shield, which is also a weapon you can use to throw your opponent off balance. So it's not as simple as "every attack is a haymaker". You might have a point about basic flanged maces.

A war hammer such as the one I posted is quite light. Some war hammers have a spiked tip you can use for thrusting:



Any serious weapons made for the battlefield were fairly light for their size, including 2h'd weapons.

If you're talking about top level fighting, I'd figure a war hammer + shield vs a polearm is a fairly even match. You could potentially break a wooden haft of a polearm with a proper shield block as well, but the opposite is also true. A 2h'd sword against plate (like in the previous SC) would have no chance against a kite shield + war hammer combo at any level of competition.

[Cipher]

1H'd weapons would be paired with a shield, which is also a weapon you can use to throw your opponent off balance. So it's not as simple as "every attack is a haymaker". You might have a point about basic flanged maces.

A war hammer such as the one I posted is quite light. Some war hammers have a spiked tip you can use for thrusting:



Any serious weapons made for the battlefield were fairly light for their size, including 2h'd weapons.

If you're talking about top level fighting, I'd figure a war hammer + shield vs a polearm is a fairly even match. You could potentially break a wooden haft of a polearm with a proper shield block as well.

Again, you are talking in videogame terms, not in actual real life evidence.

In order to use a shield to "throw the opponent off balance" you would need to first be able to reach the opponent at a range that you can use the shield to push him. If he has a longer weapon, he can attack you while backing away or maneuvering to maintain its longer reach against you. He is on the offensive, you are on the defensive. You cannot attack while he can attack you at any time.

I am not trying to be rude, but your mention of a shield clearly means we are speaking of different scenarios. Shields were not used when wearing a full plate harness. The reason why the shield was discarded is because the plate harness already provides extremely effective protection and covers almost the entire body. This frees your off-hand to wield a longer weapon, since reach is king, this is a better configuration for fighting on foot.

Warhammers are light in total weight, but like I said, their clunkyness is not due to their overall weight but due to their weight distribution. Almost all of their weight is lopsided on the head and they have no counterweight, like a pommel for a sword, so the center of balance for those weapons is almost entirely lopsided on the head.

This creates a situation where if you swing such a weapon, you will no longer have a way to change directions or stop your attack. If you are very strong you may halt the attack but it will be very taxing on your muscles across your arm, shoulder and back.

This is what makes the weapon slow. Medieval maces weight around 2 to 5 pounds or 1 to 2 kilos. This is the same as a longsword. The difference is that the longsword has a counterweight and a distal taper that makes it so the center of balance is closer to the guard and that makes it extremely lively, meaning the wielder can move the point around with ease and control its point with a lot of precision without the need to exert a lot of force. Also, a one handed sword would be lighter, around half a pound or 700 grams. A longsword, the one weighting around 1 kilo or 1 and a half kilos, will always have a longer reach than a one handed warhammer weighting the same.

Shields were still common when knights and men at arms used primarily mail or even coat of plates. As plate harness became more readily available, shields started to become less and less common in the battlefield.

Meaning, if you are talking about using a mace to "defeat" plate armor, then you are talking about a battlefield with foot soldiers wearing full plate harness, no shields, and long pole arms or two handed swords as their primary weapons. Which also means that your response was not applicable to any of the images I posted that you quoted.

As such, if you are talking about a battlefield where the configuration you described makes sense, that is, a warhammer and a shield, that means the combatants are not wearing full plate harness, and most likely they are wearing just mail, or a coat of plates or maybe a plate cuirass with mostly mail and perhaps some greaves on the feet.

With that configuration, it is still desirable to have a longer reach weapon, like a long two handed spear or even a shorter spear with a shield. See, the shield protection goes both ways, your warhammer is also deflected by the opponent's shield. However, the longer reach still means the opponent can strike at you at a distance that you cannot strike back, meaning the opponent can be more aggressive since he does not have to fear retaliation. This is what is called "having the initiative". If you have the shorter weapon, you are at the disadvantage. You still have to close in, sort out an attack that will come your way and then still be able to strike without the enemy sidestepping or backstepping or otherwise outmaneuvering you into a position where your shorter weapon is in reach.

There is no way you would break the haft of a polearm with a shield. If that happens, then the wood of that polearm was already so old and/or damaged that it had no business being wielded on the battlefield.

You clearly seem to be interested and enthusiastic about medieval arms and armor. I invite you to get some hands on experience with a warhammer so you can see for yourself how it performs. Keep in mind I am not saying they are not effective weapons. I am saying that they are slow and clunky when used to attack in relation to a sword due to their weight distribution, they are on the shorter side of one handed or hand and a half weapons and do not have any real advantages over a sword when fighting armored opponents.

[somerandomdude]

Again, you are talking in videogame terms, not in actual real life evidence.

Explain what makes you such an expert.

[Oyster Sauce]

Again, you are talking in videogame terms, not in actual real life evidence.

Explain what makes you such an expert.

He has 1300 hours in Blade & Sorcery

[Cipher]

Again, you are talking in videogame terms, not in actual real life evidence.

Explain what makes you such an expert.

I never said I am an expert. However, I do have experience and I am making my point by providing you the information on why I am saying what I am saying. I practice with medieval arms and armor and have wielded one handed swords and maces as well as longswords, two handed swords spears and a halberd.

You claiming that a shield can break the haft of a polearm tells me you have never wielded a polearm and are most likely just going off what someone else wrote or, most likely, a youtube video.

Most polearms used wood from ash which is very strong and dense for its weight. It can even take a sword cut at full power without breaking. Yes, it will dent the haft but the damage will not be enough to break or make the weapon unusable. After repeating attempts throughout an entire skirmish then maybe it can become so weak that it breaks or damaged enough that it breaks after a strong thrust from the wielder. That's why everyone carried sidearms, most commonly swords.

The only way to chop through a polearm is if you have it diagonally resting or secured and hack at it. This is because in real life, the strike of the sword or axe will push the wood to the side, as you arms are not stiff enough to absorb the force. This give makes it so not all the energy is transferred to the polearm.

As such, it will be extremely unlikely that a polearm would break in the field of battle due to a single strike or a shield. Like I said, it would have to be so old or so damaged that it had no business being on the battlefield in the first place.

And yes, if that's the only polearm available to you, it would be better than nothing. But, it is by no means representative of a battle ready polearm that would be the preferred choice to field.

It is the same thing with any weapon. If its damaged enough that it will break, then it is not worth it to bring into the battlefield unless you have no choice.

In all my posts I explained why reach is king and how people, specially on youtube, make arguments in a vacuum not accounting for the opponents moving, feinting, defending and also that they are not static. In order for a combatant to deliver a solid strike it has to be setup. Just like with boxing or other contact sports. You will never just throw an overhead strike with all your might and it will land squarely on the top of their head. The opponent will first of all try to deflect it with his weapon, and also he will flinch and move his head. This is why later helmets such as the sallet and the bascinet have the shape they do, to make it easier for the weapon to glance off to the side and thus lose a lot of its energy.

That's the thing. Armor was made and used because it works. Ask any soldier that you know if they would choose to bring something to the battlefield that is ineffective and they will always answer "Hell no!". People don't want to die. Don't want to get maimed and don't want to suffer crippling injuries.

So, yes. If the only thing that you have at your disposal is a one handed mace and a shield, and some armor then sure. That's going to be better than a pitchfork and the clothes on your back. But, given the opportunity, a full plate harness is the best protection of its time and due to not needing to use a shield, having both hands to field a longer weapon is the best option and that's why this is the configuration that was most prevalent.

Like I said, if you are really interested, I am sure you can find someone that has access to medieval arms and armor in your area and you can ask them to let you get some hands on experience. Or don't. You can do whatever you want. But, keep in mind that no youtube video will be as informative as hands on experience.

And even then, I am just making educated guesses because I was never in a battlefield. But, having dueled with other men that have experience with medieval weapons and armor, I do have some insights that inform why the things I read about medieval arms and armor on the battlefield makes sense and what some things do not.

I am open to have my mind changed but you just saying "a shield can push you off balance" doesn't really make a point since I have actually tried that and have that tried on me and I can tell you that it can work, but first you need to be very close to your opponent to tackle them with the shield. Even the warhammer with its short reach will be able to strike at you before you can push someone with a shield.

[Cipher]

Again, you are talking in videogame terms, not in actual real life evidence.

Explain what makes you such an expert.

He has 1300 hours in Blade & Sorcery

Huh, funny enough, I did not know this existed. It actually looks pretty solid. But I don't have a VR set. I don't think the technology is there yet. But this looks very promising. Maybe one day we can have games that better reflect IRL fights in medieval arms and armor.

Hellish Quartet is extremely close to how mostly unarmored duels go and the characters use realistic fighting styles. Highly recommend it to anyone that has any interest on this, keeping in mind it is still a videogame, though.

[Vergil]

Hellish Quartet is extremely close to how mostly unarmored duels go and the characters use realistic fighting styles. Highly recommend it to anyone that has any interest on this, keeping in mind it is still a videogame, though.

That game seemed like it had some promise until they started adding women.

[Goth-Girl-Supremacy]

Hellish Quartet is extremely close to how mostly unarmored duels go and the characters use realistic fighting styles. Highly recommend it to anyone that has any interest on this, keeping in mind it is still a videogame, though.

That game seemed like it had some promise until they started adding women.

Uh, the game had women in it from the start you grifting retard.

[Vergil]

grifting

I understand you have a pretty weak grasp on the english language (ESL as well as a tranny?) but I don't think that means what you think it means.

[Goth-Girl-Supremacy]

I understand you have a pretty weak grasp on the english language (ESL as well as a tranny?) but I don't think that means what you think it means.

Every one of your posts is one elaborate, "look guys, I'm based too! Women suck and what of the Jews?!"

A boring subhuman quirktard that tries too hard to fit in. Learn to use a VPN to bypass the redirect and fuck off back to Codex.

[somerandomdude]

In order to use a shield to "throw the opponent off balance" you would need to first be able to reach the opponent at a range that you can use the shield to push him. If he has a longer weapon, he can attack you while backing away or maneuvering to maintain its longer reach against you. He is on the offensive, you are on the defensive. You cannot attack while he can attack you at any time.

It depends on the weapon they're using. A pole hammer or halberd? Yeah, that would be tough to get in on. A sword would have to snipe very small openings on a fully armored or shielded opponent. It's not the reach that matters, it's be able to kill your opponent easily from that range that matters. When your openings are small, that's easier said than done. It's a fact that war hammers were made specifically to deal with plate, meaning people moved away from swords against heavily armored opponents. For lighter infantry, swords worked just fine.

This is what makes the weapon slow. Medieval maces weight around 2 to 5 pounds or 1 to 2 kilos. This is the same as a longsword. The difference is that the longsword has a counterweight and a distal taper that makes it so the center of balance is closer to the guard and that makes it extremely lively, meaning the wielder can move the point around with ease and control its point with a lot of precision without the need to exert a lot of force. Also, a one handed sword would be lighter, around half a pound or 700 grams. A longsword, the one weighting around 1 kilo or 1 and a half kilos, will always have a longer reach than a one handed warhammer weighting the same.

Impact works better on plate, you got more places you can target with a hammer, whereas your opponents options are more limited with a bladed weapon. I figured this was common knowledge, but I had to bring this up because you seem to be overlooking this. I don't disagree with the advantages you brought up about swords, but those advantages would matter a lot more against lighter armored opponents.

Learn to make shorter points, because I'm honestly not going to waste my time reading all your stuff.

[Vergil]

Every one of your posts is one elaborate, "look guys, I'm based too! Women suck and what of the Jews?!"

Still not what grifiting means.
You spent like two weeks straight constantly filling my notifs following me around the forum with asshurt seething though so I guess if anyone is an expert on "every one of my posts" it's you since you've been on my jock daily before and after your ban.

A boring subhuman quirktard that tries too hard to fit in.

The irony on this one is crazy. Everyone of your posts is drenched in try hard faggotry. We get it you're really edgy, cool, and so above it all that you come back here daily and act like an annoying retard. Your schtick is fucking stock.

[Goth-Girl-Supremacy]

Still not what grifiting means.
You spent like two weeks straight constantly filling my notifs following me around the forum with asshurt seething though so I guess if anyone is an expert on "every one of my posts" it's you since you've been on my jock daily before and after your ban.

How can anyone avoid "following you around" when you post in every single topic like a spastic dumbass? Oh boy, here's another topic with Vergin giving us a post that somebody else has already typed but much more dumb and filled with 4chan buzzword grand slams. The only reason you're noticeable is because you don't shut the fuck up.

The irony on this one is crazy. Everyone of your posts is drenched in try hard faggotry. We get it you're really edgy, cool, and so above it all that you come back here daily and act like an annoying retard. Your schtick is fucking stock.

My schtick has you running to reports like the little pussy you are because you don't like pushback and being called out for being a grifting dweeb. You hate that I know you're phony.

[Vergil]

How can anyone avoid "following you around" when you post in every single topic like a spastic dumbass? Oh boy, here's another topic with Vergin giving us a post that somebody else has already typed but much more dumb and filled with 4chan buzzword grand slams. The only reason you're noticeable is because you don't shut the fuck up.

Yet it's only you bitch, moan, and complaining and replying to everything with some gay pithy off topic remark like you're trying to be a sassy drag queen.

My schtick has you running to reports like the little pussy you are

I haven't made a single report on this site. I guess it's progress you're pulling things out of your ass instead of putting things in it, tranny.

called out for being a grifting dweeb

Still not what grifting means

[Cipher]

In order to use a shield to "throw the opponent off balance" you would need to first be able to reach the opponent at a range that you can use the shield to push him. If he has a longer weapon, he can attack you while backing away or maneuvering to maintain its longer reach against you. He is on the offensive, you are on the defensive. You cannot attack while he can attack you at any time.

It depends on the weapon they're using. A pole hammer or halberd? Yeah, that would be tough to get in on. A sword would have to snipe very small openings on a fully armored or shielded opponent. It's not the reach that matters, it's be able to kill your opponent easily from that range that matters. When your openings are small, that's easier said than done. It's a fact that war hammers were made specifically to deal with plate, meaning people moved away from swords against heavily armored opponents. For lighter infantry, swords worked just fine.

This is what makes the weapon slow. Medieval maces weight around 2 to 5 pounds or 1 to 2 kilos. This is the same as a longsword. The difference is that the longsword has a counterweight and a distal taper that makes it so the center of balance is closer to the guard and that makes it extremely lively, meaning the wielder can move the point around with ease and control its point with a lot of precision without the need to exert a lot of force. Also, a one handed sword would be lighter, around half a pound or 700 grams. A longsword, the one weighting around 1 kilo or 1 and a half kilos, will always have a longer reach than a one handed warhammer weighting the same.

Impact works better on plate, you got more places you can target with a hammer, whereas your opponents options are more limited with a bladed weapon. I figured this was common knowledge, but I had to bring this up because you seem to be overlooking this. I don't disagree with the advantages you brought up about swords, but those advantages would matter a lot more against lighter armored opponents.

Learn to make shorter points, because I'm honestly not going to waste my time reading all your stuff.

"Impact works better on plate" you clearly have never worn plate armor and so have no idea what type of damage is better on plate.

"Its not reach that matters" once again, you have no idea what matters in a melee combat with medieval arms and armor if you are saying this.

Warhammers also had to snipe the weaker parts of the armor and were only effective while striking the head or those weaker parts. You believing that a one handed hammer could strike at any part of a full plate harness and damage the wearer is 100% videogame logic and is completely false. Even without experience, a cursory glance at googling this topic will reveal the truth.

You have no experience, no idea what you are talking about and no interest in even reading what you are replying to or even googling it. Stay on your bubble of ignorance, then.

[Goth-Girl-Supremacy]

Yet it's only you bitch, moan, and complaining and replying to everything with some gay pithy off topic remark like you're trying to be a sassy drag queen.

You post like a retard and get all up in arms when somebody calls you a retard. It'd be forgivable if you posted funny stuff but it's always weak shit that adds nothing but echo what has already been said. I think I said it before but if all names/avvys/message counts were removed you'd not be able to know which one is a Vergin post. Aggressively unremarkable.

I haven't made a single report on this site.

And yet you want to keep people that think you're a moron banned. Martin isn't sending his best redirects I see.

[Vergil]

if you posted funny stuff but it's always weak shit that adds nothing

I'm too lazy to post the image of a projector here just pretend I did okay?

And yet you want to keep people that think you're a moron banned.

I don't care about what you think at all it's the fact you act like an annoying fag and all you post is the same shit over and over again because you have no desire to actually be a part of this community and have never posted anything of any substance or made any attempt to engage in discussion.

Martin isn't sending his best redirects I see.

No clue what you're talking about you name dropping fag.

I'm not gonna keep doing this gay back and forth with you and the mods should probably nuke this whole back and forth down into the garbage dump where a lot of your autism already resides.

[Emphyrio]

Again, you are talking in videogame terms, not in actual real life evidence.

Explain what makes you such an expert.

Brave of you to respond to those walls of text. I started to and then thought better of it.

[somerandomdude]

"Impact works better on plate" you clearly have never worn plate armor and so have no idea what type of damage is better on plate.

A simple google search shows specifically what war hammers were made for.

"Its not reach that matters" once again, you have no idea what matters in a melee combat with medieval arms and armor if you are saying this.

If the first strike is guaranteed to maim or kill, then reach matters a lot more. With other factors at play, it matters a lot less.

Warhammers also had to snipe the weaker parts of the armor and were only effective while striking the head or those weaker parts.
You believing that a one handed hammer could strike at any part of a full plate harness and damage the wearer is 100% videogame logic and is completely false. Even without experience, a cursory glance at googling this topic will reveal the truth.

Hammers got more openings, trying to twist this into something I never said means you're setting up a strawman, I.E. - losing the argument.

You have no experience, no idea what you are talking about and no interest in even reading what you are replying to or even googling it. Stay on your bubble of ignorance, then.

Neither do you, admittedly. If I want to read about it, I'll get it from sources or people who know what they're talking about.

[Goth-Girl-Supremacy]

I'm too lazy to post the image of a projector here just pretend I did okay?

You should post an image of someone sleeping because that's all your milquetoast, follow-the-leader posts do you droll loser.

I don't care about what you think at all it's the fact you act like an annoying fag and all you post is the same shit over and over again because you have no desire to actually be a part of this community and have never posted anything of any substance or made any attempt to engage in discussion.

I'd rather you be ran off from this "community." You're an insipid dunce who folds too easy and losing you would be addition by subtraction. Nobody would really miss you and you'd be forgotten about in a week. Maybe three days.

I'm not gonna keep doing this gay back and forth with you and the mods should probably nuke this whole back and forth down into the garbage dump where a lot of your autism already resides.

The best part is I distracted you enough to temporarily keep from shitting up other topics with such stellar takes like, "there's a WOMAN in this game?!" and "goyslop!"

Go back to making shitty NV mods nobody downloads. As low-effort as your posts.

[Oyster Sauce]

I'm too lazy to post the image of a projector here just pretend I did okay?

You should post an image of someone sleeping because that's all your milquetoast, follow-the-leader posts do you droll loser.

I don't care about what you think at all it's the fact you act like an annoying fag and all you post is the same shit over and over again because you have no desire to actually be a part of this community and have never posted anything of any substance or made any attempt to engage in discussion.

I'd rather you be ran off from this "community." You're an insipid dunce who folds too easy and losing you would be addition by subtraction. Nobody would really miss you and you'd be forgotten about in a week. Maybe three days.

I'm not gonna keep doing this gay back and forth with you and the mods should probably nuke this whole back and forth down into the garbage dump where a lot of your autism already resides.

The best part is I distracted you enough to temporarily keep from shitting up other topics with such stellar takes like, "there's a WOMAN in this game?!" and "goyslop!"

Go back to making shitty NV mods nobody downloads. As low-effort as your posts.

Hey man glad you're back!

[Goth-Girl-Supremacy]

Hey man glad you're back!

Thanks, Dave.

[Cipher]

A simple google search shows specifically what war hammers were made for.

Who is making strawmans now? I never said what they were or were not made for. I said that they still have to hit the weaker parts of a full plate harness to deliver any damage. And I know this because I have tested this in real life.

If the first strike is guaranteed to maim or kill, then reach matters a lot more. With other factors at play, it matters a lot less.

Reach always matters. Even with blunt swords and sparring with protective gear, reach always matters. No matter what. This is why polearms where always the primary weapon in the battlefield, even after the usage of foot soldiers wearing full plate harness became common. If reach is not such a huge factor, then why not use stronger hammers instead of longer ones? Because reach matters more than power and a longer weapon that allows the usage of two hands delivers more devastating blows, anyways making it both longer and more powerful. But, the length of halberds/pollaxes is considerably more than what would be needed to wield them with both hands, so clearly, by design, they were made longer for the reach advantage not just for the power advantage of using both hands to wield them. There would be no need for pollaxes if warhammers did the job or shields were relevant when wearing full plate harness.

Hammers got more openings, trying to twist this into something I never said means you're setting up a strawman, I.E. - losing the argument.

That's where you are wrong. They don't got more openings. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Neither do you, admittedly. If I want to read about it, I'll get it from sources or people who know what they're talking about.

But, I do.

Stay ignorant.

[somerandomdude]

Who is making strawmans now? I never said what they were or were not made for. I said that they still have to hit the weaker parts of a full plate harness to deliver any damage. And I know this because I have tested this in real life.

The weapon made specifically to deal with heavier armored targets is obviously better than a weapon that's not.

Reach always matters. Even with blunt swords and sparring with protective gear, reach always matters. No matter what. This is why polearms where always the primary weapon in the battlefield, even after the usage of foot soldiers wearing full plate harness became common. If reach is not such a huge factor, then why not use stronger hammers instead of longer ones? Because reach matters more than power and a longer weapon that allows the usage of two hands delivers more devastating blows, anyways making it both longer and more powerful. But, the length of halberds/pollaxes is considerably more than what would be needed to wield them with both hands, so clearly, by design, they were made longer for the reach advantage not just for the power advantage of using both hands to wield them. There would be no need for pollaxes if warhammers did the job or shields were relevant when wearing full plate harness.

If it's medieval martial arts as some sort of larp with blunt weapons, or some points contest for landing a hit then sure, reach absolutely does matter.

The specific comparison was a 1 handed war hammer vs a 2 handed sword using plate (doesn't even have to be full plate, although it could be). In an actual duel to the death, the fight will end up on the ground, which is how it usually ended up with 2 dudes in heavy armor, anyone can look this up.

That's where you are wrong. They don't got more openings. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes they got more spots they can target to inflict damage. One was designed for smashing or penetrating plate, and the other wasn't. Duh.

But, I do.

Stay ignorant.

Keep larping and thinking you're a true warrior! If you actually do get around to sparring, someone with less reach is going to plant you on your ass at some point, I guarantee it.

[Cipher]

Who is making strawmans now? I never said what they were or were not made for. I said that they still have to hit the weaker parts of a full plate harness to deliver any damage. And I know this because I have tested this in real life.

The weapon made specifically to deal with heavier armored targets is obviously better than a weapon that's not.

Reach always matters. Even with blunt swords and sparring with protective gear, reach always matters. No matter what. This is why polearms where always the primary weapon in the battlefield, even after the usage of foot soldiers wearing full plate harness became common. If reach is not such a huge factor, then why not use stronger hammers instead of longer ones? Because reach matters more than power and a longer weapon that allows the usage of two hands delivers more devastating blows, anyways making it both longer and more powerful. But, the length of halberds/pollaxes is considerably more than what would be needed to wield them with both hands, so clearly, by design, they were made longer for the reach advantage not just for the power advantage of using both hands to wield them. There would be no need for pollaxes if warhammers did the job or shields were relevant when wearing full plate harness.

If it's medieval martial arts as some sort of larp with blunt weapons, or some points contest for landing a hit then sure, reach absolutely does matter.

The specific comparison was a 1 handed war hammer vs a 2 handed sword using plate (doesn't even have to be full plate, although it could be). In an actual duel to the death, the fight will end up on the ground, which is how it usually ended up with 2 dudes in heavy armor, anyone can look this up.

That's where you are wrong. They don't got more openings. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Yes they got more spots they can target to inflict damage. One was designed for smashing or penetrating plate, and the other wasn't. Duh.

But, I do.

Stay ignorant.

Keep larping and thinking you're a true warrior! If you actually do get around to sparring, someone with less reach is going to plant you on your ass at some point, I guarantee it.

You keep talking about stuff you know nothing about. You are the one LARPing as someone that knows anything about medieval arms and armor.

Since you clearly lack the attention span to read what you are replying to, I'll write a very short reply:

Stay ignorant.

[somerandomdude]

You keep talking about stuff you know nothing about. You are the one LARPing as someone that knows anything about medieval arms and armor.

Since you clearly lack the attention span to read what you are replying to, I'll write a very short reply:

Stay ignorant.

You're arguing against things people already know if they do any research at all, like hammers being better against plate than swords.

Stay mad.

[Cipher]

You keep talking about stuff you know nothing about. You are the one LARPing as someone that knows anything about medieval arms and armor.

Since you clearly lack the attention span to read what you are replying to, I'll write a very short reply:

Stay ignorant.

You're arguing against things people already know if they do any research at all, like hammers being better against plate than swords.

Stay mad.

Are you sure you want to use that youtuber as evidence?

Fine. Here you go:






Stay ignorant.

[Oyster Sauce]

@Cipher @somerandomdude
Pretty sure axes are better than swords or maces against armor. Vikings were known to duel wield axes against knights and didn't bother with armor because they were used to fighting other axemen.

[somerandomdude]

Are you sure you want to use that youtuber as evidence?

Fine. Here you go:



Stay ignorant.

Why are you moving the goal post to mace? I admitted that flanged maces aren't that great. I was talking about hammers, there's a difference. But consoom whatever copium helps you I guess.

1H'd weapons would be paired with a shield, which is also a weapon you can use to throw your opponent off balance. So it's not as simple as "every attack is a haymaker". You might have a point about basic flanged maces.

[Cipher]

Why are you moving the goal post to mace? I admitted that flanged maces aren't that great. I was talking about hammers, there's a difference. But consoom whatever copium helps you I guess.

Everything that this guy said about maces applies to one handed warhammers. In fact, that video basically agreed with everything I said.

And keep in mind this was the youtuber you decided to use as evidence for your argument.

At minute 0:42 this guy says the video I posted is about disputing Matt Easton's claim that "warhammers and axes are more effective than swords against plate armor".

The warhammer you posted would behave exactly like a flanged mace or any other one handed mace. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

At 2:58 he mentions the disadvantages of a mace being a shorter weapon. I thought reach wasn't as important, according to you. Your own guy disagrees.

At 4:23 he mentions that maces are only effective striking on the head and he even shows how good are his vambraces, shoulder armor and cuirass at mitigating the damage. The same thing I have been saying. You are still wrong as you where before. One handed warhammers do not have better targets.

At 8:57 he talks again about the reach advantage the sword has.

At 12:18 he even brings up a bigger and longer warhammer than the one you posted in your images and mentions that it would be the same thing. His exact words: "With a warhammer, this doesn't look much better. Hits to other weak points such as hits to the armpits become more useful. But even with a warhammer, like this pollaxe, it is not possible to penetrate deep through plate armor. If you hit hardened armor, in most cases it will hardly be dented. And, if it breaks, you won't penetrate deeper than 1 centimeter [less than half an inch]. The only threatened area is the head."

So, once again, your expert basically agrees with everything that I have been saying. And keep in mind you brought this youtuber as evidence. Not me. Clearly, you have no idea what you are talking about. You just watch youtube videos and think you know stuff. You posted this guys video without realizing he had another video thoroughly trouncing your entire argument.

So that makes it two of us. This guy and me agree that swords are not less useful than maces or warhammers against a full plate harness.

Stay ignorant and stay whining all you want.