>sword
>useless weapon that can't even slice through leather armour and is completely worthless against mounted opponents
>spear
>can easily pierce even the strongest of armours and brings down horsemen with ease
spears are patrician and swords are for plebs
Swords seem more versatile, you can slash and stab.
don't know shit about weapons so prove me wrong
>pistol
>useless weapon that isn't even accurate past 50 meters
>rifle
>can easily hit targets 300 m away
This is how retarded you sound.
>implying pistols are ever actually used in combat
No, it is you who is the retard
but they are used in majority of self defense shootings.
its like a sports car vs an offroad truck.
you cant take the sports car into the woods and you cant drive as fast or handle well in an offroad truck.
hope this simple metaphore gets thru that numbskull of yours.
Pistols we're used heavily for a period, especially during the golden age of sail in the carriibbean as a versatile support weapon that could be used in close combat
Can fucktards like you only see things in black and white?
That was my point, swords are self defense back up weapons.
Swedes used them quite a lot for their shock cavalry
Depends on the type of sword user, and what kind of fighting you're doing. Fighting dudes on horseback means a spear is hella useful because you can reach up and poke the fuckers, but in a one-on-one engagement it could go either way. If you're a Greek Hoplite you're rocking both because one you lock your shield with the enemy asshats your spear becomes too much of an encumberance with all those bodies pressing up against you.
As for types, long swords are, well, long so you get the reach, and great swords are massive SOBs that can cut through shit or just crush 'em outright. Spears are also succeptible to breaking shafts, snapping when shoved into a shield or cut by some jackass who dodged your thrusts. They're also not worth a damn once you get in licking distance with the bad guy.