A good spearman will always shit on a good swordsman

A good spearman will always shit on a good swordsman.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=WYKjoosrRRI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae_(279_BC)
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Depends on the battlefield and the armor between the two.

otherwise its pretty empty words.

Nah there is a reason why spears were so widely used even among samurai post 13th century and samurai didn't fight in tight formations so don't start this ''muh phalanx only weapon'' meme shit.

Swords are garbage like every non polearm melee weapon.

reach is very important, but if the swordsman closes in he's at a clear advantage unless they're both heavily armored
swords are much more manoeuverable, can cut as well as stab, and they can cause greater wounds
spearmen are better in mass that one on one combat, especially since spears some of the easiest weapons to use

>the hour is upon us once more

The spearman and swordsman are engaged in a popularity contest. Your move.

>if the swordsman closes in
He won't.

youtube.com/watch?v=WYKjoosrRRI

Yeah, everyone remembers how the Roman Legion never won another victory after replacing the spear as its main weapon with a short sword.

Oh wait.

And yet, that's why they invented the zweihander. To chop the ends off spears to allow regular troops to close in.

>shitty tiny buckler
>1 hit anywhere on the body with any force is lethal
yeah, alright

>roman legions
>exclusively fight untrained unarmored barbarians
>good
Swordfags as usual.

>waaaa 1 hit isn't an instakill
>ignores how the swordfag was completely outmatched and couldn't touch the spearman
Typical.

Ah, you're a troll. I see.

See, the thread could have ended here, but instead TG decided to become the dragon that eats its own tail and keep going in circles.

I don't know why some people thing TG was ever hard to bait. We like being baited, we like argument for the sake of such. Never change, brothers.

Carthage. Persia. both used spears and phalanxes as their main weapon. Don't talk about shit you don't understand.

Those same Barbarians who constantly BTFO of the Greeks so much the Greeks got buttmad.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae_(279_BC)

Question, Why didn't Alexander the Great conquer North or West?

>Greeks
>Persians
>Egyptians
>Carthaginians
>Untrained barbarians

U wot Pleb?

>m-muh just get in close xD

aside from the fact that a spearman would have a secondary weapon for this exact fucking reason he could also simply change his grip

Dirt shit poor. No gold, no ancient rivalries to fix, no Glory to be had fighting opponents who will simply ambush you and raid constantly. Also, its cold up there.

Wow OP, you're right. You should go back in time and tell all ancient and medieval warriors who relied on swords that they were doing it wrong. I mean, how could they possibly know more than you about the topic? It's not like they ever had to actually use them instead of just browsing imageboards all day.

>Celts
>Whose Love of gold and Baubles allowed them to be bribed by the Roman Empire to frature them
>Don't have alot of gold.

>B-But my Ambushes MUH HONOR AND GLORY

So basically, Alexander the great was scared of the Gauls.

spear is a step above a club, it's an ape weapon. It's only benefit is that it takes 0 training.

Yet every proffesional soldier used one. I wonder why.

Except that's clearly not true.

Even in Cultures that venerated spears like the Irish and Britonnic celts and the Norse, the Spear was still classed lower than the Sword.

According to the greeks, three of those four were barbarians

Apes can't use spears. Their arms are hinged wring for the movements needed to do that.

that fucking song is now stuck in my head

According to the Greeks, the Gauls were Barbarians.

They Still Sacked Delphi after utterly bitch slapping the Greek Alliance like everyone did.

I mean, do people forget Rome conquered the Greeks before the Gauls?

Show me some of these weapon classes, show me a first hand source talking about these weapons.

Get a load of this Barbarian

Dagger>your weaponfu

Well, easiest example I can use is king Arthur of brittonic legend.

Everyone knows the name of King Arthur's sword Excalibur and to a lesser extent Caliburn.

But hardly anyone remembers Rhongomynyad or it's christian name Ron.

>swordcuck arguments: WE WUZ ROMANS
>implying the Romans didn't use whatever weapon was best for a circumstance
>implying Romans only had one weapon
>implying spears weren't still more widely used than swords
Historical revisionism and autistic obsession with one imaginary "achievement". Literal BLM tier.

You speak about the greeks and the gauls as if they were a single group. The Romans conquered the cis-alpine po-valley gauls before they conquered the greeks of south Italy

>Celts. On the wrong side of dirt poor horsemen, mountain men and the germanic tribes to be present. Also, just because someone loves gold several hundred years after a figure, yes, they must have existed in exactly the same way. 340 BC. is not the same time as 40 BC. Which is when the romans began moving into Gaul.

For the time they were used the swordsman would be chosen for being the elegant, popular man. Meanwhile the spearman would be considered a terrible uncultured brute, especially if its publicly.
God forbid if he was carrying a halberd or any of the sort, he'd be thrown out of any sensible establishment.

>Proffesional
No. SPears are used by warriors who are not warriors all the time. Swords are used by the proffesionals, because it takes more time to train to use it.

...

That's why knights used the lance as a primary weapon right?

No it won't. Look at the Macedonian wars were Roman swords men shit all over Macedonian spearmen

Lance. A weapon used for a single huge charge, which breaks upon impact.
Spear. A weapon designed not to break, and be used to poke things repatedly.
If you don't know the difference between a spear and a lance, don't try to argue they are the same.

Concession accepted.

Not only does the swordsman land some hits, but most of the spear 'hits' are side-taps instead of straight thrusts. They win by the sparring ruses used, but a real spear used that way would have trouble getting through a sweater much less any kind of armor.

>Spearchucker argument: SPEARS USED MOST EVER
>Only ever used my Levymen and peasants.
>Became outdated with the invention of the Polearm
>While swords were still used.

>Swords are the most used weapon in the history of weapons.
>B-BUT MUH PEASANT SPEARS

So the carolingian heavy cavalry allready used a lance made to break on impact like Europeans used after 1300?

No they didn't, even at hastings the cavalry used lances that were not made to break on the first impact.

Lance and spear are kind of the same weapon up till 1300.

Bows conquered more continuous landmass than swords or spears

Actually, Yes, in a way.

Lances were made to be discarded because it's close to impossible to keep a lance after the first charge.

It's why Knights and Cavalry always hard a Sword.

Do tell me; How exactly do you think You're supposed to keep fighting with a Lance after the main charge?

Counterpoint: Arrows are miniature spears.

Look at our best source for the battle of Hasting, Bayeux tapestry. What do we see. We see Norman Knights, carrying swords as they charge the shield wall. Also, can't help but realise that these Carolingian shock cavalry you seem to think exist don't exist. No Stirrups in Francia till after the carolingian empire collapse.

Counter-Counterpoint

Speartips are just small Swords.

>Spears
>Became outdated with the invention of the Polearm
Aren't spears a type of polearm?

Let me know when there's a sword shaped like this.

Celtic swords Genius.

excuse me just going to fuck your shit real quick

>leaf-blade sword
That's shaped like a leaf, not a speartip.

Depends. Are swords a kind of knife?

Are you joking?

>nitpicking this hard

>pointy tip
>flat blade with sharp bits on the narrow side
>longer than it is wide

>b-but there isn't a sword with the exact same shape so they can't be the same thing

...

Is this army v. army? or individual v. individual?

And the spear posted has the same tip shape as the sword does.
My Point.

You stab a fucker with it?

What do you want when killing somebody, a short piece of metal or a longer piece of metal?

You want range, all the time everytime. Except in small corridors like tunnels and houses

Your face is a speartip.

Sure, don't the Germans have large blades they called War Knives?

Pretty sure swords were invented after spears so it's the other way around though

I assumed this was a bait thread so yeah, pretty much.

Congratulations.

Thank you

>Let me know when there's a sword shaped like this.
I was responding to this. He asked, I delivered.

Exactly. When it comes right down to it, most early melee weapons are just different varieties of knife or club.

That definition of a knife applies to swords, swears, and even axes. That giant, two handed battleaxe your barbarian carries? Its a knife. Just a funny shaped one.

Nope.

Most polearms Evolved from Either the Poleaxe or the Polehammer. Which in turn evolved from the Dane Axe and the Warhammer respectively.

Spears were mostly unrelated.

>Stab fucker with lance while on horse
>Can't withdraw because I am riding a fucking horse full tilt
>Either need to discard the Riding Spear or stop my horse in it's charge
>Or I can drop the weapon and draw another less limited weapon.

Actually, leaf Bladed Swords probably came about before Leaf bladed Spears.

Hey, that's true. Sweet. So, new topic:

Which is better, knife or club?

>ITT Let's wank about weapons we've never used and will never use
I swear to God, you guys are worse than /k/ with this shit.

Shock cavalry was allready a thing since fucking long before Cannae

>Implying Axes are not just sharp clubs.

Knife fags delusional as always.

>coming into a thread just to whine you don't like it
Do you feel in charge?

Not lance charges genius.

Yes hoplites and Immortals clearly were amateurs let's not forget Swiss pikemen.

That's why both the poleaxe and the polehammer had a point on top?

Axes and Hammers had Points on top beforehand.

You know "a point" doesn't make something a spear.

Swiss Pikemen. Do you mean swiss Halberdiers, the people who did not use spears. Hoplites. The people with two spears for throwing, check out some cylixs, and see the throwing loops, and carried a sword.
The immortals. Again, same as hoplites.

And this gives you power over me?

a good swordsman would never engage a good spearman in a fair situation

>less limited weapon

Less range is quite the limitation

filename

>I need range when I am in the face of my enemy on a horse

A lance is a hinderence in anything but the first charge.

No he means swiss pikemen.

gun with a gunded sword every time, if you disagree you're a faggot.

That's retarded, polearms are poles with the armed part at the end of the shaft. That's a spear, a pike, a lance, a glaive, a guisarme, a poleaxe, a polehammer, etc.

>hoplites
>spears for throwing

as usual Veeky Forums knows fuck all about history

Gun with a Gunded Sword, obviously. It has two guns + 1 sword.

You are on a horse, a highly mobile fighting platform.

That's how it's like in video games you play?

Are you familiar with Roman battle tactics, famalam? Have a wee read at 'Art of War' by Niccolò Machiavelli.

Bullshit, the sword can close into melee range before the gun can draw his gun.

Typical swordfag argument ''MUH ROMANS''. If swords are so amazing why other armies didn't use them as primary weapons? Could it be that legionaires won not thanks to gladius but thanks to their fucking logistics and discipline?

>Why didn't Alexander the Great conquer North or West?
Because he was busy conquering the Persians and he died before he could launch other campaigns. If Alexander the Great lived until he was 50 or 60 I could easily imagine him launching invasions of Italy, the rest of North Africa, or Dacia. Might even have gone back to try and conquer India later in life.

>hoplites did not carry spears for thrusting in combat

Now you are just posting lies on the internet to piss people off, what is wrong with your brain? Mature hoplites did not use throwing spears, that is an early/transitional thing from pre hoplite times.

And look at the small loops on the spears. Designed for throwing.

The Evolution of Polearms are from their respective weapons being added to a longer fighting stock.

Spears have no relation to a Poleaxe or a Polehammer at all other than "They sort of have a long shaft"

They don't even have the same fighting style.

Because Spears are easier to train and manufacture than Swords, and most elite infantry did use swords.

Why is it as soon as any elite infantry come about, they stop using spears and start using different weapons?

or maybe because samurais were shit tier fighters?

Most polearms aren't similar because its a general term for a weapon at the end of a pole, its not specifically poleaxes and polehammers.

>look at how shields have small loops
>designed for throwing