Swords are fucking useless why would anyone pick them?

...

youtube.com/watch?v=kdx8kNo_ouA
#unclematt #truth #opisfaggot #opgotrekt

Style

stop making these threads please

They make me feel like a hero

Because they're the "cool guy" weapons that people take just for the style. A real man carries a mace.

>Murderhobo
>Never sure when you'll be accosted
>Combat in cramped tunnels, woodlands, open fields, inns, castles, tombs
>Combat with ambush predators and gelatinous cuddlebeasts
>spare carry capacity used for gold coins
>Mark of rank keeps podunk mayors from fucking with you
Good luck with your halberd, cockarse.

Gotta have something to replace all the threads they kicked people off of Veeky Forums for.

A better question is how many of these retarded threads are you going to make before you realize how much of a cockmongling faggot you are?

I'll take Quests back if it means we never have these threads again.

>quoth the serf

>he thinks knights used swords as a main weapon
Kek

I flail to see your point

we'll always have these threads, quests or no quests

They did.

Swords are secondary weapons like handguns. They are easy and comfy to carry, but most job will be done using a primary weapon (polearm, spear, pike, bow, crossbow...).

>nowhere is it implied
Kek

True.
I have yet to find a situation that can't be resolved via liberal use of explosives.
I don't even know why other weapons exist.

They didn't, but they did use them for killing peasants. Turns out swords are really good for killing unarmoured plebs with no shield.

Veeky Forums logic
>swords were just sidearms lmao
>b-but axes were totally different!

>that
>a rapier
That is clearly a broadsword.

With a hilt like that?

>he hasn't heard of basket-hilted broadswords

That's why I was asking.

What makes it not a rapier?

Why are you asking if you know about basket-hilted broadswords?

Scottish claymores are basket hilted boradswords.

broad blade you stupid americunt

The width of the blade.

>They're certainly the most reliable Power Weapon. Mauls have greater power, Lances are situational, and Axes strike at I1, so Power Swords are generally the go-to against MEQ and the like for higher-initiative units so they can land the killing blow before an opponent can strike back.
>what are lightning claws

Wrong guess.
I'm just saying because historical rapiers were not always thin ass fencing rapiers they are now, might as well be a rapier.

>m-muh realism
fuck off

a poor substitute for TH&SS

this

Have fun opening tin cans with your bombs.

depending on context

Pretty sure a BROADsword would be more than an inch across.

What's so unrealistic about swords again?

They're easy to carry around.

>he doesn't know that "swords" are a modern invention dated from the late XIXth century and that they existed only in the fevered imagination of romanticism-deluded victorian and their respectives european ilk...

> Universally accepted as the weapon of the professional pre-gunpowder soldier
> Useless

I bet you think pistols outclass rifles too user

it's called sidesword not broadsword u uneducated cunt
the only early-modern weapon called broadsword is the scottish one.

But in this analogy the sword is the pistol, it is so commonly used because it's everone second weapon.

>What is the spear

This fucking thread again? Really?
FFS you're not even trying anymore.
0/10

...

>being this uniformed
w e w
That is clearly not a basket hilted broadsword you dumb fuck, it's even got the correct basket for fingering the guard, which was NOT possible with a claymore. Claymore basket hilts were like a cage around the hand, not fancy twisted metal.

You would expect so, but broadsword was a relative term to the other swords of the period and place, and so they were seen as "broad" in comparison.

>> Universally accepted as the weapon of the professional pre-gunpowder soldier
By who? Fucking morons? The sword has not been the primary weapon of a professional soldiers since long, long before the widespread use of gunpowder.

what was knight's main weapon then?
>inb4 lance

good luck with using that more than once per charge

>Fighting armoured enemy
Fucking garbage tier
>Fighting anyone else
One of the best weapons possible
>Fighting in harsh terrain
Best non-range weapon around

So I would say - it depends.
But then again, I usually use ranged weapons, regardless of game, so... yeah

>Being this tier retarded
>Speaking up anyway

"Broadsword" started being used mainly in the second half of the 17th century, in opposition to smallsword. Seeing how thin a smallsword's blade is, a broadsword could well be just as "broad" as a typical arming sword, maybe less so than broader types (Oakeshott type XIV for instance).

>Knight weapon
Depends on the country, time period, current trends and season of the year, you stupid cunt.

But here is a clue - most of the time it won't be a sword.
And another clue - you carry spare lances and horses with yourself, that's what your squire/horse comrade is for. If you know just about anything about cavalry, you wouldn't sprout ininformed bullshit

Is that a challenge?

Take this shit to please

I bet longswords were used by them for the lolz right? Clearly this two handed weapon was a sidearm.

>lance
Correct, that is a primary and important weapon of the knight, which saw far more use than his side arm. Battle Lances weren't tourney lances, they didn't snap in one use.
And if they were dismounted or fought on foot, they would use a polearm of some description, such as a poleax.

Because the Romans used them, the Romans were the best, therefore swords are best.

A spear is STILL far superior to a sword in an unarmoured fight since it keeps your enemy at range and you therefore safe to stab at the cunt with a shitty short range sword.

>muh axes xD

no

>people STILL think the Romans didn't make massive use of the spear
What is the pilum?
That said, the Romans were the last major civilisation to make swords a primary weapon of their army, and it was only good because of their superior tactics and use alongside a massive shield and several dozen mates, making its inherent safety disadvantage moot.

>he thinks that halberds, poleaxes and danish axes were all memes when they have distinct and massive advantages in both penetrating armour and being longer than a sword

Good luck crashing through armour with a sword. Good luck getting close to someone wielding a polearm with a sword

While the long axe in its many forms are not a great pleb infantry weapon (other polearms fill that spot) it is the superior dismounted knightly weapon due to its ability to actually hurt people in armour.

Because Jedi don't use fucking lighthalberds, retard.

>Good luck crashing through armour with a sword

exactly no one fucking tried to ''crash through armor'' you imbecile that's why half swording was invented and I even posted an example. Kill yourself americunt.

>What is the pilum?
A throwing weapon which was almost completely unsuitable for close combat due to inherent and deliberate flaws in its design. Pila designed for melee were the exception, not the rule.

>he thinks half swording is better than just using a polearm

Well that's certainly an interesting opinion.

As is the one where you call me an Americunt when I spelt armour with a "u"

Perhaps you should learn how to read and pay attention, and then you'll realise why no retard would choose to use a subpar battle weapon, even if it can be used in a way that makes it even more short range in exchange for being able to do what a polearm already can.

I know, I even said that the Romans used the sword as a primary weapon in that post. I just wonder why so many people seem to think they never used a spear or spear type weapon when it was an important part of their military tactic.

>Veeky Forums thinks rapiers are fucking needles thinner than your finger

Yeah let's pretend no one ever used longswords right? After all they were completly useless compared to the might of an axe which is why axes were phased out the moment plate armor got popular yet swords were still used.

Spear, unless you are really, really, REALLY well-trained in using it, can be effortlessly overcome by any person carrying a much shorter weapon, be it sword, axe or mace. So unless you are facing complete idiots with zero training or you yourself are literal master of spear, they will fucking kill you, using your reach against you.

>Longswords
The only period where they were really used by anyone was High Medieval. And guess how effective they had to be if nobody was using them mare century later, while both other type of swords flourished and new "main" weapons became popular.

But hey, longsword mustardrace, right?

>Poleaxes were phased out when plate armor got popular
Except that it's completely the opposite but well...

>Halfswording

Now THAT is a meme. Please, explain us this logic
"Here am I to face a dude fully clad in armour. I shall bring the best weapon to kill him... right, a sword, which is useless, will definitely do, if I start using the hilt to hit the guy in that huge amount of metal, while he's busy pounding my ass with that poleaxe"

Maybe it never occured to you, but people use most effective weapon for killing and not randomly picked shit. If swords were so good, why the fuck nobody used them in actual combat as anything else than SIDEARM

Longsword didn't exist during the High middle-ages, they are a late 13th, early 14th century weapons to Late Medieval, not Crusader era.

>axes got phased out the moment plate armour got popular
Right, because no one used the poleax or halberd at that time, did they?

And the primary weapon of soldiers at the time of full gothic plate was the pike for fuck's sake, that's no sword.

Style points

But nobody used it, you bloody idiot. It was picked around late 12th century, experimented for another 100-120 years and then everyone realised it's fucking ineffective against dudes fully clad in metal, since you have slashing weapon against someone who won't be harmed by slashes and stabbing weapon against someone who can't be stabbed.

So sure, let's pretend longswords were anything else than a blind alley and totally weren't dropped due to their inefficiency, cost and other insignificant factors like being useless ceremonial weapon by the times it became finally cost-efficient to make them en masse

>Here am I to face a dude fully clad in armour. I shall bring the best weapon to kill him...

Maybe you killed 100 unarmoured peasants before coming up against the armoured nobleman?

>completly opposite

really? So the fact that swords got more needdle like blades to thrust through gaps better was made up and all 14th century swords were fake? And soldiers magically forgot about axes?

Being a sidearm doesn't mean it's a bad weapon, just that you can have it in conjunction with another weapon, you don't choose between poleaxe and longsword, you bring and train both.

"Friendly" duels in full armour with longswords were pretty popular during the 15th century btw, go check Jacques de Lalaing's geste, this guy duelled with both longsword and poleaxe regularly.

One handed axes disappeared almost completly and if you wanna consider halberd an axe then might as well say swords weren't sidearms because of zweihander.

Not him, but what difference does it make? You yourself just pointed out they fell out of favour pretty quick for "super-duper weapon" that supposedly was so fucking great, that everyone quickly stopped using it.

I guess it might have something to do with everyone and their mother wearing metal armour no sword could pierce or slash through, but hey, what do I know, I'm just a fa/tg/uy.

>just get inside their reach
When will this meme die? How do you intend to dodge the multiple fast and deadly thrusts to the head and chest that the spear user is throwing out as he steps backward with each thrust? Unarmed, a single thrust is enough to kill a man dead, and they're not throwing out one thrust at a time - they're keeping you at distance and picking you apart faster than you can block.

With a longsword, it's possible. With a rapier and dagger, it's almost fair (the rapier and dagger being the best duelling weapons)
With a mace? Fucking forget it, your weapon is too short and you cannot block their attacks effectively.

The pilum is a throwing weapon you tosser

Not only that, it's a throwing weapon designed to break easily so it can't be re-used against the thrower.

Are you fucking retarded?
No, seriously, are you?

Longswords came into use in late 13th century, fully becoming a thing in the middle of 14th century. You know what else became a thing in that period?
Entire armies clad in plate armour.

So nice to know you have no idea what the fuck you are even talking about, because longswords have this unfortunate luck of being invented in the same time when your average foot soldier was perfectly capable of affording his own plate.

I have been talking specifically about long axes the entire time. And you're correct, a zweihander was a good weapon - because it was long enough to basically be a polearm.

>sword, which is useless

if it was useless no one would buy them anymore you cretin and if half swording meant to deal with armor existed how the fuck would that mean swords were useless against armor you idiot?

Except plate armour was most popular in the late 15th and early 16th centuries

>How do you intend to dodge
Ever heard about shields?
I guess not

Because that's how you overcome all sorts of pikes and spears, you fucking idiot. It was a thing back in antique times, it was a thing in medieval and it was a thing in early modern period - you bring a shield. You don't dodge. You simply make it impossible to stab you, while you charge.

Dunno, read just about any late medieval or early modern treaty about military. They all will tell you the same fucking thing - bring swordsmen with shields and enemy pikemen are fucking screwed.
What? A historical meme?

You really think the needle like swords were used as battle weapons and not as duelling or self defense?