>Game has swords, axes, polearms and blunt weapons as different weapon types with strengths and weaknesses.
Fuck no!
In real life, a sword is just a direct upgrade to axes, polearms and blunt weapons. If you had access to swords, you had no reason use axes, polearms or blunt weapons because swords were just better in every way possible. The only reason axes and polearms like spears were widely used is because swords were expensive and reserved for nobility, but as the hero of the story you should never be reduced to just using axes or polearms like a peasant.
Games need to start implimenting it so polearms are stronger than blunt weapons like hammers, axes are stronger than polearms and swords are stronger than axes instead of making them "different". That way would be more realistic and make more sense.

Then I get a gun and shoot your sword wielding ass. PWNED BITCH

it doesn't need to stop doing it
it needs to progress
the type damage a light hammer does isn't the same as a warhammer

>>712918769 (OP)
>Swords are stronger than polearms
Fucking lol. Spears mogged swords like no tomorrow.

>>712918769 (OP)
No, build variety is neat. If I wanna be a knight with a sword and a shield one playthrough and a robes wearing monk punching monsters in the face the next I will do so

>>712918769 (OP)
Because as we all know realism is the end-all be-all of things

>>712918769 (OP)
Who cares, the only medieval weapon that really mattered were bows.
Far and away the most lethal weapon before the invention of guns.

>>712918769 (OP)
>In real life, a sword is just a direct upgrade to axes, polearms and blunt weapons
holy retardation.

>>712920356
Axes and polearms can't cut trough steel like sword. Even guns have trouble getting trough thicker layers of steel unlike swords which cut it like butter.
Blunt weapons are a meme made up by Dungeons and Dragons autists.

>>712920921
what

>>712918868
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWR7Q5i0JpQ

>>712918769 (OP)
Axe has more chopping power than a sword, but cant stab or parry
It's almost like... there are tradeoffs

Katanas deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that. I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine katana in Japan for 2,400,000 Yen (that's about $20,000) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even cut slabs of solid steel with my katana.

Japanese smiths spend years working on a single katana and fold it up to a million times to produce the finest blades known to mankind.

Katanas are thrice as sharp as European swords and thrice as hard for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a katana can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a katana could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.

Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Japan? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Samurai and their katanas of destruction. Even in World War II, American soldiers targeted the men with the katanas first because their killing power was feared and respected.

So what am I saying? Katanas are simply the best sword that the world has ever seen. This is a fact and you can't deny it.

>dire flail
that cannot be real

>>712918769 (OP)
>but real li-ACK
Kys and leave my hobby, faggot

>>712918769 (OP)
t. american

>>712920921
>sword
>cut through steel
lemme demonstrate what actually happens if you try to cut through a full plate armor with a sword

>>712921413
>star wars SFX
I don't remember that being in the original; are those royalty free or something?

>>712918769 (OP)
Blunt weapons exist because as armor became better, slashing and piercing became less likely to damage enemy combatants. Which led to weapons like hammers, maces, morningstars and flails becoming more common in the battleground, because they could damage you through the armor, or damage the armor itself, or damage the armor in certain ways that would harm the wearer.

>OP completely poleaxed by replies and has yet to put anyone to the sword

>>712918769 (OP)
...and start doing this

Hey if we have sword fags here is the Fire emblem weapon triangle accuarate? Swords beating axes, spears beating swords and axes cutting spears

>>712918769 (OP)
This bait is too obvious

spears

>>712920921
People like you are the reason why developers always make the protagonist's weapon a simple sword.

>>712922253
Axes beat polearms. Swords beat axes. But polearms do not beat swords.

>>712920921

>>712922106
"Eh, it's a living"

>>712918769 (OP)
>>712920921
Lowest tier bait

>>712922253
Nah, spear beat sword and axe, sword beat axe.
It's all about range.

>>712923809
Spears can not cut trough steel like swords so they are very useless against armored enemies. They also take two hands to use unlike axes and swords which can be used with a shield for extra defense.
But spears are better than blunt weapons because they can pierce and cut flesh.

>>712918769 (OP)
>a sword is just a direct upgrade toaxes, polearms and blunt weapons

A sword loses to a spear in basically every scenario except for when the sword user is already up in the spearman's face, and late medieval armor was so good that they were basically immune to swords, with claymores essentially becoming half-assed bludgeoning weapons as a response.

>>712924102
I have watched enough historical movies to know that swords can cut steel plate.

>>712918769 (OP)
Spear thread yesterday made you mad huh?

>>712924054
Supposing you actually believe this rubbish, what gave you all these ridiculous ideas?

bump

>>712923809
What if you throw the axe like a animal

>>712922528
Love this thing in AC Unity

>>712918769 (OP)
lol no. polearms raped. swords were only ever a status symbol and personal sidearm.

>>712918769 (OP)
we never knew how good we had it with 3.5 till it was too late
damnit i feel old as fuck

>>712918769 (OP)
I bet you were surprised how many people here just agreed with you out of ignorance when you were looking to bait them into anger.

>>712927474
it's dnd dude. you still have the books you can still play it. its not fucking 40 gay.

>>712926134
Get shot by an arrow as I laugh after seeing the heavy weapon flops to the ground, peasants are no hercules to get a long range kill with a lump of steel.

>>712918769 (OP)
why hasnt there been a double barreled gun where one points toward the user?

>Its another HEMA wannabe thread.

bump

>>712918769 (OP)
>game has a bunch of weapons designed by people who have done no research on actual medieval weapons technology and think that's what a warhammer looks like
STOP

>>712918769 (OP)
Historylet and weaponlet detected.

>>712930975
The idea of "war"hammers in itself is stupid when they are even weaker than spears, which were a readily available peasant weapon.

They are just weapons. Actual tools that eventually will become disposable.

>>712920110
Bows are just spears evolved to fly.

>>712918769 (OP)
Swords were never used because they were upgrades because that's false, in most cases they were worse. They were used by nobles/knights/officers/etc. as status symbols. Swords are completely useless outside of war, therefore it was a status symbol to intentionally have something lying around that had no practical use in peace time.

>Katanas are thr-AAAKKCH

>If you had access to swords, you had no reason use axes, polearms or blunt weapons because swords were just better in every way possible
You don't even deserve a (you)

>>712918769 (OP)
That's just blatantly false, though. Polearms are better than swords as long as you can zone your opponent out. It's always possible to use a sword as a sidearm while wielding a polearm as your main weapon to have a failsafe in case the former strategy fails. Roman military actually switched to spears from swords during late antiquity because they excel in close order formation warfare. Likewise, blunt weapons do better against armored targets because slashes are useless against those. A blunt weapon with the same weight will have higher strike force near the point of impact. It can break bones under some types of armor and damage other ones to slow the enemy down. About the only correct thing in your post is that axes suck as a weapon. They're primarily a tool used for chopping wood and just happened to be the most dangerous thing that an average farmer had lying around.

>>712920921
Swords can't cut through steel, you retard. The way to fight armored targets with a sword is to hit them with it as hard as you can and hope that blunt force is going to be enough, which is why blunt weapons are better at it.

Polearms and bows were the best weapons in mass formations for literally thousands of years, and were only supplanted when they invented muskets and bayonets which basically combined the two into a single weapon.

>>712918769 (OP)
>sword
>stronger than polearms, axes or maces
lol
LMAO even
swords are just a flex weapon. axes, axes on a stick (polearms) and can openers (maces) outperform swords in everything. Swords are also infamous one-hit wonders that break more often than hammers or axes. There's a reason why most tools are axes and hammers and not overgrown kitchen knives.

>>712931653
It was part status symbol and part silent threat and touting their rights to kill other people.

>>712918769 (OP)
Akshually they need to go the DMC way and only have the most bat shit retarded weapons like throwing roses, or a double motorcycle chainsaw.

>>712918769 (OP)
>spears
>halbers
>zweihander
this three weapons mogged everything. plus zweihander were the only good weapons against polearms.

>>712922106
I do this when my wife screams when she sees a bug so I bust out my bearded dragon and he eats like a king.

>>712918769 (OP)
>In real life, a sword is just a direct upgrade to axes, polearms and blunt weapons.
Stop posting.

>>712932039
Katanas were always weaker than long swords for a couple tactical reasons
Longswords:
Pointy end to stab through gaps in armor
Sharp on both sides, can slash with either side
Can be repaired
Gauntlets can grip the blade for leverage or hilt bashing

Katanas:
Even if ultra sharp, only good for slashing
Dual metals cause structural weakness, as shown in your gif
Can't really stab
If something breaks, Hatori Hanzo has to fold another whole weapon 1000 times
Were largely ceremonial and not weapons of war

>>712918868
>PWNED
Is this some new zoomerspeak word?

>>712934413
Oh and most important of all: long swords just look cooler.

A true man needs nothing more.

>>712934486
6.5/10

>>712934032
>mogs your big swords and sharp sticks

>>712922253
you arent cutting through a spear with any weapon. too many variables pop up. spears were made with durable wood that could bend and was generally shock-resistant. and axes used in combat were not axes used to chop wood. a woodcutting axe has a v-shaped head with a lot of weight on the back to help drive it through the wood. an axe used for combat would be thin and sharp because it was for use against flesh and bone.

>>712920921
and arrows are well known for piercing through plate

>>712934584
there's never going to be a good pankration game
Clash: Artifacts of Chaos at least came close but goddamn, lemme punch a man in the head until he falls over

>>712934781
>you arent cutting through a spear with any weapon
Well, there was the Zweihänder, though I hear it's disputed nowadays whether or not it really was used to break pike shafts.

>>712918769 (OP)
ICBM submarine beats all weapons, devs should stop putting swords in games

try stopping a cavalry unit from fucking your shit up with a tiny ass sword, bitch

>>712927318
Armor stopped polearms in like 900

>>712931263
So why were they incredibly common

>>712918769 (OP)
>If you had access to swords, you had no reason use axes, polearms or blunt weapons because swords were just better in every way possible.
youre an idiot

>>712934998
thats where it gets kinda muddy
Zweihander wasnt around that long because gunpowder was right around the corner and it subsequently blew up. Zweihander was specifically used against Pike Formations to BREAK INTO formations usually in their own formation themselves with their buddies using their pikes too. Then Pikes were longer than spears, and because of that, was more unwieldy if someone got too close. But, with the fact that people who used Zweihanders were actually a small group of specialized soldiers and not just any shmuck, they weren't even used all that often. So a narrow time period and rarely in use. as well it wasnt just zweihanders used against spear/pike formations, but also halberds. And we do have a lot of information regarding halberds.

there isn't that much information about zweihanders because of its short time in use

>>712918769 (OP)
Polearms mogs swords though, and hammers are much better against armor. The only advantage swords have is portability.

>>712936021
Because Dungeon and Dragons playing history revisionist nerds made them up.

>>712921973
kek

>>712924102
This
If two knights with swords run into eachother, the fight turns into sweaty, gay wrestling because you need to force the sword through one of a couple weak points, that someone who is fighting you won't let you get into.
If a knight with a sword meets a knight with a mace, the knight with the sword is about to get murdered

>>712936304
Swords are great for fighting off revolts of peasants breaking into your home.
They have no armor, your hallways are probably too narrow for polearms, and the sword is right on the mantle or display where it belongs for you to grab it.

>>712934032
>plus zweihander were the only good weapons against polearms.
Aside from other polearms, and smaller one handed swords were often used in conjuction with pole arms (since war is a team sport, its perfectly viable to have your buddies bind the enemy's pikes with their pikes while you duck underneath and stab the enemy with your sword). And firearms mogged more than either of those, which is why its called the pike and shot era.

>>712918769 (OP)
>swords were expensive and reserved for nobility
Yes, but your logic breaks down after this. Swords are weapons of the nobility not just cause they're expensive (more steel, more craftsmanship required) but because any sword that is more than just a big dagger or cleaver requires more skill/training to use effectively. In the right hands they're by far the most versatile weapons, not the absolute best ones in every situation.

>>712934413
Katanas were great weapons, for the historical context in which they were made.
You had shit iron that needed to be overworked to be useful in the first place, and respectable metal armors were basically nonexistent.
Outside of that narrow context, they are weird outliers that aren't playing the game correctly.

>>712934998
It probably wasn't. More likely its mass was used to bat them away and more often than that they were just used for crowd control because of their combination of length and versatility. Zweihanders are much closer to halberds in terms of application than they are to other swords.

medieval /his/ nerds are insufferable
>NOOO THATS NOT LE HECKIN REALISTIC
>NOOO THEY DIDN"T USE THEM LIKE THAT
>NOOOO THAT ARMOR IS THE WRONG MATERIAL AND COLOR
>NOOO THE STANCE IS WRONG YAMEROOOOO

>>712936829
If your home isn't a castle that can fit pole arms inside of it, then you don't have to worry about peasants to begin with. If you do, then pole arms are better because they give you better reach from the bastions and ramparts.

>>712918769 (OP)
Polearms are superior though.

>>712931263
>>712936021
Warhammers were generally smalelr weapons, like to to 3 feet long and usually one handed. there were two-handed warahmmers, and some of those could be around 5 feet long, mostly used from horseback. They were made for plate armor to dent or concuss the guy wearing it. yeah, the warhammer was rare because it was niche. It had its place. longswords had a technique called "Mordhau" where you grab the blade and use the hilt as a blunt instrument like a hammer... like a warhammer, one could say. it means it had real value even if it wasn't super common. and you don't want "good enough" when your life is on the line, you know? anyway, peasants wouldnt need a warhammer since they werent fighting guys in full plate. they had gambesons and helmets, maybe maille, but not full on plate armour like the nobles wore. Plate was for rich dudes

>>712918769 (OP)
People like you should never design video game or make a threads on 4chan ever.

>>712921481
you dont need to chop someone to kill them, all you need was a cut or stab to the neck.

I like pikes more

>>712918769 (OP)
>need to
Shut the fuck up

>>712938232
patapon 3 on pc never ever

>>712934413
it's no wonder samurai would use the naginata and the bow. If one is down to his katana, that means either the situation is fucking terrible, or they're putting down defeated enemies/engaging in headhunting tournaments to see who can behead more civilians in a given time.

>>712938550
Sadly...
Does anyone know if anon finished pic rel doujin?

>>712934486
Last time I've seen someone use this "new zoomerspeak word" was in 2008.

>>712918769 (OP)
> The only reason axes and polearms like spears were widely used is because swords were expensive and reserved for nobility,

Anon I

>>712920921

>mogs your sword

its seems sword superiority has ruffled the feathers of the fences again

>>712939270
>

>>712922253
Bad North had interesting and fairly grounded counters.
Spears were kings at blocking passages, but weaker in the open and defenseless on the move. They countered most melee units by outranging them but were bad against archers, axe throwers and these freaks that could jump right on top of them.
Sword & Board guys could intercept projectiles, hold their own in various engagements, chase enemies on the move, flank, but beefier enemies could give them some trouble.
Archers were good against most foes, except swordsmen who had shields, unless you had two groups of archers shooting at them from different angles. They worked best when safely hiding behind other soldiers.

Everyone shut the fuck up and kneel to the weapon of gods.

The bardiche

>>712940287
>powercreep dlc

>>712918769 (OP)
This is the second time I've seen a rapier portrayed as a saber. Is there any credence to this?

>>712940601
Mostly no but with a slight bit of truth. By the time the actual French word rapière was coined (from which the English and German rapier came from) it referred to long thin thrusting swords meant for unarmoured duelling. But those swords were developed from the Spanish "espada ropera" (literally "dress sword") which were meant for cutting and thrusting. By the time they spread to England, they did so simultaneously with Italian duelling schools, which favoured thrusting even when the swords still had cutting edges (and early rapiers were still double-edged).

>>712939467
NOOOOO THAT'S IMPOSSIBLLEEE!!!!! AAAAAAAHHHGHHHH

>>712918769 (OP)
>dire flail
How are you even supposed to use that?

>>712942375
You don't. I guess you're meant to use it like a baton but there's a reason why rope or chain linked weaponry were never used in warfrare en masse.

>>712920921
>cut trough steel like sword
huh

>>712942375
you are supposed to keep spinning it for the next 4 hours of combat

>>712942375

>>712920110
Bows have a low rate of fire and low kill rate. They're only useful for siege defense.

>>712943210
You mean crossbows, right? Even so I still one shot against you.

>>712931653
What are you fucking walking about? It’s literally the opposite. Spears and blunt weapons fill niches (range and trauma through armor) that when combined make swords obsolete. Where swords thrive is PEACE TIME because they’re good all rounders, and easy to carry at the hip. Good self defense weapon.

>>712918769 (OP)
Swords are sidearms retard.

You're arguing "Why do I need a rifle when I have a pistol?"

>>712934413
It’s crazy that the pendulum has swung so drastically from weeb dick sucking but no, retard, the katana is not a bad sword. They’re not as good at stabbing as a straight sword but absolutely can, and from like 1750 the best ones were made with imported steel so your pigiron headcanon is wrong too.

In a time when the weapons you had is whatever you could afford. I'm sure there were plenty of choices available

>>712944671
That's because somewhere around the mid 2010s everyone became armchair historians, probably with the rise of history autism games like crusader kings and total war and youtubers like skallagrim getting into the main stream. This was also around the time when vikings also got demythologized as horned helmet wearing, fur wearing, topless raiders who only used axes.

>>712944671
>from like 1750
So after the Samurai was dead and dusted as a class?

the strongest weapon is your mind, and then gorilla ass

>>712945126
Nta but bushido as a concept was also formed well after the samurai were relevant. I mean at least if we're going after a heavily romanticized weapon and warrior.

>>712943210
This is, literally, video game logic tainting your brain. I don’t know why i need to explain this but if given the option stabbing someone from 30 meters away will always be the better choice in a fight. Bows were lethal. They became the low damage dex option in games because if devs didn’t scale back their DPS games would (like in real life) favor ranged classes so heavily that they would be the only competitive way to play.

>>712945098
to be fair if you ever thought of vikings as anything besides this you're fucking retarded

>>712945126
Not especially relevant in a discussion about swords, a weapon that has NEVER had a tangible impact on warfare when spears and bows were available. Swords are almost exclusively a peacetime weapon, so yeah, peacetime Edo Japan seems like the proper era to gauge its quality.

Swords are literally just a status symbol. Nobody actually used them in warfare. If there was a way to carry around a lance or a poleaxe the way you can a sword, they would have used those.

>>712945691
It was also the time where swordsmanship and dueling got romanticized. It reminds me of ROTK, where they took contemporary (at the time) views on warfare and imposed it on a much older historical event for the purposes of making it grander than it is, which is what the japanese are doing with the sengoku period, and I suppose what even western writers did with the medieval ages. The concept of honorable dueling and errantry came from the age of enlightenment where every gentleman could practice the art of italian, german or french swordsmanship, then writers applied these to medieval knights who roamed the land seeking adventure.

>>712943210
more empires were built on bows than on melee weapons

>>712934413
katanas had thrusting techniques as well just because weebs mythologized the weapon doesn't mean it was bad, portuguese praised them for example

>>712918769 (OP)
>a sword is just a direct upgrade to axes, polearms and blunt weapons
Lol, no.
Polearms and spears are better than swords. Swords were merely decorative; most soldiers used polearms and spears in war because they were superior to a sword in every shape and form.

>>712933329
wrong retard, halfswording was what was used, no one used their blades as maces

>>712946148
It’ll happen forever. The founding fathers were guerrilla fighters. They had a spy ring. But history books still teach that the revolutionary war was an impassioned speech followed by neat rows of well dressed infantry shooting at each other from 7 feet away. Surprise, when you’re in a situation that may lead to you fucking dying you take every precaution and use every available tool, no matter when you were born.

>>712918769 (OP)
>In real life, a sword is just a direct upgrade to axes, polearms and blunt weapons
Actual mongoloid retard

>>712919364
Technically spears got phased out themselves and you had zweihanders going against halberds. Ever wonder why Zweihanders looked the way they did?

>>712946056
literal retard everyone who could afford a sword did so including the archers and crossbowmen just because they weren't the main weapon doesn't mean they weren't well respecteed and sought after side arms that's like saying a handgun is status symbol

>>712946863
P.S. swords are not a direct upgrade to axes or polearms or blunt weapons. Swords are just one of the main branches of weapons. Swords became specialized weapons the same way pole arms and blunt weapons did. Different weapons were used by diffferent armies and employed different tactics and in different time periods. Saying that swords are superior is silly AF since all weapons get replaced with time.

>>712928741
There has, good amount of them.