Thread 714063075

>Big
>Heavy
>Slow
>Takes two hands to use
>Low damage
>Can't cut trough flesh
>Can't cut trough metal
>Wooden handle can be cut
Just use a sword.

>>>/k/
is that way

>>714063075 (OP)
>Big
No
>Heavy
Also, no
>Slow
Nope
>Takes two hands to use
one handed warhammers exist and were even more common

Stop getting all your knowledge from video games. Warhammers were lightweight and quick.

>>714063075 (OP)
>not as heavy as you think
>low cost, maintenance and durability compared to swords
>the part that typically used for blocking is reinforced with metal
>blunt damage comes through armor and shatters your bones
>can be made to double as a spear
>see the pointy part on the back side of the head of that hammer? it goes through armor

>>714063075 (OP)
Actual historical weapons were used because they WORKED, you dickhead.
Swords are fucking cool but they're a backup weapon on the battlefield, generally.

>>714063075 (OP)
>Takes two hands to use
There are one handed warhammers
>Can't cut trough metal
Huuuuhhhh? That's like their primary function. Do you even see what you just posted yourself? What do you think that pointy thing is for?
>Low damage
False
>Wooden handle can be cut
All polearms are like that. And?

>Just use a sword
>ACCKKKKKKKKKKKK
Sorry, dude, you couldn't reach me with your gay sword and you're already dead, funny, isn't it?

>>714063075 (OP)
Why don't you bump your thread, retard?

>>714063075 (OP)
You use it to smack a knight off his horse and cave in his armor.

>>714063075 (OP)
For me, it's Diablo 2, where slow weapons attack faster than fast weapons if dual wield paired with fast weapons. Sadly it's not relevant in vanilla since warhammer has no relevant runewords.

>>714063190
>implying /k/ knows anything about weapons beyond what they know from youtube retards shilling the latest gear
Just make a shotgun thread and prepare to go blind from the constant facepalming.

>>714063075 (OP)
Why is the head so small? If the surface area of the striking end isn't big enough to cover the enemy's whole face, can you even call your weapon a hammer?

>>714063075 (OP)
Because armor is hard so you gotta smash it.

>>714063075 (OP)
>hammer
>hook shield or armor, knock down, punch holes into helmet, create concussion
>sword
>hope your enemy wears no good armor

>>714063075 (OP)
pollaxes like that were mostly used by guys in armor to fight guys in armor. you don't need to cut through metal to kill the guy inside it, nothing will really cut through plate easily. if you can't get a good hit then you can use the other parts to hook in, the ends as spears or just use the shaft as a way to wrestle someone down

>>714063552
pollaxes like the one in the OP were not cheap. the construction was pretty complicated for the time because it was 3 pieces welded together that had to be able to withstand getting hit. if you had the armor to make the most of that pollaxe you'd have enough money to have whatever weapons you want

>>714066861
>if you had the armor to make the most of that pollaxe
Learn English

>>714063075 (OP)
People wore armor, even some tough leather can stop a sword from cutting. Blunt weapons can knock someone silly and even break bones through armor.

>>714066861
>pollaxes like the one in the OP were not cheap
cheaper than almost every sword from that time period
>welded
it's clearly riveted and still easier to manufacture that a typical sword since after forging swords tend to curve during hardening which ruins the edge often beyond repair. also process of forging on its own rewires much more man-hours with swords
>if you had the armor
you must be imagining cartoony tin man heavy full armor, which indeed costs a fortune, but there were miles more affordable options back then like leather armor or chainmail if your lord feeling all fancy this decade.
my point being that hammer go bonk is a viable option if you are on a budget

>>714063075 (OP)
If you bonk someone wearing platemail they get hurt real bad or die, unlike faggy swords.

>>714068086
trust me m8, plate armor is not much better in this case

>>714063075 (OP)
Pollhammer such as the Lucerne or Bec de Corbin =/= warhammer. As others already told your dumbass, one-handed warhammers and bludgeons existed and were the best weapon to use if your opponent had any type of armor. Swords were at best a sidearm, or the primary weapon of nobility, and nobility were typically the only ones wearing plate armor. You do not "cut through metal" you crush the plate utilizing the hammer face or used the beaked end on the reverse to puncture it. Do you get your weapon knowledge exclusively from video games faggot?

swords were actually never used in combat

>>714068286
Combat never happened

>>714063075 (OP)
blunt doesnt matters in most action rpg with armored enemies that you can kill with a sword with bigger damage numbers easily

OP is right vidya wise, is there any game where hammers arent dog shit?

>>714069182
warhammer lol

>>714063075 (OP)
fuq yo helmet, yo coat of plates, you being on horseback what you want

thas why

>ride on horse
>see some manlet in armor
>shout "IT'S MAAAAAAAAAAANLEEEEEEEEEEET SEAAAAAAAAAAAAAASON" and belt him in the torso, crumpling his chestplate
>dies

>>714063075 (OP)
they weren't widely used IRL, it's just a fantasyslop weapon

>>714065718
It's supposed to concentrate force into a small area, to dent or puncture the armor, causing injury to the person inside. A wider head would also need to be heavier to compensate for the spread of force, which would make it more cumbersome.

>>714063075 (OP)
The point is to hit someone to death with it

>>714070185
>they weren't widely used IRL
Are you retarded, negroid? Polearms were the most used weapons. Swords are actual fantasyslop weapon because in reality swords were just a backup weapon or something for cqc

>>714070563
This thread is about warhammers not polearms, anon.

>>714070592
not that anon, but they were heaps popular, just in a little different form factor

>>714063075 (OP)
>What's even the point of warhammers?
heh
the actual pointy end carries so much force when swung that it will pierce even plate armour
it's like driving a nail into someone's body

>>714063075 (OP)
dent plate
break bones

>>714063075 (OP)
>Just use a sword.
I think you mean spear

>>714069182
Battle Brothers

Did people really fight in plate armor? How fucking strong were people back then?

>>714070984
they weren't that heavy, and the weight was distributed around the whole body so it was easier than you think

>>714063075 (OP)
hammers go bonk
also there are two points to the hammer you posted, swords only have one point

>>714065718
You're probably shitposting but a smaller hammer head delivers more concentrated force than a wider one, because the kinetic energy has less surface area to diffuse into on impact. You can try this yourself - slap yourself in the face open-palmed, then punch yourself in the face with a closed fist. Your fist will hurt more.

>>714069182
Dominions

>>714063075 (OP)
That's not a warhammer, it's a poleaxe. Warhammers were small like a hammer you use for nails. The POLEAXE was for fighting armored opponents because swords can't cut through armor.

>>714071567
Also forgot to mention, at the peak of armored combat the poleaxe was more expensive than the best sword you could have. But they usually still carry a sword at the hip with these two handers. If you were a knight with a poleaxe, you were state of the art and wealthy.

>>714070592
>warhammers not polearms
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_hammer
>Long war hammers were polearms meant for use by foot soldiers, whereas shorter ones were primarily used by those mounted
I'm awaiting for your response

>>714067936
Where is your source that the poleaxe was cheaper than a sword? By the 14th century the sword was becoming a secondary weapon.

>>714063075 (OP)
Watch and learn, fag.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8RHJsatqJY

>>714063075 (OP)
>>>Wooden handle can be cut
this nigger has not done a single day of work in his life

>>714070779
Left to right, lil' bonk, the undecided, his majesty, Stubbs, sea mine and the poker

>>714071845
I respect their larping but I don't think this speaks too well for their effectiveness. In real life these things must have been more effective. You would be in a formation side by side with other knights swinging two handers. They were obviously able to kill this way some how. They didn't do this HEMA struggle to the ground in war. You would never want to try and wrestle someone in battle

>>714070984
>Did people really fight in plate armor?
You didn't have to be in a full body plate armor set fantasy knight style. Cuirasses existed, you know. You can, like, survive a hit to your leg or arm so obviously having just an "armor vest" and a helmet greatly improves your chances of survival. Just like today
>>714071089
>they weren't that heavy
Counterpoint - having any excess weight on your legs drains your stamina much faster (this is why modern militaries literally don't use any leg armor whatsoever)
Landsknechts didn't seem to wear it even though they could probably afford it. Because they fought on foot. Picrelated is all you really need to dominate the battlefield

>>714072136
Sure, this is just one on one duels, and full plate makes you mostly impervious to most weapons.

In an actual melee most casualties happened when one side routed, say, due to being flanked by heavy cavalry, not during the actual engagement.

knights would use them on horseback because the momentum would allow the spike to punch straight through armor

>>714070185
>>714071567
t.

>>714072067
swords require steel, while hammer can be made from simple iron if not any metal ever. plus, just as i said, manufacturing swords requires more time and skill. but let's imagine that cost difference is negligible, you are still going to be chewing through swords much faster then hammers, and buying new ones obviously adds to the overall cost too. also my source is you mom talking in her sleep

Reminder that most of the warhammer hate comes from magic users who are too weak and unfit to wield them.

>>714072675
For unarmored combat, an effective warhammer can be made from stone or even wood with metal spikes.
Metal is only needed for armored combat, where a sword from the same metal will still always be worse than a hammer.

>>714063552
>blunt damage comes through armor and shatters your bones
That doesn't happen.
>>see the pointy part on the back side of the head of that hammer? it goes through armor
That doesn't happen either. It's only useful when it hits gaps in the armor. No melee weapon can go through armor unless armor is fucking cardboard.

>>714070984
Every single proper soldier in history has carried as much armor as it will allow him to still fight effectively, which is usually around 25kg, from a hoplite's panoply to a modern grunt plate carrier. War is a pragmatist territory.

>>714072136
It depends on the context of the fight, usually a spear formation involved standing with a long line of other guys with spears and you were in a deadlock trying to stab the guys across from you. Death often came from the guy diagonal from you like a pawn, not the guy directly across. Poleaxes are more of a 'fight has degenerated into a brawl' sort of thing were formations are falling apart and the knights are coming in to clean up with a superior weapon that can pierce, hammer and slash. Knights themselves were basically p2w whales running around on an f2p server doming niggas left and right, the poleaxe itself was considered a knight's weapon and there probably was very little times it ever came up against itself besides in duels. Armored knights probably rolled around a battlefield and smacked unsuspecting fuckers with it.

>>714063075 (OP)
ITT: OP gets all his knowledge from his 50 hour skyrim playthrough.

>>714072639
Daniel Tosh if he were black

>>714072802
>uhh sharp thing cant pierce armor
dumb as fuck, why are you like this spouting off about dumb shit the pointy bit on the end would fuck shit up with enough speed just like an arrow

Archery and the crossbow essentially ruined the monopoly knights had on the battlefield. Instead of paying for a few nobles as knights and all their equipment/horses they could field a few stands of peasants with long bows/crossbows who would destroy the knights before they got close.

>>714073048
That's the later model, Tosh1.0

Poleaxes don't pierce plate armour.
Arrows don't pierce plate armour.
Crossbow bolts don't pierce plate armour.
Hell, even the firearms of the day had issues piercing plate armour.
Why is it we stopped using plate armour? It certainly wasn't due to the prevalence of archery.

>>714073149
This is a far more nuanced topic than 4chan allows. There's a lot of variation in plate quality, from hardened steel fit for kings to mass produced munition iron cuirasses. The best armor was nigh invulnerable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzNAFwAyi1s&t=404s

And that includes the heaviest of bows, which can barely pierce it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mfdx01nP3Y4

Disasters like Crecy happened through saturation fire in favorable terrain for the archers, which allowed for arrows to find gaps in plate and to wound horses.

It was firearms which ended the age of knights, not bows and crossbows.

>>714071835
was meant for (you)
>>714072675

>>714073642
>Why is it we stopped using plate armour
Machine gun.
Machine gun was a mis-step in human evolution and murdered all the badass shit like plate armor, cavalery, knighthood and warhammers.

Also cannons could "pierce" plate armor.

>>714071805
This thread is about warhammers not long war hammers, anon.

>>714073745
Cannons, sure - I was more referring to the shitty little guns people were carrying, though

>>714072675
poleaxes were made with high quality steel just like swords. Again these were the most expensive weapons of the time.

>>714073817
Also hammers, especially two handed, could deform plate armor to hinder the enemies movement, break bones by transferring force trough plate armor and knock the wind out of enemies in plate armor, sending them to the floor and then allowing you to finish off with a dagger. Or you hook a knight off his horse with your warhammer and then knock him out with a mace and ransom him.

I like this weapon, it's very polite. You greet everyone you meet, and if they're Fr*nch, you stab them.

>>714070984
Have you ever seen a 20 kg gym weight lifting bar?
Add some ~5 kg to it and you have about the same weight as full plate set on the light end.
That is to say that you have almost the same amount of metal in 20kg bar as in an suit of armor, except here it is all spread out in thin sheet. If you are a heathy male, older than 15, you should be able to move around with that weight spread across your body.

>>714074143
Or bonk them if they look like they have rich families.

>>714074181
>If you are a heathy male
But most "males" on 4chan are pathetic skinny-fat wimps so they won't be able to move around swiftly while wearing this amount of weight.

>>714073642
>Why is it we stopped using plate armour?
Muskets got better, the tactics improved. Full armor was no longer feasible.

>>714074287
the medieval knight or man at arms was trained for knightly warfare since they were boys. You are correct, they were not average males.

>>714072802
>that doesn't happen
that does happen. one good impact will make typical armor cave in and now imagine this is happening while armor is on you. granted some amount of impulse is being dissipated to the larger area which softens the blow to a degree, but this is still a major oof. also armor does nothing to protect from joint dislocation even worsening it in some cases.
>No melee weapon can go through armor
when something heavy hits with a pointy end it can even punch a hole in metal, thats what horseman's pick was famously designed to do

>>714074468
or a knight, plate armor would be like a second skin, but if anyone from this thread here tried to pout on a suit, they would be super slow and cumbersome like a Dark Souls character aboive their weight limit.

>>714073992
i can't decide if you are trolling or genuinely mentally incapable. google what a price spread is

>>714074864
Every historian has said they were the elite expensive weapons int he 14th century I dunno where your source is from. You don't even know they are high quality made weapons.

More stamina than strength also very cheap to make as a weapon. Most would have had a wooden staff. Actually trained with weapons and reenactors / actors.

>>714063075 (OP)
>>Big
No
>>Heavy
No
>>Slow
No
>>Takes two hands to use
Warhammers and maces are one handed
>>Low damage
Imagine being pummeled on your head with a hammer, wven if you have a helmet it's gonna hurt like hell
>>Can't cut trough flesh
Not needed when you can give someone a concussion or break their bones even through armor
>>Can't cut trough metal
Neither can sword, hammers were desgined to kill or incapacitate people wearing heavy armor because swords are almost useless against it
>>Wooden handle can be cut
Yes, that's a disadvantage, but a lot of warhammers came with reinforced metal handles
>Just use a sword.
Swords are good if you're fighting peasants or lowly armored enemies, not so much if you're against another plate wielding knight like yourself.

>>714074958
your "every historian ever" must be one youtube person, who googled it the night before making a video about it, and surely mixing up some facts. yes, i bet there was an array of expensive ones, but when it comes to how cheap can you go, compared to swords, hammers win by a landslide

>>714075461
>Not needed when you can give someone a concussion or break their bones even through armor
A concussion perhaps, but you're not breaking any bones by hitting armor. The real point of a warhammer is to ring their head and knock them down so you can stab them with your rondel, just like every other time you fight someone in armor. Knock em down, get on top of em, stab em in the armpits or crotch or eyes.

>>714075489
Hammers and maces are small weapons for horseback. A poleaxe is not. Stop being a retard.

>>714075580
first of all, we are talking about polehammers here, not poleaxes. and polehammers are hammers are hammers to but on a longer pole. you are the retard here

>>714075836
OP's pic is not a hammer, it's a poleaxe you blubbering idiot

>>714076624
>Blunt striking face
>Pick beak
>No blade
Where is the blade?
Are one-handed warhammers "axes" too?

You are just a brownoid or spellcaster with a hate boner against hammers.

>>714076624
literally OP's pic

>>714063075 (OP)
What kind of mental retardation drives one to post this thread?

>>714063075 (OP)
Warhammers and poleaxes were dedicated anti-armour weapons. You can use a sword against armor but even with halfswording it sucks in comparison.

>>714070984
As anyone who's done buhurt can tell you, you don't need to be strong to fight in armour. But you do need a lot of stamina because fighting in it is fucking miserable.

>>714078432
Lol you're buhurt.

>>714073642
>>714073745
>>714073817
>>714074094
None of these are the actual reason, it's because armor is fucking expensive to make especially en masse and especially when you want to make it bullet-proof (which many were in the 17th century). Also the fact that tactics were changing and guns became so prevenalent meant that almost every kind of armor was a problem because it interfered with using guns. Can't grip it properly with gauntlets, can't aim it properly with vambraces, can't shoulder a musket with a cuirass, can't aim for shit with a visored helmet, etc. Black powder is kind of shit so even as late as the 19th century it was still entirely viable to make bullet-proof armor if you had the means to do so, e.g. Ned Kelly.

>>714076831
>>714076954
Not every poleaxe had a bladed head. I know you're /v/ermin, but you shouldn't derive all your knowledge from videogames.
http://myarmoury.com/feature_spot_poleaxe.html

>>714069182
KCD1 and 2
they're OP as fuck in fact.

>>714063190
/k/ is now just a colony of reddit, which itself is just a front for glowies to wage psychological warfare against their own people.