03-15-2016, 08:35 PM
(03-15-2016, 06:21 PM)Umbra Wrote:Everyone likes to romanticize swords, but they were very impractical. They're short range, take way more metal to make, and need training to even reasonably use, let alone to full efficiency. Most swords were shortsword sidearms anyways, and those who focused on using them exclusively were elite men who needed to show off how rich and powerful they were, which is how they got romanticized in the first place.(03-15-2016, 05:14 PM)Lost Rinoah Wrote: [spears rant]
/spears rant.
I agree. Polearms in general are great IMO.
Not only do you have more range, which means you can stay a lot safer, but weapons like spears and glaives can be very light, helping with maneuverability. Heavier polearms like axes and halberds are a different case, but still have similar advantages; a longer handle not only means more range, but greater force in a swing as well due to the leverage, meaning you hit harder and cleave easier. Same can be said for glaives, but axes and halberds tend to be heavier, which means more momentum when swung.
Not to mention that polearms in general tend to look really cool when designed well.
Compare polearms, which are long range, only need a tip of metal, and are close enough to pitchforks, shovels, and other long-handled equipment that you can easily arm farmers will minimal training, with most advanced tactics involving then being very easy to understand.
Linux Crime Squad