2h/Polearms STILL significantly faster than 1h weapons

[Leshma]

Hell, make us have to manual block with them, that's fine.

I would like to see that as well. If it's posible, of course.

[Gorath]

Actually 2h warriors were highly paid elite troops
http://www.thearma.org/essays/2HGS.html

Here read actually alot of good historical info there and elsewhere

I know history is forbidden but allowing gorath to talk out of his ass to further his weapon lobbying is retarded

Read your own shit:

"The two-handed sword was a specialized and effective infantry weapon, and was recognized as such in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries

true two-handed swords (epee's a deux main) or "two-handers" were actually Renaissance, not Medieval weapons.

These weapons were used primarily for fighting among pike-squares where they would hack paths through knocking aside poles, possibly even lobbing the ends off opposing halberds and pikes then slashing and stabbing among the ranks. Wielded by the largest and most impressive soldiers (Doppelsoldners, who received double pay), they were also used to guard banners and castle walls. The Italian humanist historian Paulus Jovius writing in the early 1500s also described the two-hand great sword as being used by Swiss soldiers to chop the shafts of pikes at the battle of Fornovo in 1495. 

among 16th century armies the adoption of the two-handers was very limited and in comparison with the pike or the halberd did not play a meaningful role. “In the infantry unit, the German and Swiss Landsknechts positioned the Doppelsöldner (Soldiers who received double pay for wielding the two-handers) in the front ranks for a long time to strike down the opposing pikes and to hack out breaches into which one's own soldiers could penetrate.  However it would become unusable, as soon as the opposing forces collided with one another, and there would be increased pressure from the back ranks onto the front ranks, which created a thick melee.”  Thus, “sometime around the middle of the 16th century it (the two-hander) disappeared from war and mutated into a form of guard and ceremonial weapon with a symbolic character.”

And this is a really important one:

two-handed greatswords were used less for fighting against armors and more for open battlefield where pike and halberd formations were combined with firearms.

Repeat:

combined with firearms.

 

You didn't disprove my point that on a battlefield with shield and blade, spear and lance, bow and x-bow, 2h'd swords were impractical and had no real place.  It wasn't until later that they served a SPECIALIZED purpose and even then were discarded in favor of pike and halbard rather quickly.  In the medieval settings, sword and board were the infantry rulers.  (well more accurately axe/mace/flail and shield more often than sword)

And now we can watch our posts get moved to the dreaded historical board.   

*Btw if you really knew what weapon I'm a lobbyist for you would realize that I haven't mentioned anything about spear (and specifically spear and shield) at all in the thread.   *

[DrKronic]

   

I know its going historical but the irish and danes were also well known for using two handers (kern axe, gallowglass sword)

http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=1669&highlight=irish

That site is really an awesome treasure trove of info on medieval weapons and armor

Wish we had one and two handed flails

I wasn't saying there were armies of 2handers just that they did exist

[Gorath]

I wasn't saying there were armies of 2handers just that they did exist

Right, serving very specialized purposes.  They weren't common nor all that effective overall.  What do we see in warband *and cRPG especially*?  Armies of 2hers.   

For the record, flails would be awesome.

[Roh_]

I don't think 2h/polearms are so much faster over all as... well has anyone else noticed that with 1h there is this pause.. You draw the weapon back where you could hold and there is a pause when you release. I've tried clicking with no hold many many many times to test. There is always this noticeably large(larger at 15 agi and 134 1h then I ever saw with 2h/polearm even at lvl 1) pause before it actually begins to swing forward.

[Leshma]

Naginata would be awesome as well. It's a shame samurais (Shogunate clan) have to use katanas, nodaichis and clubs/staffs all the time.

[IG_Saint]

That essay is on two-handed greatswords around 60-70 in/150-175 cm. The only cRPG sword around that length is the flamberge. All the other cRPG greatswords would be longswords: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longsword . And these swords were used in the late medieval period, which is one of the periods that cRPG draws from. And gorath, I think you're overestimating the use of shields in medieval warfare. As far as I know, shields and one handed weapons were largely phased out after plate armour started to become more common place.

"13. Fighting with a sword and shield was the typical method of Medieval foot-combat.

    False. Despite their ubiquity in popular media's depictions of Medieval combat, and their close association with knights and medieval warriors, by the 14th century large shields were actually uncommon and all but disappeared from battles and single combats. This decline continued as the decades wore on. Rather than a single-handed short sword with large shield, soldiers, knights and men-at-arms were equipped typically with double-handed weapons (whether polearms, hafted weapons, or double-hand swords), or with two weapon combinations (swords with maces, axes, daggers, etc.). Large shields survived as specialized tools mostly for sieges and judicial combats but were not primary equipment. Smaller bucklers and other hand shields were by far more common than larger shields and typically served as a principal means of training."

From: http://www.thearma.org/essays/TopMyths.htm

[Gorath]

As far as I know, shields and one handed weapons were largely phased out after plate armour started to become more common place.

During the time when plate armour started to become common place the weapons of choice were the pole-weapons.  Poleaxes, bec de corbins, etc.  They were more versatile and plate killers.  Shields were still used, most often in conjuction with picks and maces (for dealing with armor) and on horseback coupled with a lance.  But the primary weapons of the time were polearms of various designs.

Other weapons were certainly more numerous on the battlefield but the sword was still a primary weapon of choice for close-combat precisely due to its versatility and effectiveness against a range of different opponents, armored or unarmored, foot or mounted.

That's the only problem I have with that snippet.  They say they're disproving the "myth" that swords weren't primary weapons on the battlefield, then go on to contradict themselves in the line bolded above, then try to contradict that line again in the same sentence by giving subjective qualifying factors.  I'm not a sword hater or anything, but if other weapons were more numerous on the battlefield, then the sword wasn't a primary weapon (regardless of the reason). 

[IG_Saint]

I'm not a sword hater or anything, but if other weapons were more numerous on the battlefield, then the sword wasn't a primary weapon (regardless of the reason).

In most battles peasants armed with whatever sharp tool they could find were alot more numerous than the trained soldiers, yet the soldiers were the ones that decided the battles. Just because other weapons were more common on the battlefield doesn't make them primary weapons. Whether the sword was an actual primary weapon I can't really say, I wasn't there  .

Now just to post something on topic:

Most common reason why 1hs think 2hs/polearms are so much faster: they didn't take into account the distance. When you're in range with your 1H, you cannot be spammed (except when there are large differences in ping, lvl, or skill).

[Xant]

Wow this historical discussion has so much to do with cRPG

[Gorath]

Wow this historical discussion has so much to do with cRPG

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Xant]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[UrLukur]

Hmm, the game is based on years around 900-1500. There was no uniform form of combat during the period (not to mentions stuff is from all over the world).

Besides, i would not count Greatswords as Lonswords. Longswords were way shorter. In game up to lonsword fit the description.

[zagibu]

Hmmm, Thomek, are you sure? Of course, you have a lot more experience with the katana than I do, but in the cases I pick one up, I can outspam shielders pretty easily with my 15/24 150WPF build. I don't know which level they are, of course, so maybe I was just lucky till now.

[duurrr]

people should have to defeat certain persons on the duel server before posting whine threads and dumbs suggestions

avoids retarded threads made by retards