Jump to content

Swords are a loser's weapon


BondJamesBond

Recommended Posts

It seems that battle commanders who use swords end up being on the losing side of battles often. Commanders should use other weapons. See the following examples:

1) Robert used a hammer and beat Rhaegar (sword) at the Trident

2) Jaime used a sword and lost at the Whsipering Wood

3) Jon Connington (sword) lost at the battle of the bells

4) Stannis (sword) lost to Tyrion (axe) at the Blackwater

It's clear that commanders should not use swords given the pattern of losing major battles that has developed when armies are led by swordsmen.

Okay, not really. This post is a plea for more logic on the forum, the most recent offender being the OP of this post:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this would move down to which weapon you seemed most comfortable and effective with.

This. Also just to add in 13-15th century European combat the most effective weapons were hammers, maces, and mauls because of the armor of the time.. However if someone was skilled with a blade they could easily out speed someone with any bashing weapon.

Overall id go with a Valyrian Morning-Star. That would be ruthless.

i know i am comparing the real world to ASOIAF but it is based on that time in Europe atleast far as their politics, technological advancement, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overall id go with a Valyrian Morning-Star. That would be ruthless.

Isent the weight part of the weapons destructive power? Wouldnt a valyrian steel morningstar be lighter, and therefore inflict less damage, than a steel one?

OT:

Aegon the conquerer had a sword.

Barristan used a sword both during WotNPK(in his duel versus Maelys) and during the Defiance of Duskendale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter what George says I don't think the show is 100 percent like real life warfare. Swords and swordsman will always be a bit overpowered because we have a romantic notion about swords, it is too connected to fantasy to separate it completely. Obviously the weapon that is best is dependent upon situation, training, and the number of men who are backing you up. There were many times in medieval warfare when a mace or spear were far more useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would seriously make the argument that spears are always more useful than swords: on a long march they make handy walking sticks, stuck in the ground point first you have a pole, three spears held together with cord makes an instant tripod to hang small game, two spears longwise wrapped in a cloak or tunic are an instant stretcher.

In combat, the spear can be a medium range missile weapon if thrown, or can be used in close quarter combat to provide a reach advantage over a sword, a spear can also be used as a quarterstaff if lethality isn't required.

On top of that, the spear is lighter and far cheaper than the sword.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would seriously make the argument that spears are always more useful than swords: on a long march they make handy walking sticks, stuck in the ground point first you have a pole, three spears held together with cord makes an instant tripod to hang small game, two spears longwise wrapped in a cloak or tunic are an instant stretcher.

In combat, the spear can be a medium range missile weapon if thrown, or can be used in close quarter combat to provide a reach advantage over a sword, a spear can also be used as a quarterstaff if lethality isn't required.

On top of that, the spear is lighter and far cheaper than the sword.

Be careful when you say always in military matters, if you throw the spear and miss your fucked try and pick it up with a sword in your face. Also its easy to deal with a spear with a sword, wait for the moment for the spearmen to overextend and cut the spearhead right off the shaft simple as that your weapon is gone and your dead. Spearmen overextend all the time its a key weakness to their fighting strategy. Cant break of the point of sword though. Other than that in matters of practicality such as weight and extra uses your right. Id consider spears better tools not weapons. The Best swordsmen will always beat the best spearmen IMO atleast but ive been surprised before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would seriously make the argument that spears are always more useful than swords: on a long march they make handy walking sticks, stuck in the ground point first you have a pole, three spears held together with cord makes an instant tripod to hang small game, two spears longwise wrapped in a cloak or tunic are an instant stretcher.

In combat, the spear can be a medium range missile weapon if thrown, or can be used in close quarter combat to provide a reach advantage over a sword, a spear can also be used as a quarterstaff if lethality isn't required.

On top of that, the spear is lighter and far cheaper than the sword.

Spears are brilliant in formation but out of it they are generally vulnerable to Swordsmen if they are skilled enough to knock the head out of the way and close in or even to horsemen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...