Top ten greatest weapons in history

[JJMUG]

A Katana? Kind of played, don't you think?

I was expecting something a bit more interesting.

And absolutely useless against chainmail.

Even though you could just thrust the blade into the chain mail, and it'll go through just like another sword. I mean all you need to penetrate chain mail is a pointy tip, and a strong blade which the katana has. And don't give me that oh, the katana's not a thrusting weapon bs. It's curved design doesn't hinder any of its abilities.

You have no idea what you're talking about here.

Next you'll be saying that Japanese Officers would cut through machine gun barrels with them in WWII.

The katana has next to no armour piercing capability. Hell, I don't know much about swords but I know that much. The blade is flat, and in order to get through the armour, you'd have to be pushing more of it away. If you're going for an armor piercing weapon, a stabbing weapon was best with a very thin blade, so you could get between plates and the like.

Your entire list is really nothing more then weapons you thought looked cool. These aren't the greatest weapons in history. Hell, you're picking weapons from all over time that really can not be compared with one another. Perhaps if you had this as some of the most iconic weapons of all time I'd give it to you, but greatest, no.

Just no.

Sure they are *rolls eyes* Let me simply state that I've wielded most(note the word Most) of these weapons, and drew up this list out of my experiences with them while still doing an ample amount of research for them. I'm judging these weapons based on their own merits, and effectiveness in their time period + what they did for future weapons. Back to the katana debate. No of course the katana isn't the best piecing weapon, but saying it has none of downright ignorant. The katana is plenty capable of piecing through light armor, and even if it cant piece through heavier armor the blade is still able to bones through the armor. After all you have to remember that the katana can still inflict 1000's of pounds of force in its slashes. In the long run armor really isn't that much o
f an issue for most longswords since they can still just inflict bunt force trauma.

1000's or pounds of force, site your sources. You have no idea what you are talking about, i posted videos of tests of a both katana and longsword, used against real chain mail, and others posted ARMA articles. It does not go through chain mail or plate armor, i has no advantage over shields. Your nothing more than a Weeabo.

 

[lacktheknack]

This is stupid

Oh, the horror that he should have a chance to put up a top ten list that you don't care about, and thus you feel to tell him how much you don't like it in three useless words!

TLR Reported.

 

[Webb5432]

The Katana is a good weapon and it deserves a place on the list, but number one? In my opinion, probably not. I only touched on katana work in my Bujinkan Ninjitsu classes, but here are a few issues:

1. The Tip: the difference between a katana and ninjato is the tip. Almost all strikes focus on this particular section of the blade. Ninjatos are actually katanas that have been broken and thrown away by samurai.

2. The Side: English rapiers and smallswords, sabers and cutlassess all use the flat of the blade to block and parry incoming attacks. Try that with a katana, and it will break.

3. Cost: Not a big thing, but when you think about it, the money and work put into a good katana makes them quality weapons, rare to find and difficult to get a hold of without connections. And while one sword is always nice, a bloody army is always a welcome addition.

4. Training: To make the katana an effective weapon, years of training are required to grasp even just the basics. And techniques are constantly being modified and evolved.


So, I would, in my opinion, put katana at number two. And possibly put COMBAT TRAINING as number one. Heck, in my training, we were taught how to stop a swordsman while unarmed. (Haven't mastered it yet. got hit with the bloody bokken repeatedly.) And counter knife and gun work can be fun.


Oh! A suggestion: a stick/staff. You don't wanna know the crazy crap Japanese martial Artists can pull with a hanbo (3-foot staff)

I have one minor problem with number 2. A katana's not gonna break if you try that. The hardness of the blade can deal with that kind of punishment. I can understand peoples issues with me putting a katana at number one, and most of the people who complain are simply hate the massive hyperbole surrounding the weapon's acclaimed greatness. You seem to be one of the few that aren't severally disgruntled by that choice. Though the reason I put the katana at number one was because its versatility as a sword, and usefulness as a weapon based on my experience with it, and research I did on all the other weapons, but really I think any weapon you put at the top as the best would have this kind of controversy since there are so many weapons to choose from for people to argue about.

I'm not disgruntled. Weapons are tools, and you use the right tools for the job. I dunno if there is a specific weapon in existence that can ever go to the number one slot constantly, but then this is just your opinion (or possibly a collaboration of those closest to you). Pick whatever. And i do like the katana. Like you said, it is pretty much the pinnacle of sword engineering. And without it, my ninjitsu classes would be much more boring.

To be honest, I've seen so many top ten lists of varying results that I usually argue with people (especially over the net) because people have their opinions colored. You seem to know your stuff, so I won't disrespect what you say, but I do apologize for assuming you were just someone who got bored and posted their opinions in an ignorant matter (I do it sometimes, yes, and everyone does, but I'm very happy to see that there are people out there who still research their stuff).

 

[Knifewounds]

Seriously, Katana at #1 and saying it's perfect in every way just makes you look like a troll and/or weaboo, neither of which are a favorable status. Any well made sword can be just as "perfect", a massive part of a swords killability is user skill. A guy with a crowbar can kill a guy with a katana if they don't know what they're doing.

Yea, I hate engaging in hyperbole for that exact reason(in hind sight I shouldn't have said perfect knowing people like yourself would call me out on that), and yes skill has a massive part to do with things, but a weapons general design can sometimes hinder its abilities especially when other weapons can exploit those hinderencess. The katana simply had the least of these issues meaning an expert would have the least amount of difficulties using it.

 

[EMFCRACKSHOT]

Also, and finally on-topic...
the two greatest weapons to date are:
1. Nuclear ICBMs
and
2. Long-range Artillery.

May i be so bold as to ask why you say long range artillery? I mean, i can definitely see its importance-it's had a fundamental role in warfare for generations-but there are definitely weapons i would place ahead of it in terms of importance.

 

[GrimTuesday]

#1 This one will likely get some people confused but I stand by my choice that the ax is the best weapon in human history. This weapon has been around almost since humans first discovered tools not only for doing work to survive, but also to wage war on other people. The ax is very versatile as it can be used as both a cutting weapon, a puncturing weapon (depending on the type of ax you are using), and a smashing weapon.

Honestly, I'd actually put the spear ahead of the ax. They have similar levels of survival utility, but they're even easier to make ("sharp thing on a stick" construction; unless you're counting "edged rock held in hand" as an ax, of course), easier to train people to use, easier to use in massed combat, greater range, and probably even have more methods of attack. This includes several methods of stabbing, obviously, but also swinging (with the right spearhead), bashing (it's basically a staff, after all), and throwing (barring the francisca and tomahawk, not something most axes have). Hell, spears are technically still used today, if you count bayonet combat.

But spears are so boring and no fun unless one is on horseback. Axes on the other hand are fun all the time.

Huh. I'd totally forgotten that they're awesome horseback weapons, too!

By the way, you hear that sound? That's basically every army in history spontaneously rising from their graves to speak with you.

With Zhao Yun commanding them.

HAHA If you want to see some awesome spear work go watch Red Cliff. It's about Liu Bei's little rebellion during which Zhao Yun was one of his main generals.

I stand by my statement that axes are cooler and therefore they beat spears.

Still, though...

If this weapon was not the best suited for the purpose, why did it not cease to be used as a killing tool until guns came around?

What about weapons that didn't cease being used when guns came around?

Spoiler: ^_^

I've always been bothered when people say that all they would bring into a melee fight is a knife. If you ask me all you're going to get out of that is my warhammer turning your face into goo while your knife is stuck in my shield. (I like heavy weapons that make people go splat)

Assuming you're fighting on open ground with room to swing, and you actually hit the guy with the knife. And why would he be attacking your shield? Unless you're talking, like, a buckler or something.

I'm thinking more like a Scottish targe, you know the ones with the huge fucking spikes on the front. But your point is valid about the space issue, although I don't know of many melee fights that take place in small corridors. Also it's not that hard to swing a hammer (most warhammers weighted about 5-8lbs.) in a confined space.

 

[thedoclc]

If we go by the "own merits, doing what they're made for," per the OP, the rapier and other smallswords are absolutely, positively missing from this list. (I'd also consider weapons which are meant to be used together as a single "weapon," and that would put hoplon + dari + xyphos and scutum + gladius + pilum very close to the top of the list. So I'll treat it as "rapier + main gauche or buckler or pistol".)

The rapier was not designed as a military arm nor as an armor breaker. The reason was because at the time of its development, armor was very, very quickly disappearing from warfare and civilians don't use armor. The rapier was never intended as a military weapon; it was a sidearm for civilian use. These objections aren't well-suited to this list.

What the rapier did do was overcome the cut-and-thrust weapons of its era handily, eventually forcing anyone who wanted to survive a sword fight to adjust what they used. Cutting weapons were very quickly replaced in Europe because hold-outs who rejected the rapier and linear fencing died in droves. A rapier's lunging attack and ability to disengage underneath or over an opponent's hands made it extraordinarily difficult to stop and kept someone using a rapier at a safe distance. Paired with a main gauche and buckler, it retained defensive capability even in a committed attack. If an opponent with a heavier weapon attempted to parry, the blade could be slipped under their weapon with a swift wrist movement and the same attack continued. And while the wounds dealt were hardly the spectacular gorefests of Deadliest Warrior, let's remember a popped lung was just as fatal as decapitation back before modern medicine, and a hell of a worse way to go.

Estimates of the number of nobles killed by these swords gets into the very high tens of thousands. How many common folk were killed in the street or by highwaymen with these weapons I can't imagine anyone can tally.

 

[Chunga the Great]

My AR-15 has upwards of 20,000 rounds through it, and it's never jammed once. Why? Because I clean it every month, every time I shoot it, and I keep it well lubed. I also use good ammunition, none of that Wolf crap. It is more of a rifle than the AK-47, which is seem more as a machine gun than a rifle, and it can provide tighter groupings than it's counterpart. It is extremely adaptable for any mission you put it through as well.

Any gun will perform well in a controlled environment or firing range, but if you listen to stories about the conditions in Vietnam and other areas where the AR-15 has seen service, even on military bases, you will understand that moist conditions and mud wil seriously impair the effectiveness of any firearm. The AK-47's wide and open reciever was very helpful in keeping mud and dirt buildup to a minimum.

 

[loc978]

May i be so bold as to ask why you say long range artillery? I mean, i can definitely see its importance-it's had a fundamental role in warfare for generations-but there are definitely weapons i would place ahead of it in terms of importance.

You may. Long-range artillery has, from its inception, been the most instrumental part of breaking the enemy's ability to make war. Among modern war fighters, it is known as the "King of Battle" and with good reason. If an artillery unit knows where their enemy lives, they can destroy that enemy's home, weaponry, and kill a large percentage of them without exposing anyone on their own side to the risk of direct combat.
If one side has well-stocked artillery, and the other has no artillery... ten-to-one odds are child's play to overcome.

 

[NeutralDrow]

I have one minor problem with number 2. A katana's not gonna break if you try that. The hardness of the blade can deal with that kind of punishment.

Very briefly, assuming you end your fights very quickly, and you're not averse to polishing away all the chips and fractures that will accumulate after every single use (which katana are prone to anyway, making them very high-maintenance weapons). No sword is indestructible, and the only damage katana are genuinely resistant to is bending, by virtue of their hard edge/soft core construction. I mean, seriously...

After all you have to remember that the katana can still inflict 1000's of pounds of force in its slashes. In the long run armor really isn't that much of an issue for most longswords since they can still just inflict bunt force trauma.

For a self-described weapons enthusiast, the fact that you're either ignoring the consequences of edge damage (or worse, ignorant of the concept) is surprising, as is your lack of knowledge on armor. Yes, you can technically just ignore armor and treat your sword like a hammer, and possibly even do well with it...assuming you're dangerously irresponsible enough and don't want your sword to stay effective for very long.

I can understand peoples issues with me putting a katana at number one, and most of the people who complain are simply hate the massive hyperbole surrounding the weapon's acclaimed greatness.

Um...dude?

Honestly I believe it is impossible to create a sword as perfect as the katana.

You're not really qualified to talk about hyperbole.

Though the reason I put the katana at number one was because its versatility as a sword, and usefulness as a weapon based on my experience with it, and research I did on all the other weapons, but really I think any weapon you put at the top as the best would have this kind of controversy since there are so many weapons to choose from for people to argue about.

That's the problem, it's not a very versatile weapon. Even "slashing and thrusting" is just a sliding scale that all swords fall on, and katanas are still very heavily on the "slashing" side; they don't slash and thrust equally well, by pure physical mechanics. Hell, the katana isn't even as versatile as some other Japanese sword types, simply by virtue of their being places without enough room to use it (if you're fighting in a building, you'd want a wakizashi or other kodachi at largest).

Honestly, though, <url=http://www.thearma.org/essays/longsword-and-katana.html>someone else beat me to it.

 

[thedoclc]

My AR-15 has upwards of 20,000 rounds through it, and it's never jammed once. Why? Because I clean it every month, every time I shoot it, and I keep it well lubed. I also use good ammunition, none of that Wolf crap. It is more of a rifle than the AK-47, which is seem more as a machine gun than a rifle, and it can provide tighter groupings than it's counterpart. It is extremely adaptable for any mission you put it through as well.

Any gun will perform well in a controlled environment or firing range, but if you listen to stories about the conditions in Vietnam and other areas where the AR-15 has seen service, even on military bases, you will understand that moist conditions and mud wil seriously impair the effectiveness of any firearm. The AK-47's wide and open reciever was very helpful in keeping mud and dirt buildup to a minimum.

While it is true that models based on that frame do have reliability issues when muddy or poorly maintained, this problem is overcome with maintenance. The countries which use these models are also industrialized nations able to provide the service, support, and maintenance to overcome reliability problems once the problems were recognized.

The M-16 and later adaptations of that rotating bolt action are never going to get out from under the stigma of early failures of support and maintenance which occurred early in Vietnam, but these issues are corrected today. Mine did not jam or misfire once in two tours and two years of garrison duty. I've no idea how many rounds I put through it, but well into the tens of thousands, in mud, rain, desert, sand, and mountains. That's because I was able to devote the time needed to keep that weapon in order. Any disciplined, well-supplied outfit which keeps their arms very well maintained will find them accurate, easy to handle, reliable, and damn lethal. And there's the rub. Disciplined, well-supplied outfit.

No amount of end-user maintenance can overcome the AK-47's inaccuracy and poor handling.

That said, I can't honestly call one better, only better for the current task at hand.

 

[Echo136]

I would say one of the greatest military accomplishments in history would be the bow and arrow. Completely changed the course of history and the way wars were fought.

 

[thedoclc]

May i be so bold as to ask why you say long range artillery? I mean, i can definitely see its importance-it's had a fundamental role in warfare for generations-but there are definitely weapons i would place ahead of it in terms of importance.

You may. Long-range artillery has, from its inception, been the most instrumental part of breaking the enemy's ability to make war. Among modern war fighters, it is known as the "King of Battle" and with good reason. If an artillery unit knows where their enemy lives, they can destroy that enemy's home, weaponry, and kill a large percentage of them without exposing anyone on their own side to the risk of direct combat.
If one side has well-stocked artillery, and the other has no artillery... ten-to-one odds are child's play to overcome.

There's a reason the French labeled their cannons, "The last argument of kings." Ultima Ratio Regum. However, the OP was asking about weapons used by a single individual.

 

[Elf Defiler Korgan]

Bone club, bronze spear.

Oh yeaaaah. Thousands of years of use (who knows how far we could go back for bone and wood cudgels), tried'n'true in taking down man or beast.

 

[Whitenail]

The atom bomb's a pretty badass weapon of destruction.

Kudos to your list, looks like you have alot of knowledge of weapons.

 

[MercurySteam]

#8. M1911A1: This gun give birth to the modern pistol design, and could arguably be considered the greatest innovation in pistol history. With almost 100 years of military service there no doubt that the M1911A1 has some amazing lasting power behind it. So what makes this gun so great? Well, because it was the first magazine-fed handgun, and it was fired powerful 45. caliber rounds. So why is it so low on the list you may ask? Well, it does have an issue with jamming, and its recoil hinders its accuracy which bumps it down several notches.

All those who play BF: BC2 can vouch for this.

 

[NeutralDrow]

HAHA If you want to see some awesome spear work go watch Red Cliff. It's about Liu Bei's little rebellion during which Zhao Yun was one of his main generals.

I stand by my statement that axes are cooler and therefore they beat spears.

I still do need to see that. In the meantime, I've played that battle. Not as Zhao Yun, though; I prefer Guan Yu over him.

And clearly the only way would could settle this is open combat. My yari against whatever axe you pick (other than <url=http://www.studiodink.com/Images/Dynasty_Warriors/DW4/Xu-Huang.jpg>Xu Huang's; shit be cheatin', yo). Long as we're not using Fire Emblem mechanics, my advantage!

Still, though...

If this weapon was not the best suited for the purpose, why did it not cease to be used as a killing tool until guns came around?

What about weapons that didn't cease being used when guns came around?

Spoiler: ^_^

I've always been bothered when people say that all they would bring into a melee fight is a knife. If you ask me all you're going to get out of that is my warhammer turning your face into goo while your knife is stuck in my shield. (I like heavy weapons that make people go splat)

Assuming you're fighting on open ground with room to swing, and you actually hit the guy with the knife. And why would he be attacking your shield? Unless you're talking, like, a buckler or something.

I'm thinking more like a Scottish targe, you know the ones with the huge fucking spikes on the front. But your point is valid about the space issue, although I don't know of many melee fights that take place in small corridors. Also it's not that hard to swing a hammer (most warhammers weighted about 5-8lbs.) in a confined space.

To be honest, the only times I see people speak about the usefulness of knives is in modern combat situations, which is what I was thinking of.

I'd pick a spear or an iron staff, myself.

 

[acutekat]

May i be so bold as to ask why you say long range artillery? I mean, i can definitely see its importance-it's had a fundamental role in warfare for generations-but there are definitely weapons i would place ahead of it in terms of importance.

You may. Long-range artillery has, from its inception, been the most instrumental part of breaking the enemy's ability to make war. Among modern war fighters, it is known as the "King of Battle" and with good reason. If an artillery unit knows where their enemy lives, they can destroy that enemy's home, weaponry, and kill a large percentage of them without exposing anyone on their own side to the risk of direct combat.
If one side has well-stocked artillery, and the other has no artillery... ten-to-one odds are child's play to overcome.

Unless of course the side without artillery has air power

Air power destroys artillery
AAA can deter only so much air power. Case in point North vietnam during Linebacker II . Hanoi was supposed to be impregnable from the air. Having the most advanced anti air defenses at the time. They ran out of Surface to Air Missiles, ran out, and they only took down 15 B-52s.

and plus artillery is rooted to one spot and it takes time to reposition a battery

this could easily be over run if the attacking side (the ones going against the artillery) are highly mechanized ( this is why tanks were able to make breakthroughs in WWI)

not to be dissing artillery it is a vital component in a conventional modern war and can provide coordinated ground support for far longer than single air units, but in a pinch I would rather have an A10 trying to take out a tank I am currently engaged with than a 105 Howitzer lobing shells that could hit me just as easily as the tank

 

[runedeadthA]

Oh you have to have to put in a colt revolver. practically started the entire multi munnition weapon system with any reliability. That should be at least 8-10.

Ah the good old Colt. I remember playing a battlefield 1942 mod that was a realistic sim of the American war of independence. The normal infantry would fire a shot from their rifles then you would have to wait 20 seconds for the damn things to reload (Very humorous with bots, they would all lie down in front of each other, occasionally popping away). The Cavalryman however was armed with the Colt Revolver, and with 6 rounds and a quickish reload he kinda blew everyone else away.