Top ten greatest weapons in history

[Knifewounds]

Before I read the thread I knew katana would be listed as #1. It is worth noting that during the westernization of Japan rapiers/sabers were quickly overtaking katanas. The curved blade is an excellent design, good for swift movement and deeper cuts, but is much less effective against armor. When it bares down too it though, when armor is of little concern, the fastest wins out (all other factors being comparable). When armor is a factor, you want mass and leverage (while retaining balance and versatility). This is where the honorably mentioned claymore shines. Penatrating power without the unwieldy balance of an axe or polearm (though some polearms were every bit as good and in some situations much better, though the greatsword was fielded specifically to take out the long-shafted types). Katana is a good balance to be sure, though. There is no "King of Swords" so to speak. Many are situational or there wouldnt be such a variety even within cultures.

I would love to hear some more feed back from other sword fanatics.

I think the main reason katanas were over taken in Japan wasn't because rapiers/sabers were better, but that they were cheaper, and easier to make, and the heavy western influence drove many Japanese people away from their own culture, though this statement is just idol speculation as are 99% of my replies. You do have a very good point, there is no king of swords, and most are situational, but out of all the swords I think the katana could handle the most situations, but let it be known that the Claymore is very close to the katana, and that it, and a few other swords like the kilij, and rapier would have been on this list if I didn't want just one sword on it. I knew people would complain about the katana being on the list no less than being number 1, but it was one of those weapons that I'd get hated on for leaving in, or leaving out so it was kinda hard to put it there at all.

The first part is true, one Katana takes approximately 6 months at least to fabricate. Most Japanese military soldiers had a family sword passed through the generations, and anyone who didn't was provided one by the military, though most of the people who ended up getting one that way had wished that they had a family sword, because the military Katana were sub-par because they had to be made in bulk. As for the western swords, Rapier was forced on the citizens for the fact that Westerners thought (and still think) that they, and everything they do is superior. Using a Rapier was a different combat style entirely and needed teaching, while it was more efficent to have the citizens use what they already knew. Sabers were forced on for close to the same reason, Western civilization believed it to be similar to a Katana, so they thought that not much change needed to happen. (and pardon me for asking, but just exactly how is a Claymore like a Katana?)
There's more but I don't want to bore anyone.

Heh, I should elaborate on the katana Claymore thing. I didn't mean the claymore was like the katana I meant the they were almost equals as weapons. Very interesting comment though.

Studies, combined with the fabrication and forging of bladed weapons that I do and the training in the blades that comes with it, you tend to learn quite a lot. (well, except for the "Custom Fantasy Blades" that I do, mainly for fun/sometimes commisions... there's no real training style for that)

Yea, I have a great collection of practical use weapons, and bokken to practice with. I only own one fantasy sword though which happens to be a massive buster sword from FF7 http://api.ning.com/files/GgczIXFRODUbDq5MIVxBxBL4Y9gqrJn1ev1VOE33chvZzBwZHy*5JSyBjVaFsI3--bWvZcY9woUZdMMMVavFT8kk8SKZrjIN/swords3.jpg I own a copy of the top one.

 

[spartan231490]

Before I read the thread I knew katana would be listed as #1. It is worth noting that during the westernization of Japan rapiers/sabers were quickly overtaking katanas. The curved blade is an excellent design, good for swift movement and deeper cuts, but is much less effective against armor. When it bares down too it though, when armor is of little concern, the fastest wins out (all other factors being comparable). When armor is a factor, you want mass and leverage (while retaining balance and versatility). This is where the honorably mentioned claymore shines. Penatrating power without the unwieldy balance of an axe or polearm (though some polearms were every bit as good and in some situations much better, though the greatsword was fielded specifically to take out the long-shafted types). Katana is a good balance to be sure, though. There is no "King of Swords" so to speak. Many are situational or there wouldnt be such a variety even within cultures.

I would love to hear some more feed back from other sword fanatics.

I think that the "mongolian longsword" as I have heard it called might be the military king of swords. It has an extremely lengthy hilt which allows for a high manuverability and combined with a thick, curved blade combine to give a great potential for slashing and chopping damage. It's not very good at piercing, but it could function if it had to. I believe it was also relatively cheap and quick to produce. I was told that it was created when the mongolians combined blade features from the west, the east, and the middle east to create a powerful military weapon.
Only heard this from one probably unreliable source so that if anyone notices anything wrong, i'd be interested in hearing the things I got wrong.

 

[Shadows Inc.]

Disclaimer: This following article contains trolling gold against weaboos. If you are offended by a portrayal of Japanese "culture" from a source other than Rurouni Kenshin, please kill yourself.

A katana was mostly an piece of art, not a weapon.

-The edge was brittle, so you had to akwardly toggle between blocking with the back and attacking with the front.

-The weapon was double-handed, which meant you couldn't use a shield.

-They were impractical to make in large numbers and preserve quality, which hampers their use as a military weapon.

Bottom line: They're good to look at, but nothing more. Which is why they have such a heavy internet following. Most katana fans are 300lb WoW-addicts who would die within the first three seconds of an actual swordfight.

I'm a katana fan... and a broadsword fan... and a rapier fan, and kilij fan, and basically every sword ever made fan... yet I'm a physically fit healthy young male(mostly from practicing how to use each of these swords). I do have to love your broad generalizations though. Though you did give me an idea for my next list that's sure to piss people off. I need to do one of military weapons via tanks aircraft physically enhanced super monkeys, ya know, be all legit with it.

"Legit"?

That was kinda a joke. Next time I make a list I'm going to attempt to make it less controversial, so it seems more legit. Though that last statement was supposed to be ironic. like how I state "via tanks, aircraft physically, Enhanced Super Monkeys, ya know" and then say "be all legit with it"

No, it's not that. It's just that made-up words and shortened words are kind of a pet-peeve of mine. Combine that with bad grammar, and you'll be hearing a fairly large lecture-storm in a few seconds.

 

[Knifewounds]

The pen.

Saves lives and ends wars.

And can make a decent weapon when honed to a fine point and dipped in fast acting poison, then thrown from 10 feet away.

Or you could just walk up behind someone and stab them (in the skull for me because it's more fun), there's no need to get too technical. Humans are a very, very easy thing to kill.

Oh I know that. Not even my idea. I was quoting a comedian whose name escapes me at the moment. I was trying to be funny and (apparently) failing.
And why can't I be technical? What's the point of killing people if it can't be done in an elaborate and unnecessarily complicated manner?

Don't worry dude. Your atempt at being funny worked on me, but I find great humor in irony. Honestly you comment makes me think of a war where armies had to take state tests and whoever had the highest grade point average won, but then America would lose every war.

 

[Knifewounds]

Disclaimer: This following article contains trolling gold against weaboos. If you are offended by a portrayal of Japanese "culture" from a source other than Rurouni Kenshin, please kill yourself.

A katana was mostly an piece of art, not a weapon.

-The edge was brittle, so you had to akwardly toggle between blocking with the back and attacking with the front.

-The weapon was double-handed, which meant you couldn't use a shield.

-They were impractical to make in large numbers and preserve quality, which hampers their use as a military weapon.

Bottom line: They're good to look at, but nothing more. Which is why they have such a heavy internet following. Most katana fans are 300lb WoW-addicts who would die within the first three seconds of an actual swordfight.

I'm a katana fan... and a broadsword fan... and a rapier fan, and kilij fan, and basically every sword ever made fan... yet I'm a physically fit healthy young male(mostly from practicing how to use each of these swords). I do have to love your broad generalizations though. Though you did give me an idea for my next list that's sure to piss people off. I need to do one of military weapons via tanks aircraft physically enhanced super monkeys, ya know, be all legit with it.

"Legit"?

That was kinda a joke. Next time I make a list I'm going to attempt to make it less controversial, so it seems more legit. Though that last statement was supposed to be ironic. like how I state "via tanks, aircraft physically, Enhanced Super Monkeys, ya know" and then say "be all legit with it"

No, it's not that. It's just that made-up words and shortened words are kind of a pet-peeve of mine. Combine that with bad grammar, and you'll be hearing a fairly large lecture-storm in a few seconds.

Lol, sorry dude, my grammar gets worse the more I write.

 

[Shadows Inc.]

Before I read the thread I knew katana would be listed as #1. It is worth noting that during the westernization of Japan rapiers/sabers were quickly overtaking katanas. The curved blade is an excellent design, good for swift movement and deeper cuts, but is much less effective against armor. When it bares down too it though, when armor is of little concern, the fastest wins out (all other factors being comparable). When armor is a factor, you want mass and leverage (while retaining balance and versatility). This is where the honorably mentioned claymore shines. Penatrating power without the unwieldy balance of an axe or polearm (though some polearms were every bit as good and in some situations much better, though the greatsword was fielded specifically to take out the long-shafted types). Katana is a good balance to be sure, though. There is no "King of Swords" so to speak. Many are situational or there wouldnt be such a variety even within cultures.

I would love to hear some more feed back from other sword fanatics.

I think the main reason katanas were over taken in Japan wasn't because rapiers/sabers were better, but that they were cheaper, and easier to make, and the heavy western influence drove many Japanese people away from their own culture, though this statement is just idol speculation as are 99% of my replies. You do have a very good point, there is no king of swords, and most are situational, but out of all the swords I think the katana could handle the most situations, but let it be known that the Claymore is very close to the katana, and that it, and a few other swords like the kilij, and rapier would have been on this list if I didn't want just one sword on it. I knew people would complain about the katana being on the list no less than being number 1, but it was one of those weapons that I'd get hated on for leaving in, or leaving out so it was kinda hard to put it there at all.

The first part is true, one Katana takes approximately 6 months at least to fabricate. Most Japanese military soldiers had a family sword passed through the generations, and anyone who didn't was provided one by the military, though most of the people who ended up getting one that way had wished that they had a family sword, because the military Katana were sub-par because they had to be made in bulk. As for the western swords, Rapier was forced on the citizens for the fact that Westerners thought (and still think) that they, and everything they do is superior. Using a Rapier was a different combat style entirely and needed teaching, while it was more efficent to have the citizens use what they already knew. Sabers were forced on for close to the same reason, Western civilization believed it to be similar to a Katana, so they thought that not much change needed to happen. (and pardon me for asking, but just exactly how is a Claymore like a Katana?)
There's more but I don't want to bore anyone.

Heh, I should elaborate on the katana Claymore thing. I didn't mean the claymore was like the katana I meant the they were almost equals as weapons. Very interesting comment though.

Studies, combined with the fabrication and forging of bladed weapons that I do and the training in the blades that comes with it, you tend to learn quite a lot. (well, except for the "Custom Fantasy Blades" that I do, mainly for fun/sometimes commisions... there's no real training style for that)

Yea, I have a great collection of practical use weapons, and bokken to practice with. I only own one fantasy sword though which happens to be a massive buster sword from FF7 http://api.ning.com/files/GgczIXFRODUbDq5MIVxBxBL4Y9gqrJn1ev1VOE33chvZzBwZHy*5JSyBjVaFsI3--bWvZcY9woUZdMMMVavFT8kk8SKZrjIN/swords3.jpg I own a copy of the top one.

I have two Katana Bokken, one Wakizashi Bokken, and one Ninjato Bokken.
I tried forging a cloudbuster, but it didn't turn out the way I wanted and since the iron was already used, I couldn't use the steel, so I threw it away. I never tried making another one.

 

[Shadows Inc.]

The pen.

Saves lives and ends wars.

And can make a decent weapon when honed to a fine point and dipped in fast acting poison, then thrown from 10 feet away.

Or you could just walk up behind someone and stab them (in the skull for me because it's more fun), there's no need to get too technical. Humans are a very, very easy thing to kill.

Oh I know that. Not even my idea. I was quoting a comedian whose name escapes me at the moment. I was trying to be funny and (apparently) failing.
And why can't I be technical? What's the point of killing people if it can't be done in an elaborate and unnecessarily complicated manner?

Don't worry dude. Your atempt at being funny worked on me, but I find great humor in irony. Honestly you comment makes me think of a war where armies had to take state tests and whoever had the highest grade point average won, but then America would lose every war.

Not to say I didn't find it humorous... I just seem to take things quite literally most of the time. Sometimes it's a burden.

More to the point, I found Knifewounds joke to be more humorous, simply for the fact that it is true.

 

[Brawndo]

I noticed as couple factual discrepancies, and I want to make sure they are addressed.

For #10, I believe you confused the crossbow with the longbow. The crossbow was a complex, expensive, and hard to use weapon. Just reloading it required exact form and a huge amount of upper and lower body strength. It was usually only used by expensive, well trained mercenaries who could actually hit a moving target with it. The longbow, on the other hand, could be used by people ranging from a peasant to a trained archer. The arrows used by long bowmen had a long, dense tip that could rip through armor, essentially making knights and plate armor obsolete.

Actually, allow me to fix your "discrepancies":

- Longbows took YEARS of constant training to get good at using them. An untrained peasant could not just pick up a longbow with 80-120 lbs of pull and accurately fire it

- Crossbows were extremely easy to use in comparison - even women and children could fire them during sieges in an emergency. Several weeks of training could make the average person a crossbow expert

- Early crossbows WERE difficult to reload, but with the development of mechanical winches, it only became a matter of winding the weapon; this also allowed for very powerful crossbows variants like the arbalest with tension pulls well above what any person could handle

- Crossbows have much more penetrating power than even the heaviest longbows

- Crossbows can be used to "cover" an area or prisoners much easier than longbows; once cocked, a crossbow's tension could be held indefinitely until fired. However, longbowmen could not hold an 80+ pound draw for very long

- The arrows you are referring to are bodkin arrows, with a very sharp point. They were extremely effective against chainmail, but they were actually quite useless against good plate armor at any range over 50 feet. For example, people have misconceptions about the Battle of Agincourt during the Hundred Years War. The French knights were very heavily armored, and took very few causalities English arrows. The reason the French were slaughtered in that battle is because the English arrow volleys wounded and killed their mounts, and forced the French to march on foot in heavy armor several hundred yards through muddy marshland terrain. By the time the reached the English lines they were absolutely exhausted and their battle lines packed so dense they could barely swing their weapons. They were picked to pieces by the much more nimble and rested English men-at-arms and longbowmen wielding daggers and swords

 

[Knifewounds]

Before I read the thread I knew katana would be listed as #1. It is worth noting that during the westernization of Japan rapiers/sabers were quickly overtaking katanas. The curved blade is an excellent design, good for swift movement and deeper cuts, but is much less effective against armor. When it bares down too it though, when armor is of little concern, the fastest wins out (all other factors being comparable). When armor is a factor, you want mass and leverage (while retaining balance and versatility). This is where the honorably mentioned claymore shines. Penatrating power without the unwieldy balance of an axe or polearm (though some polearms were every bit as good and in some situations much better, though the greatsword was fielded specifically to take out the long-shafted types). Katana is a good balance to be sure, though. There is no "King of Swords" so to speak. Many are situational or there wouldnt be such a variety even within cultures.

I would love to hear some more feed back from other sword fanatics.

I think the main reason katanas were over taken in Japan wasn't because rapiers/sabers were better, but that they were cheaper, and easier to make, and the heavy western influence drove many Japanese people away from their own culture, though this statement is just idol speculation as are 99% of my replies. You do have a very good point, there is no king of swords, and most are situational, but out of all the swords I think the katana could handle the most situations, but let it be known that the Claymore is very close to the katana, and that it, and a few other swords like the kilij, and rapier would have been on this list if I didn't want just one sword on it. I knew people would complain about the katana being on the list no less than being number 1, but it was one of those weapons that I'd get hated on for leaving in, or leaving out so it was kinda hard to put it there at all.

The first part is true, one Katana takes approximately 6 months at least to fabricate. Most Japanese military soldiers had a family sword passed through the generations, and anyone who didn't was provided one by the military, though most of the people who ended up getting one that way had wished that they had a family sword, because the military Katana were sub-par because they had to be made in bulk. As for the western swords, Rapier was forced on the citizens for the fact that Westerners thought (and still think) that they, and everything they do is superior. Using a Rapier was a different combat style entirely and needed teaching, while it was more efficent to have the citizens use what they already knew. Sabers were forced on for close to the same reason, Western civilization believed it to be similar to a Katana, so they thought that not much change needed to happen. (and pardon me for asking, but just exactly how is a Claymore like a Katana?)
There's more but I don't want to bore anyone.

Heh, I should elaborate on the katana Claymore thing. I didn't mean the claymore was like the katana I meant the they were almost equals as weapons. Very interesting comment though.

Studies, combined with the fabrication and forging of bladed weapons that I do and the training in the blades that comes with it, you tend to learn quite a lot. (well, except for the "Custom Fantasy Blades" that I do, mainly for fun/sometimes commisions... there's no real training style for that)

Yea, I have a great collection of practical use weapons, and bokken to practice with. I only own one fantasy sword though which happens to be a massive buster sword from FF7 http://api.ning.com/files/GgczIXFRODUbDq5MIVxBxBL4Y9gqrJn1ev1VOE33chvZzBwZHy*5JSyBjVaFsI3--bWvZcY9woUZdMMMVavFT8kk8SKZrjIN/swords3.jpg I own a copy of the top one.

I have two Katana Bokken, one Wakizashi Bokken, and one Ninjato Bokken.
I tried forging a cloudbuster, but it didn't turn out the way I wanted and since the iron was already used, I couldn't use the steel, so I threw it away. I never tried making another one.

Damn, sounds like a pain to just through away something you worked on. Though I'm a perfectionist too, for example I'm a game designer, I've taken weeks worth of work, and trashed it cause I couldn't work around a bug(which was the characters faces would turn into stretched out polygons)

 

[GrimTuesday]

you're right, that is a polearm. Well in that case I'll just get myself a nice heavy waraxe and call it good.

Works for me.

Or, it would, except...

The problem with spears is once your opponent gets inside the reach of the spear it is very hard to continue to use the spear and still fight effectively, which is where my shield comes in.

Not really. I'm a wizard, you see. Once you get "inside my reach," I magically turn my spear into a staff.

The shield would be a problem, admittedly, but at the very least, it would mean your weapon is tied up, and your avenue of attack predictable, especially if you had the spike.

That's cheating, no one ever said anything about magic (which is for cowards by the way, HARRUMPH)

I changed my weapon, so now it's not tied up except for tied up in your belly, mwahaha.

True, now that you have a genuinely close-range weapon, I'd have more trouble. Hmm...

If you have a nice set of heavy plate just charging into the fray is a great idea though, it makes it even more fun.

Well...assuming you have a weapon, of course. With plate armor, a knife wielder would be one of the four people you wouldn't just want to charge at unarmed (the others being the mace-wielder, the crossbowman, and the gunman), since they can exploit your one weakness. You'd have to be a pretty good unarmed combatant to do that without fear.

...actually, <url=http://www.thearma.org/essays/G&WinRF.htm>that's not all that implausible, come to think of it.

I used to wrestle in high school (I was quite good, might have won State had I not mega messed up my ankles during football season) and I also did well in the Greco-Roman wrestling I did for a few years in the off season for whats it worth pertaining to the article. One time I cracked three of a guys ribs with a bear hug during a match.

 

[Knifewounds]

The pen.

Saves lives and ends wars.

And can make a decent weapon when honed to a fine point and dipped in fast acting poison, then thrown from 10 feet away.

Or you could just walk up behind someone and stab them (in the skull for me because it's more fun), there's no need to get too technical. Humans are a very, very easy thing to kill.

Oh I know that. Not even my idea. I was quoting a comedian whose name escapes me at the moment. I was trying to be funny and (apparently) failing.
And why can't I be technical? What's the point of killing people if it can't be done in an elaborate and unnecessarily complicated manner?

Don't worry dude. Your atempt at being funny worked on me, but I find great humor in irony. Honestly you comment makes me think of a war where armies had to take state tests and whoever had the highest grade point average won, but then America would lose every war.

Not to say I didn't find it humorous... I just seem to take things quite literally most of the time. Sometimes it's a burden.

More to the point, I found Knifewounds joke to be more humorous, simply for the fact that it is true.

My humor will wear on people after a while. Its mostly ironic wit, and jokes constructed like this "(insert silliness here) and (insert realistic comparison to the silliness)"

 

[Brawndo]

#4. RPG7
Yes, it is a useful anti-tank weapon, but the problem is that you have to be quite close. The small fins on the projectile itself don't really help in keeping it going straight and it will shoot off into random tangents. Many of them are also duds, not exploding when they hit something, or even not even firing out of the tube.

You play too much CoD.

People put scopes on them for a reason.

RPG-7s with conventional warheads are all but useless against any main battle tank made since the 1960s. All they can do is damage external components like periscopes or mounted machine guns. RPG warheads were also prone to wobbling and very inaccurate over 300 meters.

The Russians have much more advanced shit today. RPG-29s with tandem-charge warheads and Sagger anti-tank guided missiles are much more dangerous. Fortunately for US troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, these kinds of weapons aren't very common in the hands of the Taliban or insurgents.

 

[Shadows Inc.]

Before I read the thread I knew katana would be listed as #1. It is worth noting that during the westernization of Japan rapiers/sabers were quickly overtaking katanas. The curved blade is an excellent design, good for swift movement and deeper cuts, but is much less effective against armor. When it bares down too it though, when armor is of little concern, the fastest wins out (all other factors being comparable). When armor is a factor, you want mass and leverage (while retaining balance and versatility). This is where the honorably mentioned claymore shines. Penatrating power without the unwieldy balance of an axe or polearm (though some polearms were every bit as good and in some situations much better, though the greatsword was fielded specifically to take out the long-shafted types). Katana is a good balance to be sure, though. There is no "King of Swords" so to speak. Many are situational or there wouldnt be such a variety even within cultures.

I would love to hear some more feed back from other sword fanatics.

I think the main reason katanas were over taken in Japan wasn't because rapiers/sabers were better, but that they were cheaper, and easier to make, and the heavy western influence drove many Japanese people away from their own culture, though this statement is just idol speculation as are 99% of my replies. You do have a very good point, there is no king of swords, and most are situational, but out of all the swords I think the katana could handle the most situations, but let it be known that the Claymore is very close to the katana, and that it, and a few other swords like the kilij, and rapier would have been on this list if I didn't want just one sword on it. I knew people would complain about the katana being on the list no less than being number 1, but it was one of those weapons that I'd get hated on for leaving in, or leaving out so it was kinda hard to put it there at all.

The first part is true, one Katana takes approximately 6 months at least to fabricate. Most Japanese military soldiers had a family sword passed through the generations, and anyone who didn't was provided one by the military, though most of the people who ended up getting one that way had wished that they had a family sword, because the military Katana were sub-par because they had to be made in bulk. As for the western swords, Rapier was forced on the citizens for the fact that Westerners thought (and still think) that they, and everything they do is superior. Using a Rapier was a different combat style entirely and needed teaching, while it was more efficent to have the citizens use what they already knew. Sabers were forced on for close to the same reason, Western civilization believed it to be similar to a Katana, so they thought that not much change needed to happen. (and pardon me for asking, but just exactly how is a Claymore like a Katana?)
There's more but I don't want to bore anyone.

Heh, I should elaborate on the katana Claymore thing. I didn't mean the claymore was like the katana I meant the they were almost equals as weapons. Very interesting comment though.

Studies, combined with the fabrication and forging of bladed weapons that I do and the training in the blades that comes with it, you tend to learn quite a lot. (well, except for the "Custom Fantasy Blades" that I do, mainly for fun/sometimes commisions... there's no real training style for that)

Yea, I have a great collection of practical use weapons, and bokken to practice with. I only own one fantasy sword though which happens to be a massive buster sword from FF7 http://api.ning.com/files/GgczIXFRODUbDq5MIVxBxBL4Y9gqrJn1ev1VOE33chvZzBwZHy*5JSyBjVaFsI3--bWvZcY9woUZdMMMVavFT8kk8SKZrjIN/swords3.jpg I own a copy of the top one.

I have two Katana Bokken, one Wakizashi Bokken, and one Ninjato Bokken.
I tried forging a cloudbuster, but it didn't turn out the way I wanted and since the iron was already used, I couldn't use the steel, so I threw it away. I never tried making another one.

Damn, sounds like a pain to just through away something you worked on. Though I'm a perfectionist too, for example I'm a game designer, I've taken weeks worth of work, and trashed it cause I couldn't work around a bug(which was the characters faces would turn into stretched out polygons)

Was it a skeletal mesh problem? Or maybe the Actor itself is acting up, or perhaps the texture was not quite working right with the Actor Model.
(I'm in college for animation and game design, by the way)

 

[Shadows Inc.]

The pen.

Saves lives and ends wars.

And can make a decent weapon when honed to a fine point and dipped in fast acting poison, then thrown from 10 feet away.

Or you could just walk up behind someone and stab them (in the skull for me because it's more fun), there's no need to get too technical. Humans are a very, very easy thing to kill.

Oh I know that. Not even my idea. I was quoting a comedian whose name escapes me at the moment. I was trying to be funny and (apparently) failing.
And why can't I be technical? What's the point of killing people if it can't be done in an elaborate and unnecessarily complicated manner?

Don't worry dude. Your atempt at being funny worked on me, but I find great humor in irony. Honestly you comment makes me think of a war where armies had to take state tests and whoever had the highest grade point average won, but then America would lose every war.

Not to say I didn't find it humorous... I just seem to take things quite literally most of the time. Sometimes it's a burden.

More to the point, I found Knifewounds joke to be more humorous, simply for the fact that it is true.

My humor will wear on people after a while. Its mostly ironic wit, and jokes constructed like this "(insert silliness here) and (insert realistic comparison to the silliness)"

Why not? It's a safe way to go about humor.

 

[blind_dead_mcjones]

Id have though a halberd generally worse than pikes and bills. Its hard to get a swing on such a long weapon sufficient to do any real damage, meaning it effectively becomes a fancy spear, so why not just use a spear? The pike has superior range and a tighter formation, making it harder to break and highly superior vs cavalry.

your forgeting that the whole thing, including the staff can be used as a weapon or defensively, halberds were insanely effective on the battlefield by virtue of being a jack of all trades, you could stab, slash, hook and bash with it, and the shaft was more than adequete for defending against sword/axe/hammer/club/knife/spear blows

spears while useful can only be used to stab, and pikes were only useful against charging cavalry, in the event of infantry flanking them, they had to drop the pikes and draw smaller backup melee weapons due to the pike being too unwieldy in close quarters

quick ones i want to mention:

the tank
pump action shotgun
desert eagle

why the desert eagle of all things? its heavy (3.5 pounds loaded, the same weight as an M4 carbine) expensive, uncomfortable to grip and fire, and like every other attempt to make an automatic handgun that fired magnum rounds, has a tendency to jam

contrary to what hollywood would have you believe, it is one of the worst handguns ever made

 

[Nickolai77]

Snip

Now I'm not interested in getting into the discussion, but an English (I assume that's the kind you mean) longbow has to be trained in for decade to become even able to effectively pull the sting without endangering yourself, there are maybe 10 people alive today that can handle that weapon. they were NOT used by peasant conscripts, That said, they were not used by nobility either.

However I would still call it one of the best weapons ever made it rendered any and all forms of personal armor useless. I once saw a demonstration, it nearly punched clear through the armor that would have been on first generation tanks.

Ouch

Yeah i think your're right about the peasants conscripts part...i think they were actually yeoman who used longbows- who were basically relatively prosperous farmers and land holders.

There may well be only a few people who can shoot the actual kind of longbows used at Agincourt or Crecy (which had a draw weight of 120 pounds.) There are however plenty of people (a few of which i do archery with) with longbows weighing about 60 pounds, and are rough equivalents of longbows which would have been used for hunting in medieval England and Wales.

When you bear in mind that most recurved bows today weigh something between 25-35 pounds, and medieval longbows at 120, you can a sense of how insanely heavy longbows are.

1)Cannon- Made castles obsolete, breaking the stalemate in medieval warfare which castles had produced allowing for major conflicts in the early modern period to shape world history.

I love you.

No one seems to understand just how fundamental a shift warfare underwent with the advent of the cannon, not just used in siege warfare but in conventional battles as well. Hell, were it not for cannons we wouldn't have guns.

It was also cannons which brought down the city walls of Constantinople in 1453, destroying the last remnant of the Roman Empire and triggering an exodus of Greek intellectuals and ancient materials to Italy. Helping to kick-start the Rennaisance, which set in motion the processes which led to our modern world.

In our history department there is a 15th century Venetian cannon, and in the days before health and safety they used to fire it outside the chancellors office. I wish i was around to see that.

 

[Knifewounds]

Before I read the thread I knew katana would be listed as #1. It is worth noting that during the westernization of Japan rapiers/sabers were quickly overtaking katanas. The curved blade is an excellent design, good for swift movement and deeper cuts, but is much less effective against armor. When it bares down too it though, when armor is of little concern, the fastest wins out (all other factors being comparable). When armor is a factor, you want mass and leverage (while retaining balance and versatility). This is where the honorably mentioned claymore shines. Penatrating power without the unwieldy balance of an axe or polearm (though some polearms were every bit as good and in some situations much better, though the greatsword was fielded specifically to take out the long-shafted types). Katana is a good balance to be sure, though. There is no "King of Swords" so to speak. Many are situational or there wouldnt be such a variety even within cultures.

I would love to hear some more feed back from other sword fanatics.

I think the main reason katanas were over taken in Japan wasn't because rapiers/sabers were better, but that they were cheaper, and easier to make, and the heavy western influence drove many Japanese people away from their own culture, though this statement is just idol speculation as are 99% of my replies. You do have a very good point, there is no king of swords, and most are situational, but out of all the swords I think the katana could handle the most situations, but let it be known that the Claymore is very close to the katana, and that it, and a few other swords like the kilij, and rapier would have been on this list if I didn't want just one sword on it. I knew people would complain about the katana being on the list no less than being number 1, but it was one of those weapons that I'd get hated on for leaving in, or leaving out so it was kinda hard to put it there at all.

The first part is true, one Katana takes approximately 6 months at least to fabricate. Most Japanese military soldiers had a family sword passed through the generations, and anyone who didn't was provided one by the military, though most of the people who ended up getting one that way had wished that they had a family sword, because the military Katana were sub-par because they had to be made in bulk. As for the western swords, Rapier was forced on the citizens for the fact that Westerners thought (and still think) that they, and everything they do is superior. Using a Rapier was a different combat style entirely and needed teaching, while it was more efficent to have the citizens use what they already knew. Sabers were forced on for close to the same reason, Western civilization believed it to be similar to a Katana, so they thought that not much change needed to happen. (and pardon me for asking, but just exactly how is a Claymore like a Katana?)
There's more but I don't want to bore anyone.

Heh, I should elaborate on the katana Claymore thing. I didn't mean the claymore was like the katana I meant the they were almost equals as weapons. Very interesting comment though.

Studies, combined with the fabrication and forging of bladed weapons that I do and the training in the blades that comes with it, you tend to learn quite a lot. (well, except for the "Custom Fantasy Blades" that I do, mainly for fun/sometimes commisions... there's no real training style for that)

Yea, I have a great collection of practical use weapons, and bokken to practice with. I only own one fantasy sword though which happens to be a massive buster sword from FF7 http://api.ning.com/files/GgczIXFRODUbDq5MIVxBxBL4Y9gqrJn1ev1VOE33chvZzBwZHy*5JSyBjVaFsI3--bWvZcY9woUZdMMMVavFT8kk8SKZrjIN/swords3.jpg I own a copy of the top one.

I have two Katana Bokken, one Wakizashi Bokken, and one Ninjato Bokken.
I tried forging a cloudbuster, but it didn't turn out the way I wanted and since the iron was already used, I couldn't use the steel, so I threw it away. I never tried making another one.

Damn, sounds like a pain to just through away something you worked on. Though I'm a perfectionist too, for example I'm a game designer, I've taken weeks worth of work, and trashed it cause I couldn't work around a bug(which was the characters faces would turn into stretched out polygons)

Was it a skeletal mesh problem? Or maybe the Actor itself is acting up, or perhaps the texture was not quite working right with the Actor Model.
(I'm in college for animation and game design, by the way)

I'm not sure it was most likely the skeletal mesh since more than one character did that. It's worth mentioning I'm relatively amateur, and mostly self taught with the exception of one game design course I took. I never was that good with animations. The shoulders would always look jagged, and the walking animation would look stiff and sloppy like an old ps1 game.

 

[Shadows Inc.]

Snip

Now I'm not interested in getting into the discussion, but an English (I assume that's the kind you mean) longbow has to be trained in for decade to become even able to effectively pull the sting without endangering yourself, there are maybe 10 people alive today that can handle that weapon. they were NOT used by peasant conscripts, That said, they were not used by nobility either.

However I would still call it one of the best weapons ever made it rendered any and all forms of personal armor useless. I once saw a demonstration, it nearly punched clear through the armor that would have been on first generation tanks.

Ouch

Yeah i think your're right about the peasants conscripts part...i think they were actually yeoman who used longbows- who were basically relatively prosperous farmers and land holders.

There may well be only a few people who can shoot the actual kind of longbows used at Agincourt or Crecy (which had a draw weight of 120 pounds.) There are however plenty of people (a few of which i do archery with) with longbows weighing about 60 pounds, and are rough equivalents of longbows which would have been used for hunting in medieval England and Wales.

When you bear in mind that most recurved bows today weigh something between 25-35 pounds, and medieval longbows at 120, you can a sense of how insanely heavy longbows are.

1)Cannon- Made castles obsolete, breaking the stalemate in medieval warfare which castles had produced allowing for major conflicts in the early modern period to shape world history.

I love you.

No one seems to understand just how fundamental a shift warfare underwent with the advent of the cannon, not just used in siege warfare but in conventional battles as well. Hell, were it not for cannons we wouldn't have guns.

It was also cannons which brought down the city walls of Constantinople in 1453, destroying the last remnant of the Roman Empire and triggering an exodus of Greek intellectuals and ancient materials to Italy. Helping to kick-start the Rennaisance, which set in motion the processes which led to our modern world.

In our history department there is a 15th century Venetian cannon, and in the days before health and safety they used to fire it outside the chancellors office. I wish i was around to see that.

To me... All these reasons are reasons for me to hate cannons. I do like the Renaissance, but only if it stayed like that, and didn't advance to whatever "this" is now.

 

[thedoclc]

*snip*

You clearly seem to have a lot of knowledge about the rapier and its application, how it works, the innovation of the Capo Fero lunge, the disengage, the sheer fucking speed of the thing. Not too much I can add. Armour was not entirely absent when it was used. You still had the buckler and sword combination holding out in England for a while, light brigandine had been worn by nobles concerned for their safery for some time (goes under the puffy outfit) and still lasts into the Renaissance. Pikemen and equipping them with some armour lasted for a while and depends on time and place. Go east and the Ottomans and Arabs still used lamellar, leather, leather-scale for a damn long time. Brigands and highwayman would equip themselves with whatever they could get away with and afford.

The rapier is not a heavy armour puncturer (just go round and find the opening), you would want a pick or a polearm for something like that (bec de corbin perhaps, or spetum or awlpike). Then again the tuck or estoc is a two-handed rapier designed to pierce armour

http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_euroedge.html

I find the Spanish and German basket-hilt rapier designs the most pleasing, combining buckler and sword together, as the epee in fencing illustrates. Course I also find some of the European one-handed falchions quite nice and look to be useful and used more amongst Europeans then we might think, but then again, the Swiss also made two-handed sabres which look a lot like the lauded katana).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falchion
http://bjorn.foxtail.nu/h_conyers_eng.htm
http://www.myarmoury.com/review_lut_10006.html

Did you know, despite a lot of criticism, some cavalry units actually went for rapiers over sabres or cavalry swords? (Cohen 2002). Some generals said it would never work and would break, others insisted it was just fine in the field. Suppose it could be used like a swift light lance in a way.

Thanks for the info. We're in total agreement as for the look of the weapon. Granted, I would much rather have a full buckler in the off hand were I somehow caught up in a sword fight (how the hell would that happen?, but that beautiful ping on the piste when you block with the handguard is very satisfying and drives home the importance of that guard.

Sure, there was some armor in the Renaissance and beyond, and you've done a good job pointing out where and when you could find it. However, as a whole it was going away very quickly, and I'll stand by the generalization "armor was disappearing" while still agreeing with your specifics. That's why I believe the rapier should be on that list; it transformed how individual combat took place at a pivotal moment, and pretty much everything and everyone had to respond to it.

I'm enjoying the articles. Do you happen to have the Cohen article online somewhere?

I'm going to avoid commenting on the katana, since it seems its detractors and fans are already close enough to slapping each other silly.