Weapon Triangle

t. swordfag with shit reach

In reality: Lance>Sword>Axe and it's a hierarchy, not a triangle

Does anyone have the COPE SEETHE HAVE SEX DILATE YIKES version?

and only idiots would forgo an advantage to be "muh honor"

Axe smashes a lance through pure power

Lance beats a sword through long range

Sword beats an axe through finesse and being more nimble

Doesn't matter when your stats are like this

Attached: lightning bruiser.png (343x277, 25K)

Axe can inflict more damage than a sword but you can't parry for shit.

Make ONE argument for axes. You literally cannot.

Attached: Delet_this_C_U_N_T.jpg (1080x1099, 516K)

assuming lance means a cavalryman, then lance beats both of them

How can an axe beat a lance but not a sword?
If anything, a sword is against no armor and axe is against armor

that's why shields exist

Lances objectively have an advantage against swords because of the longer reach. Axes are a bit iffy, but could be useful if you get close enough, particularly if you manage to hook the lance.

Swords are sidearms at best
Spears have been the mainstay of humankind until guns

you wont get laid

they have a heavier head, thus a stronger cleave
if you put your weight into it, you can probably go through armor like butter if you get a clean hit

>Axe smashes a lance through pure power

Attached: tard.png (900x1070, 131K)

Any type of polearm is in general better than any other close combat weapon. It keeps you away from the enemy. People will say that armor can protect from a polearm but there are always gaps in armor such as eyehole.

>you can probably go through armor like butter if you get a clean hit
No, actually, you fucking can't.

they're good for cutting wood and other non-combat situations. In real life you aren't fighting 24/7 so it actually might be useful, obviously it's not good as a weapon alone.

Axes are the white man's weapon.

>only bringing one weapon into battle

Attached: 1523484164887.jpg (481x401, 45K)

depends on how heavy the axe is, but it definitely has more cutting power than a sword

Axe cut down tree, axe cut through lance

Attached: 1555293496011.png (1920x1080, 1.08M)

lmao at this idiot

If one didn't care about honor, you might as well just spread disease and poison the rivers to defeat your enemy.

Lance besting sword does actually make sense in reality. Because lance has range. Axe over Lance doesn't though, because it doesn't have range. But this is a universe with magic so you can just say "magic makes axe work."

The weapons also don't get used the way they do in reality. In reality, a lance user should have like a 90% evasion rating.

Handaxes don't beat anything because they're a shit weapon. Daneaxes are better but fell out of use some time after the battle of Stamford Bridge when vikings were btfo
You're right, I can't. Maces, warhammers and polearms totally outmode them.
The only reason you'd be using a handaxe in combat is if you just came from chopping timber. Poorfag weapon through and through.

you need a two handed axe to effectively hook a lance. with a one-handed axe the lance user has more leverage and could break your wrist or disarm you.

Sword beating Axe and Lance beating Sword has always made sense to me, but how the fuck does a Axe beat a Lance?

The idea is that lances out-range swords, axes can chop through lances, and swords are more maneuverable than axes.
Lances may also out-range axes, but the turtle-poke strategy doesn't work if someone grabs the end of your spear and chops it off.
Swords can't reliably cut through lances, as swords lack the weight to do so in the average person's hands.

replace bow with axe

Someone post the axe wielding anime dude who cuts down a house.

I think logically it's supposed to be

>Sword can't get in on Lance because lance is longer
>Axe is bulky enough to break the haft of spear, so spear user has to be careful
>Sword is more maneuverable than Axe so Axe has hard time hitting sword user

But in reality Lances are the only combat weapon worth a damn in the triangle with swords being sometimes useful and axes being lol

if a lance wielder let an axe wielder close they are doing it wrong
>willingly walking into a long pointy and very deadly stick, which is out to kill you
only counter head-to-head is another polearm
depends if you want the resources that would be affected by such things
also if you don't care about your popularity
which makes for very potent leaders

No, because you might catch the disease yourself and if you poison the river, you can't drink from it yourself
It's even a worse idea if you're planning on setteling the area you're conquring

Attached: 1534759875050.jpg (640x645, 61K)

Better than swords for getting through armor.

*shoots you from far away*

Attached: proxy.duckduckgo.com.jpg (622x463, 29K)

You're correct but now you're just moving goalposts

Attached: 1453054885925.jpg (568x898, 151K)

In your opinion, which type of sword, axe and spear are the best/your favorites?
Among those three picks, which is the best?

Attached: 1559265048659.png (824x624, 29K)

lucerne

>*literally just grabs the timber handle of your polearm, while stabbing you with the sword in my other hand*
Polearms were a FORMATION weapon. They were mass manufactured not because they were the best in foot combat, but because they required no training and were a lot cheaper than swords. Polearmfags are delusional.
>Swords can't reliably cut through lances
Neither can axes desu. The axe blade is physically just going to push the lance aside, there's no resistance to chop the lance against. Something swords can do just as well.

When it comes to mounted combat, lances>all. When it comes to foot combat, swords/maces>all.

Axes in fire emblem are pretty unrealistically big for the kind of use they see so it's not hard to imagine them mangling a spear, but yeah it makes no sense in the context of actual one-handed axes soldiers would have used in the middle ages.

>Axe is bulky enough to break the haft of spear, so spear user has to be careful
To break the haft of the spear, you at least have to hold the spear with one hand and chop with the other but if you already have the spear in your hand, why would you chop it off?
If you just hit the haft without it being held down, you might chop it off but you might just deflect it
The thing is you could achieve the same thing with a sword
People here really believe swords are just fragile and not powerful things by themselves which is wrong
The main reason that people used axes and not swords is that a sword is expensive as shit to make and axes are cheaper
Although real niggas know that maces are where it's at if we're talking practicality

>But in reality Lances are the only combat weapon worth a damn
Are polearms the new katanas folded over a thousand times?
This is reaching silly levels of delusion.

Hold my ale

Attached: agincourt_archer.jpg (400x342, 63K)

Guandao for aesthetics, Halberd for practicality.

>retards still pretend the weapon triangle is a huge defining feature of Fire Emblem

Attached: 1522198854547.png (252x215, 34K)

>AI has eight Wyvern Riders appear right next to your archer

poleaxe for me

Attached: Polearms.jpg (589x415, 50K)

good for hacking the haft into splinters, but it only makes sense if it's a 2 handed longaxe, a handaxe has no advantage over lance/spear. Personally, I don't see how sword has advantage over axe, though. and the only thing that has advantage over 2 handed mace is spear, literally everything else gets turned into pulverized metal and flesh.

I can see how a Lance would get a swordsman before they had a chance to get close, or how a sword might be more wieldly than an axe in close combat, but I just can't see how an axe would beat a spear.

>lance beats sword
Lance has greater range, there's no way a sword dude can hurt lance dude without being poked.
>sword beats axe
Sword dude has greater dexterity and mobility and dodges like a motherfucker because axes are too slow and unwieldy.
>axe beats lance
Axes are powerful as fuck and can chop lances into two. Can be used as a shield to block spear throws and also can be thrown.

You aren't grabbing a thrusting polearm it is too fast.

>scythe is the best weapon
>none of your units can use it

Attached: 12-WeaponChart.jpg (703x414, 120K)

>Mistel

That's literally how push of pike worked though. Doppelsoldner would knock aside or grab spear handles to avoid being impaled, and then there was nothing the pikeman could do from that point but get fucked in the face by a dagger/sword unless he pulled his own dagger/sword. Look at any illustration of a polearm battle in progress. There's always some guy getting shanked in the middle of a pack.

If you're in formation, you want a spear. If someone manages to get right up in your face, you want a mace/dagger. Too many idiots on Yea Forums think there's one weapon for every situation. If there was, we would never have had different weapons existing at the same time.

>correct for the first two
>went full anime for the third
So close.

Was this game really ballbustingly hard or did highschool me just not know how to play?

>axe has some of the best characters
>is either game breakingly good or terrible, no in between
>always huge might
>beat lances, usually the most common weapon type
>usually look the coolest
>devil axe

Why would you choose anything else?

Attached: Arthzura.jpg (483x325, 30K)

Cock beats pussy. Girl cock beats cock. What beats girl cock? Nothing. That's the point.

There was a video of some trained swordsmen and half of the swordsmen used spears a weapon that they had never used before and they btfo the guys with swords.

Yea that's cause spears are broke irl, the range is just too good.

You have to abuse items and elements just the right way, like abusing Rosary immunity to fire to punch Gulcasa right in the face

I know what beats girl cock, bad dragon dildos

There are plenty of training videos online where you can see spear users 1 on 1 dominating trained sword users. Also historic artwork is rarely accurate its meant to be art.

Explain this

Attached: Class_Meta_Salem_Update.png (800x400, 82K)

>What beats girl cock?
boy pussy

Axe breaks lance
Lance outranges sword
Sword is faster than axe

>Destroys every nation on earth

Projectiles are the master weapon and no one can refute me on this

If a sword can't beat a lance, neither should an ace.

>foreigner as a class
wtf? is that a mistranslation?

No, search "skallagrim fire emblem" on jewtube

It'll feel real good when I bury an axe in your chest.

True but only firearms.
Bow and arrows in the right condisions can dominate a battlefield but most pre gun battles were decided by the infantry.

HAVE RANGE AXECEL.

Foreigner as in powers not from this earth

>that chart is actually just a pentagram
it can't be a coincidence, it just can't be

Attached: 0_0VPMncf5GC0baguQ.png (1024x1024, 74K)

>someone else besides me likes the devil axe

Attached: 1502311272261.png (294x297, 47K)

holy cow, this might be useful... thanks

IRL, vs man & beast, SPEARS ARE GOAT. Now power them up in fantasy and they become even more GOAT.

Attached: 1536611120913.webm (1084x720, 601K)

Weren't those fuckers also paid high amounts because they usually didn't live very long?
Also remember that we're not talking about formation battles here but 1v1 where the polearm user can dodge backwards.

that makes more sense, still awkwardly phrased though

Spears are how you win a war. Sword is how you win in single combat. Axe is how you look tough and manly without actually having an advantage militarily.

Necessary for a siege.

*throws axe*

>misses
>pikachu.tff

I'll accept these.

Attached: Yang_sip.jpg (524x479, 54K)

>Lances outrange swords
>Swords are faster to swing than an axe
>Axes can cut the tip off of a lance
It's so simple.

I'm gonna blow your freaking mind, now listen... a crossbow... shoots... tiny spears.

since there's obviously going to be some overlap between posters in this thread and mordhau players: game just updated

>cut the tip off
This is some paper covers rock bullshit. Why is there always one relationship in every class/weapon/element/type advantage chart that makes no sense?

>Does this really makes any sense, realistically?
Sword is faster than Axe
Axe cuts lance in half
Lance outreaches sword

Axes have the highest chance to critical
Sword the all rounder and lance has the best reach.

>axe beating anything
WHO WAS THE RETARD WHO MADE THIS ?

What about the expanded weapons triangle in Fates? I get why they did it, but it's even more arbitrary.

I miss the Magic weapons triangle with Light, Dark, and Anima.

Attached: new-triangle.jpg (350x200, 31K)

Because we're playing games and unbalanced bullshit renders items irrelevant and useless which hurts the overall product so things like balance are generally accepted to be somewhat more important than absolute realism which is fine since in our case, video games, we are engaging with digital escapism where absolute realism typically isn't the most important concern we have going into a game.

That was a homing axe by the way.

Attached: 1546091718339.png (652x624, 195K)

>using caveman weapons when magic exists
fucking MAGlets

Attached: 66.jpg (117x125, 4K)

>using magic when faith exists
Apostate.

Attached: doyouhavefaith.jpg (1280x720, 115K)

>mage uses up all his spells
>gets shot by a peasant with a crossbow

Think of what a lumberjack's axe designed to cut down trees does to a tree in one hard swing. A tree, made of wood.
Now think of what an axe would do against metal armor designed to not be cut.

They should have kept the magic decoupled from the weapons.

*kills you because you have no defense or hp*
Heh, nothin personal, magicfag

Attached: 57f92933-7293-49ba-9b3e-b239670f89da.png (922x1024, 848K)

Fates' one makes no sense (like everything else in Fates) and was done purely for game balancing. Even then I think tomes being good against bows was a stupid decision because mages are meant to counter archers by sitting next to them, not fighting them directly.

lance =/= spear

Lance is only for horseback combat user

Polearms are objectively better than swords and axes since they are basically just swords and axes with more reach.

It should be weapon beats magic beats ranged beats weapon.

And I just watched one the other day. And it was of a spear trainer talking about how someone can just fucking grab your spear and you're forced to pull a dagger or get fucked because there's nothing you can do.
>where the polearm user can dodge backwards.
And dodge backwards over a tree root and land flat on his back. This isn't your Japanese animes.

>lol you trip and fall so i win
Fucking really?

Tripping and falling in a melee to the death sounds like an extremely bad idea, yes. What is your problem with what he said? Tripping in a sword fight seems like a near guaranteed death sentence.

why would someone trained to fight be stupid enough to trip over something like a root?

His problem is probably more
>durr dat wuddin habben

If you are """"""dodging backwards""""" in your combat gear in the middle of a debris-filled battlefield then yes, you are extremely likely to trip and fall, what's so hard to understand about that?
Life isn't anime.

>He doesn't triple wield

Attached: 1475768836393.jpg (500x435, 44K)

Someone trained to fight wouldn't be stupid enough to """"""dodge backwards""""""" in the first place.
You do not have eyes in your ass that can see everything behind you at all times while you look at someone running at you with a sword. Melee fights do not take place on perfectly flat, even and obstacle-free terrain. If you're in a town there are cobblestones. If you're in a field there's cow shit and rabbit warrens. If you're in a forest there's branches and tree roots. If you're in any major battle whatsoever there's corpses and discarded equipment everywhere.

Nobody """"dodges backwards"""" animetard.

Attached: where do you think we are.jpg (480x360, 16K)

woah, triple the useless!

sounds like the salty words of a loser

youtube.com/watch?v=-N2VibnjB6g

Don't forget elevation

>t. kefka

>MoonCancer

Attached: 1467208327134.jpg (540x529, 33K)

I guess. Didn't think of that. Sorry.

Gotta admit, I thought it was pretty central until I actually played FE3. You can do interesting things like anti-triangle weapons sure but it really isn't necessary, and honestly wasn't conducive to improving Shadow Dragon.

Attached: Fire Emblem - Mystery of the Emblem ENG v0.98010.png (256x224, 18K)

what the fuck you die when you're killed?

Attached: IMG_4971.jpg (631x640, 39K)

Yes Shirou, people die when they are killed.

Attached: 1559798378669.jpg (900x1308, 765K)

>someone actually apologizing on Yea Forums
y-you too

Attached: 1517323395819.jpg (537x608, 51K)

Spears are typically used in formation. If you grab one guy's spear then the guy besides him just stabs you in the face.

I'm real sick so my head is all sorts of fucked, you want me to tell you to fuck off?
But yea, if one person is polite it might make others be so I try to do it whenever possible.

That's why I literally said: "polearms are a formation weapon."
Also, of course 2 guys with weapons>1 guy with a weapon. That's a no brainer.
I appreciate your post

Even guns couldn't push away the amazing concept of long pointy sticks immediately

Attached: old-school-bayonet-attack.jpg (580x453, 69K)

The best character uses them.

Attached: images.jpg (318x159, 9K)

isn't that mostly because the first widely used guns took ages to reload and were inaccurate as fuck, combined with people unfamiliar with a new weapon?

In a best case scenario axes are more lethal if you land that really meaty heavy swing, more mass and leverage

There are other weapons that do this better than axes

That's it. I'm sick of all this "Masterwork Timber Plus Knife" bullshit that's going on in the d20 system right now. Spears deserve much better than that. Much, much better than that.

I should know what I'm talking about. I myself commissioned a genuine spear in Africa for 2,400,000,000,000 Mugabes (that's about $0.05) and have been practicing with it for almost 2 years now. I can even stab slabs of solid titanium with my spear.

Spearsmiths spend years working on a single spear and sand it up to a million times to produce the finest handles known to mankind.

Spears are three hundred times as long as European swords and swing thrice as fast for that matter too. Anything a longsword can cut through, a spear can cut through better. I'm pretty sure a spear could easily bisect a knight wearing full plate with a simple vertical slash.

Ever wonder why medieval Europe never bothered conquering Africa? That's right, they were too scared to fight the disciplined Pygmy Bushmen and their spears of destruction. Even in World War II, German soldiers target the Polish cavalry with the lances first because their killing power was feared and respected.

So what am I saying? Spears are simply the best single combat weapon that the world has ever seen, and thus, require better stats in the d20 system. Here is the stat block I propose for Spears:

(Two-Handed Exotic Weapon)
2d10 Damage
17-20 x4 Crit
+5 to hit and damage
Counts as Masterwork

Now that seems a lot more representative of the stabbing power of Spears in real life, don't you think?

tl;dr = Spears need to do more damage in d20, see my new stat block.

Haven't seen this one in a while, nice.

Bayonets stayed around for pretty long time, even after guns stopped being rng hand exploders. Just ask the fucking nips in ww2

Attached: banzai.png (694x280, 20K)

"Outsider" if we were using D&D terminology.
I would bet it's the same word in japanese.

Sword beats Lance, Lance Beats Cav, Cav beats Bow, Bow beat Sword is the superior weapon triangle.

The correct answer is spear.

The nins wasted literal thousands (actual thousands) of men against hundreds of australians during the Australian Papua New Guinea campaign with those tactics, so I wouldn't call them sane or effective. More like "drinking the kool-aid of your suicide cult".

If they'd actually used normal contemporary military tactics they would have easily defeated the Australians, who they had a massive numerical advantage against.

>triangle

for

that one enemy in FE5 that has every regular axe in the game in his inventory is living his life correctly

youtube.com/watch?v=afqhBODc_8U

Attached: chooseyourclass.png (900x1151, 1.24M)

Of course the nips went overboard with it. The banzai is just the first thing that comes to mind when you think of bayonet use as basically a main weapon in younger history. It still manifested the "spear" as a sidearm amd last resort option next to guns for generarions.

Attached: a439fd44252fa37504fcc7bc9736b98f.jpg (259x400, 17K)

>Of course the nips went overboard with it
That's an understatement. Using the bayonet as your main weapon rather than a last resort after WW1 was kind of stupid in and of itself.

If you were fighting women and children at Nanking like the Japanese were it might have been a good idea then, but otherwise no other military was constantly using the bayonet in combat during WW2 onwards, definitely not with success.

When guns became easier to reload but combat was still fought that way, why didn't they bring out the gunlance men? Imagine having a shield to block bullets and and rifle that was easy to reload or had repeated fire, as well as a bayonet

>After WW1
Bayonets were a complete meme in WW1 too, a huge knife on the end of a ridiculously long rifle is just about the least practical melee weapon in a trench. There's a reason people sharpened shovels and made clubs.

kek

Bayonets are still a thing, you know.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M9_bayonet

This If anything the people you are sieging are more likely to poison the water and ruin the land just so that you can't properly use it after they are gone.

Partizan
Slashy and stabby

What about 40% ?

agreed

>show/game about a zombie apoclypse
>no one ever uses spears, one of the simplest, easy to make, easy to use weapons in the world
>better use a survival knife to go against zombies haha

why
and for that matter, how come no one uses bicycles

should really be spear beats sword beats great sword beats spear, all lose to armor except for hammers, axes rightfully remaining a meme

But what if you put an axe on your spear

pretty sure the brits refused to use crossbows in real combat because of how noskill they were

And where are the brits now
Irrelevance central, population Brexit

>Alterego
Even though this is gachashit that seems kinda cool, what is it?

Attached: 1558134437349.png (598x981, 542K)

The sword is more agile than the top heavy axe and in several cases has more reach.
The axe can grip the handle of a lance and get in close to have the advantage.
The lance simply has better range against a sword which would have no choice but to parry it with no way to take the lance away like the axe.

If we are speaking realistically, none too much for an individual. At large they are lack the reach and dexterity of a sword. However due to it's top heavy design an Axe's blows will have more of an impact and the shape of an axe allows for hooking. Most importantly though they are far cheaper to mass produce than swords and a shield will mitigate most of it's shortcommings.
If you actually think an axe designed for battle is meant to cut through armor and trees you are a craterbrain.

Is there a point in using a pike instead of a poleaxe or halberd?

>pure faith
>using a BSS

Attached: 1519178965116.jpg (1218x1015, 212K)

even the ayys use bayonets

Attached: penis.jpg (1920x1080, 288K)

Honestly this is the most acceptable reasoning. Though really if swordsmen and axemen used shields it'd really lessen their bad matchups, especially swords. Shields fuck spears.

>a huge knife on the end of a ridiculously long rifle is just about the least practical melee weapon in a trench
Depends on the size of the trench (most frontline trenches were at least wide enough to swing a cat), plus you were not always fighting along the width of a trench, you were often fighting along the LENGTH of a trench.
>There's a reason people sharpened shovels and made clubs
Because two weapons>one weapon. Sure, bayonets had situations where they were limited, but they were not a "meme" in WW1.

I think you're falling for shit like EA's battlefield 1 or whatever where it went out of its way to meme experimental weapons and customized personal weapons to you, instead of focusing on the weapons people actually used.

Attached: WW1-Irish-soldiers-trench-1519118.jpg (590x447, 66K)

>Bayonets
This bullet, you see.

Attached: Epilogue Canas.jpg (1920x1080, 416K)

It's not, it's just the shape that appears when you connect 5 points to each other you inbred corpse.

Then modern soldiers are also cowards then?

Attached: 103987123049.webm (1920x1080, 2.31M)

>pretty sure
>source: dude trust me
source?

No the shovel shit he's just spouting from that one WW1 movie, All Quiet on the Western Front.

>Conquers the known ancient world

Attached: 123490123740124.jpg (602x269, 69K)

>axe
>lance
why don't we have both?

Attached: g637_1.jpg (895x895, 56K)

>Claims to have honor
>Will willingly fail his lord and doom his people because he's too scared of being seen as a coward
Okay, coward.
Real honor is doing whatever the fuck it takes, up to and including making an absolute fool and joke of yourself in order to protect and/or serve what's important.

and then got rekt by romans with swords
Really makes you think

Well the reason all lies in weight and length. From a spear standpoint, the weight of the axehead makes it unweildly and to compensate the shaft is usually shorter. From an axe standpoint there's not too much of a reason not too except the potential of someone closing the gap, but that's what a sidearm is for.

Italians with spaghetti?

Kind of, except the only thing better now is mounted retreating arrow fire, which is dumb and stupid and should be banned.

>pick knife
>slash windpipes of many zombies
>pick spear
>gets impaled up to your wrists on a zombie charging at you
>spear is now stuck in the corpse as other zombie charges you from the other side
and before you say anything about the practicality of the knife, yes it's impractical, but at least it's not going to get embedded in the victim and taken completely out of commission if you slash with it. A spear will if you use it for its intended purpose. As a single dude against zombies a spear is no good, a glaive perhaps though.
Reach. Pikes were for poking at VERY long range while in formations with guys to protect your sides, and the handle was so long that at that point a cutting or hammering head in addition to the spear point would have been redundant and just add to the weight of the pike.
If you're with your boys with a group of 7.5m long pikes advancing as a big wall of spikes against a bunch of bad dudes with 3m long poleaxes, you're going to kill them first. This is what lead to the development of longer and longer pikes until the point they became too heavy to hold: the dudes with the longer pikes repeatedly won infantry engagements, such as the Scottish against English cavalry (also known as "push of pike" at that point).

For me. It's dwagon.

Attached: neck scritches.png (542x750, 398K)

It was due to shitty tactics:
youtu.be/Icdm7-df64k?t=117
and war elephants you mongs:
youtu.be/FFW-OhRcMXs?t=579

I think the idea is that axe chops the pointy part off a lance. in real life they tried that with giant swords though.

>buird warr
>stupid mongorian horsefuckel are now denied from raiding your country and prance impotently around on their gay horses with their gay bows while you sit comfy behind cover

People meme about the Great Wall of China, but the truth is it was actually an incredibly effective way of combating the horse-archer raid style of combat, and was a deterrent to Mongolians and other steppe raiders for literally hundreds of years.

>axe beats a weapon that has four times the range
what

Keep coping, seething spearfag

It's fucking retarded and I'm glad it's gone.

Get rekt sword/romaboo: youtu.be/bR7VDPUj5AE?t=402

youtu.be/MroGPObEZzk?t=184

Attached: f9b0de8e41fb4ae7356f89c02e83a119.jpg (3170x2133, 1.56M)

Same one I'll make for the spear; it's cheap and easy to make. It can also break shields and deal some devastating damage.

Please remind me how the second Punic war ended, spear nigger

They are all shit.

The mace is obviously the best weapon.
great for pounding in heavy armor, and if your opponent is not wearing armor, then they will also get fucked up.

it literally requires no skill either. just smash.
A pickaxe is also a great weapon for this if you can make it lighter.

Warhammer, Mace
best melee weapons anyone who disagrees is a retard

romans used swords, spears, and javelins

>It can also break shields
So can swords, maces, a nicely placed kick
>and deal some devastating damage
see above but double for maces
an axe can glance off someone, a flanged mace will always transfer the full force of the blow, and with more force since it's heavier

>sword
>polearm
I'll take both

Attached: zweihander.jpg (539x811, 91K)

I bet you pock low tiers and act smug when you lose.

so where does fist fit into all of this since they added it to Three Houses?

Attached: FIST.jpg (480x246, 40K)

>Real honor is doing whatever the fuck it takes, up to and including making an absolute fool and joke of yourself in order to protect and/or serve what's important.
Based and Cao-Wei pilled.

Attached: Cao Cao.jpg (750x422, 23K)

thats clearly the evolution of a bow.

whatever it takes to win.

getting what you want > Pride

in the context of Fates World, the secondary triangle kind of works.

Shurikens beat tomes because all shuriken wielder classes are specifically trained to fight mages.

Bows beat shurikens because archers are generally good enough shots to counter ninja evasion.

Tomes beat bows because archers
can't fight up close like mages can,but mostly because the triangle needs to be completed.

>Hannibal fucking around in Italy for fucking 15 years?
It's like having a squatter inside your house for 15 years, and you claim that you are a hero for kicking him out after 15 years?
Even the romans adopted spear and shield as they were facin more cavalry heavy enemies (germans, sassanid persians), against them a pike phalanx would have worked even better than just using spears.

Attached: Late roman.jpg (1280x720, 272K)

Attached: gf.jpg (400x300, 108K)

There are no games with good fist classes. Inb4 FONV.

Lance wins with both of them.
I respect you user for chosing such great artwork.

Intimidation factor.

Not really, sword and shield > spear and shield
It's why the Romans BTFO of the Greeks

Based strength build, the actual chad of all warriors. I'd be scared shitless if I ran into this dude.

>Strfags

>you're at the club and this guy clangs your girlfriend's ass
>wyd

>finesse and being more nimble

Literally nothing.

Zama wasn't nowhere near the scale nor the odds of Cannae, where Hannibal managed to encircle an bigger army with less troops.
It was luck that Scipio even won, since the Numidians (the same cavalry that fought under Hannibal but defected to the romans, won the day by coming back):
youtu.be/SjxYJBWcS08?t=177
It's nowhere near as impressive as what Hannibal managed to do at Cannae:
youtube.com/watch?v=MroGPObEZzk&feature=youtu.be&t=184

Eh, kinda. Realistically, lance beats both sword and axe; I think they were going for "axe breaks lance", but the range advantage is way more significant than the axe chopping through the haft. Sword beating axe is a slim advantage presumably based on agility.

IRL axes and lances are were go-to weapons off warfare, Swords were a "last resort" weapon
axes are the patrician choice

Attached: 38_big.png (300x360, 120K)

That would be like cutting a tree that is being suspended in air by a crane, go ahead and try.

They have hammers on the other end allowing you to use that instead of half swording like a retard. They also strike bone a lot better than a sword and shields mitigate all of their downsides, they can be gripped further or closer to the head allowing you to zone better at close range.

You can grip a sword on the blade to stab closer targets too.

>axes
>go-to weapons
>off warfare
I'd call you a retard but the combination of weapon stupidity and spelling stupidity makes it more likely that this is an intentionally stupid bait post.

>polearms are the best Im so contrarian and edgy! Fuck swords
Funny how spear fags get demolished in mordhau,chivalry, mount and blade and larper sports like european martial arts

>Compared to spears
>Mace tries to get in close gets impaled
gg ez

Explain to me how two handed bladed greatflails aren't the best weapon.

>Reach of a spear
>Crushing power of a Warhammer
>Slicing power if you need it because the ends of the haft are bladed
>Tie your enemy's weapon up with the chain and yank it out of their hand
>Wrap the chain around their neck and strangle them or break their neck while also pommel striking the guy behind you for a two birds with one stone attack

It literally can't be beaten.

realistically speaking spears are actually one of the best weapons while swords are one of the worst. In vidya swords are always the strongest tho.

Attached: 454555.jpg (600x450, 29K)

They can break shields, which swords absolutely can't do unless you're wasting all your energy on bashing that shield.
The weapon always depends on what you're fighting unless you're a purist with a deathwish.

Sword is arguably better at that, even if it's still shit.
Lance beats axe and sword, sword beats axe, shield beats lance, armor beats sword and lance, sword beats shield, axe beats shield and armor.

Realistically? No. Lance beats everything. Swords are only good as EDC, in case some vagrant gets uppity.
Axes are for chopping down trees and wouldn't win against any actual weapon.

You trying to get people killed?

U can try to make sense of it

A spear outranges a sword, an axe, atleast a double sided one, is wide enough to act as a small shield and block the small and precise point of attack, and a sword can outrange an axe without suffering from the disadvantages of a spear

RPS in class/weapon balance is retarded.

It was their tactics not the equipment

They outmaneuvered the Greek phanlax

Why the fuck do you think medieval castoes always had their own water supply? Exactly because of poisons, only reasons we didn't use mustard gas more is because of the conventions. There is no honour in war.