|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 15, 2018 0:51:52 GMT
I'm not sure how happy I would be in a cavalry melee with a rapier. I'd rather be able to cut and thrust equally, or only cut. But then again swords like the Koncerz and more thrusting oriented pallasch remained cavalry staples so I could be misjudging the weapons. No doubt, something like a 1796 LC would be way better, particularly in melee. Or even a more compromise cut and thrust ![:P](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) but yeah, in D.A. Kingsleys book he has a few passages where troopers and officers have disdain for the thrust, especially in mounted or unmounted melee.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 15, 2018 0:53:29 GMT
|
|
Scott
Member
Posts: 1,678
|
Post by Scott on May 15, 2018 0:56:47 GMT
Especially while on horseback, right? Well, for a few fleeting moments anyway...until the horse kicked your arse off for not having any hands on those reigns (dismount before dagger). That's why you wore a bridle gauntlet.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on May 15, 2018 0:59:40 GMT
So all in all I think I've seem the most positive reviews of the Windlass Christus Imperat. It also looks very close to the original. I'll see if I can find it in MyA. Knowing you, you will no doubt test the functionality of the sword, something that I fail to find much information on. Plenty agree on the sword from the cosmetic standpoint. Please give us a review from the functional side.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 15, 2018 1:03:12 GMT
So all in all I think I've seem the most positive reviews of the Windlass Christus Imperat. It also looks very close to the original. I'll see if I can find it in MyA. Knowing you, you will no doubt test the functionality of the sword, something that I fail to find much information on. Plenty agree on the sword from the cosmetic standpoint. Please give us a review from the functional side. I've actually been considering picking one up. I don't like rapiers much but it has always appealed to me, perhaps because of the less flashy nature of the piece or more authentic look to it.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,274
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on May 15, 2018 1:18:14 GMT
No doubt, something like a 1796 LC would be way better, particularly in melee. Or even a more compromise cut and thrust ![:P](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) but yeah, in D.A. Kingsleys book he has a few passages where troopers and officers have disdain for the thrust, especially in mounted or unmounted melee. I wonder what General Patton would say, as his design was almost like a modern day (well, at least 20th century) lance. I really side on the chopping side for cav. (certainly melee wise) as you generate defense as well as offense when swinging that blade, while thrusting makes you more a target for others in the skirmish.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,274
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on May 15, 2018 1:28:14 GMT
Well, for a few fleeting moments anyway...until the horse kicked your arse off for not having any hands on those reigns (dismount before dagger). That's why you wore a bridle gauntlet. I think the idea was that you would be wielding a sword in one hand and main gauche in the other, hence no hands on reins. I'll admit, however, to loving that pretty thing on my forearm...even when holding dagger while nursing sore arse on ground and wondering where the horse went.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2018 1:55:35 GMT
Or even a more compromise cut and thrust ![:P](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) but yeah, in D.A. Kingsleys book he has a few passages where troopers and officers have disdain for the thrust, especially in mounted or unmounted melee. I wonder what General Patton would say, as his design was almost like a modern day (well, at least 20th century) lance. I really side on the chopping side for cav. (certainly melee wise) as you generate defense as well as offense when swinging that blade, while thrusting makes you more a target for others in the skirmish. One doesn't really need to wonder, as the history and his own words are there. www.pattonhq.com/sword.htmlI'm not sure what cavalry histories you have read and are familiar with, or whether your entire outlook is based on related videos and forum discussions.
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on May 15, 2018 2:01:37 GMT
I think the whole "cut v thrust" on cavalry is just gonna bring us back to our same boring but honest friend: context.
What era? Is either side armored? Is the cavalry heavy or light? Whats the terrain? Are the cavalry fighting infantry or other cavalry? Is it winter meaning people are wearing heavy coats? etc.
Thats always gonna very the answer, but as a very general rule of thumb, I'd say thrust for charge, cut for skirmishing (French Curassier vs British Light Cavalry)
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 15, 2018 2:25:20 GMT
I wonder what General Patton would say, as his design was almost like a modern day (well, at least 20th century) lance. I really side on the chopping side for cav. (certainly melee wise) as you generate defense as well as offense when swinging that blade, while thrusting makes you more a target for others in the skirmish. One doesn't really need to wonder, as the history and his own words are there. www.pattonhq.com/sword.htmlI'm not sure what cavalry histories you have read and are familiar with, or whether your entire outlook is based on related videos and forum discussions. I've always been intrigued by his claim of cutting 1/3rd harder than the previous (I presume M1860/1906) sabre. I own and cut with the 1860 regularly and I find it to be a very competent cutter, halving a heavy plastic jug with a shirt over it effortlessly (Jug measured 8.5 by 6 inches, 3 gallon insecticide item). Then again harder might not equate to deeper.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,274
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on May 15, 2018 2:41:13 GMT
I wonder what General Patton would say, as his design was almost like a modern day (well, at least 20th century) lance. I really side on the chopping side for cav. (certainly melee wise) as you generate defense as well as offense when swinging that blade, while thrusting makes you more a target for others in the skirmish. One doesn't really need to wonder, as the history and his own words are there. www.pattonhq.com/sword.htmlI'm not sure what cavalry histories you have read and are familiar with, or whether your entire outlook is based on related videos and forum discussions. I said "his" design, and described "like a modern day lance", so I know he favored the thrust (a potent element of a cav. charge), though maybe he thought his design could cut better than it did, as I believe it wanting in that category. but yeah, a great thruster, for sure. Point/edge debate (and what is preferable) is always classic fodder for discussion. Personally, I think some combo is best and suppose we then get into nature of design and what was (opinion) all time best cav. sword. Entirely forum and related videos. Was I wrong, and why do you ask?
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,274
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on May 15, 2018 2:44:25 GMT
I think the whole "cut v thrust" on cavalry is just gonna bring us back to our same boring but honest friend: context. What era? Is either side armored? Is the cavalry heavy or light? Whats the terrain? Are the cavalry fighting infantry or other cavalry? Is it winter meaning people are wearing heavy coats? etc. Thats always gonna very the answer, but as a very general rule of thumb, I'd say thrust for charge, cut for skirmishing (French Curassier vs British Light Cavalry) Something that can do both is always a good general (though maybe not exact/specific) pick. Gotta bow to that god of context, fer sure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 15, 2018 3:59:44 GMT
One doesn't really need to wonder, as the history and his own words are there. www.pattonhq.com/sword.htmlI'm not sure what cavalry histories you have read and are familiar with, or whether your entire outlook is based on related videos and forum discussions. I said "his" design, and described "like a modern day lance", so I know he favored the thrust (a potent element of a cav. charge), though maybe he thought his design could cut better than it did, as I believe it wanting in that category. but yeah, a great thruster, for sure. Point/edge debate (and what is preferable) is always classic fodder for discussion. Personally, I think some combo is best and suppose we then get into nature of design and what was (opinion) all time best cav. sword. Entirely forum and related videos. Was I wrong, and why do you ask? Yet, you begin your current dissertation with wondering what Patton would say. My reply was pointing out that there was no reason to wonder, as Patton's thoughts are voiced and printed long before our time. My question as to your own understandings kind of underlines, to me, how many learn in a fairly closed and limited manner. One could do worse than abstracting from forums and videos but it reads as a bit shallow to me. Too lazy, gotcha ![;)](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) No reason for me to wonder.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,274
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on May 15, 2018 4:57:52 GMT
I said "his" design, and described "like a modern day lance", so I know he favored the thrust (a potent element of a cav. charge), though maybe he thought his design could cut better than it did, as I believe it wanting in that category. but yeah, a great thruster, for sure. Point/edge debate (and what is preferable) is always classic fodder for discussion. Personally, I think some combo is best and suppose we then get into nature of design and what was (opinion) all time best cav. sword. Entirely forum and related videos. Was I wrong, and why do you ask? Yet, you begin your current dissertation with wondering what Patton would say. My reply was pointing out that there was no reason to wonder, as Patton's thoughts are voiced and printed long before our time. My question as to your own understandings kind of underlines, to me, how many learn in a fairly closed and limited manner. One could do worse than abstracting from forums and videos but it reads as a bit shallow to me. Too lazy, gotcha ![;)](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) No reason for me to wonder. "As his design was like a modern day lance"...meant as joke (universal thrusting consensus understanding on Patton saber). You didn't get it, that is fine, please read it again and you may see. Regarding the "how many learn in a closed and limited manner" statement, that is quite the conclusion of "underlined understandings" garnered from a nothing post. Am I supposed to proclaim like Alfredo in The Godfather "I'M SMART"? Fine, so your a resident brain on Cav. saber history (ala Dave Kelly), and I know that you know your history (and said as much) but haven't read a Cav. book myself. I'm guessing a lot of folks on the forum have not. I have a college degree...NOT in Cav. history. ![;)](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) I just don't get the Crab Apple attitude based on my post, but hey, part of your passionate charm I've come to lov...err...tolerate. I'm having a beer now, so hoist a few with me and tell me the best Cav. history book to read...and I WILL READ IT and you can ask me questions later about it and pester me for my inaccuracy's. ![::)](//storage.forums.net/forum/images/smiley/eyesroll.png) You will never get a better offer than that.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on May 15, 2018 5:19:10 GMT
I said "his" design, and described "like a modern day lance", so I know he favored the thrust (a potent element of a cav. charge), though maybe he thought his design could cut better than it did, as I believe it wanting in that category. but yeah, a great thruster, for sure. Point/edge debate (and what is preferable) is always classic fodder for discussion. Personally, I think some combo is best and suppose we then get into nature of design and what was (opinion) all time best cav. sword. Entirely forum and related videos. Was I wrong, and why do you ask? Yet, you begin your current dissertation with wondering what Patton would say. My reply was pointing out that there was no reason to wonder, as Patton's thoughts are voiced and printed long before our time. My question as to your own understandings kind of underlines, to me, how many learn in a fairly closed and limited manner. One could do worse than abstracting from forums and videos but it reads as a bit shallow to me. Too lazy, gotcha ;) No reason for me to wonder.I dunno about you, but I am happy to accept that some people come here to learn. By extension, not everyone has read all the relevant literature, whether due to constraints of time, finances etc. Thats fine. Dun need to sass everyone up and throw the literature at them. If you don't feel like answering, then don't. I have tried to hold my tongue for a while, but attitude like what is shown here and elsewhere really kills the forum. Most of us are amateurs who do this in our free time, however sparse that may be. We don't pretend to be experts - we offer our humble opinion and discuss as best we can and with the tools we can. If I am going to get hammered in the face whenever I say something which is slightly inaccurate, then whats the fun?
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,274
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on May 15, 2018 5:24:44 GMT
Yet, you begin your current dissertation with wondering what Patton would say. My reply was pointing out that there was no reason to wonder, as Patton's thoughts are voiced and printed long before our time. My question as to your own understandings kind of underlines, to me, how many learn in a fairly closed and limited manner. One could do worse than abstracting from forums and videos but it reads as a bit shallow to me. Too lazy, gotcha No reason for me to wonder.I dunno about you, but I am happy to accept that some people come here to learn. By extension, not everyone has read all the relevant literature, whether due to constraints of time, finances etc. Thats fine. Dun need to sass everyone up and throw the literature at them. If you don't feel like answering, then don't. I have tried to hold my tongue for a while, but attitude like what is shown here and elsewhere really kills the forum. Most of us are amateurs who do this in our free time, however sparse that may be. We don't pretend to be experts - we offer our humble opinion and discuss as best we can and with the tools we can. If I am going to get hammered in the face whenever I say something which is slightly inaccurate, then whats the fun? My fault, Afoo, I gotta work on my Patton jokes more. The ole' general gets me in trouble every time.
|
|
|
Post by Afoo on May 15, 2018 5:31:32 GMT
I dunno about you, but I am happy to accept that some people come here to learn. By extension, not everyone has read all the relevant literature, whether due to constraints of time, finances etc. Thats fine. Dun need to sass everyone up and throw the literature at them. If you don't feel like answering, then don't. I have tried to hold my tongue for a while, but attitude like what is shown here and elsewhere really kills the forum. Most of us are amateurs who do this in our free time, however sparse that may be. We don't pretend to be experts - we offer our humble opinion and discuss as best we can and with the tools we can. If I am going to get hammered in the face whenever I say something which is slightly inaccurate, then whats the fun? My fault, Afoo, I gotta work on my Patton jokes more. The ole' general gets me in trouble every time. :P No. This is a general sentiment I have had for a while, hence why the forum posts have dried to a trickle of late. I remember when I first started, I could rely on SBG for friendly help - even for what I would now consider to be very basic or stupid questions. We all have to start somewhere, and should pay it forward if we can On a more positive note, I do appreciate you and everyone else taking the time to have discussions. You may not have all the facts and literature, but you do the best with what you have, and try to find new ideas and solutions.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on May 15, 2018 5:41:27 GMT
I've remained silent on this matter as well for want to avoid any drama, but will say I agree totally with Afoo. There really is no decent reason to be standoffish and after two recent incidents where one new member left, and another member stopped posting for a while I thought the lesson may have been learned. Wondering is what allows us to gain knowledge, and showing spite to those that do so simply discourages the pursuit of knowledge whether they would have taken that course or not, and it hardly changes anything if knowledge is offered alongside a slap in the face.
Perhaps instead of discouraging mental exercise and discussion as has been done in previous threads, one could ignore what they find inane? You know, like so many others do.
I hesitate posting this as I can already foretell a post of "this is a gang-up/you bandwagoner" but I suppose we all end up in the same place anyways.
Please don't mistake this for tempers flaring, at least on my own part. More of a tired or let down feeling I would say.
We all asked stupid questions in the beginning. Whether online before the idea of the internet had been established, let's not pretend we are any better then anyone else here.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,274
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on May 15, 2018 6:14:10 GMT
My fault, Afoo, I gotta work on my Patton jokes more. The ole' general gets me in trouble every time. No. This is a general sentiment I have had for a while, hence why the forum posts have dried to a trickle of late On a more positive note, I do appreciate you and everyone else taking the time to have discussions. You may not have all the facts and literature, but you do the best with what you have, and try to find new ideas and solutions. Oh, I know Afoo, as I'm only attempting levity, and I do get your point that some folks may not wish to post, feeling they need to put forth a scholarly intellectual dissertation or get slammed. I think I clearly do have to work more on those new ideas and solutions. Don't we all.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,274
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on May 15, 2018 6:32:39 GMT
I've remained silent on this matter as well for want to avoid any drama, but will say I agree totally with Afoo. There really is no decent reason to be standoffish and after two recent incidents where one new member left, and another member stopped posting for a while I thought the lesson may have been learned. Wondering is what allows us to gain knowledge, and showing spite to those that do so simply discourages the pursuit of knowledge whether they would have taken that course or not, and it hardly changes anything if knowledge is offered alongside a slap in the face. Perhaps instead of discouraging mental exercise and discussion as has been done in previous threads, one could ignore what they find inane? You know, like so many others do. I hesitate posting this as I can already foretell a post of "this is a gang-up/you bandwagoner" but I suppose we all end up in the same place anyways. Please don't mistake this for tempers flaring, at least on my own part. More of a tired or let down feeling I would say. We all asked stupid questions in the beginning. Whether online before the idea of the internet had been established, let's not pretend we are any better then anyone else here. I've told Edel that he was a "prickly pear of passionate perfectionism" (say THAT three times) in so many words, and am mainly fine with him (as I feel I somewhat understand and relate to him...odd couple style). The fear, aside from Edel stroking out (another joke...kind of), as Afoo mentioned, that some will either not understand or just not bother to post because they may be more sensitive in expressing their budding ideas/opinions.
|
|