|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Nov 12, 2018 2:34:24 GMT
If they're both relatively highly skilled, they're both really advanced experts with their weapons, I would bet on the swordsman. Given expertness, and equal expertness, I'd bet on spear. With improved skill, the chance of major error on either side falls, and the advantage due to the "better" weapon becomes more important. (Similarly, at high levels of skill, with equal weapons, small differences in athleticism - strength and speed - matter more.) |
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Nov 12, 2018 2:56:53 GMT
My money is still on the spear.
|
|
|
|
Post by howler on Nov 12, 2018 4:53:02 GMT
So anyway, the OP talked about a duel to the death where both opponents aren't wearing armor, one has got a spear the other has a greatsword. Both opponents are of equal size and skill. So, this is the conclusion I've come to. If they're both relatively unskilled or just have beginner level skill with their weapons I would bet on the spearman. If they're both relatively highly skilled, they're both really advanced experts with their weapons, I would bet on the swordsman. Spear for both. Too much reach and speed, and certainly enough power. Greatsword was a niche battlefield weapon used against formations. Historical use renders the verdict. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2018 18:24:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by xtremetrainer on Nov 13, 2018 0:53:50 GMT
So anyway, the OP talked about a duel to the death where both opponents aren't wearing armor, one has got a spear the other has a greatsword. Both opponents are of equal size and skill. So, this is the conclusion I've come to. If they're both relatively unskilled or just have beginner level skill with their weapons I would bet on the spearman. If they're both relatively highly skilled, they're both really advanced experts with their weapons, I would bet on the swordsman. Spear for both. Too much reach and speed, and certainly enough power. Greatsword was a niche battlefield weapon used against formations. Historical use renders the verdict. Spears are easier to learn to use, but in the hands of a highly skilled person swords can do more. |
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Nov 13, 2018 1:32:38 GMT
Spears are easier to learn to use, but in the hands of a highly skilled person swords can do more. But in the one-on-one duel in the OP, that "more" that swords can do isn't of much use. A sword is versatile, and can do a lot in skilled hands. A spear is more one-dimensional, but still benefits a lot from a skilled wielder. Accuracy, speed, judgment of range, timing, lack of telegraphing, avoidance of over-commitment, more deceptive feints (or transition from feints to real attacks if they look like they will actually get through, or abandonment of an attack and transitioning to another attack when it looks like it will be blocked) will make the spear very, very dangerous in skilled hands. The unskilled spearman will hit the swordsman. The skilled spearman will be able to choose whether to hit the swordsman in the left eye or the right eye. |
|
|
|
Post by zabazagobo on Nov 13, 2018 1:44:02 GMT
Spears are easier to learn to use, but in the hands of a highly skilled person swords can do more. But in the one-on-one duel in the OP, that "more" that swords can do isn't of much use. A sword is versatile, and can do a lot in skilled hands. A spear is more one-dimensional, but still benefits a lot from a skilled wielder. Accuracy, speed, judgment of range, timing, lack of telegraphing, avoidance of over-commitment, more deceptive feints (or transition from feints to real attacks if they look like they will actually get through, or abandonment of an attack and transitioning to another attack when it looks like it will be blocked) will make the spear very, very dangerous in skilled hands. The unskilled spearman will hit the swordsman. The skilled spearman will be able to choose whether to hit the swordsman in the left eye or the right eye.Exactly my perspective. I'd be more inclined to think a pair of swords would fare better against a spear than a great sword, although that's arguably my preference (bias?) for dual-wielding Japanese styled swords yelling about that. A greatsword's recovery time would just not fare well against the 'poking game'. I think even just a lighter weight longsword (maybe a type XVa) would do better against a spear since you can respond faster and work more rapidly from a successful bind. But heck, I have no training with a true greatsword (e.g. montante or zweihander) so I can't do more than hypothesize. |
|
|
|
Post by howler on Nov 13, 2018 1:54:10 GMT
Spear for both. Too much reach and speed, and certainly enough power. Greatsword was a niche battlefield weapon used against formations. Historical use renders the verdict. Spears are easier to learn to use, but in the hands of a highly skilled person swords can do more. Swords can do things spears can't do because they are often sidearms, hence (for example) convenience when carried on a belt in the tavern while not skewering your pub mate. Swords are also nice in certain tight spaces or when using one handed. Two handed, one on one combat in open terrain...I fear it is a spear world. |
|
|
|
Post by Timo Nieminen on Nov 13, 2018 2:01:51 GMT
I'd be more inclined to think a pair of swords would fare better against a spear than a great sword, although that's arguably my preference (bias?) for dual-wielding Japanese styled swords yelling about that. A greatsword's recovery time would just not fare well against the 'poking game'. I think even just a lighter weight longsword (maybe a type XVa) would do better against a spear since you can respond faster and work more rapidly from a successful bind. But heck, I have no training with a true greatsword (e.g. montante or zweihander) so I can't do more than hypothesize. Pair of swords is good against a spear, as far as short weapons can be "good" against a spear. I'd still bet on spear, given the usual conditions and equality of skill, but two swords is significantly harder to beat with spear than single sword. Maybe sword and shield is better, but two swords is a better EDC choice. Short swords are fine - you already have a huge range disadvantage against spear, so you don't give up anything significant by losing 10" of blade. Long enough to have enough length for trapping and blocking/parrying, and short enough for easy movement (including disengaging) when you get in close. The advantage of greatsword against spear compared to longsword is IMO the very long cross, and the very long hilt, which both hinder quick circular disengages around the hilt (which are usually very effective against single sword). |
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Nov 13, 2018 13:28:50 GMT
A pair of swords, sword and shield are game changers. For instance I would not feel handicapped with my butterfly swords, which at 15" are short swords, or large knives. However the topic is Great Sword vs Spear.
|
|
|
|
Post by xtremetrainer on Nov 13, 2018 16:31:51 GMT
If the spear is so effective than I don't see why there wasn't a big fuss made about spears the way there was about swords. If you look at history, the sword was the king of all handheld weapons until it was dethroned by the gun. Up until then there has been no weapon that has been romanticized so much, and it still is to this day in movies and whatnot.
|
|
|
|
Post by legacyofthesword on Nov 13, 2018 17:09:03 GMT
If the spear is so effective than I don't see why there wasn't a big fuss made about spears the way there was about swords. If you look at history, the sword was the king of all handheld weapons until it was dethroned by the gun. Up until then there has been no weapon that has been romanticized so much, and it still is to this day in movies and whatnot.
Rifles are unquestionable better weapons than pistols, yet the legend of the gunslinger/gunfighter was based primarily around pistols. I think it has less to do with which was a better weapon, and which was commonly carried by everyone throughout history. Swords are extremely convenient to care everywhere; spears quickly become a bother.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Nov 13, 2018 17:47:56 GMT
... and it still is to this day in movies and whatnot. Swords are more romantic as well as fun. I spend far more time playing with my swords and looking at my wish book for another then a spear. But in a tight it will be a spear that I’ll grab, and have. Now that I have a shield that meets my fancy it will be a sword and shield or axe and shield if there is time. I was about to send this when I went back to reread your post and I find the last line a killer “and it still is to this day in movies”. You can forget about what you see in the movies if you are looking for facts. You might include documentaries in that also. I’ve seen documentaries with the troops marching with left hand rifles, carrier islands on the port side (the IJN did have two such carriers). I’ve watched what was supposed to be historical battle scenes and there were planes that weren’t around at the time, the wrong colour scheme is a more common error. Last night I watched a video, probably a clip from a movie, of the Sudanese attacking an Egyptian fort that took place in 1885. There was an Egyptian with an English No. 3 or US M1917 rifle, the silhouettes are the same. There was the SGT York movie with the sergeant using a M1903 rifle. He actually used a M1917. I could go on but you should have gotten the point. |
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,659 
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Nov 13, 2018 17:53:54 GMT
If the spear is so effective than I don't see why there wasn't a big fuss made about spears the way there was about swords. If you look at history, the sword was the king of all handheld weapons until it was dethroned by the gun. Up until then there has been no weapon that has been romanticized so much, and it still is to this day in movies and whatnot.
Rifles are unquestionable better weapons than pistols, yet the legend of the gunslinger/gunfighter was based primarily around pistols. I think it has less to do with which was a better weapon, and which was commonly carried by everyone throughout history. Swords are extremely convenient to care everywhere; spears quickly become a bother.
I think it is worth considering that there is a chivalric connection between swords and pistols, and perhaps their romanticism has roots in idealized knightly virtue. |
|
|
|
Post by xtremetrainer on Nov 13, 2018 17:54:08 GMT
Rifles are unquestionable better weapons than pistols, yet the legend of the gunslinger/gunfighter was based primarily around pistols.
That depends on the situation. Rifles are definitely better at long range but at close range and particularly if you're in close quarters I would go with the pistol. You can move faster with a pistol. To quote the character Jonas Chod in the movie Nevada Smith, "How are you gonna swing a rifle in a bar?" |
|
|
|
Post by xtremetrainer on Nov 13, 2018 17:58:39 GMT
So lets settle this once and for all. Take your pick. Attachments:
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,659
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Nov 13, 2018 18:05:54 GMT
If the spear is so effective than I don't see why there wasn't a big fuss made about spears the way there was about swords. If you look at history, the sword was the king of all handheld weapons until it was dethroned by the gun. Up until then there has been no weapon that has been romanticized so much, and it still is to this day in movies and whatnot. The sword is a knightly weapon, a noble weapon. Nobles have always been the taste-makers, fashionistas, and patrons of the arts. The sentiment glorifying the sword, was the same one white-washing and romanticizing knighthood and chivalric arms. Nobles buying officer ranks survived into the modern era, and the cavalry officer armed with a sword is still idealized in military art. It isn't upon the merits of the sword as a weapon which it has been idealized, but the status the sword represents. |
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,659
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Nov 13, 2018 18:10:00 GMT
So lets settle this once and for all. Take your pick.   |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2018 18:45:42 GMT
So lets settle this once and for all. Take your pick. I'll take the yardstick wielded by a true warrior  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2018 18:50:48 GMT
A pair of swords, sword and shield are game changers. For instance I would not feel handicapped with my butterfly swords, which at 15" are short swords, or large knives. However the topic is Great Sword vs Spear. Yet, as the thread began, neither spear nor "greatsword" were clearly defined. Stroke on guys, don't mind me. By my count, there are at least three recent spear vs sword threads with much the same general responses. A more recent thread abandoned sbg-sword-forum.forums.net/thread/55610/spear |
|
