|
|
Post by xtremetrainer on Sept 11, 2024 19:32:00 GMT
So this thread makes it very clear what kind of sword we're talking about, a greatsword, but it doesn't say what kind of spear we're talking about. There are all different sorts of spears, there are javelins which are meant to be thrown and not used in hand to hand combat, there are lances which are meant to be used on horseback but not on foot, and those are just two types of spears. Spears come in a great variety so when we're talking about a greatsword vs a spear, we need to know what kind of spear we're talking about.
|
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
"Lord of the Memes"
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 10,362
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 11, 2024 19:47:31 GMT
OP limited the spear blade length to 6 ". I think therefore the spear can be a bit longer than the greatsword, a foot perhaps. As the spear has some advantage in overall length and the sword in the edge area length they should have the same weight. Javelins? Sword throwing? I think it should be about melee use in principle. (Thanks for reviving this thread!  ) |
|
|
|
Post by larason2 on Sept 11, 2024 20:48:43 GMT
I agree with the general gist that untrained warriors are better served by the spear. Also when attacking a wild animal, spear is better. With training, the dynamic changes though. Still, if the spear wielder is running the other combatant down, then the sword wielder needs to do something to compensate for the lack of range of their weapon. Once the threat of the spear tip is neutralized, then all the advantage goes to the sword wielder. Swords are short range weapons, but once that range is closed, then it's hard to stop a sword. The spear wielder's only hope is to stab the sword wielder before they close. If they fail, game over!
|
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
"Lord of the Memes"
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 10,362
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 11, 2024 20:57:15 GMT
Once the threat of the spear tip is neutralized, then all the advantage goes to the sword wielder. The problem is neutralizing it. It's just like saying: Neutralize the long blade with your spear. |
|
|
|
Post by larason2 on Sept 11, 2024 23:40:44 GMT
Haha, that's true! Therein lies the rub. Most of the time it's over in a few seconds. That's why I'd give the spear the edge in most situations. As a sword wielder, it's nice to think you'll be able to somehow tame the point. But it's not that easy in practice, and first cut wins.
|
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,338
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Sept 12, 2024 1:34:17 GMT
Spear first, then longsword. Greatsword is a specialized niche weapon, great against pike formations, but far far too heavy against a good spear man with a proper spear. The only time a spear becomes one dimensional is in tight places, like if your back is against the wall so that you can't simply choke up, sliding much of the handle length behind you if the opponent gets past your point. Spear do come in different sizes, from blazing fast & nimble to basically pole-arms, which are devastating unto themselves. Swords really are sidearms by comparison (think handgun as sidearm to a rifle), carried secondarily on ones belt.
|
|
|
|
Post by willaumep on Sept 13, 2024 14:52:05 GMT
Hello
Well i am not sure that it is that clear cut.
There is are spears and spears and great-sword and great-sword. Now for me what makes a great sword is that it is what we call now a primary weapon. I see what we call we we now call arming sword and knightly sword as "side-arms" and longs sword as weapons that can be used as primary or as side arms with variation that tend to be more one or the other. (That being said we could say that given the nature of the lance, shield/buckler and arming/knightly sword is a primary weapon)
A 6"/15cm is quite a small blade for cutting but the spear can be used as a staff. So basically with what we call toma strike in aiki-jo or a one handed strike Meyers Jo, a spear can be used like great sword to clear distance.
that being said the "ringen in swert" proper works very well against spear thrust and jams the quick rearming of the follow up thrust. (either to grab or cut the arms). Not the grapling but the control of the balde to close in.
my experience is that if we both creep directly into "duelling distance" (ie bypass Zu fechten/breaking the distance) the spear is going to be "better"
Starting from ouf of distance, which makes the closing in/get the crossing we want techniques easier to pull, makes that the great sword will be "better"
Phil
|
|
|
|
Post by xtremetrainer on Sept 20, 2024 19:41:33 GMT
OP limited the spear blade length to 6 ". I think therefore the spear can be a bit longer than the greatsword, a foot perhaps. As the spear has some advantage in overall length and the sword in the edge area length they should have the same weight. Javelins? Sword throwing? I think it should be about melee use in principle. (Thanks for reviving this thread! ) Well if we're talking about javelin vs sword that would depend on the distance, from far away the javelin would clearly have the advantage but from close in, when you're in hand to hand range, the sword would clearly have the advantage. So it depends on the conditions, just like if we were to talk about lance vs sword, for two people on horseback the lance would have the advantage and for two people on foot the sword would have the advantage. If we're talking about two people on foot, one with a great sword and one with a spear that has a 6" blade, then I will stick by what I said earlier. If its a highly skilled swordsman vs a highly skilled spearman I would bet on the swordsman, if its a novice swordsman vs a novice spearman I would bet on the spearman. |
|
howler
Member
Posts: 5,338
Member is Online
|
Post by howler on Sept 21, 2024 18:01:53 GMT
OP limited the spear blade length to 6 ". I think therefore the spear can be a bit longer than the greatsword, a foot perhaps. As the spear has some advantage in overall length and the sword in the edge area length they should have the same weight. Javelins? Sword throwing? I think it should be about melee use in principle. (Thanks for reviving this thread! ) Well if we're talking about javelin vs sword that would depend on the distance, from far away the javelin would clearly have the advantage but from close in, when you're in hand to hand range, the sword would clearly have the advantage. So it depends on the conditions, just like if we were to talk about lance vs sword, for two people on horseback the lance would have the advantage and for two people on foot the sword would have the advantage. If we're talking about two people on foot, one with a great sword and one with a spear that has a 6" blade, then I will stick by what I said earlier. If its a highly skilled swordsman vs a highly skilled spearman I would bet on the swordsman, if its a novice swordsman vs a novice spearman I would bet on the spearman. The great sword (as I understand it) was a niche battlefield weapon that dealt with pike formations and the like. Just too heavy for one on one, particularly vs a proper spear. Remove shield & armor (and rapier & off hand dagger) from the equation and spear is top of the pecking order. |
|
|
|
Post by willaumep on Sept 22, 2024 18:52:25 GMT
Well if we're talking about javelin vs sword that would depend on the distance, from far away the javelin would clearly have the advantage but from close in, when you're in hand to hand range, the sword would clearly have the advantage. So it depends on the conditions, just like if we were to talk about lance vs sword, for two people on horseback the lance would have the advantage and for two people on foot the sword would have the advantage. If we're talking about two people on foot, one with a great sword and one with a spear that has a 6" blade, then I will stick by what I said earlier. If its a highly skilled swordsman vs a highly skilled spearman I would bet on the swordsman, if its a novice swordsman vs a novice spearman I would bet on the spearman. The great sword (as I understand it) was a niche battlefield weapon that dealt with pike formations and the like. Just too heavy for one on one, particularly vs a proper spear. Remove shield & armor (and rapier & off hand dagger) from the equation and spear is top of the pecking order. Hello Looking at the great-sword as an anti-pique is a little bit like looking at the MG 42 with a Bren/bar in mind for a squad support weapons. It is not that it is technically wrong it is more that it is looking at things from a macro level effects. Unless people have experience with Jo, bo or spears, it is hard to get how fast and nimble a light spear is, it makes the traditional dueling even with a great sword of any kind an daunting proposition. No if the keep a stride outside the range mention above and keep the great sword in motion is just as daunting a proposition to break the distance even with a spear. When we say great-sword, i think it is worse than with spear, according to who we speaks it conjures plenty of different swords images from Type XIIa and XIIIa to 16th century "Zweihander". greatswordPhil |
|
|
|
Post by larason2 on Sept 26, 2024 15:52:55 GMT
I find this point interesting. So just how would one or more greatsword wielders disrupt a pike formation with it? Did they temporarily use it as a spear? If so, I'd imagine the pikes would still have a range advantage, they just have to hold their ground. Did they use it as a sort of axe to try to cut the shafts? If so, they better do it fast before they get speared by the next pike over. Maybe there's other possibilities I'm not thinking of.
|
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
"Lord of the Memes"
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 10,362
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 26, 2024 16:35:44 GMT
This is a drawing from a battle with greatsword/Bidenhander fighters in the middle. I don't know if this is correct. Two seem to use heavy swings and one seem to hold it like a pole arm.  |
|
|
|
Post by mrstabby on Sept 26, 2024 16:37:06 GMT
AFIAK they used the sword to bat away the pikes and break through the line not necessarily breaking them. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forlorn_hope^Seems Andi had the same idea 
EDIT: I'm piling on, damn thats impressive.
VS multiples probably everyone knows thisone VS other Zweihänder
|
|
AndiTheBarvarian
Member
"Lord of the Memes"
Bavarianbarbarian - Semper Semprini
Posts: 10,362
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 28, 2024 7:25:50 GMT
1 greatsword vs. 1 long pike is bs, let's see it against a tight pike formation, 4, 5 rows deep.
I wonder how the greatsworders in the Kappel battle swing their swords standing so close together, maybe vertically, two handed moulinettes?
Asian movies sometimes show spearmen with spinning techniques and lunging for more reach.
That would be an interesting duel!
|
|
|
|
Post by mrstabby on Sept 28, 2024 9:22:34 GMT
That's why they got payed double beforehand. Very high likelyhood of not surviving. You can see though how hard it is for the pike to reaquire target after getting whacked by the Zwweihänder, wouldn't be that much easier in a group, hit one aside and entanle 5 others. I am guessiing they would not have used it unless it worked for some reason - if only to concentrate the enemies thoughts on one spot while you do other things in the background.
I have read they stood about a mans length apart but moving together in small contingents, 5 or so, more or less constantly swinging the sword.
I am not sure that we could get enough of either pikemen or Montante practitioners together to get a real battle test going nowdays
|
|
Zen_Hydra
Moderator
Born with a heart full of neutrality
Posts: 2,659 
|
Post by Zen_Hydra on Oct 7, 2024 18:17:57 GMT
One needs to take the entirety of a battlefield situation into consideration when discussing the notion of two-handed swords versus pikes. These were almost never formations of completely uniform arms. If one looks at the successes of the Spanish tercio (and similar pike squares), which combined pikes, firearms, and men armed with sword and round shield into a single unit organized to fight together, play to each other's strengths, and cover each other's weaknesses, one realizes that military minds recognized that committing important resources to what amounts to a game of rock/paper/scissors was a terrible long term strategy.
Clearly soldiers armed with two-handed swords existed on the battlefield, but they almost certainly were working in tandem with soldiers suitably armed to rush in and take advantage of any "holes" the greatswords might temporarily make in a forest of wound-poles.
|
|
)
