My techniuqe involves usining my left arm moving the enemies spear (It is with the danger of hurting your left arm though), the swordsman needs to be very aggrassive to hurt the spearman though as the spear is a defensive weapon.
When you add armor to the equation the spearman starts loosing though. Because the sword can be much more damaging when first in reach. This stronlgy depends on the type of armor though.
The whole spear vs sword debate is a very advanced game of rock paper scissor,
With a standard longsword with a 100 cm blade against a spear with a 200 cm shaft
Armorless without training the spear wins,
Armorless with a lot of training the sword will probably win
In soft leather Armor the sword wins.
In hard leather armor it is msotly based on skill and the strength of the swordsman
If a shield is added the swordsman will win
Unless the spearman shorten his spear then it depends on the size of the shield an skill
In chainmail the spearman will loose
This is only taking into acount 2 people, not multiple people in an armor and neither formations. The spear is far cheaper though, as only a small amount of metal is needed. Swords are best paired with armor so if you need a quick army spears are vastly superior. Especially since swords need more training before they get effective.
I think that one is not better then the other. I think their purpose in battle differs from one and another.
A spear was mostly used as a defensive weapon to take out the horses and storming troops at the start of a battle.
A sword was then used in close combat, because you have no room to use your spear. Ever been in a crowd of an EDM party ? thatās the amount of room you have to swing or move around on a battlefield. Thereās no room to move around or use the full power of a spear. Also spears are useless once the fighting gets indoors into narrow corridors or while you are climbing on ladders.
Also by swords, I mean One handed weapons, not those 2-handed game of throne weapons that in reality would see no combat and were used as an ceremonial piece.
Well the zweihander was used over a period of time, they are remarkebly effective against peasents. Two hand swords was used up until formations started being a thing, and even after that it was used for duelling purposed or in smaller fights. It becomes unuseable in tighter formations though.
Spears where actually commonly used in wars during the middle ages, also in mass combat, large maneuvers with spears are not necesary when in formation.
Weāre going to have to agree to disagree. Its very hard to prove the exact nuances of combat. My gut feeling (based on my HEMA and history study) tells me that it was not so much a rock paper scissors game. More that spears hold the advantage over both sword over cavalry except that they are heavy and unwieldy. When the battle line became significantly merged then spears would begin to have a disadvantage. Based on that I suspect soldiers would carry both if they could.
Cavalry really isnāt in the equation since they have a completely different function.
Why? a spear has a ton of piercing power. Metal armor I can see stopping it. But leather?
Very interesting, I never tried this. However based on theory I think I have the stance which I mentioned above* makes any maneuver like that not work.
*By not fully extending the spear you create a space I call the death zone. To brush aside the spear requires entering this zone (which is in easy reach of the spear) and then pushing it aside. The spear man simply stabs you as you advance.
Also brushing a spear away is not as easy as people make it sound (I tested this with some friends today). The spear acts as a great lever and the spear pushes the sword down exposing the swordsman. We found that the swordsman HAD to use two hands to push the spear. If that is the case he couldnāt be holding a shield (this may be negated by your left arm technique.)
If the spear man has room to move back (unlikely in a battle, but in single combat very likely.) I maintain that it is nearly impossible for a swordsman to win. Even with extensive skill and practice. Obviously heavy armor and shields gave the swordsmen a great advantage. But that is not the topic of discussion.
That may very well be true, but if you noticed iāve been listing the pros and cons. Not exactly saying one is better then the other.
Its not so easy to tell exactly what happened after battles began to rage. For some reason the historians of the past didnāt feel it was necessary to explain it. (Kinda makes sense, I doubt they could imagine the weapons we use nowadays)
Useless is not exactly accurate, you can fight with a spear in confined places by holding it closer to the head. It is just at a big disadvantage in that case.
Fighting against a spear is all about fear, stepping into his range before he can put to much force into a stap can mean the meaning between a damaged armor and death. Putting an untrained soldier in armor allows him to easier ignore the fact that the other guy has the ability to stab him to death ^.^
To beat a spear in one to one you need to fight insanely aggrassive. and if you do not kill the spear in the first try, you need to be able to get the hell back before he stabs you. Trying to use a moderatly aggrassive style (As most people do) against a defensive focused weapon will get you killed very fast.
But of course the swordman would need to know this, and as going into a fight without a shield is just plain stupid I donāt think that it is a technique that have been very oftenly used.
Actually in a straight narrow corridor I would peak a spear over a sword any day. As spears focus on stabbing they a re somewhat more effecting than swords in such areas.
A group of spear wielders can take out almost anything, samurai could be easily taken care off with a few ashigaru.
Spears, pikes and such things are meant for groups, not individuals.
This thread reminds me another funny but quite useless comparison years ago between swords and more precisely the point was to determinate which swordsman through history would be the winner of an hypothetical duel at this maximum of his art. Quickly the samurai with his famous katana was on top of the list but strangely it wasnāt the most effective fighter! The winner was the the 16th century European swordsman using a rapierā¦ Funny isnāt it?
No doubt, this is more for entertainment then any actual reason.
Be careful what you say, there are some expert Japanese experts on the discourseā¦they might disagree.
I still remain skeptical, Iāve faced spears. Its not only fear, they have a HUGE advantage because of length. If you havenāt already I would suggest going outside with a friend and testing it.
Actually I disagree. Spears have more range and yes itās true sword is on horse than spear but therefore spears can be thrown at like Thessalian horseman but sword is only for melee. In comparison I think spear is better than sword since spears have more durability than swords because spear sticks are hard and spear blades have more strength and is harder and the sword blade is short but I do agree swords are easy to carry but spears can dodge the blade with swords as spears are not only used for impaling and you can swing a spear and it can throw the weapon away from the sword wielder and with the weapon gone the spear wielder can impale the sword wielder. The sword can only damage not make the enemy let go with one swipe at the weapon and the spear shows itās stronger with swinging.
Leather armour? What are you even talking about? Hard leather, maybe, boiled leather is still discussed, but soft leather absolutely never existed as āarmourā in history. What are you even smoking? Just reading that made me feel tired. Replying to everything else would be a complete waste of time, just skimming through your comments makes me realize you know nothing about anything.
Aside from being rude, youāre replying to a message that is several years oldā¦
Imagine someone being rude to you, out of nowhere, because of something you said in a video game forums years and years ago (and probably donāt even remember)
Do not go around being so grumpy in lifeā¦ Itās not good for your health
