Why were maces, clubs, warhammers etc. used so rarely? You mostly hear of swords or sometimes axes, but why do you hear that little about blunt weapons? They seem pretty effective (i wouldn't want to get hit by something like that) and can also be used against armoured units. It's also pretty great for cavalry. The few depictions of blunt weapons you have are mostly during the renasaince. Why didn't medieval or ancient armys use them?
>>1370406
Comparing a mace to say, a sword, you have denser construction, the mace is thick, especially around the head.
That means, for the same weight, you have a shorter weapon, and a correspondingly slower swing.
Reach is good. Striking quickly is good. It's only when armor develops to the point that the extra anti-armor utility is worth giving up reach and speed that you see maces overtake things like swords and hafted weapons.
Armor got some huge boost in the late medieval period, hence the rising popularity of the mace then.
>>1370406
>maces, clubs, warhammers etc. used so rarely?
What the fuck are you talking about? All the knights carried warhammers around, it's the only way to defeat plate.
>>1370406
It wasn't as required?
You need blunt things like that when you're dealing with heavier armour. There are tons of issues with using weapons like that which are 'outweighed' by the need to defeat armour.
If the armour isn't enough to warrant that sort of attention why bother with it at all? Of course there will have been people who do prefer that type of weapon in many periods but the most efficient solutions become the most common. Clearly something was doing the job better.
What were dragons a metaphor for in medieval times?
The Devil.
Giant fire breathing flying lizard
Crocodiles
Would this be a viable tactic? Historically speaking of course
Mods will delete this thread if there is any good in the world
>>1386944
That is quite possibly the most retarded battle tactic I've ever seen
>>1386944
Replace the elves with rocks then maybe
What civilization is the most overrated in history and why?
Human Civilization
Egyptian
>>1388759
Why?
Explain capitalism and socialism without a showing of bias.
Capitalism-Private ownership of the means of production and wage labor
Socialism-Communal ownership of the means of production
Spooks
why?
Who was the best commander in WW2?
Unironically, Hitler
Manstein & Guderian
>>1384501
General Winter
I don't really get this whole eternal Anglo thing. Why would Germanics poke fun at Anglos, the Germanic inhabitants of Britain? Why not eternal Celt?
Germanics are the ones that ruin everything.
>not realizing that Britain was one of the first things ruined by the English
If Vortigern had lopped off Hengist and Horsa's heads the moment they stepped their Germanic asses off of their boats the world would be a much better place.
>>1381650
You're expecting too much from retarded /pol/sters
what went wrong, /his/?
>inb4 socialism
It literally was a combination of socialism and the fact that they relied heavily on oil
/thread
>>1377318
>Suffered from extreme capital flight
>Rely on oil to prop up economy
>Tried to solve the capital flight with hairbrained currency swap scheme
>Currency swap scheme creates a bubble
>Bubble bursts when oil prices fall
Contrary to popular belief, it took more than "feeding poor people" to ruin Venezuela's economy. Shit was falling apart at the seams for decades.
>>1377318
Chavez killed manufacturing and made the economy rely exclusively on oil. When oil prices went dowm,Maduro was forced to print money to keep the clienteralist structure,creating tons of inflation. So pretty much socialism
Is this even remotely true?
It isn't.
>>1387352
Evolution does not necessitate atheism. It just describes how biology on earth changed and makes no reference to the existence of God.
Atheism does not necessitate humanism because humanism is a narrow set of ideals extolling humanity when others, like nihilism, would have equal worth.
The use of "Socialism" as a negative universally is retarded, because unless you're an-cap, you believe in some of socialism. However, if this means excessively socialist economies, then no, it doesn't necessitate from humanism, which does not make judgements on the intricacies of economies.
"Socialism" does not lead to Communism, in fact, it's usually the opposite. Communism came to power in feudal states which hated Socialism, while Western states used Socialist methods to stop Communists from being popular, particularly Britain.
I wonder if whoever made this has ever heard of Objectivists.
No. Not a single one of those steps is necessarily true. It could be true, but nothing guarantees that evolution will lead to anything, much less a (loss of a) religious or ideological position
What do women really want?
>>1383225
Power
>>1383225
You, OP. You are the sublime object of ideology.
a sound dicking
What's the closest we ever had to a female Hitler ?
the planned parenthood women who help poor racial minority women get abortions and finance abortions in poor foreign countries.
>>1387797
I'm talking specific historical figure here
>>1387800
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger
She was a historical figure.
Did the Cuban revolutionaries know that building socialism would kill Cuba's tourist economy and turn them into a pariah among Latin American countries?
Did they care?
>>1390920
No they probably didn't understand that. Either way most of them were probably fucked in the end.
>>1390920
>Revolutionary socialists
>Understanding anything
Nice meme
>>1390920
Cuban revolutionaries turned to socialism because they pissed off the big US of A, so they needed a big new friend, the soviets.
In the beginning Castro wasn't a communist.
Did the Romans lay the path for the British to become so powerful?
>Brits
>powerful
lol
>>1390617
They only conquered most of the new world you butthurt fag.
>>1390627
>latin america
>most of
ok
How come random desert people thousands of years ago used to get concrete proof God exists but we're just supposed to go on faith?
It's about fucking time for another miracle I'd say. Why doesn't He schedule one every 100 years or so?
>>1390340
>Why doesn't He schedule one every 100 years or so
There was a big one 99 years ago.
>>1390343
>some solar effects and Portuplebs overreacting
>"""miracle"""
>>1390340
Do you really think this only happens every X100 years? Or X1000?
What the fuck was his problem?
>>1390262
He looks like the bad guy from a Disney movie.
>>1390336
He was a Disney villain IRL for all intents and purposes.
He just wanted to make his own jolly empire