>Perfect melee weapons don't exi-

no, you're right they don't.

>>32925455
nope

File: e28b0fa95188037f48ade4b6e510cf6c.jpg (30KB, 540x525px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 540x525px

>>32925455
You seem to have posted the wrong image. Let me rectify this.

File: pizza cutter.gif (2MB, 275x264px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 275x264px

>Perfect weapons don't exi-

File: Tonitrus.jpg (18KB, 408x409px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 408x409px

>>32925570
faggot

>>32925455
Well, it depends on the intention. There is no perfect melee weapon just like there is no perfect firearm. There's so many different types of melee weapons (swords, axes, clubs, flails, spears, halberds, crow's beak, etc.) and so many different types of firearms (pistols, SMGs, pump-actions, lever-actions, bole-actions, assault rifles, battle rifles, revolvers, etc.), that there's no way for any one weapon or firearm to be the best. To be perfect.

In a home defence situation, a halberd would suck because it's so big, bulky, and awkward to use in confined areas. Even if we assume the intruder doesn't have a firearm, which would practically render a typical melee weapon useless, I think something smaller would be advantageous. Though something like a sword or axe takes more practice to become efficient with than a spear or halberd. So if you have NO training in melee weapons, then a spear or halberd would probably be preferable.

Then, what if you needed something concealable, for like an assassin or something. A dagger would probably be the best you can get, or perhaps a bunch of dagger-sized rods you can screw together with one having a sharp point so that you can assemble a spear. Then for something like armour, you'd want something that you can thrust with rather than slash at to try and pierce said armour. There's just too much to consider.

As for firearms, at distance a rifle would be best, for something concealable a pistol would be best, for home defence probably either a shotgun with buckshot, a pistol, or a short barreled firearm using pistol ammo to minimalize penetration to some degree. A pistol... I don't think it's ever really ideal in ANY situation unless concealment is an absolute must.

File: Katana-nagai.jpg (80KB, 1024x800px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1024x800px

>>32925618
You were saying?

>>32925735
B
M A S T E R W O R K
S
T
A
R
D

S
W
O
R
D

>>32925618
i like your point. how about a rapier? good reach and still usable indoors thanks to it primarily being used in a stabbing motion? also the actual sword mostly used when pople stopped using metal armour.

>>32925455
Too bad a halberd is too long for CQB...

>>32925963
I imagine a rapier would take a significant amount of skill to use, not to mention I imagine if the threat gets within thrusting distance (closes to within about arm's reach), then the rapier couldn't serve as a weapon at all. A dagger, however, could still be used at that range. So if you had one for back-up, that might be a good combination. Though could a rapier cause enough 'damage' to stop a threat in one thrust? Unless it's well aimed, I kind of doubt it, especially if they're pumped with drugs and adrenaline.

But hey, I know absolutely nothing about knives. I accidentally stabbed my hand once with a pocket knife, only went in perhaps a centimeter. Instantly went into a mild form of shock, quickly started making a makeshift bandage with toilet paper and duct tape, didn't go to the hospital, didn't get stitches, couldn't use the hand for about 2 weeks or so, but my hand is fine now. If I lost any strength in it, I haven't noticed. That one dude who accidentally shot himself in the leg with his .45 ACP M1911 with FMJ, he didn't fall, but he did lose something like 14% of the strength in his right leg or some such thing; that's why I brought it up. I had no adrenaline or drugs in my system at the time of wounding myself though.

>>32926046
When people traditionally used halberds, they weren't alone. Either they were in an Army of some sort (prior to the invention of the bayonet, no doubt, which if I had to make a wild guess, I figure bayonets probably entered common usage in the late 1600s or early 1700s), or it was on guard duty in which case there's probably at least 2 guys immediately close to each other, or, there's other guards easily within shouting distance who can come to your aid in a hurry. My point being; you won't be alone, so you have someone watching your back, making it more dangerous for someone to try and close with you.

But you're right; like any weapon of that size, it won't be ideal in CQB. An M91/30 with its bayonet fixed would be bad enough, and that's 'only', what, 6' in length? I recall it being close to as long as I am tall, but it's been sadly years since I handled a Mosin. Long story.

>>32926047
yes that is true, some skill is probably required. i do think for practical use a knife would be the most practical paired with a long weapon. and if we take guns into the calculation any pistol would do well with a melee attacker. no strength needed and short as a knife.

>>32925963
A proper rapier is a long weapon. I wouldn't want it indoors. You could probably make it work, but I'd want something just a bit shorter, and preferably a bit better of a cutting weapon as well.

>>32926047
If you're just stabbing a guy who doesn't have a decently sized weapon of his own, it really doesn't require much skill to use.

>>32925618
>SMGs, lever-actions, revolvers
These at least are outdated in most every way.

>>32926176
Oh yeah, for sure, a pistol trumps a melee weapon pretty much any day of the week.

>>32926177
True, a rapier would probably trump a dagger unless they have some UNBELIEVABLE reflexes.

>>32926235
SMGs are indeed basically outdated. They're still effective within 150-250m or so, sure, but an assault rifle would be basically better in just about every way. Intermediate cartridge are close to the same (or in some cases even lighter) than 9x19 (let alone .40 S&W or .45 ACP), while being FAAAAAAR more accurate, and probably more effective for things like hunting. Could you hunt a coyote with a pistol cartridge? Probably best to at least use 5.56 or 5.45. The only possible advantage than an SMG could have over an assault rifle is probably more easily being silenced/suppressed. Also the barrel probably doesn't overheat as quickly.

As for revolvers, they still hold some advantages over semi-auto pistols. They can use Magnum cartridges without weighing 4lb or more, making them better handguns for hunting if you want to use one instead of a rifle or shotgun which would be better. They're also known to be utterly diehard reliable, even moreso than a Glock or AK, and the M1895 design is probably the quietest handgun on the planet when silenced. No action to rack. The only sounds you'd make if you're using subsonic ammo and a really good silencer is cocking the hammer (because the double-action trigger pull sucks balls), and then letting it detonate the primer when it falls. Seems like little more than a few clicks, with the loudest noise being the impact of the bullet on the target.

As for lever actions, you can get some in rifle cartridges. No, lever actions aren't as easily used when prone as bolt actions, but an M1895 in 7.62x54r is probably every bit as good as an M91/30 provided you're not prone, maybe even better in terms of rate of fire? Either way, all in all, I don't think 'outdated' is a good word to use. Outclassed, but still effective with training.

>>32926235
In terms of firearms, I see the term 'outdated' as sounding like 'obsolete'. A flintlock smoothbore pistol is just about completely outclassed in every way, shape, and form by modern side-arms. Same with cap-and-ball revolvers. Sure, you get about 5-6 shots typically, but the reload is obnoxiously long, the black powder won't give as good performance as smokeless, not to mention the fouling, the risk of chain-fire, the risk of caps causing jams in the mechanism, and so on. If you seen someone carrying a cap-and-ball revolver, well yeah, I'd consider it pretty damn cool, but also worthy of a laugh, ESPECIALLY at the thought of him actually having to use it. Will it kill? Abso-fucking-lutely, but it is pretty much guaranteed to be outclassed no matter what the opposition might be carrying, even a Hi-Point.

Then there's fixed-cylinder revolvers. Slow on the unloading and reloading, typically no double-action capabilities, I would consider these to be RIGHT at the line of being outdated/obsolete. Considering usually only 1-3 shots are fired in those incredibly rare instances that a person must defend themself, if it had double-action capabilities, its rate of fire and capacity of 5-6 shots typically would make it not TERRIBLY bad. Not GOOD by any means, but useable. Personally I'm a garbage shot with double-action and exclusively stick to single-action, but I imagine in a stressful life-or-death situation, I'd be just pulling on that trigger like a madman with the dangerous end pointing somewhere in the general direction of the individual shooting back. Probably no hits, but that's just the way of it. Might die? Panic is a definite possibility.

Anyways I totally see why people still use non-fixedcylinder revolvers today even though I consider semi-auto pistols to be almost entirely superior. They're accurate, utterly reliable, utterly simple, not terribly slow on the reload if you have speed loaders, can be relatively quick to shoot with double-action, etc.

>>32925533
>this
Better with a butt spike though

>>32925533
Sorry but no, OP had it right, hook at the back, thin point up front, nice axe to land a crushing or cutting blow.... there isn't much this cant do.

File: 1897 trencher.jpg (76KB, 736x414px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 736x414px

>>32925455

File: isthisbait.png (26KB, 527x409px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 527x409px

>>32925735

File: Gorgoroth_Gaahl.png (2MB, 1500x1004px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1500x1004px

most efektive

>>32927213
Dat British P07 bayonet tho... sex.