What's the closest thing to a "fantasy" weapon,

>>34446710
Probably
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulfberht_swords

>>34446710
Nukes, you dummy

>>34446931
Yeah, that was the obvious answer. The fact that both sides were working towards one disqualified it from what I'm actually looking for.

>>34446710
Excalibur

>>34447060
So you want something where the other side in the conflict not only doesn't have access to the superweapon, but doesn't even know it exists, or can exist? You didn't mention that in OP. Also, we nuked Japan, and Japan was not working on their own nukes, as far as I know.

>>34447415
I would say despite this new condition the first metal ships.

Obviously the first tank.

>>34447415
>So you want something where the other side in the conflict not only doesn't have access to the superweapon
Yes, or at least is actively having to try and work on their own prototype.
>but doesn't even know it exists, or can exist?
No.

>Japan was not working on their own nukes
Nah, but Germany was and I included them as the two sides of the conflict.

To be completely frank, I mostly just discounted nukes because they are an obvious (and thus uninteresting) answer but also because as far as I know the race for nuclear weapons WAS a race, where everybody knew what it was and was just trying to figure out how to build it first. In either case I should have worded that better and not thrown confusion onto the topic, so I'm sorry about that nigga. Please ignore the additional issues that caused.

>>34447501
>the first metal ships.
That must have been fucking terrifying to face.

>>34448877
Not if both sides show up with one at the same time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Hampton_Roads#March_9:_Monitor_engages_Virginia

>After fighting for hours, mostly at close range, neither could overcome the other. The armor of both ships proved adequate. In part, this was because each was handicapped in her offensive capabilities. Buchanan, in Virginia, had not expected to fight another armored vessel, so his guns were supplied only with shell rather than armor-piercing shot.[60] Monitor's guns were used with the standard service charge of only 15 lb (6.8 kg) of powder, which did not give the projectile sufficient momentum to penetrate her opponent's armor.

>The battle finally ceased when a shell from Virginia struck the pilot house of Monitor and exploded, driving fragments of paint and iron through the viewing slits into Worden's eyes and temporarily blinding him.[43] As no one else could see to command the ship, Monitor was forced to draw off.

Although it would have sucked to be in one of the wooden ships the Virginia destroyed on her way over.

>>34448905
Holy shit, that's hilarious.
>Convinced that his ship had won the day, Jones ordered her back to Norfolk. At about this time, Monitor returned, only to discover her opponent apparently giving up the fight. Convinced that Virginia was quitting, with orders only to protect Minnesota and not to risk his ship unnecessarily, Greene did not pursue. Thus, each side misinterpreted the moves of the other, and as a result each claimed victory.
Sorta reminds you how human it all is.

>>34446710
Damascus steel and Greek fire comes to mind.

>>34446710
How about the svd? Didn't the CIA have a bounty on them?

>>34449926
Was pretty good at the time, especially if you include the clever scope.

Not sure what the runner up would be. Sig510 with good optics?

>>34446710
Wouldn't the FG-42 and StG-44 count here? No other nation had a similar weapon in service at the time; BAR need not apply.

Some Bubba'd as fuck .25 MOA bullpup milsurp.

Wasn't there a fancy Chinese sword of super high quality bronze passed down through the ages that's still around today?

>>34446710
Girandoni air rifle.Hard AF to produce and maintain and required tons of training,but was a smokeless repeating weapon with almost no report.

>>34446897
>Muh Ulfberht
The only special thing about them is that they were mostly crucible steel at a time when pattern welding was more common, and considering that many of the swords were made with foreign crucible steel and crucible steel became the norm later I think it's a stretch to say they were unreplicated.

>>34452134

Damn, beat me to it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Girandoni_air_rifle

The issue was not so much the production, but the cost of it and the refilling of the air containers.

File: 1499194327934.jpg (24KB, 480x300px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x300px

I think when Cortez encountered the Aztecs would count. The Conquistadors had steel armor and weapons, guns and horses, all things the aztecs had never encountered before. Then of course came the pandemic.

File: Ireland 1798 01.jpg (37KB, 800x159px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 800x159px

>>34446710
The first iron sword was most likely inferior to the bronze swords of its time. Iron ad bronze are overall quite close until we get to quenched steel, and early on you're looking at a very immature iron forging (took them a while to figure out hat you should heat the iron a lot before beating it to shape) competing with very mature bronze working technology.

The advantage of iron (once we get iron smelting, and aren't relying on meteorites) is instead in the price. Copper can be a bit tricky to find, tin is really scarce, but iron is all over the place. Iron often made metal equipment something for armies, instead of the elite.

>>34452352
>and crucible steel became the norm later

In Europe? That'd be in the late 19th century at the earliest I think.

>>34446897
As good as they probably were, I suspect their performance was probably "only" roughly that of the top end "normal" blades of the time. And with metallurgy improving the "normal" swords would have been catching up. Possibly passing them by a decent margin even once full quenching (as opposed to slack quenching, not as opposed to differential quenching) became common somewhere in the early renaissance or so.

>>34450103
Good quality at least. Not so much passed down as left in a tomb were it IIRC ended up submerged in nearly oxygen-free water. Between that (isn't for nothing that a lot of old finds are made in bogs) and the corrosion-resistance of bronze it then managed to weather the years quite well.

Here's an Irish bronze blade that was found, re-hilted, and put to use again in 1798.

File: It just works.jpg (24KB, 473x650px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 473x650px

>>34452693
>late 19th century at the earliest
I guess that's what I get for assuming that longswordfags weren't just pulling muh monosteel out of their asses. If you'd be willing to go in depth on the evolution of forging in Yurop I'd like to hear what you have to say.

File: alan williams.gif (14KB, 684x402px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 684x402px

>>34452756
While pattern welding faded out in the late Viking age, this didn't mean "monosteel" blades. Instead most blades continue to be made form a mix of iron and steel through the middle ages. Pic shows a few swords form various centuries split between different groups according to construction, each * is one blade.

That we don't normally see this is due to fashion. Instead of polishing, and probably also etching the blades to bring out the pattern, swords are now instead polished to look like a single, bright piece of steel. This fashion remains until damascened blades start becoming fashionable again, somewhere in the 18th century IIRC. Maybe 19th.

Then as all steel construction starts taking over (probably simply due to steel getting cheaper and work hours being expensive post black death) in the renaissance, we still don't get mono-steel, as folding of one kind or another is still a necessity to refine the material to sufficient quality. (As you may infer from that, the metal for the previous swords would have been folded as well.)

Early on the metal would have come form bloomery furnaces, either making steel outright, or iron that was then carburised. In the late middle ages we start seeing much larger furnaces making much higher carbon material, up to pig iron. T His would then have been extensively hot forged to make wrought iron, or fined to make the same. Stopping mid way at steel directly seems to have been very rare, if done at all. This was then carburised. While the melting part of fining would have reduced the need for folding, it wouldn't remove it, and the carburisation would leave a very inhomogeneous metal in need of some folds as well.

Proper monosteel is basically a modern thing, spat out by an LD converter. And even there we bring in most of the effect of folding in the form of hot strip milling. It's the extensive hot forging that does most of the refining, not the folds themselves.

File: Sachse - Damascus Steel 02.jpg (295KB, 1398x1272px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1398x1272px

Here's a pair of blades from the "polished bright" period, etched to show what's going on in the metal. Not quite monosteel it turns out.

File: Sachse - Damascus Steel 01.jpg (345KB, 1402x1277px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 1402x1277px

Rapier, Solingen blade, ca 1600.

These two pics from "Damascus Steel" by Sachse. Info previously mostly based on "The Sword and the Crucible" by Alan Williams, very warmly recommended if you want to learn about these things.

File: feather1a.jpg (36KB, 615x461px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 615x461px

>>34452841
I should probably also mention that "hardened" here doesn't necessarily mean a proper quench as it does with modern blades. Instead up to somewhere in the 15th century (IIRC) it probably means a slack quench, ie they let the blade cool a bit before quenching. This makes for a much safer and less temperamental process, but in return you won't get a blade that's as hard or strong as a proper quench produces when everythign goes right.

Also, full quench or not, the shallow hardening nature of these steels means the core of an all-steel blade may often end up less hardened than the rest, or even effectively unhardened. Any iron parts in a sword will be outright unhardeneable.

GREEK FIRE FRIENDO, during its usage it was a closely guarded byzantine secret. Invaders literally sent back reports that "all of our ships burst into flames!"

they still don't know how to make it, it caused so much fear, and so little was actually known about it that all incendiary weapons for the next few hundred years were called "greek fire" for no reason.

>"the ingredients and the processes of manufacture and deployment of Greek fire were carefully guarded military secrets. So strict was the secrecy that the composition of Greek fire was lost forever and remains a source of speculation"

>>34452942
>it caused so much fear, and so little was actually known about it that all incendiary weapons for the next few hundred years were called "greek fire" for no reason.

That is the reason.

Looks like I've got a tripfag to not filter. Love you /k/, good posts buddy.

File: FANTASY MASTER.jpg (87KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1000x1000px

>>34452841
>>34452860
>>34452873
>>34452935
Neat, thanks.

>>34449799
Greek fire for sure.

>>34452134
So a super high-power BB-gun?

>>34446710
Me262 though that's more along the sci-fi/Gundam route.

File: IMG_1512.jpg (20KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 480x360px

>>34446710
Probably a throwing star made from special paper.

Wootz steel
Greek fire

>>34453591
.46 Caliber, so not so much.

>>34453591
Not exactly, the Girandoni Air Rifle fired a .46 caliber round ball at about the same velocity as 45 ACP. In the late 1700's a 20 round magazine rifle with that performance, high rate of fire, and low muzzle velocity was pretty exceptional. It was however hampered by the technology of the time not being up to the task of building enough air flasks and the darn things having to be hand filled.

There are similar modern air rifles with fairly good performance but the Girandoni is remarkable for existing when it did.

>>34446710
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Babylon

Heres your spoonfeeding fag. A project for the MOST DAKKA cut down in its prime by Mossad/MI5/CIA. There's plenty of shit to dig down into, but it could have been the greatest. But Israel and company were scared shitless of a giant immobile cannon pointing in the entirely wrong direction. All because some brilliant bastard was forced to make a faustian bargain to fund his dream project.

>>34447547
>doesn't appreciate a science quest for the Holy Grail of Destruction, wherein many parties race to be the first to find it

>>34446710
I would say early night vision

>>34450103
Sword of Goujian.

>>34446710
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARAUDER