Weapon suggestions?

>>45963629

>in chain
>my adversary is in full flate

why can't I run, again?
>because reasons, anon

yeah, no.

>no really, REASONS

a spear.
/thread

>>45963629
Anything with longer reach that doesn't restrict mobility too much.
The other guy is better defended so I would need to take advantage of better mobility from lighter armor

>>45963629
Shield and a warhammer. Bludgeon the shit out of him before he can end you.

>>45963667

Spear is literally useless against full plate in a duel

>>45963667
it's a hypothetical situation you retard. also spear is a shit choice for people who think world of warcraft is an accurate combat simulator
>>45963629
some kid of heavy bludgeon, mace or some kind of war pick maybe

>>45963629
Polaxe

Has some reach to keep the opponent at distance and is good for grappling and tripping, which is what you want against plate.

Though you're likely fucked anyway.

>>45963629
Canon. Artillery beat plate armor.

>>45963727
>Spear is literally useless against full plate in a duel
>>45963751
>also spear is a shit choice

Neither of you seem to know anything about anything, so...

have fun shitposting.

>>45963718
depending on the chainmail, you might actually be more encumbered than the full plate user, full plate was really fucking well made, and chainmail was cumbersome as shit

>>45963805
you have to mind the stuff your opponent probably wears underneath , also plate armor cant be build without leaving any kind of gaps

>>45963793
spears are for countering cavalry and deterring poorly armoured dumbass peasants
like you

>>45963856
No seriously that is taking into account the stuff he wears underneath. Full plate was seriously built so you could move like a normal human person

>>45963873

In the scenario we are discussing, functional reach and the ability to dictate engagement range is about the only thing that matters.

Anyone with a even a little bit of training with a spear can defeat anyone with even a lot of sword training. If you believe otherwise, you're wrong. End of story.

>>45963727
A staff is literally one of the best weapons for takedowns. A pointy staff will best stab the fucker in his gaps once he's down.

>>45963953
>Anyone with a even a little bit of training with a spear can defeat anyone with even a lot of sword training.
False. A guy whose trained with a spear for six weeks will still lose to a dude whose trained with a sword for six years.

>>45963993

Okay, okay. That bit was hyperbole.

>>45963945
then why not the same with chainmail? it is mostly about weight in this matter , and as far as i know plate was usually more moveble than the person in it.

>>45963873
All spears are 20 feet long.

>>45963986
Dude, while chopping wood it's hard to hit the same exact inch every single swing. How do you expect to hit a half-inch wide gap with a spear at length when the target and you are both moving the entire time?

>>45963953
>Anyone with a even a little bit of training with a spear can defeat anyone with even a lot of sword training.

>little training
>a lot of training

>If you believe otherwise, you're wrong.

Well I took a day of karate class, I bet I'll beat the everliving shit out of this guy who has been street fighting for half of his life.

>>45964027
You have to understand that op plays rpgs, and in rpgs chain is lighter than plate. Reality be fucked.

>>45964036
Because he's on the ground, winded and my point is to his throat.

>>45964077
And he is just going to lie down and die? I don't think so. The opponent is obviously going to have a sword and shield if he's going against a spear. Your spear gets sight in the shield and he can just run up and fuck your shit.

>>45964051
well , i have no clue how thick plate armor is build

but does the material volume really surpass regular chainmail?

>>45963953
depends on force multipliers. In this case, mr fullplate has fullplate, and it's nearly impossible to hit the narrow unarmoured bits with a spear at long range. Hell, even in close range, the technique used to engage someone in full plate with a sword was half swording, where you grab the blade of your sword about halfway up with your other hand so you have enough control to even have a chance of penetrating

>>45964134
>material volume of regular chainmail really surpass plate armor?

my bad

>>45964290
no, but full plate is built to distribute its weight and not get in your way, while chainmail just rests on your shoulders

>>45964134
Iirc a chain hauberk (hooded/skirted suit down to kneeish length) will weigh about 60 lbs and hangs maimly from your shoulders and waist (thanks to a belt). Plate armor is more like 45ish and is strapped to individual body parts, significantly improving weight distribution.

>>45964317
it was worn with a belt to distribut weight on both your shoulders and pelvis

campared to plate there is no real difference in that regard

>>45964317
>chainmail just rests on your shoulders
You can strap chainmail well enough that you don't get put off balance from wearing it you know.

>>45964077
How did he end up on the ground, why is he winded, and why is his gorget not on?

Halberd.

>>45964182
>depends on force multipliers. In this case, mr fullplate has fullplate, and it's nearly impossible to hit the narrow unarmoured bits with a spear at long range.

Actually it's REALLY easy. It takes very little commitment or effort to attack an eye-slit at long range and it's not very easy to block, parry, or counterattack.

If you watch some HEMA vids of spear combat, you'll see that they have no problems targeting an opponent's facemask.

oh hang on muskets with proper bullets showed up in the 15th century didn't they?
That would be the solution then. Even if the plate was built to resist bullets you'd have a pretty good shot at killing him at such short range. Of course you do only get the one shot.
Unless you're carrying a bunch of muskets.

>>45964122
I am going to get very close to him, and leverage him over, likely with the aid of my stick and a clevery placed leg, with GREAT force, drop my stick, put my knee to his chest with GREAT force and stab him through the fucking eye hole with my dagger. Just like the the knights did all the fucking time when they dueled with their fucking dueling sticks (poleaxe).

>>45964415
>melee

>>45964443
>with my dagger.

What dagger?

>>45964443
>get very close to him
And get stabbed
>leverage him over
While he's wearing hard armor and apparently not reacting at all
>put my knee to his chest with GREAT force
His fully armored chest with significant amount of padding behind the extremely rigid steel
>Stab him through the fucking eye hole with my dagger
While he ignores the fact that he has a sword, a solid shield (Good for bashing) and a dagger of his own.

>>45964443
You forgot part where you have average strength
Also part where warrior is not a dummy

>>45963629
First, 1500 A.D. is not medieval.

Second, anything with better reach that can also trip well.

>>45964466
OP spelled melee wrong and that's my excuse for why i'm right and you're wrong.

okay , as far as i heard , chainmail ist slightly lighter than plate in regard of mass

however , plate fits tighter , assuming your chainmail is not custom fit , and therefore swings not as much around if you move in it , making it feel lighter.
on the other hand , i know a reenactor who uses straps in his clothes to make the chain fit closer to the skin and thus making is equally comfortable to wear due to distributing the weight on the whole body.

on a related note , what are the pro/cons of these armor types outside pure combat?

>>45964517
>get close
We're fighting. It is innevitable that at some point in all the blocks and parries, we will be very very close.

>Leverage
Plate bends just like a human, that's why it's awesome. Go learn a little about poleaxe duels, they usually end with one guy thrown forcefully to the ground with the help of the poleaxe.

>Finishing the fuck
If I'm quick and he's dazed, it shouldn't take more than a second or two to get the fuck on top of the guy and stab him wherever's convenient.

>>45964665
>what are the pro/cons of these armor types outside pure combat?

You could feasibly cook on your breastplate.

You could use your chainmail as a podunk strainer.

>>45964685
real fights tend not to have a lot of blocks and parries. They end in about half a minute at most.

>>45964685
And all of that's if I don't brain him or otherwise stab him with my swiss army knife of death.

>>45964370
>Not very easy to block or parry
What is a shield anon, or moving your arm to slap it, or sidestepping, or leaning, or tilting your head, or stepping inside your reach, or breaking your pointy stick.
Weapon of choice in all the hema vids I've seen is a poleaxe

>>45964685
>Plate bends just like a human,

And it doesn't bend nearly as easily as your knee breaks.

You realize you're a dickass thief and you're facing a professional and successful warrior, right?

Pretty much irregardless of your weapon he is going to win that fight 9/10 just from a difference in actual combat capacity.

>>45963953

>Anyone who has a spear is an instant death machine that will always beat anyone who uses a different weapon
>Spearaboos

>>45964685
You have obviously never fought before. Theorycrafting a fight scene is futile as your expectations will shatter as soon as a human gets involved.

>>45964732

>What is a shield anon, or moving your arm to slap it, or sidestepping, or leaning, or tilting your head, or stepping inside your reach, or breaking your pointy stick.

We can go back and forth theoryfighting all day. It's pointless. The fact is that polearms of many varieties have a really advantageous match against sword 'n board.

Does this mean the spear is guaranteed victory? Of course not. But it's better than most of the alternatives.

>>45964685
Unless it's hand to hand or a streetfight, fights end quickly, I've gotten my ass beaten many times in under 2 minutes because that's how fights actually are, and falling down doesn't wind you as much as you think, not to mention a fight lasting less than 2 minutes doesn't wind you unless you're under constant physical strain like wrestling.

>>45964779

There's a reason polearms survived the advent of gunpowder and swords were relegated to status symbols.

Hell, bayonets were in common use up through WWII...

>>45964835
The time tested method to beat plate has been poleaxes, pole hammers, and bludgeons like maces and flails.

>>45964077
Anon, plate armor was something you wore into battle. It was made so you could battle in it.

Battles last a while.

Mr. Knightly isn't going to be winded from a thirty second fisticuffs match. You're retarded.

>>45963629
It depends on training level. If you aren't adept in combat, I'd say that a mace and shield would be the best bet. The shield makes it easy to defend yourself, and in order to effectively use a sword or axe you need to have practice with edge alignment, plus a sword or axe isn't very effective against plate in the hands of an untrained fighter.

If you are trained, I'd say that a rapier and buckler would be the best bet. You'll have a reach advantage and a precise weapon to stike at gaps in the armor.

>>45964756
how do you explain the shitton of medieval reports of how people in full plate still managed to wreck their knees pretty easily at tournaments? even outside jousting , when they were fighting eachother standing on the ground

>>45965005
How do you explain the shit ton of reports of medieval men in full plate killing unarmored idiots with spears one on one?

>>45964957
>Anon, plate armor was something you wore into battle.

Anon, plate armor was something you wore into battle if you were going to be riding on a huge fucking horse.

Nobody fought in plate on foot unless they got dismounted, and usually if that happened they just got swarmed and murdered immediately.

>>45965038
1.you are evading
2.i never doubted the "men in full plate killing unarmored idiots with spears one on one"

File: 1454952341199.gif (993KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

993KB, 250x250px

>>45965038

>Citation Needed

Look it's obvious you have a huge boner for swords. That's fine. Swords are cool, we all agree!

But they aren't very good weapons for most purposes, and they are REALLY completely worthless for dueling.

>>45965098
Says the idiot with a pointed stick that can be knocked aside (burying it eight inches in the ground), leaving you wide open for a sudden beheading.

i see this becoming an "invincible plate armor"-thread

we know that chainmail is pretty much outdated in 1500 , calm down

>>45965005
>how do you explain the shitton of medieval reports of how people in full plate still managed to wreck their knees pretty easily at tournaments?

Because knees are easy to break and inure because of the weight put onto them. And because that bone plate in there is pretty fragile all things considered. Why are you asking me this? The point I was making is that knee-dropping on the guy would just fuck your leg up, not cause any meaningful injury or hindrance to the man in plate.

>>45965174

lol
thanks for the giggles m8
seeya!

>>45965174
>who lets their weapon get buried into the ground
we are not playing darksouls , spears are quite nimble

>>45965197
okay , in this case i misread it

still , getting a full-weight kick on the knee is painfull at best

HALBERD!

>>45965098
>REALLY completely worthless for dueling

Uh, anon? You do realize that the vast majority of judicial and personal duels in europe took place with swords, right? Even in armored judicial duels, swords were often used (though they were often the side arm for a spear or poleaxe/halberd of some flavor).

It may interest you to look up halfswording. It's the technique generally used by swordsmen in armored combat.

>>45965098
>and they are REALLY completely worthless for dueling.

Most duels the "contestants" were unarmored.

Swords absofuckinglutely destroy unarmored flesh. And while yes, that shirt will help a little bit, it is not going to stop you from having a vein opened or your guts spilled by a solid strike.

You spearaboos are just as bad as swordaboos. Every weapon has its place, and each excels or falls short in various ways. There is no "superweapon". And those sword-spear "duels" you see in HEMA sparring were so uncommon historically it's laughable. You were supposed to both use the same weapon, preferably one both are skilled at to some degree, or because it was fancy, a sword. At least as far as most "honorable" duels went, or judicial duels. If you walked down the street and started shit with a guy with a spear and threw down then yes, it happened, but that's not the same thing as a duel.

Y'all niggas stupid. You just need to settle things like men and headbutt eachother until one is unconscious, the only things you guys have going for you is thickheadedness.

>>45965291
POLEAXE

because assuming you have average strength and high DEX , a nimbler weapon takes better advantage of your physical abilities

>>45965291
Halberd is NOT a dueling weapon.

File: Temmie.gif (47KB, 102x100px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 102x100px

>>45965098

This anon, no matter how much of a fucking faggot he is...

...completely correct.

Armor DID evolve to the point where it was virtually invulnerable. But the armor was so heavy, even a group of peasants could simply knock one down and easily hit weak spots.

Swords didn't exactly do that much on the battlefield either. Sure, you can cut and stab, but why do that in someone's face when you can simply do it from 5 or 6 feet away with a cheap-ass spear? Even better, you could use bows and just accidentally kill people through the sheer volume of ammo raining down.

Needless to say, swords and heavy armor were simply signs of nobility or leadership in the battle. People to inspire and look up to.

Now dueling... swords were actually very useful for this. But you wouldn't EVER wield them the way they were intended to. Rules often dictated that only swords be used, usually in heavy armor to make slashing obsolete. So the sword evolved - instead of making an awkward piercing thrust or a useless slash, duels began to see duller, longer blades. More importantly, they evolved in their crossguards. Originally, they were mostly decorative and only marginally useful in battle. But hey, how about this: make the crossguards shaped like a pick? Hold the dull blade with your hands and use the crossguard as a makeshift pickaxe. It's faster than a thrust and can be swung like a slash. That is how useless swords really were.

>>45963629
A shield and a dagger. Main weapon doesn't matter.

Get into their reach, parrying with shield and main weapon, drop main weapon to grapple them down, and then stick a dagger into their eye.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vi757-7XD94

>swords are useless against armor
>DEX is unimportant in fights

i know how some things kinda exaggerated since it is originally a tv production , but i am rather confident

>>45963629
>DEX-based character
assuming maxed dexterity, rush in close, evade your opponent's attack with your higher dexterity and go nuts with a stiletto, aiming either for gaps in the armor or the eye slit. If you aren't a superhuman DEX god, a sword-breaker/war pick or hammer combo would probably be your best bet against a sword, shield/pick or hammer combo otherwise

>>45965556
i know this

it got me into creatively using my weapons with my character

>>45965556
that's super cool, thanks for linking that. It definitely seems like the best approach to take against plate.

>>45965764
are you sarcastic?
i know that swords arent specialised for this kind of shit , but "useless" still looks different.
Mordhau has up to a 15% damage decrease because of this in our system

>>45965819
uh
what

>>45965834
oh
you werent
sorry , but looking at the thread , i still thought the invincible-Knight fags were still around

>>45964756
>irregardless

>>45965872
>tfw this spurs you to check your phone and you realize some motherfucker changed half of the words into shortcuts for other, similarly spelled but wildly different words

I never thought I'd thank someone for doing this shit. Apparently switching tomato and potato is also the highest of roommate comedy.

>why is it getting silent all of the sudden?

>full plate

Why is my chance of survival limited? You never specified that the full-plate man has a weapon. I ditch my chainmail and I push him over. He's not getting himself up easily.

>>45966082
this is assuming he has at least a sword ,

i guess

>>45966082
I thought we were over these kinds of misconceptions. That's why you have to put him to the floor with GREAT force.

>>45966082
He's wearing a plate harness, not jousting sport armor.

>>45964539
>First, 1500 A.D. is not medieval.

I literally came here to post this.

File: My Nigga.jpg (26KB, 446x336px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 446x336px

>>45967247
So all is still good.

I lost my faith in /tg/ today... no one pointed out this grave mistake.

But I see now that all is not lost

Have an excellent day good Sir.

A rapier :^)

>>45963793
>>45963986

It's you who have no clue. You can't pierce his armour with a spear and he can just get inside your reach with relative ease, and then you are fucked. Spears are good en masse, but poor in duels against heavy armour.

>>45963986
>A pointy staff will best stab the fucker in his gaps once he's down.
A properly made suit of full plate has no "gaps", otherwise it's really just what D&D calls "half-plate". Even the eye slots are too narrow for a spear blade, unless the spear blade is needle-thin and thus not very good at dealing damage. We're talking thinner then a 9mm bullet here.

>>45965098
>But they aren't very good weapons for most purposes, and they are REALLY completely worthless for dueling.

I would argue swords are for dueling more then anything else; on the battlefield the press of men and formations would make the versatility of the sword limited in a lot of situations.
In a duel, you can make use of the wide variety of ways a sword can be used in a fight since you have more room to use it. There's also the higher chance that in a duel both you and your foe are likely to be less heavily armored then in battle, which plays to a sword's strengths well.

>>45971717
I would say it depends on the design of the spear and how extensive his plate is.
The real issue is that you're going to need to knock him down first and he's not just going to stand there like a statue while you do it.
I mean we don't even know what the fuck kind of weapon the armored guy is even using. What if he's got a poleaxe or something? Suddenly your reach is a lot less useful and a "glancing" blow from him is likely to be fatal just from the mass of the weapon. Does he have a sword? What kind of sword is it? How is he holding it? Does he have a mace? How big a mace? Is it a morningstar? An axe?

OP basically left out half of this hypothetical scenario.

>>45965098
>But they aren't very good weapons for most purposes, and they are REALLY completely worthless for dueling.

im speechless

>>45963629
>mail
>1500

Why am I wearing just mail in 1500?

>>45964415
Nope. Full plate is expensive and was often proofed by having it shot with a firearm at close range to show it could resist it.

>>45964875
And Korea, and plenty of modern conflicts including Iraq and Afghanistan.

>>45965038
Which reports? Which text has these reports? I want the name of the text, the date it's thought to have been published, the author if known and which translation you were using, if you didn't translate it yourself.

>>45963667
Because your adversary is in plate while you're in chain, putting you at a mobility disadvantage.

What, did you actually think chain is easier to move in? Are you stupid?

>>45963629
A molotov used as a melee weapon.

>>45963629
A Gutentag
A net.
A torch on the end of a long pole.
A flask of oil.

Longer reach, less mobility restrictions. I'm not a trained, hardened combatant like the polatemail guy clearly is, so i need to take whatever advantages the GM is dumb enough to give me.

>>45963629
Shield and a war pick

>>45972772
You might be a shitty Irishman.

As a spearaboo myself I apologize for the faggotry this dude has brought to what could have been a good thread.

File: 10426075_1526136237633636_4200871401688816471_n.jpg (9KB, 261x177px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 261x177px

>>45963629
>no magic

>>45980473
because i asked for a realsistic solution , magic comes later

>>45964036
Training
t. Finn

I'm glad I managed to stay alive for long enough to see spearboos to become a thing. You thought katanoboos were cringy? Hoo boy you haven't seen nothing yet.

>>45965555

My nigger. Was just typing out this same thing

File: 1424592117803.jpg (19KB, 570x343px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 570x343px

>>45971717
Yes, because armor doesn't have joints and poniards were never a thing and swords don't have points and lucern hammers never had spikes on the back and polearms never had sharp points added to them on a regular basis.

Gee, I wonder what all those things had in common with spears.

>>45983205
well , regarding the comparison spear-warhammer:

>the spikes were there to prevent the head from sliding of the curved surface
>with a spearthrust , you have only your own strength , while with a hammer blow , the center of mass multiplies the force significantly if you take advantage of momentum und gravity

thats why some people bothered to ditch their ultimate spear for warhammers and halberds , spears are only more useful if your weapon should be more nimble and easier to use , otherwise if you want reach you get yourself a pike

>>45985598
>>45983205

due to the crow's beak on many hammers , you could get THROUGH the plate itself , which was mostly lethal if aimed at the head. and the longer the distance , the harder it was to actualy get into gaps due to less control