Axe, Sword or Mace, which would you fight with?

[Destroyer]

I know we are not likely to see a unit workshop like in SMAC, but in theory, which would really be better?

Should a Maceman be better than a swordsman?

I know histiorically, macemen may have come later, but isnt that because maces are easier to train with and produce?

A trained swordsman would surely have a better chance trying to beat a trained maceman?

And I am not really sure of the effectiveness of an axe.

PLease dont take this thread too seriously.

[LordShiva]

If I had to fight someone, and had to pick between mace, sword, and axe, give me a sword... Unless the axe was really badass.

[Axxaer]

Originally posted by LordShiva
If I had to fight someone, and had to pick between mace, sword, and axe, give me a sword... Unless the axe was really badass.

Swords are much harder than maces to use effectively without training. I'd go with the mace.

[Dis]

Uzi

[Lord Avalon]

The sword is probably the most maneuverable weapon (depending on length) - and certain swords would require more skill; the axe may have the potential to do the most damage, unless your foe is in plate, in which case the mace would be best for pounding on him.

I tend to favor the sword, though perhaps it would be good to have a selection of weapons for your squire to hand you.

[Dis]

I still think the sword would be the best weapon. Even for a low-skilled wielder.

Maces (or flails as in the game) can be tough to get a handle on, and can be grabbed and yanked away by your opponent. Grabbing a sword on the other hand, seems much more difficult. Axes probably don't have the long reach of the sword, limiting their effectiveness. Swords can thrust or slash vs maces which can only smash.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Axxaer
Swords are much harder than maces to use effectively without training.

Why do you assume I'm not some Grammaton-cleric-from-the-movie-Equilibrium-esque sword-wielding hotshot?

>

[Axxaer]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Why do you assume I'm not some Grammaton-cleric-from-the-movie-Equilibrium-esque sword-wielding hotshot?

OT, that movie rules.

Originally posted by Dis
I still think the sword would be the best weapon. Even for a low-skilled wielder.

Maces (or flails as in the game) can be tough to get a handle on, and can be grabbed and yanked away by your opponent. Grabbing a sword on the other hand, seems much more difficult. Axes probably don't have the long reach of the sword, limiting their effectiveness. Swords can thrust or slash vs maces which can only smash.

You seem to be assuming that a mace is a flail, which it isn't. Maces generally don't have the chain and are thus just a long handle with a spikey ball on the end. They are largely easier than swords (for inexperienced fighters) because all you need to do is hit someone as hard as you can with the spikey bit. With a sword, sometimes you need to thrust, sometimes you need to slash, sometimes you should parry, riposte or hack. I am sure that a sword is a much more versatile and effective weapon, but it is harder to be used well so for me it would be the mace, but to someone skilled it would probably be a sword.

[Solver]

Yes, maces must be easier for untrained people. Swords actually aren't all very long - but the long ones are typically very heavy, there's a reason why they're two-handed. Given that you can handle the sword, it still wouldn't be very easy to hit your adversary properly - with a mace, you just pound him as hard as you can.

[Lord Avalon]

Not all swords have a point, without which you have a slashing weapon (or possibly chopping, for something like a falchion or kukri).

Reach depends on length of blade or handle. An axe could have the most reach, if you start getting into the polearm category.

[Axxaer]

Originally posted by Lord Avalon
Reach depends on length of blade or handle. An axe could have the most reach, if you start getting into the polearm category.

"A poleaxe is to an axe what a spear is to a sword"

Don't know where I heard that but it seemed appropriate... It was talking about weird swordy-spear-things though

[unamablebuiler]

As most swords we rerelatively blunt ... particularly those in dark ages europe, they relied on their weight to cut or were stabbing weapons. it is difficult to keep a sharp edge even with stee

It wasn't until the metallurgy improved there were swords that were used for slashing attaks. The japanese katana blades if done properly could cut the barrel of a gun, this apperntly happened in the Russo japanese war of 1904-05.
The reason for this is because the swords were made out of types of steel: one a low, carbon mild steel and, one a high carbon spring or tool steel.
However each sword took 2 years to make a big dis advantage.

maces did not depend on the quality of the metal used just as long as it was hard and not brittle. aols begin a one handed weapon you could carry shield into battle. this would give an evffeciveness comparable to sword and shield combo. it was also easier to train men in the use of the mace that the sword.

Axes depended on weight and were mostly 2 handed weapons.

2 handed swords and great swords were effectively an axe with a short handle and were useful for only the firstblow if the defender survived the odds were in the defenders favour.

personallt i would go for the katana blade with or without a shield.

[Urban Ranger]

Personally I go with a paired weapon such as sai or tonfa. The biggest advantage is you can parry with one and strike with the other. The biggest disadvantage is you need lots of training to use them effectively. Of course, since you are asking me

OTOH if the opponent is in some kind of heavy armor I'll take a mace or two

[Axxaer]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Personally I go with a paired weapon such as sai or tonfa. The biggest advantage is you can parry with one and strike with the other. The biggest disadvantage is you need lots of training to use them effectively. Of course, since you are asking me

They are great if you surprise your enemy and/or are fighting someone with similar or no weapons. Against somebody with a longsword they would stand little to no chance simply due to the reach difference, and a shield is generally better at stopping attacks than parrying with a short weapon. If you want to use two weapons and be able to strike and parry simultaneously, perhaps something like rapier/dagger rapier/rapier or rapier/short sword would work better. The main problem is that for any of these you have to be faster and more agile than your opponent because in brute force, a longsword/greatsword/battleaxe/mace/etc. is far superior to the smaller weapons such as rapiers and daggers. AFAIK tonfas and sais(pl?) are only used in martial arts and not against medievally armed/armoured opponents (perhaps your mace suggestion would be appropriate).

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Axxaer
They are great if you surprise your enemy and/or are fighting someone with similar or no weapons. Against somebody with a longsword they would stand little to no chance simply due to the reach difference, and a shield is generally better at stopping attacks than parrying with a short weapon.

Yes and no. There are long Oriental weapons too, staff and such.

Longer weapons have the advantage of reach, but shorter weapons are more maneuverable. Each sort of weapons has a different "sweet spot," for want of a better term. As a result, once you get "inside" somebody who uses a longer weapon he's generally toast, because his "sweet spot" is now behind you but yours cover him just right.

You are right that a shield is better at blocking, so you need lots of training to use paired weapons wffectively.

Originally posted by Axxaer
If you want to use two weapons and be able to strike and parry simultaneously, perhaps something like rapier/dagger rapier/rapier or rapier/short sword would work better.

No idea. Sais, tonfas, etc. were designed to work as a pair. Daggers, rapier, etc. weren't.

For example, a sai isn't very sharp or pointy, so it doesn't break easily. It also has a hand guard, so if you parry an enemy's weapon and it slides down towards you, you can protect your hand with the guard. You can even try to grab the weapon with it.

Originally posted by Axxaer
The main problem is that for any of these you have to be faster and more agile than your opponent because in brute force, a longsword/greatsword/battleaxe/mace/etc. is far superior to the smaller weapons such as rapiers and daggers.

Sure. Don't forget, speed is life.

Originally posted by Axxaer
AFAIK tonfas and sais(pl?) are only used in martial arts and not against medievally armed/armoured opponents (perhaps your mace suggestion would be appropriate).

Tonfas and sais were used by ninjas against samurai