Top 10 Most Effective MEDIEVAL Weapons

[@strangerakari2836]

Whole list in nutshell: Do you want to protect yourself, or deal some damage?

[@Photoloss]

Long pointy stick: "why not both?"

[@lowlandnobleman6746]

Long pointy stick didn’t work too well at protecting Scottish Lowlanders from English arrows at Falkirk. I reckon spear and shield would be better then pike.

[@Photoloss]

@@lowlandnobleman6746 This video was about a *duel* so as long as you manage to avoid getting shot in the head or torso right off the bat you can probably rush an archer and finish them off. On a battlefield you still want longer spears than the opponent has _in addition_ to shields but yes, good shields in combination with _any_ stabbing weapon are vital against projectiles.

[@lowlandnobleman6746]

True, but a skillful opponent could get past the pike, so I’d still personally want spear and shield for that extra safety and versatility.

[@Photoloss]

@@lowlandnobleman6746 There's a reason he banned shields in the video. Although that does pose the question, if you were allowed to use _any_ shield, would you use a very large or strapped one or a smaller more nimble option such as a boss-gripped roundshield? And do you use a one-handed spear or a more hefty and versatile cut&thrust weapon such as a gladius, arming sword or the like as the shield can negate enemy reach advantage? Basically if you have a shield you might want to rush an enemy spearman at which point the greater damage potential of a cutting blade would be valuable, but if the opponent is wearing plate armour (with polearm, with or without shield) you're still pretty doomed.

[@Shaylok]

When you are fighting a knight in full plate, a can opener can be mightier than the sword.

[@howardwayne3974]

I have one of those !!!!!

[@bugvswindshield]

or...fight near water if possible.

[@reetisahu1880]

Or use a spear edged with can operner

[@jessefisher1809]

the can opening spear!

[@weloniko]

Can opener on a stick

[@britishpotato8815]

Imagine humanity in the future, taking about guns the way we talk about medieval wepons

[@chillycoldchomper9389]

Ever heard of the wild west partner

[@britishpotato8815]

@@chillycoldchomper9389 oh yeah, I guess you're right. Well played partner.

[@Technotoadnotafrog]

People already do that with WWII weapons

[@RealRagnar816]

I don’t imagine guns getting much better 🤔

[@remigiuszbisha9658]

@@RealRagnar816 Well imagine them getting obsolete, they are better ways to sling slugs of metal at each other than gunpowder

[@pointynoodle]

Anyone who's spent any time on historical youtube saw the pole-axe coming from a mile away.

[@umbrallight7508]

Indeed

[@koljaleffek7290]

I really see the halberd at the top tbh.

[@crownlexicon5225]

I figured it would've been the bill tbh, but I had the top 3 correct

[@tomc.5704]

I was leaning towards rapier, but if your opponent might be armored and you're not allowed a shield...yeah, poleaxe all the way

[@coito5307]

I was thinking about the halberd the whole vid but k

[@GCurl]

Most effective medieval weapon? Obviously the holy hand grenade.

[@Odwolf2]

I believe you mean the Pommel of Mass Destruction lol

[@-smp-scientificmethodpersp838]

Please don't skip 3 when doing the count down though!

[@jeffk464]

The most effective weapon in human history was always the pen.

[@ousamadearudesuwa]

No, you are all mistaken, it was just the dangerous bunny. No knight can win against such beast.

[@MaxSluiman]

Eh, the Plague? God's wrath? Starvation?

[@rickardhall8836]

I like that he says everything like we seriously are gonna do it irl

[@RW77777777]

those heated arguments about top 10 ranking...

[@wisewigga7129]

@@RW77777777 fr

[@jollimaiahtacksworth]

You aren't?

[@julesfalcone]

Very funny.

[@CommissarLORDBernn]

An army marches on its stomach, so clearly the most effective weapon was PASTA

[@yoursexualizedgrandparents6929]

@Rex Francorum Or you could just use your brain and summon the flying spaghetti monster. Obviously.

[@gunarsmiezis9321]

An army marches on patriotism.

[@Ezyasnos]

Well when the Dutch fought the Spanish empire in the late 16th and early 17th century, the - always with war accompanying - famine had much less of an impact because of a new 4 field crop rotation system.

[@Vlad_Tepes_III]

*poison

[@sevenproxies4255]

**laughs in rice**

[@Dell-ol6hb]

A mace is still perfectly effective even without armor, one blow from a mace against an unarmored opponent would shatter bone if it hits bone. Blunt weapons can only do more damage against an unarmored opponent than against an armored opponent.

[@meyes1098]

​@@alexanderthompson7164 The problem with a mace is that it's slow and unwieldy compared to a sword, or the majority of other weapons. So if your opponent just so happens to use a sword you're at a disadvantage regardless of their armor.

[@lordsesshoumaru8596]

true, padding and mail can displace some of the force, but the only difference would be plate. perhaps damaging plate which could put pressure on the chest to not breath properly or effect mobility. piercing is lethal but unless something vital is hit the fight could continue for minutes and slashing could remove a limb or the head, but I think by statistical probability blunt weapons would offer a game changing or fight ending strike more easily and quickly. he really should have elaborated more on maces or morning stars because he shows images of both but calls them all maces. you can definitely thrust with a morning star, if need be...and who says you can't thrust with a mace..? you can't pierce with a mace thrust, but that would hit hard to the face opening bleeding that could effect vision or damage a helmet visor, when your life is on the line everything is versatile...

[@stinkymanproductions618]

Wrong

[@RiderOftheNorth1968]

@@lordsesshoumaru8596 The word "morningstar" is complex to use because the meaning is not really fully agreed upon. Some people (and culture/languages) concider only a flail with a spiky ball a morningstar, others call any mace that is ballheaded and spiky a morningstar as examples. But that is not my main topic. There is a misconception that is very common that i like to adress here. You touch it in your comment so i would like to "fill out the gaps" so to speak: People in general seems to be fixated with the ability to kill in a weapon, even the need to kill in a battle scenario. There is no special use in killing in a battle, just put them out of action is enough. Death can be delivered after the fighting is over. So to but a hole in someone might be deadly tomorrow but useless right now. Here the blunt weapon makes much more sense i believe: A hit that cruches muscles, breaks bones and is immediately very painful is, Most likely, more effective "right now" especially when the wielder will hit again and again and again... To recieve a hit with a mace WILL make you loose focus, you can´t directly counter, it might even shift your balance slightly. That "stagger effect" gives the mace wielder time to recover and hit again. A good hit on plate transfer a lot of force into the body within. That is the reason blunt weapon was prefered against plated foes. There is no need to dent or poke a hole in the plate, the force goes through anyway. Just like the "toy" called Newtons Cradle. I hope you understand that i am not criticising you i am just elaborating.

[@denisashby5589]

@@meyes1098 not if your strong enough to swing it hard

[@ljlk8583]

warhammer: **scores low** *HERESY*

[@Raigosai]

Keep in mind, if you're not trying to murder someone, it's far more ideal

[@Feeshyenjoyer]

@@Raigosai i mean its not like you wont murder them if you hit them with any form of commitment

[@loganjerome2263]

If shields were allowed the warhammer would have place much higher. Roran will have his due.

[@anonymuz796]

Russians:it's a klevec(literally "pecker").

[@essex3777]

IT IS HERESY AGAINST HIS MOST HOLY GOD-EMPEROR OF MANKIND

[@SovereignAUS]

I personally feel that the mace deserved a little more love in terms of damage to unarmoured opponents because it almost doesn't matter where you hit said opponent, you would be able to deliver at least a debilitating blow. I might just be cocky but I imagine a full power strike would certainly break bone which even in the arm or shoulder would critically hamper their ability to offend or defend.

[@clownworld4655]

Yea the idea that blunt weapons are somehow ineffective against someone who isn’t armored is dumb. The only perk slicing has is blood loss and cutting muscles/tendons which would cause complete debilitation of the body part. Blunt force is still very deadly as you can easily break bone and rupture organs. A mace strike to the torso can be potentially lethal and will likely take the person out of the fight just from the shock of the hit. It’s even a technique used in hand to hand combat. Watch Bas Rutten. He is a famous fighter known for punching his opponents in the liver which is one of the most painful spot to be hit. Even ruptured a guys liver in a fight just from his punch

[@tannermeche7968]

@@clownworld4655 liver punch’s are devastating and it doesn’t even take a lot of power to completely rupture the liver with an accurate hit the problem is that it’s pretty hard to get an accurate liver shot in real combat

[@clownworld4655]

@@tannermeche7968 not really. Watch Bas Rutten’s fights. With some training and basically knowledge of anatomy it is pretty simple in a hand to hand fight

[@Sids1192]

If a blow is abe to kill\debilitate a guy in armour, it's hard to imagine that same blow not doing at least as well if the armour isn't there. In a low armour situation, it might not be as good as a sword, but you'll have a chance, no matter what your opponent goes with. Can't say the same for a falchion.

[@anneominous7172]

@@clownworld4655 This. Even just watch Rutten's highlights, the man is a liver aimbot.

[@poopa854]

10 Mace 1:06 9 Warhammer 3:24 8 Axe 4:13 7 Falchion 5:50 6 Arming Sword 7:26 5 Longsword 8:42 4 Estoc 10:14 3 Bill 12:13 2 Spear 13:43 HM Lance 14:53 1 Pole Axe 15:37

[@ian-rr9to]

thank you

[@poopa854]

@@ian-rr9to my pleasure

[@Beetlejuice2959]

Thanks this tells me it is an incomplete list

[@markt2609]

Thank you very much!

[@juliusspiik8498]

Bill must be One hell of a unit of a man to Score 3rd place

[@TheNorseAmerican]

I feel like a mace and a Warhammer would do much better against unarmored opponents than a Falchion would against armor.

[@volcajohann]

Truly. If I didn't know what my opponent would be wearing I'd never in my life pick a single handed sword. Even a two handed one, for that matter. A poleaxe, since they have both a point and a blunt end, would be perfect.

[@acecrimson2393]

I agree, the Warhammer and Mace were HIGHLY underated, per say, if you hit an unarmored aponets head with a mace, he is going to die... And also, he stated that the warhammer can not cut, this is outright false. It could impale, cut, hit you on the head with a sometimes spiked hammer. Warhammers were VERY versitile.

[@VicentePradoJunior]

​@@acecrimson2393 even if you get hit in the arm, i assume few people would be able to keep fighting with a broken(probably shattered) arm. Mace should be much higher up on the list

[@Glo0ze]

@@acecrimson2393 I see this alot. It's not the damage they do when landing a blow that makes them "bad" it's simply the fact that landing any telling blow with a shortish blunt weapon against a nimble and fast opponent is just very very difficult. Ofcourse if you hit someone over the head with a mace he is going to die. But you need to get very close and put yourself in danger to do this. So yes the damage is there if you land a blow but the problem is that your blows are quite slow since you need a swing which is slower than a jab/thrust plus you need to put yourself in considerable danger because of the short range to be able to land this blow. This mistake is made mostly because the other way around it does mostly only revolves around damage. A cutting weapon just doesn't do damage to armor which is why its bad against armor. But it is not that a blunt weapon doesn't do damage to unarmored that it's bad against unarmored it that it is just really fucking hard to get a hit in with a short, slow, momentum based weapon against a fast and nimble opponent.

[@acecrimson2393]

@@Glo0ze To put it simply, If your an armored Knight, going up against an "un armored nimble aponet" chances are you would be able to hit him without much fuss. You talk as if the warhammer weighs 50 pounds, which it did not. There are versions of the warhammer that have long shafts like a polearm for powerful and longer reach. I don't see your point..

[@Doodoofart725]

Sorry, but I think a pike would be a terrible 1 vs 1 weapon. Any range advantage gets negated by the fact that you have no leverage at all at three meters, your enemy can literally just grab your pike by the shaft (kinky). It takes very little strength to move the point of a pike out of the way, anyone that doubts this, try it out for yourself with a blunt 3 meter stick. Once you are past the point, the whole weapon is useless because it is way too heavy and cumbersome to retract it quickly like a spear. It's also nearly impossible to thrust accurately at such a distance. Sure, the pike could theoretically get into the weak points of enemy armor, but you're not gonna be able to hit them at that distance, so it's not really an anti armor weapon. If the enemy has a weapon, he can swat your pike away with no risk to himself. There's a reason pikes were only used in massed formations, the drawbacks I mentioned don't really come into play when you have to get through 3 rows of dozens of pikes in front of you to even get to the first pikeman. You can't knock them all away, their accuracy doesn't mean shit when there's so many. And if you get past the first row of points, there are more behind it. I mean spears, yeah sure, but anything longer than 2.5 meters seems kind of impractical.

[@LeslieMRichardson]

I'm with you on this. Have trained with lots of different weapons, including pikes. It isn't that difficult to get past ONE pike ... unfortunately, pikes allow close formation, which means you are going to get skewered before reaching the holder of the one you dealt with. But 1 vs 1 ... yeah, you're toast. In the SCA, I mastered the fine art of parrying and spinning in with a polearm against both spears and pikes ... unless they had backup, it was essentially game over.

[@mielivalta]

Imagine having a duel inside a castle with pikes...

[@messymessr]

@@mielivalta It'd quickly turn into wrestling.

[@LazyLifeIFreak]

The eternal question, can you stab him before he stabs you?

[@metatronyt]

PIkes could be, and historically were, customizable in length by cutting the bottom end to the length you wanted so there you go. :)

[@Aethgeir]

The moment you said "no shields" my immediate response was "poleaxe!"

[@gluna3196]

@@alexanderthompson7164 there’s a difference? maybe i’m slow

[@stratcat3216]

exactly.. "Gimme some distance"

[@seraphwithatank6535]

Well that's like the weapon right before guns, so yeah. Glaives, two handed axes, partisans, a big two-handed sword, ect.

[@jameshill2450]

Mine was "Why? That's a dumb rule"

[@erojerisiz1571]

@@alexanderthompson7164 the poleaxe was also modular while the halberd was made from one piece of steel

[@ingold1470]

"I prefer thrusts over cuts". Glad to see that ancient Italian tradition is alive and well!

[@thornwall6303]

The Halberd: Do you want to do literally EVERYTHING to your opponent? Cut, slash, chop, stab, whack, that is a five in one deal! (Ye olde QVC)

[@magatism]

The halberd is merely ornamental, it was spear that was generally used in battle, all those youtube videos about using halberds are a sham, it merely denoted modern technology not necessarily effectivity.

[@meyes1098]

​@@magatism It appears in way too many historical paintings to not have been used in battle.

[@magatism]

@@meyes1098 It was not widely used but those paintings were meant to impress people. Like we showcase tanks, while M-18's and RPG's do most of the fighting.

[@vast634]

The Halberts problem: in a surprise encounter on the road, you would likely not carry it. That's where the swords come in: they were much more likely to be available, since they are easier to carry.

[@wisewigga7129]

@@vast634 and lighter than a mace with a better defence and better offense to unarmoured opponents but if someone shows up perfectly armoured you're dead

[@Viper_Charlie]

Actually some Maces and warhammers (one handed hammers) had metal "rods" and something like a small handguard and weapons like these would totally devastate an unarmored opponent. Usually warhammers have a spike on the other side and some maces were either spiked or had like sharpened blades. Also these would be more capable of breaking bones than swords. Imagine hitting someone in a chest, head or even his spine, that would be devastating. Broken ribs can damage some internal organs, headshot could mean basically instant death, spine could "paralize" someone, even hitting a limb could break them which could immobilize enemies.

[@kingpopaul]

Pretty much what I'm thinking, maces will deal a lot of blunt damage, if that energy can go through an armored/padded opponent it will be efficient vs someone unarmored. Though I agree that it is less forgiving if you miss anything.

[@guyguy7953]

I think the idea is how well it would be in the given scenario. If an opponent had a pole axe and was unarmored (therefore free to move quickly) a mace is almost as good as holding a stick.

[@oathlords7989]

@@guyguy7953 Yeah, even a good club can kill someone with the right hit. The problem is delivering the hit. The warhammer is a devastating weapon, but it's also short and unbalanced.

[@corrat4866]

Thing is, most hits where glancing blows.

[@buiphamthanhvinh8265]

Guys you don't get the point, clubs and maces are not only have less range than the arming sword(yes, I checked) and slowet due to being head-heavy, even with a handguard, people would be swinging and redelivering that same slash at you mulitple times before you get to attack. You will get decapited or cut and get some major infections, broken bones and inbleeding is definitely serious but unless it's the ribs or the head, which to be honest is the hardest thing to strike on the enemy (except when you're using a polearm), decapitation and/or open wounds are much more lethal

[@losgargabonzi97]

most versatile weapon? Pole axe lawbringer laughs in *versatility*

[@hullo8246]

GNAPPO REDZ ad mortem

[@Ila-W]

Pole arm, the most versitale weapon is used by overpowered/overtuned turtle. Ad morten shobe on red

[@tanks608]

Ilari Hiltunen how on earth is the law bro op? We have no opener at all and can only turtle and/or parry.

[@Ila-W]

@@tanks608 because he is super safe, over tuned and has huge turtle potential and over all, very unhealthy for the game. Just because he has no super viable opener, dosen't mean hero is weak. Especialy in game where defence is more powerful/rewarding that offencive. Overtuned parry punishes: parrying is one of the easiest mechanics in the game( both l and h parry). Crutchbringer has 50dmg l parry which is around ~42% of most heroes health pool. Heavy parry is 40dmg (10impale+30 heavy) if there is wall in front (usualy is because thats how maps are designed). Basicly lawbringer gets over reward for simple action. Sobe on red" from shove on block to shove on red. Shove has super low recovery means he can punish players that try to punish his punish (only certain heroes like tiandi or shaman can punish sobe on prediction. Hell, lb can parry most dodge attacks that are used against sobe (50-40dmg). Sobe had also early hyper armor (like pre nerfed hito ) meaning it can be used most chain based offencive with litle risk. Safest chain offecive: lb may not have viable opener but he has one of the safest chain offecive in the game. options are top 400ms light that can be delayed, side enhanced lights or unpunishable 500ms shove. Strongest 4v4 hero: lb is the strongest 4v4 hero by multipe reasons. He is the king of mid lane which is the most important point (both renown gain and objective point gains are incorrect (b is actualy around 1.5 score per s and unboosted zone is 0.8, boosted one is 1.6 not 2.) Because low recovery zone, high health pool and really strong feat/perk combinations. Lb is also strong ganker (long arm, impale) and can hold zones long long time. Lb is also top 3 strongest duel/brawl heroes. And cheery at the top, lb health pool is highest in the game (+30hp more than most of the cast), meanig he can sobe trade his way to victory. 400ms top light from neutral is also strong shutdown tool and neutrals many heroes openers (kensei, valkyrie, nuxia ect).

[@tanks608]

Ilari Hiltunen ok parry is literally what the class is designed around so he should have a strong parry punish since that is the one thing he is designed to do. I would also say the large health pool makes up for the extremely low amount of hyper armor on anything but the shove. I will admit the shove on block was cheesy as hell and was happy to see it go. Our chain offense might be safe but it is also super predictable as well.

[@snowwhite7677]

I would have to say; Light Saber. After all that stuff happened a long time ago...

[@123456gordon]

"You can't thrust with a mace" > Total War wants to know your location

[@Bizasbusiness]

u r confusing video games with reality ..

[@123456gordon]

@@Bizasbusiness Was a joke my dude, I know you can't thrust with a mace.

[@goreobsessed2308]

you can thrust with a mace and that shit would hurt if unarmored. it would basically be a pomel strike.

[@mohammadtausifrafi8277]

You can, not as well as with a sword or spear though, unless the mace has a spike on its top, which at least some did.

[@robertharris6092]

Or just have a spike on top of the mace.

[@chowderheadify]

I'm still salty that the mace is so low on the list.

[@crazylegoman]

Maces look great and are fun to swing, but once you've had to detangle clothing, skin, womens' hair, guard dogs, harps, venetian blinds, bicycle tires, extension cords, saltwater taffy and the innards of VCR tapes from the head of one, you realize that they're just such a hassle.

[@ThexXxXxOLOxXxXx]

@@crazylegoman Nah maces and warhammers should be at the top of the list.

[@matthewwriter9539]

...who brings VCR tapes with them onto the battlefield??? Near the battlefield to record the battlefields to record the fight maybe...

[@BenAC75]

@@matthewwriter9539 My thoughts exactly.

[@bizybliztaverage9414]

Bruh the locater in Rattay killed me with a goddam flanged mace

[@ParanoeX]

i have to disagree with the inclusion of the pike. a spear is good, or my favorite, a glaive, is good for this spot in the list, but pike is a weapon used in a battlefield, in a war. in a war scenario its really really effective, but in a 1 vs 1 duel, its not as effective as the spear because a pike is much bigger and thus harder to maneuver and because of it your opponent can get past the tip much more easily than they would against a spear. and once your opponent is past the tip, you are completely defenseless.

[@yesok4244]

yep, right

[@misterfluffkins2161]

Absolutely agree with this. Rush in, control the tip, and the pike is useless. That's a strategy that all the other weapons can do, so the pike would lose and doesn't belong on this 1v1 list imo. Especially if the person rushing has armor.

[@joelout]

Getting past the tip is not that easy unless you have a shield. The pike pack alot of thrust so knocking it to the side is far from easy, and even if you succeed an experienced polearm user will retract his weapon before you're in a position to push any advantage. The speed that you can circle the tip at is really fast and varying between high and low thrust will keep any sword or axeman on constant defence. The dynamic changes greatly is you throw in a shield tho. Basically any competent swordsman/axeman will beat a pole user 1v1 with a shield. But they would get slaughtered in a group fight. The shield is the real mvp in a 1v1.

[@deleteduser3455]

It’s also very important to note with blunt weapons the effect of hydrostatic shock which below 2800fps won’t cause instant incapacitating effects (that’s why rifles do way more damage than pistols) but will cause effects that will be incapacitating over time (internal bleeding that kind of thing) in actual fact for the most part bladed weapons are significantly worse at actually flat out incapacitating someone when compared to a heavy blunt weapon it’s like comparing a shotgun to a handgun both are deadly but one has way more power

[@mikejensen6684]

Won’t cause instant incapacitating effects, eh? I think that’s a bit subjective

[@gamerbg294]

Hydrostatic shock is a very dubious theory, moreover, I've seen an article on this subject in which it argued that pistols would also be capable of causing hydrostatic shock. However, the effectiveness of the rifles does not come from the hydrostatic shock, but rather from the effect of the temporary cavity and the elastic limit of the tissues, so it seems when a projectile reaches around 2000 FPS (it is certainly known that this phenomenon occurs when the projectile has a speed of at least 2200 FPS) the temporary cavity expansion is so fast that make the tissues break causing even greater damage (no wonder rifles usually have an exit hole larger than the entry hole, even though they not usually use hollow point ammo).

[@Mortablunt]

The real answer is a flail snail. That's why they were everywhere in art.

[@malahamavet]

You watched that video about why knights fight snails didn't you?

[@SrMikicas]

I think those might be one of the first memes of history!

[@Mortablunt]

@@SrMikicas Humanity: shitposters springing eternal.

[@LeonM4c]

I feel as though you're giving maces a bum rap, honestly. I'd rather be cut by a blade any day of the week than potentially have my bones shattered by a club/mace. Armor or no armor, they're effective.

[@ITBEurgava]

I agree. All the broken knuckles, or ribs, or collarbones, or knees... Worst come to worst, shattered bones stabs you from within your own body. Imagine that.

[@LeonM4c]

@@ITBEurgava internal bleeding indeed, plus even a light tap with a mace can be painful. I have a bronze spiked mace head from Tod's workshop that I mounted. I let it once gently fall from a few inches onto the top of my gloved hand, hurt like a mother fucker, can't imagine getting hit with it in anger.

[@jackvernian7779]

unlike blade, mace won't turn you into a river of blood ending the fight in seconds.

[@ITBEurgava]

@@jackvernian7779 Depends where the cut/stab lands. People can continue fighting while wounded after all.

[@LeonM4c]

@@jackvernian7779 true enough, but there exists period artwork depicting sword fights where both parties often have several cuts all over them

[@elguate96]

Sponsor: please advertise our bronze rings Metatron: k Also metatron: I LOVE BRONZE

[@metatronyt]

I'm using the code myself to get myself more of their rings so 1 I do love bronze 2 the shop is really cool

[@armyof2ninjas381]

@@metatronyt cool can't wait to see it later if you show it off

[@metatronyt]

@Rex Francorum Ahahah he does indeed :)

[@Ynffy]

The most effective weapon all time is the hug! Turns enemies into friends.

[@ApothecaryTerry]

Also, you can stab them in the back!

[@legendaryplayz394]

But what if they don’t want to be friends and stab you

[@Ynffy]

@@legendaryplayz394 You hug first and hold them until they starve.

[@fullmetalboomer8089]

Do you mean diplomacy?

[@Ynffy]

@@fullmetalboomer8089 Not clingy enough!

[@Havi8864]

#1: The Poleaxe *laughs in Lawbringer*

[@firelordsusan555]

Lawgiver laughs in incendiary, high ex, stun, tracer, rapid fire ect ect.

[@Cafferssss]

@@firelordsusan555 different reference.

[@aaaaaaahaaaaaaahah6530]

Kensei 😠👊

[@savianrivera6831]

Lawdaddy gang

[@luisleiva2504]

laughs in a inbalanced weapon.

[@Lehnard]

Against Mat a good pair of running shoes would probably the only "weapon" that could save my arse.

[@morningstarlink]

I've always been fascinated by the Spear/pike and I'm so glad it made it tto number 2 on this list.

[@gregcampwriter]

Meh, who wants to get that close? Just stand off with a longbow.

[@markberlanga6375]

a loaded crossbow from midrange willnot give an armored opponet reaction time to dodge n can defeat armor or stun with a head shot and if you miss can be effective as a club and bolts are still effective against armor when you have tackled them and are on top of them as they act like a dagger getting through gaps sad that metatron did not include ranged weapons but did include pikes. silly actually as the weight of a 3 to 6 meter pike gives such littler control and they still only have an actual 1 meter thrust range ie I can stand just with a pikes range paryy it and essentially walk or jog downthe length of the weapon with no fear of it after I have parried the point or grabbed the shaft . ie the pike is a horrible weapon for a duel .

[@Squarelinx]

@@markberlanga6375 crossbow bolts can't really go through armour all that well

[@ataeren4246]

Better trick a scorpion with a halberd loaded into it

[@deimos7784]

Musket beats all!

[@ataeren4246]

@@deimos7784 *musket misses its only bulet* oh fuck

[@ar1steia486]

As a longtime fan of the guandao I am so so glad to see all the polearms/spears/large pointy sticks at the top of the list

[@orangeyellow9695]

I'm a fan of the Chinese halberd (ji), the one that combines a spear with a dagger axe.

[@ChaoticSorceror]

The poleaxe is my favourite medieval weapon and I always enjoy seeing it get mentioned!

[@Goldenleyend]

When you showed the ring I thought you were getting married, almost had a heart attack

[@greencondoresq]

The wings on a partisan are not for deflecting sword blows.Unless I am very mistaken, it is to prevent your opponent (or better, a boar or bear) from coming all the way down your spear to reach you after sticking you. Look at the difference between a standard spear and a boar spear. I could be wrong, but that is what I was always taught.

[@londiniumarmoury7037]

I was in the middle of a political debate Raph, but I got the notification and obviously I'm like. "Listen mate, Metatron is talking about swords, so your political mumbo jumbo can wait"

[@borgue]

Cringe is a timeless weapon.

[@londiniumarmoury7037]

@@borgue Saying Do you have a problem with something I said?

[@skystorm569]

Politics is a massive red herring.

[@londiniumarmoury7037]

The point of my OP was the swords are more important.

[@Astropeleki]

@@londiniumarmoury7037 Let me guess, something about the British general elections 🙃?

[@Rafamrkz]

Now, time to play dark souls armed with all this new knowledge

[@gabredoro2]

there are no pole axes in ds :(

[@haze6647]

He is like the gaming nerd great teacher.

[@haze6647]

@@gabredoro2 dont worry, the developer definetely gonna add it after watching this.

Crescent axe is exactly that isnt it?

[@SNOWDEVlL]

Lothric longsword is all you need

[@N3kr0n15]

The halbard has always been one of my favorites.

[@mr.s5523]

had to fight against matt easten LMAO, Definatly the pole hammer lol

[@skilletborne]

personally would 100% choose a Bec de Courbin or the Billhook. I feel like you under emphasized the actual cutting and armor penetrating ability of the billhook in particular, since that's what it was designed for - it was a foot-soldiers only weapon frequently and they were renowned for mowing down foot-soldier and knight alike.

[@BigBossTussBall]

I would choose a Lucerne Hammer/bec d' corbin. All the blunt force trauma of a warhammer, with the added reach of a polearm/poleaxe with some stabby bits.

[@jackvernian7779]

fellow appreciator of long hammers I see

[@SMJSmoK]

Lucerne Hammer - my Dark Souls reflex intensifies! :-D

[@santiagotorrezsegarra7790]

i mean its hard to kill someone in armor with a blade, while its still easy to kill a guy with a metal stick.

[@gregpartridge7554]

Two reasons I would say the pollaxe still beats it: the spike/hammer on the striking ends of the lucerne hammer or bec-de-corbin are both primarily anti-armor weapons, while the axe/hammer on the pollaxe are alternately good against unarmored and armor, so it has better versatility. Second, the pollaxe tends to be made a bit shorter than most polearms, so while they're specialized for fighting in formation and clumsier in single combat, it's specialized to a maneuverable length for dueling a single opponent like in this scenario. There's still some variation depending on whether you and/or your opponent are armored, of course (perhaps if you're unarmored [and thus need to keep your opponent at distance] and your opponent is armored, the hammer is better), but I think the pollaxe is better in a larger range of scenarios.

[@bloodypine22]

Those two are classed as the same weapon. A pollaxe doesn't need an axe blade to be a pollaxe. Medieval fight manuals didn't differentiate between then.

[@gabrielcurraj3994]

If I had my private medieval army I would have train them for 3 years gymnastics Cardio and Strength and also Fencing which helps them a lot. Weapons I would have used which existed back then would have been: -Maces -Pole Axe -Shields Range weapons -English Longbow Cavalry -Haldeblier for every type of cavalry Heavy weapons: -Heavy Crossbow -Catapult -Trebuchet IT would make them all Elite soldiers

[@f1r3hunt3rz5]

*Halberdier

[@toastedjam1470]

Did Morningstarstars with the chains in em exists back then cause they would fit here well

[@scottphillips2870]

So no spears?

[@zombiehunter5923]

The best thing to do to your army back then was to treat them right and good And your people or kingdom too Because your armys Loyalty Was the most important thing Some times armies switch sides Or kill they own leaders

[@MaxSafeheaD]

How do you wield a halberd and hold the reins of a horse?

[@dominicmeyer5862]

Just wanted to mention that even though I agree with everything on this list I would have put the mace and war hammer in the armored and unarmored zone because regardless if your are in full plate armor or a gambeson if you get hit with a pointed solid steel block your going down.

[@handsomejack3444]

Wouldn't history dictate that spears are the best weapon?

[@LeslieMRichardson]

Nah - spears lost out to both polearms and pikes. Spears *generally* require formations; in a 1-v-1 against polearms, they tend to lose. Pikes pretty much *require* formations, in which setting they trump both spears and polearms, due to the reach advantage. While the spear is teh dominant battlefield weapons throughout most of history, polearms & pikes beat them during the eras they co-existed.

[@skystorm569]

@@LeslieMRichardson spears typically ARE polearms.

[@PSquared-oo7vq]

@Rex Francorum I like your analogy. Spears are the bog-basic weapon. Bills are poor man's halberds (but still very good). Lucern hammers / bec de corbins were the ultimate refinements, being made for (rich) men wearing heavy armor, to be used against men wearing heavy armor.

[@LeslieMRichardson]

@@skystorm569 Nope. A spear is primarily thrusting, with the option of slashing. Polearms - glaive, halberd, etc - have both thrusting and slashing, but also have a much heavier head, allowing for impact swings (similar to axes, hammers and maces).

[@jayjay101hjk]

@@LeslieMRichardson Well it generally agreed that a person using a sword needs to be much more skilled than a spear user based purely on the advantage that reach gives. So in this case with two equally skilled opponents if you don't know your opponents arms or armor a spear would be a safe bet.

[@eldrenofthemist2492]

7:32 I just realised what this Painted Seen is. Its about the Battle of David and Goliath from the Bible. Told By Medieval Artists. :) It's a Nice find.

[@statarama]

thats very cool actually, I love how they show two parts of the scene like a proto comic book haha

[@caralazlow500]

The mace could still crumple an unarmored enemy and the way you attack with it, getting a solid hit could easily be an instant kill.

[@butter5842]

I would guess the most versatile weapons such as the spear or longsword would do the best. If it's a duel the weapon has to be nimble or possibly be able to be wielded for a prolonged period of time. Heavier weapons would require more strength and stamina. The spear and long sword have decent range, are good against unarmoured, can kite shorter ranged axes or machetes and might be ok against armour. With a spear you can thonk a guy to the helmet a couple of times.

[@Santisima_Trinidad]

Whilst being able to use the weapon for a long period of time gives you advantage during a drawn out duel, if you pick a longsword or esker intending a long, drawn out duel, and they come along with a poleaxe (pollaxe for some) intending to crush your skull within the first five minutes, you're at a huge disadvantage. Or, if you pick the same weapons and the opponent simply has more stamina than you, when you're exhausted, he'll be less exhausted and able to press the advantage more.

[@lowlandnobleman6746]

Reminds me of that old video Metatron did on longsword vs sword and shield. If I remember right, he said when he spars with sword and shield against longsword, he usually does better. That was a while ago though.

[@RayTC]

The poleaxe can outnimble a sword with its queue.

[@meyes1098]

Metatron, are you ever going to make a "followup" to this video where you're doing the exact same thing BUT taking a shield into account? Also you could make 3 tiers for a total of 10 entries, based on the type of shield (small like buckler, medium like a round shield or kite, and large like a scutum).

[@MyCommentsRMaturelol]

Yeah I'm not going into a duel without a shield, and I hate shields.

[@michaeltelson9798]

If you read Terry Pratchett’s Discworld series, Vimes always mentions that farmers and common people are well armed. The bill developed from an agricultural implement for example. The Lance became effective only after after the stirrup was invented during the Dark Ages. Before that mounted troops could be unhorsed easily. The Romans didn’t have stirrups.

[@Vikt0rian]

Obviously the answer is a thrown Pommel, absolutely unfair weaponry.

[@BamBamBigelow..]

imagine a full swing of a halberd against any armour, your getting a proper kilajoules hit to the body.

[@jackvernian7779]

*tens of kilojoules easily.

[@duchessskye4072]

It doesn't do much unless it is on the head.

[@jackvernian7779]

@@duchessskye4072 I beg to disagree completely, unless you're talking full plate. In that case, yes, only neck/head/shoulder/foot strikes count, otherwise it would be a glancing blow.

[@duchessskye4072]

I was talking plate.

[@jackvernian7779]

@@duchessskye4072 full plate or partial?

[@thedoctrinetv]

This is kinda late, but I think I would place the mundane spear at the top spot, and halberd as second. My reasoning for this is how easy it is to train someone to use a spear. Someone who's never touched one before can be trained to be competent at using a spear both alone and as part of a formation in a single day (thrusting, slashing), whereas I imagine the halberd would take a bit more time to master all of the techniques (thrusting, slashing, hacking, entangling, pulling, unentangling).

[@alimohammad1934]

Pikes on formation is my favorite. Swiss pikes

[@Doodoofart725]

In a formation yes, terrible 1vs 1 though. I like swiss pikes too!

[@bloodypine22]

@Rex Francorum Going against a pike formation while using a zweihänder is suicide.

[@bookknight]

Last time I was this early. Melotron was uploading daily!

[@TheRealKingDedede]

I really like halberds because of that hook they’ve got. Hooking my opponent and potentially throwing them onto the ground is really appealing to me

[@KyussSpeed-sg5je]

One utility he didn't mention which I think needs to be said is the safety advantage of a thrusting orientated weapon. Thrusting a weapon obviously requires a backwards wind-up to increase momentum, which if you have the range of a spear or bill, or even a longsword, means you don't have to give up your defence for. With a slashing weapon like a glaive or a falchion, or any weapon that requires outwards wind-up to be effective (like an axe or mace) you are opening yourself up, casting away defence for improved offence. Plus thrusting has advantage over slashing regardless of armour (not to say thrusting is capable of piercing any armour it's just better at penetrating than slashing).

[@wagfinpis]

You might have to argue some of the particulars of this scenario with Miyamoto Musashi.

[@Biden_is_demented]

But slashing wounds are more debilitating to the opponent. You cut tendons, arteries, muscle,etc. A puncture wound needs to be in certain particular places of the body to be effective. A puncture to an arm or leg will not stop an opponent, but a slash might, as it hits tendons, muscle, etc.

[@KyussSpeed-sg5je]

@@Biden_is_demented You are aware that swords are not needle thin, right? A thrust from a sword can sever tendons, arteries etc. To say otherwise is foolish on your part.

[@Biden_is_demented]

They are not needle thin, but the wounds are nonetheless punctures. Especially from swords designed to go through armor, that are very pointy. To sever an artery your thrust needs to hit the immediate vicinity of the artery, and even then it is up to luck. A slash has more surface area, making it easier to hit a vital point. If you slash across a leg, you are bound to cut something important. You will be hard pressed to make a sword thrust strong enough to go through the stomach from front to back like in the movies. Even if it did, in an unarmored opponent, you would be left with internal bleeding, and a very slow death. While a slash across the stomach will leave you holding your entrails. It only takes a cut an inch deep to open your entire stomach area (unless you are a fat ass). It doesn´t take a genius to see which wound is the more debilitating. Just make a thought exercise. Imagine you are run through by a long sword, and imagine if you were able or not to continue the fight in any capacity. And then do the same, but this time picture your insides are pouring out, and you are bleeding much faster. Will you continue the fight, or use your hands to keep your feet from tripping on your intestines? If you say the former, you are a damn liar, and i need not waste my breath any further.

[@KyussSpeed-sg5je]

@@Biden_is_demented Lol you're obviously wayyy to up your own arse to argue in any capacity. Have fun with that lie you're telling yourself though.

[@brsproductions6117]

Misconception that axes cut. Axes crush and wedge.

[@thrillofbattle3801]

#Wedgie

[@RandomAwesomeDude]

I already knew poleaxe was gonna be #1, but its still nice to hear

[@six2make4]

Hey man, just rewatched your Roman armies vs Japanese armies vid and you talked about how you would make a Roman armies vs Samurai armies later, any update on that? Also would in general love to see more of that kinda thing.

[@mymindisdigital]

How about a claymore? 😂 DUNMAGLASS!!!

[@kodlackwhitemane5596]

What about Shugoki's club?

[@samyunknown974]

Dont forget the peacekeeper guy

[@nickzheleznyak8613]

EG RYFF YKKUR I BITTA

[@jinjikisano179]

How about nuxia weapon lol

[@jacopodelbo5122]

what about shinobi's weap-hahahah alright i'll stop

[@finnbergmann4535]

Langes messer just means long knife in german and it was invented because the poor folk wasnt allowed to wear a real sword so they just made long knife s.

[@Ynffy]

"You can slice, you can dice, you can cut... but wait there is more!"

[@PpAirO5]

😂😂😂😂 Nicer dicer ! (Tv shop)

[@Tinhamodic]

I am reminded of an infomercial where the emcee try to demonstrate the sturdiness of the sword and started banging it against the table and the sword breaks at the hilt, bounces back at the emcee and cuts him.

[@aaronbuchholz4184]

War hammers would typically have a point at the end of them during the time it and full plate armor made the Dane axe obsolete. So, it should be above the axe and swords, which in this scenario not having a shield one handed swords shouldn't even be considered imo.

[@chuckhightower2730]

“You can slice, you can dice, you can cut, and you can thrust. Order now and we’ll give you the chopping attachment for FREE.”

[@MrPatrizzo]

Apart from my obvious choice, the crossbow with a huge range advantage 😂, I like your list very much. 👍

[@Glo0ze]

Ah yes a duel without shields you say? lemme just pick up mah crossbow real quick xD

[@oogs]

Akimbo siege crossbows ftw

[@weswolverine]

English long bowman enters chat

[@nicolasspray]

i like that youre putting distance as a priority on the list and i think that can give you great advantage and probably win you the fight, however... once you manage to break your opponent guard that is using a spear for example, he is literally dead... if you get close to him you can kill him with a kitchen knife and he won't be able to do anything

[@fimbul_]

17:00 Wait, wait,wait! Against Matt Easton? This changes the rule drastically. Did a legion of Spacemarines count a as a medieval weapon? No? Otherwise a horse sounds good to get some distance.

[@Lo-tf6qt]

WHAT?! Pommel isn't no.1? What is this heresy?!

[@demogorgonzola]

Exactly, against Matt Easton only the power of The Pommel can help us. :)

[@Santisima_Trinidad]

Polearms generally have a counterweight on the bottom of the pole to counterbalance the head, making it easier to use. Now, I don't know about you, but I'm fairly sure a nice counterweight is pretty similar to an ULTRA POMMEL, meaning a polearm is more effective than a standard pommel.

[@robertkaslow3720]

A pommel will pay for your child's college education.

[@hardywatkins7737]

I remember looking at battle ready swords online once trying to figure out what might be a really useful, practical sword. I took a big liking to a modern hybrid of a cutlass/sabre.

[@predwin1998]

I think you skipped over one very important factor: What armour am I wearing? When I look at poleaxe techniques it looks as though there's little you can do with a poleaxe to parry swift cuts from a sword or thrusts from a spear, especially to the arms, which matters very little if you're wearing full plate, but could be a huge problem if you're just wearing normal clothing. Now I'm not saying the poleaxe is a bad defensive weapon, as it can clearly parry pretty much any strike that would still pose a threat to a knight in armour, but it doesn't seem to be that good at parrying those swifter cuts that an armoured knight could ignore anyway. Also, I haven't held a poleaxe myself so I might be wrong here, but based on how it is usually held it looks as though the poleaxe is the one polearm that doesn't actually have (much of) a reach advantage over something like a longsword, as you seem to use the pole more for leverage than for range. If I know I'm going unarmoured into this fight, the poleaxe would go down a few spots on my list as I feel I would be at a major disadvantage against the longsword and spear if even the list and swift cuts and thrusts pose a serious threat, the longsword would go a couple steps up for it's parrying capacity and the fact that it would stil pose a decent threat against an armoured foe, a polearm along the lines of the bill or halberd would occupy number 1 followed by the spear (assuming all those polearms share n1) as their reach and speed would be essential to keeping me alive and I would throw the mace completely off of this list if only I knew what other weapon would take its place as I feel like it would throw defense out the window to use a mace (or warhammer and axe for that matter) without the armour or shield to compensate for it's lackluster defensive capabilities. If I am going to be decently armoured (gambeson and/or mail) but my arms/hands are still exposed, spear would go down a bit as the safety of its reach and speed is no longer as necessary and poleaxe would go up a few steps, but still not back to n1. I am still most likely to pick a bill-like polearm followed by a longsword, both of which I would have slightly more faith in should my opponent be wearing armour while neither leaves my arms too exposed. Maces and company would be back on the list, but they'd still be pretty low as the arms would still be in danger with their short reach and lack of hand protection. If I know I'm going to be fully armoured, screw speed and reach I'm going for the hardest hitter I can get my hands on: the poleaxe is back to n1 in all its glory. As I stated above I could still use it to defend against any major blows that might still put me at risk, and in fact I believe the poleaxe due to it's weight and leverage is more suited than anything other than a shield for parrying those heavy strikes, but I would also have the offensive power to take out my oppenent with *relative* ease regardless of what armour he might or might not be wearing. Maces axes and warhammers would also be higher than swords and maybe even spears on the list in this case, as their lack of defensive ability won't matter nearly as much, and it would be a serious threat against any opponent, while the sword and spear's ability to deflect even those swift cuts to your hand with decent reliability as well as their reach would be made largely obsolete due to the armour. Lastly, if I also (for whatever reason) don't know what armour I will be wearing I would just assume the worst and choose my weapon as though I were unarmoured. tl'dr: in addition to your ratings for effectiveness against (un)armoured, I think you should also have ratings for effectiveness when the wielder himself is (un)armoured as some weapons are far more dependent on their wielder wearing armour than others.

[@ltsandes]

Thank you very much for providing an extra clean and clear analysis on something which should absolutely be taken into account. Your explanation is more than enlightening. One of the greatest comments out there, pretty well said!

[@christiansorensen7567]

In a year, where everyone is converted to the halberd by Seki Sensei, I watch this older video and appreciate the wide factors in making this list. It's soo much more complicated given armors used, formations, and training factors.

[@flemishlion69]

Matt is easy to kill lure him with superdry deals and drop a container.

[@FENomadtrooper]

Don't be a fool, he would easily read the context and figure you out!

[@Czecher86]

cant realy imagine how u gonna fight with 4m pike against longsword , one parry ,dodge and the guy is almost next to you .its great in phalanx but 1vs1 cant be good at all

[@Steven-mk4gg]

Yea, I had to laugh. Hell, he can have a 4m pike and I will take bare handed over that. Wouldnt be too hard to get inside and sinch up a choke.

[@wisewigga7129]

Are you stupid a 4m pike would absolutely fucking destroy you, do you know how hard it is to fight against that much reach, the longsword was a secondary sword because polearms were kings, one stab youre dead one slash you're dead and you can do alot of that in a 4m reach

[@wisewigga7129]

@@Steven-mk4gg yeah sure if it's a 4 year old holding the pike

[@Steven-mk4gg]

@@wisewigga7129 Dude, good luck maneuvering a 12 foot pole in 1v1 combat. Huge pikes are made for infantry, formational warefare, not single combat. Using a 4 meter pike against a single opponent would a death sentence for anyone but Halfthor Julius Bjornsson. Do me a favor, go outside, pick up a 12 foot long branch and see just how well you can quickly, and adeptly maneuver it.

[@wisewigga7129]

@@Steven-mk4gg yes my comment was retarded I agree i underestimated how long 4m is lmao why tf did i sound like a jerk in my last comment I apologize and yeah imagine strongmen like hafthor in plate Armour lmfao a mace hit and bam u dead

[@spidersinmykeyboard6367]

Shout out to the Tuck/Estoc, super underappreciated weapon.

[@draqueporter7781]

"the axe" like which one, theres just as much diversity in axes as sword. look at a dane axe then tomohawk. completely different also axes are better than swords imo because obviously the opponent will take armor and axes are pretty much hammers at that point

[@vanlao6367]

Not only that the axe is a versaltile weapon, it is also the among the first choices for peasant infantries as close quarter weapon, mainly because it's an axe - it's a tool the peasant use everyday, so it is the weapon they are most familiar with which allow them to utilize it, unlike the sword that require long training time. Axes can also be used to break enemy's shield because that's essentially the reason to pick the axe - to break enemy defense and overwhelm them.

[@ericstaples7220]

Probably, the type of axe used in combat.

[@rumpelstilzz]

Tomahawk and Franciska have more 'reach' than said pike :D And you can easily carry more than one.

[@nickp306]

I like how he presents the video as if we are consulting him for weapon advice in our own medieval conflicts

[@mosseblack8635]

6:55 was weird, but in a good way. Throwing in ancient combat depictions of man vs myth totally peaked my interest.

[@nikbear]

Just a suggestion for future lists like this (which I really enjoy 👍) perhaps cost effectiveness, a Bill and Mace are really cheap to make compared to some of the other weapons, also perhaps skillset could be a consideration? I would have thought it's a lot easier to learn how to use some weapons, i.e Mace- bash the crap out of your opponent 😉 as opposed to a Sword which really does require alot of skill to be wielded properly, if not you can even injure yourself! 🗡🏥 just a thought, keep up the fantastic work 👍

[@luisleiva2504]

a spear is even more cheap than a mace. just a dagger in a stick.

[@ghoraxe9000]

The Mace may seem crude.. basic.. but it's extremely versatile .. easy to make.. easy to use . It'll get the job done.. it's only draw back really is it's weight and if you're not careful.. you can easily exhaust yourself or injure yourself.. it also doubles as an excellent tool.. that's why axes often had a blunt face on the opposite side

[@fransbuijs808]

Anyone who is interested in this should read The Last Duel by Eric Jager.

[@washingtoncommandcenter5541]

Like the Schiavone & broadsword, if you were talking a bit later a Munich Town guard side sword would be a must. I'd go with a Ghiavarina Spear at 3, a Poleaxe at 2, then screw, I know it's right there on the line but my #1 is without a doubt the Roncone/Italian Billhook. It's just the perfect all-around setup and beastly at everything.

[@angeluscorpius]

I thought he was going to explain how a bronze ring was an effective weapon.

[@HiroNguy]

"... One ring to rule them all...."

[@Luredreier]

5:22 Axes are best in shield vs shield engagements. At the time people didn't use armor for their feet, just chainmail over gambeson for the upper body and chainmail + helmet and perhaps a cap for the head and neck. With a axe you can hook it on a shield to pull it aside and you have the mass to push it aside etc. You got options. You have a advantage vs a sword + shield with the armor and shields of the time. And against armor of the time it's not entirely useless.

[@Divyanshu0236]

#10 Mace #9 War hammer #8 Axe #7 Falchion sword #6 Arming sword #5 Long sword #4 Stocco sword #3 Bill #2 Spear #1 Poleaxe

[@billberg1264]

As a halberd fanboy, I'm glad to see it sharing first place. Though, I always thought halberds were more similar to bills than poleaxes. I was kind of expecting bill and halberd to share 2nd place, with poleaxe getting 1st place to itself. I'm surprised to see pike got on the list at all. I would have figured its extreme length would make it too unwieldy for a 1-on-1 fight.

[@johanfridtjofvogensen6833]

I would prefere a halberd in a midival 1vs1 combat.

[@vast634]

I would prefer a sword and shield.

[@Helmet_enthusiast]

I like how the (almost) whole point of medieval weaponry is, if you hit hard enough and in a good spot you can win almost every time until your weapon breaks.

[@liawysheng616]

Simply put If your poor : The Spear , Hammer, bow and knife. If your rich A poleaxe Mace Sword Crossbow And Dagger For the meme Unscrew the pommel

[@EvidensInsania]

Where on earth do people get the idea that swords were expensive, they weren't. In the medieval era anyone who wanted a sword could get one, owning your own sword was even one of the requirements to be a lowly archer in Henry V's army.

[@Doodoofart725]

@@EvidensInsania Archers weren't lowly. It took many years of training to be a longbowman for example, or to shoot from horseback. Archery is very hard and extremely tiring, because to inflict any damage you need a bow with enough draw weight. Longbowmen could shoot more than 6 arrows a minute at draw weights of 140 pounds or even more, that takes enormous endurance and strength. Archers were valuable. In fact one of the reasons the crossbow was so popular is simply because it was easier to use than a bow. But yeah I agree that munitions grade swords probably were pretty cheap, just like some armor in the later middle ages. The cheap stuff just didn't survive to the present day, partly because of the bad quality, it was made to be expendable. But also because noone kept cheap swords as heirlooms for example and looked after them, like they did with the high quality decorated arms and armor of the rich nobility. Noone cared about that stuff, for most people they were just tools.

[@EvidensInsania]

@@Doodoofart725 And who was getting paid the least in Henry V's army? It was the archers. Did I ever say that being an archer didn't take skill? No, because I'm not a moron and do archery myself. But the simple truth is that they were just lowly peasants of a much lower social standing than the men-at-arms and obviously the knights. Proving my point that swords were not a luxury weapons when even the lowest paid soldiers in an army are required to have their own swords. I don't know why you take such offence to the word lowly.

[@calilaployploy2827]

0:04 Top 10 Medi-evil weapons

[@francocignetti9784]

Chicken drum stick

[@chrisv2557]

Thank you!

[@Sargonarhes]

So a tuck eventually became the rapier which was used by more renaissance troops like musketeers, or about the time armor started falling out of favor because the gun was coming more into the forefront in warfare.

[@GonzoTehGreat]

Obviously, with lists like these some of the choices and positions will be personal preference but there are 2 weapons you mention that don't make sense given your own judging criteria. The first error is including the Greatsword alongside the Longsword in 5th position. This doesn't make sense because these weapons weren't actually that similar in usage. Historically, medieval Longswords were primarily dueling weapons, making them ideal for the hypothetical scenario you've created to judge the suitability of these weapons. However, in contrast, the Greatsword was a specialized battlefield weapon designed to be used en masse against pikes formation, although how exactly it was employed and how effective it was, is not yet known. Hence, the longsword definitely belongs on this list, perhaps even higher up, but the Greatsword doesn't. The second error is including the Estoc, which is, by design, specialized for fighting against armored opponents, in 4th position when it can't cut at all, which restricts the wielder to thrusts, making it significantly less versatile, especially against less or unarmored opponents. For these reasons, l'd remove the Estoc from the list completely and shift all the other weapons up one place, resulting in a better, overall "top 10".

[@datkhornedog899]

Well, an Estoc works as a Lance, if you need to. Besides, personal preferences are there. I'd prefer a Spada da Lato, or Side Sword, with a slightly thinner blade.

[@GonzoTehGreat]

@@datkhornedog899 A lance is even less versatile (more specialized) than the Estoc, as it's useless on foot and only useful mounted if you're charging, so that's not a plus for the Estoc but another minus. Regardless, I don't agree that an Estoc works as a lance. They're similar in that they're both designed to exploit gaps in armor, but they're used very differently and hence require very different training. A mounted knight or man-at-arms might be armed with both a lance and an Estoc, especially if jousting in a tournament, but neither are versatile enough for the kind of open-ended, one-on-one duel that Metatron is talking about here.

[@datkhornedog899]

@@GonzoTehGreat You're thinking of a Jousting Lance. I meant the more traditional Lances, one more akin to a Spear or Javelin. The Estoc's blunt edges can be exploited: while it's possible to do so with other weapons, the Estoc can redirect a strike, especially a chopping strike, and use the crossguard and pommel to, well, pummel the enemies' face, better. You get a hammer and a spear from a sword.

[@GonzoTehGreat]

@@datkhornedog899 I mentioned jousting because this video is about a one-on-one duel, but I was referring to lances in general when I pointed out that they're used mounted and hence require a different set of skills, including horsemanship. However, this duel could be on foot, in which case a lance wouldn't be as useful as a spear or javelin, both of which are more versatile. In contrast to all three of the above, the Estoc has less reach and much less impact (momentum transfer during a charge) and also suffers from problems "giving point" as it would be difficult to withdraw the blade while moving, once it was thrust into an enemy, which is why "cut-and-thrust" swords were preferred by cavalry throughout history. As for reversing an Estoc to use the pommel as a hammer/mace, of course this can be done, but it's also possible to do this with a normal (arming) sword (or a longsword), so this isn't a reason to choose an Estoc over them for this duel.

[@datkhornedog899]

@@GonzoTehGreat I did mentioned the part about other weapons having similar tactics. The edgeless blade helps with half-swording as you won't have to risk more on cutting yourself. If I were to be honest, they would do better for the village guards. Outlaws will be dealt non lethally from the "blades" and, if permitted) executed via impaling. Cut-and-Thrust swords, such as a Broadsword or Backsword, are specially versatile to be suitable for anyone. But you won't be expecting someone to use a specialised weapon such as an Estoc, and mistake it for a thinner Longsword. Who knows? Deception is an important part of the battle. Be unpredictable, use "slashes", parry (no worries about dulling a blade), pretend a thrust, and swing that sword like a hammer, and back to a sword. We all have opinions about weapons, so unless this conversation continues for a week, like last time, I'm done. Edit - Shadiversity did cover a part about Lances on Foot.

[@Alpha.Phenix]

Estoc: makes the list Dark Souls players: R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1 R1

[@stanisawptak2509]

mordhau players: *scroll up scroll up scroll up*

[@ZWIPPMANN]

I am writing a TTRPG game with a focus on melee combat. This is very insightful.

[@inquisitormaddox8581]

“Daubeny show yourself”

[@kodlackwhitemane5596]

"Fight you? That's not a trial. That's an execution!"

[@inquisitormaddox8581]

kodlack whitemane I love you for that Edit: you made my day

[@kodlackwhitemane5596]

@@inquisitormaddox8581 lol for honor is a fun game

[@Nordic-Caveman]

"This is the Metatron speaking" Does he identify as a autobot or what

[@vgman94]

He’s clearly a Decepticon lol.

[@erojerisiz1571]

He literally has "tron" on his name Of course he does

[@guanjun1178]

Good upload. I think the environment counts for a lot. In a small room, pole weapons are basically useless. So environments need to be considered.

[@joelburgos69]

Soldier: I have the must effective weapon and armor in this battlefield. Monk: Wololo. Soldier: Why I change color?

[@dingodave89]

I would choose a Bardiche. Decent range, easily cleave through unarmoured opponents, has enough weight to knock an armoured opponent around/down and has the ability to thrust still (not the best thruster but it still has the option)

[@luisleiva2504]

inefective against armoured opponents, shields and break easily.

[@kingbranden1369]

Lets see how a list I came up with off the top of my head compares. 10. arming sword 9. greatsword 8. dane axe 7. poleaxe 6. pike 5. spear 4. longbow 3. halberd 2. lance 1. crossbow And then he immediately says he's talking about duels. Well damn it all.

[@raphaelschotzer9472]

Well, i think in this case the Pike is one of the worst weapons you could choose. You basically have one strike and that while the opponent is 4-6 meters away and if you miss, the Weapon really is to long to take it back and hit the opponent another time, so at this time, if you miss ones, you're fucked... My favorite is a normal Spear, around 2 meters long, you still have a long range, but it's still very practical. Overall i think it can easily be described as the best Weapon, especially when you look on how simple, easy and cheap to make it is compared to other weapons, but in this cenario i would put it on number 3.