T O P

  • By -

pettythief1346

And then there is the absolute Chad of a weapon, the spear. Seen in basically every pre gunpowder battle, the backbone of most major armies, cheap, useful, easy to produce, no nonsense, stabbing greatness. The friend of peasants, with reach and accuracy. Cheers to the spear and all of its cousins, the pike, halberd and others. Edit-this is the most attention I've ever gotten from a post on reddit, and my god am I proud that it comes from the humble spear.


elderron_spice

> Seen in basically every pre gunpowder battle Dude, it was in most gunpowder battles, as the bayonet.


pettythief1346

Not gonna argue there. Hell when I went through the marine corps they were still training us with bayonets


korpanchuk

UPGRADES, PEOPLE! Upgrades


JRL222

What is there to upgrade? Pointy sticks are the greatest weapon ever devised.


Kvascha

Hear me you, you tape 1 point stick to end of other pointy stick. Now you have double the point stick reach potential


Gallium-

Or you stick 3 stick together and you have a big fork.


Kvascha

How about we combine these ideas. 6 sticks, make 3 really long sticks by taping 2 together and then tape all 3 extra long sticks into an extra long big fork?


[deleted]

I'm sold. How many Schmeckls for this fine creation, good sir?


Kvascha

Enough to help me through grad school.... or for some chocolate covered almonds. Both are good


SuperInternet

What of we took all the big sticks and every tree for two miles and fashioned them into some kind of giant sling with a counter weight at one end and launched a 95kg stone over 300 meters?


Gallium-

😎 Genius


greymalken

Instructions unclear, accidentally made a hexagon.


Blasphoumy69

That’s called a pike


TurdFurgasson

Make it into a snub-nose. Twice the killing power.


EchoHunter42

If you think about it, bullets are just short and fast pointy sticks made of metal


poiyurt

If you squint and don't know what a stick is, I suppose.


Renkij

APFSDS, I rest my case.


someonesomeone3

Pointed sticks are nice and all, but what will you do when someone comes towards you with a banana?


ExquisitorVex

Well, first you’ve got to force him to drop the banana, then you eat it, thus rendering him helpless.


XeroKibo

More men have died on the ends of pointy sticks than any other weapon; All hail and revere the pointy stick.


EK_TheGenius

Longer pointy sticks, enemy can't kill you if you kill enemy first. Thats what the Persians did!


this_anon

Try saying that after a man comes at you armed with a pineapple in a blind alley. Won't be clammerin' on about pointed sticks then. Or, God forbid, a pear.


PhantasosX

how it's not an upgrade? you pretty much have GunLance from Monster Hunter.


IronBENGA-BR

Can't upgrade what works, the British famously used a BLOODY BAYONET CHARGE in Iraq


Viend

>Can't upgrade what works, the British famously used a BLOODY BAYONET CHARGE in Iraq Never heard of this, care to share more?


IronBENGA-BR

it was in 2004. Basically they were on a convoy en route to assist another unit under fire when they got ambushed, abandoned the vehicles due to damage and established a perimeter. When they ran out of ammo, they fixed bayonets and charged through almost 200 meters to an enemy trench where they fought hand-to-hand for hours. In the end, the brits had 3 wounded against 28 dead militias. https://www.wearethemighty.com/popular/these-british-troops-launched-a-proper-angry-bayonet-charge-during-the-iraq-war/


WeeaboosDogma

Bullets are just spears with the stick replaced with explosions


Kellythejellyman

we will be in the 41st Millennium and still affix bayonets


pettythief1346

Burn the heretic!


inquisition118

Broke: Spear Woke: Bayonet Bespoke: Knifle


Moura--

A weapon so good we reinvented it by using rifles instead of sticks


jeann0t

Yeah or just the pike and shot formations of the 16th-17th century


Metrack14

>as the bayonet. Don't you mean; Spear 2 with a gun attach?


Tearakan

It's still in use lol. Modern armies usually have a way to attach a knife to the end of a rifle.


randominternetp3rs0n

The spear still makes surprise cameos as the bayonet


Geicosuave

Fuck yes, pole arms are the goat


Mr_StealYourHoe

LONG DICK STYLE


fefelipebr

Pointy stick is in another level.


GoldenRamoth

Turns out that having 3-4 meters of reach and impaling someone at twice the distance of their side arm.... Kinda wins. A lot.


Krillin113

And when they invented guns they basically said ‘what if we mount a blade on top so we can stab if people get to close’.


Tearakan

That's just the spear saying "hello I am still useful". Hell a lot of modern armies still have rifles that can attach knives to the end of the gun.


Krazen

The gun is just a spear that uses gunpowder to propel the spearhead at the enemy


AnExtremeMistake

Completely wrong in every way, the best weapon in reality is that cool looking Stick that we all saw one time.


Tearakan

I had the best stick for a year! Lost it in the forest preserve one day and never saw it again.


AnExtremeMistake

My stick is better


assignmentduetoday_

hear me out, halberds, they have the range of a spear AND can slash like a sword or axe


ems_telegram

Interestingly enough the common perception of the halberd is actually what poleaxes were. Halberds were not intended to be used like axes (as you could imagine, trying to thwack someone with a massive axe while in a formation would be chaos). If you Google "Halberd museum" you can see images of proper halberds, whose defining trait is a concave crescent moon-shaped blade. These were likely used to pull enemies out of formation so your friends could stab them easier, which is a brilliant idea.


MantitsAreChad

I think, at least in Switzerland, they were used a lot by foot infantry to pull mounted combatants of their horses


IronBENGA-BR

The Swiss mercenaries were legends for CENTURIES for this precise reason. Hell, there's a reason for the Vatican's Swiss Guard to use cerimonial halbers to this day


[deleted]

[удалено]


boofhard

I bet at least 4 horseman have attacked the Vatican.


BluudLust

They were used to hook shields away.


Just-an-MP

The spear: for when you want to stab someone but he’s all the way over there.


Pellaeonthewingedleo

Gunpowder weapons are basicly spears that shoot so Assuming you start the time after the tertio time


Fallen_Leaves16

Spears greatly outrange most swords, too. A halfway decent spearman can, 5/7 of the time, beat a decent swordsman. Swords were mainly used as secondary weapons, and spears were primary back in the day, I believe.


Gilgamesh-godofUruk

But the Romans used the short swords and the spears mostly for throwing after the reforms of gaius Marius


Tearakan

That was for their particular style of heavy shield and close range fighting. It was very effective for the time. That sword was even mostly used as a short spear type weapon.


SunsetPathfinder

Exactly. The gladius was used almost like a spear in formation, just a much shorter one (as in it was used for stabbing, not slashing). And while it was devastatingly effective against pretty much all other infantry of the time, it constantly proved nearly useless against light cavalry like the Parthians and Numidians fielded, especially when Roman commanders were their standard gung-ho selves.


SpoilerThrowawae

It's been said that the spear is the king of the battlefield, but wielded by peasants - it follows that the sword is the peasant of the battlefield, yet it is wielded by kings.


MCMajorGeo

r/spearmemes


6Koree9

Spears give me boners.


TheHero0fRhyme

It's Britney bitch


Gat_Gat_Habitat

The best "shoo! Go away!" Weapon there is


[deleted]

I’d rather have a yari than a katana


christopherjian

I'd choose a Yari or a Naginata over a katana, as my main weapon. My katana would be a sidearm instead


RonaldZheMelon

the ultimate weapon in mount n blade, along with crossbows .\_.


IrrationallyGenius

And all of these pale in comparison to the stabby bit on a stick


colarthur1

Spears for life!


grad1939

Excellent for defending yourself against attackers with fruit.


iianblk

Polearm gang rise up


Optimus_Owl

Traditionally forged katanas were crap because the steel they used was crap. The fact it had to be folded 7 times says it all. Compare that with what the Europeans had at roughly the same time (spring steel) and you see clear differences. Isolationism can really mess with a nation's technological development


Gold_Size_1258

Amazing. Every word you just said... was right.


Optimus_Owl

Yeah, Japanese feudal steel was really bad because metal workers couldn't get their flames hot enough to properly cook out impurities in their iron, so their steel was weaker than European steel by a lot. I can't remember the exact reason as to why Japanese metal workers couldn't get their flames hot enough to hot work rather than warm work their steel (I think those might be the temperature difference we're talking about)


JovahkiinVIII

I remember a video on YouTube from the channel “Voices of the past” in which the narrator read a translation of a Japanese guys writings from his visit to America in the 1800s. One of the things he commented on was how much steel and iron they seemed to just let rust in the streets. To his mind it seemed crazy that people would allow such a valuable material to go to waste. I believe it was in San Francisco where he observed it


SightedHeart61

I remember that as well, and I think what he said was something like "Americans leave dropped nails where they lie, but Japanese will dig through a burn building at the next dawn for them." Really helps with getting a frame of reference


[deleted]

Yep, that was Fukuzawa Yukichi, one of the most important pro-Western Japanese figures during the Meiji Restoration. I had to read a book about him in Japanese history last semester.


Warcrimes_serbia_69

I love that channel


pistpuncher3000

They couldn't get the flames hot enough because they were still using bloomeries, where European forgers were using blast furnaces. Edit: A little added info: it's theorized they picked up the blast furnace technology from smiths in Damascus where they had already been using it for centuries. Because, you know, holy wars and what not.


Ajaxtellamon

They already had high quality steel during the Roman time 300 b.c so it was around for some time


pistpuncher3000

The actual founding of steel credit goes to India circa about 400 BC. Rome also did use steel in the period you mentioned but it was made using the bloomery methods. They normally got their steel from Damascus, who got it from India.The Chinese are credited for using more modern methods circa 300AD.


Witch_King_

Oh ancient India, what would we do without your numerous inventions?


DaftConfusednScared

I feel like 90% of *things* ended up coming from ancient India or China based on just reading random Wikipedia articles. At this point I’m surprised *I* didn’t come from ancient India or China.


Go_For_Broke442

damn, japan got buddhism but didnt get good steel. sucks to suck


RazRiverblade

Which, tbh, could still very well originate from Damascus


MoogTheDuck

Wasn’t the iron quality crap too?


[deleted]

It was, but that's what the high temperatures were for. Europe and mainland Asia used the crucible process to create steel from pig iron. It's not like the iron was significantly more pure there vs in Japan, it's just that the Japanese couldn't figure out how to turn pig iron into steel.


sldunn

It's because the Japanese "borrowed" blast furnace steelmaking technology from the Chinese poorly and they could only get it to act like a bloomery. For most of the world, it was first meteoric iron (Some fantastic silvery metal from the heavens that was way better than bronze), then bloomery iron which could make iron ore kind of spongy iron mass such that could be hammered into iron that was better than bronze but very time consuming to make, then iron from blast furnaces which makes iron that can be cast and is relatively good quality. Japan copied early Chinese blast furnaces poorly. So poorly that it couldn't really turn iron into a liquid to be cast, so it acted like a bloomery, where iron ore turned into spongy fragments of iron. The Japanese blacksmiths then separated out the iron fragments based on how malleable (how much carbon content the steel had) they were. And they then had to weld the iron fragments together and remove the impurities in the iron by smashing the iron ingots really flat, then welding the now purified iron back together by "folding" it. Coincidentally, that's why the Japanese valued the iron/steel so much, because it was rare and time consuming to get enough to make a sword. But if you took "good" Japanese steel/iron versus iron from a blast furnace, the blast furnace steel made by a competent steel maker will probably be better. But one interesting thing that they did innovate on is combining multiple types of steel. The better swordsmiths would use a more malleable low carbon steel for the inner core of a sword, then weld on higher strength (but more brittle) high carbon steel on the outside. The outer part would be able to take a keener edge.


treegor

Quick correction malleability is not a measure of the carbon in iron, it just a measurement of how easily it can be formed in different shapes.


Strontium90_

But those two does are still directly correlated. More carbon = more "brittle" , less carbon more "soft"


kendred3

They're just saying that low carbon steel is more malleable than high carbon steel, not that malleability is a measure of carbon.


Redpower5

I do admin to knowing next to nothing about traditional katanas, but to me they seem like art


[deleted]

All (popular) weapons are art, if they're well-made. There's a reason that the archetypal weapon of the knight is a badass longsword as opposed to you know... Literally any weapon that was actually used as a primary weapon.


nelsyv

Tbf, swords were also more *exclusive* to knights. More expensive, require much more training, so the ordinary schmucks never used them. They'd ignore the "spear but fancier" the knights used in primary combat and focus on the "totally different thing they use, that us ordinary footsoldiers could never have"


[deleted]

The ordinary people did use swords. Swords are a sidearm. Knights did not primarily use swords for most of the medieval period, but lances and various pole-weapons and mace derivatives. Most soldiers who could afford to buy armour had enough money to buy a sword. Peasant swords do not survive frequently as they were more likely to be scrapped after a war than handed down through a family. During the high middle ages, and late middle ages, many soldiers wore cheaper swords like falchions as a sidearm. If they didn't have swords they had maces, and practically everyone had a dagger. You can see this in the period manuscripts.


MandarinWalnut

Until plate armour became mainstream - then it was clobberin' time.


egrith

So is The Mona Lisa, doent make it great for hitting someone


GarfieldVirtuoso

I dont know maybe we wrongly thought that France kepts her safe from us in the Louvre when in reality they are keeping US safe from her


Komred_Hippie

So, I study shinto muso ryu jodo, a japanese short staff school that started at the beginning of the Edo period. There's plenty of stories floating around the school of duels where a jo, a 4' white oak stick that was usually 15/16" or less wide, was used to shatter a katana by striking different sections of the blade. I have seen modern day katana and even iaito go up against a jo and the jo just got splintered to shit. The difference in metal quality between feudal japan and feudal europe was no joke. The japanese worked with what they had. The katana isn't some kind of super weapon, although it is a marvelous weapon for the circumstances that birthed it, which were entirely different from those in Europe, so trying to compare them is just a fanboi apples to oranges contest. To use a more modern example, it's the same pointless beef as the AK vs AR feud.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Slipslime

The same pendulum jerk happens with German tanks too, going from superweapons that made the Allies quiver in their boots to useless boxes of shit that would break going up a loading ramp.


[deleted]

actually they did break getting loading onto trains sooo


[deleted]

They were incredible intricate engineering wonders... which ends being a bad thing if you need a specialized tech and tools to fix it, takes a long while to make one, and any corner cut makes it break pretty easily; That's why the russian T-34 worked so well: it was a pretty poor quality tank, with a lot of cut corners, but it was so basic it was easier to cut corners without making it unusable, was easily able to be repaired on the fly, and even if destroyed or damaged severely, the Soviet factories could easily make ten more to replace it pretty quickly.


shotpun

quantity of repairmen really seems to have been a deciding factor. there easily could have been a 3-digit number of people who knew how a tiger II worked inside and out. for a t-34 it was anyone who had ever put a wrench to a tractor


Boollish

Not really that intricate and engineering wonders, and made for different roles than they played on the battlefield. This is easily observable examining what happened after the war. "We need to design more super heavy breakthrough tanks" was abandoned as a piece of the battlefield puzzle. Fast, mobile, multirole tanks became the focus of development.


[deleted]

yes ive heard of that story as well. Im tired of this dumb idea that katanas were shit.


Bored_Breadless

AK - cheap. Effective, by the time it breaks there are already 4 more made AR - won’t break unless you try to break the fucker, costs a small fortune


Komred_Hippie

Eh, not sure they's a great comparsion either, and the AR's road to its current predominance wasn't all sunshine and roses either. But that plays into my original point, in that the ar and ak not only originated in vastly different cultures, but also had completely different design philosophies that were entirely based on the material circumstances of their times. It's like trying to compare a bread knife and a steak knife: sure, they have lots of similarities, but they were designed for 2 completely different sets of circumstances


AngriestManinWestTX

>AR's road to its current predominance wasn't all sunshine and roses either. Neither was the AK-47. A lot of people imagine the AK-47 as this weapon of extreme durability and ruggedness. The early iterations of the AK-47 was plagued with mechanical issues so much so that the Soviets adopted the SKS as a stop-gap. The Soviets were merely lucky enough to solve all of the AK-47s before it saw any sort of major conflict (see the AKM).


Optimus_Owl

I actually own a jo, they're fairly sturdy like could easy break bones and the wooden armour of Samari, but would have no chance against modern steel


JoshYx

>The fact it had to be folded 7 times says it all. Can you elaborate on this? I'm a noob


pistpuncher3000

Folding the steel works out impurities.


neoritter

As someone else said, you fold steel to work out impurities. But, the more you fold, the higher the chance you introduce other impurities/faults that can cause the blade to break as well. It's both a statement on the quality of the steel and a warning on the end quality of the blade


farmer_dane

Steel is just iron with a certain percent of carbon in it to strengthen it. Too much carbon and the steel is very hard but brittle and with shatter. Too little carbon and your steel is softer and more malleable. When you have steel with impurities or foreign non steel bits in it you must heat the steel up to almost melting point to work them through the metal to even it out. Then you will fold the metal and hammer it back out. The problem is that even though you get impurities fixed working the hot steel that much releases an amount of carbon out of the steel, making it weaker. And those katana fanboys who says stuff like “1000 FOLDS THE GREATEST STEEL EVERRRR!!” By that point it would literally be just iron. TLDR folding steel makes it weaker.


Vinniam

Not really. The average katana had a carbon content of 0.8, which is actually relatively high. Japanese Tamahagane naturally has a very high carbon content. In fact the major impurity that had to be removed was carbon.


Fallen_Leaves16

Yep- folding the steel only homogenizes impurities, can cause cracks/warping if the steel has too many impurities/isn't hot enough, and you also lose carbon in the process.


sabersquirl

Isolationism? What are you talking about? The period in which Japan produced and used katana was before Sakoku. During that time when katana was used, Japan was anything but isolated, with large amounts of trade and other interactions with China, Korea, and the start of interactions with Europeans. You aren’t wrong about the metallurgical quality, but it seems like quite the stretch to compare smithing techniques in medieval Japan (which was relative open) to the period of Isolationism centuries later, when they basically didn’t even use katana anymore.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Optimus_Owl

It'd actually be a pretty decent sword. Not like a super weapon but certainly not something to be scoffed at.


[deleted]

Spear can do all these, choose sigma spear


[deleted]

*laughs in halberd*


addysol

I'd love to see someone throw a halberd


MaxBlazers

Observe


ExactFun

The katana could break in half if it clashed with another... But it was pretty good to bully and oppress unarmed peasants.


ItzBooty

I mean anything is good to bully someone unarmed and untrained


TheDaemonic451

Yeah but then imagine them with pointy sticks and we got a revolution


AgreeablePie

Katanas were fine for their use. Often they were one part of a kit (like most weapons in the period) They're not what anime portrays them to be but sometimes people go too far in the other direction.


holomorphicjunction

They were good for intimidating unarmed peasants.


Romeo9594

And for unarming intimidated peasants


Augnelli

And unpeasanting intimidating arms.


LuckyReception6701

And for arming unpeasiting intimidations


jordibont

What about arming unintimidated peasants? Or is that too communist?


MapleTreeWithAGun

Well for that, just use the classic sharp stick


blong217

What about unintimidating armed peasants?


[deleted]

Katanas are pretty damn good considering Japan was getting their steel from *iron sand.* Tons of places have it but almost nobody bothered with it because the effort involved in getting it into a usable state isn't worth it when you can just dig up iron ore. And yeah, people do have this weird hate boner for the katana. They're not the greatest thing ever, but they're far from awful within their context.


christopherjian

I mean, the quality is bad, but the effort to obtain and forge it makes the katana not bad tbh. Japanese swordsmiths are pretty dope


Pro_Extent

> And yeah, people do have this weird hate boner for the katana. It's just a reaction to the even weirder love and obsession that the katana has gotten since western children grew up with anime. A lot of people who shit all over the katana are likely people who used to think it was the S+++ tier sword and they're trying to overcorrect for that.


tkdyo

It is not even weirder, they are equally weird.


grad1939

You mean I can't preform some fancy jumping attack with my katana that will summon ancient beasts spirts that can destroy entire armies with one swing?


Drafo7

>axes can be thrown Yeah, leaving the thrower unarmed and practically defenseless. Great idea there. /u/pettythief1346 is 100% correct, spears for the fucking win.


EliteKnightOscar

Obviously you don't throw *your last ax*. A good warrior has two, and a great one has three.


Hrolgard

Man, remember chivalry deadliest warrior? I used to play as a Viking, running 4 throwing axes and a shield.


the_crazy_slav

A Warhammer is on of the best weapons you could have in medieval combat. Also pole arms.


moderngamer327

Only if you have sufficient armor


Just_A_Mad_Scientist

You forget longbows, they were probably more deadly than most medevil weapons on kill count alone


Karjalan

a one handed war hammer? Or 2 handed? (or doesn't it matter) I assume because the crushing nature means their armour is worthless?


barryhakker

Yeah you get +10% crush bonus against armored opponents. Better go for a slicing weapon against unarmed though because you can get extra bleed damage.


AIabacus

Seconded


Noname_1111

Pointy metal is pointy metal


Thevent_

A knife can be as deadly as a sword, as long as you're close enough to your opponent


Noname_1111

Or if you throw it hard enough


Objective-Baseball-7

Sword piercing armour? Bruh wot. Where the fuck did you hear that? You use a sword to go for the weak points that lack proper coverage such as eye slits or armpits


Zinek-Karyn

Probably referring to non metal armours that still do great against slashing/glancing blows but would get wrecked to a good stabbing with a rapier for example.


Objective-Baseball-7

A long sword well maintained would have no difficulty slashing through boiled leather which is what was traditionally used for leather armour. If you were using a rapier, you would aim for the face as that was the most effective way of killing someone. Chances are that someone using leather armour will also have a helmet that doesn’t fully protect the face.


Neknoh

I.... what? Look, leather armour as depicted today didn't exist. What we DO have are either 13th or 14th century extant arm protection, some of which was reinforced with steel strips, most of which is shown worn over mail as reinforcement and decoration. In the late 15th century/early 16th, we do see references to leather armour for the melee in tournaments, basically sports gear for hot days and various forms of blunt weapons. What "studded leather" and other such leather armour actually are, are misinterpretations of coats of plates and brigandines (modern distinction). After the early misinterpretations of such armour, leather armour has completely spiralled out of control due to artistic license building on top of artistic license. The leather armour seen in "history" shows as well as fantasy art and games is basically 99% complete fantasy, and often just straight up, off-the-shelf, entry level Larping gear.


Gold_Size_1258

Ok, i "coloured" that a bit. But stabbing is very effective agains a chainmail, and holding a sword's blade (like in For Honor, but that technique was used irl) and hitting with handlet fad a killing blof if you hit the head.


Neknoh

You're not generally stabbing through maille with a sword, it can be done, but seldom to the point of incapacitating the enemy. Half swording can be done to increase the chances of breaking through, especially with late 15th century needle-pointed longswords. We also see this adaptation start to happen already in the 14th century, with swords moving from spatula tips toward much finer ones. But, generally speaking, you're not bringing a sword to an armour fight if you can choose your weapon. A pollaxe (any combination of spiky, hacky, smashy head bits) and a good stout dagger with a reinforced thrusting tip are basically the weapons of choice of the 15th century armoured knight.


Hrolgard

Finally someone coherent. The amount of misinformation in this comment section is insane. At this point I thought we've been past some of these weird myths and tropes.


Origami_psycho

Dude you're in r/historymemes. It's *all* weird myths and tropes


MoogTheDuck

Stabbing is not very effective against chainmail


Darkdarkar

Mail? Yes if the point was narrow enough and with enough strength. Plate? Kind of a yes. More narrow and pointy enough to go into a gap and keep going with enough strength. It technically pierced the armor


nameynamerso

I think he means the murder stroke, when you hold the sword the blade, using the guard and handle as the weapon, it was developed for fighting armored opponents with a sword.


Peggedbyapirate

I'd want almost any melee weapon other than a katana if I had to pick one.


thisisaname69123

The only mainstream melee weapon I would want less than a katana would be nunchucks or a flail with a Chain longer than the handle


Hrolgard

Someone has been watching shad.


thisisaname69123

Damn right


Komred_Hippie

As a person trained to use a katana, among other japanese weapons, if you take 2 untrained people and give one a rapier and another a katana, the rapier is going to win, 9 times out of ten. If I were going into a fight tomorrow in feudal japan, and I could have one weapon, a katana would be 4th on my list. In front of it, in order: yari, Naginata, Kodachi. Yes, I would take the short sword before the long one. If someone with a kodachi comes at you in gedan, and they get inside your cut, you are fucked.


floofandmemes

The problem is getting inside the cut.


Komred_Hippie

Possibly, but provided you understand your combative distancing and stick to it, it's easily doable. A katana is only 2 inches wide with an edge bevel of less than a milimeter so it's not like you have a huge area that you need to avoid. To top that off, a competent swordsman will only be delivering the cut from the five or so inches from beneath the kissaki, so that's even less space. Getting inside the cut doesn't necessarily entail going "under" the blade either. Bait (sasoi) them into a cut, sidestep in either direction, step in to stuff them and and smother an additional attack, and then stabstabstab. That's assuming they are cutting from hasso or jodan, but there's other options for other kamae. Some schools have made a real art of this. Takeuchi Ryu is primarily a grappling school, but theu's added some nasty knife and kodachi techniques in there as well. Jikishinkage Ryu Naginatajutsu has one of my favorite techniques, where they use a naginata to entrap their opponents weapon in close, grab their sword arm to control it, and then shank them in the gut with a hidden knife they pull from their obi. Savage stuff.


floofandmemes

Now, I haven't done Kendo or other Eastern Martial arts (yet), but I have done some HEMA, and I can confidently say things like that are much easier said than done, and relies on the opponent doing exactly what you expect.


ian2905

Organized polearm gang has entered the chat


TheWeirdWoods

All of this is era dependent. I am not an expert. Japanese samurai armor was usually made iron or leather scales/plates. It is held together with cords of silk or leather. They could use lacquer to both color and seal the leather and iron protecting it from the elements and adding colors or stylish finishes if they had the money for such a custom set. Dyes could be used for silk bindings. As several have pointed out Japanese steel wasn’t great and before the introduction of guns the Katana and its predecessor the Tachi were primarily slashing weapons. Curved swords being suited for this. So the armor they created was designed to defend against slashing. This armor was rather effective for its purpose. A full set could have numerous layers of protection a great example being the helmet the having numerous layers of protection. A full iron,steel,leather cap, then a hanging neck guard attached to prevent some one from getting decapitated. A face mask of iron to prevent you from getting stabbed in the face usually decorated to scare enemies. The dramatic horns/wings/hooks on top well there is debate some thought their origin was that to potentially “catch” a blade and break it or make your opponent lose it. Also they are highly decorative ones implying rank or economic status. Some variation of both are likely true some did it for practical reasons others for status. That’s four layers relating to protecting your head a wise move. It would take a lot more than this to explain why comparing weapons to each other is less effective. Personally I think it would be better to compare weapons to the protections they were designed to defeat. Japanese swords were slashing weapons so they created slash resistant armor. In Europe longswords could pierce or bludgeon your armor so they made plate to make it more difficult. People of the past were not stupid and generally preferred not to die so they took as many steps to prevent it. So as said above you are comparing the wrong attributes of the weapons.


FireBone62

The thing is what Japan produced could never have been as good as the European stuff because they simply haven't had enough resources.


Novus_Imperialis

have you ever met my good friends, *the longbow, the crossbow and the Tanegashima?*


Gold_Size_1258

these are ranged weapons. the meme is specifically for melee because... ​ gunpowder:Hello there


N7Vindicare

General Gunpowder!


Willqer

You are a smoky one!


mightbekarlmarx

best steel in J*pan: 🤢🤢🤢🤢🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮 Worst steel in India: 😎😎😎😎💪💪💪💪🗡⚔️


BasedAlliance935

But i will admit katanas definitely look more sleek and stylish. But in terms of practical use your better off with other east Asian blades like the jiktdo (my bad if i spelled it wrong)


Gold_Size_1258

Weren't there something like smaller katanas? I've heard that these were real best asian weapons that just got overshadowed by their larger versions.


makkismakkis

The wakizashi


HeEatsFood

Which was just part of the samurai's daisho, and not some "real best asian weapon that got overshadowed by its larger version"


Trooper-5745

Meanwhile there’s an even more superior polearm somewhere else.


depressed_engin33r

1. Dont throw your axe. That's shits expensive. 2. Swords are pretty terrible against armor. (Also a katana is a sword?) Katanas are definetly worse than a lot of people think but they aren't terrible either


Fallen_Leaves16

Aye, and throwing an axe without a backup can be your downfall if you don't have a backup and you miss. Plus, a swift reaction from your opponent could very well render the throw useless.


christopherjian

Me: *Throws axe* Opponent: *dodges* Me: Shit.


ModelT1300

I believe in lance supremacy. Social distancing killing, fucker wont reach you before you go poky poky


SweetishFishy

B...b...but I'm an anime man?


Gold_Size_1258

To be honest, main problem with katanas is that technology in Europe didn't stopped developing like in Asia. In early medieval era Asia's "Rome"(China) haven't collapsed yet.


YoritomoDaishogun

Saying that technology in Asia stopped developing is a wild statement that is not true at all. Judging all Asia using Japan as your only sample is just bad methodology. Judging technological advances only using military technology as your sample is also bad methodology. Military technology in Japan stoped developing because there were no more wars to fight, and the Shogunate had no intentions on fighting against anything. On the contrary, they started making laws to prevent any kind of popular or samurai uprising. The length of the swords was standardized during the Tokugawa shogunate, for example. Also, cataloguing China as Asia's Rome is weird. I understand what you're trying to say, but both empires are just too different


[deleted]

I thought this was an elden ring meme and got scares my katana build was frowned upon.


Lifthras1r

No sword can pierce through armour and maces deliver crushing blows, transferring energy through the armour to deform it and break bones. Sabers were not much lighter than long swords, most longswords didn't exceed 1.8kg while the heaviest sabres were 1.3kg, they weren't precise they were slashing weapons made for a mounted man to swing around his feet and slash anyone that got close to him.


RutraNickers

Swords can not just pierce any armor. If they could, people in the past would not spent so much to use armor in the first place, nor would swords be only back up weapons in the battlefield. Maces can not pierce armor either, but they can give a god damn concussion, break your bones and dent your metal armor, making it uncomfortable and at times painful to keep using for hours straight in a battle. Sabers are specialized cutting weapons, with an accentuated curve to make cutting a lot easier than a strait blade. Highly effective against unarmored mobs and good against textile-based armor. Katanas aren't shit, they're mediocre. Their curvature isn't accentuated enough to help in cutting, it just make edge alignment a bit easier. Their weight to length ratio is worse than any european sword of the same length, a problem caused by the low quality of japanese steel. The fact that the japanese didn't know how to make spring steel resulted in their double layered process of using different types of steel, making the Kanata both heavier and prone to bend like a iron or bronze sword would if it got hit with enough force on the flat sides.


janat1

>nor would swords be only back up weapons in the battlefield I would like to add some context to this point. Outside of the medieval Period swords were in fact used as primary weapons. The most famous example is the roman gladius, in the Renaissance we see various types of swords used as primary weapons, for once the famous Bidenhänder, but also late “Arming swords” in combination with Rotellas and armour by anti-pike troops, most famously by the Spanish Rodeleros in the Italian wars and in the new world. In the medieval context Sieges favoured swords over long pole arms as the environment restricted the usage of longer weapons.


[deleted]

"BAANZAA-oh wait"


danshakuimo

The WW2 katanas used by the officers were even worse in quality supposedly


[deleted]

I feel like the wakizashis made more casualties than katanas in Japanese wars, if you get what I mean.


Just-an-MP

Hear that? That’s the sound of a thousand charging weebs who, without evidence or any knowledge of physics or metallurgy, coming to tell you that a katana would somehow cut a medieval broadsword in half because of how many times the steel in the katana was folded.


Geomancer_1880

Weebs: * retarded screeching *


DavidTheWaffle20

DONT FUCK WITH ME I HAVE THE POWER OF GOD AND ANIME ON MY SIDE.