Medieval warfare!

[GoGummiBear]

I used to do archery so i'm pretty handy with a bow and arrow

 

[Knight Templar]

I would be the tank of the battlefield, a sword wielding Knight in full plate and idealy mounted. On foot I'm deadly but on horseback I am death itself. Unless somebody has a pike or similer polearm weapon, them I'm very screwed. Of course I'm most likely screwed anyway, thats how medieval warfare goes.

Well theoretically, it's a good combo. A rapier was designed to go between the plates of platemail armor and hit vital points, and it did that quite well. But it doesn't work if you're slow. And platemail is meant to keep you safe until you can bludgeon someone to death with your sword.

There is a reason the rapier was only used in street combat (I think it had limited use in battles but shutup I'm making a point.
It's speed wasn't worth the loss of hitting power and was mostly useful against lightly armoured targets.

 

[ClaptonKnophlerHendrix]

I'd be the princess you were all fighting for. Forward my people! Into glorious battle! I'll be waiting for you after.... with nachos

In another castle no doubt.

 

[white_salad]

I am of Scandinavian decent, thus I'd be a viking. I win. I rape plunder and murder, then drink my ass of. And get a sweet hat in the process.

 

[Zannah]

Given I've been to several big "battle-simulation", and my character alsways survived, I'd be bold enough to say yes.

 

[not_the_dm]

Kite shield. Half-plate. Flanged mace.

No swords. The silly things require too much finesse, in my opinion, and would be useless against plate.

A mace (or warhammer), on the other hand, works just as well on hard targets as soft ones. The flanges bite into plate armor and keep it from deflecting away.

The mace is also a lower maintenance weapon, so wouldn't need to worry about its lethality diminishing.

Aren't maces and warhammers generally heavier than a sword? so would use more energy to swing it about tiring the person out quicker?

And they're slower, a competent swordsman could counter quickly.

But... I'm a competent mace-wielder-man?

I'll give it to you that the more skilled soldier will win, regardless of equipment, but what I was trying to say was the mace, in general, would be the more effective death-dealer, being that it's effective against everything.

It's also heavier, sure, but I figure if someone's been using it as their main weapon forever, they'd be used to it. And would have the physique to compensate.

The flanged mace was actually quite a light weapon but because of the way it was made it could easily kill a man in field plate or leather or anything in between.

 

[JS ibanez]

Well I do medieval swordfighting myself so a longsword would be my weapon of choice. full plate armor complete with chain mail and gambeson would be nice as your pretty much sword proof in there. SWORDproof, I stress the sword part. The same cant be said for warhammers or halberds.

 

[Chaos-Spider]

Kite shield. Half-plate. Flanged mace.

No swords. The silly things require too much finesse, in my opinion, and would be useless against plate.

A mace (or warhammer), on the other hand, works just as well on hard targets as soft ones. The flanges bite into plate armor and keep it from deflecting away.

The mace is also a lower maintenance weapon, so wouldn't need to worry about its lethality diminishing.

Aren't maces and warhammers generally heavier than a sword? so would use more energy to swing it about tiring the person out quicker?

And they're slower, a competent swordsman could counter quickly.

But... I'm a competent mace-wielder-man?

I'll give it to you that the more skilled soldier will win, regardless of equipment, but what I was trying to say was the mace, in general, would be the more effective death-dealer.

It's also heavier, sure, but I figure if someone's been using it as their main weapon forever, they'd be used to it. And would have the physique to compensate.

If we go by numbers, the spear was the most devastating weapon ever made ever. And I believe weapons have innate advantages over other weapons. A sword duelist is just too fast for a mace user. A mace user can stop an armored knight really well. An armored knight is effective against a spear man. Etc.

If you even saw battle, using a halberd type pole-axe could help take care of those pesky knights. But being female in the real middle ages you would either be serving those soldiers that were living (not necessarily food), dying of any one or more diseases that existed at the time, or on fire as you were being burned at the stake.

 

[Cmwissy]

Gaelic descent here. I'd win by biting people and yelling loudly, and never losing my land [small]somehow[/small]

Weapon of choice would probably be dual daggers or a bow depending on if I feel more like a rogue or ranger.

 

[Exocet]

I would get on a horse,take a bow and ride with thousands of unstoppable,bloodthristy nomads.
You can't stop the Mongols,you just can't.I'm pretty much safe until it comes time to play a game of rugby on horses using a goat's head as a ball,in which case I'll display some fine "get knocked off a horse and faceplant into the ground" skills,and probably die trampled by angry,drunken men riding horses.

Assuming you're the average person this would be impossible, the stirrup had not been invented at the time of the Mongols so to stay on their horses they had to hold them with there legs All. The. Time.
Edit: Also Mongols =/= Nomads
Edit2: Also The Mongols were a professional army, not angry,drunken men riding horses.

Mongols are nomads,at least they were,and after a battle,soldiers looted cities,drinking heavily in the process.
Also,you might want to the read part in which I explicitly say I fall off the horse because of my complete lack of skills.

 

[Doomsday11]

I would be a dual weilding short sword expert(yes I know how to use a short sword)with either a crossbow stuck over my back or a powerful long bow I would join my team of various other experts in death dealing(I am actually writing a novel based on the recruitment style of mass effect 2 about a member of the inquisition gathering together experts in warfare to fight either Vlad the impaler who is planning to bond with a demon to take over europe or a middle eastern sheik who plans to summon demons to start a never ending crusade).

 

[Srdjan]

It was tough and messy and you would die in agony because of a single cut from enemy's rusted sword because there wasn't any antibiotics, or you would be stomped to death by your own troops in retriet.

It wasn't like in fantasy.

 

[Spitfire175]

It was tough and messy and you would die in agony because of a single cut from enemy's rusted sword because there wasn't any antibiotics, or you would be stomped to death by your own troops in retriet.

Except if you are fighting someone with rusty swords, the chances are they know just as much as the average Escapist user does about swordfighting. Nothing.

I won't write it again, already did in a thread just like this, but let it be said, that all the hyper individualistic yadda yadda and not moving with the formations and wielding swords is just going to get you killed. Unless you are someone like Johannes Lichtenauer, Fiore dei Liberi, Hans Tallhoffer or Paulus Kai, which I really do doubt.

Medieval soldiers fought in formations, wielding big weapons that enabled effective formation movement and combat. Swords are out of the picture, enter spears and halberds and the likes.

 

[Mad Gab]

personally, i'd be an english longbowman, safe back out of the melee, and protected by others because the longbow was the most important part of an English army, if the English lost the archers they had already lost the battle, plus i am already proficient with a bow.

 

[DazBurger]

Me? I would be sitting in a trench with an LMG and unlimmited ammo...

What?.. Its ME, in an medival battle... Ofc I would be cheating!

 

[guyroxorz]

probably just open up the console and type in /god, no one can kill you when you're invincible!


In reality i'd be an archer, i would keep a decent distance from the battle while racking up kills. Oncei ran out of arrows i'd use a short sword and a shield to go *ahem* Medieval on their ass...

 

[monkey jesus]

Skyclad with war hammer.

They call me Captain Hammer, this is not the hammer.......





















The hammer is my penis.


+1 internet for the first person to guess the quote I just mangled.

 

[GundamSentinel]

I'd join the English army and be a cowardly longbowman. I'm a pretty decent shot with a longbow at medium range, so I guess I could do some damage. Whether I'd survive and not be brutally injured, I really don't know. My stamina would be way down after a couple shots, so then I'd run to the woods and start a knife battle, which I'd horribly lose...

 

[JS ibanez]

Gaelic descent here. I'd win by biting people and yelling loudly, and never losing my land [small]somehow[/small]

Weapon of choice would probably be dual daggers or a bow depending on if I feel more like a rogue or ranger.

props for the biting and yelling. Spoken like a true gaelic descendant. but no claymore??

Medieval soldiers fought in formations, wielding big weapons that enabled effective formation movement and combat. Swords are out of the picture, enter spears and halberds and the likes.

This is very true. But if the formation breaks swords become useful again. getting past a long weapon isnt too hard if it isnt properly backed up. Formations could be broken by cavalry charges to the flank or simply shooting arrows into those tightly packed groups. hence the need for variety.

 

[Srdjan]

It was tough and messy and you would die in agony because of a single cut from enemy's rusted sword because there wasn't any antibiotics, or you would be stomped to death by your own troops in retriet.

Except if you are fighting someone with rusty swords, the chances are they know just as much as the average Escapist user does about swordfighting. Nothing.

I won't write it again, already did in a thread just like this, but let it be said, that all the hyper individualistic yadda yadda and not moving with the formations and wielding swords is just going to get you killed. Unless you are someone like Johannes Lichtenauer, Fiore dei Liberi, Hans Tallhoffer or Paulus Kai, which I really do doubt.

Medieval soldiers fought in formations, wielding big weapons that enabled effective formation movement and combat. Swords are out of the picture, enter spears and halberds and the likes.

Do you have idea when formation with halberds begin to use in medieval warfare, it was used later on and even then not with such efficency you speak off.

Professional forces didn't exist, there was bunch of peasents and few knights depending from a battle scale, so any formation fighting was introducted in 15th century (that is not so medieval, it's rennesanse, which is considered new age) by Swiss pikemen. Till war looked a bit different.